The URL can be used to link to this page

2026-01-06 Council PacketEdmonds City Council Agenda January 06, 2026 Page 1 Agenda Edmonds City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 ZOOM: HTTPS://ZOOM.US/J/95798484261 PHONE: +1 253 215 8782 MEETING ID: 957 9848 4261 JANUARY 06, 2026, 6:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. 3. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE FOR NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS 1. Oath of Office Ceremony for Newly Elected Councilmembers – City Council Office (10 minutes) 4. ROLL CALL 5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 6. PRESENTATIONS 1. Resolution of Appreciation to Neil Tibbott for Service as Council President 2025 – City Council Office (5 minutes) 2. Mayor's Finance Update – Mayor's Office (5 minutes) 3. Transportation Impact Fees and revisions to Section 3.36 of Edmonds City Code – Engineering (60 minutes) 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS This is an opportunity to comment regarding any matter not listed on the agenda as closed record review or as a public hearing. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please state clearly your name and city of residence. If attending via Zoom, raise a virtual hand to be recognized. If using a phone to dial in, press *9 to raise a hand. When prompted, press *6 to unmute. 8. RECEIVED FOR FILING Edmonds City Council Agenda January 06, 2026 Page 2 1. Written Public Comments 2. Resolution Appointing an Edmonds Representative to Participate in the Community Transit Board Selection Process 3. Planning Board Quarterly Report 9. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes December 9, 2025 2. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 3. Approval of claim checks and wire payments. 4. Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments 5. New Updates and Revisions to the Rules of Procedure 6. MHFR – Social Worker Grant Amendment 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing on Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax – Community Services and Economic Development (25 minutes) 2. Public Hearing on Draft Critical Areas Ordinance Periodic Update – Planning and Development Services (40 minutes) 11. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Selection of 2026 Council President and Council President Pro Tem – City Clerk's Office (15 minutes) 2. Discussion and Possible Adoption of the Critical Areas Ordinance Periodic Update – Planning and Development Services (45 minutes) 3. Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax - Council Action – Community Services and Economic Development (30 minutes) 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS 13. MAYOR'S COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT Edmonds City Council Agenda January 06, 2026 Page 3 For disability accommodations, materials in alternate formats, accessibility information, or language interpretation/ translation needs, please contact the City Clerk at 425-775-2525 at your earliest opportunity. Providing at least 72-hour notice will help ensure availability. City Council Agenda Item 3.1 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Oath of Office Ceremony for Newly Elected Councilmembers DEPARTMENT:City Council Office PRESENTER:Emily Villata NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:N/A BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: N/A CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Before an elected official may assume office, the election results must be certified, and the winner must swear to an oath or affirmation of office (RCW 29A.04.133). Every person elected to office is required by our state and federal constitution to take an oath prior to serving in office. The November 4, 2025, General Election was certified November 25, 2025. An oath can be administered anytime after certification of the election and prior to commencing the duties of office. Elected city officials assume office on January 1, 2026 (RCW 29A.60.280). The oath of office may be administered by a notary public or by any other officer authorized by statute to administer oaths per RCW 29A.04.133(3). This list of officials “authorized” to administer the oath include the following: Court commissioner – RCW 2.24.040(10) Every judicial officer (as defined in RCW 2.28.030) – RCW 2.28.060(4) Every judge and clerk of court – RCW 5.28.010 County auditor or deputy auditor – RCW 36.22.030 County commissioner or county councilmember – RCW 36.32.120(9) Mayor of a code city (RCW 35A.21.030) or a town (RCW 35.27.160) Mayor or mayor pro tem of a second-class city – RCW 35.23.191 Clerk of a code city – RCW 35A.21.030 Town clerk or deputy clerk – RCW 35.27.220 RECOMMENDATION: N/A Item 3.1 Packet pg. 4/352 BUDGET IMPACTS: None. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The official oaths of office for Councilmembers Erika Barnett and Will Chen were administered December 13, 2025 by Judge Tam Bui. The official oath of office for Councilmember Chris Eck was administered December 16, 2025 by Judge Neil Weiss. Tonight's oaths are solely for ceremonial purposes. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025 Oaths of Office - City of Edmonds Item 3.1 Packet pg. 5/352 Item 3.1 Packet pg. 6/352 Item 3.1 Packet pg. 7/352 Item 3.1 Packet pg. 8/352 City Council Agenda Item 6.1 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Resolution of Appreciation to Neil Tibbott for Service as Council President 2025 DEPARTMENT:City Council Office PRESENTER:Teresa Simanton NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Adopt a resolution thanking Councilmember Tibbott for his dedication and service. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: It has been customary to adopt a resolution thanking the outgoing Council President for their service at the end of their term. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Councilmember Neil Tibbott served as Council President from January 2025 – December 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution thanking Councilmember Tibbott for his dedication and service. BUDGET IMPACTS: 0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Thanking Council President Neil Tibbott Item 6.1 Packet pg. 9/352 4 5 6 RESOLUTION NO. _________ A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL THANKING COUNCIL PRESIDENT NEIL TIBBOTT FOR HIS SERVICE TO THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL. WHEREAS, Neil Tibbott served on Edmonds City Council from January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2025; and WHEREAS, as council president, Neil Tibbott’s collegial leadership style permeated throughout the council and allowed the council to tackle extremely difficult issues with respectful deliberation; and WHEREAS, Neil Tibbott has received multiple accolades from council colleagues in his work as council president and council peer; and WHEREAS, Neil Tibbott exemplified a steady regard and collaboration in support of City goals with multiple mayors, directors and their staff; and WHEREAS, Neil Tibbott demonstrated the ethic of continuous learning and curiosity as demonstrated through his attainment of the Advanced Certificate of Municipal Leadership from the Association of Washington Cites, completing a rigorous series of course work regarding best practices of municipal government; and WHEREAS, Neil Tibbott worked diligently to negotiate annexation into the South County Fire District and led town hall meetings and presentations engaging with the community to increase the public’s understanding of the public safety needs for Edmonds; and WHEREAS, Neil Tibbott presented at Town Hall meetings about the Edmonds finances and the needs for multiple revenues to streams necessary; and WHEREAS, during both of his terms as Council President, approached his many duties and diligently comprising himself of all the facts ensuring that the council as a body had all of the relevant information to make informed decisions: Parks and Public Works Committee Public Safety, Personnel, Human Services, and Planning Committee Port of Edmonds Edmonds Lodging Tax Advisory Commission Council Legal Assessment Committee Affordable Housing Alliance Snohomish County Cities and Towns, Officer Snohomish County Health District Board of Directors Edmonds Arts Commission Item 6.1 Packet pg. 10/352 4 5 6 Edmonds Chamber of Commerce NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Neil Tibbott be applauded and thanked for servicing as council president for his continuous service and dedication to the residents of Edmonds. RESOLVED this 6th day of January, 2026. CITY OF EDMONDS _________________________ MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST: _________________________ DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. ____ Item 6.1 Packet pg. 11/352 3 0 5 City Council Agenda Item 6.2 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Mayor's Finance Update DEPARTMENT:Mayor's Office PRESENTER:Mayor Rosen NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:The Mayor, or another member of the administration, will answer questions about City finances that have been requested by council in advance and will also share actions related to the fiscal emergency that have transpired since the last update. When there is nothing new to report, this agenda item will be the opportunity to share that there is nothing new to report. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: On July 2, 2024 the council voted to have a Mayor Update as an ongoing item on all regular meeting agendas. This was in response to a recommendation from the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: N/A RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor, or another member of the administration, will answer questions about City finances that have been requested by council in advance and will also share actions related to the fiscal emergency that have transpired since the last update. When there is nothing new to report, this agenda item will be the opportunity to share that there is nothing new to report. BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: None. Item 6.2 Packet pg. 12/352 City Council Agenda Item 6.3 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Transportation Impact Fees and revisions to Section 3.36 of Edmonds City Code DEPARTMENT:Engineering PRESENTER:Mike De Lilla/Bertrand Hauss/Consultant NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Approve revised Section 3.36 of Edmonds City Code. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):n/a ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: The Transportation Plan identified 19 roadway and intersection improvement projects and 69 active transportation projects – consisting of bike lanes, multi-use paths, sidewalk projects. The city’s travel demand model was used to calculate the eligible transportation impact fee (TIF) for roadway projects by using the total cost of those projects multiplied by the percent of PM peak hour traffic growth. For active transportation projects, TIF was calculated using the “Proximity to Activity Center and Other Key Locations” criteria developed during the prioritization process in the 2024 Transportation Plan Update. The trip rate was determined to be $9,261.55 per trip. The memo provides additional information on the TIF calculation methodology. The TIF rate for each land use category is then based on the following (based on 12th Edition of ITE Trip Generation Manual): Average PM Peak Hour Trip Rate Pass-by Rate Trip Length Factor Cost per trip: $9,261.55 New land use categories have been added and others have been removed from the Impact Fee table. The transportation impact fee for ADU’s is set at 50% of the single family detached units fee. Any retail developments with less than 1,000 sf in the Downtown Business District is to be identified as a Variety Store (previously identified as Specialty Retail / land use category removed from new ITE Trip Generation Manual). If more than 1,000 sf, the appropriate land use category is to be used. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: On December 3rd, 2024, the Council approved the 2024 Transportation Plan Update. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 13/352 The Transportation Plan is a critical component of the Comprehensive Plan, focusing on creating a multimodal transportation system that promotes the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. The plan aims to meet both current and future transportation needs by outlining both short and long- term strategies that integrate various transportation modes based on projected growth. Impact fees are charges assessed by local governments for new developments to help pay for new or expanded public capital facilities. Section 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code defines the current methods and quantities of impact fees to be collected for new developments within Edmonds. Those transportation impact fees (TIF) are based on roadway and intersection improvements projects. As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan Update, a new list of transportation capital projects was developed to meet the City’s adopted multi-modal Level of Service (MMLOS) standards with the inclusion of roadway, intersection, and active transportation projects. RECOMMENDATION: Approve revised Section 3.36 of Edmonds City Code. BUDGET IMPACTS: Considering the city’s 20-year project list and the updated land use and projected population growth estimates from the 2024 Comprehensive Plan, the impact fees have been updated. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Presentation by Paul Sharman, Patrick Lynch – Transpo Group ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Transportation Impact Fee Update Methodology memo Attachment 2 – Ordinance of revised Section 3.36 of ECC -redline Attachment 3 – Ordinance of revised Section 3.36 of ECC -clean Attachment 4 – Council Presentation Item 6.3 Packet pg. 14/352 12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203, Kirkland, WA 98034 | 425.821.3665 | MEMORANDUM Date: November 21, 2025 TG: 22355.00 To: Bertrand Hauss – City of Edmonds From: Paul Sharman, Patrick Lynch – Transpo Group cc: Subject: Edmonds Transportation Impact Fee Update Methodology The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the methodology used in updating the City’s Transportation Impact Fees (TIF) following the adoption of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. Background Impact fees are one-time charges assessed by local governments for new developments to help pay for new or expanded public capital facilities. Edmonds Municipal Code 3.36 defines the methods and quantities of impact fees to be collected for new development within Edmonds. Following the recent adoption of the City’s Transportation Master Plan in late 2024, a new list of transportation capital projects1 was developed to meet the City’s updated multimodal level of service standard. Given the City’s new 20-year transportation project list and the updated land use and population growth estimates in the 2024 Comprehensive Plan, the City has set about updating their transportation impact fees. TIFs are calculated to assess the share of capital improvements that should be attributed to development. The 20-year planned growth is not the only reason that future transportation improvements will be needed as some level of traffic and active transportation system gaps exist today. The following outlines the methodology used to estimate the share of future system improvements that should be attributed to development within Edmonds. TIF Eligible Project Costs The following sections summarize the methodology for calculating the project cost identified in the Transportation Master Plan that are TIF eligible, or what percent of each project is attributable to development. Roadway and Intersection Projects The 2024 Transportation Master Plan identifies nineteen (19) roadway and intersection improvement projects across the City, with an estimated cost of $316.6 million. To assess the share of these costs that should be attributed to development, the City’s travel demand model was used to calculate the percentage of PM peak hour traffic growth at the project location. In equation form, this calculation could be written like this: Roadway and Intersection TIF Eligible Cost = (Total Project Cost) x (% PM Peak Hour Traffic Growth at project location) For example, the installation of a traffic signal or mini roundabout at the intersection of Main Street and 9th Avenue is planned to cost approximately $1.37 million. The travel demand model estimates that PM peak hour traffic at the location will increase approximately 15% over the next twenty years, and therefore the TIF eligible cost is approximately $205,000. 1 See Table 2-4 and Table 2-5 in the Transportation Master Plan Item 6.3 Packet pg. 15/352 2 Active Transportation Projects Recent amendments to state law under RCW36.70A.070 and RCW 82.02.050 now allow for transportation impact fees to be collected for active transportation projects – not just vehicular capacity improvement projects. The 2024 Transportation Master Plan identified sixty-nine (69) active transportation system improvements in four categories: bike lanes, multiuse paths, sidewalk (long), and sidewalk (short). While the travel demand model has historically been used to calculate the nexus between growth and traffic increase, the travel demand model does not calculate active mode trips directly. As a result, a different measurement was needed to capture the link between development and active transportation trips. The assumption for this linkage is that active transportation improvement projects located nearer to areas of more dense development and existing pedestrian and bicycle generators (schools, parks, etc.) are more likely to shift traveler choice toward walking, biking and rolling and away from default automobile trips. Therefore, the TIF eligibility for active transportation improvement projects (excluding bike lanes) was calculated using the “Proximity to Activity Centers and Other Key Locations” criteria developed during the project prioritization process in the Transportation Master Plan2. This criterion was selected to create a measurable nexus between areas of higher development and likely walk / bicycle activity. Table 1 summarizes the link between the “Proximity to Activity Centers and Other Key Locations” score within the Transportation Master Plan and the TIF eligibility percentage. Table 1. TIF Eligibility – Active Transportation Projects Proximity to Activity Centers Score TIF Eligibility 40 or more 45% 35 – 40 35% 30 - 35 30% 20 – 30 25% 15 – 20 15% 10 - 15 10% Less than 10 5% Source: Transpo Group, 2024; See also Section 2.3 of the Edmonds Transportation Master Plan The proportionate share of bicycle lane project costs attributed to development was set at 5% for all bicycle lane improvements that do not require roadway widening (those that require widening use the criteria outlined in Table 1). It was assumed that most bicycle lane improvements would be completed as part of regular roadway resurfacing projects, such as the recent re-striping to add bicycle lanes on Main Street between 6th Avenue N and 9th Avenue N. TIF Eligibility Totals A complete list of total project cost, TIF eligibility percentage and costs is included in the attachment. Table 2 summarizes the total project cost and TIF eligible cost for each of the project types within the Transportation Master Plan. 2 See section 2.3 of the Transportation Master Plan Item 6.3 Packet pg. 16/352 3 Table 2. Transportation Project Costs and TIF Eligibility Project Type Total Project Cost TIF Eligible Cost Roadway $291,850,000 $32,816,000 Multi Use Path $111,070,000 $42,472,000 Intersection $24,710,000 $3,693,000 Sidewalk - Long $109,330,000 $25,391,000 Sidewalk - Short $8,500,000 $1,512,000 Bike Lanes $18,120,000 $5,801,000 TOTAL $563,580,000 $111,685,000 Source: Transpo Group, 2025 In total, approximately $111.7 million of the $563.6 million (20%) in identified transportation capital projects was determined to be TIF eligible. The full TIF eligible project list spreadsheet is included as Attachment A. Planned Development and Travel Growth This section summarizes the planned growth within the 2024 Comprehensive Plan and the resulting increase in vehicle and person trips. The 2024 Edmonds Comprehensive Plan includes an additional 9,068 households and 3,058 jobs within Edmonds over the next twenty years. The Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) was used to estimate the number of PM peak hour vehicle trips based on general land use categories. The breakdown of households and jobs by category and the corresponding number of PM peak hour trips is summarized in Table 3 below. Table 3. 20 Year Land Use and Vehicle Trip Growth Land Use Growth PM Peak Hour Average Vehicle-Trip Rate Net New PM Peak Hour Trips Singe Family Households 2,267 0.94 2,131 Multifamily Household1 6,801 0.49 3,332 RETAIL2 (jobs) 1,086 4.93 5,354 FIRES3 (jobs) 1,972 0.63 1,242 TOTAL 12,059 Source: Transpo Group, 2025 1. Multifamily housing based on average of ITE land use codes 215, 220, and 221. 2. Retail trade, food services, entertainment, hotel jobs. Based on weighted average of ITE land use codes 820, 821, 822, 930, and 932 in ITE 11th Edition. 3. Finance, insurance, real estate, services, medical, and office jobs. Based on weighted average of ITE land use codes 710, 720, and 750 in ITE 11th Edition. Proposed Impact Fee TIFs are typically calculated on a cost per vehicle trip basis. The total cost per vehicle trip is calculated by the total TIF eligible cost ($111,685,000) divided by the total number of new PM peak hour trips (12,059) for a fee of $9,261.55. The City of Edmonds existing TIF fee is $5,531 per vehicle trip. The new rate would be a 67.5% increase from the existing rate. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 17/352 4 Next Steps Assuming that the City of Edmonds adopts the proposed TIF rate per trip, the City will then update their impact fee rate schedule (currently posted here). The current impact fee schedule is based on a previous edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual, and the new impact fee rate schedule is based on the trip generation rates to the recently released 12th edition. The impact fee schedule is shown below in Table 4. Table 4. 2025 TIF Rate Schedule (assumes cost per vehicle trip of $9,261.55) Land Use (ITE Land Use Code) Unit New TIF Rate per vehicle trip 110_General Light Industrial per. sq foot $4.54 140_Manufacturing per. sq foot $5.84 151_Mini-Warehouse per. sq foot $1.30 210_Single-Family Detached Housing Dwelling Unit $8,613.66 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)1 Dwelling Unit $4,306.83 215_Single-Family Attached Housing Dwelling Unit $4,723.62 220_Multifamily housing (low-rise) (2 or 3 floors) Dwelling Unit $4,816.24 221_Multifamily housing (mid-rise) (4 to 10 floors) Dwelling Unit $3,519.56 223_Affordable Housing Dwelling Unit $4,260.52 230_Low-Rise Residential with 1st-Floor Commercial (2 or 3 floors) Dwelling Unit $3,334.32 231_Mid-Rise Residential with 1st-Floor Commercial (4 to 10 floors) Dwelling Unit $3,704.80 240_Mobile Home Park Dwelling Unit $4,260.52 251_Senior Adult Housing - Single-Family Dwelling Unit $2,685.98 252_Senior Adult Housing - Multi-Family Dwelling Unit $2,315.50 320_Motel Room $3,426.94 445_Movie Theater Seats $740.96 492_Health/Fitness Club per. sq foot $34.92 520_Elementary School Students $1,481.92 522_Middle School/Junior High School Students $1,389.30 525_High School Students $1,389.30 530_Private School (K-8) Students $2,408.12 532_Private School (K-12) Students $1,759.78 560_Church per. sq foot $3.98 565_Day Care Center per. sq foot $55.78 620_Nursing Home per. sq foot $5.46 710_General Office Building (>10,000 sf of gross floor space) per. sq foot $10.93 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 18/352 5 712_Small Office Building (<10,000 sf of gross floor space) per. sq foot $20.01 720_Medical-Dental Office Building per. sq foot $31.68 814_Variety Store2 per. sq foot $40.96 820_Shopping Center (>150,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA)) per. sq foot $21.44 821_Shopping Plaza (40-150k of GLA per. sq foot $47.68 822_Strip Retail Plaza (<40k of GLA) per. sq foot $58.26 823_Factory Outlet Center per. sq foot $21.21 850_Supermarket per. sq foot $61.87 851_Convenience Store per. sq foot $447.35 912_Drive-in Bank per. sq foot $126.61 918_Hair Salon/Spa per. sq foot $13.43 931_Fine Dining Restaurant per. sq foot $42.01 932_High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant per. sq foot $48.46 933_Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Through per. sq foot $340.19 934_Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Through per. sq foot $131.71 935_Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Through and No Indoor Seating Drive-Through Lanes $380,251.41 936_Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive-Through Window per. sq foot $292.03 937_Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window per. sq foot $68.63 938_Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window and No Indoor Seating Drive-Through Lanes $2,793.42 945_Convenience Store/Gas Station Vehicle Fueling Position $64,593.19 971_Brewery Taproom per. sq foot $91.05 975_Drinking Place per. sq foot $59.65 Source: Transpo Group, 2025 1. Accessory Dwelling Unit TIF rate set at 50% of single family detached unit 2. Variety Store is to be used for all retail developments with less than 1,000 sf in the Downtown Business District as shown in Attachment B. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 19/352 ProjectID Project Type Street Name Extents Description Cost Priority TIF Eligible Impact EligibleBL-01 Bike Lanes Main St 9th Ave to 84th Avenue (5 corners)Restripe and install 5' bike lanes 570,000$ High 5%29,000$ BL-02 Bike Lanes OLYMPIC AVE Main Street to Puget Drive Widen road to install 5' bike lanes; build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards on one side of street 8,020,000$ Medium 35% 2,807,000$ BL-03 Bike Lanes 238TH ST SW SR 104 to 84th Ave W Widen road to install 5' bike lanes 520,000$ High 5%26,000$ BL-04 Bike Lanes 9TH AVE Main Street to Caspers Street Restripe and install 5' bike lanes 270,000$ High 5%14,000$ BL-05 Bike Lanes MAIN ST Ferry Terminal to 6th Avenue Widen roadway (narrow existing sidewalks) to install eastbound (uphill) bicycle lane, sharrows on westbound (downhill)8,290,000$ High 35% 2,902,000$ BL-06 Bike Lanes 76th Ave W 220th St SW to SR 99 Restripe and install 5' bike lanes 190,000$ High 5%10,000$ BL-07 Bike Lanes 224th St SW 76th Avenue W to Interuban Trail Restripe and install 5' bike lanes 140,000$ Medium 5%7,000$ BL-08 Bike Lanes 9TH AVE S Bowdoin to Main St Restripe and install 5' bike lanes 120,000$ Medium 5%6,000$ I-01 Intersection 76th Ave. W @ 220th St. SW Intersection Improvementsat intersection Add left turn lane on east and west approaches, removing split phase, add bike lanes and sidewalk improvements 11,640,000$ Medium 15% 1,746,000$ I-02 Intersection SR 524 (196th St. SW) @ 88th Ave W. Intersection Improvementsat intersection Design intersection improvements (RAB or signal) and addition of guardrail on the west side of intersection due to 12' vertical drop (grade. adjustment to improve sight distance to be considered).1,450,000$ Low 10% 145,000$ I-03 Intersection Main St. @ 9th Ave. at intersection Installation of traffic signal or mini-roundabout.1,370,000$ Medium 15%206,000$ I-04 Intersection Westgate / SR-104 @ 100th Ave. W Intersection Access Managementat intersection Provide safety improvements within proximity to the intersection by providing better access management on all approaches 4,460,000$ Medium 10% 446,000$ I-05 Intersection SR-104 @ 95th Pl. W Intersection Improvementsat intersection Provide C-Curb with left turn channelization for access management.290,000$ Low 20%58,000$ I-06 Intersection SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvementsat intersection Install traffic signal and other intersection improvements.1,560,000$ Low 20%312,000$ I-07 Intersection SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvementsat intersection Extend bike lanes within proximity of intersection in northbound and southbound directions. Install APS on all corners and new ADA curb ramps. Add westbound right turn lane along SR-104 (~125 ft storage length)2,570,000$ Medium 25% 643,000$ I-08 Intersection 76th Ave W / Olympic View Drive at intersection Installation of traffic signal or mini-roundabout.1,370,000$ Low 10%137,000$ ITS-01 Roadway SR 104 236th St Sw to 226th St SW Install ITS Adaptive System along SR-104 from 236th St. SW to 226th St. SW 4,240,000$ High 10% 424,000$ ITS-02 Roadway 76TH AVE 206th St SW to 220th St SW Install ITS adaptive system from 206th St SW to 220th St SW 2,820,000$ High 15%423,000$ LSW-01 Sidewalk - Long 176 ST SW 72nd Ave W to Olympic View Drive Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,950,000$ Medium 25%488,000$ LSW-02 Sidewalk - Long 72ND AVE W Olympic View Drive to 176th St SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 4,200,000$ Low 15%630,000$ LSW-03 Sidewalk - Long ANDOVER ST 184th ST SW to Olympic View Drive Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,200,000$ Low 10%220,000$ LSW-04 Sidewalk - Long 232ND ST SW 100th Ave W to SR 104 Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 4,170,000$ Medium 35%1,460,000$ LSW-05 Sidewalk - Long 189TH PL SW 80th Ave W to 76th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,120,000$ Medium 25%530,000$ LSW-06 Sidewalk - Long 191ST ST SW 80th Ave W to 76th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,970,000$ Low 25%493,000$ LSW-07 Sidewalk - Long 184TH ST SW 88th Ave W to 80th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 3,070,000$ Medium 25%768,000$ LSW-08 Sidewalk - Long 92ND AVE W 189th Pl SW to 187th St SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,160,000$ Low 10%116,000$ LSW-09 Sidewalk - Long 192ND ST SW 88th Ave W to 86th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,010,000$ Low 25%253,000$ LSW-10 Sidewalk - Long 218TH ST SW 84th Ave W to 76th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 3,800,000$ Medium 35%1,330,000$ LSW-11 Sidewalk - Long 216TH ST SW 92nd Ave W to 86th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 3,030,000$ Medium 15%455,000$ LSW-12 Sidewalk - Long PARADISE LN SR 104 to 7th Ave S Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,390,000$ Low 15%359,000$ LSW-13 Sidewalk - Long 6th AVE Elm Way to Pine St Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,110,000$ Medium 25%278,000$ LSW-14 Sidewalk - Long 12TH AVE N Existing sidewalk end to Vista Way Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,810,000$ Low 10%181,000$ LSW-15 Sidewalk - Long 12TH AVE NW southern City limits to 238th St SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,830,000$ Low 15%425,000$ LSW-16 Sidewalk - Long 188TH ST SW 92nd Ave W to 88th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,500,000$ Low 15%225,000$ LSW-17 Sidewalk - Long N MEADOWDALE RD 164th St SW to 68th Ave W Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,160,000$ Medium 25%290,000$ LSW-18 Sidewalk - Long MEADOWDALE BEACH RD 75th Pl W to Olympic View Dr Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 6,420,000$ Medium 25%1,605,000$ LSW-19 Sidewalk - Long 80TH AVE W 188th St SW to Olympic View Drive Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 6,160,000$ Medium 25%1,540,000$ LSW-20 Sidewalk - Long OLYMPIC AVE Olympic View Drive to Puget Drive Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 1,210,000$ Medium 25%303,000$ LSW-21 Sidewalk - Long MAPLEWOOD DR Main Street to 200th St SW Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 4,410,000$ Medium 25%1,103,000$ LSW-22 Sidewalk - Long 88TH AVE W 200th St SW to 196th St SW Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 2,090,000$ Medium 30%627,000$ LSW-23 Sidewalk - Long 8TH AVE S 14th St SW to Elm St Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,900,000$ Low 15%285,000$ LSW-24 Sidewalk - Long 95TH PL W 224th St SW to 220th St SW Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 2,240,000$ Low 10%224,000$ LSW-25 Sidewalk - Long 82ND AVE W / 208th St SW 83rd Ave W to 206th St SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,260,000$ Medium 15%189,000$ LSW-26 Sidewalk - Long 96TH PL W 239th St Sw to 234th St SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,810,000$ Low 15%422,000$ LSW-27 Sidewalk - Long ROBIN HOOD DR 106th Ave W to existing sidewalk at Hickman Park Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,130,000$ Medium 25%533,000$ LSW-28 Sidewalk - Long 236TH ST SW SR 99 to 76th Ave W Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,180,000$ High 25%545,000$ LSW-29 Sidewalk - Long 230TH ST SW / 75th Pl W 76th Ave W to City Limits (74th Ave W)Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,630,000$ Medium 25%408,000$ LSW-30 Sidewalk - Long 240TH ST SW / 78th Ave W SR 99 to 236th St SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 4,270,000$ High 30%1,281,000$ LSW-31 Sidewalk - Long 236TH ST SW 84th Ave W to SR 104 Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,410,000$ High 25%353,000$ LSW-32 Sidewalk - Long PINE ST SR 104 to 9th Ave S Build curb, gutter, 7' sidewalk to design standards 6,620,000$ Medium 30%1,986,000$ LSW-34 Sidewalk - Long 186TH ST SW 185th Pl SW to 80th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 3,070,000$ Medium 25%768,000$ LSW-35 Sidewalk - Long 190TH PL SW Olympic View Drive to 94th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,120,000$ Low 5%56,000$ LSW-36 Sidewalk - Long 82ND AVE W 206th St SW to 204th St SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,010,000$ Medium 15%152,000$ LSW-37 Sidewalk - Long 98TH AVE W Existing sidewalk north of 220th St SW to 216th Pl SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 1,180,000$ Medium 15%177,000$ LSW-38 Sidewalk - Long 14TH ST SW 8th Ave S to 96th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,150,000$ Medium 25%538,000$ LSW-39 Sidewalk - Long 80TH AVE W 212th St SW to 206th St SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,820,000$ Medium 25%705,000$ LSW-40 Sidewalk - Long 234TH ST SW 97th Ave W to 94th Ave W Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 4,140,000$ Medium 25%1,035,000$ LSW-41 Sidewalk - Long 236TH ST SW 94th Ave W to 84th Ave W Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,980,000$ High 30%894,000$ LSW-42 Sidewalk - Long 234TH ST SW SR 99 to 76th Ave W Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 2,290,000$ Medium 25%573,000$ LSW-43 Sidewalk - Long 84TH AVE W 238th Street to 234th Street Build curb, gutter, 4' planter strip and 7' sidewalk with tree grates on east side of 84th and northbound 5' bike lane 2,350,000$ Medium 25% 588,000$ MUP-01 Multi Use Path OLYMPIC VIEW DR 76th Ave W to City Limits (Meadowdale Middle School)Construct 10' multi-use path 17,400,000$ High 35%6,090,000$ MUP-02 Multi Use Path 196TH ST SW 88th Ave W to 76th Ave W Construct 10' multi-use path 9,020,000$ High 25%2,255,000$ MUP-03 Multi Use Path 9TH AVE N Caspers / 9th Ave / Puget from Admiral to Olympic View Drive Construct 10' multi-use path 11,040,000$ High 45%4,968,000$ MUP-04 Multi Use Path SUNSET AVE N Caspers Street to 3rd Ave N / SR 104 Construct 10' multi-use path 5,260,000$ High 35%1,841,000$ MUP-05 Multi Use Path SR 104 Sunset Ave to 100th Ave W Construct 10' multi-use path 26,300,000$ High 45%11,835,000$ MUP-06 Multi Use Path SR 104 100th Ave W to 244th St Sw Construct 10' multi-use path 22,320,000$ High 45%10,044,000$ MUP-07 Multi Use Path 244th St SW Firdale Ave to SR 104 Construct 10' multi-use path 11,650,000$ Medium 25%2,913,000$ MUP-08 Multi Use Path 220TH ST SW 76th Ave W to City Limits / Interurban Trail Construct 10' multi-use path 3,030,000$ High 25%758,000$ MUP-09 Multi Use Path 212TH ST SW 74th Ave W to SR 99 Construct 10' multi-use path 5,050,000$ High 35%1,768,000$ R-01 Roadway 84th Ave W 238th St SW to 212th St SW Widen roadway to add NB/SB left turn lanes at 220th Street and 228th Street intersections and 5' bike lanes. Add 7' sidewalks on each side of the roadway with 4' planter strip. (Cost to be shared with County based on portion of project extents within City/County).16,330,000$ Medium 20% 3,266,000$ R-02 Roadway 228th St. SW Corridor improvements from Hwy. 99 to 95th Pl. WSR 99 to 95th Pl. W Widen roadway to add two-way left turn lane along stretch or left turn lanes at specific intersections. Install multi-use path on one side of street. (Cost to be shared with County based on portion of project extents within City/County).24,760,000$ Low 35% 4,333,000$ R-03 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 3 244th St. SW to 238th St. SW Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and capacity improvements at Hwy 99 @ 238th St SW (additional northbound left turn lane). Install grade separated bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides of roadway.28,700,000$ High 10% 2,870,000$ R-04 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 4 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and capacity improvements at Hwy 99 @ 220th St SW (additional nothbound / southbound / westbound left turn lane). Install grade separated bike lanes and sidewalk on both sides of roadway.36,600,000$ High 10% 3,660,000$ R-05 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 5 216th St. SW to 212th St. SW Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and capacity improvements at Hwy 99 @ 212th St SW (add left turn lane for northbound andsouthbound movements / bike lane for eastbound & westbound movements). Install grade separated bike lanes and sidewalk on both sides of roadway.50,700,000$ Low 10% 5,070,000$ R-06 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 6 234th to 238th St Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and install grade separated bike lanes and sidewalk on both sides of roadway.22,900,000$ Medium 10% 2,290,000$ R-07 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 7 234th to 228th St Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and capacity improvements at Hwy 99 @ 228th St SW. Install grade separated bike lane and sidewalk on both sides of roadway.42,800,000$ Medium 10% 4,280,000$ R-08 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 8 224th to 228th St Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and install grade separated bike lanes and sidewalk on both sides of roadway.39,500,000$ Medium 10% 3,950,000$ ATTACHMENT A Item 6.3 Packet pg. 20/352 R-09 Roadway SR-99 Revitalization Stage 9 216st St SW to 500' north of 220th St SW Installation of planter strip, lighting upgrades, utility upgrades, and install grade separated bike lane and sidewalk on both sides of roadway.22,500,000$ Medium 10% 2,250,000$ SSW-01 Sidewalk - Short WALNUT ST Existing sidewalk to 7th Ave Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 390,000$ Medium 25%98,000$ SSW-02 Sidewalk - Short 234TH ST SW 84th Ave W to existing sidewalk by 82nd Pl W Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 590,000$ Medium 25%148,000$ SSW-03 Sidewalk - Short 234TH ST SW 97th Pl W to 96th Ave W Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 860,000$ Low 15%129,000$ SSW-04 Sidewalk - Short Maple Street Existing sidewalk at 8th to 9th Ave Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 900,000$ Medium 30%270,000$ SSW-05 Sidewalk - Short 97TH AVE W 239th St Sw to 240th St SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 950,000$ Low 15%143,000$ SSW-06 Sidewalk - Short 92ND AVE W 218th St SW to 216th St SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 950,000$ Low 5%48,000$ SSW-07 Sidewalk - Short 78TH AVE W 234th St SW to 236th ST SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 960,000$ Medium 25%240,000$ SSW-08 Sidewalk - Short 80TH AVE W 220th St SW to 218th St SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 960,000$ Medium 15%144,000$ SSW-09 Sidewalk - Short 84TH AVE W 186th St SW to 188th St SW Construct curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 970,000$ Low 15%146,000$ SSW-10 Sidewalk - Short 100TH AVE W 238th St SW to 242nd Pl SW Build curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk to design standards 970,000$ Medium 15%146,000$ Total Cost TIF EligibleHigh-$ -$ 10 Medium 4,770,000$ 1,046,000$ Low 3,730,000$ 466,000$ Total 8,500,000$ 1,512,000$ High 10,840,000$ 3,073,000$ Medium 71,350,000$ 18,429,000$ 42 Low 27,140,000$ 3,889,000$ Total 109,330,000$ 25,391,000$ High 72,360,000$ 7,377,000$ Medium 144,030,000$ 16,036,000$ 11 Low 75,460,000$ 9,403,000$ Total 291,850,000$ 32,816,000$ High 99,420,000$ 39,559,000$ Medium 11,650,000$ 2,913,000$ 9 Low -$ -$ Total 111,070,000$ 42,472,000$ High 9,840,000$ 2,981,000$ Medium 8,280,000$ 2,820,000$ 8 Low -$ -$ Total 18,120,000$ 5,801,000$ High -$ -$ Medium 20,040,000$ 3,041,000$ 8 Low 4,670,000$ 652,000$ Total 24,710,000$ 3,693,000$ High 192,460,000$ 52,990,000$ Medium 260,120,000$ 44,285,000$ Low 111,000,000$ 14,410,000$ Total 563,580,000$ 111,685,000$ Total Sidewalk - Short Sidewalk - Long Roadway Multi Use Path Bike Lanes Intersection ATTACHMENT A Item 6.3 Packet pg. 21/352 Main St. Dayton St. Civic Park Howell Way Bell S t . Map of Downtown Business DistrictAttachment B Item 6.3 Packet pg. 22/352 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADDING REVISING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS TO THE NEW SECTION 3.36 OF THE ECCCC FOLLOWING THE 2024 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE;; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds updated the Transportation Plan in 20244, with a ; and a transportation impact fee was introduced (modified from traffic impact fee as part of previous Transportation Pplans); WHEREAS, a new list of transportation capital projects have been identified in this plan in order was developed to meet the City’s new updated Mmultimodal Lelevel off Sservice (MMLOS) standard; WHEREAS, the Traffic Impact Fees identified in Sethis Section 18.82 of the Edmonds City Code (“Traffic Impact Fee” Section) has been moved to a new Section 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code (Section 3.36)ECC haves used to addressed Traffic Impact Fee and now has been modified to the Transportation Impact Fee (as part of the Transportation Plan Update); WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds updated the Transportation Plan in 202415 and a transportation revised traffic impact fee was introduced (modified from traffic impact fee as part of previous plans)is being proposed with a phased increase over the next three years; WHEREAS, a new list of transportation capital projects1 was developed to meet the City’s updated multimodal level of service standard. WHEREAS, the collected Transportation Impact Fee collected fromor future developments Item 6.3 Packet pg. 23/352 - 2 - will be used to fund future transportation improvements (consisting of roadway projects with vehicular benefits as well as active transportation projects needed as some level of traffic and active transportation system gaps exist (projects identified in updated Transportation Plan / (benefiting bicycle and pedestrian users)); and WHEREAS, new Land Use Categories have been added to the Transportation Impact Fee Rate table due to theas part of the recently published ITE Trip Generation Manual (121th Edition) the land use category for any property in the Downtown Business (BD) zone used for the purpose of calculating the traffic impact fee will be Specialty Retail (ITE Land Use Code of 814); NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. New Section 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “IMPACT FEES,” will read as follows (text added to previous Section ECC 3.3618.82 is shown as underlined; deleted text is shown as strikethrough): Chapter 3.36 IMPACT FEES Sections: 3.36.010 Findings and authority. 3.36.020 Definitions. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. 3.36.040 Exemptions. 3.36.050 Credits. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. 3.36.070 Appeals. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. 3.36.090 Refunds. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 24/352 - 3 - 3.36.100 Use of funds. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 25/352 - 3 - 3.36.110 Review. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. 3.36.125 Transportation Street impact fee rates. 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. 3.36.150 Procedures guide. 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. 3.36.010 Findings and authority. The city council of the city of Edmonds (the “council”) hereby finds and determines that new growth and development in the city of Edmonds will create additional demand and need for public facilities in the city of Edmonds, and the council finds that new growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to serve the new growth and development. The city of Edmonds has conducted extensive studies documenting the procedures for measuring the impact of new developments on public facilities, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for park impact fees, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for transportation impact fees, and hereby incorporates these studies into this title by reference. Therefore, pursuant to Chapter 82.02 RCW, the council adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter to assess impact fees for parks and streets. The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the purposes of the council in establishing the impact fee program. These fees can and will only be applied to projects resulting from city-wide development growth. These fees cannot be used to mitigate existing shortfalls of the park system or street system. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.020 Definitions. The following words and terms shall have the following meanings for the purposes of this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Terms otherwise not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 and ECDC Title 21 or given their usual and customary meaning. A. “Accessory dwelling unit” is defined in ECDC 21.05.015. B. “Building permit” means an official document or certification which is issued by the building official and which authorizes the construction, alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection, demolition, moving or repair of a building or structure. C. “Capital facilities plan” means the capital facilities plan element of a comprehensive plan adopted by the city of Edmonds pursuant to Chapter 36.70A RCW, and such plan as amended. There are many references in state statutes to the “capital facilities plan” (CFP) as the basis for projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. The parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a “capital facilities plan,” and is considered to be the “capital facilities plan” (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds’ impact fees for parks. The transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a “capital facilities plan,” and is considered to be the “capital facilities plan” (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds’ impact fees for streets. Depending on the context, references to a CFP in the impact fee chapter, rate study, and procedures guide are interpreted as referring to either the parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan or the transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan, including the projects eligible for impact fees listed in Appendix C of the procedures guide for the transportation impact fees. D. “City” means the city of Edmonds. E. “Council” means the city council of the city of Edmonds. F. “Department” means the development services department. G. “Development activity” means any construction, expansion, or change in the use of a building or structure that creates additional demand and need for public facilities. H. “Development approval” means any written authorization from the city of Edmonds which authorizes the commencement of a development activity. I. “Director” means the director designated by the mayor to administer the impact fee program or that director’s designee. J. “Dwelling unit” is defined in ECDC 21.20.050. K. “Encumbered” means to reserve, set aside, or otherwise earmark the impact fees in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for public facilities. L. “Feepayer” is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated association, or any other similar entity, or department or bureau of any governmental entity or municipal corporation commencing a land development activity which creates the demand for additional capital facilities, and which requires the issuance of a building permit. “Feepayer” includes an applicant for an impact fee credit. M. Reserved. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 26/352 - 4 - N. “Hearing examiner” is defined in ECDC 21.40.010. O. “Impact fee” means a payment of money imposed by the city of Edmonds on development activity pursuant to this chapter as a condition of granting development approval in order to pay for the public facilities needed to serve new growth and development. “Impact fee” does not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, the administrative fee for collecting and handling school impact fees, the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations or any other charge or fee based upon the administrative costs of processing a development application. P. “Impact fee account” or “account” means the account(s) established for each type of public facility for which impact fees are collected. The accounts shall be established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080 and 3.36.090 and comply with the requirements of RCW 82.02.070. Q. “Independent fee calculation” means the impact fee calculation and/or economic documentation prepared by a feepayer to support the assessment of an impact fee other than by the use of the rates listed in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or the calculations prepared by the director where none of the fee categories or fee amounts in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of the new development on public facilities. R. “Interest” means the average interest rate earned in the last fiscal year by the city of Edmonds. S. ”Low-income Housing” means housing affordable to, and occupied by, a household whose income does not exceed eighty (80) percent of area median income as reported by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Seattle-Bellevue metropolitan area. To be considered affordable, for the purpose of this definition, the combined monthly cost of the housing, including rent, utilities, and other charges for the applicable unit, may not exceed thirty-percent of the household’s monthly income, adjusted for family size. T. “Occupancy permit” means the permit issued by the city of Edmonds authorizing the building to be occupied where a development activity results in a change in use of the preexisting structure, or the creation of a new use where none previously existed. U. “Owner” means the owner of record of real property, or a person with an unrestricted written option to purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the real property. V. “Procedures guide” means the administrative guidance document prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.150. W. “Project improvements” means site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular development or users of the project and are not system improvements. No improvement or facility included in a capital facilities plan adopted by the council shall be considered a project improvement. X. “Public facilities” means the public parks, open space and recreation facilities owned by the city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the park impact fee and means the public streets and roads owned by the city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the street impact fee. Y. “Rate study” means the “Rate Study for Impact Fees for Parks, Open Space and Recreation Facilities,” city of Edmonds, dated July 12, 2013, in the context of the park impact fee and means the “Rate Study for Impact Fees for Roads,” city of Edmonds, dated October 29, 2009, in the context of the street impact fee. Z. “Residential” or “residential development” means all types of construction intended for human habitation. This shall include, but is not limited to, single-family, duplex, triplex, and other multifamily development. This also includes the residential portion of mixed-use developments. AA. Reserved. BB. “Service area” means the entire corporate limits of the city of Edmonds. CC. “Significant past tax payment” means taxes exceeding five percent of the amount of the impact fee, and which were paid prior to the date the impact fee is assessed and were earmarked or pro-traratable to the same system improvements for which the impact fee is assessed. DD. Reserved. EE. “State” means the state of Washington. FF. Reserved. GG. “System improvements” means public facilities that are included in the city of Edmonds capital facilities plan and are designed to provide service to service areas within the community at large, in contrast to project improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, from any applicant seeking development approval from the city for any development activity within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 27/352 - 5 - 1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory to a residential use, and signs. 2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for which there is no increase in the number of residential units. 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note: accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single- family residential neighborhood. B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee rates in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change of use permit or remodel permit. 1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration, expansion, replacement or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the new use, less an amount equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior use. 2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of each land use based on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. 3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the proposed development. 4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete building permit application pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete building permit application, a copy of the letter or certificate prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit awarded. 5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in administering the impact fee program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time the building permit or business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the required building permit or business license or other approval unless and until the impact fees set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.040 Exemptions. A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all impact fees under this chapter: 1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use and does not expand the usable space or add any residential units; 2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs; 3. Demolition or moving of a structure; 4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less of gross floor area; 5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same site or lot when a building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the City within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size shall be interpreted to include any structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more than 100 square feet; or 6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed (accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single-family residential neighborhood, and because the city’s traffic model does not assign additional trips to the network as a result of ADUs). B. Low-income housing units shall be exempt from paying eighty percent of the street transportation traffic impact fees to the extent the units satisfy this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording Item 6.3 Packet pg. 28/352 - 6 - a covenant that prohibits using the low-income housing units for any purpose other than for low-income housing. At a minimum, the covenant must address price restrictions and household income limits for the low-income housing development, and that if the property is converted to a use other than for low-income housing, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation that shows that the low-income units are continuing to be rented in compliance with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the housing is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded upon the developer’s payment of the remaining twenty percent of the street impact fee. C. Multi-family housing unit (with tax exemption under RCW 84.14.020(1)(a)(ii)(D)) and located within a station are (as defined in RCW 36.07A-030) – essentially within ½ mile walkshed of a rail station or ¼ mile walkshed of a BRT Station shall be exempt from paying 50% of the transportation impact fee. D.C. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park impact fees under this chapter: 1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to, Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums and other low-income housing shall execute and record a lien against the property, in favor of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling unit will continue to be used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for low-income rental housing, the owner shall pay the city the impact fee from which the owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory rate. Any claim for an exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. CD. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.050 Credits. A. Pursuant to the requirement of RCW 82.02.060(4), a feepayer shall be entitled to a credit for the value of any dedication of land for, improvement to, or new construction of any system improvements provided by the feepayer, to facilities that are identified in the capital facilities plan and that are required by the city as a condition of approving the development activity. B. The director shall determine if requests for credits meet the criteria in subsection (A) of this section. C. For each request for a credit or credits, the director shall select an appraiser or the feepayer may select an independent appraiser acceptable to the director. D. The appraiser must be prequalified by the city and shall not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. A description of the appraiser’s certification shall be included with the appraisal, and the appraiser shall certify that he/she does not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. E. The appraiser shall be directed to determine the total value of the dedicated land, improvements, and/or construction provided by the feepayer on a case-by-case basis. F. The feepayer shall pay for the cost of the appraisal or request that the cost of the appraisal be deducted from the credit which the director may be providing to the feepayer, in the event that a credit is awarded. G. After receiving the appraisal, the director shall provide the applicant with a letter or certificate setting forth the dollar amount of the credit, the reason for the credit, the legal description of the site donated where applicable, and the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development to which the credit may be applied. The applicant must sign and date a duplicate copy of such letter or certificate indicating his/her agreement to the terms of the letter or certificate,, and return such signed document to the director before the impact fee credit will be awarded. The failure of the applicant to sign, date, and return such document within 60 calendar days shall nullify the credit. H. No credit shall be given for project improvements required of the development by city code and/or SEPA; only dedications in excess of those required by law are eligible for credit. In no event shall this provision be interpreted to authorize cash payment. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit the discretion of the city council to decline to accept any proposed dedication. I. A feepayer can request that a credit or credits for impact fees be awarded to him/her for significant past tax payments. For each request for a credit or credits for significant past tax payments for impact fees, the feepayer shall submit receipts and a calculation of past tax payments earmarked for or pro-ratable to the particular system Item 6.3 Packet pg. 29/352 - 7 - improvement. The director shall determine the amount of credits, if any, for significant past tax payments for public facilities. J. Any claim for credit must be made no later than 20 calendar days after the submission of an application for a building permit. The failure to timely file such a claim shall constitute a final bar to later request any such credit. K. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. L. A feepayer may, in the alternative, appeal an assessment or mitigation requirement which he believes exceeds the total which may lawfully be imposed. See ECDC 18.50.020(C). [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. Pursuant to and consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060, the rate study has provided adjustments for future taxes to be paid by the new development which are earmarked or pro-ratable to the same new public facilities which will serve the new development. The impact fee rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been reasonably adjusted for taxes and other revenue sources which are anticipated to be available to fund public improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.070 Appeals. A. Any feepayer may pay the impact fees imposed by this chapter under protest in order to obtain a building permit. B. Appeals regarding the amount of the impact fee imposed on any development activity may only be filed by the feepayer of the property where such development activity will occur. This provision shall control over any other provisions of city ordinance. C. The feepayer must first file a request for review regarding impact fees with the director, as provided herein: 1. The request shall be in writing on the form provided by the city; 2. The request for review by the director shall be filed within 14 calendar days of the feepayer’s payment of the impact fees at issue. The failure to timely file such a request shall constitute a final bar to later seek such review; 3. An administrative fee will be imposed for the request for review by the director; this shall be the same as that imposed for a request for reconsideration of a staff decision; 4. The director shall issue his/her determination in writing within 14 days from the receipt of a request for review. D. Determinations of the director with respect to the applicability of the impact fees to a given development activity, the availability or value of a credit, or the director’s decision concerning the independent fee calculation which is authorized in ECC 3.36.130, or the fees imposed by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or any other determination which the director is authorized to make pursuant to this chapter, can be appealed to the hearing examiner. E. The decision of the director may be appealed to the hearing examiner as a Type II decision. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. A. Impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and deposited in special interest-bearing accounts. B. There is hereby established a separate impact fee account for the park impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the park impact account. There is also hereby established a separate impact fee account for the street transportation traffic impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the street transportation traffic impact account. Funds withdrawn from these accounts must be used in accordance with the provisions of ECC 3.36.100 and applicable state law. Interest earned on the fees shall be retained in the respective accounts and expended for the purposes for which the impact fees were collected. C. On an annual basis, the finance director shall provide a report to the council on the impact fee accounts showing the source and amount of all monies collected, earned, or received, and the public improvements that were financed in whole or in part by impact fees. D. Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered within 10 years of receipt, unless the council identifies in written findings extraordinary and compelling reason or reasons for the city to hold the fees beyond the 10-year period. Under such circumstances, and prior to the expiration of the 10-year period, the council shall establish the period of time within which the impact fees shall be expended or encumbered. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.090 Refunds. A. If the city fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within 10 years of when the fees were paid or, where extraordinary or compelling reasons exist, such other time periods as established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080, the current owner of the property on which impact fees have been paid may receive a refund of such fees. In determining Item 6.3 Packet pg. 30/352 - 8 - whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first-in, first-out basis. B. The city shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are eligible for an impact fee refund. This notification shall be done by first class mail deposited with the United States Postal Service at the last known address of such claimants. A potential claimant must be the owner of the property. C. Owners seeking a refund of impact fees must submit a written request for a refund of the fees to the director within one year of the date the right to claim the refund arises or the date that notice is given, whichever is later. D. Any impact fees for which no application for a refund has been made within this one-year period shall be retained by the city and expended on the appropriate public facilities. E. Refunds of impact fees under this section shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by the city. F. When the city seeks to terminate any or all components of the impact fee program, all unexpended or unencumbered funds from any terminated component or components, including interest earned, shall be refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee requirements are to be terminated, the city shall place notice of such termination and the availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation at least two times and shall notify all potential claimants by first class mail at the last known address of the claimants. All funds available for refund shall be retained for a period of one year. At the end of one year, any remaining funds shall be retained by the city, but must be expended for the appropriate public facilities. This notice requirement shall not apply if there are no unexpended or unencumbered balances within the account or accounts being terminated. G. The city shall also refund to the current owner of property for which impact fees have been paid, including interest earned on the impact fees, if the development activity for which the impact fees were imposed did not occur; provided, that if the city has expended or encumbered the impact fees in good faith prior to the application for a refund, the director can decline to provide the refund. If within a period of three years, the same or subsequent owner of the property proceeds with the same or substantially similar development activity, the owner can petition the director for an offset. The petitioner must provide receipts of impact fees previously paid for a development of the same or substantially similar nature on the same property or some portion thereof. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.100 Use of funds. A. Pursuant to this chapter, impact fees: 1. Shall be used for public improvements that will reasonably benefit new development; and 2. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public facilities serving existing developments; and 3. Shall not be used for maintenance or operations. B. Impact fees may be spent for public improvements, including, but not limited to, planning, engineering, surveying, land acquisition, right-of-way acquisition, site improvements, necessary off-site improvements, construction, architectural, permitting, financing, and administrative expenses, applicable impact fees or mitigation costs, and any other expenses which can be capitalized. C. Impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs previously incurred by the city to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the previously constructed improvements or incurred costs. D. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for the advanced provision of public improvements for which impact fees may be expended, impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the facilities or improvements provided are consistent with the requirements of this section and are used to serve the new development. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.110 Review. The fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 may be reviewed and adjusted by the council as it deems necessary and appropriate in conjunction with the annual update of the capital facilities plan element of the city’s comprehensive plan. The fee rates may be adjusted 12 months after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, or 12 months after the most recent review by the council. The council may determine the amount of any adjustment up or down and revise the fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: Item 6.3 Packet pg. 31/352 - 9 - A. Effective October 1, 2014: 1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit. 2. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit. 3. Nonresidential development: $1.34 per square foot. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.125 Street Transportation Traffic impact fee rates. Transportation Traffic The street impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for herein, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below. For properties zoned BD – Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 – Specialty Retail shall be applieesd. ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee CalculationUnit 2016 Transportation Impact Fee per unit @ (w/ $9,261.551,049.41 cost per trip) 110 -General Light Industrial per square footper square foot1,000 sf GFA $1.50$4.,5438.38 140 - Manufacturing per square foot1,000 sf GFAper square foot $1.12$5.,8435.06 151 - Mini-warehouse per square foot per square f1,000 sf GFAoot $1.,30296.68$0.40 210 - Single-family house per dwelling unit $1,196.33$8,613.66 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) 1 per dwelling unit $4,306.83 220 - Apartment215 – Single Family Attached Housing per dwelling unit $776.56$4,723.62 220 – Multifamily Housing (low-rise / 2 or 3 floors) per dwelling unitPer dwelling unit $4,816.24 2210 – Multifamily Housing (mid-rise/ 4 to 10 floors) per dwelling unitPer dwelling unit $3,519.56 223 - Affordable Housing per dwelling unitPer dwelling unit $4,260.52 230 - Low-Rise Residential with 1st floor commercial (2 to 3 floors) per dwelling unitPer dwelling unit $3,334.32 231 - Mid-Rise Residential with 1st floor commercial (4 to 10 floors) per dwelling unitPer dwelling unit $3,704.80 240 - Mobile Home Park per dwelling unit $4,260.52 251 - Senior Adult Housing – Single family per dwelling unit $2,685.98 252 - Senior Adult Housing – Multi-family per dwelling unit $2,315.50 230 - Condominium per dwelling unit $629.65 240 - Mobile home per dwelling unit $671.62 251 - Senior Housing per dwelling unit $157.41 320 - Motel per room $629.65$3.426.94 420 - Marina per boat berth $188.89 4454 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00$740.96 1 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 32/352 - 10 - 492 - Health/fitness club per square foot1,000 sf GFAper square foot $$2.7834,9217.74 520 - Elementary School per students $1,481.92 522 – Middle School / Junior High School per students $1,389.30 52530 - High school per students per square foot $0.82$1,389.30 530 – Private School (K – 8th)per students $2,408.12 532 – Private School (K – 12th)per students $1,759.78 560 - Church per square foot1,000 sf GFAper square foot $0.69$3.,982.66 565 - Day care center per square foot1,000 sf GFAper square foot $6.57$55.786,757.24 620 - Nursing home per square footper bed1,000 sf GFA $199.39$5.46,464.58 710 - General office (greater than 10,000 SF of gross floor area) per square foot p1,000 sf GFAer square foot $2.07$10.93,929.16 712 - General office (less than 10,000 SF of gross floor area) per square foot1,000 sf GFA $20.010,005.92 720 - Medical – Dental office building per square foot pe1,000 sf GFAr square foot $3.81$31.68,676.04 814 Variety Store 3 per square foot $40.96 820 - Shopping center (greater than> 150,000 SFk of gross leasable area) per square foot 1,000 sf GFAper square foot $1.3421.4438,437.83 821 - Shopping Plaza (40,000 SF to 150,000 SF of gross leasable area) per square foot1,000 sf GFA $47.68,680.78 822 – Strip Retail Plaza (< 40,000 SF of gross leasable area) per square foot1,000 sf GFA $58.26,257.98 826 - Specialty retail per square foot $0.93 850 - Supermarket per square foot 1,000 sf GFAper square foot $61.87,873.86$4.80 8510 - Convenience market 15-16hrsStore per square foot 1,000 sf GFAper square foot $447.3535,354.605.80 912 - Drive-in bank per square foot pe1,000 sf GFAr square foot $126.61,606.91$7.00 918 – Hair Salon / Spa per square foot1,000 sf GFA $13.43,429.90 931 – Fine Dining Restaurant per square foot1,000 sf GFA $42.01,012.43 932 -– High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant: sit-down per square footper square foot1,000 sf GFA $48.46, 464.34$4.70 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 33/352 - 11 - 933 - Fast Food Restaurant without Drive- ThroughFast food, no drive-up per square foot 1,000 sf GFAper square foot $340.19, 193.26$9.19 934 - Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Through WindowFast food with drive- up per square foot 1,000 sf GFAper square foot $11.23$131.71,705.64 935 - Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Through and No Indoor Seating per drive- through- though lanes $380,251.41030.86 936 - Coffee/donut shop without Drive-Through Window , no drive-up per square footper square foot1,000 sq GFA $5.73292,03030.86 937_Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window per square foot1,000 sf GFA $68.63,631.42 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive-up, no indoor seating per square footper drive- throughh - though lanes $10.552,793.43 945 – Convenience Store / Gas Station per vVehicle fFueling pPosition $464,593.46 9781 - Brewery Taproom 1per square foot,000 sf GFA $91.0559,593.19 97545 -– Drinking PlaceConvenience Store / Gas station with convenience per square foot 1,000 sf GFAper vehicle fueling position $$3,347.659.652TBD 1 Accessory Dwelling Unit TIF rate set at 50% of single family detached unit. 2 Variety Store is to be used for all retail developments with less than 1,000 sf in the Downtown Business District.. ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee Calculation 2016 (w/ $1,049.41 cost per trip) 2017 (with $2,543.01 cost per trip) 2018 (w/ 4,036.61 cost per trip) 2019 and beyond (w/ $5,530.21 cost per trip) 110 - Light Industrial per square foot $1.50 $3.64 $5.77 $7.91 140 - Manufacturing per square foot $1.12 $2.72 $4.32 $5.92 151 - Mini-warehouse per square foot $0.40 $0.97 $1.54 $2.10 210 - Single-family house per dwelling unit $1,196.33 $2,873.60 $4,561.37 $6,249.14 220 - Apartment per dwelling unit $776.56 $1,881.83 $2,987.09 $4,092.36 230 - Condominium per dwelling unit $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 240 - Mobile home per dwelling unit $671.62 $1,627.53 $2,583.43 $3,539.33 251 - Senior Housing per dwelling unit $157.41 $584.89 $928.42 $1,271.95 320 - Motel per room $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 420 - Marina per boat berth $188.89 $457.74 $726.59 $995.44 444 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00 $31,905.90 $50,645.37 $69,384.85 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 34/352 - 12 - 492 - Health/fitness club per square foot $2.78 $6.74 $10.98 $14.66 530 - High school per square foot $0.82 $1.98 $3.15 $4.31 560 - Church per square foot $0.69 $1.68 $2.67 $3.65 565 - Day care center per square foot $6.57 $15.77 $25.02 $34.29 620 - Nursing home per bed $199.39 $483.17 $766.96 $1,050.74 710 - General office per square foot $2.07 $5.01 $7.95 $10.89 720 - Medical office per square foot $3.81 $9.54 $15.14 $20.74 820 - Shopping center per square foot $1.34 $3.26 $5.17 $7.08 826 - Specialty retail per square foot $0.93 $2.06 $3.27 $4.48 850 - Supermarket per square foot $4.80 $10.50 $16.84 $22.84 850 - Convenience market 15-16hrs per square foot $5.80 $14.07 $22.38 $30.58 912 - Drive-in bank per square foot $7.00 $15.97 $25.41 $34.73 932 - Restaurant: sit-down per square foot $4.70 $10.04 $15.95 $21.84 933 - Fast food, no drive-up per square foot $9.19 $22.28 $35.36 $48.44 934 - Fast food with drive-up per square foot $11.23 $26.24 $41.66 $57.07 936 - Coffee/donut shop, no drive- up per square foot $5.73 $13.88 $22.04 $30.19 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive-up, no indoor seating per square foot $10.55 $25.56 $40.37 $55.58 945 - Gas station with convenience per vehicle fueling position $3,347.62 $6,916.99 $10,979.58 $15,042.18 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. A. If in the judgment of the director, none of the fee categories or fee amounts set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and/or 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of a new development on parks and/or streets, the department may ask the applicant to conduct independent fee calculations and the director may impose alternative fees on a specific development based on those calculations. The alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be agreed to by the director and the feepayer. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. B. Any feepayer submitting an independent fee calculation will be required to pay the city of Edmonds a fee to cover the cost of reviewing the independent fee calculation. A fee is required by the city for conducting the review of the independent fee calculation plus the actual cost of outside consultant review if required by the city, unless otherwise established by the director, and shall be paid by the feepayer prior to initiation of review. C. While there is a presumption that the calculations set forth in the rate study are valid, the director shall consider the documentation submitted by the feepayer, but is not required to accept such documentation or analysis which the director reasonably deems to be inaccurate or not reliable, and may, in the alternative, require the feepayer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. The director is authorized to adjust the impact fees on a case- by-case basis based on the independent fee calculation, the specific characteristics of the development, and/or Item 6.3 Packet pg. 35/352 - 13 - principles of fairness. The fees or alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be mailed to the feepayer. D. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section may be appealed to the office of the hearing examiner as set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the city from requiring the feepayer or the proponent of a development activity to mitigate adverse environmental impacts of a specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, based on the environmental documents accompanying the underlying development approval process, and/or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions; provided, that the exercise of this authority is consistent with the provisions of Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.150 Procedures guide. The director is authorized to develop a procedures guide to facilitate the city’s administration and enforcement of this chapter. The procedures guide shall be consistent with the provisions of this chapter, shall be for the sole convenience of the city, and shall not vest any rights in or for any other person. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. A. An applicant for a building permit for a single-family detached or attached residence may request a deferral of the full impact fee payment until final inspection. The building official may withhold certification of final inspection until the impact fees have been paid in full. B. The amount of impact fees that may be deferred under this section must be determined by the fees in effect at the time the applicant applies for a deferral. C. The term of an impact fee deferral under this section may not exceed 18 months from the date of building permit issuance. D. An applicant seeking a deferral under this section must grant and record a deferred impact fee lien against the property in favor of the city in the amount of the deferred impact fee. The deferred impact fee lien, which must include the legal description, tax account number, and address of the property, must also be: 1. In a form approved by the city attorney; 2. Signed by all owners of the property, as demonstrated by a current title report, with all signatures acknowledged as required for a deed; 3. Recorded with the Snohomish County auditor’s office; 4. Binding on all successors in title after the recordation; and 5. Junior and subordinate to one mortgage for the purpose of construction upon the same real property granted by the person who applied for the deferral of impact fees. E. If impact fees are not paid in accordance with a deferral authorized by this section, the city may institute foreclosure proceedings in accordance with Chapter 61.12 RCW. F. In addition to the administrative fee collected pursuant to ECC 3.36.030(B)(5), the city shall collect an additional reasonable administrative fee to implement this section from permit applicants who are seeking to delay the payment of impact fees under this section. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. G. The section shall be construed to be consistent with state law and RCW 82.02.050, in particular. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016]. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 36/352 - 14 - Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative function of the city council, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to Item 6.3 Packet pg. 37/352 - 15 - the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect upon the latter of five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title and January 1, 2017. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. EARLINGMIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEYEMILY VILLATA APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 38/352 - 15 - Item 6.3 Packet pg. 39/352 - 16 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2025016, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REVISING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS TO SECTION 3.36 OF THE ECC FOLLOWING THE 2024 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADDING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS TO THE NEW SECTION 3.36 OF THE ECC; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 202516. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEYEMILY VILLATA Item 6.3 Packet pg. 40/352 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REVISING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS TO SECTION 3.36 OF THE ECC FOLLOWING THE 2024 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds updated the Transportation Plan in 2024, with a new list of transportation capital projects to meet the City’s new Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) standard; WHEREAS, Traffic Impact Fees identified in Section 3.36 of the ECC have been modified to Transportation Impact Fee (as part of the Transportation Plan Update); WHEREAS, the Transportation Impact Fee collected from future developments will be used to fund future transportation improvements (consisting of roadway projects with vehicular benefits as well as active transportation projects identified in updated Transportation Plan / benefiting bicycle and pedestrian users); and WHEREAS, new Land Use Categories have been added to the Transportation Impact Fee Rate table as part of the recently published ITE Trip Generation Manual (12th Edition) NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Item 6.3 Packet pg. 41/352 - 2 - Section 1. Section 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “IMPACT FEES,” will read as follows (text added to previous Section ECC 3.36 is shown as underlined; deleted text is shown as strikethrough): Chapter 3.36 IMPACT FEES Sections: 3.36.010 Findings and authority. 3.36.020 Definitions. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. 3.36.040 Exemptions. 3.36.050 Credits. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. 3.36.070 Appeals. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. 3.36.090 Refunds. 3.36.100 Use of funds. 3.36.110 Review. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. 3.36.125 Transportation Street impact fee rates. 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. 3.36.150 Procedures guide. 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. 3.36.010 Findings and authority. The city council of the city of Edmonds (the “council”) hereby finds and determines that new growth and development in the city of Edmonds will create additional demand and need for public facilities in the city of Edmonds, and the council finds that new growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to serve the new growth and development. The city of Edmonds has conducted extensive studies documenting the procedures for measuring the impact of new developments on public facilities, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for park impact fees, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for transportation impact fees, and hereby incorporates these studies into this title by reference. Therefore, pursuant to Chapter 82.02 RCW, the council adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter to assess impact fees for parks and streets. The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the purposes of the council in establishing the impact fee program. These fees can and will only be applied to projects resulting from city-wide development growth. These fees cannot be used to mitigate existing shortfalls of the park system or street system. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.020 Definitions. The following words and terms shall have the following meanings for the purposes of this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Terms otherwise not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 and ECDC Title 21 or given their usual and customary meaning. A. “Accessory dwelling unit” is defined in ECDC 21.05.015. B. “Building permit” means an official document or certification which is issued by the building official and which authorizes the construction, alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection, demolition, moving or repair of a building or structure. C. “Capital facilities plan” means the capital facilities plan element of a comprehensive plan adopted by the city of Edmonds pursuant to Chapter 36.70A RCW, and such plan as amended. There are many references in state statutes to the “capital facilities plan” (CFP) as the basis for projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. The parks Item 6.3 Packet pg. 42/352 - 3 - element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a “capital facilities plan,” and is considered to be the “capital facilities plan” (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds’ impact fees for parks. The transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a “capital facilities plan,” and is considered to be the “capital facilities plan” (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds’ impact fees for streets. Depending on the context, references to a CFP in the impact fee chapter, rate study, and procedures guide are interpreted as referring to either the parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan or the transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan, including the projects eligible for impact fees listed in Appendix C of the procedures guide for the transportation impact fees. D. “City” means the city of Edmonds. E. “Council” means the city council of the city of Edmonds. F. “Department” means the development services department. G. “Development activity” means any construction, expansion, or change in the use of a building or structure that creates additional demand and need for public facilities. H. “Development approval” means any written authorization from the city of Edmonds which authorizes the commencement of a development activity. I. “Director” means the director designated by the mayor to administer the impact fee program or that director’s designee. J. “Dwelling unit” is defined in ECDC 21.20.050. K. “Encumbered” means to reserve, set aside, or otherwise earmark the impact fees in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for public facilities. L. “Feepayer” is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated association, or any other similar entity, or department or bureau of any governmental entity or municipal corporation commencing a land development activity which creates the demand for additional capital facilities, and which requires the issuance of a building permit. “Feepayer” includes an applicant for an impact fee credit. M. Reserved. N. “Hearing examiner” is defined in ECDC 21.40.010. O. “Impact fee” means a payment of money imposed by the city of Edmonds on development activity pursuant to this chapter as a condition of granting development approval in order to pay for the public facilities needed to serve new growth and development. “Impact fee” does not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, the administrative fee for collecting and handling school impact fees, the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations or any other charge or fee based upon the administrative costs of processing a development application. P. “Impact fee account” or “account” means the account(s) established for each type of public facility for which impact fees are collected. The accounts shall be established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080 and 3.36.090 and comply with the requirements of RCW 82.02.070. Q. “Independent fee calculation” means the impact fee calculation and/or economic documentation prepared by a feepayer to support the assessment of an impact fee other than by the use of the rates listed in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or the calculations prepared by the director where none of the fee categories or fee amounts in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of the new development on public facilities. R. “Interest” means the average interest rate earned in the last fiscal year by the city of Edmonds. S. ”Low-income Housing” means housing affordable to, and occupied by, a household whose income does not exceed eighty (80) percent of area median income as reported by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Seattle-Bellevue metropolitan area. To be considered affordable, for the purpose of this definition, the combined monthly cost of the housing, including rent, utilities, and other charges for the applicable unit, may not exceed thirty-percent of the household’s monthly income, adjusted for family size. T. “Occupancy permit” means the permit issued by the city of Edmonds authorizing the building to be occupied where a development activity results in a change in use of the preexisting structure, or the creation of a new use where none previously existed. U. “Owner” means the owner of record of real property, or a person with an unrestricted written option to purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the real property. V. “Procedures guide” means the administrative guidance document prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.150. W. “Project improvements” means site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular development or users of the project and are not system improvements. No improvement or facility included in a capital facilities plan adopted by the council shall be considered a project improvement. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 43/352 - 4 - X. “Public facilities” means the public parks, open space and recreation facilities owned by the city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the park impact fee and means the public streets and roads owned by the city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the street impact fee. Y. “Rate study” means the “Rate Study for Impact Fees for Parks, Open Space and Recreation Facilities,” city of Edmonds, dated July 12, 2013, in the context of the park impact fee and means the “Rate Study for Impact Fees for Roads,” city of Edmonds, dated October 29, 2009, in the context of the street impact fee. Z. “Residential” or “residential development” means all types of construction intended for human habitation. This shall include, but is not limited to, single-family, duplex, triplex, and other multifamily development. This also includes the residential portion of mixed-use developments. AA. Reserved. BB. “Service area” means the entire corporate limits of the city of Edmonds. CC. “Significant past tax payment” means taxes exceeding five percent of the amount of the impact fee, and which were paid prior to the date the impact fee is assessed and were earmarked or pro-traratable to the same system improvements for which the impact fee is assessed. DD. Reserved. EE. “State” means the state of Washington. FF. Reserved. GG. “System improvements” means public facilities that are included in the city of Edmonds capital facilities plan and are designed to provide service to service areas within the community at large, in contrast to project improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, from any applicant seeking development approval from the city for any development activity within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities. 1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory to a residential use, and signs. 2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for which there is no increase in the number of residential units. 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note: accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single- family residential neighborhood. B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee rates in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change of use permit or remodel permit. 1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration, expansion, replacement or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the new use, less an amount equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior use. 2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of each land use based on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. 3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the proposed development. 4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete building permit application pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete building permit application, a copy of the letter or certificate prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit awarded. 5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in administering the impact fee program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time the building permit or business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the required building permit or business license Item 6.3 Packet pg. 44/352 - 5 - or other approval unless and until the impact fees set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.040 Exemptions. A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all impact fees under this chapter: 1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use and does not expand the usable space or add any residential units; 2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs; 3. Demolition or moving of a structure; 4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less of gross floor area; 5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same site or lot when a building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the City within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size shall be interpreted to include any structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more than 100 square feet; or 6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed (accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single-family residential neighborhood, and because the city’s traffic model does not assign additional trips to the network as a result of ADUs). B. Low-income housing units shall be exempt from paying eighty percent of the transportation traffic impact fees to the extent the units satisfy this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording a covenant that prohibits using the low-income housing units for any purpose other than for low-income housing. At a minimum, the covenant must address price restrictions and household income limits for the low-income housing development, and that if the property is converted to a use other than for low-income housing, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation that shows that the low-income units are continuing to be rented in compliance with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the housing is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded upon the developer’s payment of the remaining twenty percent of the street impact fee. C. Multi-family housing unit (with tax exemption under RCW 84.14.020(1)(a)(ii)(D)) and located within a station are (as defined in RCW 36.07A-030) – essentially within ½ mile walkshed of a rail station or ¼ mile walkshed of a BRT Station shall be exempt from paying 50% of the transportation impact fee. D. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park impact fees under this chapter: 1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to, Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums and other low-income housing shall execute and record a lien against the property, in favor of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling unit will continue to be used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for low-income rental housing, the owner shall pay the city the impact fee from which the owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory rate. Any claim for an exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waivedCD. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.050 Credits. A. Pursuant to the requirement of RCW 82.02.060(4), a feepayer shall be entitled to a credit for the value of any dedication of land for, improvement to, or new construction of any system improvements provided by the feepayer, to facilities that are identified in the capital facilities plan and that are required by the city as a condition of approving the development activity. B. The director shall determine if requests for credits meet the criteria in subsection (A) of this section. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 45/352 - 6 - C. For each request for a credit or credits, the director shall select an appraiser or the feepayer may select an independent appraiser acceptable to the director. D. The appraiser must be prequalified by the city and shall not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. A description of the appraiser’s certification shall be included with the appraisal, and the appraiser shall certify that he/she does not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. E. The appraiser shall be directed to determine the total value of the dedicated land, improvements, and/or construction provided by the feepayer on a case-by-case basis. F. The feepayer shall pay for the cost of the appraisal or request that the cost of the appraisal be deducted from the credit which the director may be providing to the feepayer, in the event that a credit is awarded. G. After receiving the appraisal, the director shall provide the applicant with a letter or certificate setting forth the dollar amount of the credit, the reason for the credit, the legal description of the site donated where applicable, and the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development to which the credit may be applied. The applicant must sign and date a duplicate copy of such letter or certificate indicating his/her agreement to the terms of the letter or certificate, and return such signed document to the director before the impact fee credit will be awarded. The failure of the applicant to sign, date, and return such document within 60 calendar days shall nullify the credit. H. No credit shall be given for project improvements required of the development by city code and/or SEPA; only dedications in excess of those required by law are eligible for credit. In no event shall this provision be interpreted to authorize cash payment. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit the discretion of the city council to decline to accept any proposed dedication. I. A feepayer can request that a credit or credits for impact fees be awarded to him/her for significant past tax payments. For each request for a credit or credits for significant past tax payments for impact fees, the feepayer shall submit receipts and a calculation of past tax payments earmarked for or pro-ratable to the particular system improvement. The director shall determine the amount of credits, if any, for significant past tax payments for public facilities. J. Any claim for credit must be made no later than 20 calendar days after the submission of an application for a building permit. The failure to timely file such a claim shall constitute a final bar to later request any such credit. K. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. L. A feepayer may, in the alternative, appeal an assessment or mitigation requirement which he believes exceeds the total which may lawfully be imposed. See ECDC 18.50.020(C). [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. Pursuant to and consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060, the rate study has provided adjustments for future taxes to be paid by the new development which are earmarked or pro-ratable to the same new public facilities which will serve the new development. The impact fee rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been reasonably adjusted for taxes and other revenue sources which are anticipated to be available to fund public improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.070 Appeals. A. Any feepayer may pay the impact fees imposed by this chapter under protest in order to obtain a building permit. B. Appeals regarding the amount of the impact fee imposed on any development activity may only be filed by the feepayer of the property where such development activity will occur. This provision shall control over any other provisions of city ordinance. C. The feepayer must first file a request for review regarding impact fees with the director, as provided herein: 1. The request shall be in writing on the form provided by the city; 2. The request for review by the director shall be filed within 14 calendar days of the feepayer’s payment of the impact fees at issue. The failure to timely file such a request shall constitute a final bar to later seek such review; 3. An administrative fee will be imposed for the request for review by the director; this shall be the same as that imposed for a request for reconsideration of a staff decision; 4. The director shall issue his/her determination in writing within 14 days from the receipt of a request for review. D. Determinations of the director with respect to the applicability of the impact fees to a given development activity, the availability or value of a credit, or the director’s decision concerning the independent fee calculation which is authorized in ECC 3.36.130, or the fees imposed by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or any other determination which the director is authorized to make pursuant to this chapter, can be appealed to the hearing examiner. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 46/352 - 7 - E. The decision of the director may be appealed to the hearing examiner as a Type II decision. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. A. Impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and deposited in special interest-bearing accounts. B. There is hereby established a separate impact fee account for the park impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the park impact account. There is also hereby established a separate impact fee account for the transportation traffic impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the transportation traffic impact account. Funds withdrawn from these accounts must be used in accordance with the provisions of ECC 3.36.100 and applicable state law. Interest earned on the fees shall be retained in the respective accounts and expended for the purposes for which the impact fees were collected. C. On an annual basis, the finance director shall provide a report to the council on the impact fee accounts showing the source and amount of all monies collected, earned, or received, and the public improvements that were financed in whole or in part by impact fees. D. Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered within 10 years of receipt, unless the council identifies in written findings extraordinary and compelling reason or reasons for the city to hold the fees beyond the 10-year period. Under such circumstances, and prior to the expiration of the 10-year period, the council shall establish the period of time within which the impact fees shall be expended or encumbered. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.090 Refunds. A. If the city fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within 10 years of when the fees were paid or, where extraordinary or compelling reasons exist, such other time periods as established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080, the current owner of the property on which impact fees have been paid may receive a refund of such fees. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first-in, first-out basis. B. The city shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are eligible for an impact fee refund. This notification shall be done by first class mail deposited with the United States Postal Service at the last known address of such claimants. A potential claimant must be the owner of the property. C. Owners seeking a refund of impact fees must submit a written request for a refund of the fees to the director within one year of the date the right to claim the refund arises or the date that notice is given, whichever is later. D. Any impact fees for which no application for a refund has been made within this one-year period shall be retained by the city and expended on the appropriate public facilities. E. Refunds of impact fees under this section shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by the city. F. When the city seeks to terminate any or all components of the impact fee program, all unexpended or unencumbered funds from any terminated component or components, including interest earned, shall be refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee requirements are to be terminated, the city shall place notice of such termination and the availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation at least two times and shall notify all potential claimants by first class mail at the last known address of the claimants. All funds available for refund shall be retained for a period of one year. At the end of one year, any remaining funds shall be retained by the city, but must be expended for the appropriate public facilities. This notice requirement shall not apply if there are no unexpended or unencumbered balances within the account or accounts being terminated. G. The city shall also refund to the current owner of property for which impact fees have been paid, including interest earned on the impact fees, if the development activity for which the impact fees were imposed did not occur; provided, that if the city has expended or encumbered the impact fees in good faith prior to the application for a refund, the director can decline to provide the refund. If within a period of three years, the same or subsequent owner of the property proceeds with the same or substantially similar development activity, the owner can petition the director for an offset. The petitioner must provide receipts of impact fees previously paid for a development of the same or substantially similar nature on the same property or some portion thereof. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.100 Use of funds. A. Pursuant to this chapter, impact fees: 1. Shall be used for public improvements that will reasonably benefit new development; and 2. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public facilities serving existing developments; and 3. Shall not be used for maintenance or operations. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 47/352 - 8 - B. Impact fees may be spent for public improvements, including, but not limited to, planning, engineering, surveying, land acquisition, right-of-way acquisition, site improvements, necessary off-site improvements, construction, architectural, permitting, financing, and administrative expenses, applicable impact fees or mitigation costs, and any other expenses which can be capitalized. C. Impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs previously incurred by the city to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the previously constructed improvements or incurred costs. D. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for the advanced provision of public improvements for which impact fees may be expended, impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the facilities or improvements provided are consistent with the requirements of this section and are used to serve the new development. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.110 Review. The fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 may be reviewed and adjusted by the council as it deems necessary and appropriate in conjunction with the annual update of the capital facilities plan element of the city’s comprehensive plan. The fee rates may be adjusted 12 months after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, or 12 months after the most recent review by the council. The council may determine the amount of any adjustment up or down and revise the fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: A. Effective October 1, 2014: 1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit. 2. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit. 3. Nonresidential development: $1.34 per square foot. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.125 Transportation Traffic impact fee rates. Transportation Traffic impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for herein, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below. For properties zoned BD – Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 – Specialty Retail shall be applies ITE Land Use Code - Description Unit Transportation Impact Fee per unit @ $9,261.55 per trip 110 -General Light Industrial per square foot $4.54 140 - Manufacturing per square foot $5.84 151 - Mini-warehouse per square foot $1.30 210 - Single-family house per dwelling unit $8,613.66 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) 1 per dwelling unit $4,306.83 215 – Single Family Attached Housing per dwelling unit $4,723.62 220 – Multifamily Housing (low-rise / 2 or 3 floors)per dwelling unit $4,816.24 221 – Multifamily Housing (mid-rise/ 4 to 10 floors)per dwelling unit $3,519.56 223 - Affordable Housing per dwelling unit $4,260.52 230 - Low-Rise Residential with 1st floor commercial (2 to 3 floors)per dwelling unit $3,334.32 1 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 48/352 - 9 - 231 - Mid-Rise Residential with 1st floor commercial (4 to 10 floors)per dwelling unit $3,704.80 240 - Mobile Home Park per dwelling unit $4,260.52 251 - Senior Adult Housing – Single family per dwelling unit $2,685.98 252 - Senior Adult Housing – Multi-family per dwelling unit $2,315.50 320 - Motel per room $3.426.94 445 - Movie theater per screens $740.96 492 - Health/fitness club per square foot $34,92 520 - Elementary School per students $1,481.92 522 – Middle School / Junior High School per students $1,389.30 525 - High school per students $1,389.30 530 – Private School (K – 8th)per students $2,408.12 532 – Private School (K – 12th)per students $1,759.78 560 - Church per square foot $3.98 565 - Day care center per square foot $55.78 620 - Nursing home per square foot $5.46 710 - General office (greater than 10,000 SF of gross floor area)per square foot $10.93 712 - General office (less than 10,000 SF of gross floor area)per square foot $20.01 720 - Medical – Dental office building per square foot $31.68 814 Variety Store 3 per square foot $40.96 820 - Shopping center (> 150,000 SF of gross leasable area)per square foot $21.44 821 - Shopping Plaza (40,000 SF to 150,000 SF of gross leasable area)per square foot $47.68 822 – Strip Retail Plaza (< 40,000 SF of gross leasable area)per square foot $58.26 850 - Supermarket per square foot $61.87 851 - Convenience Store per square foot $447.35 912 - Drive-in bank per square foot $126.61 918 – Hair Salon / Spa per square foot $13.43 931 – Fine Dining Restaurant per square foot $42.01 932 – High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant:per square foot $48.46 933 - Fast Food Restaurant without Drive- Through per square foot $340.19 934 - Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window per square foot $131.71 935 - Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Through and No Indoor Seating per drive-through lanes $380,251.41 936 - Coffee/donut shop without Drive-Through Window per square foot 292,03 937_Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window per square foot $68.63 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 49/352 - 10 - 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive-up, no indoor seating per drive-through lanes $2,793.43 945 – Convenience Store / Gas Station per vehicle fueling position $64,593.46 978 - Brewery Taproom per square foot $91.05 975 – Drinking Place per square foot $59.65 1 Accessory Dwelling Unit TIF rate set at 50% of single family detached unit. 2 Variety Store is to be used for all retail developments with less than 1,000 sf in the Downtown Business District.. ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee Calculation 2016 (w/ $1,049.41 cost per trip) 2017 (with $2,543.01 cost per trip) 2018 (w/ 4,036.61 cost per trip) 2019 and beyond (w/ $5,530.21 cost per trip) 110 - Light Industrial per square foot $1.50 $3.64 $5.77 $7.91 140 - Manufacturing per square foot $1.12 $2.72 $4.32 $5.92 151 - Mini-warehouse per square foot $0.40 $0.97 $1.54 $2.10 210 - Single-family house per dwelling unit $1,196.33 $2,873.60 $4,561.37 $6,249.14 220 - Apartment per dwelling unit $776.56 $1,881.83 $2,987.09 $4,092.36 230 - Condominium per dwelling unit $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 240 - Mobile home per dwelling unit $671.62 $1,627.53 $2,583.43 $3,539.33 251 - Senior Housing per dwelling unit $157.41 $584.89 $928.42 $1,271.95 320 - Motel per room $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 420 - Marina per boat berth $188.89 $457.74 $726.59 $995.44 444 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00 $31,905.90 $50,645.37 $69,384.85 492 - Health/fitness club per square foot $2.78 $6.74 $10.98 $14.66 530 - High school per square foot $0.82 $1.98 $3.15 $4.31 560 - Church per square foot $0.69 $1.68 $2.67 $3.65 565 - Day care center per square foot $6.57 $15.77 $25.02 $34.29 620 - Nursing home per bed $199.39 $483.17 $766.96 $1,050.74 710 - General office per square foot $2.07 $5.01 $7.95 $10.89 720 - Medical office per square foot $3.81 $9.54 $15.14 $20.74 820 - Shopping center per square foot $1.34 $3.26 $5.17 $7.08 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 50/352 - 11 - 826 - Specialty retail per square foot $0.93 $2.06 $3.27 $4.48 850 - Supermarket per square foot $4.80 $10.50 $16.84 $22.84 850 - Convenience market 15-16hrs per square foot $5.80 $14.07 $22.38 $30.58 912 - Drive-in bank per square foot $7.00 $15.97 $25.41 $34.73 932 - Restaurant: sit-down per square foot $4.70 $10.04 $15.95 $21.84 933 - Fast food, no drive-up per square foot $9.19 $22.28 $35.36 $48.44 934 - Fast food with drive-up per square foot $11.23 $26.24 $41.66 $57.07 936 - Coffee/donut shop, no drive- up per square foot $5.73 $13.88 $22.04 $30.19 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive-up, no indoor seating per square foot $10.55 $25.56 $40.37 $55.58 945 - Gas station with convenience per vehicle fueling position $3,347.62 $6,916.99 $10,979.58 $15,042.18 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. A. If in the judgment of the director, none of the fee categories or fee amounts set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and/or 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of a new development on parks and/or streets, the department may ask the applicant to conduct independent fee calculations and the director may impose alternative fees on a specific development based on those calculations. The alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be agreed to by the director and the feepayer. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. B. Any feepayer submitting an independent fee calculation will be required to pay the city of Edmonds a fee to cover the cost of reviewing the independent fee calculation. A fee is required by the city for conducting the review of the independent fee calculation plus the actual cost of outside consultant review if required by the city, unless otherwise established by the director, and shall be paid by the feepayer prior to initiation of review. C. While there is a presumption that the calculations set forth in the rate study are valid, the director shall consider the documentation submitted by the feepayer, but is not required to accept such documentation or analysis which the director reasonably deems to be inaccurate or not reliable, and may, in the alternative, require the feepayer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. The director is authorized to adjust the impact fees on a case- by-case basis based on the independent fee calculation, the specific characteristics of the development, and/or principles of fairness. The fees or alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be mailed to the feepayer. D. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section may be appealed to the office of the hearing examiner as set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the city from requiring the feepayer or the proponent of a development activity to mitigate adverse environmental impacts of a specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, based on the environmental documents accompanying the underlying development approval process, and/or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions; provided, that the exercise of this authority is consistent with the provisions of Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.150 Procedures guide. The director is authorized to develop a procedures guide to facilitate the city’s administration and enforcement of this chapter. The procedures guide shall be consistent with the provisions of this chapter, shall be for the sole convenience of the city, and shall not vest any rights in or for any other person. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 51/352 - 12 - 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. A. An applicant for a building permit for a single-family detached or attached residence may request a deferral of the full impact fee payment until final inspection. The building official may withhold certification of final inspection until the impact fees have been paid in full. B. The amount of impact fees that may be deferred under this section must be determined by the fees in effect at the time the applicant applies for a deferral. C. The term of an impact fee deferral under this section may not exceed 18 months from the date of building permit issuance. D. An applicant seeking a deferral under this section must grant and record a deferred impact fee lien against the property in favor of the city in the amount of the deferred impact fee. The deferred impact fee lien, which must include the legal description, tax account number, and address of the property, must also be: 1. In a form approved by the city attorney; 2. Signed by all owners of the property, as demonstrated by a current title report, with all signatures acknowledged as required for a deed; 3. Recorded with the Snohomish County auditor’s office; 4. Binding on all successors in title after the recordation; and 5. Junior and subordinate to one mortgage for the purpose of construction upon the same real property granted by the person who applied for the deferral of impact fees. E. If impact fees are not paid in accordance with a deferral authorized by this section, the city may institute foreclosure proceedings in accordance with Chapter 61.12 RCW. F. In addition to the administrative fee collected pursuant to ECC 3.36.030(B)(5), the city shall collect an additional reasonable administrative fee to implement this section from permit applicants who are seeking to delay the payment of impact fees under this section. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. G. The section shall be construed to be consistent with state law and RCW 82.02.050, in particular. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016]. Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative function of the city council, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 52/352 - 13 - APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 6.3 Packet pg. 53/352 - 13 - Item 6.3 Packet pg. 54/352 - 14 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REVISING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS TO SECTION 3.36 OF THE ECC FOLLOWING THE 2024 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2025. CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA Item 6.3 Packet pg. 55/352 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE AND REVISIONS TO SECTION 3.36 OF ECC Council Meeting 01/06/26 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 56/352 WHAT ARE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES? 2 Fees collected from developers to help pay for transportation infrastructure improvements Calculated from 20-year transportation improvement projects in Comprehensive Plan Measure development’s share of project costs Updated Impact Fee law now allows for inclusion of pedestrian/bicycle projects to support multi modal projects Existing Transportation Impact Fees (Municipal Code 3.36.125) Item 6.3 Packet pg. 57/352 APPROACH TO UPDATING IMPACT FEES 3 Step 1: Determine which projects are TIF Eligible Step 2: Determine the Percent of Project Costs that are Eligible for TIF Funding Step 3: Calculate the Per Trip TIF Rate Item 6.3 Packet pg. 58/352 Project improvements based on the evaluation of travel forecasts, safety, LOS and active transportation system gaps Projects widen corridors, build sidewalks, add bike lanes, enhance crossings, construct new connections, and improve intersections Project list includes planning level cost estimates CAPITAL PROJECT MAP 4 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 59/352 20 Year Cost # of Improvement Projects Improvement Type $ 117,830,000 52Sidewalk $ 316,560,000 19 Roadway & Intersection $ 111,070,000 9Multiuse Path $ 18,120,000 8Bike Lanes $ 563,580,000 88Total CAPITAL PROJECT TYPE AND COST 5 Which projects are TIF eligible? What percentage of each project is growth related? Item 6.3 Packet pg. 60/352 Eligibility Based on Several Factors: Does the project address a level of service (vehicle delay or sidewalk connectivity) deficiency as identified in the Comp Plan? Is the project needed to accommodate growth? Has funding been secured for the project? DETERMINING ELIGIBLE PROJECTS 6 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 61/352 GENERAL TIF ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES 7 TIF % RangeTIF Eligibility based on:Improvement Type 10 – 35% % growth in vehicle trips (from travel model)Roadway & Intersection 5 – 45% Proximity to Land Use Growth/Development Activity Sidewalk 5 – 45% Proximity to Land Use Growth/Development Activity Multiuse Path 5%Assumed to be mostly covered by roadway resurfacingBike Lanes Item 6.3 Packet pg. 62/352 TIF ELIGIBILITY – ROADWAY & INTERSECTION 8 Intersection Improvement Projects TIF Eligibility based on percent growth in vehicle trips Some level of intersection deficiency from existing traffic – future share based on how much forecasted growth Item 6.3 Packet pg. 63/352 TIF ELIGIBILITY – SIDEWALK & MULTIUSE PATHS 9 Sidewalk and Multiuse Path Projects TIF Eligibility based on ‘Activity Center Score’ % TIF EligibleActivity Center Score 45%40 or more 35%35 – 40 30%30 – 35 25%20 – 30 15%15 – 20 10%10 – 15 5%Less than 10 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 64/352 TOTAL TIF ELIGIBLE COSTS 10 TIF Eligible Cost 20 Year Cost # of Projects Improvement Type $26.9 million$117.8 million 52Sidewalk $36.5 million$316.6 million19 Roadway & Intersection $42.5 million$111.1 million 9Multiuse Path $5.8 million$18.1 million8Bike Lanes $111.7 million$563.6 million 88Total Total TIF eligible fee ~$111.7 million Assumes that remaining ~$451.9 million needed to fund transportation improvements identified in transportation master plan come from grants and other city funds as needed Item 6.3 Packet pg. 65/352 Proposed RateCurrent Impact Fee RateUnit of MeasureLand Use $8,613.66$6,249.14Dwelling UnitSingle Family Detached Home $4,306.83$3,124.57Dwelling UnitADU $4,816.24$4,092.36Dwelling UnitApartment (low rise) $3,334.32$3,318.13Dwelling UnitCondo (low rise with ground floor retail) $48.46$21.84Per sq. footRestaurant PROPOSED IMPACT FEE 11 Developments within Downtown Business District * Variety Store to be used for all retail developments with less than 1,000 sf * Appropriate land use to be used if greater than 1,000 sf Item 6.3 Packet pg. 66/352 Edmonds current TIF rate slightly above state average ($5,400) Increase inline with other ‘peer’ agencies: Bothel = $12,140 Shoreline = $11,057 Redmond = $10,022 IMPACT FEE COMPARISON 12 Increase to $9,262 / trip Item 6.3 Packet pg. 67/352 * Approval of Transportation Impact Fee rate * Approval of Ordinance revision the Impact Fee Provisions of Section 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code (following 2024 Transportation Plan Update). CONCLUSION 13 Item 6.3 Packet pg. 68/352 City Council Agenda Item 8.1 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Written Public Comments DEPARTMENT:City Council Office PRESENTER:Teresa Simanton NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:Acknowledge receipt of written public comments submitted through the public comment portal. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: Public comments submitted via the web portal. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: All community comments submitted through the comment portal will be published in agenda packet in the following Regular Meeting. The following are public comments submitted and received through the portal from December 14 – December 31, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge receipt of written public comments submitted through the public comment portal. BUDGET IMPACTS: 0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Online comments from December 14 – December 31, 2025 Item 8.1 Packet pg. 69/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-14 11:54 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/14/2025 1:54:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName JOHN LastName BROCK Email CityOfResidence Woodway AgendaTopic Revisions to draft CAO post Public Hearing Comments My name is John Brock. I live in Woodway and own a share of the Edmonds home where my siblings and I grew up. I am a board member of the EEC and was active in the small group of volunteers that worked productively with Senior Planner Brad Shipley on this Critical Areas Ordinance update. On November 25th, the draft CAO was presented to Council. A Public Hearing was held and comments read into the permanent record. The resulting draft CAO and process received a great deal of praise including from me. Now, the city attorney has replaced the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area section with fiawed language from the old CAO. This poorly advised revision would continue to allow PFAS contaminated stormwater to inflltrate into the Deer Creek Springs CARA through shallow UIC wells until the CAO is amended. The argument is that since no stormwater conveyance exists within the CARA, a prohibition on UIC wells constitutes a “de facto” building moratorium and risks litigation. This is a Strawman argument. A motivated developer could build the stormwater infrastructure needed to remove runoff from their project and protect the CARA. Yes, this would increase development costs but does not constitute a development moratorium. Over time, this could help the city in creating this missing infrastructure. This language reversion is contrary to the precautionary advice in WAC 365-195-920 - Criteria for addressing inadequate science to take a no-risk approach resulting in “no net loss of value or function” to the critical area". Current BAS published late this year concludes that no effective bioflltration method for removing PFAS from stormwater yet exists. The city attorney disagrees without citing any peer reviewed scientiflc evidence. Avoiding inflltration is the only currently viable option. I strongly encourage you to lead by example and reject this badly timed revision. The new code language provides real protection. Yes, this decision is hard but the old code language risks permanently contaminating the CARA and the clean water it has provided for well over 100 years. The late Maya Angelou said, "Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better". When Best Available Science flnds an effective PFAS flltering method, we will know better. I’m not here to lecture, but Edmonds is worth flghting for. A future with abundant clean Item 8.1 Packet pg. 70/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting water for future generations is worth flghting for. You should not be afraid to stand up and be counted. Yes, the dangers are real. This story isn’t over. Your decision will be part of how this story unfolds. What side of history do you want to be on? Please reject this maneuver and restore the new, more protective CARA language presented at the Public Hearing. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21089224&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-15 11:25 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/15/2025 1:25:45 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Patricia LastName Oneill Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Critical Area Ordinance Comments According to My Edmonds News article (December 15) the Council is going to pass on an ordinance that will allow developers to avoid safety regulations that protect Deer Creek CARA (Critical Aquifer Recharge Area) from Stormwater run-off. Brad Shipley had included language to protect our aquifers but the City Attorney decided it was not worth the hassle from developers. But residents of Edmonds are very concerned about the quality of our drinking water. I hope you will bring back language to protect our aquifers and mitigate the problems of stormwater run-off in general for the sake of humans and salmon. Thank you for your attention. Patricia ONeill Resident of Edmonds To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21090408&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 71/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-15 03:15 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/15/2025 5:15:20 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Pat LastName Pearson Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Critical areas ordinance Comments PLEASE vote only on a version of the Critical Areas Ordinance that protects Deer Creek and the Deer Creek aquifer from pollution from Stormwater Runoff. Increased development in Edmonds should NOT be at the cost of clean streams and drinking water. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21091012&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-15 03:57 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/15/2025 5:57:56 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Katy LastName Brock Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Comments With the strong scientiflc analysis results showing the essentially permanent harm that will result by rubber-stamping approval of the currently dangerous proposal, why isn’t it unanimously understood we MUST protect our aquifers? There is no second chance, no “do-over” or course correction down the line that would undo the harm of allowing PFAS contamination of our aquifer by approving this proposal. Edmonds. City Council - our families, neighbors, and friends are relying on you to make the sustainable, ethical choice here! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21091135&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 72/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-15 05:28 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/15/2025 7:28:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Glenn LastName Douglas Email t CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Updated CAO Comments Is it quite likely that the City Council is going to approve (i.e. rubber stamp) an updated CAO (Critical Areas Ordinance required by Washington state environmental and growth management law) that will allow home building developers to infuse stormwater runoff (from roofs and driveways) directly into our currently pristine Deer Creek CARA (Critical Aquifer Recharge Area) — used by Olympic View Water District to supply many of us with some of our drinking water? Is it true that the City Council didn’t even commission this legislation based on public input, open hearings, best available science and collaborative discussion? The original ordinance revision was written by City Senior Planner Brad Shipley with the help of Edmonds Environmental Council (EEC) President Joe Scordino and fellow EEC board member John Brock and that version included protection of the Deer Creek Aquifer. That version was presented to the Council on Nov. 25 (packet page 135) with action to be taken later. Now the version you are actually going to take action on (packet page 15) doesn’t protect the aquifer on the advice of your City Attorney because he is supposedly proactively protecting the city against potential lawsuits by potential developers. If all this is true, you're putting the long term health of our citizens at risk. I, among many others, consider this totally unacceptable and reprehensible. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21091348&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 73/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-15 10:17 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/16/2025 12:17:54 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Kathleen LastName Cavanagh Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic critical area ordinance threatening water quality Comments This needs to be presented to the people of Edmonds with full disclosure. Why would anyone in their right mind even consider the possibly of threatening the water that residents drink? This needs to be stopped and better information presented to our community! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21091433&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-16 07:17 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/16/2025 9:17:49 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Rachael LastName Bauer Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Water Supply Comments I am writing in regards to a recent My Edmonds News posting about our precious water supply. I urge you to NOT approve the updated CAO (Critical Areas Ordinance required by Washington state environmental and growth management law) that will allow home building developers to infuse stormwater runoff (from roofs and driveways) directly into our currently pristine Deer Creek CARA (Critical Aquifer Recharge Area) — used by Olympic View Water District to supply for drinking water. I understand this was rewritten in a way to put public health at risk and should never be considered. I'm appalled that this favors developers over a natural resource we need to survive. We are Item 8.1 Packet pg. 74/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting already dealing with microplastics and toxic chemicals in food and water, but now you have the choice to make sure we don't make more issues to deal with. You serve on behalf of the residents and residents want to protect our water. Thank you To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21091537&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-16 09:42 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/16/2025 11:42:30 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Peggy LastName McCartney Email b CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Updated critical areas ordinance Comments Please protect the Deer Creek Aquifer Recharge area! Please only pass the original draft. Not the one without the Deer Creek protection. We want clean water, don’t you?? Thank you for reading this message. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21092043&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 75/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-16 11:48 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/16/2025 1:48:56 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Dale LastName Bonn Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Yost Pool Comments In October Pete Colella, who manages Yost Pool for Cascade Swim Club (Cascade), sent us a email requesting our support for Prop 1, The Levy Lid Lift, which ultimately failed. He said that if it did not pass Yost Pool would be closed. Fast forward to today and it appears that instead of closing the pool as threatened, the City of Edmonds is asking Cascade to split the difference between the $267,000 it costs the City to operate Yost Pool and what Cascade was paying in rent. $267,000 less the prior rent of $102,000, divided by 2 = $82,500. At last week, a number of Cascade swimmers attended the City Council meeting to make public comments encouraging the city to reconsider the $82,500 cost to Cascade. I have the perfect solution. There was 7,507 voters in favor of the failed Levy Lid Lift. We were told it would cost us only $62 per month if Prop 1 passed, an annual cost of $744. If 111 of the Cascade supporters and those who voted in favor of Prop 1 were to make a $744 contribution to Cascade Booster Club, Inc. a 501(c)(3) organization and the parent of Cascade Swim Club, it would cover the $82,500. The advantages of this are: 1. Beginning in 2026 those donors would receive an above the line federal income tax deduction for the charitable contribution. 2. Edmonds taxpayers would not have to pay the $82,500 and 3. Yost Pool would remain open, perhaps with more public hours. It's a win for everyone. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21092503&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 76/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-16 12:59 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/16/2025 2:59:18 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Brian LastName Brock Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Deer Creek Springs critical area ordinance Comments I do not support the use of Underground Injection Control wells in the Deer Creek Springs Critical Aquifer Recharge Area. I urge the Edmonds City Council to reject this poorly advised code language change and instead, adopt the draft Critical Areas Ordinance as presented in the Public Hearing on November 25th. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21092658&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-16 07:02 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/16/2025 9:02:42 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Jerry LastName Masters Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Support for the 2025-2026 Mid-Biennial Budget Modiflcation Comments Councilmembers and Mayor - Thank you for your service. You represent the best Edmonds has to offer. I am consistently impressed by your professionalism and courtesy. That said, the 12/16 modiflcation represents what should have been passed by Council at its 10/8/25 meeting - a responsible budget without the hubristic assumption of a $14.5 million levy lift yet to be approved by voters. As the minutes of your all-day budget workshop on 11/14 showed, there was never signiflcant agreement amongst the council on areas/amounts of budget cuts you were willing to impose if the levy lift Item 8.1 Packet pg. 77/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting failed to pass. Based upon the tone of the campaign, post-election, voters were prepared for Council to announce cuts, not sources of revenue. Of course, this observation is offered with the beneflt of hindsight. You don't have that luxury as public servants. As a community, we will be better because we struggled through this with you, not against you. Please pass this modiflcation and begin working to restore public trust for the 2027-28 budget to come. You all represent the best this community has to offer. Thank you for your service. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21093362&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-18 11:05 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/18/2025 1:05:36 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Bill LastName Krepick Email CityOfResidence Woodway, WA AgendaTopic December 16th Council Meeting--- Four New Year's Resolutions Comments Since the Nov 4th Prop 1 defeat, the Council has refused to pursue good governance reform that the residents demanded. Instead, there has been: - No attempt to encourage citizen input and participation with a Citizen Financial Advisory Committee - No acknowledgement that the tax levy lift was wrong - No attempt to analyze 2021-2025 spending to assess the impact of the bloated Fed gov’t ARPA funding on the 2025 baseline spending. CM Dotsch and Chen asked to have the 2025 baseline spending analyzed to understand how 2021- 2025 spending excesses were baked in. Finance Director Gould offered to do a deep dive into 2021-2025 spending to quantify unjustifled staff and program spending. Five Council members voted against this due diligence that was demanded by 59% of voters. - No attempt to stop the fear mongering that characterized the tax levy lift PR that was initiated by the Mayor and majority of Council to make residents feel they would be losing popular programs like Yost Pool and Frances Anderson Center. Instead, the Council focused on: - another tax levy lift - doubling utility taxes without proper due process - increasing sales taxes for the transportation beneflt fund - increasing sales taxes for public safety How can the Council IGNORE AND DISRESPECT VOTERS to such Item 8.1 Packet pg. 78/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting a degree? How can you be so tone-deaf and pursue so many post-election actions that are not supported by residents or business owners? Since this is your last Council meeting in 2025, I hope you will take the next 2 weeks to seriously consider four New Year’s resolutions that will rebuild trust and credibility with 59% of voters: (1) You resolve to establish a professional volunteer Citizens’ Financial Advisory Committee to guide the Council on flnancial/budget matters. (2) You resolve to embrace 180 residents’ demands that are included in the ‘last straw’ Petition? (3) You resolve to adopt ‘good governance’ reform that includes flscal discipline, accountability, transparency, performance-based/results-oriented management, common sense, and putting taxpayers flrst. (4) You resolve to evaluate fundamental changes in City government and pursue a City Manager model and discontinue the ill-conceived trial City Administrator position? 10 plus years of City flnancial mismanagement demands change to a professional City Manager. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21095220&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-29 03:38 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/29/2025 5:38:43 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Philip LastName Borgnes Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Stormwater Injection in Deer Creek CARA – Protect Our Drinking Water Comments I am writing to formally provide public comment regarding the protection of the Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA). As a resident, I am deeply concerned by the City’s consideration of allowing Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells for stormwater in this highly sensitive area. The facts provided by the Edmonds Environmental Council and the Olympic View Water and Sewer District (OVWSD) make the danger clear: Geological Vulnerability: Unlike other areas, the Deer Creek CARA features exposed Advance outwash (Qva) soil at the surface. This sandy soil provides zero natural flltration for toxins. Any PFAS or carcinogenic pollutants injected via stormwater will migrate directly into the drinking water supply for Edmonds, Woodway, and Item 8.1 Packet pg. 79/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Esperance residents. The PFAS Threat: Recent sampling at Madrona K-8 has already shown PFAS presence in stormwater. We cannot ignore the "Best Available Science" (WAC 365-195), which conflrms that these "forever chemicals" pose severe long-term health risks even at low levels. Legal Responsibility over "Takings" Fears: The City’s contract attorney suggests that restricting injection could be a constitutional "taking." However, the law is clear: protecting public health and safety is a valid exercise of police power. Safeguarding a drinking water aquifer for 5,000+ customers is not a "taking"—it is a mandatory duty under WAC 365-196-830. The Precautionary Principle: Under WAC 365-195-920, the City is required to use a precautionary approach when scientiflc uncertainty exists. Until it can be proven that PFAS can be flltered to safe levels before injection, all land use activities in the CARA must be strictly limited. My Request to the Council: Prohibit all UIC wells in the Deer Creek CARA. Require infrastructure: If developers wish to build in this critical area, they must pay to connect to the City's underground stormwater system or install state-approved flltration that removes PFAS below threshold levels. Prioritize Health: Human health and the integrity of our only local water source must take precedence over the convenience of new development. Please act to protect our water, not developer proflts. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21103826&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-30 11:23 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/30/2025 1:23:19 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Tylin LastName Van Ausdal Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Flock cameras Comments We must stop using flock cameras immediately. There are huge personal privacy concerns with the use of flock. Reference material: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-roundup I don’t want flock in my community. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21106135&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 80/352 Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 6, 2025 Meeting Online Form 2025-12-31 08:40 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/31/2025 10:40:01 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Judith LastName Alexander Email j CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Water Quality considerations Comments Please value safe drinking water, and watershed conservation, above building permits. Our wildlife, and our citizens, deserve pristine reserves more than ever more buildings and parking lots. Density of housing will endanger our watershed and our pure drinking water, if we are not careful with zoning and permits. Please listen to those speaking for clean water. Sincerely, J. Alexander To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21108703&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Online Form 2025-12-31 01:02 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/31/2025 3:02:37 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Donna LastName Fraser Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Updated critical areas ordinance threatens water quality Comments I completely support Joe Scordino's position that we must protect the aquifer. I do not support the advice of our City Attorney who is supposedly proactively protecting the city against potential lawsuits by potential developers. I trust the City Council will pass an ordinance that protects Edmonds water supply. Than k you To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21108956&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub missions Item 8.1 Packet pg. 81/352 City Council Agenda Item 8.2 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Resolution Appointing an Edmonds Representative to Participate in the Community Transit Board Selection Process DEPARTMENT:Mayor's Office PRESENTER:Mayor Rosen NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:Community Transit requires formal designation of the City of Edmonds representative who will participate in the Selection Meeting to be held on Thursday, January 15, 2026. Mayor Rosen recommends that Susan Paine represent the City of Edmonds for the Community Transit Board selection process. This resolution will be placed on the January 13, 2026 agenda for council approval. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:$☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: Community Transit’s Board of Directors is the governing body for the agency, establishing policy, funding authority, and legislative direction. Community Transit bylaws require the cities of the Snohomish County Public Transit Benefit Area to meet every four years to review the composition of the Community Transit Board, and every two years to select the Community Transit Board of Directors. Each city in Community Transit’s Public Transportation Benefit Area and the Snohomish County Council may appoint an elected official to represent it at the Composition Review. The representatives from the cities will also be involved in the selection process. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Councilmember Susan Paine has served as the City Council liaison to the Community Transit Board since 2022. RECOMMENDATION: Community Transit requires formal designation of the City of Edmonds representative who will participate in the Selection Meeting to be held on Thursday, January 15, 2026. Mayor Rosen recommends that Susan Paine represent the City of Edmonds for the Community Transit Board selection process. This resolution will be placed on the January 13, 2026 agenda for council approval. BUDGET IMPACTS: No budget impact. Item 8.2 Packet pg. 82/352 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Community Transit Board Selection Representative Item 8.2 Packet pg. 83/352 4 4 1 RESOLUTION NO. _____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON APPOINTING AN EDMONDS REPRESENTATIVE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORATION BENEFIT AREA (COMMUNITY TRANSIT) BOARD SELECTION PROCESS. WHEREAS, Community Transit’s Board of Directors is the governing body for the agency, establishing policy, funding authority, and legislative direction; and WHEREAS, Community Transit bylaws require the cities of the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area to meet every four years to review the composition of the Community Transit Board, and every two years to select the Community Transit Board of Directors; and WHEREAS, each city in the Community Transit’s Public Transportation Benefit Area and the Snohomish County Council may appoint an elected official to represent it at the Composition Review. The representatives from the cities will also be involved in the selection process; and WHEREAS, Community Transit requires formal designation of the City of Edmonds representative who will participate in the Composition Review and Selection Meeting to be held on Thursday, January 15, 2026; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the appointment of Susan Paine would be in the best interest of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: Susan Paine is hereby appointed as the representative of the City of Edmonds to participate in the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Community Transit) Board of Directors selection process for the 2026-2027 biennium, or until a new representative is named. RESOLVED this ____ day of January 2026. CITY OF EDMONDS Item 8.2 Packet pg. 84/352 4 4 1 ______________________________ MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST: DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Item 8.2 Packet pg. 85/352 City Council Agenda Item 8.3 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Planning Board Quarterly Report DEPARTMENT:Planning and Development Services PRESENTER:Brad Shipley NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:Planning Board’s 2025 Q4 Quarterly Report is attached for Council Review. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):0 ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: NA CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Planning Board provides regular quarterly reports to Council. RECOMMENDATION: Planning Board’s 2025 Q4 Quarterly Report is attached for Council Review. BUDGET IMPACTS: None ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Planning Board’s Quarterly Report, Q4 2025 Item 8.3 Packet pg. 86/352 December 25, 2025 Memo To: Mayor Rosen and Edmonds City Council (CC) Members From: Edmonds Planning Board Members (PB) Subject: Q4 Planning Board Update In Q4 Edmonds PB continued our work to update development code in support of the Comprehensive Plan and other key issues. Specifically, the issues studied were Co-Living Housing code update, 2026-2031 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP), 2025 Comp Plan Amendment to North Bowl Hub, and Critical Areas Ordinance Update. Highlighted issues during our discussions of the listed code updates. 1) 2026-2031 CFP/CIP was reviewed and recommended by PB in September. 2) As directed by CC, PB studied the alternatives provided for the 2025 Comp Plan Amendment to North Bowl Hub. A recommendation was sent to CC in October, and we presented that recommendation to CC at your October 14 meeting. 3) PB reviewed code for an update to the Co-Living Housing ordinance. Our recommendation was sent to CC on 10/23. 4) Critical Areas Ordinance Update. This major update was reviewed by PB and our recommendation sent to CC at the end of October 2025. 2025 has been a challenging but highly successful year for PB, one in which we accomplished a great deal. Key to getting these accomplishments was the very strong cooperation and support provided by the Edmonds City Planning Staff. Led by Mike Clugston, and including Brad Shipley, Navyusha Pentakota, Rose Haas, and others, we could not have accomplished the volume of detailed work without the thoughtful planning, presentations and timely information provided by staff. I am confident that we have prepared a strong foundation for future collaboration between us. Edmonds Citizens Planning Board is fully subscribed. In December, our newest member, Mr. John Jensen, joined the PB as Alternate Member. Importantly, in December PB also held elections for leadership positions in 2026. Lauren Golembiewski was elected as Chair and Jon Milkey will remain as Vice Chair. As my time as 2025 PB Chair ends, I am grateful for the dedication and hard work of my fellow Board members. Collaboratively, we have provided you with timely, well researched recommendations while also actively seeking input from the citizens of Edmonds. Thank you for the opportunity to serve. Lee Hankins Planning Board Chair Item 8.3 Packet pg. 87/352 Item 8.3 Packet pg. 88/352 3 6 7 City Council Agenda Item 9.1 January 6, 2026 – Regular Meeting TITLE:Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes December 9, 2025 DEPARTMENT:City Clerk PRESENTER:Emily Villata NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Approve meeting minutes as part of consent agenda. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: N/A CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Approve meeting minutes as part of consent agenda. BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025-12-09 Council Minutes Draft Item 9.1 Packet pg. 89/352 Edmonds City Council Minutes December 9, 2025 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING ACTION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 2025 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Will Chen, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Chris Eck, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember Vivian Olson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Todd Tatum, Acting City Administrator Kisha Post, Financial Specialist Richard Gould, Finance Director Mike Clugston, Planning & Development Director Angie Feser, Parks Director Loi Dawkins, Chief of Police Josh McClure, Assistant Chief of Police Andy Rheaume, Public Works Director Uneek Maylor, Court Administrator Neil Weiss, Municipal Court Judge Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Emily Villata, Deputy City Clerk 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Council President Tibbott read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement. 3. ROLL CALL Deputy City Clerk Villata called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. PRESENTATION 1. Mayor’s Finance Update Mayor Rosen waived his time because financial items were a significant part of the agenda. Item 9.1 Packet pg. 90/352 Edmonds City Council Minutes December 9, 2025 Page 2 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1.John Culp, Edmonds, commented on concerns regarding the proposed budget modifications around Yost Pool operations. 2.Bill Krepick, Edmonds, expressed disappointment with council and city leadership and requested council read an online petition. 3.Alan Schwartz, Edmonds, commented on Yost Pool’s history of serving children, families, and seniors. 4.Ann Christiansen, Edmonds, asked council to clarify details of the recently passed ordinance regarding utility tax. 5.Finis Tupper, Edmonds, expressed dissatisfaction with the city’s public notices published in the Everett Herald, requesting more information in ordinance summaries. 6.Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, asked council if the public pays a fee to utilize Yost Pool. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. OCTOBER 2025 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1.APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 25, 2025 2.APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES - COMMITTEE A DECEMBER 2, 2025 3.APPROVAL OF PAYROLL CHECKS AND DIRECT DEPOSIT. 4.TODDLE TIME'S MAIN STREET KIDS, OLYMPIC BALLET THEATRE AND OLYMPIC BALLET SCHOOL LEASE AGREEMENTS 5.FIRE ILA MODIFICATION 6.RESTORATION OF VACATION HOURS 7.MICROSOFT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT RENEWAL 8.SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT 3 WITH SCJ FOR HIGHWAY 99 REVITALIZATION PROJECT (STAGE 3) 9.DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY AGREEMENT - 2025-2027 BIENNIAL STORMWATER CAPACITY GRANT 10.ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY’S PARKING PERMIT FEES FOR EMPLOYEES AND RESIDENTS 9. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public Hearing on Mid-Biennium Budget Modification Item 9.1 Packet pg. 91/352 Edmonds City Council Minutes December 9, 2025 Page 3 Todd Tatum, Acting City Administrator, provided introductory comments on the proposed budget modification. Kisha Post, Financial Specialist, presented an overview of the budget modification, including assumptions of upcoming revenues and expenditures. Mayor Rosen opened the public hearing. 1. Mike Goldfield, Edmonds, provided comments on Yost Pool and requested the city negotiate an alternative with Cascade Swim Club. 2. Max Effgon, Seattle, introduced himself as the VP of Cascade Swim Club and commented that the club would not be able to absorb the proposed operating increase. 3. Megan Wolfe, Edmonds, commented on the benefits to the Edmonds community provided by Yost Pool. 4. Bruce Wolfe, Edmonds, commented on the positive impact swimming at Yost Pool has had on him and his peers as young members of the Cascade Swim Club. 5. Adrienne Rohde, Edmonds, commented on her personal experience learning how to swim at Yost Pool as a child and expressed concern for public health should the pool close. 6. Lucy Hardin, Mountlake Terrace, commented on her personal experience swimming at Yost Pool and the influence it has had on her passion for swimming. 7. Wingate Packard, Kenmore, commented that she commutes to Yost Pool from Kenmore and is more inclined to visit local businesses while in the area. 8. Amelia Reese, Edmonds, commented on her personal experience swimming at Yost Pool and the influence it has had on her passion for swimming, urging council to work with Cascade Swim Club to revise the current proposal. 9. Megan Heath, Seattle, commented that she commutes to Yost Pool from Seattle and encouraged council to collaborate with Cascade Swim Club to find an alternative solution to the city’s financial situation. 10. Molly Brundis provided comments on the difficulty families face accessing pools in the area and urged council to collaborate with Cascade Swim Club to find an alternative plan. 11. Mary Joe Kintner, Edmonds, expressed concern for public safety should Yost Pool close and encouraged council to find alternative funding sources. 12. Steve Alseth, Edmonds, commented on his personal experiences swimming at Yost Pool and the positive impact it has on young members of the community. 13. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, commented on the history of Yost Pool. Mayor Rosen closed the public hearing. 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Ordinance Adopting the 2025 Amendments to the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Mike Clugston, Planning & Development Director, provided introductory comments and recommended Council approve the proposed comprehensive plan. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE COMP PLAN AND ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS ATTACHED INCLUDING THE PROPOSED 26-31 FACILITIES, CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AND PROPOSED Item 9.1 Packet pg. 92/352 Edmonds City Council Minutes December 9, 2025 Page 4 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWING THE REVISED NORTH BOWL HUB. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. North Bowl Rezone (AMD2025-0011) Mike Clugston, Planning & Development Director, presented the proposed rezone ordinance as updated per previous Council direction. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO ADOPT THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN ATTACHMENT ONE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Mid-Biennial Budget Modification - Discussion and Draft Ordinance Richard Gould, Finance Director, introduced the draft ordinance. Council questions were received by city department directors from Parks, Finance, Police Services, Municipal Court, and Economic Development. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO CONFER WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CONFIRM THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE TREE FUND IS AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT THE COST OF THE ARBORIST’S SALARY. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO CALL THE QUESTION. MOTION CARRIED 6-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH DISSENTING. THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED 6-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER CHEN DISSENTING. COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 9:30 PM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO REWORK THE MODIFIED BUDGET COMPARING IT TO 2025 ACTUAL EXPENDITURES RATHER THAN THE ORIGINAL BIENNIAL 2026 BUDGET. MOTION FAILED 2-5 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND CHEN VOTING IN FAVOR. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:00 PM. MOTION CARRIED 6-1 WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT DISSENTING. COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED TO REDUCE THE GENERAL FUND’S CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS IN 2026 BY 50% AND TO HAVE STAFF DETERMINE HOW MUCH MONEY IS FREED UP BY THAT. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO CALL THE QUESTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE MAIN MOTION FAILED 2-5 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND CHEN VOTING IN FAVOR. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:15 PM. MOTION CARRIED 5-2 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS ECK AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT DISSENTING. Item 9.1 Packet pg. 93/352 Edmonds City Council Minutes December 9, 2025 Page 5 4. Discussion on Levy Lid Lift with Review of Draft Resolution Outlining Levy Options/Variables COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 6-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH DISSENTING. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmembers commented on various issues. 12. MAYOR COMMENTS Mayor Rosen provided comments. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:14 pm. Item 9.1 Packet pg. 94/352 3 6 8 City Council Agenda Item 9.2 January 6, 2026 – Regular Meeting TITLE:Approval of Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 DEPARTMENT:City Clerk PRESENTER:Emily Villata NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Approve meeting minutes as part of consent agenda. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: N/A CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Approve meeting minutes as part of consent agenda. BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025-12-16 Special Meeting Minutes Draft Item 9.2 Packet pg. 95/352 Edmonds City Council Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING ACTION MINUTES DECEMBER 16, 2025 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Will Chen, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Chris Eck, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember Vivian Olson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager (virtual) Brad Shipley, Senior Planner Mike Clugston, Planning & Development Director Mike De Lilla, City Engineer Andy Rheaume, Public Works Director Brian Tuley, IS Director Ludwig Marz, HR Director Todd Tatum, Acting City Administrator Richard Gould, Finance Director Kisha Post, Financial Specialist Loi Dawkins, Chief of Police Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Emily Villata, Deputy City Clerk 1. CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT Councilmember Eck read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement. 3. ROLL CALL Deputy City Clerk Villata called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Item 9.2 Packet pg. 96/352 Edmonds City Council Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 Page 2 1. Georgina Armstrong, Edmonds, spoke in favor of maintaining Parks & Recreation funding. 2. Arlene Williams, Edmonds, commented on the allowed use of Tree Funds as described in Edmonds City Code. 3. Pete Adams, Edmonds, commented on the allowed use of Tree Funds as described in Edmonds City Code. 4. Pam Cowler, Edmonds, commented on trees as part of the city’s public safety infrastructure. 5. Theresa Hutchison, Edmonds, spoke in opposition to a potential levy lid lift. 6. Glenda Krull, Edmonds, commented on the overall atmosphere of Edmonds and citizens’ current lack of optimism. 7. John Brock, Woodway, commented on behalf of the Edmonds Environmental Council, noting concern about a recent language reversion in the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) regarding critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs). 8. Laura Walls, Edmonds, requested council not reallocate monies from the city’s Marsh and Tree Funds to maintain Yost Pool. 9. Marjie Fields, Edmonds, expressed concern with a section of the CAO regarding protections of the Deer Creek Aquifer. 10. Kim Bayer-Augustavo, Edmonds, spoke in opposition of new tax initiatives. 11. Mary Jane Goss, Edmonds, expressed concern about the conduct of councilmembers during council meetings. 12. Ann Christiansen, Edmonds, expressed concern about council’s actions at recent meetings. 13. Mark Mercado, Lynnwood, spoke in favor of maintaining Yost Pool. 14. Kathleen Sears, Edmonds, echoed previously stated concerns regarding use of the Tree and Marsh funds, park maintenance, and Deer Creek. 15. Jane O’Dell, Edmonds, echoed the previous comment and commented on the public’s interest in providing private donations to the Marsh Fund. 16. Ron Eber, Edmonds, noted his support of the current CAO with the exception of a section regarding developers’ improvements. 17. Karen Barnes, Edmonds, urged council to support a community fundraiser for Yost Pool and emphasized the importance of appropriate Tree Fund utilization. 18. Gayla Shoemake, Edmonds, addressed the Edmonds community, noting the city’s consistent transparency of the effects of a levy lid lift failure since its introduction and spoke in opposition of the current CAO, citing concern over the removal of the Deer Park protections. 19. Bill Krepick, Woodway, expressed concern regarding council’s governance. 20. Joseph Scordino, Edmonds, voiced his support for the current CAO ordinance with the exception of the recent CARA language reversion. 6. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. 2025 BOARD AND COMMISSION RETIREMENTS 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA Item 9.2 Packet pg. 97/352 Edmonds City Council Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 Page 3 COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda item approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 2025 2. 2026 BOARD AND COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENTS 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. 84th Ave Street Vacation - Resolution Setting Public Hearing Date Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager, provided background on the 84th Street Vacation application and recommended council approve the presented resolution to set a public hearing date for January 27th, 2026, pursuant to RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 18.55.070. COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR JANUARY 27TH. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. Critical Areas Ordinance Periodic Update (AMD2025-0001) Brad Shipley, Senior Planner, discussed methodology behind recent changes to the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) in light of best available science. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney, commented on the potential risks associated with both current and previous versions of the CAO. Mike De Lilla, City Engineer, and Andy Rheaume, Public Works Director, provided additional context on technical aspects of the current CAO. Councilmembers asked questions and provided feedback. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 6TH WITH A PACKET PROVIDED LAYING FORTH THE OPTIONS AND FOR COUNCIL TO TAKE ACTION AFTERWARDS. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. 4th Quarter 2025 ERP Update Brian Tuley, IS Director, presented an informational update on the status of the city’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation. 4. Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax Todd Tatum, Acting City Administrator, presented an ordinance enacting a 0.1% Transportation Benefit District (TBD) sales tax for a period of 10 years beginning April 1st, 2026, at the earliest, pending adoption. Andy Rheaume, Public Works Director, highlighted that TBD revenue goes into the Street Fund, specifically to be used for expanding, fixing, and maintaining roads. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO PUT THE ORDINANCE ON THE CALENDAR FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON JANUARY 6TH. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO EXTEND UNTIL 9:35PM. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Item 9.2 Packet pg. 98/352 Edmonds City Council Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 Page 4 5. Ordinance Adopting 2025-2026 Mid-Biennial Budget Modification Following Council President Tibbott’s opening comments, Richard Gould, Finance Director, and Kisha Post, Financial Specialist, presented an updated ordinance and summary modifying the city’s 2025-2026 budget per council’s previous feedback. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO ADOPT THE MODIFICATION FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ON PAGE 11 OF THE BUDGET SUMMARY DOCUMENT FOR A CUMULATIVE REDUCTION OF 1.5 MILLION FROM THE ORIGINAL 2026 BUDGET. MOTION PASSED 6-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER OLSON DISSENTING. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO ADOPT THE MODIFICATION FOR THE PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ON PAGE 13 OF THE BUDGET SUMMARY DOCUMENT SHOWING A REDUCTION OF $320,000 FROM THE ORIGINAL 2026 BUDGET. COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE THE CASCADE SWIM CLUB’S REQUIRED ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO YOST POOL OPERATIONS FROM $83,500 TO $53,500 WITH THE REMAINDER COMING OUT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET. MOTION FAILED 3-4 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, DOTSCH, AND NAND VOTING IN FAVOR. THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND UNTIL 10:00PM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO ADOPT THE MODIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REDUCING THE ORIGINAL 2026 BUDGET BY $155,656. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO ADOPT THE MODIFICATION FOR THE COMMUNITY SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ON PAGE 15 OF THE BUDGET SUMMARY DOCUMENT SHOWING REDUCTIONS OF $171,287 AND $232,273. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO ADOPT THE MODIFICATION PRESENTED BY THE MUNICIPAL COURTS ADDING $353,019 TO THE ORIGINAL 2026 BUDGET. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO APPROVE THE NON- DEPARTMENTAL MODIFICATION ADDING $1,049,230 TO THE ORIGINAL 2026 BUDGET. Item 9.2 Packet pg. 99/352 Edmonds City Council Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 Page 5 COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMOVE THE $400,000 REDUCTION IN TRANSFERS FROM THE ASSUMPTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT IMPLEMENTATION. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED A SECONDARY AMENDMENT TO DELAY THE TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE INTERNAL SERVICES FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $400,000. MOTION FAILED 2-5 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND DOTSCH VOTING IN FAVOR. MOTION FOR THE PRIMARY AMENDMENT CARRIED 4-3 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, PAINE, AND NAND DISSENTING. THE AMENDED MOTION TO APPROVE THE NON-DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET MODIFICATION OF $1,449,230 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND UNTIL 10:20PM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO EXTEND UNTIL 10:35PM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO ADOPT MODIFICATIONS IN THE BUDGET SUMMARY DOCUMENT UNDER MATERIAL CHANGES TO NON- GENERAL FUNDS FOR AN ESTIMATED CHANGE FROM BEGINNING TO ENDING BALANCES IN ALL FUNDS OF $4,543,347. MOTION CARRIED 5-2 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND CHEN DISSENTING. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO EXTEND UNTIL 11:00PM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOT MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED MID- BIENNIAL BUDGET MODIFICATION AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED 5-2 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND CHEN DISSENTING. City Attorney, Jeff Taraday, read into the record the following changes to Exhibit C of the Mid- Biennial Budget Modification Ordinance as amended by council’s action. The following rows of the 2026 Modified Budget Expenditures column will increase by $400,000: o 001 General Fund - $50,828,361 o Total General Fund - $53,053,886 o All Funds Total - $124,290,791 The following rows of the Budgeted Ending Fund Balance column will decrease by $400,000: o 001 General Fund - $2,771,006 o Total General Fund - $5,680,181 o All Funds Total - $61,285,301 Item 9.2 Packet pg. 100/352 Edmonds City Council Special Meeting Minutes December 16, 2025 Page 6 COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOT MOVED TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE IN THE PACKET WITH THE STATED AMENDMENTS TO EXHIBIT C. MOTION CARRIED 5- 2 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND DOTSCH DISSENTING. 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmembers commented on various issues. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Rosen provided comments. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 pm. Item 9.2 Packet pg. 101/352 City Council Agenda Item 9.3 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Approval of claim checks and wire payments. DEPARTMENT:Finance PRESENTER:Richard Gould NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Approval of claim checks and wire payments. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:2,547,938.16 ☒ Approved in Budget Fund(s):various ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☐ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: Approval of claim checks #269830 through #269951 dated December 10, 2025 for $1,541,804.36 (re- issued checks #269876 $1,061.91 & #269879 $5,265.00, claim checks #269952 through #270102 dated December 17, 2025 for $964,201.23 (re-issued checks #269985 $6,237.75 & #270059 $130.00) and wire payments of $2,363.04, $35,569.53 & $4,000.00. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: The Council President shall be designated as the auditing committee for the city council. The council president shall review the documentation supporting claims paid and review for approval by the city council at its next regular public meeting all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim, demand or voucher. A list of each claim, demand or voucher approved and each check or warrant issued indicating the check or warrant number, the amount paid and the vendor or payee shall be filed in the city council office for review by individual councilmembers prior to each regularly scheduled public meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of claim checks and wire payments. BUDGET IMPACTS: $2,547,938.16 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment #1 – Claim checks dated December 10, 2025 2. Attachment #2 – Claim checks dated December 17, 2025 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 102/352 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 103/352 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 104/352 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 105/352 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 106/352 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 107/352 Item 9.3 Packet pg. 108/352 City Council Agenda Item 9.4 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments DEPARTMENT:Finance PRESENTER:Richard Gould NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:1,611,502.82 ☒ Approved in Budget Fund(s):Various ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☐ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of payments. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Approval of direct deposit for $790,147.93, benefit checks #66351 through #66358 and wire payments of $821,354.89 for the pay period of December 1, 2025 through December 15, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. BUDGET IMPACTS: $1,611,502.82 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment #1 – 12-01-2025 to 12-15-2025 Payroll Earnings Report Attachment #2 – 12-01-2025 to 12-15-2025 Payroll Benefits Report Item 9.4 Packet pg. 109/352 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,194 (12/01/2025 to 12/15/2025) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description NO PAY LEAVEABSENT111 106.04 0.00 SICK LEAVE - L & ISICK120 38.00 1,654.93 SICK LEAVESICK121 839.25 44,930.23 VACATIONVACATION122 989.56 56,095.32 HOLIDAY HOURSHOLIDAY123 153.00 8,330.75 FLOATER HOLIDAYHOLIDAY124 86.50 3,863.35 COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS125 132.40 7,485.43 Holiday Bank WWTPHOLIDAY128 65.00 3,194.84 JURY DUTYJURY DUTY132 81.00 3,019.17 COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS137 40.00 4,096.00 BEREAVEMENTBEREAVEMENT141 8.00 307.91 KELLY DAYS BUY BACKKELLY DAY149 36.00 2,377.38 Kelly Day UsedREGULAR HOURS150 117.50 6,518.68 COMPTIME BUY BACKCOMP HOURS152 9.00 303.86 HOLIDAY BUY BACKHOLIDAY153 84.00 5,331.00 COMPTIME AUTO PAYCOMP HOURS155 71.89 5,161.17 SICK LEAVE PAYOFFSICK157 45.13 3,508.47 VACATION PAYOFFVACATION158 17.15 1,333.41 MANAGEMENT LEAVEVACATION160 39.00 3,764.40 REGULAR HOURSREGULAR HOURS190 15,884.57 874,991.04 LIGHT DUTYREGULAR HOURS196 90.00 5,643.00 OVERTIME .5OVERTIME HOURS205 10.00 193.66 OVERTIME-STRAIGHTOVERTIME HOURS210 29.00 904.29 WATER WATCH STANDBYOVERTIME HOURS215 48.00 3,694.92 STANDBY TREATMENT PLANTMISCELLANEOUS216 16.00 2,312.06 OVERTIME 1.5OVERTIME HOURS220 302.25 28,629.70 OVERTIME-DOUBLEOVERTIME HOURS225 56.00 5,732.69 MISC PAYMISCELLANEOUS400 0.00 154.35 Medical Opt OutMISCELLANEOUS404 0.00 300.00 WORKING OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUS410 0.00 8,480.96 SHIFT DIFFERENTIALSHIFT DIFFERENTIAL411 0.00 1,692.98 RETROACTIVE PAYRETROACTIVE PAY600 0.00 170.27 ACCRUED COMP 1.0COMP HOURS602 13.50 0.00 ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5COMP HOURS604 135.25 0.00 12/18/2025 Page 1 of 3 Item 9.4 Packet pg. 110/352 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,194 (12/01/2025 to 12/15/2025) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description Commander Standy AccrualCOMP HOURS609 5.00 0.00 ACCREDITATION PAYMISCELLANEOUSacc 0.00 193.65 ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORTMISCELLANEOUSacs 0.00 228.46 Ancilary Duty PayREGULAR HOURSanc 0.00 222.60 Ancilary Duty PayREGULAR HOURSanc2 0.00 1,792.14 Ancilary Duty PayREGULAR HOURSanc3 0.00 1,382.20 BOC II CertificationMISCELLANEOUSboc 0.00 122.39 TRAINING CORPORALMISCELLANEOUScpl 0.00 235.40 CERTIFICATION III PAYMISCELLANEOUScrt 0.00 122.39 Detective 4%MISCELLANEOUSdet4 0.00 1,115.64 EDUCATION PAY 2%EDUCATION PAYed1 0.00 867.76 EDUCATION PAY 4%EDUCATION PAYed2 0.00 695.86 EDUCATION PAY 6%EDUCATION PAYed3 0.00 10,984.68 Furlough Day Non-RepresentedREGULAR HOURSfd1 106.60 7,174.66 FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKfmls 125.00 7,783.88 HOLIDAYHOLIDAYhol 73.00 3,316.32 K-9 AssignmentMISCELLANEOUSk9 0.00 247.16 LANGUAGE PAYMISCELLANEOUSlan 0.00 950.00 LONGEVITY PAY 2%LONGEVITYlg1 0.00 1,165.99 LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%LONGEVITYlg11 0.00 1,039.62 Longevity 9%LONGEVITYlg12 0.00 3,327.84 Longevity 7%LONGEVITYlg13 0.00 1,719.13 Longevity 5%LONGEVITYlg14 0.00 1,460.35 Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITYlg16 0.00 115.90 LONGEVITY 6%LONGEVITY PAYlg3 0.00 556.41 Longevity 1%LONGEVITYlg4 0.00 1,249.12 Longevity 3%LONGEVITYlg5 0.00 4,095.06 Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITYlg7 0.00 879.50 Paid Family Medical HolidayHOLIDAYpfmh -2.50 -133.24 Paid Family Medical Kelly DayKELLY DAYpfmk 21.50 1,196.84 Paid Family Medical Unpaid/SupABSENTpfmp 237.75 0.00 Paid FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKpfms 68.25 4,801.31 Paid Family Medical VacationVACATIONpfmv 16.00 895.67 PHYSICAL FITNESS PAYMISCELLANEOUSphy 0.00 3,649.78 12/18/2025 Page 2 of 3 Item 9.4 Packet pg. 111/352 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,194 (12/01/2025 to 12/15/2025) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description Special Ops SergeantMISCELLANEOUSsop 0.00 255.80 PSET SergeantMISCELLANEOUSstr 0.00 255.80 TAC OfficerMISCELLANEOUStac 0.00 225.72 Traffic Officer - CarMISCELLANEOUStraf 0.00 634.58 Vacation PremiumVACATIONvap 16.00 733.44 Total Net Pay:$790,147.93 $1,159,736.03 20,209.59 12/18/2025 Page 3 of 3 Item 9.4 Packet pg. 112/352 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,194 - 12/01/2025 to 12/15/2025 Bank: usbank - US Bank Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck # 66351 12/19/2025 bpas BPAS 8,710.59 0.00 66352 12/19/2025 epoa2 EPOA-POLICE 6,842.50 0.00 66353 12/19/2025 epoa3 EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT 1,290.00 0.00 66354 12/19/2025 icma MISSIONSQUARE PLAN SERVICES 5,095.51 0.00 66355 12/19/2025 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 5,380.62 0.00 66356 12/19/2025 teamcom TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763 726.00 0.00 66357 12/19/2025 teams TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763 6,808.00 0.00 66358 12/19/2025 tx TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT SDU 634.50 0.00 35,487.72 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck # 3929 12/19/2025 awc AWC 459,256.73 0.00 3934 12/19/2025 edm CITY OF EDMONDS 325.00 0.00 3937 12/19/2025 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 34,897.12 0.00 3938 12/19/2025 us US BANK 159,477.01 0.00 3939 12/19/2025 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 122,572.98 0.00 3941 12/19/2025 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 8,431.03 0.00 3943 12/19/2025 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 780.00 0.00 3944 12/19/2025 empse EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPARTMENT 127.30 0.00 785,867.17 0.00 821,354.89 0.00Grand Totals: Page 1 of 112/18/2025 Item 9.4 Packet pg. 113/352 City Council Agenda Item 9.5 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:New Updates and Revisions to the Rules of Procedure DEPARTMENT:City Council Office PRESENTER:Teresa Simanton NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Repeal Resolution 1565 and adopt a new resolution amending the Council Rules of Procedure as amended and voted on during October, November, and December of 2025. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: As required by in Resolution 1565, Section 14.2 of the Council Rules of Procedure, the Council is to review the rules of procedure periodically as needed an on odd years. During the months of October- December of 2025, 5 amendments and edits were reviewed and approved by Council. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: The amendments and revisions were made to the following sections: Section 5.15 – Remote Attendance Section 5.3B – Presentations Section 9.17 – Silence and Abstention Section 9.13 – Motions Sectdion 14 – Use of City Attorney 3.5.1 Publication on the agenda planner (was “extended agenda”) RECOMMENDATION: Repeal Resolution 1565 and adopt a new resolution amending the Council Rules of Procedure as amended and voted on during October, November, and December of 2025. BUDGET IMPACTS: 0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: New Resolution to repeal and replace 1565 with new amendments and edits to Rules of Procedure. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 114/352 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 1565 WHEREAS, Chapter 35A.12.120.RCW gives the City Council of each code city the power to set rules for conducting its business within the provisions of Title 35A RCW; and WHEREAS, in 2013, the City Council passed Resolution No. 1295, which adopted Robert’s Rules of Order as its parliamentary authority for the conduct of City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, in December 2013, the Council passed Resolution No. 1306 adopting a Code of Conduct and in June 2015, the Council approved a Code of Ethics, by motion; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 2021, the council adopted a new Code of Conduct by motion; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1295 was limited to parliamentary procedure in the context of Council meetings, and such rules do not address many other processes and procedures in the conduct of City business; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1565 establishing Rules of Procedure to govern the conduct of council meetings and other council business; and WHEREAS, the City Council sees fit to update the Rules of Procedure to be consistent with amendments made to Edmonds City Code 1.04, Council Meetings. WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council that these rules of procedure be periodically reviewed as needed during odd-numbered years, as referenced in Section 14.2 of the Council Rules of Procedure. WHEREAS, the following are the changes made by and approved by the City Council during the period of time between October 2025 – December 2025 1) Section 14 Use of City Attorney 2) 5.3 B. Regarding: Presentations 3) 9.13 Amendments to Motions 4) 5.15 Remote Attendance at Regular Meetings, Adopted 5) 9.17 Silence and Abstention, Adopted 6) 3.5.1 Publication on the agenda planner (was extended agenda) NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Updated of Rules of Procedure. The City Council hereby adopts the updated “Rules of Procedure” attached hereto as “Exhibit A) Section 2. Repealer. Resolution No 1565, the previously adopted Robert’s Rules of Procedure is hereby repealed. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 115/352 2 RESOLVED this 6th day of January 2025. APPROVED: ____________________ MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ________________________ DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA FILE WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 116/352 3 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 117/352 Exhibit A - COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE i COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. AUTHORITY 1.1 Intent of Policies..............................................................................................1 1.2 Effect/Waiver of Rules......................................................................................1 1.3 Footnotes and References...............................................................................1 SECTION 2. COUNCIL ORGANIZATION 2.1 Oath of Office...................................................................................................1 2.2 Election of Council President and Council President Pro Tem.........................1 2.3 Duties of Officers..............................................................................................2 2.4 Appointments to Boards and Commissions......................................................2 2.5 Filling a Council Vacancy .................................................................................2 SECTION 3. AGENDA PREPARATION 3.1 Role of City Clerk .............................................................................................3 3.2 Placement of Items on the Agenda ..................................................................3 3.3 Format for Agenda Memos...............................................................................4 3.4 Agenda Item Priority.........................................................................................4 3.5 Readings for Ordinances..................................................................................4 SECTION 4. CONSENT AGENDA 4.1 Establishment of Consent Agenda ...................................................................4 4.2 Adoption of Consent Agenda............................................................................4 4.3 Removal of Item from Consent Agenda ...........................................................4 SECTION 5. COUNCIL MEETINGS 5.1 Open Public Meetings ...................................................................................5 5.2 Meeting Cancellation.....................................................................................5 5.3 Regular Meetings..........................................................................................5 5.4 Forms of Address..........................................................................................6 5.5 Seating Arrangement.....................................................................................6 5.6 Quasi-Judicial Items......................................................................................7 5.7 Council Committees ......................................................................................7 5.8 Executive Sessions .......................................................................................8 5.9 Special Meetings...........................................................................................8 5.10 Emergency Meetings....................................................................................8 5.11 Meeting Place...............................................................................................9 5.12 Notice of Meetings, Public Hearings .............................................................9 5.13 Quorum.........................................................................................................9 5.14 Attendance, Excused Absences ...................................................................9 5.15 Remote Attendance .....................................................................................9 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 118/352 Exhibit A - COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE ii 5.16 Role of Clerk ..............................................................................................10 SECTION 6. COUNCIL CONDUCT 6.1 General Conduct ............................................................................................10 6.2 Conduct with City Staff, and the Council Legislative Assistant.......................10 6.3 Conduct with Boards, Committees, Commissions, and Outside Agencies.....11 6.4 Implementation, Compliance, and Enforcement.............................................11 SECTION 7. CODE OF ETHICS 7.1 Code of Ethics................................................................................................12 SECTION 8. PUBLIC TESTIMONY 8.1 Public Hearings............................................................................................12 8.2 Audience Comments....................................................................................12 8.3 Group representation ...................................................................................13 8.4 Quasi-Judicial Items.....................................................................................13 8.5 Recognition by Chair....................................................................................13 8.6 Decorum.......................................................................................................13 8.7 Identification of Speakers.............................................................................13 8.8 Instructions for Speakers .............................................................................13 8.9 Donation of Speaking Time..........................................................................13 8.10 Campaigns and Elections.............................................................................13 SECTION 9. MOTIONS 9.1 Voice Votes....................................................................................................14 9.2 Motions that do not Receive or Require Seconds ..........................................13 9.3 Tie Votes.........................................................................................................13 9.4 Nature of Motion.............................................................................................13 9.5 Request for Written Motions...........................................................................14 9.6 Discussion Following a Motion.......................................................................14 9.7 Council Consensus.........................................................................................14 9.8 Withdrawal of Motions....................................................................................14 9.9 Motion to Table...............................................................................................14 9.10 Motion to Postpone to a Time Certain ..........................................................14 9.11 Motion to Postpone Indefinitely.....................................................................14 9.12 Motion to Call for the Question.....................................................................14 9.13 Motion to Amend ..........................................................................................14 9.14 Repetition of the Motion Prior to Voting........................................................14 9.15 Voting ...........................................................................................................15 9.16 Recusal.........................................................................................................15 9.17 Silence and Abstention.................................................................................15 9.18 Prohibition of Voting by Proxy.......................................................................15 9.19 Close of Discussion......................................................................................15 9.20 Motion to Reconsider ...................................................................................15 9.21 Questions of Interpretation...........................................................................15 SECTION 10. ITEMS REQUIRING FOURVOTES...............................................15 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 119/352 Exhibit A - COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE iii SECTION 11. ITEMS REQUIRING A UNANIMOUS VOTE.................................15 SECTION 12. COUNCIL REPRESENTATION 12.1 Correspondence...........................................................................................16 12.2 Use of City Resources .................................................................................16 12.3 Controversial Communications.....................................................................16 SECTION 13. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES 13.1 Authorized Expenses ...................................................................................16 SECTION 14 USE OF CITY ATTORNEY 14.1 Time requested through Council President for Written Work from Attorney 16 14.2 Intended Amendments 16 14.3 Other Reason for Councilmember to use City Attorney 16 14.4 Attorney-Client Privilege 17 SECTION 15. SUSPENSION AND AMENDMENT OF RULES 15.1 Suspension of Rules....................................................................................17 15.2 Amendment of Rules ...................................................................................17 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 120/352 Exhibit A - COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE iii Item 9.5 Packet pg. 121/352 Exhibit A - COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE 1 Section 1. Authority 1.1 These rules constitute the official rules of procedure for the Edmonds City Council. In all decisions arising from points of order, the Council shall be governed by the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order," a copy of which is maintained in the City Council Office. 1.2 These rules of procedure are adopted for the sole benefit of the members of the City Council to assist in the orderly conduct of Council business. These rules of procedure do not grant rights or privileges to members of the public or third parties. Failure of the City Council to adhere to these rules shall not result in any liability to the City, its officers, agents, and employees, nor shall failure to adhere to these rules result in invalidation of any Council act. 1.3 Any provision of these rules of procedure that is footnoted with a citation to the Revised Code of Washington, the Edmonds City Code, or other statute or ruling is included here for ease of reference only and is not intended to be adopted as a rule herein because it already constitutes governing law. Likewise, any conflict between such a provision and the law cited in the footnote shall be resolved in favor of the law cited in the footnote. Provisions herein that are not footnoted with a citation to the Revised Code of Washington or the Edmonds City Code have been adopted by City Council resolution as the Council's procedural rules and may be amended at any time by subsequent resolution. Section 2. Council Organization 2.1 New Councilmembers shall be sworn in by one of the following persons: court commissioner, judicial officer, judge, clerk of the court, county auditor or deputy auditor, county commissioner or county councilmember, mayor of a code city, a town, or a second-class city, mayor pro tem of a second-class city, clerk of a code city, town clerk or deputy clerk. 2.2. The Council shall elect a Council President and Council President Pro Tem for a one-year term. The election of the Council President shall be conducted by the City Clerk. No one Councilmember may nominate more than one person for a given office until every member wishing to nominate a candidate has an opportunity to do so. Nominations do not require a second. The Clerk will repeat each nomination until all nominations have been made. When it appears that no one else wishes to make any further nominations, the Clerk will ask again for further nominations and if there are none, the Clerk will declare the nominations closed. A motion to close the nominations is not necessary. After nominations have been closed, voting for Council President takes place in the order nominations were made. Councilmembers will be asked to vote by a raise of hands. As soon as a nominee receives a majority vote (four votes), the Clerk will declare him/her elected. No votes will be taken on the remaining nominees. If Item 9.5 Packet pg. 122/352 Exhibit A - COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE 1 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 123/352 2 none of the nominees receives a majority vote, the Clerk will call for nominations again and repeat the process until a single candidate receives a majority vote. The same process is conducted for the election of the Council President Pro Term. 2.3 Duties of Officers A. The Mayor shall be the Presiding Officer at all Council Meetings except Council Committee Meetings. In the absence of the Mayor, the Council President shall become Mayor Pro Tem and act as the Presiding Officer, performing the duties and responsibilities regarding conduct of meetings and emergency business. In the absence of both the Mayor and the Council President, the Council President Pro Tem shall act as a temporary Presiding Officer. B.It shall be the duty of the Presiding Officer to: 1.Call the meeting to order. 2.Keep the meeting to its order of business. 3.Control discussion in an orderly manner. a.Give every Councilmember who wishes an opportunity to speak when recognized by the chair. b.Permit audience participation at the appropriate times. c.Require all speakers to speak to the question and to observe Robert's Rules of Order. 4.State each motion before it is discussed and before it is voted upon. 5.Put motions to a vote and announce the outcome. C.The Presiding Officer shall decide all questions of order, subject to the right of appeal to the Council by any member. 2.4 Appointments to Boards and Committees1 The Council President shall appoint Councilmembers to Council committees and outside boards and committees that are not otherwise specified or governed by other rules. Prior to appointment, the Council President shall solicit interest from Councilmembers for their preferred appointments. The Council President shall then circulate the final appointment list to the Council at least seven (7) days prior to appointment. The Council President shall make his or her appointments as soon as practicable, following election of the Council President. 2.5 Filling a Council Vacancy A.If a vacancy occurs in the office of Councilmember, the Council will follow the procedures outlined in the Revised Code of Washington2. To fill the vacancy with the most qualified person available until an election is held, the Council will widely distribute and publish a notice of the vacancy at least two weeks in advance, the procedure by which the vacancy will be 1 ECC 1.02.031(B) 2 RCW 42.12.070 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 124/352 3 filled, and an application form. B.The Council staff will draw up and Council will approve an application form to aid the Council's selection of the new Councilmember. C.Those candidates selected by the Council will be interviewed by the Council during a regular or special Council meeting open to the public. The order of the interviews will be determined by drawing the names. Applicants will be asked to answer questions posed by each Councilmember during the interview process. The interview process will be designed to be fair and consistent. Since this is not a campaign, comments about other applicants will not be allowed. D.The Council may recess into executive session to discuss the qualifications of all candidates. Nominations, voting and appointment of a person to fill the vacancy will be conducted during an open public meeting. E.The term of an appointed Council position expires upon certification of the next election. Section 3. Agenda Preparation 3.1 In an administrative capacity, the City Clerk receives agenda topics and preferred dates from the administration for council or council committee agendas. The same process applies to the extended council meeting agendas. The City Clerk provides these inputs to the Council President for agenda setting in advance of publishing the agenda for the next public meeting. The Council President is responsible for determining which items will be moved forward for council business or moved to a future date. In the same way, the president determines what section of the meeting an item will appear and in what order. The resulting agendas for Council committees and Council regular meetings will set forth a brief general description of each item to be considered by the Council and specify the time and place of the meeting. The agenda for the next council meeting and the extended agenda are published online by the City Clerk. 3.2 An item for a Council meeting may be placed on the agenda by one of the following methods: A Majority vote or consensus of the Council. B. By the Council President or Council President Pro Tem when acting in the absence of the Council President. The Council President will make every effort to place an item Council approved by consensus or majority vote on an agenda. If time is not available for the requested date, it shall be placed on the next available Item 9.5 Packet pg. 125/352 4 agenda. 3.3 Agenda memos shall be in a standard format. The Mayor shall determine the format. 3.4 Agenda items will generally be prioritized in the following order of importance: 1) joint meetings or presentations involving outside agencies; 2) items scheduled for statutory compliance; 3) advertised public hearings; 4) continued items from a prior meeting; and 5) items scheduled for convenience, such as those involving outside consultants. 3.5 Except when the Council President has authorized an exception for items of an emergency or unexpected nature requiring immediate action, ordinances scheduled for Council action will receive a minimum of two readings. Action by the Council (by the consent agenda, or council motion and vote) will always be one of the readings. Other reading(s) will be in the number the topic warrants, and could include any or all of the following: 1.publication on the agenda planner 2.presentation of the topic by staff 3.discussion at council committee and/or meetings of the full council 4.public hearings (sometimes mandated by law) Section 4. Consent Agenda 4.1 Upon approval of the Council President, the administration shall place matters on the Consent Agenda which: (a) have been previously discussed by the Council or council committee, or (b) based on the information delivered to members of the Council, by the administration, can be reviewed by a Councilmember without further explanation, or (c) are so minor or routine in nature that passage is likely. 4.2 The motion to adopt the Consent Agenda shall be non-debatable and have the effect of moving to adopt all items on the Consent Agenda. 4.3 Since adoption of any item on the Consent Agenda implies unanimous consent, any member of the Council shall have the right to remove any item from the Consent Agenda. Councilmembers are given an opportunity to remove items from the Consent Agenda after the motion is made and seconded to Approve the Agenda. If any matter is withdrawn, the Presiding Officer shall place the item at an appropriate place on the agenda at the current or future Council meeting, subject to Council agreement. Section 5. Council Meetings. 5.1 All Council meetings shall comply with the requirements of the Open Public Meetings Act5. All Regular Meetings, Committee Meetings, and Special Meetings of the Council shall be open to the public. A Council meeting is defined as a properly noticed meeting in which a quorum of the Council transacts official City 5 RCW 42.30 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 126/352 5 business as defined by the OPMA. Meetings under the OPMA require an agenda, public notice, and an official record in the form of meeting minutes. Meetings attended by Council members which do not involve the transaction of City business are not considered meetings under the Act. If a quorum of Council members attends such meetings, they are encouraged to sit separately, refrain from discussing City business, and only participate as passive observers. 5.2 Any Council meeting may be canceled by a majority vote or consensus of the Council. The Council President may cancel a Council meeting for lack of official business. 5.3 Regular Meeting7 of the City Council shall be held in accordance with the meeting schedule adopted in Edmonds City Code 1.04.010. Council meetings shall adjourn no later than 9:00 p.m. on the day initiated unless such adjournment is extended by an affirmative vote of a majority of the Council as a whole plus one. Order of Business for Regular Meetings. The order of business shall generally be as follows: Regular Meeting (6:00 p.m.) 1.Call to Order, Flag Salute 2.Land Acknowledgment 3.Roll Call 4.Approval of the Agenda 5.Presentations 6.Public Comment 7.Approval of the Consent Agenda 8.Received for Filing8 9.Public Hearing(s) 10.Council Business: The following procedures shall be used: •Introduction of item by Presiding Officer •Presentation by staff •Council motion to adopt legislation •Council deliberation and potential action 11.Council Comments 12.Mayor's Comments 13.Adjournment (9:00 PM) 5.3 B. 1) Presentations For consistency of community participation, presentations by for-profit, non-profit, and not-for-profit organizations, or any other group not required to provide a presentation to Council will not be scheduled during Edmonds City Council meetings. 7 ECC 1.04.01O(A) 8 Received for Filing is a method of providing information on an agenda that doesn't require council action. It includes but is not limited to: financial reports, program/project status updates, committee reports, claims for damages, public comments, and appointments to boards/commissions. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 127/352 6 All individuals or organizations wishing to address the council, staff, and public regarding initiatives, events, or community projects or information must do so through the standard channels available to all constituents. No organization shall be afforded more City Council meeting time than the three-minute public comment routinely accessible to all. Available Communication Channels: The three-minute public comment period at every regular council meeting. The three-minute public hearing comment period during a public hearing. Written correspondence submitted to council by email or letter Online public comment submission (becomes part of the meeting record) Use of local media, newsletters, or public platforms outside of a regular council meeting for broader community outreach. Presentations at local civic group meetings, public events, or forums. 2) Legacy Presentations Nothing in the above Section 1 is intended to apply to presentations of an elected official related to city business, presentations by the city’s own boards or commissions, or by other governmental entities (the regional fire authority, school district, port, etc.) which are contemplated by code or necessitated by other city business. 5.4.Meetings of the council shall be presided over by the mayor, if present, or otherwise by the mayor pro tempore (Council President or Council President Pro Tempore) or by a member of the council selected by a majority of the councilmembers at such meeting. Appointment of a councilmember to preside over the meeting shall not in any way abridge his or her right to vote on matters coming before the council at such meeting. 5.5.At all meetings, the Mayor shall be addressed as "Mayor (surname)." The Council President shall be addressed as "Council President (surname)." Members of the Council shall be addressed as "Councilmember (surname)." At all meetings, the Mayor shall sit in the Presiding Officer's seat, and the Council President shall sit at the right hand of the Mayor. Other Councilmembers are to be seated in a manner acceptable to Council. If there is a dispute, seating shall be in position order. 5.6 Prior to commencement of discussion of a quasi-judicial item, the Mayor will ask if any Councilmember has a conflict of interest or Appearance of Fairness Doctrine concern which could prohibit the Councilmember from participating in the decision-making process. If it is deemed by the Councilmember, in consultation with the City Attorney, that it is warranted, the Councilmember should step down and not participate in the Council discussion or vote on the matter. The Councilmember shall leave the Council Chambers while the matter is under consideration. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 128/352 7 5.7 Council Committees11. The City Council shall have the following Standing Committees: Committee A: Committee B, and Committee of the Whole. Regular meetings of the City Council standing committees shall be held in accordance with the meeting schedule adopted in Edmonds City Code 1.04.010. The audio and/or video of Council Committee meetings shall be recorded and posted online. A. The purpose of council committees is to provide a forum for discussionand vetting of topics or issues proposed for council approval. This forum may address issues of a minor or routine nature, or significant issues that warrant additional information sharing and discussion prior to final council action.12 B. Business items considered by a City Council committee should only be forwarded to the City Council Consent Agenda with the unanimous consent of the committee members. 13 C. Committee business items that have not received unanimous support of the committee to be forwarded to the Consent Agenda may be discussed at a forthcoming committee meeting if additional committee work is likely to produce unanimity. Alternatively, the Council President may place the item on a future Council agenda for further deliberation and/or action by the City Council.14 D. The Council President shall be a nonvoting ex-officio member of all Council committees, except when a regular committee member is absent, in which case the Council President may vote. When a committee chair is absent, the regular committee member with the most council seniority will chair, or in case of a tie in seniority, the councilmember with the lowest council position. 15 E. The Mayor and Council members from other committees may attend committee meetings of which they are not members and may join the discussion and ask questions about a committee business item if they have been present during the entire discussion of that business item; provided, that only committee members, or the Council President when substituting for an absent committee member, may vote on committee business. Presence of a quorum of the City Council at a committee meeting shall not change the character of the meeting from a committee meeting to a City Council meeting.16 F. Items may be placed on the agenda of any standing committee at the discretion of the council president, PROVIDED THAT any standing committee agenda may be modified during any regular meeting of the committee by the consent of a majority of the committee.17 11 ECC 1.04.010(B) 12 ECC 1.04.050 13 ECC 1.04.050 14 ECC 1.04.050 15 ECC 1.04.050 16 ECC 1.04.050 17 ECC 1.04.050 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 129/352 8 5.8 The Council may hold Executive Sessions or Closed Sessions from which the public may be excluded, for those purposes set forth in the Revised Code of Washington25. Before convening an Executive Session, the Presiding Officer shall announce the purpose of the Session and the anticipated time when the Session will be concluded. Should the Session require more time, a public announcement shall be made that the Session is being extended. Councilmembers should keep confidential all written materials and verbal information provided to them during Executive Sessions, to ensure that the City's interests are not compromised. Councilmembers should refrain from taking notes in Executive Session because such records may be subject to public disclosure, thereby compromising the confidential nature of the matters discussed. Confidentiality also includes information provided to Councilmembers outside of Executive Sessions when the information is exempt from disclosure under the Revised Code of Washington. If a Councilmember unintentionally discloses Executive Session discussion with another party, that Councilmember shall make full disclosure to the Mayor and/or the City Council in a timely manner as soon as the error is discovered. 5.9 Special Meetings26 may be held by the Council subject to notice requirements prescribed by State law. Special Meetings may be called by the Council President, Mayor, or any four members of the City Council by written notice delivered to each member of the Council at least twenty-four hours before the time specified for the proposed meeting. The notice of such Special Meetings shall state the subjects to be considered, and no subject other than those specified in the notice shall be considered. 5.10 An Emergency Meeting27 is a special Council meeting called without the 24- hour notice. It deals with an emergency involving injury or damage to persons or property or the likelihood of such injury or damage, when time requirements of a 24-hour notice would make notice impractical and increase the likelihood of such injury or damage. Emergency meetings may be called by the Mayor or the Council President with the consent of a majority of Councilmembers. The minutes will indicate the reason for the emergency. 5.11 Special Meetings and Emergency Meetings will be at a time and place as Council directs. 5.12 The City shall comply with the public notice provisions of the Revised Code of Washington28. Unless specified otherwise, the public shall receive notice of upcoming public hearings through publication of such notice in the City's official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. 5.13 At all Council Meetings, a majority of the Council (four members) shall constitute 25 RCW 42.30.110 and RCW 42.30.140 26 RCW 42.30 27 RCW 42.30 28 RCW 35A.12.160 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 130/352 9 a quorum for the transaction of business. In the absence of a quorum, the members present may adjourn that meeting to a later date. 5.14 Members of the Council may be excused from attending a City Council meeting by contacting the Council President prior to the meeting and stating the reason for his or her inability to attend. If the member is unable to contact the Council President, the member shall contact the Mayor, who shall convey the message to the Council President. Following roll call, the Presiding Officer shall inform the Council of the member's absence, state the reason for such absence, and inquire if there is a motion to excuse the member. This motion shall be nondebatable. Upon passage of such motion by a majority of members present, the absent member shall be considered excused and the Clerk will make an appropriate notation in the minutes. Councilmembers who do not follow the above process will be considered unexcused and it shall be so noted in the minutes. A motion to excuse a Councilmember may be made retroactively at the next meeting. Removal of a sitting Councilmember for three (3) consecutive unexcused absences is authorized by RCW 35A.12.060. 5.15 Remote Attendance at Regular Meetings A.Notification of the need to attend a meeting remotely shall be made to the City Clerk by noon of the meeting day B.When attending a council meeting remotely, Councilmembers must have video and audio capabilities and enable them during the meeting whenever possible. Any attendee (Council, staff, or presenter) must enable their video and audio when speaking, unless technical difficulties do not allow. Attendees must attempt to contact the technology department to resolve any problems prior to the meeting. If the problem cannot be resolved, the attendee must inform the Council President and/or the Mayor prior to the meeting. C.Remote attendance is intended to be an alternative, infrequently used method of participation by councilmembers. D.Councilmembers attending remotely shall comply with all state and local rules, regulations, procedures and norms of decorum as if they were physically present at the meeting. E.Excusal is available when a councilmember has the occasional severe illness and is not well enough to attend either remotely or in person. 5.16 The City Clerk or an authorized Deputy City Clerk shall attend all Council meetings. If the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk are absent from any Council meeting, the Mayor shall appoint a Clerk Pro Tempore. The minutes of the proceedings of the Council shall be kept by the City Clerk and shall constitute the official record of the Council. Section 6. Council Conduct The City Council finds that Councilmembers should seek to continually improve the quality of public service and ensure public confidence in the integrity of local government and its effective, transparent, and equitable operation. Councilmembers have a public stage and privileged platform to show how individuals with contrasting points of view can find common ground, demonstrate problem-solving approaches, and Item 9.5 Packet pg. 131/352 10 achieve solutions that benefit the community as a whole. Central to these principles is that civility and decorum shall apply to all Councilmember conduct in relation to city business. To this end, the following Code of Conduct for members of the Edmonds City Council is established. 6.1 General Conduct A.Councilmembers shall focus discussions and debates on vision, policies, and their implementation. B.No Councilmember shall dominate proceedings during Council or other public meetings. C.Personal, insulting, or intimidating language, body language and actions, are not allowed. Councilmembers may raise a point of order for ruling by the Chair or by the Body to address inappropriate remarks. D.Ensuring that all meeting participants feel welcome is a vital part of the democratic process. No signs of partiality, prejudice, or disrespect should be evident on the part of Councilmembers toward any individual participating in a public meeting. Every effort should be made to be respectful in listening to Council, staff and public testimony and discussions. E.Technology allows words written or said to be distributed far and wide. Councilmember written notes, voicemail messages, texts, email, or other electronic communications, are public records and shall follow this code. 6.2 Conduct with City Staff, and the Council Legislative Assistant The community is best served when the abilities, experience, and knowledge of staff and contract employees work alongside councilmembers, and councilmembers will value these resources and relationships by: A.Using respectful language and avoiding aggressive tones. B.Whenever possible, provide questions ahead of public meetings and otherwise avoid surprises. C.Recognize that calls and emails may not be returned outside of business hours. D.Expressing concerns about performance only to the Mayor, in the case of staff, and the Council President, in the case of Council legislative aide. E.Understanding that Council, as a legislative body, directs City business via policy change initiated by majority Council vote only; councilmembers acting individually shall refrain from directing staff or otherwise intruding on the City's administrative functions. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 132/352 11 6.3 Conduct with Boards, Committees, Commissions, and Outside Agencies A The City maintains several boards and commissions as a means of encouraging and gathering community input. Residents who serve on boards and commissions are a valuable resource to the City's leadership and shall be treated with appreciation and respect. B.Councilmembers are appointed as non-voting members to serve as the primary two-way communication liaison between the Council and boards, commissions, and committees. Councilmembers are not to direct the activities or work of the board, commission, or committee. C.Councilmembers may attend any board or commission meeting to which they are not appointed but shall do so as a member of the public. Personal comments or positions, if given, will be identified as such and shall not be represented as the position of the City or Council. D.Councilmembers shall not contact a board or commission member to lobby on behalf of an individual, business, or organization, with the exception of the hearing examiner or architectural design board. It is acceptable for Councilmembers to contact boards or commissions and their members, so long as all interactions are in line with the Edmonds Code of Ethics. E.When attending a non-city sponsored event, meeting, conference, or other activity, Councilmembers shall do so in an individual Councilmember capacity only. Likewise, a Councilmember may be authorized to represent the City only in compliance with RCW 35A.12.100. 6.4 Implementation, Compliance, and Enforcement As an expression of the standards of conduct that best serve the City, the Code of Conduct is intended to be self-enforcing and is most effective when members are thoroughly familiar with it and embrace its provisions. A This Council Code of Conduct shall be included in the regular orientations for newly seated Councilmembers. Members entering office shall sign a statement affirming they read and understood the City of Edmonds Council Code of Conduct. B.The Code of Conduct shall be reviewed and reaffirmed annually by the City Council. C.When a breach of this code occurs, Councilmembers are encouraged to remind one another of the Code of Conduct terms. These communications may be documented with the subject line, "Code of Conduct Reminder." D.Repeated breaches, or egregious instances, may be dealt with according to the terms set out in the Council's adopted Robert's Rules of Order or other applicable laws and regulations. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 133/352 12 Section 7. Code of Ethics 7.1 Code of Ethics. The purpose of a Code of Ethics is to strengthen the quality of government through ethical principles which shall govern the conduct of the City Council. To this end, the Council shall: 1.Be dedicated to the concepts of effective and democratic government. 2.Affirm the dignity and worth of the services rendered by government and maintain a sense of social responsibility. 3.Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships. 4.Recognize that the chief function of local government at all times is to serve the best interest of all the people. 5.Keep the community informed on municipal affairs and encourage communications between the citizens and all municipal officers. Emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public and each other; seek to improve the quality of public service, and confidence of citizens. 6.Seek no favor; do not personally benefit or profit by confidential information or by misuse of public resources. 7.Conduct business of the city in- a manner which is not only fair in fact, but also in appearance. Section 8. Public Testimony. 8.1 Public Hearings: a.Individuals will be allowed three minutes to speak. b.The Presiding Officer may allow additional time for receipt of written testimony when needed. c.The Clerk shall be the timekeeper. d.Prior to closing the public hearing, the Presiding Officer shall inquire if there are any additional speakers other than those that have signed up and previously spoken, and if there are, they shall be allowed to testify. 8.2 Other Audience Comment at Regular Meetings Audience comments are offered at the beginning of regular meetings. This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak to any topic not listed as a public hearing or closed record review. A speaker sign-up form will be at the entry table. The procedures for the Public Hearing testimony in 8.1 A and C above are generally followed for audience comment; 8.1 D is followed for audience comment as time allows. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 134/352 13 8.3 When large numbers of people are signed up to speak on the same topic, the Presiding Officer may request that the group(s) select a limited number of speakers to cover their view and then ask all those who agree with that position to stand at the conclusion of each presentation. 8.4 Public testimony authorized in Section 8.2 and 8.3 may not include comments or information on any quasi-judicial matter pending before the City Council, or on any topic for which Council has closed the public record. 8.5 No person shall be allowed to address the Council while it is in session without the recognition of the Presiding Officer. 8.6 It shall be unlawful for any person in the audience at a Council meeting to do any of the following: Engage in disorderly, disruptive, disturbing, delaying or boisterous conduct, such as, but not limited to, handclapping, stomping of feet, whistling, making noise, use of profane language or obscene gestures, yelling or similar demonstrations, which conduct substantially .interrupts, delays, or disturbs the peace and good order of the proceedings of the Council. 33 8.7 Persons testifying shall identify themselves for the record as to name, City of residence and any organization represented. 8.8 An instruction notice for speakers will be available at the meeting. Speakers will be advised by the Presiding Officer that their testimony is being recorded. 8.9 Time cannot be donated by one speaker to another. 8.10 No person may use audience comment to promote or oppose any candidate for public office. In election years, a campaign officially begins when a candidate files their candidacy with the elections office and continues through the election. Section 9. Motions. 9.1 Unless otherwise provided for by statute, ordinance, or resolution, all votes shall be taken by voice and hand raise, except that at the request of any Councilmember, a roll call vote shall be taken by the City Clerk. 9.2 A motion must precede deliberation of an action item. A Councilmember should make a motion, which is seconded by another Councilmember, on the topic under discussion. If the motion is not seconded, it dies. Some motions do not require a second: nominations, withdrawal of a motion, request for a roll call vote, and point of order. 9.3 In case of a tie vote on a motion, the motion shall be considered lost. If the motion is an item for which the Mayor may break the tie vote, the Mayor may vote on the motion. 9.4 Motions shall be clear and concise and not include arguments for the motion. 33 Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa, 718 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013), Id., at 816 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 135/352 14 9.5 Motions shall be reduced to writing when required by the Presiding Officer or any member of the Council. All resolutions and ordinances shall be in writing. 9.6 After a motion has been made and seconded, Councilmembers may discuss their opinions on the issue prior to the vote. If they wish to do so, they may state why they will vote for or against the motion. 9.7 When the Council concurs or agrees with an item that does not require a motion, the Mayor will summarize the Council's consensus at the conclusion of the discussion. 9.8 A motion may be withdrawn by the maker of the motion upon consent of the Council. 9.9 A motion to table is nondebatable. It requires a majority to pass. If the motion to table prevails, the matter may only be "taken from the table" at the same meeting or the next regular meeting. 9.10 A motion to postpone to a specific time is debatable, amendable, and may be reconsidered at the same meeting. It requires a majority to pass. The motion being postponed must be considered later in the same meeting or a specific future meeting. 9.11 A motion to postpone indefinitely is debatable, is not amendable, and may be reconsidered at the same meeting. It requires a majority to pass. The merits of the main motion may be debated. 9.12 A motion to call for the question shall close debate on the main motion and is nondebatable. This motion must receive a second and fails without a two-thirds (2/3) vote. Debate is reopened if the motion fails. 9.13 A motion to amend is defined as amending a motion that is on the floor and has been seconded, by inserting or adding, striking out, striking out and inserting, or substituting. Whenever possible, provide advance notice of intended amendments via a one-way email to the council body and the city attorney. This minimizes surprises and gives councilmembers time to consider and vet the alternate proposal that is offered. Notifying the attorney in advance can accomplish the following: 1) Allows the attorney to display the motion during the council meeting via screen sharing, which facilitates the council’s understanding of the amendment and any amendments to the amendment that might arise during the meeting 2) Allows the attorney to work with the councilmember to refine the language in advance of the meeting to better address the councilmember’s policy concern and/or eliminate ambiguity or unintended consequences 3) Allows the attorney to be better prepared to answer questions on the amendment that might arise from other councilmembers. 9.14 .When the discussion is concluded, the motion maker, Mayor, or City Clerk, shall repeat the motion prior to voting. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 136/352 15 9.15 The City Council votes on the motion as restated. If the vote is unanimous, the Mayor shall state that the motion has been passed unanimously according to the number of Councilmembers present, such as "7-0" or "6-0." If the vote is not unanimous, the Mayor shall state the number of Councilmembers voting in the affirmative and the number voting in the negative and whether the motion passes or fails. 9.16 Personal involvement in an issue coming before Council shall be a trigger to consult with the City Attorney regarding possible conflict of interest/need for recusal from that council business item. If such conflict of interest or an appearance of fairness question under state law35 is established, the Councilmember shall recuse themselves from the issue and shall leave the Council chambers during discussion and voting on the issue. That Councilmember shall be considered absent when voting occurs 9.17 If a member of the council is silent on a vote, it shall be recorded as an affirmative vote. Councilmembers are expected to vote definitively. When abstention is warranted, the councilmember shall abstain and state for the record their reason for abstention. Abstentions shall be recorded as such and not included in the vote tally. 9.18 No vote may be cast by proxy. 9.19 Once the vote has been taken, the discussion is closed. It is not necessary for Councilmembers to justify or explain their vote. If they wish to make their positions known, this should happen during the discussion preceding the vote. 9.20 After the question has been decided, any Councilmember who voted in the majority may move for a reconsideration of the motion. The motion for reconsideration must be made at the same or next regular meeting. 9.21 The City Attorney, in consultation with the City Clerk, shall decide all questions of interpretations of these policies and procedures and other questions of a parliamentary nature which may arise at a Council meeting. All cases not provided for in these policies and procedures shall be governed by the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order. In the event of a conflict, these Council rules of procedures shall prevail. Section 10. Items Requiring Four Votes. The passage of any ordinance, grant or revocation of franchise or license, any resolution for the payment of money or approval of warrants shall require the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the whole membership of the Council (4 votes).36 Section 11. Items Requiring a Unanimous Vote. An ordinance must be adopted unanimously where both of the following conditions exist: 1) the ordinance is subject to referendum under RCW 35A.11.090, as limited by Leonard v. City of Bothell, 87 Wn.2d 18 RCW 42.36 and RCW 42.23.020 36 RCW 35A.12.120 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 137/352 16 847, 852-53, 557 P.2d 1306, 1310 (1976) ("If the grant of power is to the city as a corporate entity, direct legislation is permissible insofar as the statute is concerned. On the other hand, if the grant of power is to the legislative authority of the city, the initiative and referendum are prohibited."), and similar case law, and; 2) the ordinance is proposed to take immediate effect under RCW 35A.11.090(2). Section 12. Council Representation. 12.1 Once the City Council has taken a position on an issue, all official City correspondence regarding the issue will reflect the Council's adopted position. 12.2 City letterhead, email and other city resources shall not be used for correspondence of Councilmembers representing a dissenting point of view from an official Council position. 12.3 As a matter of courtesy, letters to the editor, or other communication of a controversial nature, which do not express the majority opinion of the Council, shall be presented to the full Council prior to publication. of the Council (4 votes).1 Section 13. Reimbursement of Expenses. 13.1 Council adopted the City of Edmonds Employee Expenses, Volunteer Recognition and Reimbursements Policy39 for application to Council as enumerated therein. In addition to the option of prior approval of training course-by-course as outlined in Section VI of the Policy, a Council President may also pre-authorize trainings relevant to the councilmember role up to a pre-authorized budget amount per councilmember annually. Section 14 Use of City Attorney 14.1 In the spirit of budget mindfulness, the attorney does written work for council (resolutions, ordinances, etc.) only when it is requested by any three councilmembers or the Council President. 14.2 It is advisable for councilmembers to send intended amendments to ordinances, code, and resolutions to the city attorney in advance of meeting. The city attorney may choose to advise on wording of or concept in the amendment and will put the motion and the amendment up on the screen during discussion. 14.3 Other typical reasons for councilmember use of the city attorney: -seek input on legislative idea being considered -ask about allowable behaviors in advance of action/speech -ask about behaviors of self or other elected officials after the fact -information about an agenda item 39 Resolution 1516, November 1, 2022 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 138/352 17 14.4 Attorney-Client Privilege applies to communications between the city attorney and elected officials of the city in their official capacity seeking legal advice. When an email between a CM and the city attorney meets the above definition, include “attorney-client privilege” in the subject line as this alerts the Public Records staff that redaction may be appropriate. Section 15. Suspension and Amendment of Rules. 15.1 Any provision of these rules not governed by state law, City code, fundamental parliamentary principle, or other statute or rule may be temporarily suspended by a majority vote of the Council. 15.2 It is the intent of the City Council that the rules of procedure be periodically reviewed as needed or during odd-numbered years. These rules may be amended, or new rules adopted, by a majority vote of the Council, provided that the proposed amendments or new rules shall have been distributed to Council at least two weeks prior to such action. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 139/352 17 Item 9.5 Packet pg. 140/352 18 ADOPTED BY: RESOLUTION NO. 1562 AMENDED BY: RESOLUTION NO. 1565 AMENDED BY: RESOLUTION NO. Item 9.5 Packet pg. 141/352 City Council Agenda Item 9.6 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:MHFR – Social Worker Grant Amendment DEPARTMENT:Police Services PRESENTER:Chief Dawkins NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Staff is requesting that the council approve this agreement so the Mayor can sign it. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: The police department received the Mental Health Field Response Grant (MHFR) to cover the salary and benefits of our social worker for approximately 30 hours a week. This contract was approved in October of 2025. WASPC has since found additional funds for our program to increase the social worker to full time (40 hours a week) which is what we are now asking Council to review and approve for the Mayor’s signature. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: The police department received the Mental Health Field Response Grant (MHFR) to cover the salary and benefits of our social worker for approximately 30 hours a week. This contract was approved in October of 2025. WASPC has since found additional funds for our program to increase the social worker to full time (40 hours a week) which is what we are now asking Council to review and approve for the Mayor’s signature. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is requesting that the council approve this agreement so the Mayor can sign it. BUDGET IMPACTS: There is no general fund impact. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: MHFR Grant Amendment Item 9.6 Packet pg. 142/352 Grant Award Agreement for Mental Health Field Response WASPC Grant Award Number MHFR-25-005-A01 This Grant Award Agreement is made by and between the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) and Edmonds Police Department (Grantee). Grantee Name: Edmonds Police Department Grantee Doing Business as (DBA): NA Tax Identification Number: 91-6001244 Unique Entity Identification Number: NF1AQNT457R7 Grantee Mailing Address: 250 5th Ave N City: State: Zip Code: Edmonds WA 98020 Grantee Primary Contact Name and Title: Loi Dawkins, Chief of Police Primary Contact Phone: Primary Contact Email: 425-771-0282 loi.dawkins@edmondswa.gov WASPC Primary Contact Name and Title: Cheyenne Sanders WASPC Contact Phone: WASPC Contact Email: 360-486-2389 csanders@waspc.org WASPC Mailing Address: 3060 Willamette Drive NE, Suite 200 City: State: Zip Code: Lacey WA 98516 Grant Program: Mental Health Field Response Authority for Award: RCW 36.28A.440 Grant Start Date: January 1, 2026 Grant End Date: June 30, 2027 Total Award Amount: $230,004.50 Funding Source(s): ☒ State Non-Trueblood Phase I, II, and III ($115,002.25) ☐ State Trueblood Phase I, II, and III ☒ HCA Trueblood Expansion Grant ($115,002.25) Is the grantee a sub-recipient under this agreement? ☒ YES ☐ NO Purpose of Award: To provide services to communities in Washington State as set forth in RCW 36.28A.440. and the grantee’s grant application. Service Area: City of Edmonds Grantee Signature Printed Name Title Date Signed WASPC Signature Printed Name Title Date Signed Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Chief of StaffJamie Weimer 12/30/2025 Item 9.6 Packet pg. 143/352 GRANT AWARD MHFR-25-005-A01 Page 2 of 6 AMENDMENT TO AWARD AGREEMENT MHFR-25-005 -now- MHFR-25-005-A01 Except as amended herein, all terms, conditions and stipulations contained in the Grant Award Agreement “MHFR-25- 005” (made “MHFR-25-005-A01” by this action), effective January 1, 2026, and its subsequent Amendments (the “Agreement”), remain in full force and effect. WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement, as set forth herein, and hereby reaffirm and ratify each of the terms and conditions in the Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual covenants set forth herein, and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows: • Facesheet: o Update WASPC Grant Award Number to “MHFR-25-005-A01”. o Update Total Award Amount to $230,004.50. o Update Funding Souce(s) to: ▪ State Non-Trueblood Phase I, II, and III to ($115,002.25) ▪ HCA Trueblood Expansion Grant to ($115,002.25) • 3.4 COMPENSATION: o 3.4.1 The Maximum Compensation payable to Grantee is $230,004.50. As this is a multi-year award it is subject to the following restrictions: ▪ The maximum amount payable to the Grantee for services rendered in year one (January 1, 2026-June 30, 2026) is $76,001.13. Funds that are not utilized from year one WILL NOT carry over to year two and are no longer able to be claimed by the Grantee under any circumstances. ▪ The maximum amount payable to the Grantee for services rendered in year two (July 1, 2026- June 30, 2027) is $154,003.37. Funds that are not utilized from year two WILL NOT carry over to any other period and are no longer able to be claimed by the Grantee under any circumstances. • Schedule B Budget: o The “2025-2027 Approved Budget (Year 1)” is updated as follows. o The “2025-2027 Approved Budget (Year 2)” is updated as follows. o References to Exhibit B shall now reference Exhibit BA01—REVISED BUDGET SUBMISSION. THIS AMENDMENT TOGETHER WITH THE AGREEMENT AND ANY PRIOR AMENDMENTS (AND ANY ATTACHMENTS, ADDENDA, AND SUPPLEMENTS THERETO) SHALL BE THE COMPLETE AND EXCLUSIVE STATEMENT OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE AGREEMENT AND SHALL BE BINDING UPON EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO, THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS, AND TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED THEIR ASSIGNS. IN THE EVENT OF A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AMENDMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT OR ANY PRIOR AMENDMENT, THE SPECIFIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THIS AMENDMENT SHALL GOVERN. Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 144/352 GRANT AWARD MHFR-25-005-A01 Page 3 of 6 SCHEDULE B: APPROVED BUDGET DEFINITIONS “Personnel” represents the base salary and wages to individuals employed by the grantee that directly support the program. This does not include any benefits expenses paid by the grantee. Personnel expenses mut be substantiated with time and effort reporting (timesheets). (2 CFR § 200.430(i)) “Fringe Benefits” represents allowances and services provided by the grantee to their employees as compensation in addition to regular salaries and wages. Fringe benefits include, but are not limited to, the costs of leave (vacation, family- related, sick or military), employee insurance, pensions, and unemployment benefit plans. (2 CFR § 200.431(a)) “Travel” represents transportation, lodging, subsistence, and related expenses incurred by employees who are in travel status on program related business. All expenses charged to this category must be applied and allocated consistently throughout the term of the award. (2 CFR § 200.475) “Equipment” represents property with an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more, and a useful life of one or more years. (2 CFR § 200.1) “Supplies” represents tangible property other than those described in the definition of equipment. (2 CFR § 200.1) “Consultants/Contracts” represents the total dollar amount budgeted for the execution of contracts and agreements with parties not employed by the grantee. Professional and consultant services are rendered by persons who are members of a particular profession or possess a special skill, and who are not officers or employees of the grantee. These costs must be reasonable in relation to the services provided. (2 CFR § 200.459) “Other” represents costs not described in or allocated to another category. “Indirect” represents those expenses that are related to the conduct of program activities, but that can not be directly attributable to any particular project. Indirect costs for this award are capped and are not to exceed 15% of actual eligible expenses. (2 CFR § 200.414) Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 145/352 GRANT AWARD MHFR-25-005-A01 Page 4 of 6 2025-2026 Approved Budget (Year 1) January 1, 2026 to June 30, 2026 Budget Category Amount Awarded A. Personnel $50,793.88 B. Fringe Benefits $22,857.25 C. Travel $0.00 D. Equipment $0.00 E. Supplies $0.00 F. Consultants/Contracts $2,350.00 G. Other $0.00 H. Indirect $0.00 TOTAL 2025-2026 AWARD $76,001.13 Please note that the “Approved Budget 2025-2026” is the final approved budget for your program during that state fiscal year. Unspent amounts from the 2025-2026 fiscal year will be forfeited by the grantee and will not be added to the following fiscal year’s budget amounts. Funds awarded under this Agreement must be expended as outlined in “EXHIBIT BA01—REVISED BUDGET SUBMISSION (As Attached)” unless otherwise noted in the “2025-2026 APPROVED BUDGET NARRATIVE”. 2025-2026 APPROVED BUDGET NARRATIVE: • As outlined in December 11, 2025 request for additional funds. Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 146/352 GRANT AWARD MHFR-25-005-A01 Page 5 of 6 2026-2027 Approved Budget (Year 2) July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027 Budget Category Amount Awarded A. Personnel $102,730.60 B. Fringe Benefits $46,228.77 C. Travel $0.00 D. Equipment $0.00 E. Supplies $0.00 F. Consultants/Contracts $5,044.00 G. Other $0.00 H. Indirect $0.00 TOTAL 2026-2027 AWARD $154,003.37 Please note that the “Approved Budget 2026-2027” is the final approved budget for your program during that state fiscal year. Funds awarded under this Agreement must be expended as outlined in “EXHIBIT BA01—REVISED BUDGET SUBMISSION (As Attached)” unless otherwise noted in the “2025-2026 APPROVED BUDGET NARRATIVE”. 2026-2027 APPROVED BUDGET NARRATIVE: • As outlined in December 11, 2025 request for additional funds. Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 147/352 GRANT AWARD MHFR-25-005-A01 Page 6 of 6 EXHIBITS (As Attached) Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 148/352 Budget Worksheet Please ensure that you provide all relevant informaton for each year. ***THIS IS A MULTI YEAR BUDGET WORKSHEET*** Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 149/352 Budget Worksheet Salary Basis Percentage of Time Length of Time 50,793.88 hourly 100%10000%50,793.88$ -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Personnel 50,793.88$ Personnel Narrative Base Rate Cost 50,793.88$ 0.45 22,857.25$ 50,793.88$ -$ 50,793.88$ -$ 50,793.88$ -$ B. Fringe Benefits - Fringe benefits should be based on actual known costs. List the composition of the fringe benefit package. Fringe benefits are for the personnel listed in budget category (A) and only for the percentage of time devoted to the project. Fringe benefits on overtime hours are limited to FICA, Workman's Compensation and Unemployment Compensation. (Note: Use decimal numbers for the fringe benefit rates, an example is 7.65% should be shown as .0765) Benefits (Medical, Pension, L&I, FICA, Medicare, PFML, Dental and Vision) Description Computation Budget Worksheet Year 1 July 1, 2025 - June 30, 2026 Purpose: The Budget Detail Worksheet is provided for your use in the preparation of the budget and budget narrative. All required information (including narrative) must be provided. Any category of expense not applicable to your budget may be left blank. A specific area is available at the end of this spreadsheet that allows for the identification and description of funds or items to be provided as program matching funds (cost sharing). A. Personnel - List each position by title and name of employee, if available. Show the annual salary rate and percentage of time to be devoted to the project. Compensation paid for employees engaged in grant activities must be consistent with that paid for similar work within the applicant organization. Include a description of the responsibilities and duties of each position in relationship to fulfilling the project goals and objectives. (Note: Use whole numbers as the percentages of time, an example is 25.50% should be shown as 25.50) PositionName Computation The Edmonds Police Department has funding for our social worker through December 31, 2025. For year one, we would need 50,793.8795 for Erin Nathan's salary from Jan 1st, 2026, through June 30th, 2026. Erin Nathan Community Social Worker Cost Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 150/352 50,793.88$ -$ 50,793.88$ -$ 50,793.88$ -$ 50,793.88$ -$ TOTAL Fringe Benefits 22,857.25$ Fringe Benefits Narrative Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Airfare Local Travel - Other Baggage Fee Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - - -$ Computation The Edmonds PD is requesting funding for the social worker's benefits provided by the City of Edmonds. Benefits average 45% of the members annual salary. The requested $22857.25 in fringe benefits is based on the total salary for the social worker from Jan 1st, 2026 to June 30th, 2026. Computation C. Travel - Itemize travel expense of staff and personnel by purpose (e.g., staff to training, advisory group meeting, field interviews, etc.). Describe the purpose of each travel expenditure in reference to the project objectives. Show the basis of computation (e.g., six people to 3-day training at $X airfare, $X lodging, $X subsistence). In training projects, travel and meals for trainees should be listed separately. Show the number of trainees and the unit costs involved. Identify the location of travel, if known; or if unknown, indicate "location to be determined." Note: Travel expenses for consultants should be included in the "Contractual/Consultant" category. -$ - - Computation - Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 151/352 Transportation: Local Travel - Other Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other Subtotal - TOTAL Travel -$ Travel Narrative Quantity Cost Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Equipment -$ Equipment Narrative -$ - - Computation - D. Equipment - List non-expendable items that are purchased (Note: Organization's own capitalization policy for classification of equipment should be used). Expendable items should be included in the "Supplies" category. Applicants should analyze the cost benefits of purchasing versus leasing equipment, especially high cost items and those subject to rapid technological advances. Rented or leased equipment costs should be listed in the "Contractual" category. Explain how the equipment is necessary for the success of the project, and describe the procurement method to be used. Item Computation -$ - Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 152/352 Quantity/ Duration Cost Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Supplies -$ Supplies Narrative Fee Basis Quantity Cost $94 25 2,350.00$ -$ -$ -$ Subtotal Consultants 2,350.00$ Consultant Fee Narrative E. Supplies - List items by type (office supplies, postage, training materials, copy paper, and expendable equipment costs costing less than $5,000, such as books, hand held recorders) and show the basis for computation. Generally, supplies include any materials that are expendable or consumed during the project. Consultant Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided, hourly or daily fee (8 hour day), and estimated time on the project. Consultant fees in excess of $450 per day or $56.25 per hour require additional justification and prior approval from WASPC. Name of Consultant Service Provided Computation F. Consultants/Contracts - Indicate whether applicant's formal, written Procurement Policy or the Federal Acquisition Regulations are followed. Supply Item Computation For our City liability insurance (WCIA), we are required to have clinical oversight for our community social worker, minimum of once a month. This grant requires weekly. We have an interlocal agreement in place through the City of Everett's Community Outreach program for this clinical oversight. The $2,350 requested is to cover weekly oversight from Jan 1st, 2026, to June 30th, 2026. Kelli Roark, City of Everett Clinical oversight for the community social worker Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 153/352 Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage Transportation: Local Travel - Other - Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other - Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other - Subtotal - Subtotal Consultant Expenses -$ TOTAL Consultants 2,350.00$ Consultant Expenses Narrative Consultant Expenses: List all expenses to be paid from the grant to the individual consultants in addition to their fees (i.e., travel, meals, lodging, etc.). This includes travel expenses for anyone who is not an employee of the applicant such as participants, volunteers, partners, etc. Computation -$ -$ - - Computation Computation -$ - Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 154/352 TOTAL Contracts Contracts Narrative Quantity Basis Cost Length of Time Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Other Costs -$ Other Costs Narrative Budget Summary - When you have completed the budget worksheet, the totals for each category will appear in the spaces below. Verify the category and total dollars requested. Budget Category Amount Requested A. Personnel 50,793.88$ B. Fringe Benefits 22,857.25$ G. Other Costs - List items (e.g. rent, reproduction, telephone, janitorial, or security services) by major type and the basis of computation. For example, provide the square footage of the cost per square foot for rent or provide a monthly rental cost and how many months to rent. The basis field is a text field to describe the quantity such as square footage, months, etc. Description Computation Funding Request Summary -$ -$ -$ -$ Contracts: Provide a description of the product or service to be procured by contract and an estimate of the cost. Applicants are encouraged to promote free and open competition in awarding contracts. A separate justification must be provided for sole-source contracts in excess of $100,000 CostItem -$ Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 155/352 76,001.13$ ↑ + ↓ = ↓ LOCAL MATCH (IF APPLICABLE)-$ TOTAL GRANT REQUEST 76,001.13$ Local Match - Use the space below to identify and describe the dollar amounts or items that will be provided as local match or cost sharing for your program. Note that everything listed here must be in conformance with 2 CFR § 200.306. OVERALL PROGRAM VALUE F. Consultants/Contracts 2,350.00$ G. Other -$ PROJECT COST TO APPLICANT (NOT INCLUDING FIGURES ABOVE)76,001.13$ C. Travel -$ D. Equipment -$ E. Supplies -$ Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 156/352 Budget Worksheet Salary Basis Percentage of Time Length of Time 102,730.60 Hourly 100%10000%102,730.60$ -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Personnel 102,730.60$ Personnel Narrative Base Rate Cost 102,730.60$ 0.45 46,228.77$ 102,730.60$ -$ 102,730.60$ -$ 102,730.60$ -$ 102,730.60$ -$ 102,730.60$ -$ Erin Nathan Community Social Worker Budget Worksheet Year 2 July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Purpose: The Budget Detail Worksheet is provided for your use in the preparation of the budget and budget narrative. All required information (including narrative) must be provided. Any category of expense not applicable to your budget may be left blank. A specific area is available at the end of this spreadsheet that allows for the identification and description of funds or items to be provided as program matching funds (cost sharing). A. Personnel - List each position by title and name of employee, if available. Show the annual salary rate and percentage of time to be devoted to the project. Compensation paid for employees engaged in grant activities must be consistent with that paid for similar work within the applicant organization. Include a description of the responsibilities and duties of each position in relationship to fulfilling the project goals and objectives. (Note: Use whole numbers as the percentages of time, an example is 25.50% should be shown as 25.50) Computation CostNamePosition Benefits (Medical, Pension, L&I, FICA, Medicare, PFML, Dental and Vision) For year two, the social worker's salary from July 1st, 2026, to June 30th, 2027, will be $102.730.60. This number includes a 3% increase to account for COLA and a step increase on the payscale this employee is on. B. Fringe Benefits - Fringe benefits should be based on actual known costs. List the composition of the fringe benefit package. Fringe benefits are for the personnel listed in budget category (A) and only for the percentage of time devoted to the project. Fringe benefits on overtime hours are limited to FICA, Workman's Compensation and Unemployment Compensation. (Note: Use decimal numbers for the fringe benefit rates, an example is 7.65% should be shown as .0765) Computation Description Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 157/352 102,730.60$ -$ 102,730.60$ -$ TOTAL Fringe Benefits 46,228.77$ Fringe Benefits Narrative Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Airfare Local Travel - Other Baggage Fee Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other - - Computation Computation Edmonds PD is requesting funding for the social worker's benefit package. Benefits for City Employees average 45% of their annual salary. The requested $46,228.77 in fringe benefits is based on the total salary for the social worker from July 1st, 2026 to June 30, 2027. C. Travel - Itemize travel expense of staff and personnel by purpose (e.g., staff to training, advisory group meeting, field interviews, etc.). Describe the purpose of each travel expenditure in reference to the project objectives. Show the basis of computation (e.g., six people to 3-day training at $X airfare, $X lodging, $X subsistence). In training projects, travel and meals for trainees should be listed separately. Show the number of trainees and the unit costs involved. Identify the location of travel, if known; or if unknown, indicate "location to be determined." Note: Travel expenses for consultants should be included in the "Contractual/Consultant" category. Computation -$ - -$ - - Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 158/352 Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other Subtotal - TOTAL Travel -$ Travel Narrative Quantity Cost Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Equipment -$ Equipment Narrative - - -$ D. Equipment - List non-expendable items that are purchased (Note: Organization's own capitalization policy for classification of equipment should be used). Expendable items should be included in the "Supplies" category. Applicants should analyze the cost benefits of purchasing versus leasing equipment, especially high cost items and those subject to rapid technological advances. Rented or leased equipment costs should be listed in the "Contractual" category. Explain how the equipment is necessary for the success of the project, and describe the procurement method to be used. Computation -$ - E. Supplies - List items by type (office supplies, postage, training materials, copy paper, and expendable equipment costs costing less than $5,000, such as books, hand held recorders) and show the basis for computation. Generally, supplies include any materials that are expendable or consumed during the project. Computation Item Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 159/352 Quantity/ Duration Cost Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Supplies -$ Supplies Narrative Fee Basis Quantity Cost $97 52 5,044.00$ -$ -$ -$ Subtotal Consultants 5,044.00$ Consultant Fee Narrative Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Computation Supply Item Kelli Roark, City of Everett Clinical oversight for the community social worker F. Consultants/Contracts - Indicate whether applicant's formal, written Procurement Policy or the Federal Acquisition Regulations are followed. Consultant Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided, hourly or daily fee (8 hour day), and estimated time on the project. Consultant fees in excess of $450 per day or $56.25 per hour require additional justification and prior approval from WASPC. Computation Name of Consultant Service Provided For our City liability insurance (WCIA), we are required to have clinical oversight for our community social worker, minimum of once a month. This grant requires weekly. We have an interlocal agreement in place through the City of Everett's Community Outreach program for this clinical oversight. The $2,350 requested is to cover weekly oversight from July 1, 2006, to June 30th, 2027. Consultant Expenses: List all expenses to be paid from the grant to the individual consultants in addition to their fees (i.e., travel, meals, lodging, etc.). This includes travel expenses for anyone who is not an employee of the applicant such as participants, volunteers, partners, etc. Computation In person meetings for clinical oversight Traveling from 2930 Wetmore Ave. Everett, WA to 250 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 160/352 Mileage Transportation: Local Travel - Other - Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other - Subtotal - Purpose of Travel Location Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity Number of People Number of Trips Cost Lodging - Meals - Mileage - Transportation: Local Travel - Other - Subtotal - Subtotal Consultant Expenses -$ TOTAL Consultants 5,044.00$ Consultant Expenses Narrative Computation Computation -$ - -$ - -$ -$ - Contracts: Provide a description of the product or service to be procured by contract and an estimate of the cost. Applicants are encouraged to promote free and open competition in awarding contracts. A separate justification must be provided for sole-source contracts in excess of $100,000 Item Cost -$ -$ -$ Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 161/352 TOTAL Contracts Contracts Narrative Quantity Basis Cost Length of Time Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ TOTAL Other Costs -$ Other Costs Narrative -$ G. Other Costs - List items (e.g. rent, reproduction, telephone, janitorial, or security services) by major type and the basis of computation. For example, provide the square footage of the cost per square foot for rent or provide a monthly rental cost and how many months to rent. The basis field is a text field to describe the quantity such as square footage, months, etc. Computation Description Funding Request Summary Budget Category Amount Requested A. Personnel 102,730.60$ B. Fringe Benefits 46,228.77$ Budget Summary - When you have completed the budget worksheet, the totals for each category will appear in the spaces below. Verify the category and total dollars requested. F. Consultants/Contracts 5,044.00$ G. Other -$ TOTAL GRANT REQUEST 154,003.37$ C. Travel -$ D. Equipment -$ E. Supplies -$ Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 162/352 = ↓ OVERALL PROGRAM VALUE 154,003.37$ Local Match - Use the space below to identify and describe the dollar amounts or items that will be provided as local match or cost sharing for your program. Note that everything listed here must be in conformance with 2 CFR § 200.306. PROJECT COST TO APPLICANT (NOT INCLUDING FIGURES ABOVE)154,003.37$ ↑ + ↓ LOCAL MATCH (IF APPLICABLE)-$ Docusign Envelope ID: 7059BC16-5F14-4568-9A09-CB86ED3692AD Item 9.6 Packet pg. 163/352 City Council Agenda Item 10.1 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Public Hearing on Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax DEPARTMENT:Community Services and Economic Development PRESENTER:Todd Tatum NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommend that Council approve this sales tax, allowing our streets crew to reduce our deferred maintenance burden, and improve our network of streets and sidewalks. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:$660,000 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):111 ☒ Budget Reallocation Required ☐ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: The Street Maintenance Division maintains and improves over 157 vehicle lane miles, traffic markings, 93 miles of sidewalks, over 6,000 signs, and 23 signalized intersections with hundreds of electronic control devices. The city routinely assesses the condition of our streets. In 2018, the recommended annual investment in our streets was $2.5m. We’ve averaged ~$1.5m/yr since then. The results of our community survey showed the importance to residents of maintaining streets and fixing potholes. Of those surveyed, 92% placed this item as either very important or extremely important. Satisfaction with the same service, however, was rated at only 44% very satisfied or extremely satisfied. This rating demonstrates the impact of limited funding on our ability to deliver this critical service. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Per the Revised Code of Washington 36.73, a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) is a quasi-municipal corporation and independent taxing district created for the sole purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation improvements within the district. On November 18, 2008, the Edmonds City Council approved Ordinance 3707, thus amending the Edmonds City Code to enact a new Chapter 3.65, Edmonds Transportation Benefit District (TBD), establishing a TBD, specifying the boundaries for the TBD, specifying the maintenance and preservation of existing transportation improvements, and fixing a time when the same shall become effective. Following public comments and deliberation, the Edmonds City Council approved Ordinance 3707. The boundary of the Transportation Benefit District is coextensive with the boundary of the City of Edmonds. The governing board of the Transportation Benefit District is the Edmonds City Council acting in an ex officio and independent capacity per RCW 36.73.020(3). TBDs have a few sources of revenue to draw from. First is a motor vehicle license fee. Our current fee is $40.00 of the maximum allowable $50.00 under councilmanic authority. The second source of revenue is a sales tax of up to 0.3%. Effective July 1, 2022, up to 0.1% of this sales tax may be imposed by a majority vote of the governing board (Edmonds City Council) as long as the TBD includes all of the territory within the boundaries of the jurisdiction(s) forming the TBD. Otherwise, the sales tax must be approved by a simple majority of voters. This sales tax may generally not exceed 10 years, but it may be renewed for additional 10-year periods with voter approval or a vote Item 10.1 Packet pg. 164/352 of the governing board, as appropriate. The TBD sales tax may only exceed 10 years for the repayment of debt, in which case the ballot measure should state the intended use and duration of the debt service. Should Council approve a 0.1% sales tax, the earliest this could go into effect is April 1, 2026 due to timing requirements with the Department of Revenue. The Department of Revenue requires a minimum of 75 days notice of the change before collections can begin. The latest reasonable date for Council to take action on this item in order to secure revenues for the majority of 2026 is the January 6, 2026 Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend that Council approve this sales tax, allowing our streets crew to reduce our deferred maintenance burden, and improve our network of streets and sidewalks. BUDGET IMPACTS: A 0.1% sales tax could bring in approximately $660,000 in 2026 if started in April. These funds can be used for the purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding a transportation improvement within the district that is consistent with any existing state, regional, or local transportation plans and necessitated by existing or reasonably foreseeable congestion levels. Projects may also include the operation, preservation, and maintenance of these facilities or programs ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Edmonds' current sales tax rate is 10.6% Mukilteo, Mill Creek, Lynnwood's rates are also 10.6% Shoreline, Montlake Terrace, Woodway, Brier, Bothell, and unincorporated Snohomish County's rates are 10.5% The average rate of Snohomish County cities is 9.6%. ATTACHMENTS: Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax Draft Ordinance Item 10.1 Packet pg. 165/352 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL SALES AND USE TAX OF ONE- TENTH OF ONE PERCENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE EDMONDS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT AS AUTHORIZED BY RCW 36.73.065 AND RCW 82.14.0455. ________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, in 2008, the City of Edmonds City Council established a transportation benefit district to be known as the Edmonds Transportation Benefit District (“District”) by way of adoption of Ordinance No. 3707; and WHEREAS, the District’s geographical boundaries comprised of the corporate limits of the City of Edmonds at the time the ordinance was adopted or as they may exist after future annexations; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) authorizes transportation benefit districts to impose an additional sales and use tax in accordance with RCW 82.14.0455 in an amount not to exceed one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) for a period of ten (10) years upon a majority vote of the governing body of the district for the purpose of financing the transportation improvements of a district; and WHEREAS, in 2016, by way of Ordinance No. 4053 and pursuant to state law, the City of Edmonds assumed the rights, powers, immunities, functions, and obligations of the District, abolished the governing body of the District, and the city council became vested with all rights, powers, immunities, functions and obligations otherwise vested by law in the governing board of the District; and Item 10.1 Packet pg. 166/352 WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v), the city council has the authority to impose up to one tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax for ten (10) years by a majority vote of the city council to be utilized pursuant to Edmonds City Code 3.65 and RCW 36.73; and WHEREAS, the city council held a public hearing on January ___, 2026 at which time the public had an opportunity to comment on the imposition of the tax and the proposed addition of new subsection B to ECC 3.65.030; and WHEREAS, the city council has carefully considered the financial needs of the city’s transportation system and the imposition of the tax, and has determined that the imposition of a one tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax for ten (10) years is in the best interest of the city; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Functions Amendment. Section 3.65.030 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “Functions of the city,” is hereby amended as follows (new text in underline, deleted text in strikethrough): 3.65.030 Functions of the city. A. The city, by a majority vote of the city council, may authorize a motor vehicle license fee as follows: 1. A vehicle fee of up to $20.00 per vehicle as provided for by RCW 82.80.140. 2. A vehicle fee of up to $40.00 as provided in RCW 82.80.140 if a vehicle fee of $20.00 has been imposed for at least 24 months; or 3. A vehicle fee of up to $50.00 as provided in RCW 82.80.140 if a vehicle fee of $40.00 has been imposed for at least 24 months and the city has met all of the requirements of RCW 36.73.065(6). B. The city, by a majority vote of the city council, may impose a tax of up to one-tenth of one percent of the sales and use tax in accordance with RCW 82.14.0455. Item 10.1 Packet pg. 167/352 B.C. When authorized by the voters pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 36.73 RCW, additional taxes, fees, charges and tolls or increases in those revenue sources may be assessed by the city for the construction, reconstruction, updating or improvement of public transportation facilities shown on the Edmonds comprehensive plan and transportation improvement plan. These additional transportation projects shall be deemed funded and effective when approved by a vote of the people in accordance with the provisions of state law. The projects authorized shall be limited to those specifically identified in the proposition put to the voters. C.D Additional transportation improvements may be added to the functions of the city upon compliance with Chapter 36.73 RCW. D.E. The city shall have and may exercise all powers and functions provided for by Chapter 36.73 RCW in order to fulfill the purposes of Chapter 36.73 RCW and this chapter. Section 2. Use of Funds Amendment. Section 3.65.040 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “Transportation improvements funded,” is hereby amended as follows (new text in underline, deleted text in strikethrough): 3.65.040 Transportation improvements funded The funds generated by vehicle fees authorized by the city council in accordance with RCW 82.80.140 and the revenues collected by the imposition of sales and use tax as authorized by city council in accordance with RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) shall be used solely for transportation improvements that preserve, maintain and operate the existing transportation infrastructure of the city, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.73 RCW. for any lawful purpose under Chapter 36.73 RCW. Upon authorization by the voters, additional funds from other taxes, fees, charges and tolls or increases in these revenue sources may be utilized for the construction of transportation improvements specifically described in the proposition submitted to the voters. Funds raised by the exercise of powers granted in ECC 3.65.030 and/or Chapter 36.73 RCW may be utilized for any lawful purpose under Chapter 36.73 RCW., but all funds raised shall be expended only for the purposes specified, i.e.: A. For the preservation, maintenance and operation of the existing city street transportation improvement infrastructure; or B. For projects specifically designated in a ballot proposition approved by the voters and utilizing the funding source approved by the voters. Such improvements are intended to comply with the provisions of the Growth Management Act and the city’s comprehensive plan and reduce the risk of transportation facilities’ failure, improve safety, continue the cost effectiveness of the city’s infrastructure improvements and to encourage the optimum use of the transportation system. Additional transportation improvement projects may be funded only after Item 10.1 Packet pg. 168/352 compliance with the provisions of RCW 36.73.050(B) following notice, public hearing and enactment of an additional authorizing ordinance. Section 3. Imposition of Additional Sales and Use Tax. A new Section 3.28.025 of the Edmonds City Code, is hereby added to impose the additional one-tenth of one percent sales and use tax authorized by RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) to read as follows: 3.28.025 TBD sales and use tax authorized. A. Imposition. Pursuant to RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) and RCW 82.14.0455, there is hereby imposed an additional sales and use tax to be collected from persons who are taxable by the state under Chapters 82.08 and 82.12 RCW upon the occurrence of any taxable event within the district. The tax imposed by this Section shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including but not limited to, the sales and use taxes imposed under Chapter 3.28 of the Edmonds City Code. B. Tax Rate. The rate of the tax imposed by this section shall be one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of the selling price (in the case of the sales tax) or the value of the article used (in the case of the use tax). C. Duration. The tax imposed by this section shall apply for a period of ten (10) years from the date the tax is first collected within the district and shall thereafter cease to be imposed unless renewed with the affirmative vote of the voters voting at an election or a majority vote of the Edmonds City Council exercising its authority as the governing body of the district. D. Use of Revenues. The revenues received from the tax imposed by this Section shall be general revenues of the transportation benefit district and shall be used for those purposes as set forth in ECC 3.65, RCW 36.73 or as otherwise authorized by law. Section 4. Duties of Clerk and Finance Director. The Deputy City Clerk and the Finance Director are hereby requested to submit this ordinance to the Washington State Department of Revenue and to request that the Department take all necessary steps to implement and collect the tax imposed by this ordinance as soon as possible. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. Item 10.1 Packet pg. 169/352 ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ON THIS ____ DAY OF JANUARY, 2026. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE DEPUTY CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 10.1 Packet pg. 170/352 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of December, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL SALES AND USE TAX OF ONE-TENTH OF ONE PERCENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE EDMONDS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT AS AUTHORIZED BY RCW 36.73.065 AND RCW 82.14.0455. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2025. DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA Item 10.1 Packet pg. 171/352 City Council Agenda Item 10.2 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Public Hearing on Draft Critical Areas Ordinance Periodic Update DEPARTMENT:Planning and Development Services PRESENTER:Brad Shipley NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommends Option 3: Adopt the Critical Areas Ordinance and defer consideration of the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) regulations until completion of the Deer Creek CARA study (Attachment 1). This approach brings the City into compliance with state requirements while allowing CARA regulations to be informed by completed, site- specific scientific analysis, consistent with best available science and adaptive management principles. Existing CARA regulations, zoning limitations, and state-level protections remain in effect during the study period, preserving aquifer protection and property owners’ development rights while reducing legal and regulatory risk. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):0 ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: City Council is considering adoption of updates to the City’s Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), including how to address regulations for Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARA) while the Deer Creek PFAS/CARA study is ongoing. Substantive changes to the CARA approach have been made since the draft CAO was presented at the November 25 public hearing. As a result, City Council has scheduled an additional public hearing to consider these changes and evaluate alternative policy approaches. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Under the Growth Management Act (GMA), the City is required to periodically update its Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) using best available science. The current CAO update represents a comprehensive reorganization and modernization of existing regulations intended to improve clarity, consistency, and usability while maintaining environmental protection. A key unresolved issue is how to address CARA regulations in the Deer Creek watershed while a focused PFAS study is underway. The study is intended to inform long-term regulatory approaches related to aquifer protection and stormwater infiltration practices, particularly relate to PFAS. The early draft CAO included revisions to the CARA section at the recommendation of the Edmonds Environmental Council (EEC), as received in an email on August 20, 2025. Staff initially included those revisions as a Item 10.2 Packet pg. 172/352 precautionary measure, subject to internal inter-departmental review, with the expectation that the Deer Creek PFAS/CARA study would provide best available science to inform permanent regulations. Scientific literature available at that time offered limited information specific to stormwater infiltration practices and PFAS. EEC’s request focused on the potential for PFAS to enter the groundwater recharge but did not address that the proposed regulation would fail to recharge the aquifer and would be in conflict with the City’s requirements under its state stormwater permit and its own stormwater regulations, which require infiltration. As a result, staff’s initial analysis under the precautionary principle was incomplete. Upon further internal inter-departmental review, staff determined that there are two competing theoretical risks to the aquifer: 1) adopting regulations that would deprive the aquifer of recharge (the primary objective of a critical aquifer recharge area is to recharge the aquifer); and 2) adopting regulations that would continue to allow infiltration and, in so doing, pollute the aquifer with any PFAS that is associated with new development. As between these two theoretical risks and the two competing regulatory approaches, the first risk is more certain to occur than the second one. In other words, over an extended period, it is likely that prohibiting infiltration will reduce the water supply to the aquifer. By comparison, over a similarly long period, new development that is allowed to infiltrate stormwater may or may not pollute the aquifer with PFAS more than the aquifer would already be polluted with PFAS under baseline conditions.* Therefore, under a more robust analysis of the precautionary principle, where the city is forced to choose between two competing threats to the aquifer, it seems more precautionary to protect the aquifer from a probable threat than a speculative threat. Therefore, staff is recommending to defer CARA regulatory updates until completion of the PFAS study, anticipated in the first half of 2026. This change in direction was communicated to EEC during stakeholder meetings; however, due to an oversight, short timeframe for adoption, and limited staffing, the CARA provision was not removed from the draft ordinance prior to the initial public hearings. *Note: the City received an email from Bob Danson, the general manager of the Olympic View Water & Sewer District on December 11, 2025. In that email, Mr. Danson states the following: PFAS Are Consistently Present in Urban Stormwater Recent peer-reviewed studies, including the 2025 MDPI article Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Urban Stormwater Runoff: Insights from a Roadside Rain Garden, see attached, document that PFAS are present in stormwater at high and consistent concentrations throughout the year. These contaminants originate from numerous unavoidable urban sources including roofing materials, vehicles, atmospheric deposition, household products, and fire-retardant materials. Across all sampling events, PFAS levels remained remarkably stable, demonstrating that PFAS are not sporadic contaminants, they are pervasive in stormwater. The study referenced by Mr. Danson is in the council packet (Attachment 2 – Public Comments). Accepting the above summary from Mr. Danson as truthful, it seems that there would be little point in singling out new development for special stormwater treatment when PFAS are “pervasive,” “stable,” and derive from sources that aren’t necessarily associated with new development. Furthermore, while the City does not have in-house PFAS expertise, a reading of the article does not indicate to the City that new development (which is the focus of CAO regulation) brings a greater PFAS contamination risk than other existing sources of contamination. The article does not directly compare PFAS shedding from new-home construction versus an existing home, and it doesn’t present data that would let one conclude construction is more likely to contaminate than presence of an existing home. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 173/352 What it does say (in general terms) is that PFAS in urban stormwater can come from many diffuse urban sources, including building-related materials/surfaces. For example, it lists building materials among potential contributors to PFAS in urban environments (along with things like household waste, street dust, and atmospheric deposition) and later notes that buildings/rooftops can contribute PFAS via things like coatings, sealants, and construction materials—but it does not distinguish the new construction phase from existing buildings over time, nor does it rank those two scenarios as being more or less likely to cause contamination. If anything, the emphasis of the paper is that PFAS in stormwater is ubiquitous and often tied strongly to traffic/roadway and other urban sources; buildings/rooftops are mentioned as a possible source category, not as evidence that construction of a new home is uniquely higher than an existing home. Even upon review of the article, the City has no reason to suspect that new construction would contaminate the aquifer above baseline conditions. So, the City cannot identify a rational basis to treat stormwater from that source differently from the other stormwater in the basin. Best Available Science, Regulatory Framework, and Precautionary Principle Public comments have asserted that the draft CARA provisions presented at the prior public hearing were required by or derived from best available science. It is important for the administrative record to distinguish between policy choices informed by an incomplete analysis of the precautionary principle and regulations supported by best available science. Existing monitoring data does not demonstrate current contamination of the Deer Creek aquifer attributable to residential stormwater infiltration practices. Olympic View Water & Sewer District’s Deer Creek Springs currently test below Washington State’s 10 parts-per-trillion (ppt) PFAS standard, despite decades of stormwater infiltration practices that EEC and OVWSD would have the city prohibit — including drywells, rain gardens, and similar underground injection control (UIC) systems—within the Deer Creek CARA. OVWSD conducts proactive PFAS monitoring and reports that drinking water remains safe and compliant with applicable health standards. From a hydrogeologic perspective, the distinction between infiltrating stormwater at the surface versus two to three feet below grade is not supported by evidence as a determinative factor in aquifer protection, particularly where the pollutant of concern is PFAS, which are known to travel through soil. Aquifer systems function at a scale far greater than shallow infiltration depth, and no study has been presented demonstrating that this distinction materially alters contaminant transport or risk within the Deer Creek CARA. State regulatory context further informs this analysis. Under WAC 173-218-100, Class V UICs (Attachment 3) that receive only residential roof runoff automatically meet the non-endangerment standard, indicating that such systems are not presumed to pose a threat to groundwater quality. This regulatory determination applies regardless of shallow infiltration depth and reflects state-level evaluation of risk. In addition, existing land use regulations already provide meaningful aquifer protection. The Deer Creek CARA is predominantly zoned for low-density residential use, and the zoning code strictly limits land uses commonly associated with groundwater contamination risk, such as industrial activities, hazardous Item 10.2 Packet pg. 174/352 material storage, and intensive commercial uses. Some stakeholders have invoked the precautionary principle to justify immediate and more restrictive CARA regulation. While precaution is an appropriate planning concept when scientific uncertainty exists, its application must be balanced with all threats to the aquifer, including the risk of inadequate recharge. As noted above, staff considers the risk of reduced recharge to be less speculative than the risk of PFAS contamination caused by new development. Beyond the precautionary principle, staff’s current recommendation is mindful of existing regulatory controls, available monitoring data, and the risk of enforcing the conditions that would likely result from the regulation advanced by EEC and OVWSD, particularly where those conditions would conflict with the City’s own stormwater regulations. In this context, adaptive management—where CARA regulations are refined based on the completed PFAS study and ongoing monitoring performed by OVWSD—provides a scientifically defensible and legally resilient framework. It is also important to note that future regulatory risk related to PFAS is largely driven by evolving federal standards independent of local infiltration practices. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has adopted a more stringent PFAS standard of 4 ppt. If Deer Creek exceeds that standard in the future, OVWSD would be required to pursue treatment or alternative water supplies regardless of which CARA option is adopted today. The Deer Creek aquifer is not the only urban aquifer in Washington state. EEC and OVWSD has not provided staff with information of any other urban aquifer in Washington where infiltration in a closed basin CARA has been prohibited to protect the aquifer from PFAS contamination. Given the obligation to infiltrate and recharge the CARA, we doubt that any other jurisdiction has such a regulation in a comparable CARA. None of the above should be read as staff making light of the PFAS pollution possibility. Staff readily acknowledges that PFAS can contaminate an aquifer. The disagreement with EEC and OVWSD surrounds what should be done about PFAS with regard to new development and stormwater regulation. The federal authorities require the removal of PFAS from drinking water, not stormwater. EEC seems to suggest that PFAS are only caused by new development, not existing development. But OVWSD, as noted above, has informed the City that PFAS already exist within the Dear Creek CARA, a closed basin where all stormwater either infiltrates or evaporates. Given that PFAS can already be found in the basin and that there is no gravity pathway out of the basin except through infiltration, it is reasonable to conclude that, even without any new development, PFAS will make their way to the aquifer. Furthermore, the CARA is already mostly developed. New development in the CARA is expected to be moderate in-fill development of a relatively small scale. While the City has not yet performed a site- specific development analysis of this type, it is unlikely that the City would be able to justify, without a scientific study to back it up, a development condition that required a builder to pump all of the stormwater from its development out of the basin at significant cost while allowing the remaining already polluted stormwater to infiltrate. It is possible that the City’s forthcoming PFAS study will eventually support such a condition. But staff thinks it is more likely that the study will give the City a basis for mitigating PFAS through the prohibition of PFAS sources that are commonly found in residential areas. These prohibitions could be applied to both existing and new development and, as a result of their increased applicability, would do a better job of protecting the aquifer from contamination. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 175/352 Policy Options for Council Consideration Option 1: Take no action at this time and consider adoption of both the CAO and CARA following completion of the study. Pros: Allows CAO and CARA to be adopted together based on completed, scientific PFAS analysis. Avoids interim CARA policy decisions while the study is ongoing. Cons: Leaves the City out of compliance with state CAO update requirements, potentially affecting eligibility for state and federal grant funding. Prolongs regulatory uncertainty for property owners, applicants, and staff. Requires restarting the public process at a later date. Option 2: Adopt the CAO with amended CARA (November City Council public hearing version), with CARA to be updated again upon completion of the PFAS/CARA study. Pros: Brings the City into compliance with state CAO update requirements. Addresses concerns raised by EEC and OVWSD, potentially reducing appeal risk from those stakeholders. Adopts CAO and CARA together in the near term. Cons: Will significantly constrain redevelopment options where stormwater improvements are triggered, without clear scientific justification. Increases risk of legal challenge from property owners unable to make improvements to their property that one would ordinarily be able to make, e.g. repaving a driveway or building an addition. Stormwater regulations will need to be developed specifically for the Deer Creek CARA. Likely requires additional amendments once the PFAS/CARA study is completed. Regulations would conflict with the City’s stormwater permit and stormwater code, making it extremely difficult for City staff to process applications until the two sets of regulations can be made consistent with one another. Effect on the aquifer is unlikely to be positive: o Recharge function of the CARA could be impaired. o Because existing development would still infiltrate, there is serious doubt as to whether such regulations would materially prevent the introduction of any new PFAS to the aquifer. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 176/352 Option 3: Adopt the CAO and defer consideration of the CARA until completion of the study. Pros: Brings the City into compliance with state requirements while allowing CARA regulations to be informed by completed scientific study on PFAS. Preserves existing development rights under current CARA regulations. Allows the updated CAO to take effect near-term, improving usability and clarity. Reflects adaptive management principles and aligns regulatory changes with evidence. Cons: May be perceived by some stakeholders as providing less immediate precautionary protection, despite existing zoning and regulatory safeguards. Option 4: Adopt the CAO, defer consideration of the CARA, and adopt a moratorium on development within the Deer Creek CARA. Pros: The moratorium signals strong precautionary intent during the PFAS/CARA study period. Might avoid a second appeal from EEC. Gives residents of the neighborhood a preview of their potential future use restrictions in the event that the council eventually adopts EEC’s preferred CARA regulation. Might generate another perspective for council to consider during public comment. Avoids the scenario where staff is forced to process applications when development regulations are in conflict. Cons: Moratoria carry their own legal risks. Significantly restricts property use for property owners. Prolongs uncertainty for affected property owners. Option 5: Adopt CAO and CARA while establishing an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and non-regulatory actions achieve their objectives. Pros: Expressly follows the language of the precautionary principle. Cons: Staff has not yet prepared an effect adaptive management program. So, this course would delay adoption. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 177/352 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option 3: Adopt the Critical Areas Ordinance and defer consideration of the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) regulations until completion of the Deer Creek CARA study (Attachment 1). This approach brings the City into compliance with state requirements while allowing CARA regulations to be informed by completed, site-specific scientific analysis, consistent with best available science and adaptive management principles. Existing CARA regulations, zoning limitations, and state-level protections remain in effect during the study period, preserving aquifer protection and property owners’ development rights while reducing legal and regulatory risk. BUDGET IMPACTS: There are no direct budget impacts associated with adoption of the CAO. Delaying adoption or adopting a moratorium or adaptive management program would increase staff workload and may indirectly affect the City’s ability to pursue state grants while out of compliance. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Key Notes for Council: 1) Existing monitoring shows Deer Creek PFAS levels below current state and federal standards. 2) Residential zoning and UIC regulations already protect the aquifer by strictly limiting high-risk activities. 3) Adaptive management allows CARA regulations to be refined based on completed science. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Draft Critical Area Ordinance Attachment 2 – Public Comments Attachment 3 – Excerpts from WAC 173-218-100 (UIC non-endangerment standard) Item 10.2 Packet pg. 178/352 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING ALL OF THE CITY’S PERIODIC UPDATE TO ITS CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE EXCEPT THE PERIODIC UPDATE TO THE CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, RCW 36.70.130 requires a periodic update to the city’s critical areas ordinance (CAO); and WHEREAS, the city has completed most of the work required to adopt the CAO periodic update; and WHEREAS, the city is still in the process of completing a study related to the best available science around PFAS in stormwater; and WHEREAS, the pending PFAS study will be completed in the first half of 2026 and will inform the update of the city’s critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) regulations; and WHEREAS, the CARA will be updated in 2026 after the results of the PFAS study have been considered by the planning board and city council, and after a subsequent public hearing on the yet-to-be-proposed CARA regulations; and WHEREAS, the city held a public hearing on the periodic update of the CAO on November 25, 2025; and WHEREAS, the draft CARA regulations that were before the city council for the November 25, 2025 public hearing was prepared with heavy input from a group of interested citizens known as the Edmonds Environmental Council and does not necessarily reflect best available science; and WHEREAS, the November 2025 draft CARA regulations would have necessitated such a significant deviation from the current CARA regulations, the current stormwater regulations, and the city’s obligations under its stormwater permit that the city council believes it most appropriate to leave the current CARA regulations (chapter 23.60 ECDC) in place over the next several months until the results of the PFAS study are before the city council; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 179/352 WHEREAS, the city’s tree related regulations in chapter 23.10 ECDC are being re- codified in a separate companion ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Repealer. The following chapters of Title 23, entitled “Natural Resources,” are hereby repealed: 23.10 Tree Related Regulations Revised 23.40 Environmentally Critical Areas General Provisions 23.50 Wetlands 23.70 Frequently Flooded Areas 23.80 Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.90 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. Section 2. Periodic Update of Critical Areas Ordinance. A new chapter 23.10 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Environmentally Critical Areas,” is hereby adopted to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative function of the city council, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 180/352 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 181/352 4 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING ALL OF THE CITY’S PERIODIC UPDATE TO ITS CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE EXCEPT THE PERIODIC UPDATE TO THE CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA REGULATIONS. . The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2025. DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 182/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 1 of 86 Title 23 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS Chapters: 23.10 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas Chapter 23.10 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS SecƟons: IntroducƟon - General Provisions 23.10.000 Purpose. 23.10.010 Authority. 23.10.020 Severability. 23.10.030 DefiniƟons. 23.10.040 ProtecƟon of criƟcal areas. 23.10.050 Applicability, idenƟficaƟon, inventory, mapping. 23.10.060 General provisions. 23.10.070 Use of best available science, monitoring, and adapƟve management. 23.10.080 Allowed acƟviƟes and exempƟons - General. 23.10.090 AddiƟonal allowed acƟviƟes and exempƟons – Specific to CriƟcal Area Types. 23.10.100 RestoraƟon projects. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 183/352 23.10.110 Unauthorized alteraƟons and enforcement. 23.10.120 Markers and signs. 23.10.130 NoƟce on Ɵtle. 23.10.140 Building setback. CriƟcal Area Review Procedures 23.10.200 CriƟcal area review sequence. 23.10.210 CriƟcal area report requirements - General. 23.10.220 CriƟcal area report requirements – Specific to CriƟcal Area Types. 23.10.230 Review criteria. 23.10.240 ConƟngent review procedure and criteria. 23.10.250 MiƟgaƟon requirements and sequencing. 23.10.260 Monitoring and Bonds. 23.10.270 Appeals. 23.10.280 Variances. 23.10.290 InspecƟons. ArƟcle I. Wetlands 23.10.300 DescripƟon and Purpose. 23.10.310 DesignaƟon, raƟng, and mapping. 23.10.320 Development standards. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 184/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 3 of 86 23.10.330 Performance standards – Subdivisions. ArƟcle III. Frequently flooded areas 23.10.500 DescripƟon and Purpose. 23.10.510 DesignaƟon, raƟng and mapping. 23.10.520 Liability disclaimer. 23.10.530 Development standards. ArƟcle IV. Geologically hazardous areas 23.10.600 DescripƟon and Purpose. 23.10.610 DesignaƟon and mapping. 23.10.620 Development Standards – General Requirements. 23.10.630 Development Standards – Specific Requirements. ArƟcle V. Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas 23.10.700 DescripƟon and Purpose. 23.10.710 DesignaƟon, raƟng and mapping – Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas. 23.10.720 Development standards – General requirements. 23.10.730 Development standards – Specific Requirements. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 185/352 IntroducƟon - General Provisions 23.10.000 Purpose. This chapter designates and classifies environmentally criƟcal areas. It protects the public from hazards, conserves the funcƟons and values of environmentally sensiƟve areas, and allows for reasonable use of private property in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW) through the applicaƟon of the best available science, as determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172, and the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. Included, but not limited, in this purpose statement are the following: 1. Maintain no net loss of value or funcƟon of fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas by preserving and restoring riparian corridors and protecƟng wildlife habitats that support state priority species and species of local importance. 2. Achieve no net loss of value or funcƟon of wetlands and their buffers and enhance or restore wetlands where feasible. 3. Protect criƟcal aquifer recharge areas by avoiding land uses that risk contaminaƟon and prevent negaƟve impacts. 4. Avoid and minimize risks to life and property from geological hazards by requiring appropriate study, analysis, and sound engineering principles to ensure sites are as safe as those without hazards. 5. Maintain no net loss of structure, value, and funcƟon of natural systems in frequently flooded areas. 23.10.010 Authority. A. As provided herein, the Edmonds planning and development director or his/her designee (hereaŌer referred to as “the director”) is given the authority to interpret and apply, and the responsibility to enforce, this chapter to accomplish the stated purpose. B. This chapter is to be administered with flexibility and aƩenƟon to site-specific characterisƟcs. It is not the intent of this chapter to make a parcel of property unusable by denying its owner reasonable economic use of the property nor to prevent the provision of public faciliƟes and services necessary to support exisƟng development. C. The city of Edmonds’ enactment or enforcement of this chapter shall not be construed to benefit any individual person or group of persons other than the general public. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 186/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 5 of 86 D. The director may withhold, condiƟon, or deny development permits or acƟvity approvals to ensure that the proposed acƟon is consistent with this chapter. 23.10.020 Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, secƟon, or part of this chapter or the applicaƟon thereof to any person or circumstances shall be judged by any court of competent jurisdicƟon to be invalid, such order or judgment shall be confined in its operaƟon to the controversy in which it was rendered. The decision shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any part thereof and to this end the provisions of each clause, sentence, paragraph, secƟon, or part of this law are hereby declared to be severable. 23.10.030 DefiniƟons. For the purposes of this chapter, the following definiƟons shall apply: “AdapƟve management” means the systemaƟc acquisiƟon and applicaƟon of reliable informaƟon to improve management over Ɵme. It oŌen includes treaƟng management decisions as experiments to address criƟcal uncertainƟes and learn more quickly from experience. It involves seƫng objecƟves, monitoring condiƟons, and adjusƟng management based on results. Hallmarks of a sound adapƟve management program include (1) adequate funding for monitoring and research, (2) a willingness to change course when pre-established triggers are reached, and (3) a commitment to gather data and evaluate condiƟons at appropriate special extents and Ɵme scales. See WAC 365-195-920(2). “Adjacent” means those acƟviƟes located on sites immediately adjoining a criƟcal area; or within a distance of 225 feet or less of a development proposal or subject parcel; or criƟcal areas within the jurisdicƟon of criƟcal areas regulaƟon requirements to support the intent of this chapter and ensure protecƟon of the funcƟons and values of criƟcal areas. “AlteraƟon” means any human-induced acƟon which changes the exisƟng condiƟon of a criƟcal area or its buffer. AlteraƟons include, but are not limited to: grading; filling; dredging; draining; channelizing; cuƫng, pruning, limbing or topping, clearing, relocaƟng or removing vegetaƟon; applying herbicides or pesƟcides or any hazardous or toxic substance; discharging pollutants; paving, construcƟon, applicaƟon of gravel; modifying for surface water management purposes; or any other human acƟvity that changes the exisƟng landforms, vegetaƟon, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat value of criƟcal areas. “Applicant” means a person, as defined in ECDC 21.80.030, proposing or undertaking an alteraƟon. “AquaƟc species” means wildlife species that live in marine or freshwater including fish, shellfish, amphibians, repƟles, crustaceans, and various other invertebrates. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 187/352 “Aquifer” means a body of soil or rock that contains sufficient saturated material to conduct groundwater and yield usable quanƟƟes of groundwater to springs and/or wells. “Best Available Science” See ECDC 23.10.070. “Best management pracƟces” means a system of pracƟces and management measures that are inclusive of but not limited to:  Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradaƟon caused by nutrients, animal waste, and toxics;  Control the movement of sediment and erosion caused by land alteraƟon acƟviƟes;  Minimize adverse impacts to surface and ground water quality, flow, and circulaƟon paƩerns; and  Prevent adverse impacts to the chemical, physical, and biological characterisƟcs of criƟcal areas. “Buffer” means the area adjacent to a criƟcal area that is required for the conƟnued maintenance, funcƟon, and/or structural stability of the criƟcal area. Buffer widths vary depending on the relaƟve quality and sensiƟvity of the area being protected. Buffer areas are intended to be leŌ primarily undisturbed, but may be altered in limited circumstances when enhancement is provided to improve funcƟons and values over exisƟng condiƟons. “Chapter” means those secƟons of this Ɵtle sharing the same third digit . “Class” or “wetland class” means descripƟve categories of wetland vegetaƟon communiƟes within the wetlands taxonomic classificaƟon system of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al., 1979). “Clearing” means the act of cuƫng and/or removing vegetaƟon. This definiƟon shall include grubbing vegetaƟon and the use or applicaƟon of herbicide. “CompensaƟon project” means an acƟon(s) specifically designed to replace project-induced criƟcal area or buffer losses. CompensaƟon project design elements may include but are not limited to: land acquisiƟon procedures and detailed plans including funcƟonal value assessments, detailed landscaping designs, construcƟon drawings, and monitoring and conƟngency plans. “Compensatory miƟgaƟon” means replacing project-induced losses or impacts to a criƟcal area such that there is no net loss to the funcƟons and values of the criƟcal areas involved, including but not limited to acƟons involving the creaƟon, reestablishment, rehabilitaƟon, enhancement, and/or preservaƟon of criƟcal areas, as defined in this secƟon. “CreaƟon” means project performed to intenƟonally establish a wetland or stream at a site where one did not formerly exist. “CriƟcal aquifer recharge areas (CARAs)” See Chapter 23.60 ECDC. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 188/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 7 of 86 “CriƟcal areas” means the following areas and ecosystems, including associated buffers: wetlands, criƟcal aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas as defined herein. “Deleterious substances” include, but are not limited to, chemical and microbial substances, whether the substances are in usable or waste condiƟon, that are not classified as hazardous materials per this chapter, that have the potenƟal to pose a significant groundwater hazard, or for which monitoring requirements or treatment- based standards are enforced under Chapter 246-290 WAC. “Development proposal” means any acƟvity relaƟng to the use and/or development of land requiring a permit or approval from the city, including, but not limited to: commercial or residenƟal building permit; binding site plan; condiƟonal use permit; franchise; right-of-way permit; grading and clearing permit; mixed use approval; planned residenƟal development; shoreline condiƟonal use permit; shoreline substanƟal development permit; shoreline variance; short subdivision; special use permit; subdivision; flood hazard permit; unclassified use permit; uƟlity and other use permit; variance; rezone; or any required permit or approval not expressly exempted by this chapter. “Director” means the city of Edmonds planning and development director or his/her designee. “Division” means the planning division of the city of Edmonds planning and development department. “Ecosystem funcƟons" are the products, physical and biological condiƟons, and environmental qualiƟes of an ecosystem that result from interacƟons among ecosystem processes and ecosystem structures. Ecosystem funcƟons include, but are not limited to, sequestered carbon, aƩenuated peak streamflow, aquifer water level, reduced pollutant concentraƟons in surface and ground waters, cool summer in-stream water temperatures, and fish and wildlife habitat funcƟons. “Ecosystem values" are the cultural, social, economic, and ecological benefits aƩributed to ecosystem funcƟons. “Enhancement” means an acƟon taken to improve the condiƟon and funcƟon of a criƟcal area. For compensatory miƟgaƟon, enhancement addiƟonally means acƟons performed to improve the condiƟon of degraded wetlands, riparian areas or streams such that the funcƟons and values they provide are increased. “Erosion” means the process in which soil parƟcles are mobilized and transported by natural agents such as wind, rain, frost acƟon, or stream flow. “Erosion Hazard Areas” See ECDC 23.10.610(C). "Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area" See ECDC 23.10.700(A). “Floodplain” See ECDC 19.07.020. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 189/352 “Footprint of exisƟng development” or “footprint of development” means the area of a site that contains legally established: buildings; roads, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, walkways or other areas paved with concrete, asphalt or compacted gravel; outdoor swimming pools; paƟos. “Frequently Flooded Areas” See ECDC 23.10.500(A). “Geologically Hazardous Areas” See ECDC 23.10.600(A). “Geologist” means a person licensed as a geologist, engineering geologist, or hydrologist in the state of Washington. For geologically hazardous areas, an applicant may choose a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the state of Washington to assess the potenƟal hazard. “Geotechnical engineer” means a pracƟcing geotechnical/civil engineer licensed as a professional civil engineer in the state of Washington who has at least five years of professional employment as a geotechnical engineer in responsible charge including experience with landslide evaluaƟon. “Grading” means any one or a combinaƟon of excavaƟng, filling, or disturbance of that porƟon of the soil profile which contains decaying organic maƩer. “Habitats of local importance” See ECDC 23.10.710(B)(3). “Hazardous materials” means any material, either singularly or in combinaƟon, that is a physical or health hazard, whether the materials are in usable or waste condiƟon, and any material that may degrade surface water or groundwater quality when improperly stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, disposed of, or otherwise mismanaged. Hazardous materials also include: all materials defined as or designated by rule as a dangerous waste or extremely hazardous waste under Chapter 70A.300 RCW and Chapter 173-303 WAC; hazardous materials also include petroleum or petroleum products that are in liquid phase at ambient temperatures, including any waste oils or sludges. “Hazardous materials inventory (HMI)” is an inventory of all current and anƟcipated types and quanƟƟes of hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of at a facility as required in ECDC 23.60.030(C)(2), Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI). “Hazardous materials management plan (HMMP)” is a plan completed by the operator that demonstrates how the facility implements required BMPs as required in ECDC 23.60.030(C)(3), Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). “Hazard tree” See ECDC 17.130.020. “Impact (to a criƟcal area or buffer)” means a net loss of values or funcƟons to a criƟcal area or its buffer. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 190/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 9 of 86 “In-lieu fee program” means a program which sells compensatory miƟgaƟon credits to permiƩees whose obligaƟon to provide compensatory miƟgaƟon is then transferred to the in-lieu program sponsor, a governmental or nonprofit natural resource management enƟty. “Landslide Hazard Areas” See ECDC 23.10.610(D). “MiƟgaƟon” means the use of any of the acƟons listed in ECDC 23.10.250(E) for acƟviƟes and development on sites containing criƟcal areas, except for criƟcal area aquifer recharge areas. “Monitoring and AdapƟve Management” means the process of monitoring, reporƟng, and improving permits, regulaƟons, and programs to ensure the protecƟon of criƟcal areas. “NaƟve vegetaƟon” means vegetaƟon comprised of plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region and which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. “NaƟve vegetaƟon” does not include noxious weeds as defined by the state of Washington or Snohomish County. “No Net Loss of CriƟcal Areas” refers to the acƟons taken to achieve and ensure no overall reducƟon in exisƟng ecosystem funcƟons and values or the natural systems consƟtuƟng the protected criƟcal areas. “Normal maintenance of vegetaƟon” means removal of shrubs/nonwoody vegetaƟon and trees (less than four- inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at least every other year. Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previously approved by the city in the past five years. “Noxious weeds” means any plant that is highly destrucƟve, compeƟƟve or difficult to control by cultural or chemical pracƟces, limited to those plants on the state noxious weed list contained in Chapter 16-750 WAC. “PreservaƟon” means acƟons taken to ensure the permanent protecƟon of exisƟng wetlands and fish and conservaƟon areas. “Priority Habitat” means a habitat type with unique or significant value to many species. An area idenƟfied and mapped as priority habitat has one or more of the following aƩributes: comparaƟvely high fish and wildlife density, comparaƟvely high fish and wildlife species diversity, important fish and wildlife breeding habitat, important fish and wildlife seasonal ranges, important fish and wildlife movement corridors, limited availability, high vulnerability to habitat alteraƟon, and unique or dependent species. “Priority Species” are fish and wildlife species requiring protecƟve measures and/or management acƟons to ensure their survival. A species idenƟfied and mapped as priority species fit one or more of the following criteria: State-listed candidate species, vulnerable aggregaƟons, and Species of recreaƟonal, commercial, and/or Tribal importance. “Qualified criƟcal areas consultant” or “qualified professional” means a person who has the qualificaƟons specified herein to conduct criƟcal areas studies pursuant to this chapter, and to make recommendaƟons for criƟcal areas miƟgaƟon. For geologically hazardous areas, the qualified criƟcal areas consultant shall be a Item 10.2 Packet pg. 191/352 geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the state of Washington to assess the potenƟal hazard. If development is to take place within a geologically hazardous area, the qualified criƟcal areas consultant developing miƟgaƟon plans and design shall be a professional engineer licensed in the state of Washington and familiar with landslide and slope stability miƟgaƟon. For wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat priority areas, the qualified criƟcal areas consultant shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of five years’ field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. For criƟcal aquifer recharge areas, the qualified professional must be a currently licensed Washington State geologist holding a current specialty license in hydrogeology. “Reasonable economic use(s)” means the minimum use to which a property owner is enƟtled under applicable state and federal consƟtuƟonal provisions in order to avoid a taking and/or violaƟon of substanƟve due process. "Recharge" means the process involved in the absorpƟon and addiƟon of water from the unsaturated zone to groundwater. “Redeveloped land(s)” means those lands on which exisƟng structures are demolished in their enƟrety to allow for new development. The director shall maintain discreƟon to determine if the demoliƟon of a majority of exisƟng structures or porƟons thereof consƟtute the redevelopment of a property or subject parcel. “Reestablished” means acƟons performed to restore processes and funcƟons to an area that was formerly a criƟcal area; where the former criƟcal area was lost by past alteraƟons and acƟviƟes. “RehabilitaƟon” means improving or repairing processes and funcƟons to an exisƟng criƟcal area that is highly degraded because one or more environmental processes supporƟng the criƟcal area have been disrupted. “RestoraƟon” means the acƟons necessary to return a stream, wetland or other criƟcal area to a state in which its stability, funcƟons and values approach its unaltered state as closely as possible. For wetlands, restoraƟon as compensatory miƟgaƟon may include reestablishment or rehabilitaƟon. “Riparian management zone” See ECDC 23.10.710(B)(8). “Seismic Hazard Areas” See ECDC 23.10.610(E). “Species of local importance” See ECDC 23.10.710(B)(3). “Stormwater Management Manual” means the stormwater manual specified in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. “Streams” means any area where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorƟng of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definiƟon is not meant to include irrigaƟon ditches, canals, storm or surface water runoff devices (drainage ditches) or other enƟrely arƟficial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or used to convey streams naturally occurring prior to construcƟon of such watercourse. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 192/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 11 of 86 “Underground injecƟon control well” means as defined in Chapter 173-218 WAC and associated guidance documents. “Undeveloped land(s)” means land(s) on which manmade structures or land modificaƟons (clearing, grading, etc.) do not exist. The director retains discreƟon to idenƟfy undeveloped land(s) in those instances where historical modificaƟons and structures may have existed on a property or subject parcel in the past. “Wellhead protecƟon area (WHPA)” means protecƟve areas associated with public drinking water sources established by water systems and approved or assigned by the state Department of Health. “Wetland funcƟons” means those natural processes performed by wetlands, such as facilitaƟng food chain producƟon; providing habitat for nesƟng, rearing and resƟng sites for aquaƟc, terrestrial or avian species; maintaining the availability and quality of water; acƟng as recharge and/or discharge areas for ground water aquifers; and moderaƟng surface water and stormwater flows. “Wetland miƟgaƟon bank” means a site where wetlands are restored, created, enhanced, or in excepƟonal circumstances, preserved expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory miƟgaƟon in advance of authorized impacts to similar resources. “Wetlands” See ECDC 23.10.300(A). 23.10.040 ProtecƟon of criƟcal areas. Any acƟon taken pursuant to this chapter shall result in equivalent or greater funcƟons and values of the criƟcal areas associated with the proposed acƟon, as determined by the best available science, including the consideraƟon of climate change impacts such as increased flooding, sea level rise, extreme heat, drought, wildfire risk, and shiŌing habitat condiƟons. All acƟons and developments shall be designed and constructed in accordance with ECDC 23.10.250(E), MiƟgaƟon sequencing, to avoid, minimize, and restore all adverse impacts, including those exacerbated by climate change. Applicants must first demonstrate an inability to avoid or reduce impacts before the use of acƟons to miƟgate potenƟal impacts will be allowed. No acƟvity or use shall be allowed that results in a net loss of the funcƟons or values of criƟcal areas or their buffers now or under projected future climate condiƟons. 23.10.050 Applicability, idenƟficaƟon, inventory, mapping. A. Compliance. No permit or authorizaƟon may be issued to alter land, water, vegetaƟon, or to construct or modify any structure or improvement without first meeƟng the requirements of this chapter. B. CriƟcal areas regulated by this chapter include: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 193/352  Wetlands as designated in ArƟcle I: Wetlands;  CriƟcal aquifer recharge areas as designated in Chapter 23.60 ECDC- ArƟcle II: CriƟcal Aquifer Recharge Areas;  Frequently flooded areas as designated in ArƟcle III: Frequently Flooded Areas;  Geologically hazardous areas as designated in ArƟcle IV: Geologically Hazardous Areas; and  Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas as designated in ArƟcle V: Fish and Wildlife Habitat ConservaƟon Areas. C. CriƟcal areas maps. The City’s criƟcal area map is for reference only and is intended to help idenƟfy potenƟal criƟcal areas on a site. A site-specific invesƟgaƟon is required prior to any alteraƟon to confirm the presence or absence of criƟcal areas. The department will maintain and update criƟcal area maps as new informaƟon becomes available. These maps include, but are not limited to:  Federal Emergency Management Agency flood insurance rate maps;  U.S. Geological Survey landslide, seismic, and volcano hazard maps;  Washington Department of Natural Resources seismic hazard maps for Western Washington;  Washington Department of Natural Resources slope stability maps;  NaƟonal Wetlands Inventory maps;  Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species maps;  Other City-adopted criƟcal area maps, including CriƟcal Aquifer Recharge Areas and Geologically SensiƟve Areas maps. D. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeƟng the definiƟon of one or more criƟcal areas are hereby designated criƟcal areas and are subject to the provisions of this chapter. E. Areas Adjacent to CriƟcal Areas Subject to RegulaƟon. Areas adjacent to criƟcal areas shall be considered within the jurisdicƟon of these requirements and regulaƟons to support the intent of this chapter and ensure protecƟon of the funcƟons and values of criƟcal areas. F. PotenƟal Downstream Impacts on Type F streams. Areas located within a watershed that drains to a Type F stream may be subject to addiƟonal review under this chapter when a proposed acƟvity has the potenƟal to affect the funcƟons or values of the downstream Type F stream or its associated habitat. The director may Item 10.2 Packet pg. 194/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 13 of 86 require criƟcal area reports, miƟgaƟon, or best management pracƟces only to the extent necessary to evaluate and address such potenƟal impacts. 23.10.060 General provisions. A. RelaƟonship to Other RegulaƟons. The provisions of this chapter shall apply as an overlay and in addiƟon to zoning, site development, stormwater management, building and other regulaƟons adopted by the city of Edmonds. Where this chapter imposes more protecƟve requirements for the environment, the requirements of this chapter shall prevail. B. SEPA Compliance. These criƟcal areas regulaƟons shall be coordinated with review conducted under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), as necessary and locally adopted. C. Compliance with the provisions of this Ɵtle chapter does not consƟtute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulaƟons and permit requirements that may be required (for example, shoreline substanƟal development permits, Hydraulic Permit Act (HPA) permits, SecƟon 106 of the NaƟonal Historic PreservaƟon Act, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers SecƟon 404 permits, and NaƟonal PolluƟon Discharge EliminaƟon System permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in this chapter. D. If applicaƟon of this chapter would deny all reasonable use of a subject property, the owner may apply for a reasonable use variance pursuant to 23.10.280(A)(2). 23.10.070 Use of Best available science, monitoring, and adapƟve management. A. Best available science (BAS). 1. Protect FuncƟons and Values of CriƟcal Areas. CriƟcal areas reports and decisions to alter criƟcal areas shall rely on the BAS to protect the funcƟons and values of criƟcal areas, and must give special consideraƟon to conservaƟon or protecƟon measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish, such as salmon and bull trout, and their habitat, where applicable. 2. BAS to Be Consistent with Criteria. The best available science is that scienƟfic informaƟon applicable to the criƟcal area prepared by local, state, or federal natural resource agencies, a qualified scienƟfic professional, or a team of qualified scienƟfic professionals that is consistent with criteria established in WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172. 3. CharacterisƟcs of a Valid ScienƟfic Process. In the context of criƟcal areas protecƟon, a valid scienƟfic process is one that produces reliable informaƟon useful in understanding the consequences of a Item 10.2 Packet pg. 195/352 local government’s regulatory decisions, and in developing criƟcal areas policies and development regulaƟons that will be effecƟve in protecƟng the funcƟons and values of criƟcal areas. To determine whether informaƟon received during the permit review process is reliable scienƟfic informaƟon, the director shall determine whether the source of the informaƟon displays the characterisƟcs of a valid scienƟfic process. Such characterisƟcs are as follows: a. Peer Review. The informaƟon has been criƟcally reviewed by other persons who are qualified scienƟfic experts in that scienƟfic discipline. The proponents of the informaƟon have addressed the criƟcism of the peer reviewers. PublicaƟon in a refereed scienƟfic journal usually indicates that the informaƟon has been appropriately peer-reviewed; b. Methods. The methods used to obtain the informaƟon are clearly stated and reproducible. The methods are standardized in the perƟnent scienƟfic discipline or, if not, the methods have been appropriately peer reviewed to ensure their reliability and validity; c. Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences. The conclusions presented are based on reasonable assumpƟons supported by other studies and consistent with the general theory underlying the assumpƟons. The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived from the assumpƟons and supported by the data presented. Any gaps in informaƟon and inconsistencies with other perƟnent scienƟfic informaƟon are adequately explained; d. QuanƟtaƟve Analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate staƟsƟcal or quanƟtaƟve methods; e. Context. The informaƟon is placed in proper context. The assumpƟons, analyƟcal techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of perƟnent scienƟfic knowledge; and f. References. The assumpƟons, analyƟcal techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with citaƟons to relevant, credible literature and other perƟnent exisƟng informaƟon. 4. NonscienƟfic InformaƟon. NonscienƟfic informaƟon, such as anecdotal observaƟons, nonexpert opinion, and local knowledge, may supplement scienƟfic informaƟon, but it is not a subsƟtute for valid and available scienƟfic informaƟon. 5. Absence of Valid ScienƟfic InformaƟon. When valid or complete scienƟfic informaƟon is lacking, and this results in uncertainty about the risk a proposed acƟvity may pose to the funcƟons and values of a criƟcal area, the director shall: a. Take a “precauƟonary or a no-risk approach” that strictly limits development and land use acƟviƟes unƟl the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved; and Item 10.2 Packet pg. 196/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 15 of 86 b. Require applicaƟon of an effecƟve adapƟve management program that relies on scienƟfic methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory acƟons protect the criƟcal area. An adapƟve management program is a formal and deliberate scienƟfic approach to taking acƟon and obtaining informaƟon in the face of uncertainty. E. Monitoring and adapƟve management program. The City may use adapƟve management to support the ongoing protecƟon of criƟcal areas. AdapƟve management is a science-based approach that incorporates new informaƟon, monitors outcomes, and adjusts management strategies when needed to beƩer achieve intended funcƟons and values. The specific methods, procedures, and tools used in adapƟve management may vary over Ɵme and will be determined administraƟvely, consistent with the general principles outlined in this chapter. 23.10.080 Allowed acƟviƟes and exempƟons. A. Purpose. The purpose of this secƟon is to idenƟfy acƟviƟes that may occur within criƟcal areas and their buffers, with or without a criƟcal areas report. B. Applicability. AcƟviƟes allowed without a criƟcal areas report are limited to those that, when implemented using appropriate best management pracƟces, will not result in a net loss of criƟcal area funcƟons or values. All other acƟviƟes require review under this chapter. Unless otherwise specified, acƟviƟes allowed under this secƟon may sƟll require permits or approvals under other chapters of the Edmonds Community Development Code or applicable state or federal law. C. Best Management PracƟces (BMPs). All allowed acƟviƟes shall be conducted using the BMPs. The director may require field inspecƟon to confirm the use of BMPs. Any incidental damage to a criƟcal area shall be restored or miƟgated at the responsible party’s expense. D. Allowed AcƟviƟes – No CriƟcal Area Report Required. The following acƟviƟes are allowed and do not require preparaƟon of a criƟcal area report: 1. Allowed AcƟviƟes within CriƟcal Areas and Buffers. 2. Minor Structural ModificaƟons. Maintenance, repair, or modificaƟon of a legally established structure that does not increase its footprint, alter a criƟcal area or buffer, or increase hazard risk to life or property. 3. Minor Site InvesƟgaƟve Work. AcƟviƟes necessary for permit submiƩal, including surveys, soil logs, percolaƟon tests, hand-dug test pits, and similar non-intrusive work, provided disturbed areas are restored immediately and no lasƟng impacts occur. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 197/352 4. Minor UƟlity Projects. UƟlity projects acƟviƟes that: a. Have no pracƟcal alternaƟve with less impact; b. Are limited to the placement of poles, signs, anchors, or vaults, or similar other small uƟlity components; and c. Disturb no more than 75 square feet. 5. AcƟviƟes in Improved Right-of-Way. InstallaƟon, repair, replacement, or modificaƟon of uƟliƟes within the improved porƟon of the public right-of-way or a city-approved private roadway, provided the acƟvity: a. Does not alter a wetland or watercourse; and b. Does not increase sediment or stormwater discharge. 6. NavigaƟonal Aids and Boundary Markers. InstallaƟon or modificaƟon of navigaƟonal aids and boundary markers. 7. Select VegetaƟon Removal AcƟviƟes. The following vegetaƟon removal acƟviƟes are allowed: a. Removal of invasive and noxious plant species shall be restricted to hand removal unless permits or approval from the appropriate regulatory agencies have been obtained for approved mechanical, biological or chemical treatment, or other removal techniques. Plants that appear on the Washington State and/or Snohomish County Noxious Weed Control Boards list of noxious weeds must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species. b. The removal of invasive, non-naƟve plants and noxious weeds for the purpose of habitat maintenance or restoraƟon when the area of work is restricted to under 1,500 square feet in area per year. c. VegetaƟon removal for habitat protecƟon or restoraƟon in wetlands or fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas may exceed the 1,500-square-foot limit when the work is proposed and managed by a qualified nonprofit or similar organizaƟon approved by the City or another agency with jurisdicƟon, and is supported by a City-approved proposal describing the project scope and locaƟon, providing appropriate supervision, and including a monitoring and inspecƟon schedule acceptable to the City. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 198/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 17 of 86 d. Hazardous Trees. The removal of hazard trees within criƟcal areas and their buffers may be approved by the director, provided the trees are documented as hazardous and the following condiƟons are met: i. DocumentaƟon and review. Prior to any tree cuƫng, the applicant shall submit a report from an ISA-cerƟfied arborist documenƟng that the tree presents a high or extreme risk using a Level 2 ISA Tree Risk Assessment. The report shall include a replanƟng schedule consistent with an approved restoraƟon plan. ii. Tree Pruning or Removal Methods. Tree cuƫng shall be limited to pruning or crown thinning necessary to remove the hazard, unless an ISA-cerƟfied arborist determines that full removal is warranted due to a high or extreme risk. Where feasible, hazardous trees shall be converted to wildlife snags rather than removed enƟrely. If removal to a stump is required, tree roots shall remain intact and undisturbed. iii. Imminent Risk. When a tree poses an imminent risk to public safety or property, the landowner may prune or cut the tree into a wildlife snag before receiving wriƩen City approval. Within 14 days of such acƟon, the landowner shall submit to the director: (a) a report from an ISA- or ASCA-cerƟfied arborist documenƟng the hazard and (b) a restoraƟon plan demonstraƟng compliance with this secƟon. iv. Tree Replacement. Any enƟty, including public uƟliƟes, removing a hazard tree shall replace it at a raƟo of two replacement trees for each tree removed (2:1) within one year, in accordance with an approved restoraƟon plan. Replacement trees shall be naƟve species and indigenous to the site, a minimum of one to two inches DSH for deciduous trees or six feet in height for evergreens. Where replanƟng in the same locaƟon would create a new hazard or impact the criƟcal area, replacement may occur in a nearby locaƟon. v. Hazardous trees that provide criƟcal habitat. If a hazardous tree provides criƟcal habitat (e.g., an eagle or heron nest), a qualified wildlife biologist shall be consulted to determine appropriate Ɵming, removal methods, and other agency permiƫng to minimize impacts. vi. VegetaƟon removal. All vegetaƟon removed (e.g., stems, branches) shall remain within the criƟcal area or buffer unless removal is necessary to prevent the spread of disease or pests, protect the understory, or the debris poses a risk to slope stability. vii. Hazardous trees that do not pose an imminent risk. In advance of any cuƫng, the applicant submits a report to the City from an ISA-cerƟfied arborist that documents the hazard as a high- or extreme risk using Level 2 ISA Tree Risk Assessment and provides a replanƟng schedule for the replacement trees. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 199/352 viii. Prohibited vegetaƟon removal. Except as provided above or as part of an approved alteraƟon, the removal of vegetaƟon or woody debris from a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area or wetland is prohibited. 8. Pedestrian Trails. ConstrucƟon of new pedestrian-only trails located in the outer 25 percent of a wetland buffer, riparian management zone, or other criƟcal area buffer when: a. No feasible alternaƟve exists; b. Constructed of pervious materials; c. Limited to five feet in width; d. Avoids removal of significant trees. Raised boardwalks uƟlizing nontreated pilings may be used where necessary. 9. InstallaƟon of fences in geologically hazardous areas that do not require grading or structural foundaƟons. Fence posts shall be installed using hand tools that do not alter slope stability or impact criƟcal area funcƟons. D. Allowed AcƟviƟes – CriƟcal Areas Report Required. The following acƟviƟes may occur in criƟcal areas or buffers with preparaƟon of a criƟcal area report demonstraƟng consistency with this chapter: 1. Wetland - Buffer Uses. a. ConservaƟon, restoraƟon, or preservaƟon acƟviƟes required as miƟgaƟon. b. Passive recreaƟon faciliƟes, including walkways, boardwalks, wildlife viewing structures, and small-scale fishing access, when located and designed to minimize disturbance and placed in the outer 25 percent of the buffer unless otherwise jusƟfied. c. Stormwater conveyance and dispersion faciliƟes within the outer 25 percent of buffers for Category III and IV wetlands only, consistent with ECDC 18.30, Stormwater Management, including Minimum Requirement No. 8, Wetland ProtecƟon. 2. Geologically Hazardous Areas - Seismic Hazard Areas. a. ConstrucƟon of non-residenƟal buildings under 2,500 square feet of floor area or roof area, whichever is greater, and which are not used as places of employment or public assembly. b. AddiƟons to exisƟng single-story residences that are 250 square feet or less. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 200/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 19 of 86 3. Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas – Riparian Management Zones. The following uses may be permiƩed within a riparian management zone in accordance with the review procedures of this chapter; provided, they are not prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as to minimize impacts to the riparian management zone and adjacent stream: a. Pedestrian Trails. AŌer reviewing the proposed development and technical reports, the director may determine that a pedestrian-only trail may be allowed in a riparian management zone; provided, proposed development meets the requirements in ECDC 23.10.080(C)(8), and appropriate provisions are made to protect water quality. No motorized vehicles shall be allowed within a stream or the riparian management zone except as required for necessary maintenance or security. VegetaƟve edges, structural barriers, signs or other measures must be provided wherever necessary to protect streams by restricƟng vehicular access to designated public use or interpreƟve areas. E. ExempƟons. 1. ExempƟon Request and Review Process. The proponent of the acƟvity may submit a wriƩen request for exempƟon to the director that describes the acƟvity and states the exempƟon listed in this secƟon that applies. The director shall review the exempƟon request to verify that it complies with this chapter and approve or deny the exempƟon. If the exempƟon is approved, it shall be placed on file with the city of Edmonds. If the exempƟon is denied, the proponent may conƟnue in the review process and shall be subject to the requirements of this chapter. 2. Exempt AcƟviƟes and Impacts to CriƟcal Areas. All exempted acƟviƟes shall avoid impacts to criƟcal areas. To be exempt from this chapter does not give permission to degrade a criƟcal area or ignore risk from natural hazards. Any incidental damage to, or alteraƟon of, a criƟcal area associated with the exempted acƟvity shall be subject to the miƟgaƟon requirements and sequencing in 23.10.250 ECDC at the responsible party’s expense. 3. Exempt AcƟviƟes. The following development, acƟviƟes, and associated uses shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter; provided, that they are consistent with the provisions of other local, state, and federal laws and requirements: a. Emergencies. Those acƟviƟes necessary to prevent an immediate threat to public health, safety, or welfare, or that pose an immediate risk of damage to private property and that require remedial or preventaƟve acƟon in a Ɵme frame too short to allow for compliance with the requirements of this chapter. i. Emergency acƟons that create an impact to a criƟcal area or its buffer shall use reasonable methods to address the emergency; in addiƟon, they must have the least possible impact to the criƟcal area or its buffer. The person or agency undertaking such Item 10.2 Packet pg. 201/352 acƟon shall noƟfy the director within one working day following commencement of the emergency acƟvity. Within 30 days, the director shall determine if the acƟon taken was within the scope of the emergency acƟons allowed in this subsecƟon. If the director determines that the acƟon taken, or any part of the acƟon taken, was beyond the scope of an allowed emergency acƟon, then enforcement provisions of ECDC 23.10.110, Unauthorized criƟcal area alteraƟons and enforcement, shall apply. ii. AŌer the emergency, the person or agency undertaking the acƟon shall fully fund and conduct necessary restoraƟon and/or miƟgaƟon for any loss to the funcƟons and values of the criƟcal area and its buffers resulƟng from the emergency acƟon in accordance with an approved criƟcal areas report and miƟgaƟon plan. Within 30 days aŌer an emergency acƟon that impacts a criƟcal area, the person or agency undertaking the acƟon shall submit a criƟcal area report, and miƟgaƟon plan for review and approval by the director in accordance with the review procedures contained herein. RestoraƟon and/or miƟgaƟon acƟviƟes must be iniƟated within one year of the date of the emergency and completed in a Ɵmely manner. b. OperaƟon, Maintenance, or Repair. OperaƟon, maintenance, or repair of exisƟng structures, infrastructure improvements, uƟliƟes, public or private roads, dikes, levees, or drainage systems that do not require a construcƟon permit, are exempt, provided that: i. The acƟvity does not further alter, encroach upon, or impact the criƟcal area or buffer. ii. The acƟvity does not result in a net loss to the criƟcal area or buffer funcƟons or values iii. The acƟvity does not increase the risk to life or property. iv. When operaƟon and maintenance requires removal of naƟve vegetaƟon, it shall be limited the minimum necessary to complete the work. c. Passive Outdoor AcƟviƟes. RecreaƟon, educaƟon, and scienƟfic research acƟviƟes that do not degrade the criƟcal area, including fishing, hiking, and bird watching. d. ModificaƟons to ExisƟng Structures within CriƟcal Areas and/or Buffers. ModificaƟon to a legally constructed structure exisƟng within a criƟcal area or buffer shall be allowed when the modificaƟon: i. Does not increase the footprint of the structure; and ii. Does not increase the impact to a the criƟcal area or buffer; and iii. Does not increase risk to life or property as a result of the proposed modificaƟon or replacement. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 202/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 21 of 86 This provision shall be interpreted to supplement the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code relaƟng to nonconforming structures in order to permit the full reconstrucƟon of a legal nonconforming building within its footprint. e. Development Proposals within Riparian Management Areas funcƟonally isolated from Riparian Management Zones. Streams, or Wetlands. Adjacent areas that are funcƟonally isolated from a riparian management zone, stream, or wetland due to exisƟng legally established structures or paved areas may be exempted from the riparian management zones widths or wetland buffers if proven scienƟfically to be funcƟonally isolated from the stream or wetland. The director will require the applicant to provide a site assessment criƟcal areas report, prepared in accordance with ECDC 23.10.210, that includes a funcƟonal analysis documentaƟon report by a qualified professional that demonstrates the proposed development area is funcƟonally isolated. The director shall consider, and evaluate the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connecƟon potenƟal and the extent and permanence of the physical separaƟon. 23.10.100 RestoraƟon projects. A. When a criƟcal area restoraƟon project is proposed that includes acƟons beyond the acƟviƟes allowed per ECDC 23.10.080, may alter or affect criƟcal areas or their buffers, and is not required as miƟgaƟon for a development proposal, the director or hearing examiner (as applicable) may grant relief from standard criƟcal area or their buffer requirements if: 1. The restoraƟon project is permiƩed and/or otherwise authorized by state or federal agencies having jurisdicƟon over the proposed project acƟviƟes; 2. The restoraƟon project will result in a net increase in the funcƟons and values of the affected criƟcal areas; 3. A copy of the restoraƟon plan, as submiƩed to the authorizing state or federal agency, is submiƩed to the director for review and consideraƟon of any condiƟons that may be necessary to miƟgate any negaƟve effects during the restoraƟon work. B. The director or hearing examiner may require a buffer width necessary to ensure success and enhancement of the values and funcƟons of the areas adjacent to the stream or wetland. C. In determining whether to allow a deviaƟon from standard buffer widths, the director or hearing examiner shall consider the proposed width along with site-specific hydrologic, geologic, and habitat data. If a reduced buffer is warranted, the director or hearing examiner may approve it for the restoraƟon site. 23.10.110 Unauthorized alteraƟons and enforcement. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 203/352 A. When a criƟcal area or its buffer has been altered in violaƟon of this chapter or the provisions of Chapter 7.200 ECC, all ongoing development work shall stop, and the criƟcal area shall be restored. The director shall have the authority to issue a stop work order to cease all ongoing development work, and order restoraƟon, rehabilitaƟon, or replacement measures at the owner’s or other responsible party’s expense to compensate for violaƟon of the provisions of this chapter. The director may also require an applicant or property owner to take immediate acƟon to ensure site stabilizaƟon and/or erosion control as needed. B. Requirement for RestoraƟon Plan. All development work shall remain stopped unƟl a restoraƟon plan is prepared and approved by the director. Such a plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional using the best available science and shall describe how the acƟons proposed meet the minimum requirements described in subsecƟon (C) of this secƟon. The director may, at the violator’s expense, seek expert advice in determining the adequacy of the plan. Inadequate plans shall be returned to the applicant or violator for revision and resubmiƩal. C. Minimum Performance Standards for RestoraƟon. The following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoraƟon of a criƟcal area; provided, that if the violator can demonstrate that greater funcƟonal and habitat values can be obtained, these standards may be modified. 1. For unauthorized alteraƟons to frequently flooded areas, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas: a. The historic structural and funcƟonal values shall be restored, including water quality and habitat funcƟons; b. The historic soil types and configuraƟon shall be replicated; c. The criƟcal area and buffers shall be replanted with naƟve vegetaƟon that replicates the vegetaƟon historically found on the site in species types, sizes, and densiƟes. d. The historic funcƟons and values shall be replicated at the locaƟon of the alteraƟon; and e. InformaƟon demonstraƟng compliance with the requirements in ECDC 23.10.250, MiƟgaƟon plan requirements, shall be submiƩed to the City. 2. For alteraƟons to flood and geological hazards, the following minimum performance standards shall be met: a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the predevelopment hazard; b. Any risk of personal injury resulƟng from the alteraƟon shall be eliminated or minimized; and Item 10.2 Packet pg. 204/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 23 of 86 c. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with naƟve vegetaƟon sufficient to minimize the hazard. 3. Site InvesƟgaƟons. The director is authorized to make site inspecƟons and take such acƟons as are necessary to enforce this chapter. The director shall present proper credenƟals and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto private property. 4. PenalƟes. Any person, party, firm, corporaƟon, or other legal enƟty convicted of violaƟng any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to penalƟes not to exceed a square footage cost of $10.00 per square foot of impacted criƟcal area and criƟcal area buffer and/or a per tree penalty consistent with ECDC 17.130.100(C). Any development carried out contrary to the provisions of this chapter shall consƟtute a public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the statutes of the state of Washington. The city of Edmonds may levy civil penalƟes against any person, party, firm, corporaƟon, or other legal enƟty for violaƟon of any of the provisions of this chapter. 23.10.120 Markers and signs. A. General Requirements. 1. The boundary at the outer edge of any criƟcal area or its buffer may, at the direcƟon of the director, be required to be delineated with signage, fencing, or other markers as necessary to prevent unauthorized disturbance and protect criƟcal area funcƟons and values. 2. The director may modify these requirements to ensure protecƟon of sensiƟve features or wildlife needs. 3. All signs and fencing required under this secƟon shall be installed prior to final occupancy or site use, when applicable to the permit type, and maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. B. Temporary Markers. 1. Prior to site alteraƟon, the outer boundary of the criƟcal area or buffer, and the limits of approved disturbance areas, shall be marked in the field in a manner that clearly prevents unauthorized intrusion. 2. Temporary markers shall be maintained throughout construcƟon and may be subject to inspecƟon by the director. 3. Temporary markers shall remain in place unƟl any required permanent signs or fencing are installed. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 205/352 C. Permanent Signs. 1. As a condiƟon of any permit or authorizaƟon issued under this chapter, the director may require the installaƟon of permanent signs along the boundary of a criƟcal area. 2. Permanent signs shall be made of durable material such as enamel-coated or metal faced signage and affixed to metal or another nontreated material of equal durability. 3. Signs shall be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. 4. The sign shall be worded as follows or with alternaƟve language approved by the director: Protected [CriƟcal Area Type] Area Do Not Disturb Contact the City of Edmonds Regarding Uses and RestricƟons D. Permanent fencing. 1. The director may require permanent fencing along the outer edge of a criƟcal area buffer when necessary to protect the area’s funcƟons and values. 2. Fencing shall be constructed of materials that do not interfere with wildlife movement and shall be designed to minimize habitat impacts. 3. The following circumstances may warrant fencing, unless waived by the director: a. Development proposals for single-family plats, short plats, mulƟfamily, mixed-use, or commercial projects; b. Parks where adjacent uses involve acƟve recreaƟon; c. Where domesƟc grazing animals are present or may be introduced on site; or d. Where buffer averaging or reducƟons are approved. 4. Breaks in fencing may be permiƩed for access to approved buffer uses. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 206/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 25 of 86 23.10.130 NoƟce on Ɵtle. A. NoƟce on Title. The owner of any property with field-verified presence of criƟcal areas and/or criƟcal areas buffers, except criƟcal aquifer recharge areas, for which a permit applicaƟon is submiƩed shall, as a condiƟon of permit issuance, record a noƟce of the existence of such criƟcal area and/or criƟcal area buffer against the property with the Snohomish County auditor’s office. The noƟce shall be approved by the director and the city aƩorney for compliance with this provision. The Ɵtleholder will have the right to challenge this noƟce and to have it released if the criƟcal area designaƟon no longer applies; however, the Ɵtleholder shall be responsible for compleƟng a criƟcal areas report, subject to approval by the director, before the noƟce on Ɵtle can be released. 23.10.140 Building setbacks. A. Buildings and other structures shall be set back a minimum distance of 15 feet from the edges of all criƟcal area or their buffers. In addiƟon to other allowances provided by this chapter, the following may be allowed in the building setback area from a criƟcal area: 1. Landscaping; 2. Uncovered decks; and 3. Building overhangs, may extend no more than 30 inches into the setback area. Impervious ground surfaces, such as driveways and paƟos; provided, that such improvements may be subject to water quality regulaƟons as adopted in the current ediƟons of the InternaƟonal ResidenƟal Code and InternaƟonal Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 207/352 CriƟcal Area Review Procedures 23.10.200 CriƟcal area review sequence. A. Purpose. The purpose of this secƟon is to establish a clear and consistent review sequence for proposals requiring a criƟcal areas report. The review process ensures that potenƟal impacts are idenƟfied early, appropriate studies and miƟgaƟon measures are applied, and projects comply with the requirements of this chapter. The sequence is intended to: 1. IdenƟfy criƟcal areas and potenƟal hazards; 2. Determine applicable standards and required reports; 3. Evaluate miƟgaƟon measures; and 4. Confirm the proposal is consistent with other applicable regulaƟons and standards prior to project approval. B. Prior to any alteraƟon or development acƟvity. 1. DeterminaƟon of the presence of criƟcal areas. A property owner, or an authorized representaƟve, must submit a criƟcal area checklist form through the City’s permiƫng system. Staff will review the checklist, conduct a site visit, and determine whether there are criƟcal areas and/or criƟcal area buffers on or near the site. CriƟcal area determinaƟons are valid for a period of five years, except when recent events or updates to best available science jusƟfy a new criƟcal areas determinaƟon. 2. CriƟcal Areas Report Required. If criƟcal areas or their buffers are found, a criƟcal areas report addressing the applicable criƟcal area requirements of this chapter is required if the proposed acƟvity impacts criƟcal areas or their buffers. The report shall: a. Address miƟgaƟon sequencing in accordance with ECDC 23.10.250(E); and b. Meet all requirements for criƟcal areas reports set forth in ECDC 23.10.210. C. OpƟonal Pre-applicaƟon ConsultaƟon. 1. Any person preparing to apply for development or use of land that may be regulated by the provisions of this chapter may request a pre-applicaƟon meeƟng with the director prior to applying for development or other approval. At this meeƟng, the director shall discuss the requirements of this chapter; provide criƟcal areas maps, scienƟfic informaƟon, and other source materials; outline the review process; and work with the acƟvity proponent to idenƟfy any potenƟal concerns that might arise during the review Item 10.2 Packet pg. 208/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 27 of 86 process, in addiƟon to discussing other permit procedures and requirements. All applicants, regardless of parƟcipaƟon in a preapplicaƟon meeƟng, are held fully responsible for knowledge and disclosure of criƟcal areas on, adjacent to, or associated with a subject parcel and full compliance with the specific provisions and goals, purposes, objecƟves, and requirements of this chapter. D. ApplicaƟon review and preliminary decision. The director shall review the applicaƟon materials for compliance with the requirements of this chapter and issue a preliminary CriƟcal Areas NoƟce of Decision as follows: 1. Favorable decision. Issued when the director determines that the proposed acƟvity either avoids impacts to the criƟcal area altogether or complies with the provisions of this chapter. Any condiƟons of the preliminary CriƟcal Areas NoƟce of Decision shall be included in said noƟce, aƩached to the underlying permit file, and be considered during the next phase of review in accordance with any other applicable codes or regulaƟons. Any subsequent changes to the proposed acƟvity that conflict with the condiƟons set forth in the noƟce shall void the preliminary decision and be subject to further review. A favorable decision should not be construed as endorsement or approval of any underlying permit or approval. 2. Unfavorable decision. Issued when the director determines that the proposed acƟvity is not exempt or does not adequately miƟgate its impact on criƟcal areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.10.230(C), Review criteria, and the provisions of this chapter. No proposed acƟvity or permit shall be approved or issued if the impact to criƟcal areas is not avoided, miƟgated, and/or comply with the requirements of this chapter. E. ReconsideraƟon of an unfavorable decision. Following noƟce of decision that the proposed acƟvity does not meet the review criteria and/or does not comply with the applicable provisions of this chapter, the applicant may request consideraƟon of a revised criƟcal area report. If the revision is found to be substanƟal and relevant to the criƟcal area review, the director may reopen the criƟcal area review and make a new decision based on the revised report. F. Public noƟce. When the underlying permit type requires public noƟce under ECDC 20.01.003, the preliminary CriƟcal Areas NoƟce of Decision, including any condiƟons of a favorable decision, shall be included in any NoƟce of ApplicaƟon required pursuant to 20.03.002 ECDC, NoƟce of ApplicaƟon. The director shall provide opportunity for public comment on the NoƟce of Decision as to whether the proposed acƟvity and miƟgaƟon, if any, is consistent with the provisions of this chapter. G. CompleƟon of the criƟcal areas review. The director’s decision regarding criƟcal areas pursuant to this chapter shall be final, concurrent with the final project decision to approve, condiƟon, or deny the development proposal or other acƟvity involved. 23.10.210 CriƟcal areas report requirements - General. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 209/352 A. PreparaƟon by Qualified Professional. The applicant shall submit a criƟcal areas report prepared by a qualified professional as defined in ECDC 23.10.030. B. Independent Review of CriƟcal Areas Reports. CriƟcal areas studies and reports on geologically hazardous areas and those developed by an applicant representaƟve or consultant not as part of a three-party contract shall be subject to independent review. This independent review shall be performed by a qualified technical consultant selected by the city with all costs borne by the applicant. The purpose of such independent review is to provide the city with objecƟve technical assistance in evaluaƟng the accuracy of submiƩed reports and/or the effects on criƟcal areas which may be caused by a development proposal and to facilitate the decision-making process. The director may also have technical assistance provided by appropriate resource agency staff if such assistance is available in a Ɵmely manner. This requirement may be selecƟvely waived at the discreƟon of the director, provided the applicable qualified professional for the project provides wriƩen concurrence, determinaƟon, details, facts and/or data that individual site condiƟons warrant an exempƟon from outside peer review. C. Best Available Science. The criƟcal areas report shall use scienƟfically valid methods and studies in the analysis of criƟcal areas data and field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. The criƟcal areas report shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to criƟcal areas in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. D. Minimum CriƟcal Area Report Contents. At a minimum, the report shall contain the following: 1. The name and contact informaƟon of the applicant, a descripƟon of the proposal, and idenƟficaƟon of the permit requested; 2. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal including: a. A map to scale depicƟng criƟcal areas, buffers, the development proposal, and any areas to be cleared; b. A descripƟon of the proposed stormwater management plan for the development and consideraƟon of impacts to drainage alteraƟons; c. The site plan shall idenƟfy and locate all vegetaƟon of six inches DSH or larger; 3. The dates, names, and qualificaƟons of the persons preparing the report and documentaƟon of any fieldwork performed on the site; 4. IdenƟficaƟon and characterizaƟon of all criƟcal areas, wetlands, water bodies, shorelines, and buffers within 200 feet of the proposed project area; 5. A descripƟon of efforts made to apply miƟgaƟon sequencing pursuant to ECDC 23.10.250(E), to avoid, minimize, and miƟgate impacts to criƟcal areas. DemonstraƟon of avoidance of impacts must Item 10.2 Packet pg. 210/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 29 of 86 include, where applicable: alternaƟve building locaƟons on the property; adjustments to the project footprint and orientaƟon; and/or alternate building design; 6. A statement specifying the accuracy of the report and all assumpƟons made and relied upon; 7. A descripƟon of the methodologies used to conduct the criƟcal areas study, including references; 8. Plans for adequate miƟgaƟon, as needed to offset any criƟcal areas impacts, in accordance with the miƟgaƟon plan requirements in ECDC 23.10.250(F); and 9. An evaluaƟon of the funcƟons and values of affected criƟcal areas at a scale appropriate to the funcƟons being assessed. The evaluaƟon shall consider interrelated ecosystems and processes that may extend beyond parcel boundaries, including watershed- or regional-scale influences, where relevant to maintaining overall ecological funcƟon. E. Supplemental InformaƟon. A criƟcal areas report may incorporate, be supplemented by or composed, in part, of any reports or studies required by other laws and regulaƟons or previously prepared for and applicable to the development proposal site, as approved by the director. At the discreƟon of the director, reports previously compiled or submiƩed as part of a proposal for development may be used as a criƟcal areas report to the extent that the requirements of this secƟon and the report requirements for each specific criƟcal area type are met. F. ExpiraƟon. CriƟcal areas reports shall be considered valid for five years, except when recent events or updates to best available science jusƟfy a new report; aŌer such date the city shall determine whether a revision or addiƟonal assessment is necessary. G. ModificaƟons to requirements. 1. LimitaƟons to Study Area. The director may limit the required geographic area of the criƟcal areas report as appropriate if: a. The applicant, with assistance from the city of Edmonds, cannot obtain permission to access properƟes adjacent to the project area; or b. The proposed acƟvity will affect only a limited part of the subject site. 2. ModificaƟons to Required Contents. The applicant may consult with the director prior to or during preparaƟon of the criƟcal areas report to obtain approval of modificaƟons to the required contents of the report where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, a modificaƟon to the required contents is required to adequately address the potenƟal criƟcal area impacts and required miƟgaƟon. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 211/352 3. AddiƟonal InformaƟon Requirements. In addiƟon to the requirements in ECDC 23.10.210, the director may require addiƟonal informaƟon to be included in the criƟcal areas report when determined to be necessary to review the proposed acƟvity in accordance with this chapter. AddiƟonal informaƟon that may be required includes, but is not limited to: a. Historical data, including original and subsequent mapping, aerial photographs, data compilaƟons and summaries, and available reports and records relaƟng to the site or past operaƟons at the site; b. Grading and drainage plans; and c. InformaƟon specific to the type, locaƟon, and nature of the criƟcal area. 23.10.220 CriƟcal areas report requirements – Specific to criƟcal area types. A. In addiƟon to the general criƟcal areas report requirements of ECDC 23.10.210, criƟcal areas reports for specific criƟcal area types must meet the requirements of this secƟon, as applicable. CriƟcal areas reports for two or more types of criƟcal areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of criƟcal area. B. Wetlands - AddiƟonal CriƟcal Areas Report Requirements. 1. CriƟcal areas report requirements for wetlands may be met in “stages” or through mulƟple reports. The typical sequence of potenƟally required reports that may in part or in combinaƟon fulfill the requirements of this secƟon include: a. Wetland reconnaissance report documenƟng the existence and general locaƟon of wetlands in the vicinity of a project area; b. Wetland delineaƟon report documenƟng the extent and boundary of a jurisdicƟonal wetland per RCW 36.70A.175; and c. Wetland miƟgaƟon report documenƟng potenƟal wetland impacts and miƟgaƟon measures designed to retain or increase the funcƟons and values of a wetland in accordance with the general provisions of this chapter. 2. A wetland criƟcal areas report may include one or more of the above three report types, depending on the informaƟon required by the director and the extent of potenƟal wetland impacts. The director maintains the authority and discreƟon to determine which report(s), alone or combined, are sufficient to meet the requirements outlined below and to waive report requirements based upon site condiƟons and the potenƟal for project impacts. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 212/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 31 of 86 3. Area Addressed in CriƟcal Area Report - Wetlands. In addiƟon to the requirements in ECDC 23.10.210(D), the following areas shall be addressed in a criƟcal area report for wetlands: a. The project area of the proposed acƟvity; b. A descripƟon of the data collecƟon methodology, including the date(s) of data collecƟon, the data forms used for wetland delineaƟon, and a map idenƟfying data collecƟon points and the boundaries of the delineated wetland. Wetland field data forms used for compleƟon of wetland raƟngs shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetland RaƟng System for Western Washington: 2014 Update or as amended; c. All wetlands and recommended buffers within 200 feet of the project area; and d. All shoreline areas, water features, floodplains, associated streams, and other criƟcal areas, and related buffers within 200 feet of the project area. The locaƟon and extent of wetlands and other criƟcal areas exisƟng outside of the project area or subject parcel boundary may be shown in approximaƟon as pracƟcal and necessary to provide an assessment of potenƟal project effects. 4. Wetland Analysis. A criƟcal areas report for wetlands shall contain an analysis of the wetlands, including the following site- and proposal-related informaƟon at a minimum: a. A wriƩen assessment and accompanying maps of the wetlands and buffers within 200 feet of the project area, including the following informaƟon at a minimum: i. Wetland delineaƟon and required buffers; ii. ExisƟng wetland acreage; iii. Wetland category; iv. VegetaƟve, faunal, and hydrologic characterisƟcs; v. Soil and substrate condiƟons; vi. Topographic elevaƟons, at two-foot contours; and vii. A discussion of the water sources supplying the wetland and documentaƟon of hydrologic regime (locaƟons of inlet and outlet features, water depths throughout the wetland, and evidence of recharge or discharge, evidence of water depths throughout the year: driŌ lines, algal layers, moss lines, and sediment deposits). Item 10.2 Packet pg. 213/352 viii. The locaƟon, extent and analyses of wetlands not conƟguous with the subject parcel exisƟng outside of the immediate project area may be described in approximaƟon as pracƟcal and necessary to provide an assessment of potenƟal project effects and hydrologic/ecological connecƟvity to on-site wetlands and other criƟcal areas. b. A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimizaƟon, and miƟgaƟon, proposed to preserve exisƟng wetlands and restore any wetlands that were degraded prior to the current proposed land use acƟvity. c. A habitat and naƟve vegetaƟon conservaƟon strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on-site habitat and wetland funcƟons. d. FuncƟonal evaluaƟon for the wetland and adjacent buffer using a local or state agency staff- recognized method and including the reference of the method and all data sheets. e. Proposed miƟgaƟon, if needed, including a wriƩen assessment and accompanying maps of the miƟgaƟon area, including the following informaƟon at a minimum: i. ExisƟng and proposed wetland acreage; ii. VegetaƟve and faunal condiƟons; iii. Surface and subsurface hydrologic condiƟons including an analysis of exisƟng and future hydrologic regime and proposed hydrologic regime for enhanced, created, or restored miƟgaƟon areas; iv. RelaƟonship to the watershed and exisƟng waterbodies; v. Soil and substrate condiƟons, topographic elevaƟons; vi. ExisƟng and proposed adjacent site condiƟons; vii. Required wetland buffers; and viii. Property ownership. f. A scale map of the development proposal site and adjacent area. A discussion of ongoing management pracƟces that will protect wetlands aŌer the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs. g. A bond esƟmate for the installaƟon (including site preparaƟon, plant materials and installaƟon, ferƟlizers, mulch, and stakes) and the proposed monitoring and maintenance work for the required number of years. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 214/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 33 of 86 C. Frequently Flooded Areas - AddiƟonal CriƟcal Areas Report Requirements. CriƟcal areas reports for frequently flooded areas must meet the requirements of this secƟon and demonstrate consistency with ECDC 19.07, Flood Damage PrevenƟon, and the current ediƟons of the InternaƟonal ResidenƟal Code and InternaƟonal Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. 1. Frequently Flooded Area Assessment. The report shall evaluate: a. The site area of the proposed acƟvity; b. All special flood hazard areas within 200 feet of the project area, as idenƟfied on FEMA flood-insurance rate maps; and c. Any mapped floodways or other flood-prone areas within 200 feet of the project site; and d. Any fish-passable or anadromous-fish-bearing watercourses within the affected floodplain. 2. Flood Hazard Assessment. The report shall include, at a minimum: a. Site and ConstrucƟon Plans. Plans and elevaƟons consistent with the submiƩal standards of ECDC 19.07.070, idenƟfying: i. Regulatory floodplain and floodway boundaries, base-flood elevaƟons, and other criƟcal-area features; ii. ExisƟng and proposed structures, fill, material storage, uƟliƟes, drainage faciliƟes, and clearing limits; and iii. Finished-floor elevaƟons and proposed flood-proofing measures. b. Watercourse AlteraƟon. Natural watercourses shall not be altered unless unavoidable. If alteraƟon is proposed, the report shall include: i. A plan showing the extent of alteraƟon or relocaƟon; ii. An assessment of the watercourse’s funcƟons and habitat value, including fish-passage potenƟal; and iii. A maintenance program ensuring the altered or relocated segment retains its flood- carrying capacity, consistent with ECDC 19.07.100, Watercourse AlteraƟons and Maintenance. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 215/352 D. Geologically Hazardous Areas - AddiƟonal CriƟcal Areas Report Requirements. Geotechnical report(s) shall be required whenever a potenƟal landslide hazard area is located within 50 feet of the proposed development site; whenever a development site is located within a seismic hazard area; or when otherwise determined as warranted by the director (e.g., a distance equal to the height of the slope). 1. Area Addressed in CriƟcal Areas Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a criƟcal areas report for geologically hazardous areas: a. The project area of the proposed acƟvity; and b. All geologically hazardous areas within 200 feet of the project area or that have the potenƟal to be affected by the proposal. 2. Geological Hazards Assessment. The report shall include a field invesƟgaƟon and contain an assessment of whether or not each type of geologic hazard idenƟfied in ECDC 23.10.610 is present or not present and if development of the site will increase the risk of landslides or erosion on or off the site. Geotechnical reports shall be prepared, stamped and signed by a qualified professional. These reports must address all the following requirements for approval: a. Be appropriate for the scale and scope of the project; b. Include a discussion of all geologically hazardous areas on the site and any geologically hazardous areas off site potenƟally impacted by the proposed project. If the affected area extends beyond the subject property, the geology hazard assessment may uƟlize exisƟng data sources pertaining to that area; c. Clearly state that the proposed project will not decrease slope stability or pose an unreasonable threat to persons or property either on or off site and provide a raƟonale as to those conclusions based on geologic condiƟons and interpretaƟons specific to the project; d. Provide adequate informaƟon to determine compliance with the requirements of this chapter; e. Follow the guidelines set forth in the Washington State Department of Licensing Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geology Reports in Washington (2006). 3. If a landslide or erosion hazard is idenƟfied, in accordance with ECDC 23.10.610, provide minimum setback recommendaƟons for avoiding the landslide or erosion hazard, other recommendaƟons for site development so that the frequency or magnitude of landsliding or erosion on or off the site is not altered. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 216/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 35 of 86 4. MiƟgaƟon of Long-Term Impacts. When hazard miƟgaƟon is required, the miƟgaƟon plan shall specifically address how the acƟvity maintains or reduces the preexisƟng level of risk to the site and all other properƟes potenƟally impacted on a long-term basis (equal to or exceeding the projected lifespan of the acƟvity or occupaƟon). Proposed miƟgaƟon techniques shall be considered to provide long-term hazard reducƟon only if they do not require regular maintenance or other acƟons to maintain their funcƟon. MiƟgaƟon may also be required to avoid any increase in risk above the preexisƟng condiƟons following abandonment of the acƟvity. 5. AddiƟonal Technical InformaƟon Requirements for Projects within Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. In addiƟon to the basic criƟcal areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in (1) through (4) of this secƟon, technical informaƟon for any development within erosion and landslide hazard areas shall meet the requirements of Chapter 19.10 ECDC and include the following informaƟon at a minimum: a. Site Plan. The criƟcal areas report shall include a copy of the site plan for the proposal showing: i. The height of slope, slope gradient, and cross-secƟon of the project area; ii. The locaƟon of springs, seeps, or other surface expressions of ground water on or within 200 feet of the project area or that have the potenƟal to be affected by the proposal; and iii. The locaƟon and descripƟon of surface water runoff features; b. Hazards Analysis. The hazards analysis component of the criƟcal areas report shall specifically include: i. A descripƟon of the extent and type of vegetaƟve cover; ii. A descripƟon of subsurface condiƟons based on data from site-specific exploraƟons; iii. DescripƟons of surface and ground water condiƟons, public and private sewage disposal systems, fills and excavaƟons, and all structural improvements; iv. An esƟmate of slope stability and the effect construcƟon and placement of structures will have on the slope over the esƟmated life of the structure; v. An esƟmate of the bluff retreat rate or an esƟmate of the percent risk of landslide area expansion that recognizes and reflects potenƟal catastrophic events such as seismic acƟvity or a 100-year storm event; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 217/352 vi. ConsideraƟon of the run-out hazard of landslide debris and/or the impacts of landslide run-out on downslope properƟes; vii. A study of slope stability including an analysis of proposed cuts, fills, and other site grading; viii. A documented recommendaƟon for buffer size in accordance with ECDC 23.10.630. Any buffer recommendaƟon below the minimum 15-foot requirement must be substanƟated by the report. ix. RecommendaƟons for building siƟng limitaƟons; and x. An analysis of proposed surface and subsurface drainage, and the vulnerability of the site to erosion; c. Geotechnical Engineering Report. The technical informaƟon for a project within a landslide hazard area shall include a geotechnical engineering report prepared by a licensed engineer that presents engineering recommendaƟons for the following: i. Parameters for design of site improvements including appropriate foundaƟons and retaining structures. These should include allowable load and resistance capaciƟes for bearing and lateral loads, installaƟon consideraƟons, and esƟmates of seƩlement performance; ii. RecommendaƟons for drainage and subdrainage improvements; iii. Earthwork recommendaƟons including clearing and site preparaƟon criteria, fill placement and compacƟon criteria, temporary and permanent slope inclinaƟons and protecƟon, and temporary excavaƟon support, if necessary; and iv. MiƟgaƟon of adverse site condiƟons including slope stabilizaƟon measures and seismically unstable soils, if appropriate; d. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. For any development proposal on a site containing an erosion hazard area, an erosion and sediment control plan shall be required. The erosion and sediment control plan shall be prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. 6. Limited Report Requirements for Stable Erosion Hazard Areas. At the director’s discreƟon, detailed criƟcal areas report requirements may be waived for erosion hazard areas with stable slopes. Report requirements for stable erosion hazard areas may be met through construcƟon documents that shall include at a minimum an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 218/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 37 of 86 7. Seismic Hazard Areas. In addiƟon to the basic criƟcal areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in (1) through (4) of this secƟon, a criƟcal areas report for a seismic hazard area shall also meet the following requirements: a. The hazards analysis shall include a complete discussion of the potenƟal impacts of seismic acƟvity on the site (for example, forces generated and fault displacement). b. A geotechnical engineering report shall evaluate the physical properƟes of the subsurface soils, especially the thickness of unconsolidated deposits and their liquefacƟon potenƟal. If it is determined that the site is subject to liquefacƟon, miƟgaƟon measures appropriate to the scale of the development shall be recommended and implemented. [Ord. 4026 § 1 (AƩ. A), 2016; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. E. Fish and Wildlife Habitat ConservaƟon Areas - AddiƟonal CriƟcal Areas Report Requirements. CriƟcal area reports for fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas must meet the requirements of this secƟon. 1. Areas Addressed in CriƟcal Areas Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a criƟcal areas report for fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas: a. The project area of the proposed acƟvity; b. All fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas and recommended buffers within 200 feet of the project area; c. All shoreline areas, floodplains, other criƟcal areas, and related buffers within 200 feet of the project area; and d. A discussion of the efforts to avoid and minimize potenƟal effects to these resources and the implementaƟon of miƟgaƟon/enhancement measures as required. 2. Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment is an invesƟgaƟon of the project area to evaluate the potenƟal presence or absence of designated criƟcal fish or wildlife species or habitat. A criƟcal areas report for a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area shall contain an assessment of habitats, including the following site- and proposal-related informaƟon at a minimum: a. Detailed descripƟon of vegetaƟon on and adjacent to the project area and its associated buffer; b. A descripƟon of the watershed in which the project is located; c. IdenƟficaƟon of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered, threatened, sensiƟve, or candidate species that have a primary associaƟon with habitat on Item 10.2 Packet pg. 219/352 or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potenƟal project impacts to the use of the site by the species; d. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management recommendaƟons, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat management recommendaƟons, that have been developed for species or habitats located on or adjacent to the project area. 3. AddiƟonal Technical InformaƟon Requirements for Streams and Riparian Management Zones. CriƟcal area report requirements may be met, at the discreƟon of the director, through submission of one or more specific report types: a. If an enhancement to the riparian management zone is proposed per ECDC 23.10.730(D)(2) to reduce the required width of the riparian management zone, or as part of project miƟgaƟon required by the director, a riparian management zone enhancement plan may be submiƩed to fulfill the requirements of this secƟon. b. If no project impacts are anƟcipated and riparian management zone widths are retained, a stream survey report, general criƟcal areas report or other reports alone or in combinaƟon may be submiƩed as consistent with the specific requirements of this secƟon. 4. In addiƟon to the basic criƟcal areas report requirements for fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas provided in subsecƟons (1) through (2) of this secƟon, technical informaƟon on streams shall include the following informaƟon at a minimum: a. A wriƩen assessment and accompanying maps of the stream and associated hydrologic features within 200 feet of the project area, including the following informaƟon at a minimum: i. Stream survey showing the ordinary high water mark(s); ii. Standard stream buffer boundary; iii. Boundary for proposed reduced stream buffers; iv. VegetaƟve, faunal, and hydrologic characterisƟcs; v. Soil and substrate condiƟons; and vi. Topographic elevaƟons, at two-foot contours; b. A detailed descripƟon and funcƟonal assessment of the stream buffer under exisƟng condiƟons pertaining to the protecƟon of stream funcƟons, fish habitat and, in parƟcular, potenƟal anadromous fisheries; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 220/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 39 of 86 c. A habitat and naƟve vegetaƟon conservaƟon strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on-site habitat and stream funcƟons; d. Proposed buffer enhancement, if needed, including a wriƩen assessment and accompanying maps and planƟng plans for buffer areas to be enhanced, including the following informaƟon at a minimum: i. A descripƟon of exisƟng buffer condiƟons; ii. A descripƟon of proposed buffer condiƟons and how proposed condiƟons will increase buffer funcƟoning in terms of stream and fish habitat protecƟon; iii. Performance standards for measuring enhancement success through a monitoring period of at least five years; and iv. Provisions for monitoring and submission of monitoring reports documenƟng buffer condiƟons as compared to performance standards for enhancement success; e. A discussion of ongoing management pracƟces that will protect stream funcƟons and habitat value through maintenance of vegetaƟon density within the stream buffer. 23.10.230 Review criteria. A. Any alteraƟon to a criƟcal area shall be reviewed and approved, approved with condiƟons, or denied based on the proposal’s ability to comply with all of the following criteria: 1. The proposal minimizes the impact on criƟcal areas in accordance with ECDC 23.10.250(E), MiƟgaƟon sequencing; 2. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this chapter and the public interest; 4. Any alteraƟons permiƩed to the criƟcal area are miƟgated in accordance with ECDC 23.10.250; 5. The proposal protects the criƟcal area funcƟons and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of criƟcal area funcƟons and values; and 6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulaƟons and standards. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 221/352 B. The director may condiƟon the proposed acƟvity as necessary to miƟgate impacts to criƟcal areas and to conform to the standards required by this chapter. Except as provided for by this chapter, any project that cannot adequately miƟgate its impacts to criƟcal areas in the sequencing order of preferences in ECDC 23.10.250(E) shall be denied. 23.10.240 ConƟngent review procedure and criteria. A. Scope. The procedures set forth in this secƟon shall apply to the following types of criƟcal area restoraƟon projects as allowed by ECDC 23.10.100: 1. RestoraƟon projects involving anadromous fish streams; 2. RestoraƟon projects involving Category I or Category II wetlands; 3. RestoraƟon projects involving Category I or Category II estuarine wetlands. B. NoƟce of ApplicaƟon. Development acƟvity within the scope of subsecƟon (A) of this secƟon shall be processed as a Type II applicaƟon, unless the process is altered according to subsecƟon (D) of this secƟon. In addiƟon to the noƟce provided pursuant to ECDC Title 20, noƟce of applicaƟon for all such development shall also be sent to the city council by email. C. ConƟngent Review Process. Development acƟvity within the scope of subsecƟon (A) of this secƟon shall be escalated to a Type III-A process when: 1. The city receives a request from any person for a public hearing within 14 days of the date of the noƟce of applicaƟon; and 2. The public hearing request is accompanied by a hearing fee in the amount of 50 percent of the difference between the Type II and Type III-A applicaƟon fee. D. Effect of ConƟngent Review. When the conƟngent review process is triggered pursuant to subsecƟon (C) of this secƟon, the project applicant shall pay the other 50 percent of the difference between the Type II and Type III-A applicaƟon fee, on top of the previously paid Type II applicaƟon fee. The applicant shall pay this fee within 30 days of noƟce from the city that the fee is due. If the applicant fails to pay the addiƟonal fee within the required 30-day period, the applicaƟon for the project shall be deemed withdrawn. The city shall not schedule the public hearing unƟl the addiƟonal fee has been paid. For these public hearings, the cost of the hearing examiner shall be borne by the city. E. NoƟce of Decision. Whether development acƟvity within the scope of subsecƟon (A) of this secƟon is processed as a Type II applicaƟon or escalated to a Type III-A applicaƟon, noƟce of decision shall be sent by email to the city council in addiƟon to any other noƟce that may be required by ECDC Title 20. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 222/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 41 of 86 23.10.250 MiƟgaƟon requirements and sequencing. A. MiƟgaƟon requirements. Applicants must avoid impacts to criƟcal areas whenever possible. If impacts are unavoidable, they shall be miƟgated using the best available science in accordance with an approved criƟcal areas report and SEPA documents to ensure no net loss of criƟcal area funcƟons and values. B. MiƟgaƟon standards. MiƟgaƟon must: 1. Maintain or replace the funcƟons and values of the impacted criƟcal area; and 2. Eliminate or reduce risks posed by criƟcal area hazards. C. Timing of miƟgaƟon. MiƟgaƟon shall not begin unƟl the director approves of a criƟcal areas report that includes a miƟgaƟon plan. All miƟgaƟon shall follow the approved plan. D. Project approval. If impacts cannot be adequately miƟgated to achieve no net loss or protect public safety as required in this chapter, the project shall not be approved. E. MiƟgaƟon sequencing. Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been made to avoid and minimize impacts to criƟcal areas. 1. Sequence. When an alteraƟon to a criƟcal area is proposed, impacts must be addressed in the following order of priority to ensure no net loss of criƟcal area funcƟons: a. Avoid the impact by not taking a certain acƟon or parts of an acƟon; b. Minimize impacts by limiƟng the degree or magnitude of the acƟon, redesigning the project, relocaƟng faciliƟes, adjusƟng Ɵming, or using alternaƟve technologies to avoid net loss of funcƟons and values of the criƟcal area; c. Repair or restore the affected area to the extent feasible to reestablish criƟcal area funcƟons and values. d. Stabilize hazards by restoring or engineering the hazard area to eliminate or minimize risks to public safety and property; e. Compensate for remaining impacts by replacing, enhancing, or providing subsƟtute resources or environments; and/or Item 10.2 Packet pg. 223/352 f. Monitor and adapt to ensure miƟgaƟon measures are successful, with remedial acƟons taken as needed to achieve performance standards. 2. Project viability. If impacts cannot be provided to ensure no net loss to funcƟon and values, or to protect public safety, the project must be redesigned or withdrawn. 3. CombinaƟon of measures. MiƟgaƟon for individual projects may include a combinaƟon of the measures above, as appropriate. F. MiƟgaƟon plan requirements. When miƟgaƟon is required, the applicant shall submit for approval by the director a miƟgaƟon plan as part of the criƟcal areas report. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include: 1. Environmental Goals and ObjecƟves. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include a wriƩen report idenƟfying environmental goals and objecƟves of the compensaƟon proposed and including: a. A descripƟon of the anƟcipated impacts to the criƟcal areas, the miƟgaƟng acƟons proposed, and the purposes of the compensaƟon measures, including the site selecƟon criteria; idenƟficaƟon of compensaƟon goals; idenƟficaƟon of resource funcƟons; and dates for beginning and compleƟon of site compensaƟon construcƟon acƟviƟes. The goals and objecƟves shall be related to the funcƟons and values of the impacted criƟcal area; b. A review of the best available science supporƟng the proposed miƟgaƟon; c. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensaƟon project; and d. Specific miƟgaƟon plan and report requirements for each criƟcal area type as indicated in this chapter. 2. Performance Standards. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include measurable specific criteria for evaluaƟng whether the goals and objecƟves of the miƟgaƟon project have been successfully aƩained and whether the requirements of this chapter have been met. 3. Detailed ConstrucƟon Plans. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include wriƩen specificaƟons and descripƟons of the miƟgaƟon proposed, such as: a. The proposed construcƟon sequence, Ɵming, and duraƟon; b. Areas of proposed impacts on criƟcal areas or buffers; c. Grading and excavaƟon details; d. Erosion and sediment control features; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 224/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 43 of 86 e. A planƟng plan specifying plant species, quanƟƟes, locaƟons, size, spacing, and density; and f. Measures to protect and maintain plants unƟl established. These wriƩen specificaƟons shall be accompanied by detailed site diagrams, scaled cross-secƟonal drawings, topographic maps showing slope percentage and final grade elevaƟons, and any other drawings appropriate to show construcƟon techniques or anƟcipated final outcome. 4. Monitoring Program. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include a program for monitoring construcƟon and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included outlining the schedule for site monitoring (for example, monitoring shall occur in years one, three, and five aŌer site construcƟon), and how the monitoring data will be evaluated to determine if the performance standards are being met. A monitoring report shall be submiƩed as needed to document milestones, successes, problems, and conƟngency acƟons of the compensaƟon project. The compensaƟon project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five years without approval from the director. 5. ConƟngency Plan. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include idenƟficaƟon of potenƟal courses of acƟon and any correcƟve measures to be taken if monitoring or evaluaƟon indicates project performance standards are not being met. 6. Financial Guarantees. The miƟgaƟon plan shall include financial guarantees, as necessary, to ensure that the miƟgaƟon plan is fully implemented. Financial guarantees ensuring fulfillment of the compensaƟon project, monitoring program, and any conƟngency measures shall be posted in accordance with ECDC 23.10.290, Bonds to ensure miƟgaƟon, maintenance, and monitoring. G. InnovaƟve miƟgaƟon. 1. Purpose. The City may encourage and approve innovaƟve miƟgaƟon approaches, such as advance miƟgaƟon, in-lieu fee programs, or miƟgaƟon banking, when they are based on the best available science and likely to provide equal or greater criƟcal area funcƟons than on-site miƟgaƟon. 2. Criteria for approval. InnovaƟve miƟgaƟon may only be approved when all of the following apply: a. Lack of on-site feasibility. On-site miƟgaƟon is not feasible or has a low likelihood of success due to site limitaƟons, such as inadequate hydrology, unsuitable soil, or insufficient area for full miƟgaƟon. b. Improved funcƟonal outcome. Off-site miƟgaƟon offers a greater potenƟal for long-term success and funcƟonal value compared to on-site miƟgaƟon. c. LocaƟon preference. Off-site miƟgaƟon shall occur within the same drainage basin and within City limits unless: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 225/352 i. Established watershed goals jusƟfy another locaƟon; ii. Credits are purchased from a state-cerƟfied miƟgaƟon bank; or iii. Fees are paid to an approved in-lieu fee program consistent with program requirements. H. Wetlands – Compensatory MiƟgaƟon Requirements. Compensatory miƟgaƟon for alteraƟons to wetlands shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic funcƟons. Wetland miƟgaƟon plans shall be consistent with guidelines in Wetland MiƟgaƟon in Washington State – Part 2: Developing MiƟgaƟon Plans (Ecology, 2006) and SelecƟng Wetland MiƟgaƟon Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Ecology, 2009), as revised. 1. MiƟgaƟon for Lost or Affected FuncƟons. Compensatory miƟgaƟon acƟons shall address funcƟons affected by the alteraƟon to achieve funcƟonal equivalency or improvement and shall provide similar wetland funcƟons as those lost, except when: a. The lost wetland provides minimal funcƟons as determined by a site-specific funcƟon assessment, and the proposed compensatory miƟgaƟon acƟon(s) will provide equal or greater funcƟons or will provide funcƟons shown to be limiƟng within a watershed through a formal Washington State watershed assessment plan or protocol; or b. Out-of-kind replacement will best meet formally idenƟfied watershed goals, such as replacement of historically diminished wetland types. 2. Preference of MiƟgaƟon AcƟons. MiƟgaƟon acƟons that require compensaƟon by replacing, enhancing, or subsƟtuƟon shall occur in the following order of preference: a. Restoring (reestablishing) wetlands on upland sites that were formerly wetlands. b. CreaƟng wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetaƟve cover consisƟng primarily of nonnaƟve, introduced species. This should only be aƩempted when there is a consistent source of hydrology and it can be shown that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive for the wetland community that is being designed. c. Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands in combinaƟon with restoraƟon or creaƟon. Such enhancement should be part of a miƟgaƟon package that includes replacing the impacted area meeƟng appropriate raƟo requirements. d. ImplemenƟng compensatory restoraƟon through purchase of credits at an approved miƟgaƟon bank or through payment into an approved in-lieu fee program. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 226/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 45 of 86 3. Type and LocaƟon of MiƟgaƟon. Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of ecological funcƟoning would result from an alternate approach, compensatory miƟgaƟon for ecological funcƟons shall be in kind and conducted on the site or in the vicinity of the alteraƟon except when all of the following apply: a. On-site opportuniƟes do not have a high likelihood of success, aŌer a determinaƟon of the natural capacity of the site to miƟgate for the impacts. ConsideraƟon should include: anƟcipated wetland miƟgaƟon replacement raƟos, buffer condiƟons and proposed widths, hydrogeomorphic classes of on-site wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, and potenƟal to miƟgate riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connecƟvity); b. Off-site miƟgaƟon has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland funcƟons than the impacted wetland; c. Off-site miƟgaƟon incorporates guidance from CalculaƟng Credits and Debits for Compensatory MiƟgaƟon in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 10- 06-011, Hruby 2012); and d. Off-site locaƟons for compensatory miƟgaƟon are consistent with city of Edmonds goals for watershed wide ecological restoraƟon. Off-site locaƟons are selected with a preference for sites within the same basin as the impact, followed by other sites within the city. Specific areas targeted for restoraƟon efforts include: i. Lake-fringe wetlands and habitat areas associated with Lake Ballinger; ii. Edmonds marsh; iii. Yost Park wetlands; iv. Good Hope wetlands; v. Wetlands and habitat areas peripheral to anadromous fish-bearing streams; and vi. Sites available through an approved miƟgaƟon bank or in-lieu fee program. This list is not comprehensive and may change as the city of Edmonds idenƟfies areas suitable for restoraƟon and capital improvement projects consistent with goals for jurisdicƟon-wide habitat retenƟon and enhancement provided in the city’s comprehensive plan. 4. MiƟgaƟon Timing. MiƟgaƟon projects shall be completed with an approved monitoring plan prior to acƟviƟes that will disturb wetlands. In all other cases, miƟgaƟon shall be completed immediately Item 10.2 Packet pg. 227/352 following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the acƟvity or development. ConstrucƟon of miƟgaƟon projects shall be Ɵmed to reduce impacts to exisƟng fisheries, wildlife, and flora. 5. MiƟgaƟon RaƟos. a. Acreage Replacement RaƟos. The raƟos in the table below shall apply to creaƟon or re- establishment, rehabilitaƟon, or enhancement that is in kind, is on site, is Ɵmed prior to or concurrent with alteraƟon, and has a high probability of success. These raƟos do not apply to remedial acƟons resulƟng from unauthorized alteraƟons; greater raƟos shall apply in those cases. The first number specifies the acreage of replacement wetlands and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered. RaƟos for rehabilitaƟon and enhancement may be reduced when combined with 1:1 replacement through creaƟon or reestablishment pursuant to Table 1a, Wetland MiƟgaƟon in Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and Category and Type of Wetland CreaƟon or Reestablishment RehabilitaƟon only Enhancement only Category I: Based on funcƟons 4:1 8:1 16:1 Mature and old-growth forest 6:1 12:1 24:1 High conservaƟon value/bog Not considered possible Category II: All 3:1 6:1 12:1 Category III: All 2:1 4:1 8:1 Category IV: All 1.5:1 3:1 6:1 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 228/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 47 of 86 Guidance – Version 1 (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 06-06-11a, or as revised). CreaƟon, reestablishment, rehabilitaƟon, and enhancement definiƟons are provided in ECDC 23.10.020 and shall be addiƟonally consistent with intent pursuant to Ecology PublicaƟon No. 06-06-11a. MiƟgaƟon requirements may also be determined using the credit/debit tool described in CalculaƟng Credits and Debits for Compensatory MiƟgaƟon in Wetlands of Western Washington: Final Report (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 10-06-011, Olympia, WA, March 2012, or as revised) if approved by the director. 6. Off-Site MiƟgaƟon. The raƟos provided in subsecƟon (5)(a) of this secƟon do not apply to off-site miƟgaƟon, including use of credits from a state-cerƟfied wetland miƟgaƟon bank or payment to a cerƟfied in lieu fee program. When off-site miƟgaƟon is proposed, or when a miƟgaƟon bank or in- lieu fee program is used, replacement raƟos may incorporate guidance from CalculaƟng Credits and Debits for Compensatory MiƟgaƟon in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 10-06-011, Hruby 2012), and for miƟgaƟon banks or in-lieu fee programs should be consistent with the cerƟficaƟon requirements. Use of miƟgaƟon banks shall meet all requirements of subsecƟon (9) of this secƟon. 7. Increased Replacement RaƟo. The director may require increased compensatory miƟgaƟon raƟos under the following circumstances: a. Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoraƟon or creaƟon; b. A significant period of Ɵme will elapse between impact and replicaƟon of wetland funcƟons; c. Proposed miƟgaƟon will result in a lower-category wetland or reduced funcƟons relaƟve to the wetland being impacted; or d. The impact was an unauthorized impact. 8. Wetlands Enhancement as MiƟgaƟon. a. Impacts to wetland funcƟons may be miƟgated by enhancement of exisƟng significantly degraded wetlands, but may, at the discreƟon of the director, be used in conjuncƟon with restoraƟon and/or creaƟon. Applicants proposing to enhance wetlands must produce a criƟcal areas report that idenƟfies how enhancement will increase the funcƟons of the degraded wetland and how this increase will adequately miƟgate for the loss of wetland area and funcƟon at the impact site. An enhancement proposal must also show whether exisƟng wetland funcƟons will be reduced by the enhancement acƟons. b. At a minimum, enhancement acreage shall be double the acreage required for creaƟon or restoraƟon under subsecƟon (5) of this secƟon. The raƟos shall be greater than double the Item 10.2 Packet pg. 229/352 required acreage where the enhancement proposal would result in minimal gain in the performance of wetland funcƟons and/or result in the reducƟon of other wetland funcƟons currently being provided in the wetland. c. MiƟgaƟon raƟos for enhancement in combinaƟon with other forms of miƟgaƟon shall range from six-to-one to three-to-one and be limited to Class III and IV wetlands. 9. Wetland MiƟgaƟon Banks and In-Lieu Fee Programs. a. Wetland MiƟgaƟon Banks. Credits from a wetland miƟgaƟon bank may be approved for use as compensaƟon for unavoidable impacts to wetlands when: i. The bank is cerƟfied under state rules; ii. The director determines that the wetland miƟgaƟon bank provides appropriate compensaƟon for the authorized impacts; iii. The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and condiƟons of the bank’s cerƟficaƟon instrument; iv. Replacement raƟos for projects using bank credits are consistent with replacement raƟos specified in the bank’s cerƟficaƟon; and v. Credits from a cerƟfied wetland miƟgaƟon bank are used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the cerƟfied bank instrument. In some cases, the service area of the bank may include porƟons of more than one adjacent drainage basin for specific wetland funcƟons. b. In-Lieu Fee Programs. As an alternaƟve to on-site or other off-site miƟgaƟon approaches, the director may approve purchase of credit for compensatory miƟgaƟon from an in-lieu fee program. Any such program used to compensate for direct wetland impacts shall be developed and approved through a public process and be consistent with federal rules, state policy on in-lieu fee miƟgaƟon and state water quality regulaƟons. Determining credit purchase necessary to compensate for wetland impacts shall incorporate guidance from CalculaƟng Credits and Debits for Compensatory MiƟgaƟon in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 10-06-011, Hruby 2012). Development proposals impacƟng criƟcal areas and/or associated buffers may contribute payment towards an idenƟfied city of Edmonds miƟgaƟon project with approval from the director; provided, that the miƟgaƟon approach meets all state and federal permit requirements, where required. Applicant provision of funds for compensatory miƟgaƟon shall only be approved if: i. The director determines that it would provide environmentally appropriate compensaƟon for the proposed wetland impacts; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 230/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 49 of 86 ii. The miƟgaƟon will occur on a site idenƟfied using the site selecƟon and prioriƟzaƟon process in the approved in-lieu fee program instrument or at a city-idenƟfied restoraƟon site consistent with ECDC 23.10.250(G). iii. A restoraƟon area and plan have been idenƟfied and shall be implemented within three years of project development; iv. RestoraƟon efforts are focused in areas idenƟfied as suitable for restoraƟon by the director; and v. Credits from an approved in-lieu fee program may be used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the approved in-lieu fee instrument. I. Fish and Wildlife Habitat ConservaƟon Areas - AddiƟonal MiƟgaƟon Requirements. 1. Where allowed, a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area may be altered only in accordance with miƟgaƟon sequencing as prescribed in ECDC 23.10.250(E) and only if the proposed alteraƟon does not result in a net loss of the funcƟons and values of the habitat. Any approval of an alteraƟon or impacts to a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area must be supported by best available science as described in the required criƟcal area report prepared by a qualified professional. 2. MiƟgaƟon of alteraƟons to fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic funcƟons and shall include miƟgaƟon for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. MiƟgaƟon shall address each funcƟon affected by the alteraƟon to achieve funcƟonal equivalency or improvement on a per funcƟon basis. MiƟgaƟon shall be located on site except when demonstrated that a higher level of ecological funcƟoning would result from an off-site locaƟon. MiƟgaƟon shall be detailed in a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area miƟgaƟon plan, which may include the following as necessary: i. A naƟve vegetaƟon planƟng plan; ii. Plans for retenƟon, enhancement or restoraƟon of specific habitat features; iii. Plans for control of nonnaƟve invasive plant or wildlife species; and iv. SƟpulaƟons for use of innovaƟve, sustainable building pracƟces. 23.10.260 Monitoring and bonds. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 231/352 A. Bonds to ensure miƟgaƟon, maintenance, and monitoring. 1. When required. If required miƟgaƟon cannot be completed before final permit approval (e.g., final plat approval, final building inspecƟon), the applicant shall post a financial guarantee, such as a performance bond or other security, to ensure miƟgaƟon, maintenance, and monitoring are completed as approved. 2. Form and amount. a. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the esƟmated cost of uncompleted work, including a reasonable inflaƟon factor based on the length of anƟcipated delay. b. Bond shall be in a form acceptable to the City’s aƩorney (e.g., surety, performance, or maintenance bond). 3. DuraƟon and release. a. Bonds or other security authorized by this secƟon shall remain in effect unƟl the director determines, in wriƟng, that miƟgaƟon is fully implemented and performance standards are met. b. Bonds or other security shall be held by the city for a minimum of five years or longer if needed to ensure miƟgaƟon success. c. DepleƟon, failure, or collecƟon of bond funds shall not discharge the obligaƟon to complete required miƟgaƟon, maintenance, monitoring, or restoraƟon. 4. Public projects. Public development projects are exempt from bonding requirements of this secƟon if public funds have been commiƩed for miƟgaƟon, maintenance, monitoring, or restoraƟon. 5. Default. Failure to comply with requirements, including monitoring and reporƟng deadlines, within 30 days aŌer the due date consƟtutes default. Upon default, the City may collect bond funds or take other enforcement acƟons authorized by law. 6. Recovered funds. Any funds recovered pursuant to this secƟon shall be used to complete the required miƟgaƟon. 23.10.270 Appeals. Any decision to approve, condiƟon, or deny a development proposal or other acƟvity based on the requirements of this chapter may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 232/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 51 of 86 23.10.280 Variances. A. Variances from the standards of this chapter may be authorized through the process of hearing examiner review in accordance with the general requirements set forth in ECDC 20.85.020 only if an applicant demonstrates that one or more of the following two condiƟons exist: 1. The applicaƟon of this chapter would prohibit a development proposal by a public agency or public uƟlity. A public agency and uƟlity excepƟon may be granted as a variance if: a. There is no other pracƟcal alternaƟve to the proposed development with less impact on the criƟcal areas; b. The applicaƟon of this chapter would unreasonably restrict the ability to provide uƟlity services to the public; c. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; d. The proposal protects and miƟgates impacts to the criƟcal area funcƟons and values consistent with the best available science; and e. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulaƟons and standards. 2. The applicaƟon of this chapter would deny all reasonable economic use (see the definiƟon of “reasonable economic use(s)” in ECDC 23.10.030) of the subject property acquired prior to the applicable provisions of this chapter. A reasonable use excepƟon may be authorized as a variance only if an applicant demonstrates that: a. The applicaƟon of this chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of a property or subject parcel; b. No other reasonable economic use of the property consistent with the underlying zoning and the city comprehensive plan has less impact on the criƟcal area; c. Applicant demonstrates that an alternaƟve building type permiƩed under the parcel’s zoning cannot be used to avoid impacts; d. The proposed impact to the criƟcal area is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the property; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 233/352 e. The applicant’s inability to derive reasonable economic use of the property must not result from acƟons taken by the applicant aŌer the effecƟve date of this chapter or its predecessor, including acƟons related to acquisiƟon of the property; f. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; g. The proposal creates no net loss of criƟcal area funcƟons and values consistent with the best available science; and h. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulaƟons and standards. B. Specific Variance Criteria. A variance may be granted if the applicant demonstrates that the requested acƟon conforms to all of the following specific criteria: 1. Special condiƟons and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land, the lot, or something inherent in the land, and that are not applicable to other lands in the same district; 2. The special condiƟons and circumstances do not result from the acƟons of the applicant; 3. A literal interpretaƟon of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of all reasonable economic uses and privileges permiƩed to other properƟes in the vicinity and zone of the subject property under the terms of this chapter, and the variance requested is the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with such rights; 4. GranƟng the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this chapter to other lands, structures, or buildings under similar circumstances; 5. The granƟng of the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this chapter, and will not further degrade the funcƟons or values of the associated criƟcal areas or be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the subject property; 6. The variance applicaƟon shall include an assessment by a qualified professional with a recommendaƟon for setbacks from the criƟcal area to preserve its values and funcƟon; and 7. The decision to grant the variance is based upon the best available science and gives special consideraƟon to conservaƟon or protecƟon measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish habitat. C. Hearing Examiner Review. The city hearing examiner shall, as a Type III-A decision (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC), review variance applicaƟons and conduct a public hearing. The hearing examiner shall approve, approve with Item 10.2 Packet pg. 234/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 53 of 86 condiƟons, or deny variance applicaƟons based on a proposal’s ability to comply with general and specific variance criteria provided in subsecƟons (A) and (B) of this secƟon. D. CondiƟons May Be Required. The director retains the right to prescribe such condiƟons and safeguards as are necessary to secure adequate protecƟon of criƟcal areas from adverse impacts, and to ensure conformity with this chapter for variances granted through hearing examiner review. E. Time Limit. The director shall prescribe a Ɵme limit within which the acƟon for which the variance is required shall be begun, completed, or both. Failure to begin or complete such acƟon within the established Ɵme limit shall void the variance, unless the applicant files an applicaƟon for an extension of Ɵme before the expiraƟon. An applicaƟon for an extension of Ɵme shall be reviewed by the director as a Type II decision (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC). F. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to bring forth evidence in support of a variance applicaƟon and upon which any decision has to be made on the applicaƟon. 23.10.290 InspecƟons. Reasonable access to the site shall be provided to the city, state, and/or federal agency review staff for the purpose of inspecƟons during any proposal review, restoraƟon, emergency acƟon, or monitoring period. Failure to provide access shall consƟtute grounds for issuance of a stop work order. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 235/352 ArƟcle I. Wetlands 23.10.300 DescripƟon and Purpose. A. DescripƟon. Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duraƟon sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetaƟon adapted to life in saturated soil condiƟons. All areas meeƟng the wetland designaƟon criteria, as determined using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands DelineaƟon Manual (1987) and applicable regional supplements, are regulated under this chapter. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Wetland RaƟng System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology PublicaƟon #14-06-029, or as amended), in accordance with WAC 173-22-035. B. Purpose. The purpose of this arƟcle is to protect, maintain, and where feasible restore the funcƟons and values of wetlands—including flood storage and aƩenuaƟon, water-quality improvement, groundwater recharge, and fish and wildlife habitat—in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.170 and 36.70A.172). 23.10.310 DesignaƟon, raƟng, and mapping. A. DesignaƟon. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with the approved federal delineaƟon manual and applicable regional supplements as set forth in WAC 173-22-035. B. Wetland RaƟngs. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington Department of Ecology wetland raƟng system, as set forth in the Washington State Wetland RaƟng System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology), which contains the definiƟons and methods for determining whether the criteria below are met. 1. Category I. Category I wetlands are: (a) relaƟvely undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one acre; (b) wetlands of high conservaƟon value that are idenƟfied by scienƟsts of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR; (c) bogs; (d) mature and old-growth forested wetlands larger than one acre; (e) wetlands in coastal lagoons; (f) interdunal wetlands that score eight or nine habitat points and are larger than one acre; and (g) wetlands that perform many funcƟons well (scoring 23 points or more). These Item 10.2 Packet pg. 236/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 55 of 86 wetlands: (a) represent unique or rare wetland types; (b) are more sensiƟve to disturbance than most wetlands; (c) are relaƟvely undisturbed and contain ecological aƩributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifeƟme; or (d) provide a high level of funcƟons. 2. Category II. Category II wetlands are: (a) estuarine wetlands smaller than one acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one acre; (b) interdunal wetlands larger than one acre or those found in a mosaic of wetlands; or (c) wetlands with a moderately high level of funcƟons (scoring between 20 and 22 points). 3. Category III. Category III wetlands are: (a) wetlands with a moderate level of funcƟons (scoring between 16 and 19 points); (b) can oŌen be adequately replaced with a well-planned miƟgaƟon project; and (c) interdunal wetlands between one-tenth and one acre. Wetlands scoring between 16 and 19 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are oŌen less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. 4. Category IV. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of funcƟons (scoring fewer than 16 points) and are oŌen heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that we should be able to replace, or in some cases to improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important funcƟons and should be protected to some degree. 5. Illegal ModificaƟons. Wetland raƟng categories shall not change due to illegal modificaƟons made by the applicant or with the applicant’s knowledge. C. Date of Wetland RaƟng. Wetland raƟng categories shall be applied as the wetland exists on the date of adopƟon of the raƟng system by the local government, as the wetland naturally changes thereaŌer, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permiƩed acƟviƟes. D. DelineaƟon. The exact locaƟon of a wetland’s boundary shall be determined through the performance of a field invesƟgaƟon by a qualified professional wetland scienƟst applying the approved federal wetland delineaƟon manual and applicable regional supplements and appended to the criƟcal area report. Wetland delineaƟons are valid for five years, except when recent events or updates to best available science jusƟfy a new delineaƟon. E. Lake Ballinger. Lake Ballinger is designated on the U.S. NaƟonal Wetlands Inventory as a lacustrine (lake) environment and should not be delineated as a wetland in its enƟrety. Lake fringe wetlands exisƟng along the periphery of Lake Ballinger shall be idenƟfied according to specific criteria provided in this secƟon. Consistent with guidance for delineaƟng lake fringe wetlands provided in these resources, the existence of jurisdicƟonal wetlands along Lake Ballinger shorelines shall be largely based upon the presence of persistent emergent vegetaƟon in shoreline areas less than 6.6 feet in depth. Provisions for protecƟon of Lake Ballinger shorelines not meeƟng criteria for jurisdicƟonal wetlands are provided in the city of Edmonds shoreline master program. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 237/352 F. Edmonds Marsh. The Edmonds Marsh is a 28-acre Category I Ɵdal wetland which in addiƟon to being a wildlife habitat and natural resource sanctuary is also classified by the state as a priority habitat. G. Other Significant Wetlands. 1. Good Hope Pond. 2. Mouth of Shell Creek. 23.10.320 Development standards. A. AcƟviƟes and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.090 and 23.10.100. B. AcƟviƟes may only be permiƩed in a wetland buffer if the applicant can show that the proposed acƟvity will not degrade the funcƟons and funcƟonal performance of the wetland and other criƟcal areas. C. Category I Wetlands. AcƟviƟes and uses shall be prohibited from Category I wetlands, except as provided in ECDC 23.10.090, ECDC 23.10.100, and restoraƟon projects approved by the director. D. Category II Wetlands. With respect to acƟviƟes proposed in Category II wetlands, the following standards shall apply: 1. Water-dependent acƟviƟes may be allowed where there are no pracƟcable alternaƟves that would have a less adverse impact on the wetland, its buffers and other criƟcal areas. 2. Where non-water-dependent acƟviƟes are proposed, it shall be presumed that alternaƟve locaƟons are available, and therefore, acƟviƟes and uses shall be prohibited unless the applicant demonstrates that: a. The basic project purpose, as proposed, cannot be accomplished and avoid impact, or result in a less adverse impact, on a wetland on another site or sites in the general region; and b. All alternaƟve designs of the project as proposed, such as a reducƟon in the size, scope, configuraƟon, or density of the project, would not avoid or result in less of an adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer. E. Category III and IV Wetlands. AcƟviƟes and uses that result in unavoidable and necessary impacts may be permiƩed in Category III and IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance with an approved criƟcal areas report and miƟgaƟon plan. F. Wetland Buffers. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 238/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 57 of 86 1. General Buffer Requirements. a. VegetaƟon requirements. At least 70 percent of the buffer area not covered by pre-exisƟng structures or paved surfaces shall be covered with naƟve plants. Non-naƟve and non- invasive species shall not exceed 10 percent of the total area. Noxious weeds and invasive species shall be removed in compliance with the provisions found in ECDC 23.10.070(C)(7). b. Buffer widths. Established in accordance with best available science and the Washington State Wetland RaƟng System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology PublicaƟon No. 14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology) and are based on the category of wetland, habitat score, and the adjacent land use intensity (assumed to be high). c. The more protecƟve buffer widths in the Standard Buffer Width table in subsecƟon (F)(3)(a) below apply by default. However, if the condiƟons in subsecƟon (F)(2) of this subsecƟon are met and approved, buffers found in the Reduced Buffer Width table in subsecƟon (F)(3)(b) below may be used. 2. Reduced Buffer OpƟons Based on Habitat Score. a. Wetlands with habitat score of six or more. The Reduced Buffer Width table in (F)(3)(b) of this subsecƟon may be used only when all of the following condiƟons are met: i. A protected, undisturbed vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide is provided between the wetland and a priority habitat, as defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. ii. The corridor is legally protected for its enƟre length (e.g., conservaƟon easement). iii. A qualified biologist confirms the presence of the priority habitat. iv. If no corridor opƟon exists, the buffer widths in Table (F)(3)(a) may be used only when all the applicable impact-reducƟon measures in Table (F)(4)(b) are implemented. b. Wetlands with a habitat score of three to five. The impact-minimizaƟon measures in subsecƟon (F)(4) are required when using the buffer widths in Table (F)(3)(b). 3. Wetland Buffer Width Tables. Table 23.10.320(F)(3)(a): Standard Buffer Widths. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 239/352 Buffer Width (in Feet) Based on Habitat Score Wetland Category Habitat Score: 3 – 5 Habitat Score: 6 – 7 Habitat Score: 8 – 9 Category I: Based on total score 100’ 150’ 300’ Bogs and wetlands of high conservaƟon value 250’ 300’ Forested 100’ 150’ 300’ Interdunal 300’ Estuarine and coastal lagoons 200’ Category II: Based on score 100’ 150’ 300’ Interdunal wetlands 150’ Estuarine and coastal lagoons 150’ Category III: All 80’ 150’ 300’ Category IV: All 50’ Item 10.2 Packet pg. 240/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 59 of 86 Table 23.10.320(F)(3)(b): Reduced Buffer Widths. Buffer Width (in Feet) Based on Habitat Score Wetland Category Habitat Score: 3 – 5 Habitat Score: 6 – 7 Habitat Score: 8 – 9 Category I: Based on total score 75’ 110’ 225’ Bogs and wetlands of high conservaƟon value 190’ 225’ Forested 75’ 110’ 225’ Interdunal 225’ Estuarine and coastal lagoons 150’ Category II: Based on score 75’ 110’ 225’ Interdunal wetlands 110’ Estuarine and coastal lagoons 110’ Category III: All 60’ 110’ 225’ Category IV: All 40’ Item 10.2 Packet pg. 241/352 4. Impact-ReducƟon Measures. The impact-reducƟon measures in this subsecƟon shall be implemented, where applicable, and minimize impacts to the adjacent land uses. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 242/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 61 of 86 Table 23.10.320(F)(4). Impact-ReducƟon Measures. Disturbance Measures Lights  Direct lights away from wetland Noise  Locate acƟvity that generates noise away from wetland  If warranted, enhance exisƟng buffer with naƟve vegetaƟon planƟng adjacent to noise source  For acƟviƟes that generate relaƟvely conƟnuous, potenƟally disrupƟve noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an addiƟonal 10-foot heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer Toxic runoff  Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered  Establish covenants limiƟng use of pesƟcides within 150 feet of wetland  Apply integrated pest management Stormwater runoff  Retrofit stormwater detenƟon and treatment for roads and exisƟng adjacent development  Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer  Use low-intensity development techniques (for more informaƟon see stormwater ordinance and manual) Changes in water impervious regime surfaces  Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns Pets and human disturbance  Use privacy fencing or plant dense vegetaƟon to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetaƟon appropriate for the ecoregion  Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservaƟon easement Dust  Use best management pracƟces to control dust Item 10.2 Packet pg. 243/352 5. Increased Wetland Buffer Widths. The director shall require increased buffer widths in accordance with the recommendaƟons of an experienced, qualified professional wetland scienƟst and the best available science on a case-by-case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland funcƟons and values based on site-specific characterisƟcs. This determinaƟon shall be based on one or more of the following criteria: a. A larger buffer is needed to protect other criƟcal areas; b. The buffer or adjacent upland has a slope greater than 15 percent or is suscepƟble to erosion and standard erosion control measures will not prevent adverse impacts to the wetland; c. The buffer area has minimal vegetaƟve cover. In lieu of increasing the buffer width where exisƟng buffer vegetaƟon is inadequate to protect the wetland funcƟons and values, development and implementaƟon of a wetland buffer enhancement plan in accordance with this subsecƟon (G)(3) may subsƟtute; or d. The wetland and/or buffer is occupied by a federally listed threatened or endangered species, a bald eagle nest, a great blue heron rookery, or a species of local importance; and it is determined by the director that an increased buffer width is necessary to protect the species. 6. Measurement of Wetland Buffers. All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensaƟon for approved wetland alteraƟons shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland. 7. Buffer Consistency. All miƟgaƟon sites shall have buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this chapter. 8. Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with this chapter, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced condiƟon. Removal of invasive nonnaƟve weeds is required for the duraƟon of the miƟgaƟon bond. G. Wetland Buffer ModificaƟons. 1. Where wetland or buffer alteraƟons are permiƩed by the city of Edmonds, the applicant shall miƟgate impacts to achieve no net loss of wetland acreage and funcƟons consistent with applicable provisions of this chapter. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 244/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 63 of 86 2. At the discreƟon of the director, standard wetland buffers may be averaged or reduced when consistent with all criteria in this subsecƟon. Wetland buffer averaging with enhancement shall be preferred over wetland buffer reducƟon with enhancement. Wetland buffer reducƟon shall only be approved by the director when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on site. 3. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging with Buffer Enhancement. The director may allow modificaƟon of a standard wetland buffer width in accordance with an approved criƟcal areas report and the best available science on a case-by-case basis by averaging buffer widths so long as there is no net loss of the funcƟons and values of the criƟcal area. Any allowance for averaging buffer widths shall only be granted concomitant to the development and implementaƟon of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for areas of buffer degradaƟon. Only those porƟons of a wetland buffer exisƟng within the project area or subject parcel shall be considered the total standard buffer for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional wetland scienƟst demonstrates that: a. The buffer averaging and enhancement plan provides evidence that wetland funcƟons and values will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementaƟon for those wetlands where exisƟng buffer vegetaƟon is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementaƟon for those wetlands where exisƟng buffer vegetaƟon is inadequate to protect the funcƟons and values of the wetland; b. The wetland contains variaƟons in sensiƟvity due to exisƟng physical characterisƟcs or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetaƟon, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other places; c. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area exisƟng on a subject parcel for wetlands extending off site, aŌer averaging is no less than that which would be contained within a standard buffer; and d. The buffer width at any single locaƟon is not reduced by more than 25 percent of the standard buffer width. 4. Buffer Width ReducƟons through Buffer Enhancement. At the discreƟon of the director, and only when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on site, wetland buffer width reducƟons (or approval of standard buffer widths for wetlands where exisƟng buffer condiƟons require increased buffer widths) may be granted concomitant to the development and implementaƟon of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for Category III and IV wetlands only. Approval of a wetland buffer enhancement plan shall, at the discreƟon of the director, allow for wetland buffer width reducƟons by no more than 25 percent of the standard width; provided, that: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 245/352 a. The plan provides evidence that wetland funcƟons and values will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementaƟon for those wetlands where exisƟng buffer vegetaƟon is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementaƟon for those wetlands where exisƟng buffer vegetaƟon is inadequate to protect the funcƟons and values of the wetland; b. The plan documents exisƟng naƟve plant densiƟes and provides for increases in buffer naƟve plant densiƟes to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success; and d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards including but not limited to: i. Percent vegetaƟve cover; ii. Percent invasive species cover; iii. Species richness; and iv. Amount of large woody debris. H. AddiƟons to Structures ExisƟng within Wetlands and/or Wetland Buffers. 1. AddiƟons to legally constructed structures exisƟng within wetlands or wetland buffers that increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing shall be permiƩed consistent with the development standards of this secƟon; provided, that a wetland and/or buffer enhancement plan is included in the criƟcal area report to miƟgate for impacts consistent with this chapter; and provided, that all impacts from temporary disturbances within the criƟcal area buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement planƟngs during and following construcƟon of the allowed alteraƟon. Provisions for standard wetland buffers, wetland buffer averaging with enhancement, and buffer reducƟons with enhancement require applicants to locate such addiƟons in accordance with the following sequencing: a. Outside of the standard wetland buffer; b. Outside of a wetland buffer averaged (with enhancement) per subsecƟon (G)(3) of this secƟon; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 246/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 65 of 86 c. Outside of a wetland buffer reduced (with enhancement) per subsecƟon (G)(4) of this secƟon; d. Outside of the inner 25 percent of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than 300 square feet of structure addiƟon footprint within the inner 50 percent of the standard wetland buffer width; provided, that enhancement is provided at a minimum three-to-one (3:1) raƟo (enhancement-to-impact); e. Outside of the inner 25 percent of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than 500 square feet of new footprint within the inner 50 percent of the standard wetland buffer width; provided, that enhancement is provided at a minimum five-to-one (5:1) raƟo (enhancement-to-impact), and that stormwater low impact development (LID) techniques and other measures are included as part of the wetland/buffer enhancement plan. 2. Where meeƟng wetland buffer enhancement requirements required by subsecƟon (I)(1) of this secƟon would result in enhancement that is separated from the criƟcal area due to uncommon property ownership, alternaƟve enhancement approaches may be approved by the director. AlternaƟve approaches could include a vegetated rain garden that receives storm runoff, replacement of exisƟng impervious surfaces with pervious materials, or other approaches that provide ecological benefits to the adjacent criƟcal area. 3. AddiƟons to legally constructed structures exisƟng within wetlands or wetland buffers that cannot be accommodated in accordance with the sequencing in subsecƟon (I)(1) of this secƟon (e.g., addiƟons proposed within a wetland or the inner 25 percent of a standard buffer width) may be permiƩed at the director’s discreƟon as a variance subject to review by the city hearing examiner and the provisions of ECDC 23.10.280. I. Development Proposals within the Footprint of ExisƟng Development. New development shall be allowed within the footprint of exisƟng development occurring within a wetland buffer; provided, that the following condiƟons are met: 1. The footprint of exisƟng development was legally established, and is consistent with the definiƟon provided in ECDC 23.10.030. 2. The proposed development within the footprint of exisƟng development is sited as far away from the wetland edge as is feasible; 3. As part of the development proposal, opportuniƟes to reduce the footprint of exisƟng development are implemented where such reducƟon would increase the buffer width adjacent to the wetland and not represent an undue burden given the scale of the proposed development. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 247/352 4. The proposed development must include a wetland or buffer enhancement to the adjacent wetland and its buffer that improves funcƟons degraded by prior development and provides an area of enhancement that is equal to or greater than the area affected by the proposed development. 5. Impacts from temporary disturbances within the wetland buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement planƟngs during and following construcƟon of the allowed alteraƟon. 23.10.330 Performance standards – Subdivisions. A. The subdivision and short subdivision of land in wetlands and associated buffers is subject to the following: 1. Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided. 2. Land that is located parƟally within a wetland or its buffer may be subdivided; provided, that an accessible and buildable conƟguous porƟon of each new lot is located outside of the wetland and its buffer. 3. Access roads and uƟliƟes serving the proposed subdivision may be permiƩed within the wetland and associated buffers only at the discreƟon of the director. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 248/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 67 of 86 ArƟcle II. CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS Reserved. See Chapter 23.60 ECDC. ArƟcle III. Frequently flooded areas 23.10.500 DescripƟon and Purpose. A. DescripƟon. Frequently flooded areas include floodways, floodplains, and other lands subject to a one percent or greater annual chance of flooding, as idenƟfied by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or other best-available data. Such areas are designated consistent with WAC 365-190-110, the standards of the NaƟonal Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and the provisions of ECDC 19.07 (Flood Damage PrevenƟon). B. Purpose. The purpose of this arƟcle is to protect life, property, and the environment by minimizing losses due to flood condiƟons; maintaining the natural hydrologic, storage, and habitat funcƟons of floodplains; and prevenƟng increases in flood hazards. This arƟcle complements ECDC 19.07, which governs flood-hazard reducƟon, floodplain development, and construcƟon standards consistent with the NFIP. Title 23 provides for the protecƟon of ecological funcƟons and values within frequently flooded areas consistent with the Washington Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.060) and WAC 365-190-110. 23.10.510 DesignaƟon and mapping. A. DesignaƟon. Frequently flooded areas shall include: 1. Those areas designated as special flood hazard areas and other mapped flood-prone lands as defined and adopted in ECDC 19.07.040, Basis for Establishing Flood Areas; and 2. Any areas idenƟfied by the City through best-available science or other reliable data that can demonstrate suscepƟbility to flooding or conveyance of floodwaters. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 249/352 B. Use of Best-Available InformaƟon. The city shall uƟlize the most current FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS), Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and any revisions thereto as adopted under ECDC 19.07, together with other scienƟfically valid sources, to idenƟfy frequently flooded areas and guide regulaƟon under this chapter. C. Supplemental DesignaƟon. The city may designate addiƟonal flood-prone areas not shown on the current FIRMs where historical or scienƟfic evidence indicates a risk of flooding. Such areas shall be regulated consistent with ECDC 19.07 and the current ediƟons of the InternaƟonal ResidenƟal Code and InternaƟonal Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. 23.10.520 Liability Disclaimer. The degree of flood protecƟon required by this chapter and ECDC 19.07, is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scienƟfic and engineering consideraƟons. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by manmade or natural causes. This chapter does not imply that land outside frequently flooded areas or uses permiƩed within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damage. This chapter shall not create liability on the part of the city of Edmonds, any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance AdministraƟon for any flood damages that result from reliance on this chapter or any administraƟve decision lawfully made hereunder. 23.10.530 Development standards. A. General. Development standards and provisions for protecƟon of frequently flooded areas shall comply with ECDC 19.07 and the current ediƟons of the InternaƟonal ResidenƟal Code and InternaƟonal Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. Compliance with the provisions of ECDC 19.07 shall be deemed compliance with ECDC 23.10.040, ProtecƟon of CriƟcal Areas, for the purposes of flood-hazard management. B. CriƟcal area review. CriƟcal-area reports prepared for projects within frequently flooded areas shall idenƟfy and evaluate floodplain funcƟons and ecological values, consistent with ECDC 23.10.090, CriƟcal-Areas Reports. Such reports shall be incorporated into the corresponding floodplain development permit review under ECDC 19.07, ensuring consistency between environmental protecƟon and flood-hazard reducƟon requirements. C. Conflict of Standards. Where provisions of this arƟcle and ECDC 19.07 conflict, the more restricƟve standard that provides the greatest protecƟon to public safety and ecological funcƟon shall apply. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 250/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 69 of 86 ArƟcle IV. Geologically hazardous areas 23.10.600 DescripƟon and Purpose. A. DescripƟon. Geologically hazardous areas are lands that, because of their suscepƟbility to erosion, landslides, seismic acƟvity, or other geologic processes, pose a risk to health, safety, or property when developed. Such areas are designated and classified in accordance with WAC 365-190-120, which provides criteria for idenƟfying and evaluaƟng the degree of risk associated with specific hazard types. B. Purpose. The purpose of this arƟcle is to reduce risk to people, property, and the environment by requiring appropriate site invesƟgaƟon, design, and miƟgaƟon measures; by locaƟng development to minimize hazard potenƟal; and by maintaining the stability and natural funcƟons of slopes and related landforms. RegulaƟon of these areas ensures consistency with RCW 36.70A.172 and the use of best available science in managing geologic hazards. 23.10.610 DesignaƟon and mapping. A. DesignaƟon. Geologically hazardous areas include areas suscepƟble to erosion, land sliding, earthquakes, or other geological events. They pose a threat to the health and safety of ciƟzens when incompaƟble development is sited in areas of significant hazard. Such incompaƟble development may not only place itself at risk but also may increase the hazard to surrounding development and use. Areas suscepƟble to one or more of the following types of hazards shall be designated as a geologically hazardous area: 1. Erosion hazard; 2. Landslide hazard; and 3. Seismic hazard. B. Mapping of Geologically Hazardous Areas. The approximate locaƟon and extent of geologically hazardous areas are shown on the city of Edmonds’ criƟcal areas inventory GIS map. In addiƟon, resources providing informaƟon on the locaƟon and extent of geologically hazardous areas include: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 251/352 1. Washington Department of Ecology coastal zone atlas (for marine bluffs); 2. U.S. Geological Survey geologic maps, landslide hazard maps, and seismic hazard maps; 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources seismic hazard maps for Western Washington; 4. Washington State Department of Natural Resources slope stability maps; 5. NaƟonal Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministraƟon tsunami hazard maps; and 6. Federal Emergency Management Agency flood insurance maps. The criƟcal areas inventory and the resources cited above are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds planning and development department, project applicants, and/or property owners and may be conƟnuously updated as new criƟcal areas are idenƟfied. They are a reference and do not provide a final criƟcal area designaƟon. C. Erosion Hazard Areas. Erosion hazard areas are at least those areas idenƟfied by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources ConservaƟon Service as having a “moderate to severe,” “severe,” or “very severe” rill and inter-rill erosion hazard. Erosion hazard areas are also those areas impacted by shoreland and/or stream bank erosion. Within the city of Edmonds, erosion hazard areas include: 1. Those areas of the city of Edmonds containing soils that may experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. This group of soils includes, but is not limited to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: a. Alderwood soils; b. Alderwood/EvereƩ series; c. EvereƩ series. 2. Coastal and stream erosion areas which are subject to the impacts from lateral erosion related to moving water such as stream channel migraƟon and shoreline retreat; 3. Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with granular soils and springs or ground water seepage; and 4. Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include exisƟng landslide deposits regardless of slope. D. Landslide Hazard Areas. Landslide hazard areas are areas potenƟally subject to landslides based on a combinaƟon of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. They include areas suscepƟble because of any Item 10.2 Packet pg. 252/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 71 of 86 combinaƟon of soil, slope (gradient), slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors. Within the city of Edmonds potenƟal landslide hazard areas include: 1. Areas of ancient or historic failures in Edmonds which include all areas within the earth subsidence and landslide hazard area as idenƟfied in the 1979 report of Robert Lowe Associates and amended by the 1985 report of GeoEngineers, Inc., and further discussed in the 2007 report by Landau Associates; 2. Coastal areas mapped as class u (unstable), uos (unstable old slides), and urs (unstable recent slides) in the Department of Ecology Washington coastal atlas; 3. Areas designated as quaternary slumps, earthflows, mudflows, or landslides on maps published by the United States Geological Survey or Washington State Department of Natural Resources; Figure 1. Simple Slope CalculaƟon 4. Any slope of 40 percent or steeper that exceeds a verƟcal height of 10 feet over a 25-foot horizontal run. Except for rockeries that have been engineered and approved by the engineer as having been built according to the engineered design, all other modified slopes (including slopes where there are Item 10.2 Packet pg. 253/352 breaks in slopes) meeƟng overall average steepness and height criteria should be considered potenƟal landslide hazard areas; 5. Any slope with all three of the following characterisƟcs: a. Slopes steeper than 15 percent; b. Hillsides intersecƟng geologic contacts with a relaƟvely permeable sediment overlying a relaƟvely impermeable sediment; and c. Springs or ground water seepage; 6. Any area potenƟally unstable as a result of rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion; 7. Any area located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to, or potenƟally subject to, inundaƟon by debris flow or deposiƟon of stream-transported sediments; and 8. Any slopes that have been modified by past development acƟvity that sƟll meet the slope criteria. E. Seismic Hazard Areas. Seismic hazard areas are areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake-induced ground shaking, slope failure, seƩlement, soil liquefacƟon, lateral spreading, or surface faulƟng. These areas are designated as having a “high” and “moderate to high” risk of liquefacƟon as mapped on the LiquefacƟon SuscepƟbility Map of Snohomish County by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources or areas located within landslide hazard areas. 23.10.620 Development standards – General requirements. A. AlteraƟons of geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers may only occur for acƟviƟes that: 1. Will not increase the threat of geological hazard to adjacent properƟes beyond predevelopment condiƟons; 2. Will not adversely impact other criƟcal areas; 3. Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or miƟgated to a level equal to or less than predevelopment condiƟons; and 4. Are cerƟfied as safe as designed and under anƟcipated condiƟons by a qualified engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 254/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 73 of 86 B. CriƟcal FaciliƟes Prohibited. CriƟcal faciliƟes shall not be sited within geologically hazardous areas unless there is no other pracƟcal alternaƟve. 23.10.630 Development standards – Specific hazards. A. Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. AcƟviƟes on sites containing erosion or landslide hazards shall meet the requirements of ECDC 23.10.620, Development standards – General requirements, and the specific following requirements: 1. Minimum Building Setback. The minimum building setback shall be the greater of (a) the minimum setback required by ECDC 23.10.140, or (b) the distance required to ensure the proposed structure will not be at risk from landslides for the life of the structure, considered to be 120 years, and will not increase the risk of landslides occurring on-site or off-site. The setback shall be measured from all edges of landslide hazard areas. The required setback distance shall be determined by the director based on the recommendaƟons of a geotechnical report and upon review of, and concurrence with, a criƟcal areas report prepared by a qualified professional, and shall be sufficient to eliminate or minimize the risk of property damage, injury, or loss of life resulƟng from landslides caused in whole or in part by the proposed development.. 2. Buffer Requirements. A buffer may be established with specific requirements and limitaƟons, including but not limited to drainage, grading, irrigaƟon, and vegetaƟon. Buffer requirements shall be determined by the director consistent with recommendaƟons provided in the geotechnical report to eliminate or minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulƟng from landslides caused in whole or part by acƟviƟes within the buffer area, based upon review of and concurrence with a criƟcal areas report prepared by a qualified professional. 3. AlteraƟons. AlteraƟons of an erosion or landslide hazard area, building setback and/or buffer may only occur for acƟviƟes for which a hazards analysis is submiƩed and approved. It must cerƟfy that: a. The alteraƟon will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentaƟon to adjacent properƟes beyond predevelopment condiƟons; b. The alteraƟon will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properƟes; and c. Such alteraƟons will not adversely impact other criƟcal areas. 4. Design Standards within Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. Development within an erosion or landslide hazard area and/or buffer shall be designed to meet the following basic requirements unless it can be demonstrated that an alternaƟve design that deviates from one or more of these standards provides greater long-term slope stability while meeƟng all other provisions of this chapter. The requirement for long-term slope stability shall exclude designs that require regular and Item 10.2 Packet pg. 255/352 periodic maintenance to maintain their level of funcƟon. The basic development design standards are: a. The proposed development shall not decrease the factor of safety for landslide occurrences below the limits of 1.5 for staƟc condiƟons and 1.2 for dynamic condiƟons. If stability at the proposed development site is below these limits, the proposed development shall provide pracƟcable approaches to reduce risk to human safety and improve the factor of safety for landsliding so it saƟsfies the limits stated above. In no case shall the exisƟng factor of safety be reduced for the subject property or adjacent properƟes; b. Structures and improvements shall be clustered to avoid geologically hazardous areas and other criƟcal areas; c. Structures and improvements shall minimize alteraƟons to the natural contour of the slope, and foundaƟons shall be Ɵered where possible to conform to exisƟng topography; d. Structures and improvements shall be located to preserve the most criƟcal porƟon of the site and its natural landforms and vegetaƟon; e. The proposed development shall not result in greater risk or a need for increased buffers on neighboring properƟes; f. The use of retaining walls that allow the maintenance of exisƟng natural slope area is preferred over graded arƟficial slopes; and g. Development shall be designed to minimize impervious lot coverage; 5. VegetaƟon RetenƟon. Unless otherwise provided under Allowed AcƟviƟes in ECDC 23.10.080(D) or as part of an approved alteraƟon, removal of vegetaƟon from an erosion or landslide hazard area or related buffer shall be prohibited. 6. Trees. Trees on slopes of 25 percent or greater shall not be removed, except as allowed per ECDC 23.10.080(D)(7)(d); 7. Seasonal RestricƟon. Clearing shall be allowed only from May 1st to October 1st of each year; provided, that the director may extend or shorten the dry season on a case-by-case basis depending on actual weather condiƟons, except that Ɵmber harvest, not including brush clearing or stump removal, may be allowed pursuant to an approved forest pracƟce permit issued by the city of Edmonds or the Washington State Department of Natural Resources; 8. Point Discharges. Point discharges from surface water faciliƟes and roof drains onto or upstream from an erosion or landslide hazard area shall be prohibited except as follows: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 256/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 75 of 86 a. Conveyed via conƟnuous storm pipe downslope to a point where there are no erosion hazard areas downstream from the discharge; b. Discharged at flow duraƟons matching predeveloped condiƟons, with adequate energy dissipaƟon, into exisƟng channels that previously conveyed stormwater runoff in the predeveloped state; or c. Dispersed discharge upslope of the steep slope onto a low-gradient, undisturbed buffer demonstrated to be adequate to infiltrate all surface and stormwater runoff, and where it can be demonstrated that such discharge will not increase the saturaƟon of the slope; and 9. Prohibited Development. On-site sewage disposal systems, including drain fields, shall be prohibited within erosion and landslide hazard areas and related buffers. B. Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area. In addiƟon to the requirements of this chapter, development proposals for lands located within the earth subsidence and landslide hazard area as indicated on the criƟcal areas inventory shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.10 ECDC. C. Seismic Hazard Areas. AcƟviƟes proposed to be located in seismic hazard areas shall meet the standards of ECDC 23.10.620, Development standards – General requirements. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 257/352 ArƟcle V. Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas 23.10.700 DescripƟon and purpose. A. DescripƟon. Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas are lands and waters necessary to maintain populaƟons of species in suitable habitats within their natural geographic distribuƟon, ensuring viable populaƟons over the long term and avoiding isolated subpopulaƟons. These areas are designated and regulated using best available science and include, but are not limited to, streams, riparian corridors, wetlands, lakes, marine and freshwater shorelines, and other areas idenƟfied as priority habitats and species by state or federal agencies or designated by the City. B. Purpose. The purpose of this secƟon is to: 1. Protect and maintain fish and wildlife populaƟons and their habitats using best available science to prevent net loss of habitat funcƟons and values. 2. Ensure development and land uses within or adjacent to FWHCAs are compaƟble with long-term species viability. 3. Give special consideraƟon to measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish and other priority species. 23.10.710 DesignaƟon, raƟng, and mapping. A. DesignaƟon. Any area meeƟng one or more of the following criteria, regardless of any formal idenƟficaƟon, are hereby designated criƟcal areas and are subject to the provisions of this chapter and shall be managed consistent with the best available science, such as the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Management RecommendaƟons for Priority Habitat and Species. B. Fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas includes: 1. Areas where endangered, threatened, and sensiƟve species have a primary associaƟon. This includes: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 258/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 77 of 86 a. Federally designated endangered and threatened species are those fish and wildlife species idenƟfied by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the NOAA Fisheries that are in danger of exƟncƟon or threatened to become endangered. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the NaƟonal Marine Fisheries Service shall be consulted for current lisƟng status. b. State-designated endangered, threatened, and sensiƟve species are those fish and wildlife species naƟve to the state of Washington idenƟfied by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, that are in danger of exƟncƟon, threatened to become endangered, vulnerable, or declining and are likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant porƟon of their range within the state without cooperaƟve management or removal of threats. State- designated endangered, threatened, and sensiƟve species are periodically recorded in WAC 232-12-014 (state endangered species) and WAC 232-12-011 (state threatened and sensiƟve species). The State Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains the most current lisƟng and shall be consulted for current lisƟng status. 2. State priority habitats and areas associated with state priority species. Priority habitats and species are prioriƟes for conservaƟon and management. Priority species require protecƟve measures for their perpetuaƟon due to their populaƟon status, sensiƟvity to habitat alteraƟon, and/or recreaƟonal, commercial, or tribal importance. Priority habitats are those habitat types or elements with unique or significant value to a diverse assemblage of species. A priority habitat may consist of a unique vegetaƟon type or dominant plant species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural element. Priority habitats and species are idenƟfied by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 3. Habitats and species of local importance. Habitats and species idenƟfied by the city of Edmonds that, due to their populaƟon status or sensiƟvity to habitat manipulaƟon, warrant protecƟon. Habitats may include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a species has a primary associaƟon, and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. 4. Commercial and RecreaƟonal Shellfish Areas. These areas include all public and private Ɵdelands or bedlands suitable for shellfish harvest, including shellfish protecƟon districts established pursuant to Chapter 90.72 RCW. 5. Kelp and eelgrass beds and herring and smelt spawning areas. 6. Naturally Occurring Ponds Under 20 Acres. Naturally occurring ponds are those ponds under 20 acres and their submerged aquaƟc beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those arƟficial ponds intenƟonally created from dry areas in order to miƟgate impacts to ponds. Naturally occurring ponds do not include ponds deliberately designed and created from dry sites, such as canals, Item 10.2 Packet pg. 259/352 detenƟon faciliƟes, wastewater treatment faciliƟes, farm ponds, temporary construcƟon ponds, and landscape ameniƟes, unless such arƟficial ponds were intenƟonally created for miƟgaƟon. 7. Waters of the State. Waters of the state include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdicƟon of the state of Washington, as classified in WAC 222-16-031 (or WAC 222-16-030, depending on classificaƟon used). 8. Riparian management zones (RMZs). The area that has the potenƟal to provide full riparian funcƟons for bank stability, shade, polluƟon removal, contribuƟon of detrital nutrients, and recruitment of large woody debris. In many forested regions of the state, this area occurs within one 200-year site-potenƟal tree height measured from the edge of the stream channel. In non-forest zones, the RMZ is defined by the greater of the outermost point of the riparian vegetaƟve community or the polluƟon removal funcƟon, at 100 feet. 9. Streams. Streams shall include those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorƟng of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. Streams shall be classified in accordance with the Washington Department of Natural Resources water typing system (WAC 222-16-030) hereby adopted in its enƟrety by reference and summarized as follows: Table 23.10.720(9) Stream Types Stream ClassificaƟon DescripƟon DesignaƟon Criteria Type F Fish-bearing with conƟnuous flows Segments of natural waters within the bankfull widths of defined channels and periodically inundated areas of their associated wetlands, or within lakes, ponds, or impoundments having a surface area of 0.5 acre or greater at seasonal low water and which contain fish habitat or meet the criteria below:  Waters, which are diverted for use by federal, state, tribal or private fish hatcheries. Such waters shall be considered Type F water upstream from the point of diversion for 1,500 feet, including tributaries if highly significant for protecƟon of downstream water quality.  Riverine ponds, wall-based channels, and other channel features that are used by fish for off-channel habitat. These areas are Item 10.2 Packet pg. 260/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 79 of 86 criƟcal to the maintenance of opƟmum survival of fish. This habitat shall be idenƟfied based on the following criteria: o The site must be connected to a fish habitat stream and accessible during some period of the year; and o The off-channel water must be accessible to fish. Type N Non-fish- bearing, with perennial or season flows. Segments of natural waters within the bankfull width of defined channels that are non-fish habitat streams. C. Mapping. The approximate locaƟon and extent of fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas are shown on the city of Edmonds criƟcal areas inventory. Resources providing informaƟon on the locaƟon and extent of fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas incorporated into the inventory include: 1. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife priority habitat and species maps; 2. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 200-year Site-potenƟal Tree Height (SPTH200) and Riparian Management Zone (RMZ) Values mapping resource; 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources official water type reference maps, as amended; 4. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Puget Sound interƟdal habitat inventory maps; 5. Washington State Department of Natural Resources shore zone inventory; 6. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program mapping data; 7. Washington State Department of Health annual inventory of shellfish harvest areas; 8. Anadromous and resident salmonid distribuƟon maps contained in the habitat limiƟng factors reports published by the Washington ConservaƟon Commission; and 9. Washington State Department of Natural Resources state natural area preserves and natural resource conservaƟon area maps. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 261/352 The criƟcal areas inventory and the resources cited above are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds planning and development department, project applicants, and/or property owners and should be conƟnuously updated as new criƟcal areas are idenƟfied. They are a reference and do not provide a final criƟcal areas designaƟon. 23.10.720 Development Standards - General. A. AlteraƟons. A fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area may be altered only if the proposed alteraƟon of the habitat or the miƟgaƟon proposed does not degrade the quanƟtaƟve and qualitaƟve funcƟons and values of the habitat. There are no specific development standards for upland habitats of local importance unless these areas include another criƟcal area (streams, heron rookeries, steep slopes, etc.). City staff will review the criƟcal areas report and work with the applicant to minimize effects or improve condiƟons to upland habitat. B. Approvals of AcƟviƟes. The director shall condiƟon approvals of acƟviƟes allowed within or adjacent to a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area as necessary to minimize or miƟgate any potenƟal adverse impacts. CondiƟons shall be based on the best available science and may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Establishment of buffer zones; 2. PreservaƟon of criƟcally important vegetaƟon and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; 3. LimitaƟon of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; 4. Seasonal restricƟon of construcƟon acƟviƟes; 5. Establishment of a duraƟon and Ɵmetable for periodic review of miƟgaƟon acƟviƟes; and 6. Requirement of a performance bond, when necessary, to ensure compleƟon and success of proposed miƟgaƟon. C. Buffers. 1. Establishment of Buffers. When needed to protect fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, the director shall require the establishment of temporary or permanent buffer areas for permiƩed acƟviƟes adjacent to fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas which may result in fish or wildlife disturbance (e.g., construcƟon, grading, etc.). Establishment of buffers shall follow Item 10.2 Packet pg. 262/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 81 of 86 recommendaƟons set forth by a qualified biologist in the project criƟcal areas report except as provided for riparian management zones in ECDC 23.10.750(E). Required buffer widths shall reflect the sensiƟvity of the habitat and the type and intensity of the proposed human acƟvity to be conducted nearby and shall be consistent with the management recommendaƟons issued by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2. Seasonal and Daily Timing RestricƟons. When a species is more suscepƟble to adverse impacts during specific periods of the year or day, seasonal restricƟons on permiƩed acƟviƟes within or adjacent to fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas may be required at the discreƟon of the director pursuant to recommendaƟons set forth in a criƟcal areas report. 23.10.730 Development standards – Specific requirements. A. Endangered, Threatened, and SensiƟve Species. 1. No development shall be allowed within a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area or riparian management zone with which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensiƟve species have a primary associaƟon, except that which is provided for by a management plan established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or applicable state or federal agency. 2. Whenever acƟviƟes are proposed adjacent to a fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area with which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensiƟve species have a primary associaƟon, such area shall be protected through the applicaƟon of protecƟon measures in accordance with a criƟcal areas report prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the director. Approval for alteraƟon of land adjacent to the fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area shall not occur prior to consultaƟon with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for animal species, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for plant species, and other appropriate federal or state agencies. 3. Bald eagle habitat is subject to the Federal Bald and Golden Eagle ProtecƟon Act. Washington State bald eagle protecƟon rules (WAC 232-12-292) shall not be required as long as bald eagles are not listed as a state endangered or threatened species. B. Anadromous Fish. 1. All acƟviƟes, uses, and alteraƟons proposed to be located in water bodies used by anadromous fish or in areas that affect such water bodies shall give special consideraƟon to the preservaƟon and enhancement of anadromous fish habitat, including, but not limited to, adhering to the following standards: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 263/352 a. AcƟviƟes shall be Ɵmed to occur only during the allowable work window as designated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for the applicable species; b. An alternaƟve alignment or locaƟon for the acƟvity is not feasible; c. The acƟvity is designed so that it will not degrade the funcƟons or values of the fish habitat or other criƟcal areas; d. Shoreline erosion control measures shall be designed to use bioengineering methods or soŌ armoring techniques, according to an approved criƟcal areas report; and e. Any impacts to the funcƟons or values of the fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon area are miƟgated in accordance with an approved criƟcal areas report. 2. Anadromous fish bearing streams: streams exisƟng in whole or in part within the city of Edmonds in which anadromous fish are known to occur. As of 2025, Edmonds fish bearing streams are known to include Willow Creek, Shellabarger Creek, Shell Creek, Hindley Creek, Northstream Creek, Perrinville Creek, and Lunds Gulch Creek. 3. Structures that prevent the migraƟon of salmonids shall not be allowed in the porƟon of water bodies currently or historically used by anadromous fish. Fish bypass faciliƟes shall be provided that allow the upstream migraƟon of adult fish and shall prevent fry and juveniles migraƟng downstream from being trapped or harmed. 4. Fills, when authorized, shall not adversely impact anadromous fish or their habitat or shall miƟgate any unavoidable impacts and shall only be allowed for a water-dependent use. C. Streams. No alteraƟon to a stream shall be permiƩed unless consistent with the provisions of this chapter and the specific standards for development outlined below. 1. Stream Crossings. Stream crossings may be allowed only if all reasonable construcƟon techniques and best management pracƟces are used to avoid disturbance to the stream bed or bank. Upon compleƟon of construcƟon, the area affected shall be restored to an appropriate grade, replanted with naƟve species and/ or otherwise protected according to a stream miƟgaƟon and riparian zone enhancement plan approved by the director, and maintained and monitored per the requirements of this chapter and provide for riparian zone enhancement in accordance with the requirements of subsecƟon (D)(2) of this secƟon. In addiƟon, the applicant must demonstrate that best management pracƟces will be used during construcƟon; provided that: a. Fisheries protecƟon is maintained, including no interference with fish migraƟon or spawning; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 264/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 83 of 86 b. All crossings shall be constructed during summer low flow periods and shall be Ɵmed to avoid stream disturbance during periods when stream use is criƟcal to salmonids; c. Crossings shall not occur over salmonid spawning areas unless no other possible crossing site exists; d. Crossings and culverted porƟons of the stream shall be minimized to the extent feasible and serve mulƟple purposes and mulƟple lots whenever possible; e. Roads may cross streams only on previously approved rights-of-way, provided no pracƟcal alternaƟve exists and adequate provision is made to protect and/or enhance the stream through appropriate miƟgaƟon. Roads shall be designed and located to conform to topography, and maintained to prevent erosion and restricƟon of the natural movement of ground water as it affects the stream; f. Roads and uƟliƟes shall be designed in conjuncƟon to minimize the area of disturbance to the stream; g. Roads shall be constructed so as to minimize adverse impacts on the hydrologic quality of the stream or associated habitat to a degree acceptable to the city; h. An alternaƟve alignment or locaƟon with less impact is not feasible; and i. The crossing will be designed as near as perpendicular with the water body as possible. 2. Stormwater Management FaciliƟes. Stormwater management faciliƟes, limited to ouƞalls, pipes and conveyance systems, stormwater dispersion ouƞalls and bioswales, may be allowed within riparian management zone; provided, that: a. No other locaƟon is feasible; b. Pipes and conveyance faciliƟes will be in the outer 25 percent of the riparian management zone; c. Stormwater dispersion ouƞalls, bioswales, and bioretenƟon faciliƟes may be allowed anywhere within riparian management zones; d. Such faciliƟes are designed consistent with requirements of Chapter 18.30 ECDC; and e. The locaƟon and funcƟon of such faciliƟes will not degrade the funcƟons or values of the stream or riparian management zone. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 265/352 D. Riparian Management Zones (RMZ). 1. Standard RMZ Width by Water Type. Water Type Standard Width (in feet) Type F 200’ Type N 100’ 2. Reduced RMZ Widths. Standard RMZ widths for Type F waters may be reduced by no more than 25 percent of the required width pursuant to (D)(1) of this subsecƟon, and concomitant to development and implementaƟon of a riparian zone enhancement plan approved by the director. Reduced widths shall only be approved by the director if a riparian zone enhancement plan conclusively demonstrates that enhancement of the reduced area will not degrade the quanƟtaƟve and qualitaƟve funcƟons and values of the criƟcal area in terms of fish and stream protecƟon and the provision of wildlife habitat. Riparian zone enhancement plans must meet the following specific requirements: a. The plan is proposed as part of riparian zone reducƟon and provides evidence that funcƟons and values in terms of stream and wildlife protecƟons will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementaƟon for those streams where exisƟng vegetaƟon is generally intact and providing the funcƟons and values of a riparian zone; or ii. Increased through plan implementaƟon for those streams where exisƟng buffer vegetaƟon is inadequate to protect the funcƟons and values of the stream; b. The plan documents exisƟng naƟve plant densiƟes and provides for increases in naƟve plant densiƟes in RMZ to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success for a minimum of five years in accordance with ECDC 23.10.260; and Item 10.2 Packet pg. 266/352 Title 23 Environmentally CriƟcal Areas | Edmonds Community Development Code Page 85 of 86 d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards for assessing increases in RMZ funcƟoning as related to: i. Bank stability; ii. Shade; iii. PolluƟon removal; iv. ContribuƟons to detrital nutrients; and v. Recruitment of large woody debris. 3. City DiscreƟon in ProtecƟon, Enhancement and PreservaƟon of Riparian Zones. The city of Edmonds is unique within the state of Washington as a built-out community with streams that have been incorporated within, and oŌen located immediately adjacent to, residenƟal development. The director is allowed full discreƟon to condiƟon proposals for development on parcels containing, adjacent to, or potenƟally impacƟng streams consistent with the purposes and objecƟves of this chapter. CondiƟons on development shall be required to enhance streams and riparian management zones as fish and wildlife habitat conservaƟon areas to provide increased protecƟon of anadromous fisheries and potenƟal fish habitat in accordance with best available science and the recommendaƟons of an approved criƟcal areas report and may include: a. Removal of stream bank armoring; b. In-stream habitat modificaƟon; c. NaƟve planƟng; d. RelocaƟon of stream channel porƟons to create conƟguous riparian corridors or wildlife habitat; e. PlanƟng of stream bank naƟve vegetaƟon to increase stream shading; f. Removal and control of nonnaƟve, invasive weed species; g. Requiring addiƟonal building setbacks or modified buffers; and h. LimiƟng or reducing the types or densiƟes of parƟcular uses. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 267/352 The right of discreƟon in provisioning development in regard to streams is maintained in order to provide for the creaƟon of enhanced condiƟons over those currently exisƟng around streams in the city of Edmonds. In all instances where an applicant cannot demonstrate that Riparian Management Zone widths as provided in subsecƟon (D)(1) of this secƟon can be accommodated by project development, the applicant shall be required to submit a project plan or a stream miƟgaƟon and riparian management zone enhancement plan as part of a criƟcal areas report indicaƟng that post- project site condiƟons will provide equivalent or greater protecƟon of stream funcƟons and fish habitat over a riparian management zone and exisƟng site condiƟons. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 268/352 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RECODIFYING AND MAKING MINOR UPDATES TO THE CITY’S TREE CODE. WHEREAS, the city’s critical areas ordinance is being consolidated in chapter 23.10 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, as part of the periodic update; and WHEREAS, the city’s tree related regulations had been codified in chapter 23.10; and WHEREAS, that chapter is being repealed as part of the periodic update to the critical areas ordinance; and WHEREAS, the city would like to re-codify its tree related regulations and make other minor changes, like updating the definition of “hazard tree” and references to other code provisions; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Re-codification of tree code. A new chapter 17.130 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Tree Related Regulations,” is hereby adopted to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative function of the city council, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN Item 10.2 Packet pg. 269/352 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 270/352 3 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RECODIFYING AND MAKING MINOR UPDATES TO THE CITY’S TREE CODE. . The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2025. DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 271/352 Page 1 of 22 Chapter 23.10 TREE RELATED REGULATIONS Sections: 17.13023.10.000 Intent and purpose. 17.13023.10.010 Administration authority. 17.13023.10.020 Definitions. 17.13023.10.030 Permits. 17.13023.10.040 Exemptions. 17.13023.10.050 Tree removal prohibited. 17.13023.10.060 Tree retention associated with development activity. 17.13023.10.070 Tree protection measures during development. 17.13023.10.080 Tree replacement. 17.13023.10.085 Repealed. 17.13023.10.090 Bonding. 17.13023.10.100 Violation, enforcement and penalties. 17.13023.10.110 Liability. 17.13023.10.000 Intent and purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a process and standards to provide for the evaluation, protection, enhancement, preservation, replacement, and proper maintenance of significant trees. This includes the following: A. Implement the goals and objectives of the city’s urban forest management plan; B. Implement the goals and objectives of the city’s comprehensive plan; C. Implement the goals and objectives of the city’s climate action plan; D. Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat; E. To promote the public health, safety, biodiversity, environmental health and general welfare of the residents of Edmonds, provide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and preserve the Item 10.2 Packet pg. 272/352 Page 2 of 22 physical and aesthetic character of the city through the prevention of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover on improved or partially improved property; F. Preserve the maximum number of trees that are determined to be appropriate for preservation in the Edmonds urban environment and that have a reasonable chance of long- term survival; G. Promote site planning, building, and development practices that work to avoid removal or destruction of trees and vegetation, that avoid unnecessary disturbance to the city’s natural vegetation, and that provide landscaping to buffer the effects of built and paved areas; H. Encourage tree retention efforts by providing design flexibility with respect to certain development requirements; I. Retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner and replanting when trees are removed during development; J. Promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the city’s natural topographic and vegetation features while recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; and K. Mitigate the environmental and aesthetic consequences of tree removal in land development through on-site and off-site tree replacement to help achieve a goal of no net loss of tree canopy coverage throughout the city of Edmonds, while providing applicants with optional procedural mechanisms to ensure that the mitigation is proportional to the impact. L. Promote net ecological gain on a citywide basis over a long period of time. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.010 Administration authority. The planning and development director (“director”) or a designee shall have the authority and responsibility to administer and enforce all provisions of this chapter. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 273/352 Page 3 of 22 Ord. 4299 § 65 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.020 Definitions. “Caliper” means the American Association of Nurserymen standard for trunk measurement of nursery stock. Caliper of the trunk shall be the trunk diameter measured six inches above the ground for up to and including four-inch caliper size and 12 inches above the ground for larger sizes. “Canopy” means the leaves and branches of a tree from the lowest branch on the trunk to the top. “Critical root zone” means the area surrounding a tree at a distance from the trunk, which is equal to one foot for every one inch of tree DSH. “Developable site” means the gross site area of a lot minus critical areas and buffers. “Diameter at standard height (DSH)” means the diameter or thickness of a tree trunk measured at four and one-half feet from the ground. References to DBH shall be understood as synonymous with “diameter at standard height (DSH).” “Dripline” means the distance from the tree trunk that is equal to the furthest extent of the tree’s crown. “Feasible” means, for the purpose of this chapter, the project applicant’s primary intended legal use may be achieved. In cases where this chapter requires certain actions unless they are infeasible, the burden of proving infeasibility is placed on the applicant. “Hazard tree” means a tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective and considered a threat to life or public safety, posing a high or extreme risk using Level 2 ISA Tree Risk Assessment as determined by a qualified professionalISA-certified arborist. “Grove” means a group of three or more significant trees with overlapping or touching crowns. “Improved lot” means a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located, and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to city subdivision regulations and zoning code. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 274/352 Page 4 of 22 “Improvement” means and includes, but is not limited to, any building, structure, storm drainage facilities, road, driveway, utility and pedestrian facilities, or other object constituting a physical addition to real property. “Limits of disturbance” means the boundary between the area of minimum protection around a tree and the allowable site disturbance. Native Tree. Native trees are described in the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) as being well suited to our climate and tending to provide good habitat for local wildlife. The UFMP contains a partial list of species that are considered native trees. “Net ecological gain” means a standard for a development project, policy, plan, or activity in which the impacts on the ecological integrity caused by the development are outweighed by measures taken consistent with the new mitigation hierarchy to avoid and minimize the impacts, undertake site restoration, and compensate for any remaining impacts in an amount sufficient for the gain to exceed the loss over a period of 20 years. “Nuisance tree” means a tree that is causing significant physical damage to a private or public structure and/or infrastructure, including but not limited to: sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities, driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof. “Protected tree” means a tree identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention and protection plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction. “Pruning” means the proper removal of roots or branches of a tree according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards. “Qualified professional” means an individual with relevant education and training in arboriculture or urban forestry, having two or more of the following credentials: 1. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist; 2. Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) as established by the ISA TRAQ (or equivalent); 3. American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered Consulting Arborist; 4. Society of American Foresters (SAF) Certified Forester for Forest Management Plans. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 275/352 Page 5 of 22 For tree retention associated with a development permit, a qualified professional must have, in addition to the above credentials, a minimum of three years’ experience working directly with the protection of trees during construction and have experience with the likelihood of tree survival after construction. A qualified professional must also be able to prescribe appropriate measures for the preservation of trees during land development. “Significant tree” means a tree that is at least six inches in diameter at standard height (DSH) as measured at four and one-half feet from the ground. For trees with multiple leaders at four and one-half feet height, the DSH shall be the combined cumulative total of branches greater than six inches diameter at four and one-half feet above the average grade. If a tree has been removed and only the stump remains that is below four and one-half feet tall, the size of the tree shall be the diameter of the top of the stump. “Specimen tree” means a tree of exceptional size or form for its species or rarity as determined by the city’s qualified professional. “Tree” means a self-supporting woody plant characterized by one main trunk or, for certain species, multiple trunks, that is recognized as a tree in the nursery and arboricultural industries. “Tree fund” refers to the fund created by Chapter 3.95 ECC. “Tree removal” means the direct or indirect removal of a tree(s) or vegetation through actions including, but not limited to: clearing, cutting, girdling, topping, or causing irreversible damage to roots or stems; destroying the structural integrity of trees through improper pruning, unless pruning back to the point where the tree has been previously topped; poisoning; filling, excavating, grading, or trenching within the dripline that results in the loss of more than 20 percent of the tree’s root system; or the removal through any of these processes of greater than 50 percent of the live crown of the tree. “Tree topping” means the significant cutting back of the leader stem or major branches, resulting in severely altering the growth potential of a tree. This definition does not apply when the sole purpose is to create a snag or snags for wildlife habitat. “Viable tree” means a significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is windfirm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, and is a species that is suitable for its location. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 276/352 Page 6 of 22 17.13023.10.030 Permits. A. Applicability. No person shall remove, excessively prune, or top any significant tree except as provided by this chapter. B. Tree removal not specifically exempted in ECDC 17.13023.10.040 will be processed as a Type I permit. C. Procedural Exemption. Tree removal associated with building permit, subdivision, or other land use approval will be reviewed with the associated project and will not require a separate tree removal permit. All clearing shall be consistent with and apply the standards established by this chapter. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.040 Exemptions. The following activities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter and do not require a permit: A. Removal of trees on an improved single-family lot, except for: 1. That portion of the property containing a critical area or its associated buffer. Critical area in this context does not include erosion hazards with slopes less than 25 percent. B. Removal of nonsignificant trees that are not protected by any other means. C. Removal of trees by the public works department, parks department, fire department and/or franchised utilities for one of the following purposes: 1. Installation and maintenance of public utilities or motorized or nonmotorized streets or paths. 2. In response to situations involving danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. Franchised utilities shall provide notification to the city prior to tree maintenance or removal. A separate right-of-way permit may be required. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 277/352 Page 7 of 22 D. Removal and maintenance of trees within city of Edmonds’ parks at the direction of the parks department. E. Routine landscaping and maintenance of vegetation, such as pruning and planting, removal of invasive/exotic species, management of brush and seedling trees. Pruning should comply with ANSI A300 (Part 1 – 2017), Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management – Standard Practices, to maintain long term health. This includes maintenance of trees and vegetation required to be retained or planted under the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Pruning existing trees back to the point where they have been previously topped is considered maintenance for these trees alone, provided pruning will be undertaken only to the extent necessary for public safety or tree health. F. Trees that do not meet the exemptions in subsections (A) through (E) of this section may be removed with supporting documentation: 1. Nuisance tree with documentation of the damage and any tree work that has been attempted to rectify the nuisance, and/or a statement from the applicant’s qualified professional explaining why no arboricultural practices can safely rectify the nuisance. 2. Hazard tree located outside a critical area with a tree risk assessment prepared by the applicant’s qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. 3. Hazard tree removal in a critical area or critical area buffers consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.40.220(C)(8)23.10.070(D)(7)(d). [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.050 Tree removal prohibited. A. Protected Trees. Removal of protected trees is prohibited, except as provided for in ECDC 17.13023.10.040(F), hazard and nuisance trees, or through an approved modification of a landscape plan. B. Vacant Lots. Removal of trees from a vacant lot prior to a project development is prohibited except as provided for in ECDC 17.13023.10.040(F), hazard and nuisance trees. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 278/352 Page 8 of 22 C. Demolition of Structures. Tree removal shall be prohibited as part of a permitted demolition except as required to reasonably conduct demolition activities subject to approval of the director. Tree replacement shall be required for removed trees. D. In critical areas, critical area buffers, and in all native growth protection easements, tree removal is prohibited except as allowed per Chapters 23.410 through 23.90 ECDC. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.060 Tree retention associated with development activity. A. Introduction. The city’s objective is to retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing a feasible development proposal to move forward in a timely manner. To that end, the city requires approval of a tree retention and protection plan in conjunction with the following applications: 1. Short subdivision; 2. Subdivision; 3. New multifamily development; 4. New single-family development on a vacant lot or a demolition and replacement of a single-family house; and 5. Any tree removal on developed sites not exempted by ECDC 23.10.040.17.130.040 In order to make better decisions about tree retention, particularly during all stages of development, tree retention and protection plans will require specific information about the existing trees before removal is allowed. Specific tree retention and protection plan review standards provided in this section establish tree retention priorities, incentives, and variations to development standards in order to facilitate preservation of viable trees. B. Tree Retention and Protection Plan. 1. An applicant for a development identified in subsection (A) of this section must submit a tree retention and protection plan that complies with this section. A qualified professional Item 10.2 Packet pg. 279/352 Page 9 of 22 may be required to prepare certain components of a tree retention and protection plan at the applicant’s expense. 2. Tree Retention and Protection Plan Components. The tree retention and protection plan shall contain the following information, unless waived by the director: a. A tree inventory containing the following: i. A number system of all existing significant trees on the subject property (with corresponding tags on trees); ii. Size (DSH) and estimated tree crown diameter; iii. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained); iv. Brief general health or condition rating of trees (i.e., poor, fair, good, excellent, etc.); v. Tree type or species. b. A site plan depicting the following: i. Location of all proposed improvements, including building footprint, access, utilities, applicable setbacks, critical areas, buffers, and required landscaped areas clearly identified. If a short subdivision or subdivision is being proposed and the location of all proposed improvements has not yet been established, a phased tree retention and protection plan review is required as described in subsection (3)(a) of this section; ii. Accurate location of significant trees on the subject property and adjacent properties where the canopy and/or critical root zone of adjacent significant trees extend onto the subject property (surveyed locations may be required); iii. Trees labeled corresponding to the tree inventory numbering system; iv. Location of tree protection measures; v. Indicate limits of disturbance drawn to scale around all trees potentially impacted by site disturbances resulting from grading, demolition, or construction activities; Item 10.2 Packet pg. 280/352 Page 10 of 22 vi. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained) noted by an “X” or by ghosting out; vii. Proposed locations of any required replacement trees as outlined in ECDC 17.13023.10.080 and trees required to be planted in accordance with subsection (C)(5) of this section. Where replacement trees are proposed to be planted at a different location than the project site, a description of the alternate site and written approval from the property owner must be provided. c. An arborist report containing the following: i. A complete description of each tree’s health, condition, and viability; ii. A description of the method(s) used to determine the limits of disturbance (i.e., critical root zone, root plate diameter, or a case-by-case basis description for individual trees); iii. Any special instructions specifically outlining any work proposed within the limits of the disturbance protection area (i.e., hand-digging, tunneling, root pruning, any grade changes, clearing, monitoring, and aftercare); iv. For trees not viable for retention, a description of the reason(s) for removal based on poor health, high risk of failure due to structure, defects, unavoidable isolation (windfirmness), or unsuitability of species, etc., and for which no reasonable alternative action is possible must be given (pruning, cabling, etc.); v. Description of the impact of necessary tree removal to the remaining trees, including those in a grove; 3. Additional Tree Retention and Protection Plan Standards for Short Subdivisions and Subdivisions. a. Phased Review. i. If during the short subdivision or subdivision review process the location of all proposed improvements, including the building footprint, utilities, and access, have not yet been established, the applicant may submit a tree retention and protection plan that addresses the current phase of development and limits removal to the impacted areas. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 281/352 Page 11 of 22 ii. A new tree retention and protection plan shall be required at each subsequent phase of the project as more information about the location of the proposed improvements is known subject to all of the requirements in this section. C. Tree Retention Requirements. 1. General Tree Retention Requirements. Significant trees on lots proposed for development or redevelopment, except as substituted under subsection (F)(3) of this section, shall be retained as follows: Table 23.1017.130.060.C. Tree Retention Requirements for Proposed Development Development Retention Required New single- family, short subdivision, or subdivision 30% of all significant trees in the developable site Multifamily development, unit lot short subdivision, or unit lot subdivision 25% of all significant trees in the developable site 2. Trees that are located within native growth protection areas, critical areas and their associated buffers, or that have otherwise been designated for protection shall not be removed except as provided for in ECDC 17.13023.10.040(E), hazard and nuisance trees, and ECDC 23.10.070(D)(7)(d)23.40.220(C)(8), critical area hazard tree. 3. The director may require the retention of additional trees to meet the stated purpose and intent of this chapter, as required by the critical area regulations (Chapters 23.140 through 23.90 ECDC), or the shoreline master program (ECDC Title 24) or as site-specific conditions demand using SEPA substantive authority. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 282/352 Page 12 of 22 4. In addition to the tree retention requirements in subsection (C)(1) of this section, every significant tree that is removed under this chapter must be replaced consistent with the requirements of ECDC 17.13023.10.080. 5. For developing properties identified in subsection (A) of this section that have fewer than three significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that will result in the site having at least three trees, which will be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area. D. Priority of Tree Retention Requirements. Significant trees to be retained should be retained in the following order of priority: 1. Priority One. a. Specimen trees; b. Significant trees which form a continuous canopy; c. Significant trees on slope greater than 15 percent; d. Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and e. Significant trees over 60 feet in height or greater than 18 inches DSH. 2. Priority Two. a. Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; b. Trees within the required yard setbacks or around the perimeter; c. Trees that have a screening function or provide relief from glare, blight, or commercial development; d. Other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and e. Other significant nonnative trees. 3. Priority Three. Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained except where adjacent to open space, wetlands or creek buffers. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 283/352 Page 13 of 22 E. In considering trees for retention, applicants and the city shall avoid, to the extent known, the selection of trees that are mature and may be a fall hazard, including trees adjacent to utility corridors where falling trees may cause power outages or other damage. F. Tree Retention Procedures. 1. If a revised improvement placement would result in the retention of more and/or higher priority trees, the tree retention and protection plan should be adjusted to: a. Maximize the retention of higher priority trees; and b. Satisfy the retention requirement in subsection (C) of this section. 2. This adjustment in subsection (F)(1) of this section must be done unless the applicant can demonstrate that actual compliance with subsection (C) of this section would make the proposed development infeasible. In documenting infeasibility, applicants of subdivision and short subdivision must consider implementing conservation subdivision design as provided for in ECDC 20.75.048. 3. Once the location of on-site improvements has been established through city review and applicant revision of the tree retention and protection plan, existing priority one trees not impacted by the installation of said improvements must be retained at least to the number of trees required by subsection (C) of this section, except for hazard trees and nuisance trees. 4. If there are not enough existing trees outside of the improved areas of the site to satisfy subsection (C) of this section through retention alone, the applicant shall be required to make up the deficiency as follows: a. Planting a number of new trees on site in accordance with ECDC 17.13023.10.080 that would be sufficient, in combination with the number of trees actually retained, to satisfy subsection (C) of this section; and b. If it is not feasible for planting under this subsection, to achieve the required number of trees, the applicant shall make a fee-in-lieu payment of $2,500 for every tree not planted pursuant to this subsection. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 284/352 Page 14 of 22 G. If a development retains at least 50 percent of the significant trees on a site, the fee-in-lieu provisions of ECDC 17.13023.10.080(E) do not apply. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.070 Tree protection measures during development. Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved in accordance with ECDC 17.13023.10.060(B) shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate city staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows: 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines. B. Placing Materials Near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 285/352 Page 15 of 22 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state, at a minimum, “Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited,” and provide the city phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. Limit the time period that the critical root zone is covered by mulch, plywood, steel plates or similar materials, or by light soils, to protect the tree’s critical root zone. 7. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand-excavating a two-foot-deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 286/352 Page 16 of 22 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director’s authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half of the area of the tree’s critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree’s survival. 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree’s critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree’s survival and to minimize the potential for root-induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree’s survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. F. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 287/352 Page 17 of 22 17.13023.10.080 Tree replacement. A. Replacement Required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by this chapter and/or for tree removal associated with the development types identified in ECDC 17.13023.10.060(A). Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows; provided, that these replacement ratios shall not apply if the applicant opts to have its tree replacement requirement calculated through an individualized determination pursuant to subsection (F) of this section: 1. For each significant tree between six inches and 10 inches DSH removed, one replacement tree is required. 2. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 14 inches in DSH removed, two replacement trees are required. 3. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches and less the 24 inches in DSH removed, three replacement trees are required. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: 1. The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor, for reasons not attributable to the development. 2. The tree is proposed to be relocated to another suitable planting site; provided, that relocation complies with the standards in this section. C. Prior to any tree removal, the applicant shall demonstrate through a tree protection and replacement plan, critical area mitigation plan, or other plans acceptable to the director that tree replacement will meet the minimum standards of this section. D. Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. One-and-one-half-inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller-sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the Item 10.2 Packet pg. 288/352 Page 18 of 22 purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. E. Tree Replacement Fee-In-Lieu. After providing clear documentation to planning and development that all replacement options have been considered and are infeasible, including arborist reports as necessary, the developer shall pay a fee-in-lieu for each replacement tree required but not replaced. 1. The amount of the fee shall be $2,500 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the city’s tree fund. 2. The fee shall be paid to the city prior to the issuance of a tree removal permit or associated development permit. 3. For each significant tree greater than 24 inches in DSH removed, a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the city’s qualified professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required; provided, that no appraisal shall be required if the applicant’s tree removal will necessitate the maximum fee-in-lieu, as specified in subsection (E)(4) of this section, without the appraisal. 4. In no case shall the fee-in-lieu payments required by this subsection exceed $4.00 per square foot of lot area. F. Individualized Determination. An applicant who believes that the replacement ratios of subsection (A) of this section are disproportionate to the impact of its tree removal may opt to calculate an alternative replacement ratio using an individualized determination of impact and impact mitigation as provided in this subsection. 1. To calculate an alternative replacement ratio under this subsection, the applicant must pay a supplemental fee as set forth in the city’s fee schedule and retain a qualified professional to perform the replacement calculation. The qualified professional shall use best available science to quantify the environmental value of the trees that will be removed as a direct result of the development. In doing so, the qualified professional shall evaluate, at least, the following factors in its calculation: Item 10.2 Packet pg. 289/352 Page 19 of 22 a. Carbon sequestration; b. Air quality; c. Stormwater mitigation; d. Shade and temperature regulation; e. Biodiversity support; f. Erosion control. Once the environmental value of the trees to be removed has been calculated, the qualified professional shall develop an on-site tree replacement plan that, using the same factors, is likely, within 20 years of planting, to yield the same environmental value of the trees being removed. The replacement plan shall specify the number, species, size at planting, and location of each tree to be replaced pursuant to the plan. If the qualified professional determines that it is not feasible to yield the same environmental value of the trees being removed within 20 years, it shall calculate the replacement value that would be achieved in 20 years and propose a fee-in-lieu payment that allows the city to achieve the remaining value off site; provided, that the plan must show that at least 50 percent of the environmental value would be replaced on site in 20 years. 2. The individualized determination of impact and impact mitigation shall undergo peer review by a qualified professional. If the peer review results in a more burdensome replacement plan, the city will condition the permit on the peer-reviewed replacement plan, giving the applicant an opportunity to appeal the more burdensome plan to the hearing examiner. G. Removal of Protected Trees. If it becomes necessary to remove a protected tree, the replacement ratio for replacement of the protected tree shall be governed by an individualized determination as provided in subsection (F) of this section. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4299 § 66 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.085 Protected trees – Notice on title. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 290/352 Page 20 of 22 Repealed by Ord. 4410. 17.13023.10.090 Bonding. A. The director may require a performance bond for tree replacement and site restoration to ensure the planting of replacement trees, and/or compliance with other landscaping requirements as identified on the approved site plans. B. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the estimated cost of implementation of the tree replacement and/or site restoration including trees, irrigation and labor. C. A five-year maintenance bond shall be required after the installation of required site improvements and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or finalization of permit and following required landscape installation and/or tree replacement. The maintenance bond shall be in place to ensure adequate maintenance and protection of replaced trees and site improvements. The maintenance bond shall be for an amount of 50 percent of the performance bond in subsection (B) of this section. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.100 Violation, enforcement and penalties. A. Noncompliance with any section of this chapter constitutes a violation of this code. B. A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as provided in Chapter 5.50 ECC. C. Penalties. 1. Aiding or Abetting. Any person who, through an act of commission or omission, procures, aids or abets in the violation shall be considered to have committed a violation for the purposes of the penalty. All persons who have been found to commit a violation under this chapter shall be responsible for an equal share of any penalties imposed under subsection (C)(2) of this section. 2. Civil Penalties. Any person violating any provisions of this chapter may be subject to civil penalties in addition to any criminal penalties. Pursuant to Chapter 64.12 RCW, the city may Item 10.2 Packet pg. 291/352 Page 21 of 22 be entitled to triple the amount of civil damages claimed or assessed. The extent of the penalty shall be determined according to one or more of the following: a. An amount reasonably determined by the director to be equivalent to the costs estimated by the city to investigate and administer the infraction; b. The economic benefit that the violator derives from the violation (as measured by the greater of the resulting increase in market value of the property or the value received by the violator or savings of construction costs realized by the violator performing any act in violation of this chapter); c. Removal of existing 12-inch diameter or larger trees in violation of this chapter will require an appraisal of the tree value by the city’s qualified professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the person(s) who removed existing trees in violation of this chapter; d. Penalty for illegal removal of trees shall be $1,500 per tree less than 12 inches in diameter and the appraised value of trees 12 inches or more in diameter. Penalties shall be paid into the city tree fund. If diameter of removed tree is unknown, determination of the diameter size shall be made by the city arborist by comparing size of stump and species to similar trees in similar growing conditions; e. The cost of replacing and replanting the trees and restoring the disturbed area according to a specific plan approved by the city. Violators of this chapter or of a permit issued thereunder shall be responsible for restoring unlawfully damaged areas in conformance with a plan, approved by the director, that provides for repair of any environmental and property damage, and restoration of the site; and which results in a site condition that, to the greatest extent practical, is equivalent to the site condition that would have existed in the absence of the violation(s); f. If illegal tree topping has occurred, the property owner shall be required to have a certified arborist develop and implement a five-year pruning schedule in addition to monetary fines and/or required tree replacement. 3. Civil penalties under this section shall be imposed pursuant to Chapter 20.110 ECDC, Civil Violation – Enforcement Procedure. The notice shall order the acts constituting the Item 10.2 Packet pg. 292/352 Page 22 of 22 violation to cease and desist, or, in appropriate cases, require necessary corrective action within a specific time, or any other remedy set forth within the city code or state law. 4. Any fiscal penalty recovered under this section shall be deposited in the city’s tree fund as established in Chapter 3.95 ECC. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 17.13023.10.110 Liability. A. Liability for any adverse impacts, damages or injury resulting from work performed in accordance with any permit issued by the city under ECDC 17.13023.10.030 shall be the sole responsibility of the permit applicant and/or owner of the property or site for which the permit was issued, and shall not be the responsibility of the city of Edmonds. Issuance by the city of any permit under this chapter shall not be construed as an assumption of any risk or liability by the city of Edmonds, nor as a warranty or guarantee that the work authorized by the permit will have no adverse impact or will cause no damages or injury to any person or property. B. Issuance by the city of a permit under ECDC 17.13023.10.030 and/or compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with any permit conditions therein shall not relieve an applicant and/or property owner from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for any adverse impacts, injury or damage to persons or property resulting from the work authorized by any permit issued under this chapter. C. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to relieve any property owner within the city limits from the duties imposed under Chapter 9.25 ECC to keep any tree or vegetation upon his property or under his control in such condition as to prevent it from constituting a hazard or a nuisance. D. The amount of any security required as part of any land development permit with which tree removal is associated shall not serve as a gauge or limit to the compensation that may be owed by a property owner as a result of injury or damages to persons or property resulting from any tree removal authorized under this chapter. [Ord. 4410 § 1 (Exh. A), 2025; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 293/352 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING VARIOUS MINOR CRITCAL AREAS RELATED UPDATES TO THE EDMONDS CITY CODE AND THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, NONE OF WHICH CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIVE POLICY CHANGES WHEREAS, the city council adopted Ordinance 4295 to create a streamlined process for updating the city code; and WHEREAS, the streamlined process is intended for code amendments that are minor, noncontroversial, and lacking any substantive policy changes that would require more in depth consideration; and WHEREAS, the amendments adopted by this ordinance have been deemed appropriate for this new streamlined process in that no councilmember requested that any of these amendments be removed from the streamlined process; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The definitions of “creek” and “wetlands” in ECDC 18.30.010, entitled “Definitions,” are hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 2. Subsection A.8, of Section 18.40.020 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “Prohibited rockeries,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Item 10.2 Packet pg. 294/352 Section 3. Subsection G of Section 19.00.025 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “International Building Code section amendments.,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 4. The definition of “steep slope,” in Section 19.10.020 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Definitions,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 5. Subsections H.1 and H.7 of Section 19.10.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Minimum required application submittals,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 6. Subsection C.1 of Section 24.20.050 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Shoreline use element,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 7. Subsection D.4 of Section 24.30.060 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Shoreline residential,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 8. Subsection B of Section 24.40.020 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled “Critical areas,” is hereby amended to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is Item 10.2 Packet pg. 295/352 attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strikethrough). Section 9. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative function of the city council, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 296/352 4 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING VARIOUS MINOR CRITCAL AREAS RELATED UPDATES TO THE EDMONDS CITY CODE AND THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, NONE OF WHICH CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIVE POLICY CHANGES . The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2025. DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 297/352 Critical Areas Code Minor Amendments 1 | P a g e Code Reference Status of Original Code 18.30.010 Definitions “Creek” is synonymous with “streams,” which is defined in ECDC 23.40.00523.10.030. 18.30.010 Definitions “Wetlands” means as defined in ECDC 23.40.00523.10.300(A). 18.40.020 Prohibited rockeries. 8. Rockeries are prohibited in designated geologically hazardous areas other than erosion hazard areas as defined in Chapter 23.80 ECDC 23.10.610 ECDC and within the designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area of North Edmonds unless as provided by ECDC 19.10.070(E). 19.00.025 International Building Code section amendments. G. Section 105.2, Work Exempt From Permit, is replaced as follows: Permits shall not be required for the following unless required by the provisions of ECDC Title 23 or Chapter 19.10 ECDC: 1. Building (general): … (d) Retaining walls 4 feet (1,219 mm) in height or less measured vertically from the finished grade at the exposed toe of the retaining wall to the highest point in the wall, unless: i. Supporting a surcharge; or ii. Impounding Class I, II, III-A liquids; or iii. Subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.150 ECDC or Chapter 23.80 ECDC. … (l) Grading less than fifty (50) cubic yards (placed, removed or moved within any 365-day period) unless subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.150 ECDC or Chapter 23.80 ECDC. 19.10.020 Definitions. “Steep slope” shall be defined and calculated pursuant to Chapter ECDC 23.8023.10.610 ECDC. 19.10.030 Minimum required application submittals. H. Included in the permit submittal checklist shall be general and specific soils and geotechnical information, details or analysis required pursuant to IBC 1802. The applicant shall retain a geotechnical engineer to prepare a report and evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions on the site to include: 1. The geotechnical report shall be prepared in accordance with ECDC 23.80.05023.10.210 and ECDC 23.10.220 generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices, under the supervision of, and signed and stamped by, the geotechnical engineer. A geologist may be required to be part of the geotechnical consulting staff. The report shall reference the Landau Associates Summary Report (2007) as a technical document reviewed as part of the geologic analysis for the project and Item 10.2 Packet pg. 298/352 Critical Areas Code Minor Amendments 2 | P a g e Code Reference Status of Original Code discuss all items listed in the permit submittal checklist and shall make specific recommendations concerning development of the site. … 7. Geotechnical letter addressing the provisions of Chapter 23.80 23.10 ECDC. 24.20.050 Shoreline use element. C. Shoreline Use Policies. 1. “Environmentally critical areas” are to be protected and regulated consistent with the city’s environmental review and critical areas regulations contained in Chapters 20.15A and 23.140 through 23.90 ECDC, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020(C). 24.30.060 Shoreline residential. D. Management Policies. … 4. Steep slopes shall be protected per the requirements of Chapter 23.80 23.10 ECDC, the building code, and this SMP. 24.40.020 Critical areas. B. The city of Edmonds critical area ordinance, as codified in Chapters 23.140 through 23.90 ECDC (dated May 3, 2016, Ord. 4026 and as amended by Ord. 4106 and Ord. 4127), is herein adopted as a part of this program, except for the specific subsections list below in subsection (C) of this section. All references to the city of Edmonds critical area ordinance in this program Item 10.2 Packet pg. 299/352 From:Bob Danson To:Rosen, Mike; Tibbott, Neil; Eck, Chris; Chen, Will; Dotsch, Michelle; Olson, Vivian; Paine, Susan; Nand, Jenna Cc:Kelly Boswell; Billy Ward; Shipley, Brad; Clugston, Michael Subject:CARA Update – Importance of Retaining the No-UIC Provision to Protect the Deer Creek Source Aquifer Date:Thursday, December 11, 2025 9:16:36 AM Attachments:PFAS in Stormwater Article.pdf Good Morning Mayor Rosen, Council President Tibbot, and City Councilmembers, I am writing regarding the proposed last-minute change to the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) section of the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). Because the Deer Creek source aquifer is a drinking water source for Olympic View Water & Sewer District, I want to provide clear, fact-based information to help guide your decision. Public Comment Alignment Olympic View submitted written public comment in support of the CARA update with the understanding that the no-UIC provision presented at the public hearing was moving forward. Changing the ordinance after public testimony creates a misalignment with the record and weakens aquifer protection. The CARA section was originally drafted by your planning staff through their own research, reviewed by the Planning Board, and presented at the public hearing with a prohibition on UICs in the Deer Creek CARA. This no-UIC provision was supported by the Planning Board. It represented important progress toward aligning the code with Best Available Science and strengthening protection of a vulnerable drinking water source. It has now been changed due to concerns about stormwater infrastructure and legal questions related to land use. Not allowing UICs does not stop development; it simply requires development to be protective of the aquifer below. If development is desired, then the developer will need to build infrastructure that manages stormwater in a way that protects public health. This is consistent with the City’s legal authority and responsibility to protect its citizens and its drinking water resources. Revising or removing the no-UIC language at this stage would leave the City without a protective mechanism at a time when emerging science is showing heightened concern about stormwater infiltration and PFAS. PFAS Are Consistently Present in Urban Stormwater Recent peer-reviewed studies, including the 2025 MDPI article Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Urban Stormwater Runoff: Insights from a Roadside Rain Garden, see attached, document that PFAS are present in stormwater at high and consistent concentrations throughout the year. These contaminants originate from numerous Item 10.2 Packet pg. 300/352 unavoidable urban sources including roofing materials, vehicles, atmospheric deposition, household products, and fire-retardant materials. Across all sampling events, PFAS levels remained remarkably stable, demonstrating that PFAS are not sporadic contaminants, they are pervasive in stormwater. Infiltration Systems Do Not Remove PFAS The MDPI study also demonstrates that infiltration-based stormwater BMPs, including rain gardens, bioretention systems, and soil-based infiltration, remove essentially none of the PFAS present in stormwater. Observed reductions were between 0 and 1 percent, which falls within measurement uncertainty. Both short-chain and long-chain PFAS migrate easily through soils due to their chemical stability and extremely low sorption. This conclusion is reinforced by other studies examining PFAS mobility, vadose-zone transport, and failures of soil sorption to retain PFAS. Across the scientific literature, the pattern is clear: infiltrating stormwater is effectively the same as infiltrating PFAS. Once PFAS Enter an Aquifer, They Are Nearly Impossible to Remove PFAS are persistent, mobile, resistant to natural degradation, and extremely costly to remove from drinking water. Once introduced into a groundwater source, PFAS contamination becomes a long-term burden for water systems, ratepayers, and public health. Preventing contamination is the only reliable protection. This Is a Critical Areas Protection Issue The CARA section of the CAO is designed to protect sensitive groundwater resources using Best Available Science. It is not intended to resolve broader stormwater infrastructure limitations. BAS clearly shows: PFAS cannot be removed through infiltration practices, green stormwater infrastructure does not mitigate PFAS, soil does not attenuate PFAS, and UIC wells create a direct and unfiltered pathway into aquifers. For these reasons, the safest and most scientifically supported method of protecting the Deer Creek source aquifer is the straightforward one originally included in the draft: no UICs within the CARA or wellhead protection area. Growth Still Occurs — with Proper Stormwater Management The no-UIC provision does not prohibit development. It simply requires that stormwater be managed in a way that protects the aquifer. If development is proposed in the CARA, the City can require that the necessary conveyance and treatment infrastructure be built Item 10.2 Packet pg. 301/352 and funded by the developer. This ensures that development does not occur at the expense of a drinking water source. Conclusion and Request Given the strong and consistent scientific evidence regarding PFAS mobility and the inability of infiltration systems to remove these contaminants, retaining the no-UIC provision is the most responsible and protective approach for safeguarding this drinking water resource. I respectfully request that the Council retain the no-UIC provision exactly as presented by your planning staff and supported by the Planning Board. I am available to meet, provide PFAS sampling information, or further discuss groundwater protection considerations at any time. Please feel free to share this message with others involved in the CAO process. Thank you for your attention to this matter and for your commitment to protecting Edmonds’ drinking water resources. Best Regards, Bob Danson, General Manager Olympic View Water and Sewer District 8128 228th Street SW Edmonds, WA 98026-8449 NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic message is confidential and only for the use of the intended recipient(s); and contains confidential and/or privileged information belonging to Olympic View Water and Sewer District or its customers or consultants or vendors. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, disclosure or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the message and any attachments immediately. Email from this address is subject to public disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 302/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 303/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 304/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 305/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 306/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 307/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 308/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 309/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 310/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 311/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 312/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 313/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 314/352 From:John Brock To:Council; Rosen, Mike; Shipley, Brad Subject:Critical Areas Ordinance update public hearing Date:Tuesday, December 30, 2025 9:04:19 AM Public Comments for January 6th, 2026 My name is John Brock. I live in Woodway and serve on the board of the Edmonds Environmental Council. At the last City Council meeting, a thoughtful and productive discussion led to postponing the Critical Areas Ordinance update until this evening. This was the right decision. It corrects a flawed process in which substantive changes were introduced after the public hearing was closed, limiting meaningful public review. The City Attorney has stated that there is insufficient Best Available Science to justify prohibiting shallow UIC wells within the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area. That conclusion is incorrect. While it is true that residential stormwater BAS is limited, it does exist—and we have provided it. https://edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/critical-areas-best-available-science/ The available BAS from recent years consistently concludes that avoiding infiltration is currently the only viable approach for preventing PFAS contamination. The claim that such science does not exist reflects a lack of awareness, not a lack of evidence. The City is now pursuing a negotiated settlement contract to review existing BAS and provide a recommendation, a process expected to take three to six months. This scenario was explicitly anticipated by WAC 365-195-920 (“Criteria for addressing inadequate scientific information”), which clearly recommends adopting a precautionary or no-risk approach when scientific uncertainty exists. Continuing to allow shallow UIC wells in the CARA—even temporarily—runs directly counter to this guidance and violates both the spirit and the letter of the WAC. Council has the authority—and the responsibility—to correct this. I urge you to reject the proposed CAO language change. The CARA code presented at the November public hearing protects the aquifer and complies with the law. If a future study demonstrates that infiltration poses no risk of contamination, the CAO can be relaxed. But once an aquifer is contaminated, the damage is permanent. This story is still being written, and your decision will shape how it unfolds. What side of history do you want to be on? Thank you Item 10.2 Packet pg. 315/352 From:DIANNA MAISH To:Shipley, Brad Subject:Fwd: PFOS Resources Date:Saturday, December 27, 2025 11:28:04 AM You don't often get email from dmm98020@comcast.net. Learn why this is important ---------- Original Message ----------From: DIANNA MAISH <> To: "council@edmondswa.gov" <council@edmondswa.gov>,"mike.rosen@edmondswa.gov" <mike.rosen@edmondswa.gov> Date: 12/27/2025 8:12 AM PSTSubject: PFOS Resources Why are PFOS, the forever chemicals, a known threat to human health? Although the PFOS chemicals were developed shortly after WWII, the U.S. environmental agency was not created until the mid-seventies and these substances remained under the radar of federal regulation. However, the serious health impacts to animals and humans, created apublic demand to know more, why these problems devastated communities. The primary manufacturers have been 3M and DuPont, well financed corporations, who did not want federal interference despite knowing of thedangers to human and animal health. PFOS substances, of which there are many, accumulate in the body and have been proven to negatively impact children's ability to learn and cause deadly cancers in adults. Resources that provide understanding of the impacts are: the film, "DarkWaters" (available on YouTube, Netflix) which is based on Robert Bilott's book, "Exposure" and the 2025, "They Poisoned the World" by Mariah Blake. Both are written for a general audience but index many scientific studies in support.Dianna Maish Edmonds resident Item 10.2 Packet pg. 316/352 From:Marjorie Fields To:Council; Rosen, Mike; Shipley, Brad Subject:PFAS and Deer Creek Aquifer comment for Hearing Jan 6 Date:Tuesday, December 30, 2025 7:41:24 PM At the December 16 meeting, some City Council members and the city attorney indicated that a lack of scientific information was the problem with including protection for the Deer Creek aquifer. Therefore local environmentalists have been solidifying the significant scientific basis for keeping PFAS out of our drinking water. There is an abundance of evidence to draw from, and because it has already been shared with you, I won’t send it again. We have also talked to Bob Danson, the director of the Olympic View Water and Sewer District about OVWS opposition to stormwater infiltration in the Deer Creek aquifer. He cited several comments he had submitted to Council and also a peer-reviewed article about PFAS in stormwater runoff sent to Council. Lack of scientific proof certainly cannot be the cause of hesitation in protecting our drinking water. As Mr. Danson says, “Once PFAS enters an aquifer, it is extremely persistent and difficult or costly to address. That is why Olympic View has focused on preventing that pathway rather than reacting later.” The city of Edmonds would be wise to do the same, though Mr. Taraday seems to advocate for waiting until the damage is done. Another argument put forth by attorney Taraday had to do with fear of the aquifer running dry if stormwater infiltration was not allowed. Checking this out with stormwater experts indicates that this is indeed “preposterous” (as stated by Woodway Council member John Brock). Mr. Danson of OVWS explains that “Recharge of the Deer Creek aquifer occurs through natural infiltration of rainfall; and engineered stormwater injection is not required to maintain aquifer viability.” Mr. Taraday’s concerns about a lawsuit also aren’t valid because of laws that put public health first. There doesn’t seem to be any actual reason not to disallow infiltration of Forever Chemicals into the Deer Creek Aquifer. Isn’t keeping citizens safe a major role for city government? Let’s get our priorities straight here. Edmonds is counting on you Marjie Fields Item 10.2 Packet pg. 317/352 From:votepetso To:Council Cc:Rosen, Mike; Shipley, Brad Subject:Edmonds Beacon Guestview Date:Tuesday, December 30, 2025 12:32:57 PM These comments are my own, and not as a representative of any government or group. For my convenience, these comments are a repeat of my comments submitted December 16. Please adopt the version of the CAO presented in November (that prohibits UIC wells in CARA's). The City is required to protect underground sources of drinking water, using a precautionary approach, byprovisions of the SDWA, and by State RCW's and WAC's, including the GMA. I believe all electeds promise to obey the laws, and that likely includes not only the above mentioned provisions, butalso the GMA requirement for ongoing and continuous public participation. From the very earliest days of theGMA, it has been recognized that substantive last second changes violate the public participation requirements.Please don't intentionally break the law. Pass the ordinance presented at the public hearing in November (thatprohibits UIC wells in CARA's). Again, these comments are my own, and not as a representative of any government or group. Please include thesecomments in the record for the CAO. Lora Petso, as a citizen Item 10.2 Packet pg. 318/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 319/352 From:ronaldeber@comcast.net To:Rosen, Mike; Tibbott, Neil; Paine, Susan; Chen, Will; Dotsch, Michelle; Nand, Jenna; Eck, Chris; Olson, Vivian Cc:Shipley, Brad; joe scordino; Bob Danson; Marjie Fields; John Brock; Kathleen Sears; Arlene Williams Subject:CAO Update and Remaining CARA Issue Date:Tuesday, December 16, 2025 2:21:22 PM Mayor and City Council: Here are my comments and concerns about the update to the Critical Area Ordinance for tonight'smeeting. CAO Update To be brief, I was one of the persons who worked closely with Brad Shipley on preparing the update nowbefore you.. I strongly urge you to support and move to adopt this CAO with one exception regarding theCARA section. I am in full accord with the comments sent today by Joe Scordino as well as those sent byBob Danson, General Manager for the Olympic View Water and Sewer District. I specifically want tosupport Mr. Danson's comment from December 11, 2025 that: "Not allowing UICs does not stop development; it simply requires development to be protective of the aquiferbelow. If development is desired, then the developer will need to build infrastructure that manages stormwaterin a way that protects public health. This is consistent with the City’s legal authority and responsibilityto protect its citizens and its drinking water resources.Revising or removing the no-UIC language at this stage would leave the City without a protective mechanism at atime when emerging science is showing heightened concern about stormwater infiltration and PFAS." No development right or expectation is "reasonable" if it permits development that harms and does notprotect public water supplies and its health. Fear or concern about possible legal challenges are frivolous at best and the City should defend our public resources and health. I especially direrct your attention to section 23.10.200 - Critical Area Review Sequence as a majorimprovement in the CAO. It will insure that icritical areas are identified and information provided forreview at the earliest possible time in the review process which will hopefully lead to better protection. Waiting to the end of the application review process only leads to unresolved issues and cconflicts. Addressing the challenges and limitations that the protection of critical areas present at the earliestpossible time is essential to their protection. Further, I support keeping the protections for trees on steep slopes in the CAO and not moving them tothe Tree Code. These are primarily slope stabilization and hazard mitigation provisions and not for treeprotection. Given the current flood and slide problems being faced by Washington residents, this shouldbe self evident. Commendation for Brad Shipley I also support Joe's suggestion for the Council to publicly commend Brad Shipley for his outstanding workon the CAO update. As a retired planner with over 30 years experience I can personally attest to just howgood this work is given the complex and inconsistent provisions of the existing code. Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. I am sending a seperate email regarding thepotential raid on the Edmonds Marsh Fund for Yost Pool. Ron Eber - Edmonds Item 10.2 Packet pg. 320/352 From:Rrie B To:Shipley, Brad Subject:Fresh water Date:Tuesday, December 23, 2025 9:08:57 PM You don't often get email from blakelorrie21@gmail.com. Learn why this is important It is my right to have safe drinking water. And by passing laws is just plain stupid. The cost ofthousands of lawsuits for health concerns cannot be afforded. When placing the correct drainage is so very much less costly. Lorrie Blake Item 10.2 Packet pg. 321/352 From:Stephen Lacy To:Council; Shipley, Brad Subject:Deer Creek CARA Date:Saturday, December 27, 2025 1:06:51 PM You don't often get email from stephlac@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Council Members and Director Shipley,I'm writing to express my concern about the use of underground injection wells (UICs) in areas around the Deer Creek Critical Area. My understanding is that the Olympic View Water& Sewer District has raised the alarm that this is likely to harm a critical source of drinking water for the city of Edmonds, of which I am a resident. There appears to be strong evidencethat PFAS pollutants are being injected into the UICs particularly in the Madrona school area. I urge you not to promote further development in this area until and unless appropriate stormwater pipes are installed to mitigate the risk to this critical resource for the city of Emonds. I've been impressed over the years by the city of Edmonds' commitment to the environment,particularly the restoration of the Edmonds Marsh. Please continue in this tradition and protect the Deer Creek watershed.Thank you, Stephen Lacy Item 10.2 Packet pg. 322/352 EDMONDS ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL PRESS RELEASE December 30, 2025 EDMONDS ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL CALLS ON EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL TO FOLLOW “BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE” IN CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE UPDATE The Edmonds Environmental Council (EEC) has consistently encouraged the City of Edmonds to align its critical area regulations with Washington State Laws that require Cities to manage critical areas in accordance with the State’s Growth Management Act (GMA) (Chapter 36.70A RCW). And now, as part of the City’s Critical Area Ordinance update process, the EEC seeks to underscore that limiting or conditioning new development as well as establishing essential protective regulations for critical areas, when supported by the best available science, is a requirement of the GMA. In instances of scientific uncertainty where potential harm is involved, the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 365-195-920 calls for the ‘Precautionary Principle’ in which “development and land use activities are strictly limited until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved.” Although members of the EEC were invited and did collaborate with City staff in a several- month process of updating the Critical Area Ordinance, the exemplary civic process was undermined by a last-minute revision by the City’s contract attorney to the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) chapter that the EEC and the Olympic View Water District do not support. The revision results in a reduced level of protection for the Deer Creek aquifer which provides drinking water for southern Edmonds, Woodway, and Esperance. This revision increases the risk of contaminating the Deer Creek aquifer with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that have already been detected at high levels in Edmonds’ stormwater. To assist the Council in its decision-making, EEC has compiled the scientific publications and agency documents - - the ”Best Available Science” - - applicable to protecting* the Deer Creek drinking water aquifer and posted them for City Council (and public) review at: https://edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/critical-areas-best-available-science/ [*Note that protecting is defined at WAC 365-196-830 as “Preservation of the functions and values of the natural environment, or to safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety.”] Item 10.2 Packet pg. 323/352 This “Best Available Science” review of scientific information and agency guidance reveals that: • PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) are man-made, persistent chemicals found in many products and can easily leach into our “water environment” with serious consequences to humans and wildlife. They are known as ‘forever chemicals’ because they don't break down and conventional stormwater treatments such as rain gardens and filtering are ineffective in removing most of them. • Drinking water is the principal source of PFAS getting into humans causing cancers, immune issues, thyroid problems, and developmental effects even at minute PFAS levels. The federal government in 2024 established a 4 parts-per-trillion limit in drinking water for only two of the many PFAS compounds, and stormwater in Edmonds was found to be 8-times greater than that limit in 2024. Scientific research is ongoing on environmental effects of additional PFAS compounds that are not easily or completely removed from stormwater even with advanced technologies. • Prestigious scientific institutions, including the National Academy of Sciences, and state and federal agencies have called for prevention (i.e., source and conveyance control) of PFAS contamination of drinking water due to its serious human health effects. Thus, Edmonds should not be allowing underground injection (UIC wells) that concentrate PFAS into the groundwater that ‘feeds’ the Deer Creek drinking water aquifer. However, the City’s contract attorney is advising the City Council to ‘exempt’ new development from ‘required’ protective regulations that would prohibit injection of potentially contaminated stormwater into the Deer Creek drinking water aquifer in order to reduce costs of new development. The contract attorney is advising the City Council that this exemption is necessary to avoid a potential ‘takings’ lawsuit since portions of the Deer Creek CARA lack City owned stormwater pipes that new development could otherwise use (and avoid costs) to transport stormwater away from the aquifer. The EEC believes additional legal considerations may be relevant to the City Council’s deliberations, including: • U.S. Supreme Court rulings on ‘takings’ where public health and safety regulations are involved. A legal review of regulatory ‘takings’ presented in the Cornell School of Law website specifically addresses when “a regulation adopted under the police power to protect the public health, safety, or welfare is not a taking“ (See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/taking#:~:text=The%20power%20of%20the%20government%20throug h%20the,the%20point%20of%20it%20constituting%20a%20taking ) Item 10.2 Packet pg. 324/352 • The State Attorney General’s Office, in October 2024, issuing an Advisory Memorandum for decision-makers that discusses “If it [a regulation] acts more to prevent a public harm, it is probably not a taking” (see: https://agportal-s3bucket.s3.us-west- 2.amazonaws.com/uploadedfiles/October%202024%20AGO%20Takings%20Guidance%20FINAL.pdf?Versi onId=OVi41YoylBtea3QLJvLtzwsc7lD3p0C j • Concerns that allowing UIC wells in a drinking water aquifer raises issues regarding compliance with State and federal laws on protecting public health, and specifically on State law requiring use of “Best Available Science” in protecting critical areas. The EEC believes that the potential legal risks associated with public health protections warrant equal consideration.” • Concerns that lack of nearby City stormwater pipes be treated differently than lack of nearby sewer pipe instances where developers are required to absorb costs for pipes and sewage pumps necessary for new development. The EEC urges the City Council to use the Best Available Science to update the Critical Area Ordinance including the prohibition on UIC wells in the Deer Creek CARA in accordance with State Law requirements for critical areas that “safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety”. If new information becomes available on effective methods to completely remove toxic chemicals such as PFAS from stormwater in CARAs, the critical area regulations can be revised accordingly at that time. The EEC also asks citizens who raised concerns about the Deer Creek drinking water aquafer to send their concerns to council@edmondswa.gov and/or attend the City Council’s January 6 Public Hearing on the Critical Area Update. The Edmonds Environmental Council (EEC) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that seeks to bring balance between needed development, environmental protection, and compliance with State laws. The EEC was formed in response to a growing need for “informed” voices to help educate residents and City officials on the perils of ignoring the human and natural environment. Membership and Donor information can be found on the EEC's website at: https://edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/ . Item 10.2 Packet pg. 325/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 326/352 Posted Thursday, December 25, 2025 5:54 pm By Joe Scordino Edmonds Environmental Council We have a serious human health issue brewing in Edmonds at the Deer Creek CARA (Critical Aquifer Recharge Area), which provides drinking water to south Edmonds, Woodway, and Esperance. The issue is accommodating potential development instead of avoiding contaminating our drinking water with PFAS – a pervasive, forever chemical known to have serious human health effects. Believe it or not, the City actually wants to allow new development to inject potentially toxic stormwater (containing forever chemicals, PFAS, carcinogenic pollutants, etc.) into the Deer Creek drinking water Aquifer. And why? It’s because the City doesn’t have stormwater pipes in parts of the Deer Creek CARA for developers to connect to. You’d think the situation would be the same as sewer pipes – if City pipes aren’t present, the developer has to pay to have them installed if they want to build at that site. However, the City’s contract attorney is actually telling the City Council that if they don’t allow the injection of stormwater into the drinking water aquifer (regardless of the human safety risks), they might be sued by a developer who might claim such a critical area restriction might be a constitutional “taking.” Sounds pretty speculative and uninformed to me, especially since the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute’s website on “takings” states: “Even if a regulation amounts to a taking, it may be upheld if it serves a valid public health or safety goal” (see law.cornell.edu/wex/takings (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/takings)). I’d argue that state law is very clear that development can and should be restricted where necessary to protect public health and safety – and the City should not be making ‘bad’ decisions based on potential ‘frivolous’ developer lawsuit threats. So now, since the City’s contract attorney is not providing appropriate legal advice and Public Works staff are avoiding (https://alpha.creativecirclecdn.com/beaconpub/ original/20251225-175316-a92-Scordino%20Joe.png.jpg) Joe Scordino Item 10.2 Packet pg. 327/352 the facts about stormwater filtering, the burden falls on us – the affected citizens – to educate our councilmembers on the facts, the science, and the law, including: • Facts about PFAS in stormwater, and serious health impacts. • Best available science (WAC Chapter 365-195) that must be used to decide necessary protections. • WAC 365-196-830, that requires Edmonds to protect the Deer Creek CARA for “preservation of the functions and values of the natural environment, or to safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety.” • The precautionary principle in state law (WAC 365-195-920) and what it prescribes when there is scientific uncertainty or need for more information (i.e., “development and land use activities are strictly limited” until additional best available science suggests otherwise). Factual information about the Deer Creek CARA, stormwater, PFAS, state and federal standards, critical area regulations can be accessed at edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/deer-creek/ (https://edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/deer- creek/) or at Olympic View Water and Sewer District’s website at olympicviewwater.com/pfas (https:// www.olympicviewwater.com/pfas). Also, to add insult to injury, the City now has another ploy to avoid restricting development in the Deer Creek CARA. They’re now claiming they need “additional best available” information and want to conduct a study before restricting development in this critical area. However, that’s contrary to the precautionary principle cited above, and it is very doubtful that the City can contract (given their budget limitations) for a bona fide scientific study that would provide any new or different information that isn’t already available in scientific literature. So, I’d conclude that there is no legal or scientific basis for retaining the prior CARA chapter – the purpose of the 10- year CAO update is to update the code based on existing best available Science – and that is what the City Council is obligated to do. I encourage residents to email council@edmondswa.gov (mailto:council@edmondswa.gov) , mike.rosen@edmondswa.gov (mailto:mike.rosen@edmondswa.gov) , and brad.shipley@edmondswa.gov (mailto:brad.shipley@edmondswa.gov) before Dec. 31 so that your comments will be placed in the briefing material for the City Council’s Jan. 6 public hearing. You could also make verbal comments at the public hearing. It will be important for councilmembers and the mayor to hear that the safety of human health is far more important than new development in an area (Deer Creek CARA) designated as a critical area – specifically to protect the drinking water it produces (i.e., bad place for the City to be encouraging new development since it is a “protected” drinking water aquifer). Comments My breast cancer diagnosis (/stories/my-breast-cancer-diagnosis,156928) Working as fiduciaries to bring expenditures in line … (/stories/working-as-fiduciaries-to-bring- expenditures-in-line-with-revenue,154959) Campaign sign placement and use of unopened public … (/stories/campaign-sign-placement-and- use-of-unopened-public-rights-of-way,151264) Homelessness partnership showing promise (/stories/homelessness-partnership-showing- promise,151100) Item 10.2 Packet pg. 328/352 From:joe scordino To:Council Cc:Rosen, Mike; Taraday, Jeff; Dave Bricklin; Edmonds Environmental Council; Clugston, Michael; Shipley, Brad; Bob Danson Subject:Flawed "Best Available Science" in City Council"s Meeting Packet Date:Monday, December 15, 2025 7:52:56 PM Attachments:Chapter 365-195 WAC .pdfDeer Creek CARA - Best Available Science.pdf Council Members; As most of you know, I am the local environment expert that Brad Shipleycollaborated with (in addition to other community members) through a series of focused meetings to review the effectiveness of the Critical Area Ordinance and address inconsistencies, test draft language, and refine provisions to improve clarity and ensure consistency with “Best Available Science” in accordance with State law requirements for this 10-year CAO update. I spent countless hours reviewing drafts, past staff reports on the CAO, and searching out scientific information to improve the City’s Critical Area code both for better protecting critical areas AND for resolving inconsistencies and eliminating overburdening and unnecessary processes/requirements for reasonable land use anddevelopment. And I actually thought this process would serve as a great example of good governance and how the City should operate and utilize local volunteer expertise - - AND THEN I saw the CAO Update Ordinance in your Dec. 16 Agenda Packetapparently prepared by your contract attorney who obviously had NO knowledge of the collaborative community process or what “Best Available Science” even means. Besides the Ordinance language being flawed, it is important for Council to note that an Ordinance is supposed to reflect Council’s discussions and deliberations leadingto the final decision to approve regulations, etc. Since the Council has not even begun public discussions, why is the City presenting a flawed Ordinance that the Council didn’t request? The flawed Ordinance improperly focuses on one topic (the CARA Chapter change)that Council hasn’t even discussed in an open public meeting. Shouldn’t it be the legislative branch (the City Council) that decides if it wants to change the CARA Chapter from what was presented at the Public Hearing? Has the Council been provided the necessary background information to believe that “additional scientificinformation” is actually needed? And if so, has the Council been advised what State law says it must do if there is uncertainty on the “Best Available Science”. Unfortunately for the City Council, this means Council members will have to do their own research on “Best Available Science” and the REQUIRED precautionaryapproach as prescribed in State law in order to avoid lawsuits and costly appeals of City Council actions. To assist the Council , I’m attaching a copy of Chapter 365-195 of the Washington Item 10.2 Packet pg. 329/352 Administrative Code on “Best Available Science”. Please note what WAC 365-195- 920 (1) states the Council must do: “Where there is an absence of valid scientific information or incomplete scientific information relating to a county's or city's critical areas, leading to uncertainty about which development and land uses could lead to harm of critical areas or uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permitting development, counties and cities should use the following approach” -- (see WAC 365-195-920 (1)(a) on precautionary approach). The City and the Council have received multiple letters from the experts at OlympicView Water and Sewer District (OVWSD) on the Best Available Science regarding “which development and land uses could lead to harm of critical areas” (i.e., the Deer Creek drinking water aquifer). So, what “additional best available science” in this defunct Ordinance does your contract attorney think is needed beyond the OVWSDexpertise and attached list of Best Available Science documents (which were accessed for the CARA Chapter update)? And why isn't the State law's precautionary approach advised if there is indeed some scientific uncertainty? It's also important for the Council to understand that State law is clear thatdevelopment and land use can be restricted to “avoid net loss of the functions and values of critical areas.” And in the case of the drinking water aquifer critical area, the requirement for protection of public health should negate any speculative ‘takings’ concerns espoused by your contract attorney regarding the City being sued bydevelopers. Thus, I strongly urge the Council to disregard the fictitious CAO Update Ordinance that is in your agenda packet. Further, I urge Council to deliberate on the CAO Update document WITHOUT theflawed CARA Chapter change in your packet - - Please discuss instead the CAO Chapter in the update document presented at the Public Hearing (which WAS updated in accordance with State Law). As noted above, your contract attorney’s attempt to change the CARA Chapterupdate is NOT consistent with State Law and likely will result in an Appeal to the State’s Growth Management Hearings Board. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 330/352 Chapter 365-195 WACChapter 365-195 WAC Last Update: 3/29/23Last Update: 3/29/23 Return to Chapter ListingReturn to Chapter Listing GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT—BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCEGROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT—BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE WAC SectionsWAC Sections PART NINEPART NINE BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCEBEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE 365-195-900365-195-900 Background and purpose.Background and purpose. 365-195-905365-195-905 Criteria for determining which information is the "best available science."Criteria for determining which information is the "best available science." 365-195-910365-195-910 Criteria for obtaining the best available science.Criteria for obtaining the best available science. 365-195-915365-195-915 Criteria for including the best available science in developing policies and development regulations.Criteria for including the best available science in developing policies and development regulations. 365-195-920365-195-920 Criteria for addressing inadequate scientific information.Criteria for addressing inadequate scientific information. 365-195-925365-195-925 Criteria for demonstrating "special consideration" has been given to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhanceCriteria for demonstrating "special consideration" has been given to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.anadromous fisheries. DISPOSITION OF SECTIONS FORMERLY CODIFIED IN THIS TITLEDISPOSITION OF SECTIONS FORMERLY CODIFIED IN THIS TITLE 365-195-010365-195-010 Background. [Statutory Authority: RCW Background. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-010, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-010, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-020365-195-020 Purpose. [Statutory Authority: RCW Purpose. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A. 9036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-020, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-020, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-030365-195-030 Applicability. [Statutory Authority: RCW Applicability. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-030, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-030, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-040365-195-040 General method. [Statutory Authority: RCW General method. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-040, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-040, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-050365-195-050 Presumption of validity. [Statutory Authority: RCW Presumption of validity. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-050, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-050, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-060365-195-060 Regional and local variations. [Statutory Authority: RCW Regional and local variations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-060, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-060, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-070365-195-070 Interpretations. [Statutory Authority: RCW Interpretations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-070, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-070, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-200365-195-200 Statutory definitions. [Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory definitions. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-200, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-200, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-210365-195-210 Definitions of terms as used in this chapter. [Statutory Authority: RCW Definitions of terms as used in this chapter. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-210, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-210, filed93-17-040, § 365-195-210, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-210, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-220365-195-220 Additional definitions to be adopted locally. [Statutory Authority: RCW Additional definitions to be adopted locally. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-220, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-220, filed93-17-040, § 365-195-220, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-220, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-300365-195-300 Mandatory elements. [Statutory Authority: RCW Mandatory elements. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-300, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-300, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-305365-195-305 Land use element. [Statutory Authority: RCW Land use element. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-305, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-305, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-310365-195-310 Housing element. [Statutory Authority: RCW Housing element. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-310, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-310, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-315365-195-315 Capital facilities element. [Statutory Authority: RCW Capital facilities element. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-315, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-315, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-320365-195-320 Utilities element. [Statutory Authority: RCW Utilities element. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-320, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-320, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-325365-195-325 Transportation element. [Statutory Authority: RCW Transportation element. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-325, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-325, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-330365-195-330 Rural element. [Statutory Authority: RCW Rural element. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-330, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-330, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-335365-195-335 Urban growth areas. [Statutory Authority: RCW Urban growth areas. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-335, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-335, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365 195 3 0365 195 3 0 Si i i l li f ili i [S i RCW Si i i l li f ili i [S i RCW 36 70 19036 70 190 WSR 92 23 065 § WSR 92 23 065 § Item 10.2 Packet pg. 331/352 365-195-340365-195-340 Siting essential public facilities. [Statutory Authority: RCW Siting essential public facilities. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-340, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-340, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-345365-195-345 Optional elements. [Statutory Authority: RCW Optional elements. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-345, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-345, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-400365-195-400 Natural resource lands. [Statutory Authority: RCW Natural resource lands. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-400, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-400, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-410365-195-410 Critical areas. [Statutory Authority: RCW Critical areas. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-410, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-410, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-420365-195-420 Identification of open space corridors. [Statutory Authority: RCW Identification of open space corridors. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-420, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,§ 365-195-420, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-430365-195-430 Identification of lands useful for public purposes. [Statutory Authority: RCW Identification of lands useful for public purposes. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-430, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed92-23-065, § 365-195-430, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-500365-195-500 Internal consistency. [Statutory Authority: RCW Internal consistency. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-500, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-500, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-510365-195-510 Concurrency. [Statutory Authority: RCW Concurrency. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-510, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-510, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-520365-195-520 Interjurisdictional consistency. [Statutory Authority: RCW Interjurisdictional consistency. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-520, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-520, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-530365-195-530 Coordination with other plans. [Statutory Authority: RCW Coordination with other plans. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-530, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-530, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-540365-195-540 Analysis of cumulative effects. [Statutory Authority: RCW Analysis of cumulative effects. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-540, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10,365-195-540, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-600365-195-600 Public participation. [Statutory Authority: RCW Public participation. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-600, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-600, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-610365-195-610 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). [Statutory Authority: RCW State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-610, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed92-23-065, § 365-195-610, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-620365-195-620 Submissions to state. [Statutory Authority: RCW Submissions to state. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-620, (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-620, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-620, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.]filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-620, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-630365-195-630 Amendment. [Statutory Authority: RCW Amendment. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-630, filed (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-630, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-640365-195-640 Record of process. [Statutory Authority: RCW Record of process. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-640, (4)(b). WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-640, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-700365-195-700 Background. [Statutory Authority: RCW Background. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-700, filed (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-700, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-700, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.]8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-700, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-705365-195-705 Basic assumptions. [Statutory Authority: RCW Basic assumptions. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-705, (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-705, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-710365-195-710 Identification of other laws. [Statutory Authority: RCW Identification of other laws. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-710, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-710, filed 11/17/92,365-195-710, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-710, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutoryeffective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-715365-195-715 Integrating external considerations. [Statutory Authority: RCW Integrating external considerations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-715, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-715, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-720365-195-720 Sources of law. [Statutory Authority: RCW Sources of law. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-720, filed (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-720, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-720, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.]8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-720, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-725365-195-725 Constitutional provisions. [Statutory Authority: RCW Constitutional provisions. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-725, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-725, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-730365-195-730 Federal authorities. [Statutory Authority: RCW Federal authorities. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-730, (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-730, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10.filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-735365-195-735 State and regional authorities. [Statutory Authority: RCW State and regional authorities. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-735, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-735, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-740365-195-740 Regional perspective. [Statutory Authority: RCW Regional perspective. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-740 filed 8/11/93 effective 9/11/93 ] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085 filed 1/19/10 effective365-195-740 filed 8/11/93 effective 9/11/93 ] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085 filed 1/19/10 effective Item 10.2 Packet pg. 332/352 365 195 740, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10 03 085, filed 1/19/10, effective365 195 740, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10 03 085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-745365-195-745 Special siting statutes. [Statutory Authority: RCW Special siting statutes. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-745, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-745, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-750365-195-750 Explicit statutory directions. [Statutory Authority: RCW Explicit statutory directions. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-750, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-750, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-755365-195-755 Voluntary interjurisdictional planning efforts. [Statutory Authority: RCW Voluntary interjurisdictional planning efforts. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-755, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed93-17-040, § 365-195-755, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-760365-195-760 Integration of SEPA process with creation and adoption of comprehensive plans and developmentIntegration of SEPA process with creation and adoption of comprehensive plans and development regulations. [Statutory Authority: RCW regulations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-760, filed (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-760, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-765365-195-765 State agency compliance. [Statutory Authority: RCW State agency compliance. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-765, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-765, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-770365-195-770 Compliance by regional agencies and special districts. [Statutory Authority: RCW Compliance by regional agencies and special districts. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-770, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filedWSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-770, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-800365-195-800 Relationship to comprehensive plans. [Statutory Authority: RCW Relationship to comprehensive plans. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-800, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-800, filed 11/17/92,§ 365-195-800, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-800, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutoryeffective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-805365-195-805 Implementation strategy. [Statutory Authority: RCW Implementation strategy. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-805, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-805, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-810365-195-810 Timing of initial adoption. [Statutory Authority: RCW Timing of initial adoption. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-810, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-810, filed 11/17/92,365-195-810, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-810, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutoryeffective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-815365-195-815 Review for compliance. [Statutory Authority: RCW Review for compliance. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-815, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-815, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-820365-195-820 Submissions to state. [Statutory Authority: RCW Submissions to state. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-820, (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-820, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-820, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.]filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-820, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-825365-195-825 Regulations specifically required by the act. [Statutory Authority: RCW Regulations specifically required by the act. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-825, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed93-17-040, § 365-195-825, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-830365-195-830 Optional authorizations. [Statutory Authority: RCW Optional authorizations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-830, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-830, filed 11/17/92,365-195-830, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-830, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutoryeffective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-835365-195-835 Concurrency regulations. [Statutory Authority: RCW Concurrency regulations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-835, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-835, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-840365-195-840 Essential public facilities. [Statutory Authority: RCW Essential public facilities. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-840, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-840, filed 11/17/92,365-195-840, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93; WSR 92-23-065, § 365-195-840, filed 11/17/92, effective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutoryeffective 12/18/92.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-845365-195-845 Permit process. [Statutory Authority: RCW Permit process. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.1936.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-845, filed (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-845, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-850365-195-850 Impact fees. [Statutory Authority: RCW Impact fees. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-850, filed (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-850, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-855365-195-855 Protection of private property. [Statutory Authority: RCW Protection of private property. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-855, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective365-195-855, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-860365-195-860 Housing for persons with handicaps. [Statutory Authority: RCW Housing for persons with handicaps. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-860, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective§ 365-195-860, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. 365-195-865365-195-865 Supplementing, amending and monitoring. [Statutory Authority: RCW Supplementing, amending and monitoring. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR (4)(b). WSR 93-17-040, § 365-195-865, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed93-17-040, § 365-195-865, filed 8/11/93, effective 9/11/93.] Repealed by WSR 10-03-085, filed 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 1/19/10, effective 2/19/10. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190.. PART NINEPART NINE BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCEBEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE 365-195-900365-195-900 Background and purpose.Background and purpose. (1) Counties and cities planning under RCW (1) Counties and cities planning under RCW 36.70A.04036.70A.040 are subject to continuing review and evaluation of their comprehensive land use plan and are subject to continuing review and evaluation of their comprehensive land use plan and development regulations. Periodically, they must take action to review and revise their plans and regulations, if needed, to ensure they comply with thedevelopment regulations. Periodically, they must take action to review and revise their plans and regulations, if needed, to ensure they comply with the requirements of RCW requirements of RCW 36.70A.13036.70A.130.. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 333/352 (2) Counties and cities must include the "best available science" when developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values(2) Counties and cities must include the "best available science" when developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas and must give "special consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. RCWof critical areas and must give "special consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. RCW 36.70A.17236.70A.172(1). The rules in WAC 365-195-900 through (1). The rules in WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925365-195-925 are intended to assist counties and cities in identifying and including the best available are intended to assist counties and cities in identifying and including the best available science in newly adopted policies and regulations and in this periodic review and evaluation and in demonstrating they have met their statutory obligations underscience in newly adopted policies and regulations and in this periodic review and evaluation and in demonstrating they have met their statutory obligations under RCW RCW 36.70A.17236.70A.172(1).(1). (3) The inclusion of the best available science in the development of critical areas policies and regulations is especially important to salmon recovery(3) The inclusion of the best available science in the development of critical areas policies and regulations is especially important to salmon recovery efforts, and to other decision-making affecting threatened or endangered species.efforts, and to other decision-making affecting threatened or endangered species. (4) These rules are adopted under the authority of RCW (4) These rules are adopted under the authority of RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b) which requires the department of commerce (department) to adopt rules to (4)(b) which requires the department of commerce (department) to adopt rules to assist counties and cities to comply with the goals and requirements of the Growth Management Act.assist counties and cities to comply with the goals and requirements of the Growth Management Act. [Statutory Authority: RCW [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190. WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-900, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW . WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-900, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4) (4) (b). WSR 01-08-056, § 365-195-900, filed 4/2/01, effective 5/3/01; WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-900, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.](b). WSR 01-08-056, § 365-195-900, filed 4/2/01, effective 5/3/01; WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-900, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] 365-195-905365-195-905 Criteria for determining which information is the "best available science."Criteria for determining which information is the "best available science." (1) This section provides assessment criteria to assist counties and cities in determining whether information obtained during development of critical areas(1) This section provides assessment criteria to assist counties and cities in determining whether information obtained during development of critical areas policies and regulations constitutes the "best available science."policies and regulations constitutes the "best available science." (2) Counties and cities may use information that local, state or federal natural resource agencies have determined represents the best available science(2) Counties and cities may use information that local, state or federal natural resource agencies have determined represents the best available science consistent with criteria set out in WAC consistent with criteria set out in WAC 365-195-900365-195-900 through through 365-195-925365-195-925. The department will work with state agencies to identify resources that meet the criteria. The department will work with state agencies to identify resources that meet the criteria for best available science. Such information should be reviewed for local applicability.for best available science. Such information should be reviewed for local applicability. (3) The responsibility for including the best available science in the development and implementation of critical areas policies or regulations rests with the(3) The responsibility for including the best available science in the development and implementation of critical areas policies or regulations rests with the legislative authority of the county or city. Cities and counties must conduct a best available science review when updating critical area regulations. The complexitylegislative authority of the county or city. Cities and counties must conduct a best available science review when updating critical area regulations. The complexity of the review should reflect the scope of the amendment. When feasible, counties and cities should consult with a qualified scientific expert or team of qualifiedof the review should reflect the scope of the amendment. When feasible, counties and cities should consult with a qualified scientific expert or team of qualified scientific experts to identify scientific information, determine the best available science, and assess its applicability to the relevant critical areas. The scientificscientific experts to identify scientific information, determine the best available science, and assess its applicability to the relevant critical areas. The scientific expert or experts may rely on their professional judgment based on experience and training, but they should use the criteria set out in WAC expert or experts may rely on their professional judgment based on experience and training, but they should use the criteria set out in WAC 365-195-900365-195-900 through through 365-195-925365-195-925 and any technical guidance provided by the department. Use of these criteria also should guide counties and cities that lack the assistance of a and any technical guidance provided by the department. Use of these criteria also should guide counties and cities that lack the assistance of a qualified expert or experts, but these criteria are not intended to be a substitute for an assessment and recommendation by a qualified scientific expert or team ofqualified expert or experts, but these criteria are not intended to be a substitute for an assessment and recommendation by a qualified scientific expert or team of experts.experts. (4) Whether a person is a qualified scientific expert with expertise appropriate to the relevant critical areas is determined by the person's professional(4) Whether a person is a qualified scientific expert with expertise appropriate to the relevant critical areas is determined by the person's professional credentials and/or certification, any advanced degrees earned in the pertinent scientific discipline from a recognized university, the number of years of experiencecredentials and/or certification, any advanced degrees earned in the pertinent scientific discipline from a recognized university, the number of years of experience in the pertinent scientific discipline, recognized leadership in the discipline of interest, formal training in the specific area of expertise, and field and/or laboratoryin the pertinent scientific discipline, recognized leadership in the discipline of interest, formal training in the specific area of expertise, and field and/or laboratory experience with evidence of the ability to produce peer-reviewed publications or other professional literature. No one factor is determinative in deciding whether aexperience with evidence of the ability to produce peer-reviewed publications or other professional literature. No one factor is determinative in deciding whether a person is a qualified scientific expert. Where pertinent scientific information implicates multiple scientific disciplines, counties and cities are encouraged to consultperson is a qualified scientific expert. Where pertinent scientific information implicates multiple scientific disciplines, counties and cities are encouraged to consult a team of qualified scientific experts representing the various disciplines to ensure the identification and inclusion of the best available science.a team of qualified scientific experts representing the various disciplines to ensure the identification and inclusion of the best available science. (5) Scientific information can be produced only through a valid scientific process. To ensure that the best available science is being included, a county or(5) Scientific information can be produced only through a valid scientific process. To ensure that the best available science is being included, a county or city should consider the following:city should consider the following: (a) (a) Characteristics of a valid scientific process.Characteristics of a valid scientific process. In the context of critical areas protection, a valid scientific process is one that produces reliable In the context of critical areas protection, a valid scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in understanding the consequences of a local government's regulatory decisions and in developing critical areas policies and developmentinformation useful in understanding the consequences of a local government's regulatory decisions and in developing critical areas policies and development regulations that will be effective in protecting the functions and values of critical areas. To determine whether information received during the public participationregulations that will be effective in protecting the functions and values of critical areas. To determine whether information received during the public participation process is reliable scientific information, a county or city should determine whether the source of the information displays the characteristics of a valid scientificprocess is reliable scientific information, a county or city should determine whether the source of the information displays the characteristics of a valid scientific process. When weighing scientific information contained in the record for inclusion, counties and cities must weigh the scientific information contained in theprocess. When weighing scientific information contained in the record for inclusion, counties and cities must weigh the scientific information contained in the record based on its scientific validity. The characteristics generally to be expected in a valid scientific process are as follows:record based on its scientific validity. The characteristics generally to be expected in a valid scientific process are as follows: 1. 1. Peer review.Peer review. The information has been critically reviewed by other persons who are qualified scientific experts in that scientific discipline. The criticism The information has been critically reviewed by other persons who are qualified scientific experts in that scientific discipline. The criticism of the peer reviewers has been addressed by the proponents of the information. Publication in a refereed scientific journal usually indicates that the informationof the peer reviewers has been addressed by the proponents of the information. Publication in a refereed scientific journal usually indicates that the information has been appropriately peer-reviewed.has been appropriately peer-reviewed. 2. 2. Methods.Methods. The methods that were used to obtain the information are clearly stated and able to be replicated. The method are standardized in the The methods that were used to obtain the information are clearly stated and able to be replicated. The methods are standardized in the pertinent scientific discipline or, if not, the methods have been appropriately peer-reviewed to assure their reliability and validity.pertinent scientific discipline or, if not, the methods have been appropriately peer-reviewed to assure their reliability and validity. 3. 3. Logical conclusions and reasonable inferences.Logical conclusions and reasonable inferences. The conclusions presented are based on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and The conclusions presented are based on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and consistent with the general theory underlying the assumptions. The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived from the assumptions and supported by theconsistent with the general theory underlying the assumptions. The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived from the assumptions and supported by the data presented. Any gaps in information and inconsistencies with other pertinent scientific information are adequately explained.data presented. Any gaps in information and inconsistencies with other pertinent scientific information are adequately explained. 4. 4. Quantitative analysis.Quantitative analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or quantitative methods. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or quantitative methods. 5. 5. Context.Context. The information is placed in proper context. The assumptions, analytical techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with The information is placed in proper context. The assumptions, analytical techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge.respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge. 6. 6. References.References. The assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with citations to relevant, credible literature and other The assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with citations to relevant, credible literature and other pertinent existing information.pertinent existing information. (b) (b) Common sources of scientific information.Common sources of scientific information. Some sources of information routinely exhibit all or some of the characteristics listed in (a) of this Some sources of information routinely exhibit all or some of the characteristics listed in (a) of this subsection. Information derived from one of the following sources may be considered scientific information if the source possesses the characteristics in Table 1.subsection. Information derived from one of the following sources may be considered scientific information if the source possesses the characteristics in Table 1. A county or city may consider information to be scientifically valid if the source possesses the characteristics listed in (a) of this subsection. The information foundA county or city may consider information to be scientifically valid if the source possesses the characteristics listed in (a) of this subsection. The information found in Table 1 provides a general indication of the characteristics of a valid scientific process typically associated with common sources of scientific information.in Table 1 provides a general indication of the characteristics of a valid scientific process typically associated with common sources of scientific information. �� Table 1Table 1 PeerPeer reviewreview MethodsMethods LogicalLogical conclusionsconclusions && reasonablereasonable inferencesinferences QuantitativeQuantitative analysisanalysis ContextContext ReferencesReferences�� A. Research.A. Research. Research data collected and Research data collected and analyzed as part of a controlled experiment (or otheranalyzed as part of a controlled experiment (or other appropriate methodology) to test a specific hypothesis.appropriate methodology) to test a specific hypothesis. XX XX XX XX XX XX B. Monitoring.B. Monitoring. Monitoring data collected Monitoring data collected periodically over time to determine a resource trend orperiodically over time to determine a resource trend or evaluate a management program.evaluate a management program. XX XX YY XX XX C. Inventory.C. Inventory. Inventory data collected from Inventory data collected from an entire population or population segment (e.g.,an entire population or population segment (e.g., individuals in a plant or animal species) or an entireindividuals in a plant or animal species) or an entire ecosystem or ecosystem segment (e.g., the species inecosystem or ecosystem segment (e.g., the species in a particular wetland).a particular wetland). XX XX YY XX XX D. Survey.D. Survey. Survey data collected from a Survey data collected from a statistical sample from a population or ecosystem.statistical sample from a population or ecosystem.XX XX YY XX XX E. Modeling.E. Modeling. Mathematical or symbolic Mathematical or symbolic simulation or representation of a natural system.simulation or representation of a natural system. Models generally are used to understand and explainModels generally are used to understand and explain occurrences that cannot be directly observed.occurrences that cannot be directly observed. XX XX XX XX XX XX F. Assessment.F. Assessment. Inspection and evaluation Inspection and evaluation of site-specific information by a qualified scientificof site-specific information by a qualified scientific expert An assessment may or may not involveexpert An assessment may or may not involve XX XX XX XX Item 10.2 Packet pg. 334/352 expert. An assessment may or may not involveexpert. An assessment may or may not involve collection of new data.collection of new data. G. Synthesis.G. Synthesis. A comprehensive review and A comprehensive review and explanation of pertinent literature and other relevantexplanation of pertinent literature and other relevant existing knowledge by a qualified scientific expert.existing knowledge by a qualified scientific expert. XX XX XX XX XX H. Expert Opinion.H. Expert Opinion. Statement of a qualified Statement of a qualified scientific expert based on his or her best professionalscientific expert based on his or her best professional judgment and experience in the pertinent scientificjudgment and experience in the pertinent scientific discipline. The opinion may or may not be based ondiscipline. The opinion may or may not be based on site-specific information.site-specific information. XX XX XX X =X =characteristic must be present for information derived to be considered scientifically valid and reliablecharacteristic must be present for information derived to be considered scientifically valid and reliable Y =Y =presence of characteristic strengthens scientific validity and reliability of information derived, but is not essential to ensure scientificpresence of characteristic strengthens scientific validity and reliability of information derived, but is not essential to ensure scientific validity and reliabilityvalidity and reliability (c) (c) Common sources of nonscientific information.Common sources of nonscientific information. Many sources of information usually do not produce scientific information because they do not Many sources of information usually do not produce scientific information because they do not exhibit the necessary characteristics for scientific validity and reliability. Information from these sources may provide valuable information to supplement scientificexhibit the necessary characteristics for scientific validity and reliability. Information from these sources may provide valuable information to supplement scientific information, but it is not an adequate substitute for scientific information. Nonscientific information should not be used as a substitute for valid and availableinformation, but it is not an adequate substitute for scientific information. Nonscientific information should not be used as a substitute for valid and available scientific information. Common sources of nonscientific information include the following:scientific information. Common sources of nonscientific information include the following: (i) Anecdotal information. One or more observations which are not part of an organized scientific effort (for example, "I saw a grizzly bear in that area while(i) Anecdotal information. One or more observations which are not part of an organized scientific effort (for example, "I saw a grizzly bear in that area while I was hiking").I was hiking"). (ii) Nonexpert opinion. Opinion of a person who is not a qualified scientific expert in a pertinent scientific discipline (for example, "I do not believe there are(ii) Nonexpert opinion. Opinion of a person who is not a qualified scientific expert in a pertinent scientific discipline (for example, "I do not believe there are grizzly bears in that area").grizzly bears in that area"). (iii) Hearsay. Information repeated from communication with others (for example, "At a lecture last week, Dr. Smith said there were no grizzly bears in that(iii) Hearsay. Information repeated from communication with others (for example, "At a lecture last week, Dr. Smith said there were no grizzly bears in that area").area"). (6) Counties and cities are encouraged to monitor and evaluate their efforts in critical areas protection and incorporate new scientific information, as it(6) Counties and cities are encouraged to monitor and evaluate their efforts in critical areas protection and incorporate new scientific information, as it becomes available.becomes available. [Statutory Authority: RCW [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190. WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-905, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW . WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-905, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4) (4) (b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-905, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.](b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-905, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] 365-195-910365-195-910 Criteria for obtaining the best available science.Criteria for obtaining the best available science. (1) Consultation with state and federal natural resources agencies and tribes can provide a quick and cost-effective way to develop scientific information(1) Consultation with state and federal natural resources agencies and tribes can provide a quick and cost-effective way to develop scientific information and recommendations. State natural resource agencies provide numerous guidance documents and model ordinances that incorporate the agencies'and recommendations. State natural resource agencies provide numerous guidance documents and model ordinances that incorporate the agencies' assessments of the best available science. The department can provide technical assistance in obtaining such information from state natural resources agencies,assessments of the best available science. The department can provide technical assistance in obtaining such information from state natural resources agencies, developing model GMA-compliant critical areas policies and development regulations, and related subjects.developing model GMA-compliant critical areas policies and development regulations, and related subjects. (2) A county or city may compile scientific information through its own efforts, with or without the assistance of qualified experts, and through state agency(2) A county or city may compile scientific information through its own efforts, with or without the assistance of qualified experts, and through state agency review and the Growth Management Act's required public participation process. The county or city should assess whether the scientific information it compilesreview and the Growth Management Act's required public participation process. The county or city should assess whether the scientific information it compiles constitutes the best available science applicable to the critical areas to be protected, using the criteria set out in WAC constitutes the best available science applicable to the critical areas to be protected, using the criteria set out in WAC 365-195-900365-195-900 through through 365-195-925365-195-925 and any and any technical guidance provided by the department. If not, the county or city should identify and assemble additional scientific information to ensure it has included thetechnical guidance provided by the department. If not, the county or city should identify and assemble additional scientific information to ensure it has included the best available science.best available science. [Statutory Authority: RCW [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190. WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-910, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW . WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-910, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4) (4) (b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-910, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.](b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-910, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] 365-195-915365-195-915 Criteria for including the best available science in developing policies and development regulations.Criteria for including the best available science in developing policies and development regulations. (1) To demonstrate that the best available science has been included in the development of critical areas policies and regulations, counties and cities(1) To demonstrate that the best available science has been included in the development of critical areas policies and regulations, counties and cities should address each of the following on the record:should address each of the following on the record: (a) The specific policies and development regulations adopted to protect the functions and values of the critical areas at issue.(a) The specific policies and development regulations adopted to protect the functions and values of the critical areas at issue. (b) The relevant sources of best available scientific information included in the decision-making.(b) The relevant sources of best available scientific information included in the decision-making. (c) Any nonscientific information—including legal, social, cultural, economic, and political information—used as a basis for critical area policies and(c) Any nonscientific information—including legal, social, cultural, economic, and political information—used as a basis for critical area policies and regulations that depart from recommendations derived from the best available science. A county or city departing from science-based recommendations should:regulations that depart from recommendations derived from the best available science. A county or city departing from science-based recommendations should: (i) Identify the information in the record that supports its decision to depart from science-based recommendations;(i) Identify the information in the record that supports its decision to depart from science-based recommendations; (ii) Explain its rationale for departing from science-based recommendations; and(ii) Explain its rationale for departing from science-based recommendations; and (iii) Identify potential risks to the functions and values of the critical area or areas at issue and any additional measures chosen to limit such risks. State(iii) Identify potential risks to the functions and values of the critical area or areas at issue and any additional measures chosen to limit such risks. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review often provides an opportunity to establish and publish the record of this assessment.Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review often provides an opportunity to establish and publish the record of this assessment. (2) Counties and cities should include the best available science in determining whether to grant applications for administrative variances and exemptions(2) Counties and cities should include the best available science in determining whether to grant applications for administrative variances and exemptions from generally applicable provisions in policies and development regulations adopted to protect the functions and values of critical areas. Counties and citiesfrom generally applicable provisions in policies and development regulations adopted to protect the functions and values of critical areas. Counties and cities should adopt procedures and criteria to ensure that the best available science is included in every review of an application for an administrative variance orshould adopt procedures and criteria to ensure that the best available science is included in every review of an application for an administrative variance or exemption.exemption. [Statutory Authority: RCW [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-915, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] (4)(b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-915, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] 365-195-920365-195-920 Criteria for addressing inadequate scientific information.Criteria for addressing inadequate scientific information. (1) Where there is an absence of valid scientific information or incomplete scientific information relating to a county's or city's critical areas, leading to(1) Where there is an absence of valid scientific information or incomplete scientific information relating to a county's or city's critical areas, leading to uncertainty about which development and land uses could lead to harm of critical areas or uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permittinguncertainty about which development and land uses could lead to harm of critical areas or uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permitting development, counties and cities should use the following approach:development, counties and cities should use the following approach: (a) A "precautionary or a no risk approach," in which development and land use activities are strictly limited until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved; and(a) A "precautionary or a no risk approach," in which development and land use activities are strictly limited until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved; and (b) As an interim approach, an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory(b) As an interim approach, an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory actions achieve their objectives. Management, policy, and regulatory actions are treated as experiments that are purposefully monitored and evaluated toactions achieve their objectives. Management, policy, and regulatory actions are treated as experiments that are purposefully monitored and evaluated to determine whether they are effective and, if not, how they should be improved to increase their effectiveness. An adaptive management program is a formal anddetermine whether they are effective and, if not, how they should be improved to increase their effectiveness. An adaptive management program is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to taking action and obtaining information in the face of uncertainty. To effectively implement an adaptive management program,deliberate scientific approach to taking action and obtaining information in the face of uncertainty. To effectively implement an adaptive management program, counties and cities should be willing to:counties and cities should be willing to: (i) Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management program;(i) Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management program; (ii) Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that resolves uncertainties; and(ii) Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that resolves uncertainties; and Item 10.2 Packet pg. 335/352 g g (iii) Commit to the appropriate time frame and scale necessary to reliably evaluate regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting critical areas protection(iii) Commit to the appropriate time frame and scale necessary to reliably evaluate regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting critical areas protection and anadromous fisheries.and anadromous fisheries. (2) Ongoing permit implementation monitoring and adaptive management.(2) Ongoing permit implementation monitoring and adaptive management. (a) In addition to the use of formal scientific approaches to monitoring and adaptive management program as an interim approach as described above, the(a) In addition to the use of formal scientific approaches to monitoring and adaptive management program as an interim approach as described above, the department recommends counties and cities develop and maintain ongoing monitoring and adaptive management procedures to ensure implementation of criticaldepartment recommends counties and cities develop and maintain ongoing monitoring and adaptive management procedures to ensure implementation of critical area regulations is efficient and effective. Counties and cities should consult department guidance documents for information.area regulations is efficient and effective. Counties and cities should consult department guidance documents for information. (b) Steps in developing permit implementation monitoring and adaptive management programs include:(b) Steps in developing permit implementation monitoring and adaptive management programs include: (i) Determining the reasons for monitoring;(i) Determining the reasons for monitoring; (ii) Establishing key objectives and study questions;(ii) Establishing key objectives and study questions; (iii) Designing the monitoring program;(iii) Designing the monitoring program; (iv) Determining the monitoring time frame; and(iv) Determining the monitoring time frame; and (v) Evaluating results and making recommendations.(v) Evaluating results and making recommendations. [Statutory Authority: RCW [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.05036.70A.050 and and 36.70A.19036.70A.190. WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-920, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW . WSR 23-08-037, § 365-195-920, filed 3/29/23, effective 4/29/23. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4) (4) (b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-920, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.](b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-920, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] 365-195-925365-195-925 Criteria for demonstrating "special consideration" has been given to conservation or protection measures necessary toCriteria for demonstrating "special consideration" has been given to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. (1) RCW (1) RCW 36.70A.17236.70A.172(1) imposes two distinct but related requirements on counties and cities. Counties and cities must include the "best available science"(1) imposes two distinct but related requirements on counties and cities. Counties and cities must include the "best available science" when developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas, and counties and cities must give "specialwhen developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas, and counties and cities must give "special consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. Local governments should address bothconsideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. Local governments should address both requirements in RCW requirements in RCW 36.70A.17236.70A.172(1) when developing their records to support their critical areas policies and development regulations.(1) when developing their records to support their critical areas policies and development regulations. (2) To demonstrate compliance with RCW (2) To demonstrate compliance with RCW 36.70A.17236.70A.172(1), a county or city adopting policies and development regulations to protect critical areas should(1), a county or city adopting policies and development regulations to protect critical areas should include in the record evidence that it has given "special consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromousinclude in the record evidence that it has given "special consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. The record should be developed using the criteria set out in WAC fisheries. The record should be developed using the criteria set out in WAC 365-195-900365-195-900 through 365-195-925 to ensure that conservation or protection measures through 365-195-925 to ensure that conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries are grounded in the best available science.necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries are grounded in the best available science. (3) Conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries include measures that protect habitat important for all(3) Conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries include measures that protect habitat important for all life stages of anadromous fish, including, but not limited to, spawning and incubation, juvenile rearing and adult residence, juvenile migration downstream to thelife stages of anadromous fish, including, but not limited to, spawning and incubation, juvenile rearing and adult residence, juvenile migration downstream to the sea, and adult migration upstream to spawning areas. Special consideration should be given to habitat protection measures based on the best available sciencesea, and adult migration upstream to spawning areas. Special consideration should be given to habitat protection measures based on the best available science relevant to stream flows, water quality and temperature, spawning substrates, instream structural diversity, migratory access, estuary and nearshore marinerelevant to stream flows, water quality and temperature, spawning substrates, instream structural diversity, migratory access, estuary and nearshore marine habitat quality, and the maintenance of salmon prey species. Conservation or protection measures can include the adoption of interim actions and long-termhabitat quality, and the maintenance of salmon prey species. Conservation or protection measures can include the adoption of interim actions and long-term strategies to protect and enhance fisheries resources.strategies to protect and enhance fisheries resources. [Statutory Authority: RCW [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A.19036.70A.190 (4)(b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-925, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] (4)(b). WSR 00-16-064, § 365-195-925, filed 7/27/00, effective 8/27/00.] Item 10.2 Packet pg. 336/352 BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE Infiltration of PFAS into the Deer Creek Drinking Water Aquifer (abbreviated list in chronological order) Saleh, H., Sarkar, D., Zhang, Z., Boufadel, M. and Datta, R., 2025. Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Urban Stormwater Runoff: Insights from a Roadside Rain Garden. Water,17(20), p.2982. [https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/17/20/2982] Wong, S. and D. Escobedo. 2025. Greater Lake Washington Watershed PFAS Survey: Final Report. Publication 25-03-008. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia. https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/SummaryPages/2503008.html. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2024 "Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Occurrence and Contaminant Background Support Document for the Final PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation" (https://nepis.epa.gov) Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council’s, September 2023, “PFAS Technical and Regulatory Guidance Document” (https://pfas-1.itrcweb.org/) WA Dept of Ecology 2023 “Guidance for Investigating and Remediating PFAS Contamination in Washington State” (https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/summarypages/2209058.html) Olympic View Water & Sewer District 2023 Watershed Protection Plan [https://www.olympicviewwater.com/resources ] WA Dept of Ecology 2022 “Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Chemical Action Plan” (https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/summarypages/2104048.html) WA Dept of Ecology 2022 “Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas – Guidance” https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/0510028.pdf Saifur, S. and Gardner, C.M., 2021. Loading, transport, and treatment of emerging chemical and biological contaminants of concern in stormwater. Water Science and Technology, 83(12), pp.2863-2885. [https://iwaponline.com/wst/article/83/12/2863/82044/Loading-transport- and-treatment-of-emerging ] Robson & Noble. 2018. Olympic View Water and Sewer District Wellhead Protection Area Delineation Deer Creek Springs and 228th St. Wellfield (EEC website) Olympic View Water and Sewer District PFAS Webpage [https://www.olympicviewwater.com/pfas ] Edmonds Environmental Council Webpage [https://edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/deer- creek/] Item 10.2 Packet pg. 337/352 From:Bob Danson To:Council Cc:Kelly Boswell; Billy Ward; Shipley, Brad; Clugston, Michael Subject:Public Comment 12.16.25 - Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Date:Monday, December 15, 2025 1:58:22 PM December 16 Council MeetingGood Evening Mayor Rosen, Council President Tibbot, and Councilmembers, On behalf of the Olympic View Water & Sewer District, I am submitting this written commentregarding the proposed revisions to the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) affecting the Deer Creek source aquifer, a drinking water source for our community.Olympic View submitted written public comment in support of the CARA update as it was presented at the November 25th public hearing, including the prohibition on undergroundinjection control (UIC) wells within the Deer Creek CARA. That comment was submitted with the understanding that the no-UIC provision was moving forward. The proposedordinance has been changed since the public hearing which creates a misalignment with the public record and weakens protection of a critical drinking water resource.The no-UIC provision was developed through research by the Edmonds Planningdepartment, reviewed by the Planning Board, and represented important progress towardaligning the code with Best Available Science. The recent proposal to now revise that language in the Critical Areas Ordinance appears to be driven by stormwater infrastructureand land-use concerns rather than the primary purpose of the CAO, which is protection ofcritical areas. Not allowing UICs does not prohibit development. It simply requiresdevelopment to be protective of the aquifer below. If development is desired, the developer must provide stormwater infrastructure that protects public health. This is consistent with theCity’s legal authority and responsibility to protect its citizens and drinking water resources. Recent scientific research reinforces why this protection is necessary.A 2025 peer-reviewed article Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Urban Stormwater Runoff: Insights from a Roadside Rain Garden, found that PFAS are consistentlypresent in urban stormwater at high and stable concentrations and that infiltration-based stormwater BMPs, including rain gardens and bioretention systems, removed essentially noneof these contaminants. In addition, the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Survey of PFAS in the GreaterLake Washington Watershed documented widespread PFAS throughout an urban watershed where stormwater runoff is the dominant transport pathway. Together, these studies show thatstormwater routinely contains PFAS in Washington State and that infiltrating stormwater introduces those contaminants into the subsurface environment. Where stormwater isintentionally infiltrated within a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area, PFAS contained in that stormwater pose a contamination risk to the underlying drinking water aquifer.In simple terms, infiltrating stormwater means infiltrating PFAS. PFAS in Urban Stormwater Study: PFAS in Urban Stormwater RunoffEcology study (PDF): https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/2503008.pdf Once PFAS reach an aquifer, they are extremely persistent and costly to remove. Advancedtreatment is expensive and requires long-term investment, placing the continued feasibility of the drinking water source at risk. Prevention remains the only reliable protection for a drinkingwater source. It is important to note that the Critical Areas Ordinance is not intended to resolve stormwaterinfrastructure challenges. Its purpose is to protect sensitive environmental resources using Best Available Science. The science shows that PFAS are widespread in urban stormwater and arenot effectively attenuated by infiltration practices. UIC wells and infiltration facilities therefore pose a direct risk when located within a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 338/352 For these reasons, Olympic View respectfully requests that the Council retain the no-UICprovision exactly as it was presented at the public hearing. Doing so is consistent with Best Available Science, was recommended by your Planning staff and Planning Board, protects acritical drinking water resource, and avoids creating a protection gap while additional studies are underway.Thank you for your consideration and for your commitment to protecting Edmonds’ drinking water resources.Best Regards, Bob Danson, General Manager Olympic View Water and Sewer District 8128 228th Street SW Edmonds, WA 98026-8449 NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic message is confidential and only for the use of the intended recipient(s); and contains confidential and/or privileged information belonging to Olympic View Water and Sewer District or its customers or consultants or vendors. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, disclosure or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the message and any attachments immediately. Email from this address is subject to public disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56. Item 10.2 Packet pg. 339/352 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 340/352 new or different information that isn’t already available in scientific literature. I respectfully ask that my comments be placed in the briefing material for the City Council’sJan. 6 public hearing. It is important for the Mayor and Council members to hear that thesafety of human health is far more important than new development in an area (Deer CreekCARA) designated as a critical area – specifically to protect the drinking water it produces. Because I am aware of Mr. Scordino's background and work on behalf of Edmonds andbecause time is of the essence (I only just saw the piece by Mr.Scordino on December 27),there is no time for me to be able to fact check each and every thing Mr. Scordino hasinformed us of. I believe most of you also know of Mr. Scordino and his knowledge of thissubject and I am doing my part as a citizen (and one who drinks our water) to pass alongthe above information to the Council and Mayor. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Pamela Clerico (south Edmonds resident) Item 10.2 Packet pg. 341/352 WAC 173-218-100 UIC wells that automatically meet the nonendan- germent standard. (1) The following new and existing Class V UIC wells automatically meet the nonendangerment standard and are consid- ered rule authorized after the well is registered. These Class V wells are not subject to the requirements of WAC 173-218-090: (a) UIC wells which inject fluids that meet chapter 173-200 WAC, Water quality standards for groundwaters of the state of Washington, to control subsidence; (b) UIC wells that temporarily inject fluids or other material for the purpose of maintaining a properly functioning water extraction well or dewatering well; (c) Closed loop heating and cooling water return flow wells that have not added any chemicals or product to the water; (d) Air conditioning or heat pump return flow wells that have not added any chemical or product to the water, and are used to return fluid to the supply aquifer. The fluids must not impair beneficial uses of groundwater or surface water; (e) Aquifer recharge wells that meet the requirements in chapter 173-157 WAC Underground artificial storage and recovery; (f) UIC wells used as part of a reclaimed water project that meet the requirements of the Water reclamation and reuse standards as au- thorized by RCW 90.46.042; (g) Septic systems that serve twenty or more people per day or an equivalent design capacity of 3,500 gallons or larger per day; and (i) Receive operating permits, meet the requirements and are per- mitted in accordance with chapter 246-272B WAC Large on-site sewage system regulations; or (ii) Meet the requirements of chapter 246-272A WAC On-site sewage systems. (h) UIC wells receiving stormwater from nonpollution generating surfaces; and (i) UIC wells that only receive runoff from a roof coated with an inert, nonleachable material and a roof that is not subject to venting of manufacturing, commercial, or other indoor pollutants. (2) The following Class V UIC wells automatically meet the nonen- dangerment standard, are considered rule authorized and are exempt from registering: (a) UIC wells used in residential settings that receive water from sump pumps, for basement flood control; and (b) UIC wells that only receive runoff from a residential roof. [Statutory Authority: Chapters 43.21A and 90.48 RCW. WSR 06-02-065 (Order 01-10), § 173-218-100, filed 1/3/06, effective 2/3/06. Statuto- ry Authority: RCW 43.21A.445. WSR 84-06-023 (Order DE 84-02), § 173-218-100, filed 2/29/84.] Certified on 2/20/2023 WAC 173-218-100 Page 1 Item 10.2 Packet pg. 342/352 City Council Agenda Item 11.1 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Selection of 2026 Council President and Council President Pro Tem DEPARTMENT:City Clerk's Office PRESENTER:Emily Villata NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Elect a Council President and Council President Pro Tem for a one-year term per Council’s Rules of Procedure. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: Per Council Rules of Procedure Section 2.2, each year City Council shall elect a Council President and President Pro Tem for a one-year term. The election shall be conducted by the City Clerk. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: The election process is laid out in the Rules of Procedure as follows: No one Councilmember may nominate more than one person for a given office until every member wishing to nominate a candidate has an opportunity to do so. Nominations do not require a second. The Clerk will repeat each nomination until all nominations have been made. When it appears that no one else wishes to make any further nominations, the Clerk will ask again for further nominations and if there are none, the Clerk will declare the nominations closed. A motion to close the nominations is not necessary. After nominations have been closed, voting for Council President takes place in the order nominations were made. Councilmembers will be asked to vote by a raise of hands. As soon as a nominee receives a majority vote (four votes), the Clerk will declare him/her elected. No votes will be taken on the remaining nominees. If none of the nominees receives a majority vote, the Clerk will call for nominations again and repeat the process until a single candidate receives a majority vote. The same process is conducted for the election of the Council President Pro Tem. RECOMMENDATION: Elect a Council President and Council President Pro Tem for a one-year term per Council’s Rules of Procedure. BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: None. Item 11.1 Packet pg. 343/352 City Council Agenda Item 11.2 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Discussion and Possible Adoption of the Critical Areas Ordinance Periodic Update DEPARTMENT:Planning and Development Services PRESENTER:Brad Shipley NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommends Option 3: Adopt the Critical Areas Ordinance and defer consideration of the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) regulations until completion of the Deer Creek CARA study. This approach brings the City into compliance with state requirements while allowing CARA regulations to be informed by completed, site- specific scientific analysis, consistent with best available science and adaptive management principles. Existing CARA regulations, zoning limitations, and state-level protections remain in effect during the study period, preserving aquifer protection and property owners’ development rights while reducing legal and regulatory risk. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):0 ☐ Budget Reallocation Required ☒ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: City Council is considering adoption of updates to the City’s Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), including how to address regulations for Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARA) while the Deer Creek PFAS/CARA study is ongoing. Substantive changes to the CARA approach have been made since the draft CAO was presented at the November 25 public hearing. As a result, City Council has scheduled an additional public hearing to consider these changes and evaluate alternative policy approaches. After the public hearing, City Council will discuss and potentially adopt the draft CAO. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Under the Growth Management Act (GMA), the City is required to periodically update its Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) using best available science. The current CAO update represents a comprehensive reorganization and modernization of existing regulations intended to improve clarity, consistency, and usability while maintaining environmental protection. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option 3: Adopt the Critical Areas Ordinance and defer consideration of the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) regulations until completion of the Deer Creek CARA study. This approach brings the City into compliance with state requirements while allowing CARA regulations Item 11.2 Packet pg. 344/352 to be informed by completed, site-specific scientific analysis, consistent with best available science and adaptive management principles. Existing CARA regulations, zoning limitations, and state-level protections remain in effect during the study period, preserving aquifer protection and property owners’ development rights while reducing legal and regulatory risk. BUDGET IMPACTS: There are no direct budget impacts associated with adoption of the CAO. Delaying adoption or adopting a moratorium or adaptive management program would increase staff workload and may indirectly affect the City’s ability to pursue state grants while out of compliance. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Key Notes for Council: • Existing monitoring shows Deer Creek PFAS levels below current state and federal standards. • Residential zoning and UIC regulations already protect the aquifer by strictly limiting high-risk activities. • Adaptive management allows CARA regulations to be refined based on completed science. ATTACHMENTS: See attachments filed under the Public Hearing on Draft Critical Areas Ordinance Periodic Update agenda item. Item 11.2 Packet pg. 345/352 City Council Agenda Item 11.3 January 6, 2026 - Regular Meeting TITLE:Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax - Council Action DEPARTMENT:Community Services and Economic Development PRESENTER:Todd Tatum NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommend Council approve this 0.1% sales tax to enable our streets division to provide funding to address deferred maintenance and make improvements to our street and sidewalk networks. BUDGET: Total Dollar Amount:$660,000 ☐ Approved in Budget Fund(s):111 ☒ Budget Reallocation Required ☐ No Budget Impact PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT: As presented during the public hearing. CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES: Public comment will be received during the public hearing prior to this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend Council approve this 0.1% sales tax to enable our streets division to provide funding to address deferred maintenance and make improvements to our street and sidewalk networks. BUDGET IMPACTS: This sales tax, if approved by Council at this meeting, allows the sales tax to be collected starting on April 1st and will bring in approximately $660,000 in 2026. Future years will collect the entire 12 months, which is an estimated $1,000,000/yr. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Draft Transportation Benefit District Sales Tax Ordinance Item 11.3 Packet pg. 346/352 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL SALES AND USE TAX OF ONE- TENTH OF ONE PERCENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE EDMONDS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT AS AUTHORIZED BY RCW 36.73.065 AND RCW 82.14.0455. ________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, in 2008, the City of Edmonds City Council established a transportation benefit district to be known as the Edmonds Transportation Benefit District (“District”) by way of adoption of Ordinance No. 3707; and WHEREAS, the District’s geographical boundaries comprised of the corporate limits of the City of Edmonds at the time the ordinance was adopted or as they may exist after future annexations; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) authorizes transportation benefit districts to impose an additional sales and use tax in accordance with RCW 82.14.0455 in an amount not to exceed one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) for a period of ten (10) years upon a majority vote of the governing body of the district for the purpose of financing the transportation improvements of a district; and WHEREAS, in 2016, by way of Ordinance No. 4053 and pursuant to state law, the City of Edmonds assumed the rights, powers, immunities, functions, and obligations of the District, abolished the governing body of the District, and the city council became vested with all rights, powers, immunities, functions and obligations otherwise vested by law in the governing board of the District; and Item 11.3 Packet pg. 347/352 WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v), the city council has the authority to impose up to one tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax for ten (10) years by a majority vote of the city council to be utilized pursuant to Edmonds City Code 3.65 and RCW 36.73; and WHEREAS, the city council held a public hearing on January ___, 2026 at which time the public had an opportunity to comment on the imposition of the tax and the proposed addition of new subsection B to ECC 3.65.030; and WHEREAS, the city council has carefully considered the financial needs of the city’s transportation system and the imposition of the tax, and has determined that the imposition of a one tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax for ten (10) years is in the best interest of the city; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Functions Amendment. Section 3.65.030 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “Functions of the city,” is hereby amended as follows (new text in underline, deleted text in strikethrough): 3.65.030 Functions of the city. A. The city, by a majority vote of the city council, may authorize a motor vehicle license fee as follows: 1. A vehicle fee of up to $20.00 per vehicle as provided for by RCW 82.80.140. 2. A vehicle fee of up to $40.00 as provided in RCW 82.80.140 if a vehicle fee of $20.00 has been imposed for at least 24 months; or 3. A vehicle fee of up to $50.00 as provided in RCW 82.80.140 if a vehicle fee of $40.00 has been imposed for at least 24 months and the city has met all of the requirements of RCW 36.73.065(6). B. The city, by a majority vote of the city council, may impose a tax of up to one-tenth of one percent of the sales and use tax in accordance with RCW 82.14.0455. Item 11.3 Packet pg. 348/352 B.C. When authorized by the voters pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 36.73 RCW, additional taxes, fees, charges and tolls or increases in those revenue sources may be assessed by the city for the construction, reconstruction, updating or improvement of public transportation facilities shown on the Edmonds comprehensive plan and transportation improvement plan. These additional transportation projects shall be deemed funded and effective when approved by a vote of the people in accordance with the provisions of state law. The projects authorized shall be limited to those specifically identified in the proposition put to the voters. C.D Additional transportation improvements may be added to the functions of the city upon compliance with Chapter 36.73 RCW. D.E. The city shall have and may exercise all powers and functions provided for by Chapter 36.73 RCW in order to fulfill the purposes of Chapter 36.73 RCW and this chapter. Section 2. Use of Funds Amendment. Section 3.65.040 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled “Transportation improvements funded,” is hereby amended as follows (new text in underline, deleted text in strikethrough): 3.65.040 Transportation improvements funded The funds generated by vehicle fees authorized by the city council in accordance with RCW 82.80.140 and the revenues collected by the imposition of sales and use tax as authorized by city council in accordance with RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) shall be used solely for transportation improvements that preserve, maintain and operate the existing transportation infrastructure of the city, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.73 RCW. for any lawful purpose under Chapter 36.73 RCW. Upon authorization by the voters, additional funds from other taxes, fees, charges and tolls or increases in these revenue sources may be utilized for the construction of transportation improvements specifically described in the proposition submitted to the voters. Funds raised by the exercise of powers granted in ECC 3.65.030 and/or Chapter 36.73 RCW may be utilized for any lawful purpose under Chapter 36.73 RCW., but all funds raised shall be expended only for the purposes specified, i.e.: A. For the preservation, maintenance and operation of the existing city street transportation improvement infrastructure; or B. For projects specifically designated in a ballot proposition approved by the voters and utilizing the funding source approved by the voters. Such improvements are intended to comply with the provisions of the Growth Management Act and the city’s comprehensive plan and reduce the risk of transportation facilities’ failure, improve safety, continue the cost effectiveness of the city’s infrastructure improvements and to encourage the optimum use of the transportation system. Additional transportation improvement projects may be funded only after Item 11.3 Packet pg. 349/352 compliance with the provisions of RCW 36.73.050(B) following notice, public hearing and enactment of an additional authorizing ordinance. Section 3. Imposition of Additional Sales and Use Tax. A new Section 3.28.025 of the Edmonds City Code, is hereby added to impose the additional one-tenth of one percent sales and use tax authorized by RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) to read as follows: 3.28.025 TBD sales and use tax authorized. A. Imposition. Pursuant to RCW 36.73.065(4)(a)(v) and RCW 82.14.0455, there is hereby imposed an additional sales and use tax to be collected from persons who are taxable by the state under Chapters 82.08 and 82.12 RCW upon the occurrence of any taxable event within the district. The tax imposed by this Section shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including but not limited to, the sales and use taxes imposed under Chapter 3.28 of the Edmonds City Code. B. Tax Rate. The rate of the tax imposed by this section shall be one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of the selling price (in the case of the sales tax) or the value of the article used (in the case of the use tax). C. Duration. The tax imposed by this section shall apply for a period of ten (10) years from the date the tax is first collected within the district and shall thereafter cease to be imposed unless renewed with the affirmative vote of the voters voting at an election or a majority vote of the Edmonds City Council exercising its authority as the governing body of the district. D. Use of Revenues. The revenues received from the tax imposed by this Section shall be general revenues of the transportation benefit district and shall be used for those purposes as set forth in ECC 3.65, RCW 36.73 or as otherwise authorized by law. Section 4. Duties of Clerk and Finance Director. The Deputy City Clerk and the Finance Director are hereby requested to submit this ordinance to the Washington State Department of Revenue and to request that the Department take all necessary steps to implement and collect the tax imposed by this ordinance as soon as possible. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. Item 11.3 Packet pg. 350/352 ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ON THIS ____ DAY OF JANUARY, 2026. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE DEPUTY CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Item 11.3 Packet pg. 351/352 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of December, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL SALES AND USE TAX OF ONE-TENTH OF ONE PERCENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE EDMONDS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT AS AUTHORIZED BY RCW 36.73.065 AND RCW 82.14.0455. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2025. DEPUTY CITY CLERK, EMILY VILLATA Item 11.3 Packet pg. 352/352