2022-12-14 Planning Board Packet1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
o Agenda
Edmonds Planning Board
V
SPECIAL MEETING
BRACKETT ROOM
121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020
DECEMBER 14, 2022, 7:00 PM
MEETING INFORMATION
Persons wishing to join this meeting virtually in lieu of in -person attendance for the purpose of
providing audience comments can click on or paste the following Zoom meeting link into a web
browser using a computer or smart phone
Zoom Information: https://edmondswa-
gov.zoom.us/j/82563310743?pwd=VVRlUkdzSXFISOZpMkFDZUxmSVgxdzO9&from=addon
Or comment by phone: US: +1 253 215 8782 Meeting ID: 825 63310743 Passcode: 010838
Those commenting using a computer or smart phone are instructed to raise a virtual hand to be
recognized. Persons wishing to provide audience comments by dial -up phone are instructed to press
*9 to raise a hand. When prompted, press *6 to unmute
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
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.
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Approval of Minutes
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
A. Planning Board Handbook
PUBLIC HEARINGS
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Tree Code Amendments, ADM 2022-0004
NEW BUSINESS
PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
A. Extended Agenda
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
December 14, 2022
Page 1
10. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
12. ADJOURNMENT
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
December 14, 2022
Page 2
2.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/14/2022
Approval of Minutes
Staff Lead: Michael Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Michael Clugston
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Planning Board to approve meeting minutes from November 9th.
Narrative
Draft meeting minutes attached.
Attachments:
Draft 11.09.22 Planning Board Minutes
Packet Pg. 3
2.A.a
CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Meeting
November 9, 2022
Chair Pence called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. He
noted it was the first time they have met in person in 32 months.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
Board Member Kuehn read the Land Acknowledgement.
Board Members Present
Roger Pence, Chair
Richard Kuehn
Mike Rosen
Beth Tragus-Campbell
Lily Distelhorst (student rep)'
Board Members Absent
Judi Gladstone, Vice Chair (excused)
Todd Cloutier (excused)
Staff Present
Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Angie Feser, Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Director
Mr. Clugston reported that Matt Cheung had resigned and that Board Members Gladstone, Cloutier, and
Distelhorst had indicated they would not be attending.
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER ROSEN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER
CAMPBELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 26 MEETING AS PRESENTED.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY WITH BOARD MEMBER KUEHN ABSTAINING.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Dan O'Brien stated he lives directly east of Civic Park on 7 h Avenue. He thanked the City for the park; he
thinks it will be great when it is done. He emphasized that the park is very unique with the noise of the pickleball
and the skate park. He expressed concern about the noise, especially after hours. He brought up concerns about
' Student Representative Distelhorst arrived at approximately 7:17 p.m.
N
c
0
0
L
a
0.
g
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 1 of 7
Packet Pg. 4
2.A.a
the dawn -to -dusk hours and about allowing wheeled sports. He thinks the lighting will be subtle enough so he
doesn't have concerns about that. He is fine with it being on during open hours. He hopes they can continue the
conversation after the park has been open for a while.
Jim Okanowski, Edmonds resident, spoke regarding the visioning statement. He thanked Director McLaughlin
for the input she did with the community to gain input. He attended many of the chat sessions for each of the
elements. There were a lot of good comments and modest participation from the community at each of those
events. He applauded her for going out to various areas of the community. He expressed disappointment in the
draft vision statement and stated he thinks it should be much more forward -looking than it is. He thinks the draft
is looking more at the present and the past, as opposed to looking at the future. It is more of a values statement
than a vision statement. He referred to what he thinks are well -written examples of vision statements such as
Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech and President Kennedy's vision to the nation for achieving
the goal before the decade was out of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth. Each of
these lay out clear ideas, goals, timelines, and reasons for their achievement which are the foundational elements
of a good vision statement. A vision statement should be inspirational, forward -looking, and reflect our core
c
values. He referred to the Land Acknowledgement read at the beginning of the meeting for other inspirational
ideas to include in the vision statement. He urged the City to take another look at the draft vision statement.
°
a
a
a
Tara Ashton, resident, stated she lives near the old tennis courts at the park. She also expressed concern about
the noise from the pickleball courts. They have always been able to hear the sound from the tennis courts, and
she is sure they will be able to hear the noise from the pickleball courts. She did a search for pickleball noise
c
issues online and found many results of problems people are having with the noise. The noise has driven people
to putting up fences as sound barriers and requirements for players to use sound -reducing paddles and balls.
Other areas have reduced the hours that people can play from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. She noted that the neighbors
m°
near Civic Park have already had problems with the dawn -to -dusk park usage hours. They also know that
pickleball noise complaints are a big issue in the United States. She would like to see signage to give people
guidance about the hours and make them aware of the noise concerns and ways to dampen the sounds.
Barry Ehrlich, 628 DaleX, stated that his residence of 20 years overlooks the park. He also is concerned about
the evening hours, especially in the summertime. There are a few people who abuse the hours, and the neighbors
have to listen to the wheels on the concrete and the loud, offensive language at night. He supports having limited,
specified hours, not dawn -to -dusk. He hopes they will read Pat Woodall's letters to the Parks Department and
to Chair Pence and seriously consider putting in specific hours for the Civic Center Playfield.
NEW BUSINESS
C. Civic Center Playfield / Civic Center Playfield Rules Request
Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Director Angie Feser discussed the rules request that had been submitted.
She stated she was bringing it forward to the Planning Board in the form of a recommendation for City Council.
She noted that Civic Park is a very important park for the community, and there are some challenges with its
use. She reviewed the Master Plan and PROS Plan goals and Edmonds City Code sections regarding park hours.
She discussed the project background, construction timeline, and project design.
The rules request by park neighbors is as follows:
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 2 of 7
Packet Pg. 5
2.A.a
1. Change the "Dawn to Dusk" hours to fixed hours of operation including the general park hours being 6
a.m. to 9 p.m. and restricted hours of use for the skate park, tennis/pickleball court, basketball, soccer
(multipurpose lighted athletic fields) and exercise stations to 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.
2. Prohibit wheeled sports on the walkways and promenade.
3. Limit hours of lighting of the east -west promenade to posted hours of use.
Director Feser discussed her recommendations in response to the rules request:
1. Park Hours:
• Park Hours — Dawn to Dusk (Sunrise to Sunset)
• Skate Park — 9 a.m. to Dusk (previous rules)
• Tennis/pickleball court, basketball — Dawn to Dusk
• Multipurpose athletic fields — lighted to 10:15 p.m.
• Exercise stations — Dawn to Dusk
2. Wheeled Sports: Director Feser recommended not prohibiting the use of wheeled sports within the park G
other than the possible restriction of some types of wheels activity which could damage the rubberized c
track. The wide sidewalks and paved paths provide for multiple uses including bicycles, tricycles, strider Q.
bikes, scooters, rollerblades, and the like. Currently, there are no prohibitions of wheeled sports in any 0.
a
City of Edmonds parks nor any city code that allows prohibition of this use. V)
3. Promenade Lighting Hours: Director Feser recommended allowing for pedestrian lighting after dusk.
City practice is to have pedestrian lighting through dark hours for safety and expanded opportunity of
use by park users especially in the fall and winter months (Hickman Park). Edmonds Police Department
supports the lighting. This enables pedestrian movement through the park rather than alleyways. There
will be limited lighting within the park, with most of it being the east -west promenade, one side of the
concrete path, and a 30' lighting radius.
Director Feser recommended allowing a year of usage before making any significant changes. She reviewed
enforcement challenges. She requested consideration of a recommendation to Council by the Planning Board.
Board Member Kuehn agreed that a lot of thoughtfulness has been put into the park, and it is hard to make a
recommendation to change when they don't really know how it will work out. As of right now he is comfortable
with her recommendations.
Board Member Rosen asked about exceptions beyond the dawn -to -dusk limits. Director Feser explained that
4th of July is an example of one of those times. Exceptions are developed with conditions surrounding special
events agreements. Board Member Rosen noted that the pickleball demand is very high. He is wondering if
there might be some public -private partnership opportunities that could relieve some of the burden from the
Parks Department while meeting the need. He also asked if they have explored any of the noise -mitigating
technology associated with the sport. Director Feser acknowledged there are ways to go about requiring
equipment that can help with the noise — both the paddle and the ball. There are also sound -reducing baffling
walls that can be put up in the courts to help absorb the sound. This is staff s least favorite method because of
the lack of visibility in and out of the courts as well as the expense and maintenance required. Staff is more
supportive of using the noise -mitigating equipment and controlling the hours around using the court. She stated
she would support looking at reduced hours for the pickleball on the tennis court because of the noise.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 3 of 7
Packet Pg. 6
2.A.a
Board Member Campbell echoed comments thanking the audience members for their comments and letters.
She thanked Director Feser for putting together information, especially regarding the lighting. In general, she is
supportive with moving forward with this. She agrees with the audience comment that says we need to re-
evaluate this. She is also supportive of coming back to this in a year after they have had some time to see how
it works out.
Board Member Campbell provided more detailed feedback on staff's recommendations:
• She asked about putting up something on the west side of the skate park which might absorb sound
rather than reflect it. Director Feser noted this is a possibility they could explore. There is an existing
Boys and Girls Club and possibly a new Boys and Girls Club in the future. This could be something
they consider as they look at plans for the new building. Board Member Campbell encouraged this.
• She asked about the circumstances surrounding having playfields lit until 10:15. Director Feser
explained the lights are turned on in conjunction with scheduled activities. This could be city
programs or other users. The irrigation and lighting are all handled remotely. If there is something
2
scheduled, the playfield lights will go off at 10:15. If there is nothing scheduled, the lights never go
0
on. Board Member Campbell asked about historical complaints about the lighting use at the
>
playfields in the past. Director Feser explained she didn't have any history with that because she
a
started with the City in April of 2020. The use of Civic Park was prior to that. Also, prior to
a
construction of the Civic Park programming was diminished significantly because of COVID. She
noted she could check with staff about complaints they had received. She commented that
W
discussions with night police staff revealed that there had not been many serious issues with the
fields. There have been some calls about skaters after dark, but the police are right across the street.
She added that the field lighting is much improved to the old lighting. The new lights are very
c
precise on the field without a lot of spillover.
m
• She is in support of the dawn -to -dusk park hours because of the clarity of this; however, she agrees
c
with the concerns about the pickleball courts. She agreed with the recommendation about trying to
do some signage and education about respectful use of the areas. She did not recommend changing
a
the ending time until they have more information about how the space if being used. She thought
N
the previous skate park rules of 9 am to dusk seemed acceptable. She doesn't feel like early morning
o
use of the exercise stations is going to cause any sort of noise issues. She did not feel like the
playfield lighting would be a problem as long as the lights are oriented as described with the new
lighting.
c`
• She agreed with the City's recommendation to not limit wheeled sports on the promenade but
stressed that people need to know and use the rules of the road.
E
Regarding promenade lighting, she thanked the City for the light orientation consideration. She
agreed with the Police Department that the lighting should be on during dark hours for safety
reasons. She requested that they do not put in any overhead lighting at the skate park as this would
encourage nighttime use.
Student Representative Distelhorst agreed with staff recommendations. She was in support of allowing wheeled
sports inside the park because this the park is a great resource for everyone in the city to use. She thinks the
10:15 playfield light turnoff time makes sense for athletes. She agreed that lighting on the walkway at night is
very important for safety.
Chair Pence asked about the recommendation for dawn -to -dusk park hours except for areas that are lighted. He
asked how this would get communicated and noted it could be confusing for users. Director Feser suggested
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 4 of 7
Packet Pg. 7
2.A.a
signage that would explain that the park is closed at dusk, but the promenade is still available to walk through
the park. Chair Pence noted there is a fabric material that has great sound absorbing qualities and is frequently
applied to fences along highways. This may be something to explore for the pickleball area even though it would
block some views. He agreed with the recommendation to have a minimum set of clear rules to start with and
give it a year to see how they are working before making changes.
Vice Chair Rosen also thought that waiting a year was good unless something important comes up sooner. He
was a little troubled by the lack of ordinance on wheeled sports. He suggested isolating that issue and getting a
recommendation from staff at some point in the future.
Board Member Campbell agreed that the promenade through the park needs to have careful signage to avoid
confusion. She supported using Authority of the Resource type signage.
Director Feser thanked the Planning Board and the members of the public for their input. She indicated staff
would make some changes and bring this back.
A. Debrief. November lst Joint Meeting with City Council
Chair Pence reviewed the topics of the joint meeting held with the City Council on November 1. At the meeting
he had reviewed the rules that guide the Planning Board and the main substantive issues that they are addressing
(Comprehensive Plan Update and the Development Code revision). He stated that Mike Clugston will be the
lead person for the Development code rewrite. He commented that there was a lot of emphasis by council
members at the meeting about issues on Highway 99 such as the infrastructure improvements and a planning
study the City has undertaken. This was emphasized as an area of priority by the Council.
Vice Chair Rosen agreed and stated that the Board has been given direction by the Council's priorities as stated
at the meeting.
Board Member Campbell noted that there was mention of a certain Planning Board's member's attendance at
other meetings in the city. She would like help in knowing what events are coming up so she and others have
an opportunity to participate in that way.
Student Representative Distelhorst commented that when people talk about housing and development in
Edmonds, they also talk about keeping the "charm" of Edmonds. She thinks they are referring to single-family
residential housing, but she stressed that they can keep a charming city while focusing on other things like bike
lanes, transit, and multifamily housing.
Board Member Kuehn agreed it would be nice to have a simple reminder about events that board members
might want to attend.
Chair Pence commented that the Planning Board made a formal request to Council, sponsored by
Councilmember Teitzel, for a budget amendment to support hybrid meetings by the Planning Board as is done
by the Council. He indicated he would investigate providing some sort of calendar of events for the Board.
N
as
c
0
0
a
0.
a
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 5 of 7
Packet Pg. 8
2.A.a
Board Member Campbell said she went to the City of Edmonds website to search for a calendar of events. She
got one, but it appears to be blank. Chair Pence acknowledged that this is an issue, and he will add this to his
topics to address with staff.
B. Review Draft: Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement
Chair Pence noted that at least three board members were present for the unveiling of the vision statement at
Porchfest over the weekend. He solicited feedback on the vision statement by Board.
The City of Edmonds Vision Statement.- Edmonds is a welcoming city offering outstanding quality of
life for all. We value environmental stewardship, vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, safe and healthy
streets, and a thriving arts scene. We are engaged residents who take pride in shaping our resilient
future.
Chair Pence commented that this seems more like a values statement than a statement pointing the planning c
process one way or another. He feels like it is too broad to be useful in planning.
0
L
Board Member Campbell agreed with Chair Pence. It is a values statement and reflects values the City has, but a
there is no action. It needs to be distilled into additional direction in order to help guide.
Board Member Kuehn agreed that this is a statement of values. This is not necessarily bad, but he is not sure if
it does what it is intended to do.
Vice Chair Rosen said he is a big fan of vision statements. He applauds the City for heading in that direction.
He wondered about the process for evaluating whether this truly encapsulates what they heard from the
community outreach. He also wondered how this will be used. If it is used appropriately, it should be the filter
through which all other things must pass. He agrees that it is more of a values statement. Vision statements
should be inspirational and aspirational and invoke emotion. This does not do that. He thinks the City needs to
make sure that everybody understands what a vision statement is in the same way. Having a common language
would help. In his opinion a vision statement states the desired destination — where they are going. It would also
be helpful for the community to be aware of the schedule for developing this. He noted that a high priority in
the community outreach was housing, and this does not mention that. Should it? He also expressed concern that
this does not even nod at the business community.
Student Representative Distelhorst agreed that it doesn't address multifamily residences or businesses, but she
felt it was inspiring and evoked positive images of how they want the City to be. She thinks it is a great vision
statement.
Chair Pence asked about next steps. Mr. Clugston was not sure. Vice Chair Rosen suggested asking the Council
how they would like the Planning Board to be involved. Chair Pence concurred and indicated he would bring
it up.
D. Discuss Attendance Policies for Planning Board
Chair Pence brought up concerns about low attendance in the past few months. He noted that the alternate
position has been advertised. There is now another member vacancy upon the resignation of Matt Cheung. Chair
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 6 of 7
Packet Pg. 9
2.A.a
Pence brought up concerns about the way this had played out and stated that Mr. Cheung was offended by the
process. Mr. Clugston explained that there had been a misunderstanding, and it was an unfortunate situation,
but there was no intent to offend Mr. Cheung.
Vice Chair Rosen reviewed the existing attendance rules. He wondered if they have been overly gracious in the
way they have/have not been enforced. Chair Pence agreed.
Board Member Campbell recommended going through the rules with new board members to make sure
everyone understands. She also cautioned against being overly strict because of the challenges they are having
finding people to fill the positions. Chair Pence concurred. He stated he prefers to handle this in a casual,
personal way.
N
Chair Pence asked staff about the status of a Planning Board member manual that Kemen Lien had discussed.
Mr. Clugston said he didn't know but indicated he would look into it. He noted that Director McLaughlin
wanted to have one of these for each board. He will try to bring something to the Board next month. c
PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
a
a
Mr. Clugston reviewed the extended agenda. There were comments and questions about the schedule. a
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
None
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Board Member Kuehn said he would be sending an email to City Council to request a speedy adoption of the
budget amendment to allow for hybrid meetings. He encouraged other board members to do the same.
Vice Chair Rosen thanked Matt Cheung for his service and stated he was sorry to see him go. He was
disappointed about the way this was handled and noted it didn't seem to be unique to this board. He encouraged
better protocols by staff. He recommended that in the recruitment process they follow up with people who have
applied for other boards and commissions to see if they are interested. He also recommended very specific
training about roles and responsibilities with board members. It would also be nice to thank and recognize
people when they leave.
Student Representative Distelhorst said she really enjoyed the announcement of the vision statement at
Porchfest. It was a great opportunity to see a lot of people in the city who were interested in the Comprehensive
Plan and to talk to fellow Planning Board members, the Council, the Mayor, and staff. She hopes to see more
events like this where they can interact with people with other positions in the City.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 9, 2022 Page 7 of 7
Packet Pg. 10
5.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/14/2022
Planning Board Handbook
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Michael Clugston
Background/History
This is a new topic.
Staff Recommendation
Review the attached draft handbook. Discuss at the meeting and provide any comments or corrections
to staff using your City email account after the meeting.
Narrative
The intent of the handbook is to provide members, particularly new members, with onboarding and
context about the Planning Board.
Also, the Board's enabling legislation in ECC 10.40 indicates that the Board must adopt internal rules of
procedure and rules governing election and duties of officers of the board. It's unknown whether such
rules were ever agreed upon in the past but it's likely some were since the board has been functioning
for many years. Now would be a good opportunity to discuss the rules again and include them in the
Board's handbook. Some draft language is included in the handbook for review and discussion.
Attachments:
DRAFT PB Handbook v1 - 12.7.22
Packet Pg. 11
DRAFT Planning Board Handbook
J„—��o
This handbook was organized to provide an overview of the Planning Board and its processes
and to gather useful references useful in one place. It is not exhaustive but touches on many of
the aspects of the Board's organization and work. Rules of procedure and rules governing the
election and duties of officers are included.
Two important documents are referenced in the handbook and are available on the City's
website - the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Edmonds City Codes (ECC) and the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC).
Welcome
History
Powers and Duties
Orientation
Meetings
Administration, Membership, Officers, Quorum
Conduct
Appendices
N
Welcome from the Planning and Development Director
N
Hello! The City of Edmonds boards and commissions play an important role in serving our r
community. Each provides advice and recommendations to the Mayor and City Council >
regarding programs, activities, and issues unique to their mission and purpose. Edmonds
Planning and Development Department oversees the Architectural Design, Planning and Tree
Boards in addition to the Historical Preservation Commission. I am generally responsible for
handling board budgets, staffing, and any legal or policy issues that may arise.
Thank you for your volunteer service to the City of Edmonds.
Susan McLaughlin
[(signature]]
Planning Board History
The Planning Board was created by Edmonds City Council in 1980 (Ordinance 2170). The
Board combined the activities of the Park and Recreation Advisory Board, the Parking
Commission, the City Planning Commission and Shorelines Management Citizens Advisory
Committee. The Board has an official webpage which summarizes a variety of information
about Board activities.
Planning Board Powers and Duties
All City boards and commissions have powers and duties codified in Title 10 of the Edmonds
City Code (ECC). According to the Planning Board's codes in Section 10.40.020 ECC:
DRAFT PB Handbook vl - 12.7.22 Paj- I, 1�
Packet Pg. 12
5.A.a
C. Powers and Duties. The planning board shall serve in an advisory capacity to the
mayor and the city council in the following matters:
1. The board shall advise on all amendments to the comprehensive plan. This
includes reviewing all elements of the plan on a periodic basis and reporting to
the mayor and city council on the need for changes in the plan. It also includes
holding public hearings and making recommendations to the mayor and city
council on proposed changes to the plan, to the text of the development
regulations, and also to the zoning map in the case of rezones, as provided in
ECDC Title 20. Review of and recommendations for the plan may be prepared as
a whole or in successive parts.
2. The board shall advise the mayor and city council on all parking matters that
involve an amendment or other modification to any city ordinance or code
section within the jurisdiction of the board.
3. The board shall serve as an ongoing park board and advise the mayor and city
council on all matters relating to the acquisition and development of all city parks
and recreation facilities.
4. The board shall do research and investigation on specific projects assigned to it
N
by the mayor and city council. The board will analyze data collected, arrange for Cli
public participation, and organize its findings. The board will then present its r
findings to the mayor and city council detailing a summary of pertinent data,
public contribution, alternatives available, and may, if appropriate, recommend a ,>
course of action, giving reasons for such recommendation. °o_
5. The board shall have such other powers and duties as contained in
Chapter 35A.63 RCW, as may be amended from time to time, that are not
otherwise specifically delegated to the hearing examiner or other specific staff or
agency of the city.
Chapter 10.40 is included in its entirety as Appendix 1.
Orientation
Once a member's appointment has been confirmed by Council, a city email address is assigned
for their use. All Board -related correspondence and meeting agendas from the city will be sent
to that email. Do not use your personal email for City or Board business as it is subject to public
records requests.
Staff Roles & Responsibilities
Mike Clugston is staff liaison to the Planning Board. Mike has subject matter expertise related
to Board business. He provides guidance in developing the Board's extended agendas,
coordinates with the Board Chair on meeting agenda items, and facilitates/records Board
meetings.
Pal--), I �
Packet Pg. 13
5.A.a
Michelle Martin is the Administrative Assistant to the Planning Division. She is primarily
responsible for distributing meeting agendas and posting minutes once they are transcribed.
Carolyn LaFave is the Executive Assistant to the Mayor. Carolyn manages personnel on City
boards and commissions, advertises for vacancies, and maintains the Planning Board position
list. If your personal information changes during your tenure or should you need to resign your
position during your term for any reason, contact Carolyn.
[[ ]] is the Planning Division Manager and oversees daily operations of the Planning
Division and the Boards they support. If Mike is unavailable, [[ ]] is the City staff
contact for any Planning Board business or issues. [[ ]] should be contacted initially
and included in any correspondence for any Planning Board projects or events that involve
Planning staffing resources.
Contact Information
Mike Clugston
michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov
Michelle Martin
michelle.martin@edmondswa.gov
Carolyn LaFave
carolyn.lafave@edmondswa.gov
[Planning Manager]
[email address]
Susan McLaughlin
susan.mclaughlin@edmondswa.gov
The Planning and Development Department is located on the second floor of City Hall (121 5tn
Ave. N) and can be reached at 425-771-0220.
Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) training
The Washington State Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) RCW 42.30.020 and Edmonds ECC
10.02 codes strive for greater government transparency by requiring all board/commission
business be conducted in open public meetings. All new board members are required to
take OPMA training within 90 days of appointment and to retake the training every 4
years. The City Attorney typically provides this training at a regular board meeting early in
the year but there are online options available as well. If using the online option, provide
Mike a copy of your training certificate so he can notify the City Clerk that you have
completed the training.
OPMA and communicating via email, social media, phone, etc.
Violations of OPMA laws can result in penalties, as well as a breakdown in confidence in
government. The city but also individuals can be held liable for OPMA violations. For that
reason, board and commission members are advised to conduct business in regular or
special meetings and retreats, but not engage in emails and other electronic
communication between members outside of meetings. Even seemingly innocuous email
discussions can unknowingly become 'rolling quorums' in violation of OPMA rules. Urgent
information that must be conveyed to all board members prior to the next meeting can be
sent to staff for distribution via 'BCC' with 'no reply' expressly stated at the top of
informational emails. This handout from the Municipal Research Services Center (MRSC) helps
explain electronic communications under OPMA rules.
N
N
ti
N
r
Pal- 2 , I �
Packet Pg. 14
5.A.a
Meetings
"Regular meetings" are held in person the second and fourth Wednesdays of the month at 7
PM in Council Chambers, at the Public Safety Complex located at 205 5t" Avenue N in Edmonds.
Planning Board meetings are scheduled for 2 hours but may run under or over time, depending
on the agenda.
During COVID, meetings were held virtually using the Zoom platform. As of November 1, 2022,
all board meetings became in -person only. If meetings are held remotely again in the future (or
if "hybrid" meetings become possible), members may join meetings and participate on the
Zoom webinar platform when admitted as a "panelist" versus joining the meeting as an
"attendee." Please allow sufficient time to join the webinar and notify staff if you are having
technical difficulties.
"Special meetings" are any meetings that take place outside the regularly scheduled date, time
and/or place. Public notice is required at least 24 hours in advance. The special meeting agenda
must be posted online and physically at 3 locations: in City Hall, at the Edmonds Public Library
and in the entrance to the Public Safety Building, outside Council Chambers. Once a special
meeting agenda is posted, the board cannot consider any subject or issue that is not listed on
the agenda per OPMA rules. Members may remove items but not add new items. Special
meetings are typically called for emergencies or for a focused topic or topics.
"Joint meetings" involving the Planning Board occur periodically. The Board may join another C,
group's meeting (as with City Council) or may host another board or commission to discuss IN
certain topics of common interest (Tree Board, Economic Development Commission, r
Architectural Design Board, etc.).
The Board "retreat" occurs during the first quarter of each year. The Board's work plan for the
year is established at the retreat.
Meeting Agendas
The purpose of an agenda is to organize Board business, set and achieve goals, plan events, and
work on projects efficiently. Meeting agendas are a coordinated effort:
• Members contact Chair/Vice Chair with clearly stated agenda topics. Chair may ask
member(s) how much time the topic may need and who will be leading the discussion
The Chair may suggest to members certain topics be placed on a subsequent meeting
agenda.
• The Chair and staff discuss the upcoming meeting agenda to further clarify and prioritize
topics. A final meeting agenda is due to staff by 5pm on the Friday prior to the upcoming
meeting.
Although agendas can be posted up to 24 hours before the meeting, out of courtesy to
members, staff posts upcoming meeting agendas the Friday prior to the next meeting.
That allows members sufficient time to review the upcoming meeting agenda, read the
previous meeting minutes and complete any action items prior to the next meeting.
Pa
Packet Pg. 15
5.A.a
• Agendas (including special meeting agendas) must be posted at least 24 hours before
the meeting, or the meeting cannot be held. Posting the meeting agenda constitutes
public noticing.
Extended Agenda
The Planning Board maintains an extended agenda, which is a forward -looking schedule
containing several months of meeting dates. Ever evolving, this agenda is intended for
longer term meeting schedules and maintaining a list of quarterly and annual agenda items
as well as topics of Board concern for future work.
Meetine Attendance
Your attendance at Planning Board meetings is important! If something arises that
prevents your attending a regular meeting, please notify the Planning Board Chair (or Vice
Chair, as needed). Excused absences must be noted by the chairperson in the meeting
minutes during roll call. Members of all boards/commissions must attend at least 70% of =
the regular meetings in any one calendar year and cannot miss more than 3 consecutive
meetings, excused absences notwithstanding, per the code requirements set forth in ECDC m°
1.05. Any board member that does not meet attendance requirements may be removed
from that position by the mayor, per ECDC 1.05.020 and 1.05.030 (Appendix 2).
ca
Meeting Notes a
N
Planning Board meetings are recorded by audio (and video as available) then professionally
transcribed as draft meeting minutes. Draft minutes are attached to the agenda of the r
following meeting for approval. Board members should review the draft minutes and discuss
any changes to them that are needed. Once approved (or approved as corrected), meeting c
minutes are posted on the Planning Board meeting webpage. �°
Board Administration, Membership, Officers, and Quorum
m
By code, the Planning Board consists of seven members plus one alternate. The Board may also a -
have a non -voting student representative. All Board members must be Edmonds residents a
and ideally be from different areas of the city. No planning experience is required; the goal
0
is to have a board of members with varied occupational and professional experience.
a�
Officer Positions E
Officers are normally selected the last meeting of the year or the first meeting of a new
year. If volunteering for an officer position, carefully consider your personal schedule,
your comfort level with electronic communication and availability outside of meetings for
tasks such as coordinating meeting agendas. While not essential to have an in-depth
knowledge, the Chair should be familiar with rules of order to facilitate meetings. When
nominating someone, consider the same.
The Chair runs board meetings and is the primary liaison with staff. The Vice Chair
operates in the same capacity when the Chair is not available.
The Chair/Vice Chair positions are typically rotated each year, with the Vice Chair moving
to Chair when the previous Chair's year is up.
Pa
Packet Pg. 16
5.A.a
Quorum
All board members share an equal right and obligation to participate in Planning Board
decisions. This handout from Jurassic Parliament is helpful in making a shift from discussing
affairs in a conversational manner to conducting board business in a democratic manner.
Board business is conducted by consensus agreement (vote) by a minimum number of
members (quorum). Per ECDC 10.40.020, four Planning Board members constitute a
quorum for transaction of business and at least three members are needed to take action
on any particular item before the Board (i.e., if two out of four members abstained from
voting on an item, no action could be taken on that item).
The Alternate position generally abstains from voting except if needed for a quorum. In the
event a regular member is absent or disqualified for any reason, the alternate has all the
powers of a regular member, including the right to vote on board decisions. The alternate
is subject to the same attendance requirements as regular board members. If a regular
position on the board becomes vacant, the alternate becomes a regular member and fills
that vacancy for the remainder of the unexpired term.
Budget
The Council provides money annually for professional services used by staff to support the
Planning Board including the professional minute transcriber, printing, noticing, and the like
Document Storage N
IT has set up accounts for boards and commissions in the City's File Transfer Protocol server, r
WingFTP for document and photo storage. Due to public records laws, Board members should
not use personal or other external file storage. Your staff liaison can provide the FTP server
password and account login information. You can log on to WingFTP to upload new documents
to share with the Board. You can also download documents from the server to make changes,
then upload the edited documents. If certain documents should be archived, let your staff
liaison know so they can be moved to the City/Planning shared drive.
Member Conduct
At meetings, please respect fellow board members' time by considering new topics (that
are not on the agenda) for the following/next month's meeting agenda and limit personal
commentary. The Chair and members must always insist on courtesy and respect. No
personal remarks, no insulting language, no attacks, no interrupting, no sidebar
conversations, no disrespectful body language. If this happens, the Chair or any member
should gently but firmly put a stop to it.
Outside of meetings, all communication with City staff should be through the contacts
referenced previously.
Pal-< f I �
Packet Pg. 17
5.A.a
Appendices
1. Planning Board code (ECC 10.40)
2. Public Meeting attendance (ECC 1.05)
3. City email password/sign-in procedure
Pa
Packet Pg. 18
5.A.a
1. Planning Board enabling language (Chapter 10.40 of the Edmonds City Code)
10.40.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide for the creation of a planning board pursuant to
Chapter 35A.63 RCW, and provide for its membership, organization, operation, and
expenses. The planning board shall generally serve in an advisory capacity to the city in
regional and local planning and specifically assist in the development of the
comprehensive plan and development regulations and their successive review and
amendment from time to time. The board shall have the additional duties specifically set
forth in this chapter and such ad hoc duties as the city council may from time to time
assign to it. [Ord. 4222 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 2342, 1983; Ord. 2170 § 2, 1980].
10.40.020 Planning board.
A. Appointment. There is created the planning board, consisting of seven members. Each
member shall be appointed by the mayor, subject to confirmation by the city council.
1. Members of the board must be residents of the city of Edmonds.
2. Although the city of Edmonds is not divided into political or geographical wards, it is
the intent of this section that said board membership shall maintain a reasonable
balance of geographical distribution throughout the city of Edmonds.
3. It is the intent of this section to maintain a diversified representation of occupations
and experience on the planning board. To this end each appointee shall be considered Cl
for board membership according to his/her field of experience, among other factors. N
r
4. An alternative member shall be appointed to serve in the event any regular member is
absent or disqualified for any reason. In the event a regular member is absent or c
disqualified for any reason, the alternate shall have all the powers of a regular member, �°
including the right to vote on board decisions. The alternate shall be subject to the some
attendance requirements as regular board members. In the event that a regular position =
on the board shall be declared vacant, the alternate shall be deemed to fill such vacancy a
for the remainder of the unexpired term. LL
B. Term. In order to provide for continuity of membership, members shall be assigned a
position number. Except as provided below, two positions shall expire each year. The
term of each position shall be four years, provided, that the current term for each
position shall expire, and a new term shall begin, at the end of the years shown,
respectively, below, and further provided, that the current term for Position 1 will be a
short term ending at the end of 202Z to be followed by a four-year term:
Position One
- 2022
Position Five
- 2024
Position Two
- 2022
Position Six
- 2024
Position
- 2023
Position
- 2021
Three
Seven
Position
- 2023
Alternate
- 2021
Four
Pal-V, 1�
Packet Pg. 19
5.A.a
C. Powers and Duties. The planning board shall serve in an advisory capacity to the
mayor and the city council in the following matters:
1. The board shall advise on all amendments to the comprehensive plan. This includes
reviewing all elements of the plan on a periodic basis and reporting to the mayor and
city council on the need for changes in the plan. It also includes holding public hearings
and making recommendations to the mayor and city council on proposed changes to the
plan, to the text of the development regulations, and also to the zoning map in the case
of rezones, as provided in ECDC Title 20. Review of and recommendations for the plan
may be prepared as a whole or in successive parts.
2. The board shall advise the mayor and city council on all parking matters that involve
an amendment or other modification to any city ordinance or code section within the
jurisdiction of the board.
3. The board shall serve as an ongoing park board and advise the mayor and city council
on all matters relating to the acquisition and development of all city parks and
recreation facilities.
4. The board shall do research and investigation on specific projects assigned to it by the °0
a
mayor and city council. The board will analyze data collected, arrange for public
participation, and organize its findings. The board will then present its findings to the
mayor and city council detailing a summary of pertinent data, public contribution, a
alternatives available, and may, if appropriate, recommend a course of action, giving N
reasons for such recommendation.
N
r
5. The board shall have such other powers and duties as contained in
Chapter 35A.63 RCW, as may be amended from time to time, that are not otherwise
specifically delegated to the hearing examiner or other specific staff or agency of the
city.
D. Operation.
1. The city planning division shall provide regular staff services to the planning board.
Other city departments shall provide staff services as requested by the planning board.
2. The city council shall establish an annual budget for planning board operations for
services in addition to regular staff services. Should the planning board and planning
staff determine that a particular project requires services in addition to those normally
provided by the city staff, then an estimate of needs detailing the type of assistance and
funding required shall be presented to the city council for approval before that project is
undertaken.
3. Four members of the board shall be the minimum number necessary to constitute a
quorum for the transaction of business, provided, that the vote of not less than three
members shall be necessary to take action on any particular item before it.
4. The board shall hold regular meetings on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each
month at 7:00 p.m. at the Edmonds city council chambers. Cancellation of a regular
meeting, or a different location for a regular meeting, shall be announced at the last
regular meeting preceding the affected meeting, if possible, otherwise the change will be
advertised in the regular manner.
Pa
Packet Pg. 20
5.A.a
5. The city council shall meet periodically with the planning board at a city council
meeting in order to review and update planning board agendas. The intent of this
section is to stimulate continuing communication between mayor, city council and the
planning board in an effort to identify and solve the problems facing the city of
Edmonds. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the manner in which items are
placed on a planning board agenda nor the topics that may be considered by the
planning board.
6. The board shall adopt rules of procedure and rules governing election and duties of
officers of the board; provided, however, said rules shall pertain only to the internal
procedures of the members and said rules and procedures may be questioned only by
members of the board and do not give standing to question said procedures to
nonmembers or other parties. [Ord. 4222 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 3421 § 1, 2002; Ord.
3094 § 1, 1996; Ord. 2659, 1988; Ord. 2656 § 4, 1988; Ord. 2433, 1984; Ord. 2342, 1983;
Ord. 2196 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2170 § 3, 1980].
N
N
ti
N
r
Page,
Packet Pg. 21
5.A.a
2. Public Meeting Attendance (Chapter 1.05 of the Edmonds City Code)
1.05.010 Attendance required — Remote participation allowed.
A. In addition to being subject to removal for other particularized grounds as set forth in
applicable provisions of the Edmonds City Code and violations of the city of Edmonds
Code of Ethics for Board and Commission Members, members of all city boards,
commissions and committees (hereinafter "members"), except as set forth herein, shall
be removed from office, and the position deemed vacant as set forth in ECC 1.05.020(C)
if such member attends less than 70 percent of the regular meetings in any one calendar
year, and/or is not in attendance at three or more consecutive regular meetings.
Members may participate in board and commission meetings remotely (by telephone,
video conference, etc.) and such participation shall be considered attendance for the
purposes of this subsection; provided, that any such participation must allow for all other o
members of the board or commission and any public in attendance to hear the member
on the remote device; and provided further, that any member participating remotely
must commence participation at the beginning of the meeting and must declare an
intention to participate until the end of the meeting. Remote participation is not a right. c
Reasonable efforts should be made to facilitate remote participation within the limits of 00
a
the city's personnel and fiscal resources, but technical disruption may still occur. After
resuming a remote connection after any technical disruption of said connection, the a
chair shall determine, subject to appeal, whether a remote member may participate in a
any action on a matter that may have been discussed during the disconnection, based on Cl
the duration of the disconnection, nature of the discussion, etc. N
r
B. The chairperson of the particular board, commission or committee may excuse,
subject to appeal, any member from attendance at any particular meeting or meetings
for reasons that are (1) work related, (2) due to illness or death in the family, (3)
extended vacations in excess of two weeks in length, or (4) technical disruption;
provided, however, each such excused absence shall be so noted by the chairperson at
the meeting from which the member is being excused and such fact shall be recorded in
the minutes along with the reason given for the excused absence by the member.
Excused absences shall not be counted for purposes of removal from office, but only if so
noted in the minutes as set forth herein. In the absence of the chairperson, the member
acting in the chairperson's behalf, such as vice -chairperson or pro tem, shall make the
determination, subject to appeal, of whether the absence is excused, and announce the
same for recording in the minutes of the meeting from which the member is excused.
[Ord. 4266 § 1, 2022, Ord. 4098 § 1, 2018, Ord. 2556, 1986; Ord. 2033 § 2, 1978; Ord.
2156 § 1, 1980].
1.05.020 Attendance records.
A. The city clerk shall keep a record of attendance of all board, commission and
committee meetings. Upon any member failing to attend three or more consecutive
regular meetings without the chairperson's excuse being noted in the minutes, the city
clerk shall certify said member's name in writing to the mayor and shall notify in writing
the members, the chairperson, and the appropriate city department head.
Page,
Packet Pg. 22
5.A.a
B. On or before January 15th of each calendar year, commencing in 1980, the city clerk
shall compile a list of members, if any, who have attended less than 70 percent of the
regular meetings in the past calendar year without the chairperson's excuses being
noted in the minutes, and shall certify this list to the mayor. The city clerk shall also
notify in writing the members, the applicable chairperson and the appropriate city
department head.
C. The member shall be automatically removed from office and the position deemed
vacant as of the date of the city clerk's written notification as set forth in subsections (A)
and (8) of this section. [Ord. 2033 § 3, 1978; Ord. 2156 § 2, 1980].
1.05.030 New nominees appointment/ confirmations.
Upon receipt from the city clerk of the names of members failing to maintain attendance
as provided herein, the mayor shall, within 90 days thereof, submit new nominations to
the city council for confirmation. The city council shall confirm or reject the nominations
within 30 days after the mayor submits the nominations to the council for consideration.
A member removed for failing to maintain attendance as provided by this chapter may
not be renominated or reappointed to a position on that or other city of Edmonds'
board, committee or commission for at least one year after removal. [Ord. 2033 § 4,
1978].
1.05.040 Exemptions.
N
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to members of the following boards, Cli
commissions and committees: N
r
A. Edmonds city council; and
Y
B. Edmonds civil service commission. [Ord. 2033 § 5, 1978]. 0
0
1.05.050 Quorum requirements.
�a
A. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Edmonds City Code, if the number of m
members of any city board, commission or committee having seven positions and subject a
to this chapter should be reduced to six or less for any reason, including a member's a
removal for failure to maintain attendance, three members shall constitute a quorum. o
B. Members participating in a board or commission meeting remotely, as provided for in =
a�
ECC 1.05.010, shall be counted towards the number of members required to constitute a E
quorum by the regulations pertaining to each board or commission, provided in ECC Title
10. [Ord. 4098 § 2, 2018, Ord. 2033 § 6, 1978]. a
Page,
Packet Pg. 23
5.A.a
3. Instructions for accessing City Email:
Please click here to access outlook. office3 65. com
You will then be directed to the below paged where you may enter your email
(Firstname.Lastnamegedmondswa. gov)
If need to reset your password click into "Can't access your account?" to reset.
Outlook
MM Microsoft
Sign in
to continue to Outlook
mail, phone, or Skype
No account? Create one!
Can't access your account?
Click into Work or school account
Outlook
so Microsoft
Which type of account do you
need help with?
Work or school account
A Created by your IT department
RPersonal account
Created by you
Then answer the following questions provided in the next screen which should look like this.
Microsoft
Get back into your account
Who are you?
Ta recover your account, begin by entering your email or username and the characters in the picture or audio below.
Email or Username: ^
Example: user®contoso.onmiaosok.com or user®con[osocom
O
Enter the characters in the picture or the vrords in the audio. ^
® Cancel
a
Pag
Packet Pg. 24
7.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/14/2022
Tree Code Amendments, ADM 2022-0004
Staff Lead: Deb Powers
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Deb Powers
Background/History
The City Council and Planning Board (PB) requested that property owner tree removal regulations be
considered after the development -related tree regulations were adopted in 2021. Regulating property
owner tree removals is a substantial, new code requirement and as such, is a major amendment to the
existing code.
Prior to initiating the "Phase 2" tree code amendments, staff, permit applicants and property owners
were experiencing difficulties applying the newly adopted code. In response to these emerging issues,
the Council and PB affirmed that the scope of the Phase 2 code updates should include minor
amendments to the existing code.
Staff Recommendation
Provide a consensus decision on which specific minor code amendments should be pulled from the list,
so that the remaining minor code amendments may be considered for adoption (pending approval of
the Minor Code Amendment Process). Affirm the direction to consider property owner tree removals, as
scoped, in January 2023.
Narrative
The Planning Board (PB) requested a joint meeting with the Tree Board to check in at this stage in the
tree code amendment process and asked staff to present the following three items:
1. Status on public engagement plan. Based on their subject matter expertise and experience
working with local communities, the City has selected a consultant to develop and implement a
public engagement plan related to Edmonds' tree code amendments (currently under contract
negotiations). Staff anticipates that a Public Outreach and Engagement Strategy will be ready to
share with the Planning Board in mid -late January.
2. Draft minor code amendments. To understand the context of minor code amendments within
the entire Chapter 23.10 ECDC, the PB requested staff prepare draft code showing
markups/strikeouts. Draft code markups are shown in the "sample code rewrite" column in
Attachment 1.
Comprehensive list of all known potential code amendments. The PB requested staff consolidate
all known tree code changes into one list so that all potential code changes can be viewed
simultaneously. Attachment 1 has been organized by color accordingly:
Pale yellow - minor code amendments to the existing code that do not change the intent of
the code and are within the project scope.
Orange - new property owner tree removal codes that are major code amendments within
Packet Pg. 25
7.A
the project scope.
Since initiating the Phase 2 project, the City Council, PB and Tree Board have suggested changes to the
existing code that fall outside the project scope. For example, the PB expressed interest in considering
significant changes to building/zoning standards that would be considered with Comprehensive Plan and
other ECDC updates. In another example, the Tree Board has discussed alternative solutions to some
code issues that have moderate or major policy impacts (rather than the scoped minor code change).
These are shown as:
Light gray - moderate or major code amendments listed for later discussion and consensus
decisions. These are not within the project scope.
Dark gray -. involve broader policy or zoning/building code changes outside of ECDC 23.10
and/or do not necessarily involve urban forestry expertise. These are changes outside the
project scope but may be added to future Planning Work Plan and/or Comprehensive Plan
updates.
Staff expects that additional code amendments will be identified from public and stakeholder feedback
and at subsequent Planning/Tree Board and City Council meetings. Recognizing the importance of the
community's input, the PB asked staff to refrain from developing draft code language for moderate and
major code amendments. Only general considerations are shown in the "sample code rewrite" column
in Attachment 1 under property owner tree removals.
Next Steps
Pending the approval of the Minor Code Amendment Process in early 2023, staff anticipates the final list
of minor tree code amendments will proceed to adoption under that process. In moving forward with
next steps, staff has two questions for the PB:
1. Which minor code amendments should be pulled from the "minor list"?
The PB has indicated a few clarifications were needed but that generally, the preliminary minor
amendments to the existing code would achieve the scope and direction of the Phase 2 tree code
amendments. The Tree Board has expressed the same, apart from recommending that Minor-9 (identify
incentives to retain trees) be pulled from the minor amendment list and considered under moderate or
major code changes.
Staff recommends that the following minor code amendments be pulled and considered under
moderate or major code changes, due to:
Minor-12 to allow the degree of restructuring needed to clarify the existing code, which "bumps" this
minor code update into the "moderate" category.
Minor-13 to establish an actual numerical threshold instead of the ambiguous "greater tree retention"
incentive. This increase in requirements would "bump" Minor-13 to a major code amendment.
Minor-15-18 pertain to tree replanting and fee in lieu requirements. Although clarifying these existing
codes would be helpful in applying the code now, these requirements may relate to property owner tree
removals and should be considered at the same time, rather than duplicating efforts or reversing
decisions.
2. Shall staff proceed with the Phase 2 property owner tree removal code provisions as scoped,
assuming the strategies established in a Public Engagement Plan are in place?
Staff realizes that there may be a desire to work on the non-scoped, development -related moderate and
major tree code amendments next. Staff recommends the PB consider working on property owner tree
removal codes, as scoped, in January 2023 and reserve discussions on remaining development -related
moderate/major code amendments thereafter, due to:
Timing: property owner tree removal requirements are somewhat prescriptive (for example, x
number of trees can be removed over x time) enough that obtaining community feedback on
options is typically straightforward.
Complexity: in contrast, the existing development -related tree codes are more complex,
Packet Pg. 26
7.A
involving greater levels of outreach/education, multiple stakeholder meetings/events, survey
development and distillation of community input. A relatively new PB may want to schedule a
special meeting or retreat to review how the development -related tree code works, prior to
considering its alteration.
Priority: the primary scope of the Phase 2 code amendments is property owner tree removals;
focusing on changing the existing code next implies that the enormous work and public
engagement involved in adopting ECDC 23.10 is unheeded.
Logistics: if addressed next, it's likely that certain changes to the existing code will need to be
reconsidered when eventually addressing property owner tree removal codes (for example
replacement and fee in lieu options).
Attachments:
Attach 1 Code Amend List
Packet Pg. 27
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
The current definition implies any tree with a minor defect is a
Hazard tree - dear,, dying, diseased damaged, eY StFUGtUF211y def ^tive
hazard, resulting in excessive tree removals in critical areas.
as determined by a r„asfied tree ,,,-„f ss a tree/tree part with an
Extreme or High overall risk rating using the most current version of the
Hazard tree definition
Development permit applicants claim healthy trees are "hazardous"
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) method, with the
Minor-1
020.H
Dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective
to justify removals or to avoid replanting/paying fees in lieu
following:
Both
as determined by a qualified tree professional.
associated with development.
1. A combination of structural defects and/or disease that makes it
subject to a high probability of failure,
Recommendation: define per industry standard.
2. In proximity to high -frequency use targets, persons, or property; and
3. The hazard condition cannot be reduced with reasonable and proper
'TO CONSIDER EXPANDING HAZARD TREE DEFINITION, SEE MODERATE #11
arboricultural practices, nor can the target be moved.
Vaguely defines tree protection fence locations that are required to
Lim.its--n-.f distu rhanne _ the boundary hot1e1oon the area of minimum
teG n tie are,und- ' tree and- the alIP- abie site disturh�noe
be shown on development site plans. Is often confused with other
Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) - a defined area as determined by a
Limits of disturbance definition
limits of disturbance on site plans, ultimately resulting in trees
qualified professional applicable to tree trunks, roots, and soil. TPZ is
Minor-2
020.E
The boundary between the area of minimum protection
damaged during development.
measured in feet from the face of the trunk to an outer boundary, where
Development
around a tree and the allowable site disturbance.
tree protection fence is located. May be determined using critical root
zone formula, dripline, air spade excavations and is variable depending
Recommendation: define per industry standard.
on species, age and health of the tree, soil conditions and existing
infrastructure.
"Significant" damage is too subjective, results in frequent code
Nuisance tree ...is causing significant physical damage that is obvious in
Nuisance tree definition
interpretation issues. Remediation measures are not considered,
aphotograph to a nvate or public structure and/or infrastructure,
p�
Is causing significant physical damage to a private or public
implying that tree removal is the sole manner to address nuisance
including but not limited to: sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or
Minor-3
020.N
structure and/or infrastructure, including but not limited to
issues.
stormwater utilities, driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof.
Property
Owner
sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities,
The problems associated with a nuisance tree must be such that they
driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof.
Recommendation: include corrective actions. Allow over -the -
cannot be corrected by reasonable practices, including, but not limited to
counter approvals for situations that clearly don't need an arborist's
branch or root pruning, bracing, or cabling.
expertise.
Qualified Professional definition
Qualified professional ...[has] relevant education and training in
...[has] relevant education and training in arboriculture or
The current list of professional credentials is outdated. The
arboriculture or urban forestry, having 2 or more of the following
Minor-4
020.Q
urban forestry, having 2 or more of the following
definition does not consider other qualifications.
credentials (or equivalent):
Both
credentials:
1. ISA Certified Arborist
1. ISA Certified Arborist
Recommendation: Add BCMA credential and "or equivalent."
2-4. Additional professional standards (TRAQ, ASCA, SAF)
2-4. Additional professional standards (TRAQ, ASCA, SAF)
5. Board Certified Master Arborist
Terms such as "or other land use approval" and "in conjunction
Development types that require a tree retention plan
with" are ambiguous, allows the City greater authority to require
030.0
030.0 - Tree removal associated with building permit,
tree retention plans for any development.
Minor-5
subdivision, or other land use approval...
Recommendation: clarify which specific development types require
List, use a chart format or provide examples of specific "other land use
approval" permit types, such as demolition, clearing and grading permits
Development
p
060.A
060.A ...the city requires approval of a tree retention and
tree retention plans.
protection plan in conjunction with...
*TO CONSIDER TREE RETENTION REQUIREMENTS WITH OTHER
DEVELOPMENT TYPES (OFFICE, MIXED USE, COMMERCIAL, SEE MAJOR #10.
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 28
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
Without an understanding of the development review process,
some permit applicants "downgrade" tree condition to avoid tree
Tree condition related to development review process
replacement and/or fees in lieu, resulting in code interpretation
Viable tree - significant tree that a qualified professional
issues and prolonged review times.
Viable tree - significant tree that a qualified professional has determined
Minor-6
020.X
has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of
to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is
Development
failure due to structural defects, is windfirm if isolated or
Recommendation: Add "subject to review"
windfirm if isolated or remains as part of a grove and is a species that is
remains as part of a grove and is a species that is suitable
suitable for its location, subject to City review/approval.
for its location.
*To CONSIDER TREE CONDITION DEFINITIONS (BASED ON INDUSTRY
STANDARDS) FOR TREES RETAINED WITH DEVELOPMENT, SEE MODERATE
#2
Which existing trees count towards retention goals or
Without "viable," some applicants interpret the code to include
require mitigation?
dead, dying or poor condition trees towards meeting required tree
060.C: 30% [retention is required] of all s@nifiGant viable trees...
060. C: 30% [retention is required] of all significant trees...
retention thresholds.
060.0
060.F.3:... existing viable priority one trees not impacted by the
Minor-7
060.F.3,
060.F.3:... existing priority one trees not impacted by the
Recommendation: Replace "significant" with or add "viable" where
installation of said improvements must be retained...
Development
060.G, etc.
installation of said improvements must be retained.
needed.
G. Tree Retention Incentive. If a development retains 50% of the
G. If a development retains 50% of the significant trees on
*TO CONSIDER SPECIFIC TREE CONDITION DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO
signifiGant viable trees on a site, the fee -in -lieu provisions... do not apply
a site, fee -in -lieu provisions... do not apply
TREE RETENTION WITH DEVELOPMENT, SEE MODERATE #2.
Tree protection fence shown on site plans
Various terminology is confusing to applicants, resulting in tree
iv. [Show] location of tree protection mea'suFes fence at the proposed
060.B.2.b.iv
iv. [Show] location of tree protection measures...
protection fence locations incorrectly shown on proposals and/or
TPZs, with distances from the face of trunks to fence noted on the site
Minor-8
060.B.2.b.v,
060.B.2.c.ii
inadequate on -site tree protection.
plan, v. lnd,�G to fi itS Of „iStU baRGe drawn to scale around all trees
Development
060.B.2.c.iii
V. Indicate limits of disturbance drawn to scale around all
impacted by site disturbances resulting from grading, demolition, or
etc.
trees impacted by site disturbances resulting from grading,
Recommendation: Use "TPZ" industry standard. Clarify that silt
construction activities. Silt fence per TESC requirements may satisfy tree
demolition, or construction activities.
fence may be allowed if TPZs are observed.
protection fence requirements if TPZs are observed.
Incentives to retain trees on development sites are not prominent
Clearly identify incentives
enough in the code. Applicants interpret the 50% retention incentive
"cap"
If a development retains 50% of the significant trees on a
as a versus striving for greater than 50% retention rates,
G. Tree Retention Incentive. If a development retains at least 50% of the
Minor-9
060.G
site, the fee -in -lieu provisions of ECDC 23.10.080(E) do not
inadvertently resulting in greater tree removals than what's feasible.
signifiGan viable trees on a site, the fee -in -lieu provisions of ECDC
Development
apply
"at
23.10.080(E) do not apply.
Recommendation: Clearly identify tree retention incentives, add
least" to numerical thresholds.
Fee in lieu/appraised value process
The appraisal requirement does not reflect the development review
...After providing clear documentation to development
process and presents a conflict of interest as currently shown in the
.After providing clear documentation to Gfeve apmept eA4Ges the City
services that all replacement options have been considered
code. Inconsistent references to City and applicant.
that all replacement options have been considered... the developer
Minor-10
080.E
..the developer shall pay a fee -in -lieu for each
Recommendation: Replace "developer" with applicant Replace
"
applicant shall pay a fee -in -lieu for each replacement tree... into the
Development
p
replacement tree... (1) into the city's tree fund. For each
"City," "Director," "development services," "Planning Official," "city
City's Tree Fund. For each significant tree greater than 24" DBH
significant tree greater than 24" DBH removed, a fee based
tree protection professional," etc. with appropriate terms consistent
removed, a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the , ,
on an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection
with Chapter. Clarify that appraisals are to be submitted by
applicant's arborist shall be required...
professional shall be required...
applicant, subject to City review.
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 29
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
When an arborist report is required
Current code is unclear that an arborist report, although not
...After providing clear documentation, which may include the applicant's
Minor-11
080.E
..After providing clear documentationthat all
...
required, may be needed to document infeasibility of replanting.
g.
arborist recommendations ...that all replacement options have been
replacement options have been considered and are
considered... iRG!U inn aFbeFi t Fe eds as neGessa „
infeasible, including arborist reports as necessary...
Recommendation: Restructure sentence, add "may."
When a tree removal permit is required
030.8: Tree removal not specifically exempted will be
processed as a Type 1 permit...
Too many exemptions, followed by "exceptions to exemptions" and
other double negatives are confusing. Omission of clear code
040: ... activities exempt from the provisions of this chapter
requirements has resulted in code interpretation issues and
that do not require a ermit...exce t for...
[that] q p p
lowered code compliance. Combining property owner tree removal
Exemption
23.10.040 Tree Removal Not Associated with Development
permit requirements with development permit requirements is
A :
Type 1 or Landscape Modification permit is required for
040.F: ... trees that do not meet the exemptions... may be
confusing.
0 Trees proposed for removal in critical areas that do not fit
removed...
hazard/nuisance criteria
Minor-12
030-060
Recommendation: Clarify when a Type 1 permit or Landscape
Tree removal on commercial and multi -family -zoned
Y- properties
Both
050.A: Removal of protected trees is prohibited, except as
Modification is required. Clearly define the condition or criteria for
0 Tree removal on vacant lots and/or subdividable properties
provided for in...
tree removal in critical areas, vacant lots, subdividable properties,
etc. using a list or chart. Add examples in code.
For hazard/nuisance tree removals, a permit is not required, however
050.B: ... removal of trees... is prohibited except as
documentation is required...
provided for in...
*TO CONSIDER RESTRUCTURING CODE TO REPLACE "EXEMPTIONS" WITH
"ALLOWANCES" AND OTHER DOUBLE NEGATIVES TO DEFINE WHAT IS
060.A.5: ... the city requires approval of a tree retention
ALLOWED, VERSUS WHAT'S NOT, SEE MODERATE #1.
plan in conjunction with... for... any tree removal on
developed sites not exempted by...
The one tree retention incentive within the tree code (23.10.060.G —
the 50% tree retention threshold) is not very prominent or identified
Restructure 23.10.060 as follows:
as an incentive. ECDC 20.75.048 (an incentive for "greater tree
A. Introduction
"...incentives and variations to development
retention" using variations to development standards) is not located
B. Tree Retention and Protection Plan
060.A, last
standards"
Specific tree retention and protection plan review standards
in the tree code.
C. Tree Retention Requirements
Minor-13
sentence
provided in this section establish tree retention priorities,
D. Priority of Tree Retention Requirements
Development
incentives, and variations to development standards ... to
Recommendation: Move 20.75.048 to 23.10 (see Minor #14 below).
E. ...+.eon that w,a„ he a fou haxa (move to D, replace with) Tree
facilitate preservation of viable trees...
Clearly identify incentives and variations to development standards
Retention Incentives (insert 20.75.048 and 23.10.060.G)
as such or strike the last sentence in 23.10.060.A if superfluous.
F. Tree Retention Procedures
G. If a deveiepn9ent retains 5�� (move to E)
*TO CONSIDER A SPECIFIC TREE RETENTION THRESHOLD VERSUS THE
AMBIGUOUS "GREATER" TREE RETENTION, SEE MAJOR #8.
"Phased" short plat/subdivision review process
Phased review/tree removal typically results in lower successful
...If during the short [plat] or subdivision review process the
tree retention, gives the public the initial perception of greater tree
location of all proposed improvements... have not yet been
retention and incurs higher costs for tree removal.
Restructure 23.10.060 as shown above in Minor #13, or
060.B.3.a
established, the applicant may submit a tree retention
Minor-14
060.F.2
[plan] that addresses the current phase of development
and limits removal to the impacted areas....A new tree
Recommendation: Promote early planning for successful tree
Move ECDC 20.75.048, the Tree Conservation Subdivision Design
9
Development
retention... plan shall be required at each subsequent
retention with short plat/subdivision development by showing tree
incentive to 23.10.060.G, with the 50% tree retention incentive.
phase of the project as more information about the location
retention incentives and variations to development standards more
of the proposed improvements is known.
prominently in the code.
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 30
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
Tree replacement requirements — general
Multiple tree replacement requirements that apply to both
...Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits
development scenarios and property owner tree removals, when
Reformat 080.A as shown in the chart below under Minor #16. Clarify the
080.A
.. •and/or for tree removal associated with development.
spread over different code sections, are confusing.
order of priority for tree replanting.
Recommendation: Differentiate between property owner and
Note that new property owner tree removal requirements will likely
Both
development tree removal replacement requirements.
warrant creating a new code section, so that 23.10.080 may be
Tree replacement requirement (1)
consolidated into 23.10.060.
In addition to the [30%] tree retention requirements... every
CONSIDER FURTHER STREAMLINING TREE REPLACEMENT
060.C.4
significant tree that is removed under this chapter must be
REQUIREMENTS SEE #3
Minor-15
replaced consistent with the requirements of
"Several new trees" indicates a certain number of trees need to be
ECDC 23.10.080.
planted to meet the deficiency, while 23.10.080 refers to replacing
1-3 trees according to the size (DBH) of each removed tree, which
Tree replacement requirement (II)
is confusing and causes code interpretation issues.
If there are not enough existing trees... to satisfy [the 30% retention
If there are not enough existing trees... to satisfy [the 30%
threshold], the applicant shall be required to make up the deficiency by
060.F.4.a-b
retention threshold], the applicant shall be required to make
Recommendation: Strike reference to 080 to clarify that a
planting several new trees that would be sufficient, in
po mina several
Development
P
up the deficiency by planting several new trees
ocertain
number of trees are required to be planted to meet the 30%
with the number of trees actually retained, to satisfy the
Y Y
per 23.10.080 that would be sufficient, in combination with
retention threshold.
o
30% tree retention threshold] ...
the number of trees actually retained, to satisfy [30% tree
retention threshold] ...
*TO CONSIDER STREAMLINING TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS, SEE
MODERATE #3
Tree replacement requirement (III)
Numerical requirements in a narrative format appear overly
..each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as
complicated.
080.A.1-3
follows:
1. For each significant tree between 6-10" DBH removed,
Recommendation: Reformat 080 to chart form.
one replacement tree is required.
2. For each significant tree between 10.1-14" DBH
removed, two replacement trees are required.
Minor-16
3. For each significant tree greater than 14" and less than
Each signifisapt viable tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows:
24" DBH removed, three replacement trees are required.
Note the code lacks any replanting options to replace removed
080.E.3 Tree replacement requirement (IV) viable trees >24" DBH.
...For each significant tree greater than 24" DBH removed,
a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the city *TO CONSIDER REPLANTING OPTIONS TO REPLACE REMOVED VIABLE
tree protection professional using trunk formula method in TREES >24" DBH, SEE MODERATE #4.
the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be *TO RECONSIDER FEE IN LIEU OPTIONS TO MITIGATE REMOVED VIABLE
required. TREES >24" DBH, SEE MAJOR #7.
Both
Multiple tree replacement requirements spread over different code
Tree replacement requirement (V) sections are confusing.
For developing properties... that have fewer than three
Minor-17 060.C.5 significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that Recommendation: consolidate tree removal replacement
will result in the site having at least three trees, which will requirements into one section.
be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area *TO CONSIDER STREAMLINING THE TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS,
SEE MODERATE #3
'POLICY IMPACT
Removed Tree DBH
Required Replacements
6-10"
1
10.1-14"
2
14.1 - 24"
3
>241,
Appraised Value
Less than 3 existing
trees on site
3 trees per 8,000 sq. ft. lot
area
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 31
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
Applies to
POLICY ECDC CURRENT CODE WHAT'S THE ISSUE? SAMPLE CODE REWRITE Development
i or Property
Owner?A[ IL A?Mlil
Multiple fees -in -lieu in different code sections are confusing. The
difference between the $1,000/$2,500 fee is unclear, or if
applicable to >24" DBH trees. Current fee in lieu structure does not
reflect order of priority to retain and replant first and may be
marginally effective in achieving offsite tree planting.
Fees in lieu of replanting — general
060-080 $1,000 per tree fee in lieu relates to the number of trees required to
meet the 30% tree retention threshold per 23.10.060.C, however,
"of this section" relates to the number of replacement trees (1-3)
based on the size of removed trees per 23.10.080.
Fees in lieu of replanting (1)
080.E.1 ... the [applicant] shall pay a fee -in -lieu for each $2,500 per tree also relates to the number of trees required to meet
replacement tree required but not replaced [in] the amount the 30% tree retention threshold per 23.10.060.C. Where $1,000
of ... $1,000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to per tree is an average standard cost of planting a new tree, $2,500
satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section... is an arbitrary and seemingly inflated cost.
Fees in lieu of replanting (11)
Viable trees >24" DBH removed with development are not replaced
Minor-18
060.F.4.b
If it is not feasible for planting under this subsection to
with trees replanted on site, which does not support priorities to
achieve the required number of trees, the applicant shall
retain, then replant before assessing fees in lieu (see Minor #16).
make a fee -in -lieu payment of $2,500 for every tree not
May be challenged as denying reasonable use of private property
planted pursuant to this subsection.
(RCW 82.02.020).
080.E.3
Fees in lieu of replanting (III)
Significantly reduces the total of the appraised values of removed
For each significant tree greater than 24" DBH removed, a
trees >24" DBH.
fee based on an appraisal of the tree value... shall be
required.
Recommendation: Combine 060 and 080 fee in lieu requirements in
sequence, according to retention, replanting and payment priorities
Removed
Required
Fee in Lieu of
Tree DBH
Replacements
Replanting
6-10"
1
$1,000 per
10.1-14"
2
required tree
14.1 - 24"
3
>24„
Appraised
Appraised
Value
Value
Less than 3
3 trees per
$1,000 per
existing trees
8,000 sq. ft. lot
required tree
on site
area
Both
Fees in lieu of replanting (IV) using a chart format. Strike the arbitrary and redundant $2,500 fee
080.E.4 In no case shall the fee -in -lieu payments required by this in lieu. Examine effects of the $2 per square foot "cap."
subsection exceed $2.00 per square feet of lot area.
*TO CONSIDER A SINGLE RETENTION/REPLACEMENT SYSTEM USING A
FORMULA APPROACH, SEE MODERATE #3,
*TO CONSIDER ELIMINATING THE $2 PER SQUARE FOOT "CAP" SEE MAJOR
#7.
Code provisions for the Tree Fund are in a different Chapter (ECDC
3.95) and are not cross-referenced throughout 23.10, causing
procedural confusion.
Minor-19 080.E, et al How fees in lieu of replanting are paid .. deposited into the Cit 's Tree Fund per ECDC 3.95. Both
...fees shall be deposited into the city's tree fund. Recommendation: update Tree Fund references throughout ECDC p Y
23.10.
*TO CONSIDER MOVING TREE FUND CODE PROVISIONS INTO ECDC 23.10,
SEE MODERATE #12.
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 32
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
Redundant and incorrect code reference
Incorrect code reference: (F)(3) refers to the same section,
Significant trees on lots proposed for development or
whereas (F)(4) describes requirements if there are not enough
Significant trees on lots proposed for development or redevelopment,
Minor-20
060.C.1
redevelopment, except as substituted under subsection
existing significant trees. Use of term "substitute" is confusing.
t ,,nde th;s be
.tiGn (9()
Development
eXGe as substituted ubse of eGti„n shall
(F)(3) of this section, shall be retained as follows...
retained as follows...
Recommendation: Strike "substitution" reference.
Incorrect code reference
ECDC 23.10.040.E does not refer to hazard/nuisance trees, it
Trees... located within... critical areas and their associated buffers, or that
Trees... located within... critical areas and their associated
relates to routine landscaping and vegetation management. ECDC
have otherwise been designated for protection shall not be removed
Minor-21
060.C.2
buffers, or that have otherwise been designated for
23.10.040.E does relate to hazard/nuisance trees.
except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040(€F), hazard and nuisance
Development
protection shall not be removed except as provided for in
trees...
ECDC 23.10.040(E), hazard and nuisance trees...
Recommendation: replace E with F.
Overly complex code language is not user-friendly. Lack of code
simplicity/clarity leads to lower quality permit applications and lower
overall code compliance.
Moderate-1
040
"Exemptions"
Both
Recommendation: Reorganize disparate sections, separate
ADDRESSES MINOR #12, BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
property owner tree removal requirements from development
requirements. Restructure code to reduce "exemptions," add
"allowances" to define what IS allowed, versus what's NOT.
Code does not establish tree condition ratings to define trees
Tree condition related to development review process
worthy of retention and arborists' condition ratings vary widely,
020.H,
020.X1
Definitions for hazard, viable and specimen trees and
resulting in code interpretation issues and prolonged reviews.
Moderate-2
060.D-F
"one" trees identified for retention with development.
Develo p ent
mpriority
Recommendation: define tree condition applicable to trees retained
ADDRESSES MINOR #6, 7, BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
with development, based on industry standards, i.e., dead, poor,
good, excellent, etc.
The current code uses 5 different replanting methods and 3 fees in
lieu methods to mitigate trees removed by property owners or with
development. This combination of tree replacement systems is not
equitable across varying existing site conditions, i.e., no trees
060.C.5,
Tree replacement requirements
versus heavily wooded sites (Tree Board 10/6/22).
Moderate-3
0601,
080.A.1-3
ADDRESSES MINOR #15-18 BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
Recommendation: Consider using one methodology/calculation to
Both
determine the minimum number of trees to be replanted. For
example: x number of trees per area (or square feet), or x number
of trunk diameter inches per area (also known as minimum required
tree density).
Appraised values are subjective and logistically problematic with
phased development.
Appraisal requirement for trees >24" DBH
Moderate-4
080.E.3
Recommendation: Revise to require tree planting 1st, before
Both
ADDRESSES MINOR #16, BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
assessing fees in lieu.
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 33
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
'TO CONSIDER FEE IN LIEU OPTIONS WHEN PLANTING IS NOT FEASIBLE TO
REPLACE REMOVED VIABLE TREES >24" DBH, SEE MAJOR #7.
Location of trees required to be retained w/
Various terminology is confusing and does not establish clear
development
priorities for retained trees based on location. The code does not
"Developable site" is defined as the gross site area of a lot,
address sites entirely encumbered by critical areas.
020.D
minus critical areas and buffers.
Moderate-5
060.D.2.b
Recommendation: Revise definition/language for consistency
Development
060.F.4
Other code language:
throughout Chapter. Clarify "outside of the improved area of the
trees within the required yard setbacks or around the
site..." Consider prioritizing tree retention by location (outside the
perimeter... existing trees outside of the improved
building envelope or within setbacks) or other defined location of
areas ... trees in non -developable areas...
high retention value trees.
When calculating tree retention requirements, the code doesn't
provide guidelines for fractions. Without guidelines, some
Moderate-6
060.C.1
Tree retention threshold calculation - fractions
applicants wish to interpret any fraction up to .99 less than a whole
Development
number as justification to round down.
Recommendation: round up or down at .5 fractions
Use of various terms (may, should, must, shall) can be confusing
and result in code interpretation issues, although the intent of many
0,
Code flexibility versus ambiguous language
of these terms is to allow some flexibility in the code.
Moderate-7
070.C.30C-F
080..D.2,,
Director may... [allow, require, approve, consider, etc.]
Both
090.A
Recommendation: Consider areas of the code that require
flexibility. Replace "must," "should" and "may" with uniform,
intended code language.
Code emphasizes assessing fees in lieu, versus tree planting to
mitigate removed trees. Application of the "cap" significantly
reduces opportunities to purchase/plant trees offsite.
Moderate-8
080.E.4
Fee in lieu "cap" at $2 per square foot
Recommendation: Adjust the code to prioritize tree planting to
Development
replace >24" DBH trees removed with development.
TO CONSIDER ELIMINATING/REDUCING THE $2 PER SQUARE FOOT "CAP"
SEE MAJOR #9
Performance and maintenance bonds
SF property owners assume developers will maintain protected and
C. A 2-year maintenance bond shall be required after the
newly planted trees due to maintenance bonds.
installation of required site improvements... to ensure
Moderate-9
090.C-D
adequate maintenance and protection of retained trees and
Recommendation: Examine post -development tree mortality and
Both?
site improvements.
effectiveness of performance bonds. Consider emphasizing
property owner (not developer) maintenance responsibilities with a
D. The director shall exempt individual single-family lots
3-5 Year Maintenance Agreement. Consider bonds for commercial
from a maintenance bond...
landscapes (MF) only.
Moderate-10
020.1
Grove definition and retention priority
Consider changes to the code in response to 2015-2019 canopy
"forest
Development
study findings to slow the loss of patches" with development
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 34
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
060.D
Definition: a group of three or more significant trees with
and protect ecological functions (City Council 6/21/22, Planning
overlapping or touching crowns.
Board 9/14/22).
Significant trees to be retained should be retained in the
Recommendation: Require that groves be identified on tree
following order of priority... [groves are not specifically
retention plans, assign a high priority retention status.
identified]
Without including noxious/invasive species language in the hazard
Hazard tree definition
tree definition, a permit or arborist report would be required to allow
Dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective as determined
Dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective
their removal. On development sites, they would be required to be
by a qualified tree professional and trees listed as noxious or invasive
Moderate-11
020.H
as determined by a qualified tree professional.
retained or mitigated (Tree Board 11/3/22).
species by WA State or Snohomish County Noxious Weed Control
Both
Boards.
ADDRESSES MINOR #1, BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
Recommendation: Refer to state/county noxious/invasive
regulators.
The code provisions for the Tree Fund are in a different Chapter
How fees in lieu of replanting are paid
(ECDC 3.95) and is not cross-referenced throughout 23.10, causing
Moderate-12
080.E, et al
...shall be deposited into the city's tree fund.
procedural confusion.
ADDRESSES MINOR #19, BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
Recommendation: move Tree Fund code provision from ECDC
3.95 into ECDC 23.10.
New codes that:
Address:
• Limit the number of property owner tree removals within a
• How many trees can be removed at one time?
specific
Is 12 months between allowed removals appropriate?
• Don't require apame.ermit/fee, but tracks removals over time
require
What are appropriate replacement requirements?
Major-1
-
Property owner tree removals
using it notification process that can check for conditions
Should there be a minimum number of trees required to remain
Property
Not clearly identified in the current code
like critical areas.
on the property? Should a permit be required for their removal?
Owner
• Allow limited Landmark tree removal, with notification.
Should their removal be prohibited unless they're hazard or
nuisance?
(City Council 2021 direction for Phase 2 tree code amendments)
What resources are in place for tracking/processing permits?
• How to define Landmark tree (see Major #3)
Consider requiring permits for all property owner tree removals.
Permit requirements for property owner tree removals
Slow loss of "forest patches" on private property in response to
Property
Major-2
-
Not clearly identified in the current code
canopy study findings. Protect ecological functions.
Should process involve a permit/fee? Or a notification process?
Owner
(City Council 6/21/22 direction for Phase 2 tree code amendments).
Define Landmark trees to address incremental loss of canopy cover
on private property in response to canopy study findings, protect
Major-3
_
Landmark tree definition
ecological functions. Do not define by location on development
Is >24" DBH size appropriate?
Both
Not in current code
sites
(City Council 6/21/22 direction for Phase 2 tree code amendments).
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 35
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
• Do not allow paid "tree cutting permits" for the removal of
Unclear and contradictory code provisions result in excessive
healthy trees in critical areas
unauthorized tree removals in critical areas, without adequate
0 Require a permit to remove hazard/nuisance trees in critical
resources to enforce or require penalty fines. Current code does
areas to address code enforcement issues and lack of penalty
little to protect ecological functions and results in negative impacts
fine collection.
Major-4
040 & 050
Tree removal in critical areas
040.E ...`may" be removed with documentation...
to water quality and landslide hazard areas. Leads to incremental
Clarify that hazard/nuisance tree removals do not apply to
Property
loss of canopycover due to removal of "forest patches" per canopy
p p pY
vacant lots in critical areas unless targeting adjacentpropertyOwner
( 9 g 1
study findings.
structures).
• Add an appeals process.
(City Council 6/21/22 direction for Phase 2 tree code amendments).
Consider fee in lieu of replanting 2:1 in critical areas.
• Strike "rectify" and replace with "remedy" or other.
Tree topping in critical areas
020. V. Tree removal - direct or indirect removal of a
tree(s) ... through actions including... clearing, cutting,
girdling, topping...
050.D. In critical areas, critical area buffers, and in all
native growth protection easements, tree removal is
prohibited except as allowed per ECDC 23.40-23.90...
Frequent, numerous, complex code enforcement cases resulting
from tree removal/topping in critical areas resulting from
020.V
23.40.220.8.b. (Allowed activities in critical areas include...)
contradictory and inconsistent code language in various code
The removal of trees from critical areas and buffers that are
sections. Difficulty in verifying previously approved topping in the
050.D
hazardous, posing a threat to public safety, or posing an
past 5 years.
• Consider creation of wildlife snags for the removal of
Property
Major-5
23.40.220.8.
imminent risk of damage to private property; provided, that:
hazard/nuisance trees only in critical areas.
Owner
ii. Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown
thinning, unless otherwise justified by a qualified
Protect and avoid negative impacts to critical areas. Slow the loss
23.40.005
professional. Where pruning or crown thinning is not
of canopy cover due to large tree removal in critical areas and loss
sufficient to address the hazard, trees should be removed
of "forest patches" in response to canopy study findings, protect
or converted to wildlife snags;
ecological functions.
23.40.005 Critical area definitions
"Normal maintenance of vegetation" means removal of
shrubs/nonwoody vegetation 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.
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 36
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
Emergency tree removals
vi. Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or
The current code does not consider that emergency tree removals
g Y
fix]. Emergency Tree Removal. Any tree that requires City approval for
danger to public health or safety, to public or private
may be applicable to property owners, outside of critical areas.
removal may be removed by the property owner if it is determined to
23.40.220.C.
property, or of serious environmental degradation may be
pose an imminent threat or danger to public health and safety, public or
Property
Major-6
8 b
removed or pruned by the landowner prior to receiving
written approval from the city; provided, that within 14 days
Recommendation: Move applicable text from 23.40.22.C.8.b.vi (left)
private property, or of serious environmental degradation; provided, that
Owner
following such action, the landowner shall submit a
or use sample code provision (right) in 23.10.040 with new property
within 14 days, the property owner notifies the City and demonstrates
restoration plan that demonstrates compliance with the
owner tree removal code provisions.
compliance with the provisions of this title.
provisions of this title;
Under the current code, removed trees >24" DBH are not mitigated
through planting, only through fees in lieu based on appraised
Fees in lieu for removed trees >24" DBH
values. Applicants typically opt for the $2 per square foot "cap,"
For each significant tree greater than 24 inches in DBH
reducing the mitigation potential.
removed, a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value...
Major-7
080.E.3
using trunk formula method in the current edition of the
Still, a fee in lieu option is needed if replanting is not feasible;
Both
Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required.
however, appraised value method is subjective and logistically
Problematic with phased development (See Minor #16)
WORKS IN TANDEM WITH MODERATE #4 (REPLANTING OPTION)
WHEN REPLANTING IS NOT FEASIBLE.
Recommendation: codify replanting options. Provide a simple
formula or calculation ($ per inches DBH) versus appraised value.
Consider changes to the Conservation Subdivision design
standards, ECDC 20.75.048 (City Council 6/21/22).
20.75.048 &
Conservation Subdivision
Major-8
060, 0605.2
Recommendation: require a minimum tree retention threshold that
Development
ADDRESSES MINOR #13, BUT WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
is higher than the 50% fee in lieu exemption in addition to moving to
23.10 as described in Minor #13.
Code requires payment of fees in lieu to replace >24" DBH trees
Fee in lieu "cap" at $2 per square foot
removed with development, versus tree planting. However, data
In no case shall the fee -in -lieu payments required by this
indicates the "cap" significantly reduces fees in lieu for trees
Major-9
080.E.4
subsection exceed $2.00 per square feet of lot area.
removed with development (Tree Board 11/3/22).
Development
ADDRESSES MODERATE #8 WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
Recommendation: Eliminate or reduce the cap. Emphasize on -site
tree planting to replace trees >24" DBH removed with development.
Consider other land use/development types that may have
Tree retention with other development types
opportunities for tree retention (Planning Board 9/14/22).
Tree retention plan/review is required for single family,
Major-10
030.C, 060.A
multifamily, short plat and subdivision development only.
Recommendation: Examine data on existing tree retention within
Note: should be consistent with any new language in 060.A.
Development
ADDRESSES MINOR #5 WITH GREATER POLICY IMPACTS
required buffers of COMM, Office, Mixed Use, etc. and consider
tree retention requirements.
MF zoning allows max build -out and greater impervious surface
Major-11
060.C.1
MF/unit lot subdivision 25% retention requirements
areas for fire lanes, parking lots, other structures. Tree planting is
Development
required per MF landscaping requirements/buffers already. Fees in
lieu may be considered a takings challenge (RCW 82.02.020).
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 37
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
POLICY
ECDC
CURRENT CODE
WHAT'S THE ISSUE?
SAMPLE CODE REWRITE
Applies
Development
i
or Property
Owner?
Recommendation: Examine MF 25% tree retention effectiveness
versus time spent in review. If tree planting on MF sites through
buffer/landscaping requirements is acceptable, strike MF retention
requirements to simplify code and streamline review process.
Code emphasizes "meeting a quota" instead of retaining trees of
merit (quantitative vs qualitative). Adjust to respond to canopy study
findings loss of "forest patches" in critical areas and protect
ecological functions.
Major-12
060.D., F
Tree retention "priorities and procedures"
Recommendation: Reformat to chart form, adjust priorities. Replace
Development
subjective Priority Ones with specific qualitative retention criteria.
Strike "over 60 feet in height" and replace with (new) Landmark
definition. Move "trees within required yard setbacks," groves and
critical areas to Priority One. Revise "priorities and procedures" so
focus is on high -value viable trees located in setbacks or other non -
buildable areas (Planning Board 9/14/22).
Revise general zoning/development codes' maximum allowed
MULTIPLE
setbacks, lot coverage, height limits, etc. for greater tree retention
Outside OF
ECDC,
COMP
Not in ECDC 23.10, not in UFMP
beyond what's allowed with a Conservation Subdivision Design
Development
scope
PLAN
(20.75.048). [Major ECDC code amendments, possibly
Comprehensive Plan updates] (Planning Board 9/14/22).
Ensure Landmark trees/groves are protected in perpetuity to
preserve canopy cover and protect ecological functions.
Recommendation: Consider program that compensates property
Outside OF
New
INCENTIVE
Not in code, not in UFMP
owners for large tree retention with development (Transfer of
Development
scope
Development Rights program). Use funds collected from fees in lieu
or create a new account [check with Finance]. See TDR state laws.
City Legal to draft covenant template, property owner required to
submit with site plan, (+maintenance plan?), recorded on title.
Voluntary Tree Conservation Easement (Covenant?) to protect
Outside OF
New
INCENTIVE
Not in code, not in UFMP
trees in perpetuity, preserve canopy cover and protect ecological
Property
Owner
scope
functions. City Legal to draft covenant template.
No process, may be outcome of Equitable Engagement
Outside OF
Unknown
Framework or Comp Plan process to analyze/revise City
Build greater equity into the tree code (Planning Board 9/14/22)
Both
scope
codes for diversity, equity and inclusion
'POLICY IMPACT
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 38
7.A.a
ATTACHMENT 1
Revised 11121122
'POLICY IMPACT
Comprehensive Tree Code Issues & Preliminary Amendment List
Minor - Amendments that in no way change the meaning of the current code. They clarify/simplify or further define something already in the code, address typos and redundancies, and/or result in simple reformatting or removal of outdated references,
including industry standards, Best Available Science, Best Management Practices, etc. that do not result in changes to code intent or an increase in requirements.
Moderate - Relatively uncontroversial restructuring of code sections, and any amendments above that result in new, increased or eliminated requirements without additional cost to permit applicants or procedural changes that require additional resources.
Major - Adds extensive new requirements or substantially prohibits/bans something currently allowed; amendments resulting in significant changes to procedures or significant additional cost to permit applicants, and/or change the intent of the code.
Packet Pg. 39
9.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/14/2022
Extended Agenda
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Michael Clugston
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review Extended Agenda
Narrative
Extended Agenda attached.
Packet Pg. 40