Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2023-10-25 Planning Board Packet
OF BbMG ti Agenda Edmonds Planning Board 1,00 REGULAR MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL- 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 OCTOBER 25, 2023, 7:00 PM REMOTE MEETING INFORMATION: Meeting Link: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/s/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxITG9LZkc3 KOhuS014QT09 Meeting ID: 873 2287 2194 Passcode:007978 This is a Hybrid meeting: The meeting can be attended in -person or on-line. The physcial meeting location is at Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue N., 3rd floor Brackett R000m Or Telephone :US: +1 253 215 8782 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. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approve previous meeting minutes 4. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA S. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 6. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Discussion of updates to draft Critical Aquifer Recharge Area code (AMD2023-0004) B. Tree Code Amendments, AMD 2022-0004 9. NEW BUSINESS A. Parkland Acquisition Purchase & Sale Agreement - Mee Property 10. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA A. October 25 Extended Agenda Edmonds Planning Board Agenda October 25, 2023 Page 1 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 13. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda October 25, 2023 Page 2 3.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 10/25/2023 Approve previous meeting minutes Staff Lead: Michael Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve minutes from the October 11 meeting. Narrative October 11 draft meeting minutes attached. Attachments: PB101123 draft Packet Pg. 3 3.A.a CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting October 11, 2023 Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. She announced she would be serving as administrator of the meeting since Chair Gladstone was online in a different time zone and might need to drop off. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Mitchell. ROLL CALL Board Members Present Judi Gladstone, Chair (online) Lauren Golembiewski (online) Richard Kuehn (online) Susanna Martini Nick Maxwell Jeremy Mitchell Beth Tragus-Campbell, Vice Chair Lily Distelhorst (student rep) Board Members Absent Emily Nutsch (altemate)(excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Staff Present Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Deb Powers, Urban Forest Planner Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell noted that Chair Gladstone had submitted amended comments to the group prior to the meeting. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL MOVED, CHAIR GLADSTONE SECONDED, TO ADD A BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING THE TREE CODE AND SOME OF THE CONCLUSIONS THE Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Pagel of 8 Packet Pg. 4 3.A.a GROUP CAME TO BEFORE THE CURRENT FIRST ITEM IN UNFINISHED BUSINESS. THE MOTION PASSED. BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL MOVED, CHAIR GLADSTONE SECONDED, REMOVING THE PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT - 2023 Q3 ACCOMPLISHMENTS FROM THE AGENDA IN LIEU OF BOARD MEMBERS READING THE REPORT ON THEIR OWN AND FORWARDING QUESTIONS TO STAFF. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department - 2023 Q3 Accomplishments - REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Brief Tree Code Discussion Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell explained the subcommittee discussed all the various proposals and public comments on the tree code and submitted a document with suggested language for the code. Board Member Maxwell didn't think it was appropriate to discuss the code language specifically, just the summary table of the guiding principles. There was concern about discussing this at all since it was not included in the packet. Director McLaughlin commented that it was not an accident this item was not included on the agenda. The project is on pause at the staff level for legal review and director review. Chair Gladstone expressed a concern about waiting too long to discuss this and having to start over again. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested putting it on the agenda for the next meeting so they can stay updated on the staff review. She thinks it is important for this to stay on the agenda every meeting until they can get an answer and move forward. Board Member Maxwell suggested that legal review would be easier if they actually had some clear language to review. He also pointed out that there was no legal review of the step back ordinance. Board Member Martini asked what triggered this. Director McLaughlin said she was not able to answer that. Board Member Martini did not like the prospect of repeatedly pushing this down the road. Board Member Golembiewski expressed the concern about delaying this too long and ending up with a Council that proposes an emergency ordinance. She hopes they get to a point where they stop ruling by emergency ordinance. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 2 of 8 Packet Pg. 5 3.A.a MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, THEY HAVE A REVIEW OF THE PLANNING BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION MEMO AND RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM STAFF ABOUT STATUS OF THE REVIEWS PROCESS AT THE OCTOBER 25 MEETING. Board Member Kuehn expressed frustration about the situation. He doesn't understand why they can't even have a discussion about this to keep the ball moving forward. Board Member Maxwell noted that they could continue to share the key concepts tonight. Other board members disagreed because the public didn't have a chance to review the documentation ahead of time. Chair Gladstone expressed concern about having any process violations on this important topic. It was noted there would need to be continued discussion about how all of this would impact the extended agenda. MOTION PASSED WITH BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL ABSTAINING. B. Planning Board Action on 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) & Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to a memo drafted by another subcommittee regarding the Planning Board's recommendation. The memo states that the Board does not have sufficient information to make a clear recommendation. Chair Gladstone added that in the memo they tried to capture the concerns raised at the last meeting around the CIP/CFP. She explained that they had primarily tried to characterize what the concerns were around equity. They recognized there were gaps in the information that was provided in order to make a solid recommendation. Board Member Mitchell commented that there is a time crunch to present this to Council. It would take significant staff work to provide that backup information in time for the Board to make a formal decision. For that reason, they have left it open and recommended that specific questions be asked. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell thought the memo captured what was discussed at the last meeting and also during the last year. Mainly, they were raising questions about how items were prioritized. The public has consistently brought up concerns around sidewalks, and there was concern about not having any of that in the plan. She encouraged the Council to ask questions around prioritization and how they can make some progress toward addressing inequities in the infrastructure. Board Member Golembiewski asked if the intent was for these priorities to be presented to Council or for this to come back to Planning Board before making a recommendation to Council. Chair Gladstone did not think there was time for this to come back to the Planning Board which is why the memo ends up with things the Board thinks the Council should look at to make an informed decision. Board Member Martini thought that providing the Council with what they collectively agree on would be useful. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred and noted that the memo outlines that. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE CIP/CFP AS WRITTEN. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 3 of 8 Packet Pg. 6 3.A.a NEW BUSINESS A. Landmark 99 Project Overview Director McLaughlin made the presentation regarding the Landmark 99 project. She expressed appreciation to Board Members Mitchell and Golembiewski for sitting on the advisory committee for this project and representing the Planning Board. The site is located at the southern gateway of Edmonds at 24111 Highway 99. It is ten acres, owned by one owner, and zoned General Commercial. She reviewed details about the site and noted it is ideally situated for frequent transit by BRT and in close proximity to the upcoming light rail in Mountlake Terrace. Burlington has a lease on the property until 2029. Board Member Maxwell asked about the ownership of the cloverleaf. Director McLaughlin explained that is owned by WSDOT. She added that one of the recommendations in the Community Renewal Plan is to pursue rationalizing or removing that cloverleaf which would do a great deal to revitalize open space and perhaps provide new parcels. Director McLaughlin continued the presentation and explained that initially this site acquisition was led by Parks for the purpose of seeking parks space. Parks did the zoning and massing study which shows how much could be on that site. There has been interest from the community for years on revitalizing the southern gateway and providing housing, open space, and community amenities. She reviewed illustrations about possibilities for the site. She then discussed project organization, research/education, the community poll, tasks, timeline, and co -dependencies. Staff is pursuing a master plan process on this site. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked about the possibility of this remaining greenspace. Director McLaughlin explained that given the price tag, the location, and the fact that the City could not carry the costs alone she doesn't anticipate that it would be a significant amount of green space. Plus, the location it affords itself to something a bit more dynamic that could absorb a lot of people on the site. However, this will be part of the community conversation. Board Member Golembiewski commented that it is likely that the project would not proceed if there were not a strong private development partnership established before the decision deadline. Director McLaughlin concurred and reviewed examples of public -private partnerships including Tukwila Village, Federal Way, and Woodinville. She discussed poll results and noted there is strong support for a community center, recreation facility, a police annex, park space, housing, retail, and dining. Chair Gladstone asked if the respondents to the poll were self-selected or random. Director McLaughlin replied they were self-selected. Chair Gladstone commented that the other category was quite large. Director McLaughlin agreed and noted 120 of the 351 other comments said not to buy the property. Chair Gladstone also asked if they knew where the respondents came from. Director McLaughlin said they did not. The first broad community conversation will be held on October 21 from 10-12 at Edmonds Woodway High School. For the October 21 public meeting, staff mailed the invitation to properties in the adjacent area and in multiple languages. They will also be posting in the local papers, posting yard signs, running Facebook ads, etc. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked about the notification radius. She hasn't received anything in the mail but lives very close to this. Director McLaughlin commented that since Council did not approve funding for this, they have a very limited amount to spend. Chair Gladstone said she received an invitation in the mail. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 4 of 8 Packet Pg. 7 3.A.a Board Member Golembiewski asked if it is safe to assume they would not see groundbreaking until 2029 since Burlington has a lease through that date. Director McLaughlin thought they would probably need that much time, and relocation prior to a lease expiration tends to be very expensive. Board Member Martini asked about Council support for this. Board Member Mitchell explained they voted to do the purchase agreement. Advisory committees and the team were formed to give them the best information possible to make that decision in December. He encouraged the Planning Board to look at the project in the context of the good it will be for the city and how it will benefit that area node. The price tag is a small thing in his mind because he works in that area and is aware of all the tools available for cities to do that. The big part of this is the partnership. He is excited for the potential, but he thinks there is a lot of work to do. Chair Gladstone wondered how the location of this property compares to the geographic location of the example properties in relation to what else is going on in their cities. Director McLaughlin explained that Tukwila is on the northern boundary of city limits. In other ways, the consultant has indicated that both the Tukwila and Federal Way examples are nearly identical to Edmonds. Chair Gladstone asked if the property would be rolled into the community renewal area to take advantage of those funding opportunities. Director McLaughlin replied that the community renewal plan affords more powers by municipalities in the realm of land development. The City has the draft plan, which is not adopted, but if they did adopt it, they would become a community renewal agency and would have a lot of flexible powers associated with that. Pursuing site acquisition is not entirely relevant right now. They may want to consider adopting it next year if they decide to exercise the purchase option. Tax increment financing (TIF) is a state tool that is available to all municipalities. You are restricted to having two TIF areas in your jurisdiction, but the size is not limited in area as much as it is in anticipated revenue. Federal Way created a very large TIF area, and their project is right in the middle of it. There are a lot of opportunities with the Edmonds project as well. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked that staff provide plenty of examples to the public of how they are not just planning on raising property taxes to come up with the $37 million. Director McLaughlin agreed. Chair Gladstone referred to the comparisons and noted that each had a fair amount of housing associated with it. She wondered how that related to housing goals for that area and for the rest of the city. Director McLaughlin replied that they have consistently heard that housing, especially affordable housing, is of high demand. Right now, it is more feasible to build housing than it is to build commercial. Board Member Mitchell clarified that regarding meeting housing goals, all they are required to do per the GMA is to make adjustments in zoning to provide that capacity. That parcel is already zoned for the capacity anyway, so it's already in the GMA projections. Director McLaughlin concurred. She stressed that they are focusing on building the community and finding the right balance of uses, not just the number of units. Chair Gladstone asked if the repeal of Ordinance 4079 would affect this property at all. Director McLaughlin replied that it would. SEPA is costly. It also elevates the risk for the developer because of the unknowns associated with not only the environmental analysis, but the public process associated with an environmental review. Chair Gladstone said she was surprised to learn that there was Planning Board representation on the advisory group. Director McLaughlin explained the members were recently chosen by the Mayor in collaboration with Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 5 of 8 Packet Pg. 8 the Council President, and they got off to a bumpy start. They just had their first meeting two weeks ago. They anticipate keeping the advisory group going until final decisions are made on the property. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested adding a section to the agenda for an advisory board report out. Board Member Maxwell said it is somewhat important to acknowledge that the success of the Civic Park indicates that they have some talent at creating public spaces which matters. Based on other public spaces in the City, it is very promising that it would work out well. Board Member Martini concurred and added that the accessibility for the new Civic Park is amazing. B. Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement Review Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said the City Council requested that the Planning Board review the original vision statement and associated word cloud and make a recommendation to the Council by November 30. Director McLaughlin provided some background on the Comprehensive Plan branding process and the six -week targeted public outreach process. Throughout the process, 8500 comments were received and categorized. From this, a draft vision statement was created along with a graphic illustration of the process. The statement was put through a multilingual review process to make sure that words weren't misinterpreted or not understood by different languages. Draft community 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. A survey was put in the city newsletter to see if they generally got the statement right. 51 % of those who responded were supportive of the statement. 49% were not. Director McLaughlin reviewed how each of the phrases correspond to the most commonly used words. She explained that Council had specific concerns about the phrase "healthy streets". While "healthy" was not a word that was necessarily represented, staff thought it did represent the other words used such as walkability, green, biking, pedestrian, kids, etc. She summarized the Council resolution as previously discussed by Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell with the request that Planning Board provide feedback and recommendations to the City Council about which of the versions to adopt ("as is" or with suggested revisions) as soon as possible. Director McLaughlin stated she is confident in their process and believes that the draft community vision statement is representative of the comments. She thinks if they have to revisit the statement for an extended period of time, they risk delaying the plan itself. She pointed out that the State does not require a vision statement to be part of the comprehensive plan for the Growth Management Act. It was something staff wanted to use to energize people around in high level conversation. They did that and were able to categorize key themes to be used moving forward. If the Board wishes to advance another version, staff recommend striking the word "healthy" and just keeping it to "safe streets". Discussion: Board Member Mitchell pointed out that the Council wouldn't have drafted the resolution if they were happy with it. He assumed they wanted the Board to revise it. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred. Board Member Mitchell said he didn't like how the resolution was drafted in the first place, pinning the original draft vision statement to the Bloom version. A more appropriate resolution would have been to send it to a steering committee of some kind to evaluate the data, come up with two versions, and bring those two versions to the Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 6 of 8 Packet Pg. 9 Planning Board. It seems like a step was missed in the process engagement by just picking Ms. Bloom's version. He suggested making the revisions to the original statement rather than just sending one or the other back. Board Member Maxwell thought that Director McLaughlin's approach was reasonable rather than jumping to rewriting the vision statement. Vice Chair Tragus Campbell asked the Board if they wanted to tackle any sort of revision or if they support going with the staff recommendation of just moving forward. Chair Gladstone recalled they had discussed the vision statement earlier in the year and that there was a general feeling that it wasn't really a vision statement; instead, it was more of a statement of values. She thought that the phrases in the vision statement were fair representations of the comments they received. In her mind, it would be improved by voicing it as a vision statement and not a value statement, but she didn't know if this was what Council had in mind. She thinks to go without a value statement is going to plague the process of the comprehensive plan with various residents. She recommended spending time on this at a different meeting to try to coalesce around a vision statement that contains most of the concepts here. Board Member Golembiewski said she thinks this vision statement is very close to acceptable. She thinks it accurately reflects the comments received. She thinks it could be as simple as, "Edmonds strives to be a welcoming city ..." She agrees that the word "healthy" associated with streets is a little weird although she understands the thought process behind it. Health is something they value as far as being an active, healthy community that takes pride in outdoor spaces and walkability and things like that. Board Member Kuehn agreed with Chair Gladstone that this seems more like a statement of values rather than a vision statement. He also agreed that it was very close and could use some tweaking to voice it as a vision statement. He would like to tweak it at a future meeting and send a recommendation to Council. Board Member Martini expressed concern about kicking this down the road. She recommended establishing a timeframe in which to finish this. Student Representative Distelhorst said she was surprised they were still talking about the vision statement. She doesn't understand why this has taken so long. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell recommended forming another subcommittee. Director McLaughlin commented that staff would want to be part of that to make sure that all those statements are taken into account. The translation issue is also very important. They do not have any consultant funding at all for this right now. Board Member Kuehn thought that if they just tweak some of the wording to make it a vision statement, but don't change the message, it could be good enough. It wouldn't need to be anything that changes from the word cloud. Director McLaughlin explained it was intended to be written in the present tense as if you were already in the future. Board Member Golembiewski asked if they could just call it a value statement since a vision statement isn't a required element of the comprehensive plan. Board Member Kuehn said he recommended that months ago. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 7 of 8 Packet Pg. 10 3.A.a MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI TO DECLARE THIS TO BE A VALUE STATEMENT INSTEAD OF A VISION STATEMENT AND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CONSTRUCT MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO IT AT THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN, THAT THEY WORK WITH STAFF TO TWEAK THIS AND COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD NO LATER THAN TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA There will be a tree code update at the next meeting. There will also be a discussion or recommendation on the Critical Aquifer Recharge Zone and a comprehensive plan discussion. Highway 99 community renewal program update is being removed from the 25th. If there are any comments regarding the Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department - 2023 Q3 Accomplishments, they should be sent to Director Feser. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Gladstone said it was nice to see Director McLaughlin at the meeting. She thanked Ms. Powers for filling in for Mike Clugston. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell thanked everyone for their participation. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 8 of 8 Packet Pg. 11 8.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 10/25/2023 Discussion of updates to draft Critical Aquifer Recharge Area code (AMD2023-0004) Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History After several work sessions on the topic, the Planning Board held a public hearing on proposed amendments to the City's critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) code on July 26, 2023. After a staff presentation and public testimony, the Planning Board closed the public comment portion of the hearing and began deliberating on the draft code. The Planning Board subsequently approved a motion to continue the public hearing to August 23, 2023 and again to September 13, 2023, to allow time for staff to refine the stormwater portions of the draft code. Based on a meeting between City and Olympic View Water and Sewer District staff on September 6, it became apparent that while progress had been made on several issues related to stormwater management within the CARAs, there were still technical details to be resolved before returning to the Planning Board. As a result, the Planning Board closed the July 26 public hearing on September 13 to allow additional time to resolve the outstanding issues (Attachment 6). Staff has refined the stormwater management language relating to CARAs. Specific reference is made to stormwater in the CARA code in proposed ECDC 23.60.030.A (see Attachment 1). Additional language related to CARAs is also proposed to be included in the City's Stormwater Addendum, which is related to the stormwater chapter in ECDC 18.30 (revised addendum language is in Attachment 2). While the stormwater code and addendum are not typically reviewed by the Planning Board, the addendum language is included to show the relationship of stormwater in the CARA chapter and the stormwater code. Minutes, media and staff slides from July 26 are attached as well as a memo from Lora Petso summarizing the comments she made during the July 26 public hearing (Attachments 3 - 5). Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Planning Board listen to the presentation, including relevant stormwater code information, and provide feedback in advance of the second public hearing on the draft CARA code, which is tentatively scheduled for November 29. In addition to the stormwater element, staff would like Board direction on whether the use of greywater should be prohibited in the CARA or whether some greywater reuse could be appropriate in certain locations. Greywater options were discussed on July 26. The City Attorney is still reviewing the feasibility of requiring pollution liability insurance for certain uses in CARAs. Narrative Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are established to protect public groundwater drinking supplies Packet Pg. 12 8.A from potential contamination and to ensure adequate groundwater availability. The proposed code amendment would revise Chapter 23.60 ECDC to regulate CARAs in the City of Edmonds, based on the identification of CARAs in proximity to aquifers utilized by the Olympic View Water and Sewer District. Amendments to Chapter 23.60 ECDC are a Type V legislative decision, with the Planning Board holding a public hearing before making a recommendation to the City Council, who will then hold a separate public hearing to consider adoption of the code amendment by city ordinance. Attachments: Attachment 1 - draft CARA ECDC 23.60 Attachment 2 - Draft Stormwater Addendum language related to CARA Attachment 3 - July 26 PB minutes Attachment 4 - July 26 CARA slides Attachment 5 - Petso comments July 26 hearing Attachment 6 - September 13 PB minutes Media from July 26 CARA public hearing Packet Pg. 13 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 Chapter 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS .SP44 2a cn n-1n r.itisal .ifeF Fe.shaFRe a s desigaRtiOR GritiGal aqu4er reGharge areas (CARAs) are these areas; vvith ;; r—ritiGal recharging teffi-c-t on aqu greund water-. GARAs are preteGted as crifir-al areas under the �.Nashingten State Growth pFeyided within this title. [g Fd 4026 § 'I (Att. Al 2016• 9Fd 3527- § 2 20041 Sections: 23.60.010 Scope. 23.60.020 Administration. 23.60.030 Regulated Activities. 23.60.010 Scooe. Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(2). CARAs have prevailing geologic conditions associated with infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. CARAs are protected as critical areas under the Washington State Growth Management Act. The purpose of this chapter is to establish critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) and groundwater protection standards to protect aquifers from degradation and depletion. The intent is to minimize loss of recharge quantity, to maintain the protection of supply wells for public drinking water, and to prevent contamination of groundwater. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaf4 EGIMPRd; C.A.R.A. ECDC 24630 Y 10 �q �q Packet Pg. 14 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 23.60.020 Administration. A. Mapping. Olympic View Water and Sewer District (Olympic View) has two GSA wellhead protection areas in Edmonds: Deer Creek Springs and the 228" Street Wellfield. Deer Creek Springs itself is located west of Edmonds in the Town of Woodway while the 228th Street Wellfield is located in Esperance (unicorporated Snohomish County), which is surrounded by Edmonds. Both areas have been mapped and modeled using best available science and include four travel time zones (6 month, 1 year, 5 year, and 10 year) plus an additional buffer, which is the entire zone of contribution for the wellhead protection area. An area of exposed highly sensitive soils (Qva aquifer) is also mapped. B. Classification. CARAs are classified using the following criteria: 1. Class 1 CARAs include those mapped areas located within the 6 month, one (1) and five (5) year capture zones of a wellhead protection area. 2. Class 2 CARAs include those mapped areas located within the ten (10) year capture zone of a wellhead protection area. 3. Class 3 CARAs include those mapped areas in the wellhead protection area buffer. C. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter apply to regulated activities occurring within Class 1. Class 2 and Class 3 CARAs as identified in the ON of Edmonds GIS. which may be updated as new information becomes available. D. Local Consultation. The City of Edmonds will notify Olympic View when new development applications are submitted within the mapped CARAs. Typical applications will include but not be limited to: single family/multifamily/commercial building permits, and short/formal subdivisions. 23.60.030 Regulated Activities. A. Stormwater. 1. The use of stormwater infiltration best management practices (BMPs) including those that qualify as a Class V Underground Infection Control well (UIC), are prohibited for all land uses within all wellhead protection areas (WHPAs), including the buffer, associated with Olympic View Water and Sewer District's (OVWSD) 228th Street Wellhead. 2. Within all WHPAs, associated with Olympic View's Deer Creek Springs, including the buffer, the following shall apply: a. All new bored, drilled, or driven shaft UICs for stormwater management purposes are prohibited. b. All other new stormwater infiltration BMPs that are not bored, drilled, or driven shaft UICs shall be regulated by: draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23draft ra..,,..,a. CARA ECDC 23.60 v 1 n 25 23 Commented [MC1]: New subsection - stormwater reference removed from table v 0 0 0 A N O N Q O O V to O L Q a) as M t 0 d G' L d W a Q M t2 �L V L O to O M a w O c O N to 0 t� rn O co M N V U W a 0' Q V tv L Q Packet Pg. 15 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 i. Chapter 173-218 WAC, that meet that chapter's definition of a Class V UIC well. The UIC regulations are implemented by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). ii. The requirements of ECDC 18.30 (Stormwater Management), including the Ecology stormwater manual adopted by ECDC 18.30, and the current Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. c. In addition, these requirements shall apply to the following allowed activities: i. All new UICs that replace any existing UIC that has reached its useful life. ii. Any area that proposes connecting to an existing City -owned and operated UIC. d. These requirements shall apply until Ecology approves a subsequent version of its stormwater manual that is more protective of the aquifers than the above requirements. At that time, the more protective requirements shall apply. Table 23.60.030.1, CARA Prohibited and Restricted Uses, establishes land uses and related activities that are prohibited and restricted within a specific CARA classification and applies to any new use or activity proposed after [MONTH DAYI, 2024. New land uses or activities that pose a hazard to the City's groundwater resources, resulting from storing, handling, treating, using, producing, recycling, or disposing of hazardous materials or other deleterious substances, are prohibited in Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 1 and 2. Some uses are prohibited in all CARA classes. Uses and activities lawfully established prior to [MONTH DAYI, 2024, are not considered to be legal nonconforming uses subject to Chapter 17.40 ECDC, and may continue to operate within the scope of the existing use. Table 23.60.030.1. CARA Prohibited and Restricted Uses Use Activity CARA Restriction All mineral resource uses 1. Mining, processing and reclamation of a Cemeteries Hazardous liquid transmission pipelines CARA outside of the area of Imanaeement (IPM) are reauired for the use in Class ibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23d•^a E-a..GRd" CARA ECDC 23.60 v 10 25 23 Packet Pg. 16 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Hazardous waste storage and/or treatment facilities and/or processing, or Hazardous waste storage and/or treatment facilities, as defined by Chapter 173-303 WAC are prohibited disposal of radioactive substances in all CARA classes. Storage, processing, or disposal of radioactive substances as defined in RCW 70.99.020 is prohibited in all CARA classes, except for medical equipment and/or material and medical waste, defined by RCW 70A.390.020, that is held for proper disposal. Aboveground storage tanks for hazardous substances or hazardous wastes with primary and secondary containment areas ands ill protection Ian are prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A hydrogeologic report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Automotive uses Wrecking yards are prohibited in all CARA classes. Vehicle towing yards that store vehicles on permeable surfaces are also prohibited. Service stations are prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. In Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa, vehicle repair and servicing must be conducted indoors over impermeable pads. For underground storage tanks UST with hazardous substances applicants must demonstrate that the facility complies with federal and state laws. Dry cleaning Dry cleaning using chlorinated solvents or using solvent perchloroethylene is prohibited in all CARA classes. Large on -site sewage systems, as defined Prohibited in all CARA. in Chapter 246-272 WAC Solid waste landfills Prohibited in all CARA. Solid waste is defined in WAC 173-304 10 . Solid waste transfer stations Prohibited in all CARA. Solid waste is defined under WAC 173-304 100. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23d•^a Ed...ORd. CARA ECDC 23.60 v 1 n 25 23 Packet Pg. 17 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 Petroleum refinement processes, including any related reprocessing or Prohibited in all CARA. storage Bulk storage facilities where flammable or Prohibited in all CARA. combustible liquids, solids, or gels are received by pipeline or tank vehicle, and are stored or blended in bulk for the purpose of distributing such substances by pipeline, tank vehicle, portable tank, or container Chemical manufacturing, including but not Prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in limited to organic and inorganic chemicals, plastics and resins, pharmaceuticals, cleaning compounds, exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A h dro eolo is report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Applicants must paints and lacquers, and agricultural demonstrate that the facility complies with federal chemicals and state laws. Primary and secondary metal industries Prohibited in all CARA. that manufacture, produce, smelt, or refine ferrous and nonferrous metals from molten materials Commercial wood preserving and wood Prohibited in all CARA. products preserving Mobile fleet fueling operations Prohibited in all CARA. "Mobile fleet fueling" means the practice of filling fuel tanks of vehicles from tank vehicles. Mobile fleet fueling is also known as wet fueling and wet hosing. Mobile fleet fueling does not include fueling at construction sites. Permanent dewatering of the aquifer Prohibited in all CARA. when done as part of remediation action that is approved by the Department of Ecology Irrigation and infiltration of greywater Prohibited in all CARA. Reclaimed or recycled water use with the Prohibited in all CARA. exception of uses that discharge to the sanitary sewer Rainwater collection and use Allowed in all CARA. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23d•^a E-a..GRd" CARA ECDC 23.60 v 1 n 25 23 Commented [MC2]: PB needs to determine whethe prohibit greywater outright or allow for use in some circumstances. Q <O M N V a U W a al !C L c d E t t� 10 a C d E t t) M a Packet Pg. 18 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 Hydrocarbon extraction Metal recycling facilities with outdoor storage and handling activities C. Regulation of facilities handling and storing hazardous materials. Activities may only be permitted in a critical aauifer recharge area if the aDDlicant can show that the proposed activity will not cause contaminants to enter the groundwater by compliance with the best management practices (BMPs) for handling and storing hazardous materials. The City may impose development conditions in accordance with BMPs to prevent degradation of groundwater. 1. Best Management Practices for Handling and Storing Hazardous Materials. Any facility, activity, or residence in the City in which hazardous materials or other deleterious substances are present must be operated in a manner that ensures safe storage, handling, treatment, use, production, and recycling or disposal of such materials and substances and prevents their unauthorized release to the environment. Businesses, cemeteries and schools that store and/or handle hazardous materials must, at a minimum, comply with the following BMPs: a. Waste disposal and record keeping of disposal and use activity; b. Spill containment supplies and an emergency response plan; c. An emergency response training plan for all employees; d. Hazardous materials must be stored using secondary containment measures at all times; e Periodic monitoring of the storage areas and methods used for containment must be reviewed: i. On a regular basis; ii. Whenever business practices change regarding hazardous materials; and iii. As required by laws and regulations; f. In no case may hazardous materials or other deleterious substances be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of in a way that would pose a significant groundwater hazard within the City. 2. Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI). draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaft EGIMPRd; C.A.R.A. ECDC 24630 Y 10 �q �q Packet Pg. 19 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 The HMI statement is intended reflect all current and anticipated types and quantities of hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of at a facility. The HMI must always be kept on site. New and existing commercial land uses, schools and cemeteries located in Class 1 and Class 2 CARAs must submit an HMI statement: a. Within 1 year of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter; b. With any new land use or building permit application; c. With a new business license; and d. At periodic intervals as needed to keep up with changing business practices. 3. Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). Hazardous materials quantities correspond to the aggregate total of all hazardous materials, not individual chemicals. Facilities that use aggregate quantities of hazardous materials equal to or greater than 20 gallons or the equivalent of 200 pounds, or that use hazardous materials that may be a potential risk to the WHPA, are reviewed to determine the potential risk to the groundwater and the need for an HMMP. Commercial land uses and activities using aggregate quantities of hazardous materials equal to or greater than 50 gallons or the equivalent of 500 pounds, or that use hazardous materials that are considered to be a potential risk to the groundwater in lower quantities, must submit an HMMP to the City. a. The City requires an HMMP based on the type and aggregate quantity of inventoried material. The following are exempt from an HMMP: i. Retail sale of containers 5 gallons or less in size when the business has fewer than 500 gallons on the premises at any one time; and ii. Hazardous materials of no potential risk to the wellhead protection areas. b. HMMPs must demonstrate implementation of BMPs. An HMMP must be completed by the facility operator and must always kept on site and include: i. A description of the facility including a floor plan showing storage, drainage and use areas. The plans must be legible and approximately to scale; ii. The plan must include and identify all hazardous materials containers, sizes, storage locations and methods of secondary containment of the hazardous materials; and iii. The plan must, at a minimum, include how the facility implements the BMPs as identified in this code. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaf4 EGIMPRd; C.A.R.A. ECDC 24630 Y 10 �q �q Packet Pg. 20 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 4. Inspections. The City has the right to inspect a facility at reasonable times for the purpose of determining compliance with this chapter. Inspections may include, but are not limited to. a. Visual inspections of hazardous materials storage and secondary containment areas; b. Inspections of HMMP; and c. Sampling of soils, surface water and groundwater. 5. Third -Party Review. The City may employ a hydrogeologic consultant licensed in Washington State at the applicant's expense for third -party review for compliance with the BMPs, the HMI and the HMMP. 6. Enforcement. Whenever a person has violated any provisions of this chapter, the (Planning and Development Director, in consultation with the Public Works Director as necessari may take code enforcement action based on the nature of the violation , - commented [MC3]: since there are now specific including, but not limited to, abatement, injunction, mitigation, fines and penalties as set stormwater requirements within the CARA chapter, PV forth in Section 18.30.100 ECDC, Stormwater Management. Director needs referenced too. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23draft ra..,ORd CARA ECDC 23.60 v 1 n 25 23 v 0 0 0 A N O N Q O O V to O L Q O L M L 0 d G' L d w a Q R V J R L O U) 4) R Q W O C O :.i a Packet Pg. 21 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 23.40.005 Definitions pertaining to critical areas. For the purposes of this chapter and the chapters on the five specific critical area types (Chapters 23.50, 23.60, 2IM 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC) the following definitions shall apply: "Adjacent" means those activities located on site immediately adjoining a critical area; or distance equal to or less than 225 feet of a development proposal or subject parcel. "Alteration" means any human -induced action which changes the existing condition of a critical area or its buffer. Alterations include, but are not limited to: grading; filling; dredging; draining; channelizing; cutting, pruning, limbing or topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation; applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance; discharging pollutants; paving, construction, application of gravel; modifying for surface water management purposes; or any other human activity that changes the existing landforms, vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat value of critical areas. "Aquifer" means a body of soil or rock that contains sufficient saturated material to conduct groundwater and yield usable quantities of groundwater to springs and/or wells. Best Available Science. See ECDC 23.40.310. "Best management practices" means a system of practices and management measures that: 1. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal waste, and toxics; 2. Control the movement of sediment and erosion caused by land alteration activities; 3. Minimize adverse impacts to surface and ground water quality, flow, and circulation patterns; and 4. Minimize adverse impacts to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of critical areas. 'Buffer' means the designated area immediately next to and a part of a steep slope or landslide hazard area and which protects slope stability, attenuation of surface water flows and landslide hazards reasonably necessary to minimize risks to persons or property; or a designated area immediately next to and part of a stream or wetland that is an integral part of the stream or wetland ecosystem. "Chapter" means those sections of this title sharing the same third and fourth digits. "City" means the city of Edmonds. City Council or Council. See ECDC 21.15.030. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaft EGIM ..,a C.A.R.A. ECDC 2460 V 10 �q �R Packet Pg. 22 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 "Class" or "wetland class" means descriptive categories of wetland vegetation communities within the wetlands taxonomic classification system of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al., 1979). "Clearing" means the act of cutting and/or removing vegetation. This definition shall include grubbing vegetation and the use or application of herbicide. "Compensation project" means an action(s) specifically designed to replace project -induced critical area or buffer losses. Compensation project design elements may include, but are not limited to: land acquisition procedures and detailed plans including functional value assessments, detailed landscaping designs, construction drawings, and monitoring and contingency plans. "Compensatory mitigation" means replacing project -induced losses or impacts to a critical area, and includes, but is not limited to, the following: 1. "Creation" means actions performed to intentionally establish a wetland at a site where it did not formerly exist. 2. "Reestablishment" means actions performed to restore processes and functions to an area that was formerly a critical area, where the former critical area was lost by past alterations and activities. 3. "Rehabilitation" means improving or repairing processes and functions to an area that is an existing critical area that is highly degraded because one or more environmental processes supporting the critical area have been disrupted. 4. "Enhancement" means actions performed to improve the condition of existing degraded wetlands so that the functions they provide are of a higher quality. 5. "Preservation" means actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing high - quality wetlands. "Creation" means a compensation project performed to intentionally establish a wetland or stream at a site where one did not formerly exist. "Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs)" means areas that are determined to have a critical recharging effect on aquifers used as a source for potable water, and are vulnerable to contamination from recharge, as identified in the City's GIS. "Critical areas" for the city of Edmonds means wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas as defined in Chapters 23.50, 23.60, 23.70, 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC, respectively. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaft EGIM ..,a. C.A.R.A. ECDC 2460 V I n �q �R 10 Packet Pg. 23 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 "Deleterious substances" include, but are not limited to, chemical and microbial substances that are not classified as hazardous materials per this chapter, whether the substances are in usable or waste condition, that have the potential to pose a significant groundwater hazard, or for which monitorine reauirements or treatment -based standards are enforced under Chanter 246- 290 WAC. "Development proposal" means any activity relating to the use and/or development of land requiring a permit or approval from the city, including, but not limited to: commercial or residential building permit; binding site plan; conditional use permit; franchise; right-of-way permit; grading and clearing permit; mixed use approval; planned residential development; shoreline conditional use permit; shoreline substantial development permit; shoreline variance; short subdivision; special use permit; subdivision; flood hazard permit; unclassified use permit; utility and other use permit; variance; rezone; or any required permit or approval not expressly exempted by this title. "Director" means the city of Edmonds development services director or his/her designee. "Division" means the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. "Enhancement" means an action taken to improve the condition and function of a critical area. In the case of wetland or stream, the term includes a compensation project performed to improve the conditions of an existing degraded wetland or stream to increase its functional value. "Erosion" means the process in which soil particles are mobilized and transported by natural agents such as wind, rain, frost action, or stream flow. Erosion Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(A). Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. See Chapter 23.90 ECDC. "Floodplain" means the total area subject to inundation by a "100-year flood." "100-year flood" means a flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. "Footprint of existing development" or "footprint of development" means the area of a site that contains legally established: buildings; roads, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, walkways or other areas paved with concrete, asphalt or compacted gravel; outdoor swimming pools; patios. Frequently Flooded Areas. See Chapter 23.70 ECDC. "Functions" means the roles served by critical areas including, but not limited to: water quality protection and enhancement; fish and wildlife habitat; food chain support; flood storage, conveyance and attenuation; ground water recharge and discharge; erosion control; wave attenuation; aesthetic value protection; and recreation. These roles are not listed in order of priority. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaft EGIM ..,a. C.A.R.A. ECDC 2460 Y 10 �q �R 11 Packet Pg. 24 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 Geologically Hazardous Areas. See Chapter 23.80 ECDC "Geologist" means a person licensed as a geologist, engineering geologist, or hydrologist in the state of Washington. For geologically hazardous areas, an applicant may choose a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the state of Washington to assess the potential hazard. "Geotechnical engineer" means a practicing geotechnical/civil engineer licensed as a professional civil engineer in the state of Washington who has at least five years of professional employment as a geotechnical engineer in responsible charge including experience with landslide evaluation. "Grading" means any one or a combination of excavating, filling, or disturbance of that portion of the soil profile which contains decaying organic matter. "Habitats of local importance" means areas that include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a given species has a primary association, and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. These might include areas of high relative density or species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and movement corridors. These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alterations such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands. In urban areas like the city of Edmonds, habitats of local importance include biodiversity areas and corridors, which are characterized by a framework of ecological components which provides the physical conditions necessary for ecosystems and species populations to survive in a human -dominated landscape. "Hazardous materials" means any material, either singularly or in combination, that is a physical or health hazard, whether the materials are in usable or waste condition; and any material that may degrade surface water or groundwater quality when improperly stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, disposed of, or otherwise mismanaged. Hazardous materials also include: all materials defined as or designated by rule as a dangerous waste or extremely hazardous waste under Chapter 70.105 RCW and Chapter 173-303 WAC; hazardous materials also include petroleum or petroleum products that are in liquid phase at ambient temperatures, including any waste oils or sludges. "Hazardous materials inventory (HMI)" is an inventory of all current and anticipated types and quantities of hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of at a facility as required in ECDC 23.60.030.C.2, Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI). "Hazardous materials management plan (HMMP)" is a plan completed by the operator that demonstrates how the facility implements required BMPs as required in ECDC 23.60.030.C.3, Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). "In -lieu fee program" means a program which sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in - lieu program sponsor, a governmental or nonprofit natural resource management entity. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23drafi ra,.,,..,ag CARA ECDC 23.60 v 1 n 25 23 12 Packet Pg. 25 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 Landslide Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(B). "Mitigation" means the use of any or all of the following actions, which are listed in descending order of preference: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps such as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts; 3. Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineered or other methods; 5. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 6. Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and 7. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. "Native vegetation" means vegetation comprised of plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region and which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. "Native vegetation" does not include noxious weeds as defined by the state of Washington or federal agencies. "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. "Noxious weeds" means any plant that is highly destructive, competitive or difficult to control by cultural or chemical practices, limited to those plants on the state noxious weed list contained in Chapter 16-750 WAC. "Planning staff" means those employed in the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaft EGIM ..,a C.A.R.A. ECDC 2460 V 10 �q 24 13 Packet Pg. 26 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 "Qualified critical areas consultant" or "qualified professional" means a person who has the qualifications specified below to conduct critical areas studies pursuant to this title, and to make recommendations for critical areas mitigation. For geologically hazardous areas, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the state of Washington to assess the potential hazard. If development is to take place within a geologically hazardous area, the qualified critical areas consultant developing mitigation plans and design shall be a professional engineer licensed in the state of Washington and familiar with landslide and slope stability mitigation. For wetlands and streams, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of five years' field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. Requirements defining a qualified critical areas consultant or qualified professional are contained within the chapter on each critical area type. "Reasonable economic use(s)" means the minimum use to which a property owner is entitled under applicable state and federal constitutional provisions in order to avoid a taking and/or violation of substantive due process. "Recharge" means the process involved in the absorption and addition of water from the unsaturated zone to groundwater. "Redeveloped land(s)" means those lands on which existing structures are demolished in their entirety to allow for new development. The director shall maintain discretion to determine if the demolition of a majority of existing structures or portions thereof constitute the redevelopment of a property or subject parcel. "Restoration" means the actions necessary to return a stream, wetland or other critical area to a state in which its stability, functions and values approach its unaltered state as closely as possible. For wetlands, restoration as compensatory mitigation may include reestablishment or rehabilitation. Seismic Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(C). "Species of local importance" means those species that are of local concern due to their population status, their sensitivity to habitat manipulation, or that are game (hunted) species. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(4).) "Storm Water Management Manual" means the storm water manual specified in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. "Streams" means any area where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definition is not meant to include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water runoff devices (drainage ditches) or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or used to convey streams draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaft EGIM ..,a. C.A.R.A. ECDC 2460 Y 10 �q �R 14 Packet Pg. 27 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 naturally occurring prior to construction of such watercourse. Streams are further classified into Categories S, F, Np and Ns and fishbearing or nonfishbearing 1, 2 and 3. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(1).) "Title" means all chapters of the city of Edmonds Development Code beginning with the digits 23. "Undeveloped land(s)" means land(s) on which manmade structures or land modifications (clearing, grading, etc.) do not exist. The director retains discretion to identify undeveloped land(s) in those instances where historical modifications and structures may have existed on a property or subject parcel in the past. "Underground Infection Control Well" as defined in Chapter 173-218 WAC and associated _ _ _ _ - - Commented [MC4]: New definition related to store guidance documents. J in CARAs "Wellhead protection area (WHPA)" means the surface and subsurface area surrounding a well or well field that supplies a public water system through which contaminants are likely to pass and eventuallv reach the water well(s) as desienated under the Federal Clean Water Act. "Wetland functions" means those natural processes performed by wetlands, such as facilitating food chain production; providing habitat for nesting, rearing and resting sites for aquatic, terrestrial or avian species; maintaining the availability and quality of water; acting as recharge and/or discharge areas for ground water aquifers; and moderating surface water and storm water flows. "Wetland mitigation bank" means a site where wetlands are restored, created, enhanced, or in exceptional circumstances, preserved expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation in advance of authorized impacts to similar resources. "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street or highway. However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands if permitted by the city (WAC 365-190-030(22)). Wetlands are further classified into Categories 1, 2, 3 and 4. (See ECDC 23.50.010(B).) [Ord. 4026 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3952 § 1, 2013; Ord. 3931 § 2, 2013; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004. Formerly 23.40.320]. draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23draft ra..,,..,ag CARA ECDC 23.60 v 1 n 25 23 15 a Packet Pg. 28 8.A.a Draft Edmonds CARA Update 2023 draft Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v4 10.25.23dFaf4 EGl^'^^d; C.A.R.A. ECDC 24630 Y 10 �q �q 16 Packet Pg. 29 Managing Stormwater Runoff in CARAs — For Stormwater Addendum Only 8.A.b The City of Edmonds does not implement or enforce the UIC regulations, and they are independent of the City's stormwater regulations. It is the responsibility of the applicant to abide by all applicable Federal and State requirements related to UICs. • The use of stormwater infiltration best management practices (BMPs) including those that qualify as a Class V Underground Injection Control well (UIC), are prohibited for all land uses within all wellhead protection areas (WHPAs), including the buffer, associated with Olympic View Water and Sewer District's (OVWSD) 228' Street Wellhead. Within all WHPAs, associated with OVWSD's Deer Creek Springs, including the buffer, stormwater infiltration systems including UICs, shall be regulated using Ecology's 2019 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SWMMWW), including Volume I, Section 1.4 (UIC Program); provided that Tables 1-4.2 (Vadose Zone Treatment Capacity), 1-4.3 (Pollutant Loading Classifications for Solids, Metals, and Oil in Stormwater Runoff Directed to UIC Wells), and 1-4.4 (Treatment Required for Solids, Oil, and Metals) in the SWMMWW shall not apply and are superseded by the following tables, respectively, to be more protective of the aquifers: Table 1- Assumed Vadose Zone Treatment Capacity by Wellhead Protection Area Assumed Treatment Wellhead Protection Areal Capacity' Additional Protection Areas for Exposed Qva Aquifer None All other Zones Low 1 - From Figure 8, Appendix B (Wellhead Protection Areas Delineation, Robinson Noble, Inc.) - 2018 Watershed Protection Plan. Olympic View Water & Sewer District. Pace Engineering, 11/2018. 2 -- From Table 1-4.2 (Vadose Zone Treatment Capacity) - 2019 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, modified to be more protective of aquifer. Table 2 - - Pollutant Loading Classifications for Solids, Metals, and Oil in Stormwater Runoff Directed to UIC Wells Land Use' Pollutant Loading Risk' Single -Family Residential (SFR) lots Low Multifamily Residential Medium All Other not mentioned above High Roadway' Local Low Collector Minor Arterial Medium Principal Arterial High 1 - Site zoning at time of permit application 2 - From Table 1-4.3 (Pollutant Loading Classification for Solids, Metals and Oil in Stormwater Runoff Directed to UIC Wells) - 2019 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, modified to be more protective. 3 - Figure 3-1- Roadway Functional Classification - Edmonds 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Packet Pg. 30 8.A.b Table 3: Treatment Required for Solids, Oil, and Metals' Assumed Treatment Capacity Pollutant Loading Risk Low Nnnp Low Pretreatmentz Remove Solids' Medium Remove SolidS' Remove Solids' High Remove Oil & SolidS3,4 Remove Oil & SolidS3,4 1- From the 2019 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SWMMWW), modified to be more protective (Table 1-4.4). 2 - Pretreatment removes solids, but at a level less than basic treatment. Ecology's definition for pre-treatment is 50% removal. See the definition for pretreatment in the Glossary of the SWMMWW. 3 - Treatment to remove solids means basic treatment. See the definition of basic treatment in the Glossary of the SWMMWW. Removal of solids removes a large portion of the total metals in most stormwater runoff. Any special treatment requirements in the SWMMWW still apply. 4 - Treatment to remove oil is to be accomplished by applying one of the oil control BMPs identified in the SWMMWW. See BMP T11.10: API (Baffle type) Separator and BMP T11.11: Coalescing Plate (CP) Separator in the SWMMWW. • At high -density intersections and at commercial or industrial sites subject to an expected average daily traffic (ADT) count of 100 vehicles/1,000 sf gross building area, sufficient quantities of oil may be generated to justify operation of a separator BMP. • At other high -use sites, project proponents may select a basic treatment BMP that also provides adsorptive capacity, such as a biofiltration or bioinfiltration swale, a filter, or other adsorptive technology, in lieu of a separator BMP. A catch basin with a turned down elbow is not adequate for oil control in this case. • The requirement to apply a basic treatment BMP with adsorptive characteristics also applies to commercial parking and to streets with ADT > 7,500. m a� M s d d Cr Q Ta v �L V L O N d M CL O w O C O N N 7 U Q U O rr N rr M d CID M CID _M E C Q L 3 E L O 4+ U) M L N r.+ C O E t V R Q C d E t V R Q Packet Pg. 31 8.A.c CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting July 26, 2023 Chair Gladstone called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:02 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Chair Gladstone. Board Members Present Judi Gladstone, Chair Lauren Golembiewski Susanna Martini Nick Maxwell Jeremy Mitchell Beth Tragus-Campbell, Vice Chair' Emily Nutsch (alternate) Lily Distelhorst (student rep) Board Members Absent Richard Kuehn (excused) READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES Staff Present Mike Clugston, Senior Planner David Levitan, Planning Manager Amber Brokenshire, Planner MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 12, 2023 WITH THE AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY CHAIR GLADSTONE IN A JULY 24, 2023 EMAIL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None 1 Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell arrived at 7:08 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 26, 2023 Pagel of 7 Packet Pg. 32 8.A.c ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department — 2023 Q2 Accomplishments Chair Gladstone said she had submitted an email with several questions to Planning Manager Levitan who will provide a response to everyone. There were no other questions raised. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing on updates to Critical Aquifer Recharge Area code (AMD2023-0004) Senior Planner Clugston made the staff presentation regarding the proposed Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) code amendment. He discussed the definition of a CARA and the need for the code amendment to address two wellhead protection areas in the Olympic View Water and Sewer District. He reviewed proposed changes that had been made since the last meeting as reflected in Attachment 1. He noted that there were still several unresolved items that need further research and refinement, either by the Planning Board or by City Council during their review of the code amendment. These are related to: • Stormwater management — Discussions are ongoing with Olympic View Water and Sewer District (OVWSD). • Greywater — Need to re-evaluate in light of information provided by Snohomish County Department of Health. The County allows greywater reuse for irrigation during the dry season. Should the City continue prohibition of all greywater or allow some flexibility? Firefighting foam — Staff is waiting for confirmation that the fire district doesn't use PFAS (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) foam. Pollution Liability Insurance requirements — Staff is waiting for a response from the city attorney. Board Member Golembiewski asked if the prohibited and restricted uses are limited to commercial uses or if they include residential uses as well. Senior Planner Clugston explained that many of the uses, just by definition of the uses, are commercial. Board Member Golembiewski asked about things like the storing of hazardous materials and greywater. Senior Planner Clugston stated that staff could clarify this. Board Member Golembiewski asked if septic systems are allowed in CARAs. Senior Planner Clugston said he thought they were, but they could check with OVWSD. He wasn't sure if there were any onsite septic systems in the City of Edmonds anymore. Any new development would require connection to sewer. Board Member Maxwell expressed some concerns about allowing greywater although he had raised the initial question. Public Testimony: The public hearing was opened at 7:33 p.m. and public comments were solicited. Lora Petso commented as an individual. She recommended not passing this on until staff has a chance to complete their work and get input on it from the Planning Board. She would like to see a provision that this chapter would apply to all land use and development proposals on parcels entirely within the area and that the protections contained herein would not be subject to waiver, variance, mitigation, or any other exceptions provided in the city codes. She also expressed concern about the time of travel structure and explained that it is not based on the Best Available Science. She discussed the hazards of PFAS which are extremely toxic and Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 26, 2023 Page 2 of 7 Packet Pg. 33 8.A.c don't degrade. Regarding greywater, she stated that it is all going to contain PFAS because it's in soaps, lotions, detergents, cosmetics, etc. She recommended not allowing greywater or rainwater at all because of this, noting that PFAS are now even in the rain. Additionally, since the science is evolving rapidly, the City is required to use the precautionary principle and err on the side of being overprotective. Finally, she recommended making the ordinance as self -updating as much as possible by using language that gives staff authority to impose restrictions to protect the drinking water sources including, but not limited to, those that are listed in the chapter. Bob Danson, General Manager, OlMpic View Water and Sewer District, thanked the City for working with them to try to protect our community's drinking water resources and by updating the City's CARA code. He explained the importance of protecting the watershed wellhead protection areas which are the source of the community's drinking water. He also discussed the hazards of PFAS and the need to protect the system from them. OVWSD is looking forward to continuing to work with staff on the stormwater piece to find a solution that best protects the drinking water aquifers. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS- CAMPBELL, TO EXTEND THE PUBLIC COMMENT TIME TO ALLOW THE PARTICIPANTS TO ELABORATE IF DESIRED. MOTION PASSED WITH CHAIR GLADSTONE ABSTAINING. Lora Petso discussed other ways to make the ordinance self -updating such as referring to OVWSD mapping so that when OVWSD updates its maps, it is automatically recognized in the CARA code or to have a provision to recognize the State's Stormwater Manual so that when the state updates the manual it's automatically recognized in the CARA code. They should have a provision that in the event of conflicting requirements, the requirements most protective of the drinking water source shall apply. She also urged them to put all the stormwater protections and land use protections into the CARA ordinance so they can more easily prohibit things in the CARAs that they would want to allow elsewhere. Finally, she encouraged them to ban the use of recycled tire products, recycled asphalt, impervious parking lots and roads, and new infiltration facilities in CARAs. She thanked the Board for the additional time. The public comment period was closed at 7:48 p.m. Discussion: Board Member Maxwell said he was surprised to hear that PFAS were being found in rainwater. If that is the case, he recommended not allowing rain barrels and encouraging people to get their rain into the stormwater system as much as possible. Board Member Martini noted that so far, the water has been in good shape. They need to figure out what they are doing right to keep the drinking water clean and continue with that. Senior Planner Clugston thought it has to do with the land use. Single-family residential zoning is the biggest land use in both of those areas so there is not a lot of intense industry and heavy uses. Chair Gladstone noted that there are still some significant outstanding issues with this code. She proposed tabling this until those issues have been addressed. She was particularly concerned about stormwater and how the UIC (Underground Injection Control) wells are handled in the CARA. It would be good for the Planning Board to send a recommendation to Council that they feel confident about. Senior Planner thought there might Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 26, 2023 Page 3 of 7 Packet Pg. 34 8.A.c be another meeting on Friday with Olympic View, but it is unknown if that will lead to a resolution. The project is tentatively scheduled for Council review at their first meeting in September. Board Member Golembiewski asked for others' opinions about recommending this with a pending stormwater issue. There was discussion about options for moving forward and potential timelines. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL THE MAJOR ISSUES WITH THE OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT ARE RESOLVED AND STAFF IS ABLE TO COME BACK WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Board Member Golembiewski asked if they were making a recommendation to postpone this until the stormwater is resolved. She wondered if they would want to entertain making a recommendation in lieu of stormwater since that typically wouldn't be in their purview anyway. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO POSTPONE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL AUGUST 23 AND SEEK AN UPDATE ON THE STORMWATER CODE AS PART OF THE CONTINUATION. Board Member Maxwell said he hoped that staff would seriously consider Ms. Petso's comments. Planning Manager Levitan indicated staff would follow up on this along with the stormwater code. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. None NEW BUSINESS A. Introduction to Site -Specific Rezone Proposal at 9530 Edmonds Way (PLN2023-0024) Amber Brokenshire, Planner, introduced the rezone from RM-EW to BC-EW at 9530 Edmonds Way. She gave the site context and rezone criteria. The rezone would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It would not require a SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) review at this point in the process. The zoning analysis shows that it would allow for increased densities, reduced setback, a smaller floor area ratio, and an increased height to 40 feet, if it met specific site development standards. Also, at least 3 public benefit measures must be incorporated into the building or site design within the BC-EW zone: sustainable building techniques (LEED Gold), inclusion of housing units affordable to persons at low/moderate income, public amenities, and low impact development (LID) techniques. She reviewed a map showing the uses and zoning of the surrounding area. Site specific rezones are a Type IV (legislative) permit, with the Planning Board holding a public hearing and making a recommendation to City Council. The Planning Board hearing is preliminarily scheduled for August 23. The City Council will hold a separate public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance to change the zoning. Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 26, 2023 Page 4 of 7 Packet Pg. 35 8.A.d o� E ,4 s Packet Pg. 36 Tonight's Meeting V kOverview of CARA and updated draft code in Attachment 1 Take public testimony Discuss draft, comments received Action... recommendation to Council or additional work by PB Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are established to protect public groundwater drinking supplies from What is a potential contamination and to ensure CARA? adequate groundwater availability. They are required by and treated as critical areas under the Growth Management Act (GMA). Current Edmonds code (from 2016) states the are no CARAs in the city (Chapter 23.60 ECDC) Why In 2022, City learned there were two Update? CARAs in Edmonds (Olympic View Water &Sewer District wellhead protection areas) OV partnership yielded BAS, mapping, and code review and input 8.A.d S \ 7 A si 228t Soo L r ��ji1 ` �' _ t s �• y� -�,QW .. Cill Tit • Neils 1 • t •• WARC TAUM I i l • - rJ 201 Note: Basemap from PM: MTW Snohomish County USGS Edmonds August 2018 T 27 N/R 3,4 E 1A/ncf -1 C�cf .___ ___. •` ' 1 • . �.0 f j 30 I` / •' •1 t7eet WeHfiaelCL InfluencE o by • r'7 r• y / Hall Cr o •• • •• ..�...�.��-ice;. . •. 3 •R 17 vi' V i. 1'. • ' • r Tt •' Q •F' - iv Legend . I •. "� N • '• •� • ;� L 6 Month Travel Time Zone >, •� •• - • II L J Zone 1 (1 Year Travel Time Zone) • _ 1 _ , • ' i>Hor�t�t �,(; ` L J Zone 2 (5 Year Travel Time Zone) l J Zone 3 (10 Year Travel Time Zone) C "� • 4C • _ Buffer Zone s • •� �� +�; � �• � Water Sources ca Additional Protection Areas for Exposed Qva Q 'er j Q Olympic View Water and Sewer District Servi = ea d Fic E 8 Ai 43 he, Packet Pg. 40 Renamed `Scope' from `Purpose and Intent' Added first sentence of existing 23.60.010 "Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190- Scope 030(2). CARAs have prevailing geologic conditions associated with infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. CARAs are protected as critical areas under the Washington State Growth Management Act." OV has concern about the inserted language Classification (using DOH travel times) Class 1 — 6 mo, 1 yr, and 5 year Class 2 — 10 year Class 3 - Buffer Local consultation - OV review of certain City Administration projects in CARAs (new SFR/MF/commercial building permits, subdivisions) Renamed `Administration' from `Mapping, Classification, Applicability, and Local Consultation' Removed term `Group A' in reference to wellhead protection areas (23.60.020.A) In CARA Use Table (ECDC 23.60.030-1) Stormwater placeholder for Underground Injection Control `All automotive uses' is changed to `Automotive Regulated Uses' `Wood preserving' clarified to mean only Activities `Commerical wood preserving' `Rainwater collection and use' added and allowed in all CARAs Enforcement clarified to Planning and Development Director (23.60.030.C.6) Stormwater (City and OV in dialog) Firefighting foam (South County Fire) Unresolved Pollution liability insurance (City Items Attorney) Greywater (County DOH responded) Current draft - prohibit in all CARAs reconsider? SnoCo DOH allows (state -approved DOH septic technology) Greywater is wastewater from Greywater bathtubs, showers, bathroom sinks, washing machines (light) and dishwashers and kitchen sinks (dark) - any source other than toilets Only used for irrigation during dry season Tier 1 - `light' greywater, SFRs only (no treatment) - allow in Class 2 and 3 CARA? Tier 2 -'light' greywater, MF & Greywater Commercial (no treatment) -Class 2 or Tiers and 3 CARA? Options Tier 3-'dark' greywater, MF & Commercial (treatment) -Class 3 roof top gardens? Should Tiers be allowed in certain CARA Classes or prohibited in all? 8.A.d r� Q Packet Pg. 47 Public testimony Discuss updated draft, comments Potential Actions Recommendation that directs staff to Next Steps continue to work with partner agencies to finalize code language on unresolved topics Continue public hearing to August 23 to allow for additional refinement of the proposed code language 8.A.e Summary of public hearing comments — CARA ordinance (Lora Petso, as best I can recall, and perhaps with just a little added information) As always, my comments, herein and at the public hearing, are my own, and not as a representative of any government or group that I am associated with. I thanked everyone for the work done, and suggested several additional ideas: 1) Make the ordinance applicable to all new land use and development proposals on parcels partially or entirely within the contribution area of either drinking water source. 2) Provide that the protections will not be subject to waiver, variance or other exceptions authorized throughout the city codes. Recognize that CARA's are different than other critical areas, and you can't really apply the usual critical area treatments and exceptions to a drinking water aquifer. (I may have used the example of mitigation sequencing, and I think I mentioned that due to the complexity of our code staff assistance would be very much required to make this happen). 3) The time of travel structure and table do not appear to be based on best available science. The only science in the record indicates that the entire contribution area is highly susceptible, and the area without any confining layer is even more susceptible. With super common super toxic contaminants that don't degrade in the environment, such as PFAS, there is no scientific basis for failing to fully protect CARA 3. (Today's comment: Well, that is what my notes say, I don't think I stayed on script last night. I have attached part of a document from ITRC that I believe qualifies as BAS which includes on page 1 the comment that PFOA and PFOS are mobile, persistent, bioaccumulative, and are not known to degrade in the environment. It also includes on page 2 that they are focused on due to their stability and known toxicity at low doses. Hopefully that provides scientific backing for my comments.) 4) I mentioned that since the science is still evolving rapidly, (probably also in the ITRC guidance document), the City is required to use the precautionary principal (probably in the Commerce Guidance, GMA and/or WAC). We need to err on the side of being overprotective and not take additional risks. 5) I also suggested making the ordinance self -updating. We could add things like "in implementing this ordinance, staff shall impose restriction to protect the drinking water sources including but not limited to the uses and activities Packet Pg. 49 8.A.e outlined in table L" I think I also suggested referencing the Olympic View Maps and Source protection plan as now or hereafter adopted. Similar for the State stormwater manual, so the updated protections take effect immediately and automatically. I also suggested a provision that in the event of conflicting requirements, the requirements most protective of the drinking water sources shall apply. 6) I suggested that all stormwater and land use protections be included in the CARA ordinance so that you can easily prohibit things in the CARA's that you want to allow elsewhere. I mentioned possible prohibitions for recycled tire products, recycled asphalt, pervious parking lots and roads, and new infiltration facilities. 7) Off my script, I think I mentioned being careful with graywater, since I think HAS is in a lot of products like shampoo, cosmetics, and detergents. 8) My conclusion was that water is finite and precious, and you should not be reluctant to protect it. Economic development, equity, affordable housing and the environment all depend on clean water. Packet Pg. 50 8.A.e 1 Introduction Understanding the fate and transport of a chemical in the environment is fundamental to the investigation and remediation of any contaminated site This fact sheet focuses on how the unique chemical and physical properties of PFAS affect their behavior in the environment. Additional information is available in the Guidance Document. PFAS are a large family of compounds used in or to create non-stick coatings, textiles, paper products, food packaging, some firefighting foams, and many other products. These compounds have many manufacturing and product applications because they repel oil and water, resist temperature extremes, and reduce friction. PFAS include compounds that vary in molecular weight and can have multiple structures and functional groups, but share the feature of linked carbon atoms bonded to fluorine atoms at most or all available carbon bonding sites. Additional discussion of the definitions of PFAS is included in Section 2.2 of the Guidance Document. Over the years, manufacturing and use of these compounds, in concert with their recalcitrance, has resulted in their widespread occurrence in the environment. ITRC has developed a series of fact sheets that summarizes recent science and emerging technologies regarding PFAS. The information in this and other PFAS fact sheets is more fully described in the ITRC PFAS Technical and Regulatory Guidance Document (Guidance Document) (https://pfas-1. itrcweb. org�. This fact sheet describes: • Physical and chemical properties of PFAS that effect compound state and partitioning in the environment • Partitioning and transport behavior of PFAS Abiotic and biotic transformation of The scientific community is rapidly expanding its understanding of the select PFAS in the environment environmental and health effects of PFAS. Some PFAS, such as perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), are mobile, persistent, and bioaccumulative, and are not known to degrade in the environment (USEPA 2003 Ref#858; ATSDR 2020 Ref#1942; NTP 2016; CONCAWE 2016). 2 Physical and Chemical Properties The physical and chemical properties of PFAS, in concert with the characteristics of the environmental system, determine the environmental behavior, including the compound's state and partitioning behavior (Banks, Smart, and Tatlow 1994). Partitioning can occur between neutral and ionic molecular forms, solid and liquid states, and between different media and biota (aqueous, pure phase, soil/sediment, biota, and atmospheric). The environmental behavior of many PFAS is further complicated by their surfactant properties. Figure 1 illustrates key chemical and physical properties and distribution coefficients. Comparing the chemical and physical properties of different PFAS provides insight into similarities and differences in their environmental behavior and can inform investigation design. V„ t1Kh Chemical State BAF determined by: S P■ Tm, TW pKa Vd' Kos BSAF Figure 1. The role of key physical and chemical properties (shown in red) in influencing environmental compound behavior. Other key distribution coefficients (BAF and BSAF shown in grey) are addressed in the Sections 5.5 (Table 5.1) and 9.2 of the Guidance Document. Tm = melting point; Tb = boiling point; pKa = acid dissociation constant; Vp = vapor pressure; S = solubility; Kb = dimensionless Henry's law constant; Kd = soil and sediment partitioning coefficient; Ko, = organic carbon partitioning coefficient; BAF = bioaccumulation factor,- and BSAF = biota -sediment accumulation factor. Packet Pg. 51 8.A.e Fate and Transport for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) continued Physical and chemical properties for a variety of PFAS are available in the literature. While some experimentally derived values are available, the majority of values are estimated using predictive mathematical techniques that predict properties of compounds from knowledge of their chemical structure. A combination of empirically derived physical and chemical properties and modeled values is invaluable to predictive development of conceptual site models, but lacks the site - specific detail required to definitively resolve PFAS behavior and partitioning at impacted sites. PFAS can be cationic, anioic, or zwitterionic and most site characterization work has focused on anionic perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) with limited attention to the cationic or zwitterionic PFAS. With few exceptions (for example, Kos), much of the data for available properties are based on the acid form of the compound, which is not present at environmentally relevant pH values (pKa<3). Common physical and chemical properties of several PFAS, related references, and the uncertainties in the published values, are discussed in Section 4 of the Guidance Document and provided in Table 4-1 (see the External Data Tables on https://pfas-1 .itrcweb.org). Bioaccumulation factors and bioconcentration factors, which are used to understand bioaccumulation and associated risk, are discussed and presented in Sections 5.5 (aquatic organisms) and 5.6 (plants) and in Tables 5-1 and 5-2 (see the External Data Tables on https:Hpfas-l.itrcweb.org). 3 Fate and Transport Processes Partitioning, transport, and transformation of PFAS occur across multiple media types. Most regulatory attention focuses on perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs), especially PFOS and PFOA, due to their stability and known toxicity at low concentrations. However, processes affecting other PFAS, such as transformation of polyfluorinated precursor PFAS to PFAAs, affect conceptual model development and our ability to assess the potential for PFAS-impacted sites to become long- term PFAA sources. See Section 5 of the Guidance Document for additional discussions of fate and transport. Partitioning Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) Tail 3 2 2 2 S03 Head Perfluorooctane carboxylate (PFOA) F3C-CF2CF2-CF2-CF2 CF2-CF2 Figure 2. The tail and head structure of PFOS and PFOA. Source: PFAS-1, Figure 2-6. The PFAS most commonly detected in the environment typically have a hydrophobic fluoroalkyl "tail' and a polar, hydrophilic nonfluorinated "head" consisting of a polar functional group, as illustrated for PFOS and PFOA in Figure 2 PFAAs are typically considered amphiphilic, as they have hydrophilic (head) and oleophilic (tail) regions. The predominant mechanisms driving PFAS partitioning include hydrophobic and lipophobic effects, electrostatic interactions, and interfacial behaviors. Electrostatic effects drive the association with organic carbon in soils and are a function of the charge of the polar functional group at the head of the molecule. As is the case for all surfactants, the competing nature of the head and tail groups results in accumulation along interfaces of environmental media such as soil/water, water/air, and water/NAPL (Guelfo and Higgins 2013; McKenzie et al. 2016; Brusseau 2018). The partitioning behaviors of perfluoroalkyl carboxylates (PFCAs) and perfluoroalkane sulfonates (PFSAs) have been studied more in depth than that of other PFAS. At relevant environmental pH values, PFCAs and PFSAs are present as anions and are therefore relatively mobile in groundwater (Xiao et al. 2015) but may tend to associate with the organic carbon fraction present in soil or sediment or aggregate at the air -water interface within the vadose zone (Higgins and Luthy 2006; Guelfo and Higgins 2013). Generally, cationic and zwitterionic PFAS can be expected to sorb to soils and sediment more strongly than anionic PFAS due to their higher electrostatic attractions to negatively charged organic matter and clays. Both solid phase and interfacial sorption and, as a result, retardation generally increase with increasing perfluoroalkyl chain length (Guelfo and Higgins 2013; Sepulvado et al. 2011; Psillakis et al. 2009), indicating that the short -chain PFSAs and PFCAs are retarded less than their long -chain counterparts. In addition, PFSAs tend to sorb more strongly than PFCAs of equal chain length (Higgins and Luthy 2006; Psillakis et al. 2009), and branched isomers appear to have less solid phase sorption than linear (Karrman et al. 2011). 2 Packet Pg. 52 Fate and Transport for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) continued 8.A.e Transport Critical PFAS transport processes The resistance of most PFAS to biotic or abiotic degradation (except for include: advection, dispersion, precursor transformation) means that physical transport processes are critical diffusion, atmospheric deposition, for PFAS transport and potential for exposure. and leaching. Advection, Dispersion, Diffusion Processes such as advection, dispersion, and diffusion can strongly influence the migration of PFAS within and between media. Advection (the flow -related transport of compounds within a fluid such as water or air) drives PFAS mobility in many cases. Advection, however, does not reduce concentration along the flow path. Small-scale changes in air and surface water velocities can disperse contaminants in multiple directions, contributing to rapid vertical mixing of PFAS and cross -media transport (for example, surface water to sediment and deposition from air to surface soil). In air and water, molecules moving in response to a concentration gradient is known as diffusion. In surface water and air, mixing caused by turbulence is also referred to as eddy diffusion. Diffusion in groundwater is often ignored because diffusion rates are slow relative to advection. However, diffusion of contaminant mass into lower permeability soils or site materials such as clays, bedrock, and concrete may enhance the long-term persistence of PFAS in groundwater. Deposition • Atmospheric transport and subsequent deposition can lead to measurable PFAS accumulation away from their point of release. • Downward leaching of PFAS in unsaturated soils during precipitation or irrigation events is site specific and occurs as a function of media and PFAS structural properties. • At high concentrations PFAAs can form micelles, which could enhance or reduce adsorption on carbon and minerals. While many PFAS exhibit relatively low volatility, airborne transport of some PFAS is a relevant migration pathway through industrial releases (for example, stack emissions). Once airborne, some PFAS are subject to photooxidation and transport, but they can eventually accumulate to measurable levels in soil and surface water through atmospheric deposition (Young and Mabury 2010; Ahrens and Bundschuh 2014; Rankin et al. 2016). Atmospheric deposition can occur as dry or wet deposition, both of which are relevant for PFAS (Barton, Kaiser, and Russell 2007, 2010; Dreyer et al. 2010; Taniyasu et al. 2013). During dry deposition, PFAS that are preferentially associated with liquid or particle phases in air (aerosols) can be naturally deposited onto surfaces by sedimentation, diffusion, or other processes. When precipitation washes out these PFAS-containing aerosols, the process is known as wet deposition. Leaching PFAS present in unsaturated soils are subject to downward leaching during precipitation or irrigation events that promote dissolution of soil -bound contaminant mass (Sepulvado et al. 2011; Ahrens and Bundschuh 2014). This process is a potential driver of PFAS transport from surface soils to groundwater and surface water, because releases often involve surface applications or atmospheric deposition. Recently there has been an increase in the focus on biosolids contribution to PFAS leaching into receiving waters as a result of the practice of land application of biosolids as fertilizer (Schaefer et al. 2022). Leaching is also potentially relevant for plant uptake and transport of PFAS contained in landfill waste without adequate leachate control (Benskin et al. 2012 Ref#10; Yan et al. 2015 Ref#278; Lang et al. 2017). Leaching potential is a function of both media properties (for example, affinity for the air -water interface, pH and increased partitioning with organic -rich soil) and PFAS structural properties (for example, ionic charge, and chain length) (Gellrich, Stahl, and Knepper 2012). Surfactant Properties and Micelle Formation PFAS exhibit surfactant properties because they often contain hydrophobic and hydrophilic portions, which affect transport in ways that are complex and not well understood. By design, many PFAS preferentially form films at the air - water interface, with the hydrophobic carbon -fluorine (C-F) tail oriented towards the air and the hydrophilic head group dissolved in the water (Krafft and Riess 2015). This behavior influences aerosol -based transport and deposition and suggests that PFAS accumulates at water surfaces (Prevedouros et al. 2006). This preference for the air -water interface may also influence vadose zone transport, where unsaturated conditions provide significant air -water interfacial area. Adsorption of PFOS and PFOA at the air -water interface can increase the retardation factor for aqueous -phase transport (Brusseau 2018). At higher concentrations, PFAAs may form aggregates in which the hydrophilic portions interact with the water phase and the hydrophobic portions interact with each other (for example, micelles or hemimicelles), but more research is needed to understand this behavior. 3 Packet Pg. 53 8.A.e Fate and Transport for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) continued PFAS Transformation Both biotic and abiotic transformations of some polyfluorinated substances 0Precursor PFAS can transform (precursors) may form PFAAs. However, PFAAs likely do not degrade or to PFAAs via biotic and abiotic otherwise transform under ambient environmental conditions. Unlike the fully processes. fluorinated PFAAs, precursor PFAS contain carbon -hydrogen (C-H) and 0 Transformation rates are highly carbon -oxygen (C-O) bonds that are subject to a variety of biotic and abiotic variable and site specific. reactions that ultimately form terminal end products. While available studies on 0 PFAAs are not known to both biotic and abiotic transformation of precursor PFAS primarily consist of transform under ambient controlled laboratory experiments (discussed below), a number of field studies environmental conditions. have demonstrated the importance of precursors at a variety of sites (for example, Weber et al. 2017; Dassuncao et al. 2017). Abiotic Transformation Abiotic processes that can transform precursors under ambient environmental conditions include hydrolysis, photolysis, and oxidation. Hydrolysis of some precursors, followed by subsequent biotransformation, can produce PFCAs and PFSAs. For example, PFOS is produced from perfluorooctane sulfonyl fluoride (POSF) (Martin et al. 2010), and PFOA and other PFCAs with half-lives of 50-90 years are produced by the hydrolysis of flu orotelomer-derived precursors at neutral pH (Washington and Jenkins 2015). While direct photolysis of PFAS has not been observed, indirect photolysis of some precursors, notably fluoroteolomer alcohols (FTOHs), does occur in the atmosphere and can contribute to PFCA deposition (Armitage, MacLeod, and Cousins 2009; Yarwood et al. 2007). Perfluoroalkane sulfonamides can also degrade abiotically through oxidation in the atmosphere to form PFCAs in yields that may be 10 times greater than FTOHs (Martin et al. 2006). Shorter -chain PFSAs such as PFBS also can be produced by oxidation reactions between hydroxyl radicals and sulfonamido derivatives (D'Eon et al. 2006). Finally, in some cases, abiotic precursor transformations may not initially produce any PFAA though eventual formation of PFAAs may still be possible (Martin et al. 2010). Biotic Transformation While PFOA, PFOS, and other PFAAs are resistant to microbial degradation, numerous studies have reported biotransformations of various precursors similar to the abiotic transformations discussed herein. The current literature indicate that numerous aerobic biotransformation pathways exist, with relatively rapid kinetics and all polyfluorinated precursors may have the potential to aerobically biotransform to PFAAs. Fewer studies have been published regarding anaerobic biotransformation of PFAS. FTOHs have been observed to biotransform anaerobically, but appear to form stable polyfluorinated acids rather than PFCAs or PFSAs (Zhang et al. 2013; Allred et al. 2015). Defluorination of PFOA and PFOS was observed during anaerobic oxidation of ammonium under iron reducing conditions (Huang and Jaffe 2019). 4 References and Acronyms The references cited in this fact sheet and further references can be found at https://pfas-l.itrcweb.org/references/. Reference numbers are included in this fact sheet for non -unique citations in the Guidance Document reference list. The acronyms used in this fact sheet and in the Guidance Document can be found at https://pfas-l.itrcweb.org/acronyms . Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Team Contacts Sandra Goodrow • New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 609-940-4164 . Sandra. Goodrow(aDdep.ni.gov Kate Emma Schlosser • New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services 603-271-2910 • KateEmma.A.Schlosser(cDdes.nh.aov July 2022 E t U INTERSTATE . ITRC ® ' C co w 1250 H St. NW, Suite 850 w 0 Washington, DC 20005 ITRC Disclaimer ENVIRONMENTAL RESEH Q itrcweb.org woinn�aa. INSTITUTE OF THE STATES 4 Packet Pg. 54 8.A.f Debora Ashland expressed support for the tree code, particularly regulations regarding the removal of trees in Edmonds. She noted that she has only seen regulations related to single family tree removals but she is also interested in regulations for all developed properties. She stated she supported regulations that limit tree removal much like Kirkland. She thinks people should be able to remove nuisance or hazardous trees but there needs to be a definition of those. She encouraged the Planning Board to work jointly with the Tree Board in these efforts. Bill Phipps commented in the online chat that he had submitted written comments already and agrees with the comments of Larry Williamson. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS None PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued Public Hearing on updates to Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) Code Amendment (AMD2023-0004) Senior Planner Mike Clugston noted that the hearing has been continued a couple times. Staff found out in the last week or so that they need to do some more work on the draft CARA regulations, especially as it relates to the Stormwater Code. Staff's recommendation is to close the current public hearing, and when the draft is ready, staff can notice a new public hearing. He asked if the Board would want another work session to go over those things before holding another public hearing. Board Member Golembiewski asked about the Board's purview as it relates to the stormwater code. Mr. Clugston explained that staff is now leaning toward putting the stormwater language in the CARA chapter. If so, it would be something the Planning Board would look at. Board Member Golembiewski spoke in support of having a work session on the draft code. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred. Chair Gladstone also expressed support noting that the stormwater code is the critical piece for the CARA for the aquifer protection. She is pleased that it will be in the CARA code because it makes it easier for developers to sort out what is required. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CARA CODE AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW STAFF TIME TO COMPLETE THE WORK AND REQUEST THAT STAFF BRINGS THE DRAFT BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR A WORK SESSION PRIOR TO A NEW PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Board Member Mitchell asked about a timeline. Mr. Clugston said they hope to bring it back to a work session in October and a public hearing soon after that. He noted, however, that there have been some staff changes that will impact this. B. Continued Public Hearing for Rezone Proposal at 9530/9620 Edmonds Way (PLN2023-0024) Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 2 of 9 Packet Pg. 55 8.B Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 10/25/2023 Tree Code Amendments, AMD 2022-0004 Staff Lead: Deb Powers Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Deb Powers Background/History Currently, tree removals on developed single-family, multifamily, and commercial properties (with no critical areas) are not regulated in Edmonds. When the tree retention development code was adopted in 2021, the City Council directed staff to further amend the code to address property owner tree removals not related to development activity (Attachment 2). The Planning Board reviewed property owner tree removal codes between April and September, 2023, examining other cities' tree codes, best management practices and public -stakeholder feedback for code amendments. A Planning Board subcommittee drafted property owner tree removal recommendations for full Board review and discussion at the October 11, 2023 Planning Board meeting in attachment 1. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Planning Board discuss the subcommittee recommendations per the Board's request at the October 11th meeting. Staff has included draft code language from the subcommittee's recommendation, alongside staff recommendations in attachment 3. The feedback from this meeting will be factored into the tree code amendments once the work recommences. Staff has paused the code amendment work with the intent of establishing a citywide tree canopy target. A subcommittee of members of the Climate Protection Committee, Planning Board and the Tree Board will be established to guide this work. A citywide tree canopy target is critical to understand what the City's goal is in overall tree canopy management so we can analyze the anticipated impacts/outcomes of our tree code legislation - including regulations on private property (with and without development) alongside our street tree plan, which provides guidance and legislation around ROW trees. Staff anticipates recommencing the tree code amendments at the end of Q12024. Narrative A Planning Board subcommittee developed draft code recommendations to address certain metrics related to property owner tree removals (Attachment 2). For example, the number of trees that may/may not be removed and the timeframe in which the removals may occur. While the recommendations provided by the subcommittee may help to advance the discussion on certain code language, some proposals conflict with the existing development code and arboricultural best management practices (definitions for tree size/DBH, multiple-trunked trees). Packet Pg. 56 8.B To facilitate decisions on property owner tree removal metrics rather than the code language itself at the October 25, 2023 Planning Board meeting, staff provided code amendment language in attachment 3 for Planning Board's consideration. Staff will also have additional information at the meeting to facilitate the Board conversation. Next Steps Staff will convene a tree canopy target subcommittee in Q4 2023 to review best practice, to agree on an approach and to help establish Edmonds' target. Once established, staff will recommence the tree code amendment work with corresponding analysis that shows the anticipated loss, gain, or retention of tree canopy as a result of proposed legislation. Attachments: 1 PB Minutes 2_PB Subcom_Recs 3_ECDC 23.10 Markups Packet Pg. 57 8.B.a Draft Sept. 13, 2023 Meeting Minutes Planner Amber Brokenshire pointed out the inclusion of noticing 300 feet around both parcels. She reviewed the proposed project to rezone two parcels along Edmonds Way to BC-EW Community Business. The adjacent PUD substation was added to the proposal. The site to the east is still undeveloped even after being rezoned last year from RM-1.5 to RM-EW. Upon a request by the Planning Board, staff had reached out to the PUD about including the property as part of the rezone proposal. The PUD had no objections to the proposed zoning change. The proposal boundaries have been expanded to include both properties. She reviewed the surrounding area, compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, zoning analysis, public benefits of BC-EW zoning, public notice, and public comments. Staff is recommending that the Planning Board forward a recommendation to City Council to approve the rezone. Chair Gladstone commented that they had had a pretty thorough discussion at the last hearing; the only issue was the noticing of 300 feet around both parcels. Staff had re -noticed this and received no additional public comments. She asked if there were any other questions. Public Testimony: Shaun Leiser, 2024 NW 190th Street, Shoreline, WA, applicant, said he was available to answer any questions. Seeing no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed. Deliberation: MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONE TO CITY COUNCIL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. UNFINISHED BUSINESS N as w A. AMD2022-0004, Tree Code Amendments =_ m Urban Forest Planner Deb Powers shared public testimony on the tree code amendments since the last meeting ai and continued the discussion from the last meeting on property owner tree removals. She shared the following verbiage as a starting point for discussions and stated they would need to determine the number, tree size, and timeframe metrics to fill in the gaps in the draft code. E �a III. Tree removal allowance a 4. Any private property owner of developed property may remove up to [number] [tree size] within [timeframe] with the submittal of a Tree Removal Notification form. No replacement trees are required for trees removed under the tree removal allowance. Ms. Powers explained that they had discussed having mandatory minimums so that when a property owner gets to a certain number of trees left on a lot or if they started with a low number of trees, it could trigger tree replacement requirements. She reminded the Board that the tree removal allowance is meant to be an extremely easy process that does not require extensive review. Staff believes it will still slow the loss of canopy as well as Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 3 of 9 Packet Pg. 58 8.B.a provide a way to track tree removals over time. Prior Planning Board considerations for property owner tree removals are to keep it simple, prohibit tree removal in critical areas, and limit larger tree removals. Board Member Mitchell asked if they are tracking by neighborhood or area. Ms. Powers explained that the TRAKit software tracks permit activity by parcel and would need to check if it can be queried for removal information by area. Ms. Powers reviewed the Planning Board's previous leaning toward allowing two landmark trees (24" DBH or larger) per 12-months. Replacement trees would be triggered when the property owner has the last two or three trees on the property. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she strongly supports requiring a permit and replacement (3:1) for removal of any landmark trees. She does not want landmark trees under the allowance. She feels this is where there is consensus with public comments they have heard. Chair Gladstone agreed and asked if there is a way to incentivize the replacement of the types of trees they want to see. Maybe have a 2:1 replacement? Staff replied that 3:1 replacement requirements are consistent with the current development code. Board Member Martini asked who pays for the replacement. Staff replied that the property owner pays for the removal and the replacement. Chair Gladstone brought up the issue of equity. What happens if it's a hazard tree that needs to come down and somebody can't afford the 3:1 replacement. Ms. Powers explained that under the current code, hazardous or a nuisance tree removal outside critical areas do not have replacement requirements. Under the proposed allowance approach, there is no permit or arborist report cost but under a hazard or nuisance tree removal permit, documentation by a certified arborist is required and is subject to staff review. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell clarified that she thought anything that is hazardous or nuisance should not require 0 a permit or replacements. Staff clarified that a permit would be required for hazard or nuisance tree removals 2 over and above the allowance. For trees removed under the allowance, no permit would be involved, and the N board has considered mandatory minimums to address replacements. 2 Board Member Golembiewski said her concern about requiring a permit for landmark trees is that it would take 2 m away the opportunity for someone to remove a hazard tree without the expense to do so. She thought if they ai could allow removal of one landmark tree every three or five years as part of the tree allowance it could help with the equity and affordability issue. E Board Member Maxwell agreed and added that his understanding of a reason to have an allowance is that it would allow low-income families to remove nuisance and hazard trees without any costs as long as they are a within the allowance. On top of that he is concerned that they have a $325 fee for a permit because it involves some sort of evaluation, but what is the evaluation in this situation? Board Member Kuehn suggested they could possibly make it more economically feasible for low-income families if that is something they want to do, but he had concerns about making it easier to remove landmark trees unless they are hazardous or nuisance. Chair Gladstone noted that equity can be achieved in different ways than just code. She suggested that the City could have a fund that pays for permits for low-income residents. She was concerned about just allowing landmark trees to be included in the allowance because of equity because they then forego the balance of taking Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 4 of 9 Packet Pg. 59 8.B.a care of the canopy. Maybe they need to be more creative about how they accomplish the equity and allow for ease of removal of the hazard trees since that is what they are really concerned about. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell agreed with Chair Gladstone. She wondered about having the permit for hazardous trees potentially be free so you have to go through the process but there is no charge for it. The hazard/nuisance tree is a different topic to her than the healthy landmark tree. She asked the Board's thoughts on healthy landmark trees. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN, THAT THE TREE CODE IS UPDATED TO REFLECT THAT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ANY TREES OF 24" DBH OR GREATER ARE NOT INCLUDED IN TREE REMOVAL ALLOWANCES AND WOULD REQUIRE A PERMIT AND REPLACEMENTS IN ORDER TO BE REMOVED. Board Member Maxwell spoke against the motion and said he was in support of having different allowances for the larger trees than they have for the smaller trees. To him, this hasn't dealt with the problems that were brought up about equity. MOTION FAILED. Board Member Golembiewski suggested having an allowance to remove one landmark tree every three years. Board Member Maxwell referred to public comments by Larry Williamson and Bill Phipps and suggested an allowance of three trees that are 12" or larger every 36 months. For larger trees such as landmark trees and up, the allowance would be one tree per 36 months. The landmark tree would count toward the total of three per 36 months. N Ms. Powers spoke to the decrease in code effectiveness and difficulty in administration when there are multiple 2 timeframes for different sized trees and when timeframes are over 12 months. She discussed the Shoreline code =_ as an example how 4 trees on an 8,000 square foot lot could be removed all at the same time, even with a 36 2 m month timeframe and discussed various ways to look at this. ai Board Member Mitchell recommended just starting somewhere, tracking tree removals, and looking at this again in the near future to evaluate how it is working. Board Member Maxwell said it was his understanding that was what they were doing. a Board Member Golembiewski recommended allowing three "regulated" trees over 12" DBH every three years or one landmark tree over 24" DBH every three years. There was further discussion about the complexities of having an extended timeline applied to different tree sizes. Would it be a rolling three years or a set three years? Chair Gladstone asked about the tradeoff from a canopy management standpoint of protecting the 6" and above trees versus starting at the 12" and up trees. Ms. Powers explained that Edmonds canopy data wasn't that detailed yet and spoke to the importance of getting something on the books so they can begin to track this. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell spoke in support of the 12-month allowance as opposed to the 36-month allowance. She pointed out you are far more likely to see a change in ownership in a 36-month period versus a Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 5 of 9 Packet Pg. 60 8.B.a one-year period. She thinks a 12-month timeframe would be easier for both the consumer and the City. Ms. Powers noted that the removals, whether as allowance or permit are tied to the parcel and not necessarily the property owner. Board Member Kuehn also was in favor of the 12-month time period. He asked if the system would allow one tree removal per 12-months, but if it's a landmark tree, you can't take another one out for a certain period of time. Ms. Powers noted that could work under a 1-per 12 month allowance that applies to trees at least 6" DBH, without a permit or replacements and that additional landmark tree removals would require a permit with an extended time and replacement requirements. Mr. Clugston thought they could make that work. Board Member Golembiewski suggested increasing the size of landmark trees to something bigger than 24" and still making them permit required. This might be a good compromise. She also asked that the size of landmark trees in the definition be based on a single trunk. She suggested that they also clarify the definition to reflect what they are really concerned about. Do they want to protect conifers? Native trees? Ms. Powers noted that the current DBH definition for multiple-trunked trees is already a proposed code change to follow industry standards. She thought that regulating tree removals based on retaining desired species would increase code complexity and its administration. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, TO DEFINE LANDMARK TREES AS 28 INCHES OR GREATER WITHIN A SINGLE TRUNK, THAT THOSE TREES WOULD REQUIRE A PERMIT AND REQUIRE REPLACEMENTS, AND THAT THE BOARD CONTINUE TO EXPLORE OPTIONS IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR FINANCIAL EQUITY TO DEAL WITH THE VARIETY OF ISSUES SUCH AS PERMIT FEES AND REPLACEMENTS. Board Member Maxwell recommended that the permit fee should be used for inspecting the replacement trees. Chair Gladstone did not think the Board had the authority to specify what the City should be charging fees for. Board Member Kuehn thought this was getting closer. Taking care of the landmark trees is a huge issue for the residents of Edmonds. Chair Gladstone said she was weighing the public education needs that would be required with changing the size from 24 to 28 inches and other implications of the size of the tree that may affect the loss of canopy cover. She wondered about including landmark trees in the allowance but only allowing one tree above significant per year. Student Representative Distelhorst asked about the rationale for making the size bigger since it counteracts the goal of trying to prevent people from cutting down larger trees. She thought they should keep the size for landmark trees the same and noted that people are already familiar with this size. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell explained that she agrees that 24 inches is an appropriate size, but her rationale for changing the definition of landmark trees to a larger size is to make it more palatable to everybody. Board Member Kuehn asked how the permit process works. Ms. Powers explained the main difference from the allowance process is that the permit requires staff review and a site visit, which is why a permit fee is charged and that the timeframe can be different from the allowance and it ensures that the replacements happen. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 6 of 9 Packet Pg. 61 8.B.a Currently, permits for tree removal in critical areas, street trees, commercial, multifamily properties and vacant lots all require a site visit. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell commented on some quick research she had just done that a 24-inch DBH Douglas Fir would be about 120 years old based on a standard growth factor. She commented that there would not be many trees bigger than that since most of Edmonds is second growth forest. In order to get closer to a decision, Chair Gladstone asked if the Board would rather have one tree allowance that allows the landmark trees or have them permitted. Board Member Golembiewski said she would be in favor of two trees per year with a permit required for landmark trees. A big concern she had about landmark trees is adding the multiple trunks together. If that is rectified, she feels better about permitting landmark trees. She thinks a good definition of what they are trying to protect is important. Board Member Nutsch said she really likes separating out the landmark trees into a permit, noting that there are not many of them left. She thinks having landmark trees included in the allowance is inviting people to try to sneak it in. Chair Gladstone recommended concluding the discussion for tonight and asking staff to come back with a definition of landmark trees and the revised development code language regarding measuring multiple trunks. Board Member Maxwell commented that for critical areas if the slope is less than 25% you can cut the trees down, and he doesn't think that is a good idea. Also, in section 23.10.040 it appears to say that the limit for the v allowance doesn't apply to invasive trees, and people are welcome to cut down invasive trees as much as they a) like. He doesn't approve of that either. Ms. Powers explained that "invasive" is defined by Washington State 2 and county noxious weed boards for different levels of control. Board Member Maxwell said he was N comfortable with allowing compliance with what is required to be cut down but he is not comfortable cutting down something that is stabilizing landscape and providing canopy just because it is invasive. Chair Gladstone =_ recommended adding this to a list of things to discuss in the future. m IL i Board Member Golembiewski asked the difference between developed properties and improved properties. She asked for clarification about if this code applies to property that has a house on it but could be subdividable. Ms. Powers explained the current definitions for improved lot and developable site and noted that we may need a new definition for a property of any size regardless of the presence of critical areas. Board Member Golembiewski said the way she was reading it was if you could subdivide your lot then you don't get an a allowance. Ms. Powers noted that is why we need to define "developed property" . Board Member Golembiewski requested clarity on which properties this applies to and how the changing state regulations affect any of it. Are they addressing only what the situation is today or are they thinking about what the changing regulations will mean for developable lots? VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL RETRACTED HER MOTION. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell offered to chat with Board Member Maxwell offline about his invasive species management concerns. She noted that the way the code is written, it excludes sections of property containing critical areas. She added she has a lot of materials she can share with him on this topic. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 7 of 9 Packet Pg. 62 8.B.a The discussion was continued to the next meeting. NEW BUSINESS None PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Clugston informed the Board they have lost two staff members in the last two weeks — Planning Manager David Levitan and Associate Planner Michele Szafran - so they will need to make some changes in the upcoming schedules. He discussed the impact this will have on topics coming up. September 27 was supposed to be a discussion about the development tree code, but now it will be another discussion about property owner tree removals. The public hearing that was scheduled for October 25 will have to be bumped out. Chair Gladstone recommended trying to wrap up the property owner tree code on September 27 and starting the discussion on the development tree code on October 11. Mr. Clugston thought that would work. Chair Gladstone commented that Councilmember Olsen asked her about trying to have the Planning Board consider the vision statement. She asked Mr. Clugston about the status of that. He was not sure but indicated he could check on it. Mr. Clugston said he would try to adjust the schedule for the next meeting and bring it back with consideration of staffing challenges and all the projects they are juggling. He will be staffing the Planning Board for now. Chair Gladstone said she had been meeting with David Levitan every other week to discuss the upcoming agenda and extended agenda. Mr. Clugston indicated he could continue those meetings with her for now. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS N as w Student Representative Distelhorst discussed a scholarship program she did over the summer with Puget Sound =_ Regional Council. m a i Board Member Mitchell expressed appreciation to David Levitan and Michele Szafran and wished them the best in their new positions. Board Member Golembiewski concurred. E Board Member Martini also wished David Levitan well. She said she appreciated that the Board had more time for discussion at this meeting. a Board Member Maxwell said he appreciated how well they were able to work with people on Zoom tonight. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell welcomed Mr. Clugston back to the Planning Board and thanked him for filling in as staff liaison again. Best of luck to David Levitan. She thanked Ms. Powers for continuing to come back and give them as much information as she can. She felt like this was a really good meeting. She appreciates the Planning Board's patience with her as she tries to move them closer to a determination. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 13, 2023 Page 8 of 9 Packet Pg. 63 8.B.a August 23, 2023 Planning Board Meeting UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Work Session on Private Property Tree Regulations (AMD2022-0004) Urban Forest Planner Deb Powers made the presentation on code options related to property owner tree removals. Due to technical difficulties with sharing the PowerPoint, Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell requested that a copy of the presentation be included with the minutes. At the previous meeting there was general agreement to keep the regulations simple, that no healthy trees should be removed in critical areas, and to allow two trees to be removed per 12 months. Does this apply to larger trees? What about replacement requirements? She reviewed public and stakeholder feedback. She stated there was general support for limiting or prohibiting tree removal in critical areas. Additionally, the Tree Board had a strong recommendation to limit landmark tree removals. There was also previously a discussion about allowing a greater number of tree removals on larger properties. She reviewed a table showing options for property sizes with greater numbers of tree removal allowances for larger properties. The Board needs to decide if removal limits based on property size is a preferred approach. She reviewed some draft code options related to tree removal allowances depending on the size of the removed trees and noted that this would also increase the complexity and involvement by both the staff and applicant. Is this consistent with the stated goal of having a simple code? Chair Gladstone asked if there are other jurisdictions that use property size as part of their reporting and notification. Ms. Powers replied that Kirkland, Woodinville, and Bellevue all look at differences in property sizes, but it is up to the community. There was some discussion about the process of code development and how that affects the complexity or simplicity of the resulting code. Chair Gladstone noted it was important to answer the question of which trees to which this would apply. Would they even allow tree removals for trees over 23.9" DBH? Ms. Powers referred to a matrix that showed various code options related to landmark trees available to the Board, staff recommendations and solicited feedback. After landmark trees are defined, that code option is shown under Code Option III, Tree Removal Allowance - applicable tree size, in blue text under number 2. Code Option III.2: Any private property owner of developed property may remove up to one landmark tree within a 12-month period with the submittal of a Tree Removal Notification form. The Board had expressed support for limiting but not prohibiting landmark tree removals. Ms. Powers explained that rather than create a new size definition for trees in between significant and landmark trees, that the removal allowance just applies to landmark trees. The matrix shows the more complex code options in red text. There was some discussion if the number of allowed landmark tree removals should be one or two per 12 months. A permit would be required to exceed that numerical allowance, as shown under Code Option IV. Code Option IV.1: Tree removal scenarios that require a permit. The following activities shall require a Tree Removal Permit and tree replacements: The proposed removal of • Hazard or nuisance trees that exceed allowances (new) • Hazard or nuisance trees located within wetlands, streams and associated buffers, high landslide%rosion hazard areas and slopes greater than 25% critical areas (new) Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2023 Page 5 of 6 Packet Pg. 64 8.B.a • Trees located on commercial and multi family -zoned properties (current) • Trees located on vacant lots and/or subdividable properties (current) • Healthy landmark trees that exceed the number of tree removal allowances. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell spoke in support of the allowance and not having the graduated sizes because of the cleanliness of it. She likes the idea of the graduated sizes but it feels like it will cause more of a burden from an applicant and processing standpoint. She thinks allowing two landmark trees is too much. If they are going to do an across-the-board allowance of two trees, she thinks they should be 20 inches or smaller. Chair Gladstone said she agrees that landmark trees feel different. She realizes this adds complexity to the code but she thinks they need to figure out a way to differentiate them. Ms. Powers explained that Kirkland has two categories — significant and landmark. Significant is defined as trees at least 6 inches in trunk diameter. If they want to regulate trees of a certain size range between significant and landmark trees (such as over 12 inches), they need to define that category though. There was discussion about how these definitions relate to the development code. Vice Chair Campbell expressed an interest in staying consistent with the development code definitions and possibly increasing the allowance for significant trees. Chair Gladstone acknowledged the late hour and recommended they come back to this at the next work session in order to have enough time to get feedback from everyone. She also requested that staff provide a clear staff preferred recommendation for the tree code as a starting point so they can get through it a little quicker. Board Member Golembiewski suggested jumping right back in where they left off at the next meeting and skipping the introduction. NEW BUSINESS None. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA There was discussion about the extended agenda and agreement to revisit the tree code on September 13 if there is time after the two hearings and then again on September 27. Staff needs to consider how pushing this out impacts everything else on the extended agenda including the Comprehensive Plan, the planned public hearing for the CFP/CIP, and a couple other projects. Staff will review this and come back with a revised schedule on a proposed approach for the tree code. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Gladstone commented that the earlier staff can provide the CFP/CIP to the Board the better. She urged all board members to review the tree code and submit questions to staff ahead of the meeting in order to save time at the meeting. She asked Planning Manager Levitan to pass along her appreciation to Deb Powers for the format of the information she had provided tonight. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:22 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2023 Page 6 of 6 Packet Pg. 65 8.B.a June 28, 2023 Planning Board/Joint Tree Board Meeting ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Steve W stated that there has been little or no discussion on the negative effects that some trees have on active or passive solar access. Is there any intention to do so? ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS None PUBLIC HEARINGS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Joint Work Session with Tree Board on Tree Code Update (AMD2022-00004) Urban Forest Planner Deb Powers made a PowerPoint presentation regarding Property Owner Tree Removals. Under the current code, in most cases on developed single-family lots with no critical areas, it's basically unlimited tree removals. This code amendment is addressing that situation. Key concepts for consideration with this code update: • Number of removals • Frequency • Additional trees that can be removed (exceptions) • Landmark trees • Tree removal in critical areas • Replacement requirements Number of removals: Ms. Powers reviewed that at the April 26 meeting the Planning Board was supportive of allowing a certain number of trees to be removed under a notification process. There had been some question about whether it should depend on the property size and/or what frequency the removals would be allowed. She reviewed some sample code language. Another question was related to the size of the trees. The Planning Board had proposed that only trees 12" to 23.9" DBH would be "regulated" under the allowance. "Landmark" trees would be 24" DBH or greater. Frequency: Is 12 months between allowed tree removals appropriate? The Planning Board had thought that it would depend on the size and number of trees. Additional trees that can be removed: Are hazardous and nuisance trees reasonable exceptions to the number of allowances? These would be allowed to be removed in addition to whatever the allowance is. Planning Board Meeting Minutes June 28, 2023 Page 2 of 8 Packet Pg. 66 Landmark tree removals: Should "Landmark" tree removals be regulated in the same manner as smaller trees? Fewer number of allowed removals? Greater number of months between removals? The Planning Board had indicated that Landmark tree removals (24"+ DBH) should be more limited than smaller trees. Ms. Powers reviewed some sample potential numbers with different allowances for different property sizes. Planning Board Member Mitchell wondered about having different standards for different neighborhoods rather than a one -size -fits -all approach in order to retain characteristics of specific neighborhoods. For example, he noted that the existing tree density in Westgate is way less than Perrinville. Ms. Powers acknowledged that this could raise equity concerns. She noted that they could made the code as complex or as simple as desired, but with greater code complexity there is usually less code compliance. Additionally, staff does not have the resources to deal with administering a complex code. Planning Board Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell recommended not overcomplicating the process. She agreed that there are areas where there is a much greater canopy loss but having the same regulations across the city will be easier for everyone to understand. She said she liked the way the chart shared by Ms. Powers was set up even though she would be in favor of having two trees be the starting point for regulated tree removal allowances per 12 months rather than three trees. Critical areas: Should the same tree removal allowances apply in critical areas? The Planning Board had previously suggested only hazard and nuisance trees should be allowed to be removed in critical areas. A permit would be required to review whether the trees fit that criterion. Ms. Powers explained that the number one code enforcement issue they are having right now is unauthorized tree removals in critical areas. Replacement requirements: Should replacement trees be required for property owner tree removals? The response at the previous meeting was that it depends on the size and number of trees removed. Ms. Powers noted that no replanting is occurring with the current unlimited tree removals and reviewed a proposed matrix showing the removed tree DBH and the required number of replacements. Planning Board Member Maxwell asked the Tree Board their thoughts about regulating tree removals on private property. Tree Board Chair Cass explained that they are all passionate about trees and maintaining the tree canopy but they had mixed opinions about how to go about it. She referred back to a heated 2015 Planning Board public hearing about this topic. The decision then was to make sure there was an Urban Forest Management Plan which should extend at least 20 years out with good goals. She noted there is now a Plan with a good set of goals they haven't done and yet they are jumping to this action which wasn't necessarily in the Plan. She thinks it would be hard to re-engage with the public when they asked for an Urban Forest Management Plan with specific goals. She added that she noticed the consultant's report on the most recent public outreach related to the current code updates didn't go back to 2015 or include all the public input that went into the management plan. Tree Board Vice Chair Phipps commented that he feels they should allow more trees to be removed on larger - sized properties. Tree Board Member Kliment expressed support for not allowing any tree removals in critical areas unless they are hazardous trees. She liked the simplicity of the proposed plan. She is concerned about compliance and whether or not they will lose more trees simply because of the fact that there is a tree code. A lot of people have made it clear they don't want a tree code. Planning Board Meeting Minutes June 28, 2023 Page 3 of 8 Packet Pg. 67 8.B.a Planning Board Member Mitchell asked the Tree Board if the Urban Forest Management Plan aligns with the existing tree code. Tree Board Chair Cass stated that the first goal was to maintain or enhance canopy coverage but there was a whole bunch of sub goals that were supposed to be encouraged. There was also supposed to be some tracking and reassessment after ten years. Planning Board Member Mitchell commented that it seems that there needs to be a regulatory framework aligned with the Urban Forest Management Plan. Tree Board Chair Cass agreed and said she thought that the control of tree removal on private property did not meet the goals of the Urban Forest Management Plan. Tree Board Member Kliment said there is a statement in the Urban Forest Management Plan that says that the Edmonds population did not want any sort of control of tree removal on private property. Even in the current outreach done by the consultant, the number of people that responded is minimal and 19% of them did not even live in Edmonds. Planning Board Member Mitchell wondered about goal number 3 with more of an incentivized approach to protecting and planting trees. Tree Board Member Kliment said she was very supportive of an educational approach. Critical areas are something that they really need to pay attention to and have some sort of regulations around those because of landslides. Planning Board Member Martini asked about focusing on critical areas where environmental impacts would be greatest. Tree Board Member Kliment replied that the Tree Board's idea was to have a computer at the fall market booth where residents can type in their address to see whether their property is in a critical area and get information about what that means. She noted that what people in critical areas do with their trees has an impact on their neighbors. Planning Manager Levitan acknowledged that the public outreach they have done with this current work is not v statistically significant but said he would say the same for the 2015 comments at the public hearing. Tree Board Chair Cass said she heard there were close to 300 people in the chambers for that meeting. Planning Manager 2 Levitan said he didn't see the video but based on the minutes there were 15-20 people who provided oral N testimony. Planning Board Chair Gladstone asked Ms. Powers what has been undertaken to implement the existing Urban 2 m Forest Management Plan from 2019. She also wondered what triggered the notion of having a code that may ai not have been consistent with the Urban Forest Management Plan. Ms. Powers explained there are quite a few goals in the Urban Forest Management Plan that have been achieved already. In 2024 there will be a gap analysis of the goals and consideration of the barriers to achieving the goals. She noted that the Urban Forest Management Plan goals are not just for the City to implement but for citizens, volunteer groups, the Tree Board, a etc. She noted that Goal I related to development was achieved in 2021. At that point in time there was a direction given to look at private property tree removal. Council was concerned that there was no accounting for or tracking of trees that were removed and no requirements for replanting. Planning Board Chair Gladstone asked about the percentage of canopy cover that is on private property. Tree Board Vice Chair Phipps replied that it was 87% - the vast majority of trees in Edmonds are on private property that has already been developed. Tree Board Chair Cass later added that 58% of the city's tree canopy is on single-family residential land. PLANNING BOARD VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL MOVED TO REMOVE THE OPTION OF DOING NOTHING FROM THE TABLE AND THAT PROPERTY OWNER TREE REMOVALS SHOULD BE RESTRICTED IN SOME MANNER TO BE RECOMMENDED FURTHER ON IN Planning Board Meeting Minutes June 28, 2023 Page 4 of 8 Packet Pg. 68 8.B.a THIS DISCUSSION. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY PLANNING BOARD MEMBER KUEHN. Planning Manager Levitan noted that this was a work session and not the traditional time to make a motion. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said her goal was to spend time on the analysis and not discussing whether or not they should do the analysis because she feels like that has already been determined. Planning Board Member Maxwell commented that there seems to be general agreement by the group that they would want to restrict tree removals in critical areas. He noted he is sympathetic to Edmonds residents who are concerned about taking away the ability to cut down trees on their own property given that they don't have a canopy problem. Planning Board Member Mitchell asked when the tree canopy would become a problem. Planning Board Member Maxwell replied that the canopy is growing and not shrinking. It may not be growing as fast as they would like but it is not shrinking. He noted that some of the documents indicated that there are concerns but those are about developers and newcomers. In general, Edmonds residents seem to value their trees and do not cut them down. Planning Board Chair Gladstone said it is very difficult to determine at what point they are going to act. She believes they are at a point where the canopy is important for so many things including affecting the urban temperature. She doesn't want to wait until there is a reduction in the tree canopy and a problem; she wants to retain it the way it is. She also wants to do it in an equitable way, understanding that there is a tension between private property ownership and communal good. She thinks they can come to some reasonable compromises in navigating that tension. It may not necessarily be what's recommended in the Urban Forest Management Plan, but it may complement it. She also recommended keeping it as simple as possible. N Planning Board Member Kuehn agreed that simple is good. He also supported the motion. He acknowledged 2 there may not be a problem right now with the tree canopy, but their job is to plan for the future before there is =_ a problem. Playing catchup with something like this is a losing battle. He noted that having a nice big tree 2 m canopy is important for helping with climate change. ai MOTION PASSED 4-2. E Planning Board Chair Gladstone urged the group to keep the code simple because the simpler it is, the less there a is to argue about. Recognizing the strong tension between private property and tree protection and canopy a protection she thinks they need to figure out the best way to navigate that and get something reasonable and workable to Council. Ms. Powers suggested that there seems to be a basic agreement that critical areas need to be protected. The next most basic form of regulations would be a simple allowance (a certain number of trees per year with notification) not based on property size. At this simplest level, landmark tree removal would not be distinguished. Nuisance and hazard trees would be over and above that numbers and would be subject to review to make sure they meet the criteria. There was some discussion about how this would be counted and documented. Planning Board Meeting Minutes June 28, 2023 Page 5 of 8 Packet Pg. 69 8.B.a Tree Board Chair Cass asked if they could consider rolling over allowed trees to future years to be more cost effective for property owners. Ms. Powers explained that in Kirkland that was considered "borrowing" from future tree removals. It was hotly debated and there were questions as to whether it was effectively and fairly slowing the loss of canopy. It also complicates tracking tree removals. Tree Board Member Fagerstrom commented that ultimately the Council will decide this following a public hearing and there will probably be a lot of public comments. He asked if the Planning Board had discussed tree replacement or fee -in -lieu requirements. He noted that he is in favor of tree replacement but the current standards are almost a joke because they don't replicate the environmental benefit from the trees that were removed. He wants to maintain people's private property rights but he also wants to do what they can to maintain if not increase the tree canopy to help protect the environment. Planning Board Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she was generally in favor of tree replacements but agreed that the current standards are highly inequitable in terms of trying to make sure that they are trying to replace the same volume of impacted tree canopy. She would not be in favor of requiring homeowners to do replacements or fees -in -lieu because it would just add more negativity to the situation. It might be worthwhile to consider the outright allowance only for 12-24" DBH trees. If they want to remove larger trees, they could require a permit and replacements. She stated that she was opposed to allowing fees in lieu in any circumstance. Planning Board Member Mitchell asked about using a green factor metric to alleviate the controversies between how many trees they could remove and replace. He commented that some jurisdictions are doing this to simplify the issue. Ms. Powers agreed that this was a wonderful method, but it is also a much more complex level of code for both the property owner and for staff. Planning Board Member Maxwell commented that the chart showing the number of trees that could be removed at one time (depending on property size) is more complicated than it has to be and doesn't make sense to him. He wondered why it wasn't a simple formula like 1 tree per 3000 square feet. Ms. Powers explained this was N similar to the breakdowns in other jurisdictions but it sounds like the left side. (property size) is dropping off anyway in favor of a simplified number of trees. Planning Board Member Maxwell said it should change with =_ the size of the lot. 2 CO a. i Tree Board Vice Chair Phipps agreed that it should be graduated. He didn't think that was too complex. He also thinks that landmark trees should get special consideration because they are very large trees and hold in tremendous amounts of carbon. When you remove those there needs to be replacement trees. �a Planning Board Member Kuehn said he agreed that landmark trees should be treated differently because of what a it would take to replace those. He thought the proposed chart was pretty simple if you can read a table. Planning Board Chair Gladstone commented that breaking it up by property size is an equity issue because it is a privilege to have a larger piece of land and be able to remove more trees. She wrestles with this because she also recognizes that it is a bigger lot with maybe more trees. She would be interested in discussing this more at a future meeting. She also wondered why staff chose three trees per year instead of the "two -per" trees concept that Kirkland used. Tree Board members departed. Planning Board Meeting Minutes June 28, 2023 Page 6 of 8 Packet Pg. 70 8.B.a April 26, 2023 Planning Board Meeting MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Gladstone thanked Board Members Mitchell and Golembiewski for their work in the subcommittee. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Tree Code Update Phase II — Private Property Tree Removals Urban Forest Planner Deb Powers introduced this topic and reviewed background on the Tree Code. She explained that updates were made to the Tree Code in 2021 (Phase 1) to achieve the goal of reducing development impacts on the urban forest. The goal of Phase II is to consider limits to property owner tree removals that are unrelated to development. Currently, tree removal is unlimited on single-family residential lots that are not subdividable. Board Member Golembiewski raised a question about lots that are developable but not subdividable. Staff explained that the current definition just relates to parcels that cannot be subdivided. Planning Manager Levitan indicated they could look into that as a potential loophole. Board Member Martini asked if being able to add an ADU in the backyard could make the lot subdividable. Staff explained it would just be a secondary use. Ms. Powers said she was seeking guidance on the maximum number of removals and the frequency. She explained how the City of Kirkland addressed this in their code. Two trees were allowed to be removed per 12 months. Hazardous and nuisance trees did not count toward this total. Under Edmonds' current code for tree removals in critical areas, there is no permit required but you would be required to submit documentation that shows it fits the hazard criteria. Usually this is done by an arborist. Chair Gladstone expressed concerns about equity because there may be people who have hazardous trees on their property but cannot afford an arborist. Ms. Powers explained that staff s recommendation is to allow over the counter approval of hazard tree removals if it is evident in a photograph. N Chair Gladstone asked if there are analytics done on tree codes in other cities that show what the resulting impact 2 is on the tree canopy. She noted that the whole point of the Tree Code is to slow down the reduction of the tree =_ canopy when 75% of the trees are on private property. Understanding the impact of different policies would be m very helpful to her. Ms. Powers explained that a canopy assessment done at regular intervals such as every five ai or ten years shows trends in canopy gain or loss. Not all cities do that. Kirkland had three canopy assessments in the time she was there, but they also did a boots -on -the -ground analysis of tree removals to see what was going on as well. A canopy assessment is the best way to see trends of gain or loss overall and in different E specific areas. Edmonds just did a canopy assessment in 2020. Chair Gladstone said she was interested in looking at anywhere in the world where they have tried different policies and are able to show what the impact a of that policy is. Ms. Powers offered to provide links for how that was done in Kirkland. She noted canopy loss is one of the reasons Council said we need to look at property owner tree removals. There has been no account of how many trees are being removed on the property owners' side of things. Requiring permits or requesting a notification of tree removals are some ways to track removals over time. Board Member Golembiewski asked what exactly they count in a canopy study. Ms. Powers explained there are different ways of doing it but they use high resolution satellite and LiDAR technology to get the highest accuracy. They subtract out water, shrubs, meadow, and use various methodologies to get the most accurate assessment. She noted that the technology is constantly changing. Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 26, 2023 Page 5 of 8 Packet Pg. 71 8.B.a Should tree removal on private property be limited? • Board Member Maxwell asked about trends they are seeing. Ms. Powers explained they have done two canopy assessments. The second one showed a slight gain from the last assessment, but the methodology was different than the first time. Also, there were losses in some areas and gains in others. • Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell expressed support for having limits on property owner tree removal. If there aren't limits there is nothing to stop someone from removing all their trees. • There was a suggestion to also look at minimum retentions such as not allowing a property owner to remove the last two trees on their property. • Board Member Maxwell agreed with establishing tree removal limits but wondered if they were trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. He moved here eight years ago and as far as he can tell the canopy has only gotten thicker. People do cut trees down but he thought they were not cutting them down as fast as they are growing. On the other hand, he would not want the tide to turn in the other direction. Whatever they put in place should feel roughly like what they are doing now because it seems to be working in Edmonds for the tree canopy. • Board Member Golembiewski asked how many calls they get about taking trees down. Ms. Powers noted Planning gets frequent calls about tree removals and they get some calls from neighbors about enforcement issues, especially in critical areas. However, they aren't tracking tree removals in general on private property. Planning Manager Levitan explained if someone calls about tree removals on private property and there is no critical area or development happening there it is generally an allowed tree removal. He said he gets several calls a week. • Chair Gladstone commented that the challenge is that they don't know exactly how often this is happening. Without the data it is hard to know the degree of urgency and the level of restraint that is appropriate. She wondered if using a tree retention level, rather than removal allowances, with frequent assessments made over time made more sense. What are they striving for in terms of the canopy cover? What kind of loss are they trying to avoid? • Board Member Martini noted it would be nice to have two studies comparing different years that used similar methods. Ms. Powers explained the first assessment used different imagery but they still did the analysis of gains and loss. The technology will always be changing so it is not likely they will have the same methodology from one canopy assessment to another. They can still get a general idea. She noted in Kirkland, residents were allowed to take out two trees per year. There were no replacements triggered until they go to the minimum on the lot (three trees per lot). This was a simple method. • Board Member Golembiewski said she was in support of having a limitation but was in favor of valuing some sorts of trees over others. Ms. Powers noted that under the definitions anything over 6" DBH (diameter at breast height) is considered a significant tree. They aren't regulating anything under 6" DBH. If they want to define landmark trees (larger trees) they could do so. Board Member Golembiewski said she would be in favor of a larger diameter than 6 inches because there are so many landscape buffers and poorly placed trees that aren't necessarily nuisances or hazards but aren't actually providing the kind of canopy cover they are aiming for. Ms. Powers noted they could determine the exact sizes later. There appeared to be agreement that 6" DBH seemed too small to regulate. • Board Member Mitchell noted that most cities that are 100% urbanized have a code like this to establish single-family residential removal allowances. They can decide on the specificity at a later date. He commented he did not want Edmonds to turn into Innis Arden. • Planning Manager Levitan suggested they focus on landmark trees and any replacements related to that. He gave an overview of the process. • Chair Gladstone commented that the consensus seemed to be "possibly" depending on the specifics. Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 26, 2023 Page 6 of 8 Packet Pg. 72 8.B.a • Board Member Golembiewski agreed and said they agree that there needs to be a tree code for private property. They just don't know what it needs to look like. Is 12 months between allowed tree removals an appropriate length of time? • Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she wasn't sure about the timeframe until they knew what size tree they were talking about. • Board Member Kuehn said it depends on how many trees they are talking about for a 12-month period. Does the Planning Boardfeel that landmark tree removal should beprohibited? (except for hazard or nuisance trees) Is minimum 24 " DBH an appropriate landmark tree size? Should landmark tree removal be limited more than smaller trees? Should time between landmark tree removals be longer than what's allowed for smaller trees? • There was general consensus for limiting the removal of landmark trees. N • Board Member Maxwell said 24" DBH is a sizeable tree but not what he would consider landmark. He N thought 36" DBH was more appropriate. Other board members thought 24" DBH was appropriate. o • Chair Gladstone said regardless of what size they establish for a landmark tree she would still be more a inclined to go with limited (not prohibited) removals. It should be based on limited frequency or limited Ui per area (based on geographic location, etc.). She doesn't think an out-and-out prohibition would be E accepted politically. • Board Member Mitchell asked about the frequency of canopy assessments. Ms. Powers explained it is E every five to ten years as resources allow. Chair Gladstone noted that this frequency does not allow for a much nimbleness in response. Ms. Powers agreed but noted that canopy assessments done more a frequently than every five years wouldn't show changes in a way that shows a trend. U • Board Member Golembiewski thought that a notification procedure for larger trees would be a useful a metric for shorter term monitoring. She thinks that the general community consensus when they are thinking about tree loss is the 24" DBH and above size. She doesn't think people are concerned about taking out a 12" DBH fruit tree or other decorative landscaping tree. • Chair Gladstone recommended that, as they move forward, staff provide photos depicting what they are 2 talking about because it is difficult to visualize. a • Board Member Maxwell said he was fine with limiting 24" DBH and larger trees. He is supportive of prohibiting removal of larger trees such as 36" DBH. Planning Manager Levitan noted that some cities have larger trees designated as heritage trees. E • Ms. Powers commented that they are looking for a healthy, sustainable urban forest. They are making a decisions now for 20 years from now. This is important to keep in mind for the future. A healthy, a sustainable urban forest has diversity not only in species but in age and size. • There was discussion about a desire to preserve certain species of trees over others. Ms. Powers cautioned against this and suggested instead they list things they don't care about because they are invasive, noxious, or weed trees. Board Member Maxwell suggested looking at native versus not native. Ms. Powers commented that because of climate change they need to rethink this. When they think of native, they are thinking of what was native 200 years ago, but this has changed. Should a permit be required for tree removals in critical areas? • Ms. Powers noted that in the public survey there was a lot of support for limiting tree removal in critical areas. The current code is confusing on this topic. • There was consensus that a permit should be required for tree removals in critical areas. Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 26, 2023 Page 7 of 8 Packet Pg. 73 Should the same tree removal allowances (as outside of critical areas) apply in critical areas. • Chair Gladstone commented that it would depend on what the allowances are and how generous they are. Overall, she thought they should be more restrictive in critical areas. • Board Member Maxwell commented that critical areas affect the safety of people who are downhill. He doesn't think it should be the same allowance because they don't want to set up a mudslide for downhill neighbors. Ms. Powers noted that most cities that don't even have a tree code have limitations to tree removal in critical areas. With the exception of hazard and nuisance trees, should tree removal in critical areas (steep slopes, wetland buffers, stream buffers) be prohibited? • Board Member Golembiewski said they should be prohibited without a permit. • Chair Gladstone asked about the difference between hazardous and nuisance trees. Ms. Powers explained that a hazardous tree is a tree that has a defect or disease that predisposes it to failure. A nuisance tree is a tree that is causing significant physical damage, and whatever that nuisance is cannot be mediated by reasonable practices or procedures. There was discussion about the need to take a photo of the tree or provide some sort of documentation and justification for removing trees in critical areas. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she was in favor of heavier restrictions, especially for larger trees and especially in critical areas because of the importance of preserving habitat and preventing landslides. She is also in support of possibly having a larger size than 6" DBH being regulated. She thought 8-10" DBH would be a good starting point. NEW BUSINESS A. Potential Parkland Acquisition: Hurst Property (continued to a future meeting TBD) PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA w Planning Manager Levitan noted there are a couple joint meetings proposed in June. Staff is proposing to invite the Tree Board to this meeting on June 14 to discuss the Tree Code. They are also looking at having a joint a workshop with the City Council on some of the current housing -related topics at 6:00 preceding the June 14 meeting. Board members expressed concern that this could be too much for that meeting. Planning Manager Levitan will continue to look at alternatives. He added that Multifamily Design Standards is a potential topic for a separate joint meeting with the Architectural Design Board. �a PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS a None PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:27 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 26, 2023 Page 8 of 8 Packet Pg. 74 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 Planning Board Subcommittee Recommendations PROPOSED CODE CHANGES ADDING TREE REMOVAL REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPED PRIVATE PROPERTY I. Public Comment The Edmonds Tree Board has taken public input and deliberated about Edmonds tree code for developed private property for over a year. The Edmonds Planning Board has held a public hearing with multiple in -person comments, and received emails from multiple citizens, about proposed tree code for developed private property Most comments have encouraged the Planning Board to propose legislation that roughly matches the tree regulations of Shoreline, which allow for the removal of up to three mature trees every 36 months. One comment expressed concerns regarding equity, noting that if tree removal is made expensive, it will become out the reach of low income and low wealth families. It is noted that disincentivizing the removal of hazard trees may result in some families failing to remove trees that are dangerous to their neighbors. II. Neighboring municipalities Multiple neighboring municipalities have tree codes limiting tree removal. III. Code considered and reasoning for the current proposal Private Developed Non -Critical Land There was a request to revise the tree code for development. That is a worthwhile task. So far, the planning board has not completed such a code review and improvement. This proposed code is only for private land. These policies are not proposed for Edmonds locations that are defined as "environmentally critical areas" in Edmonds code chapter 23.40. Regulations and policies for environmentally critical areas are defined in chapter 23.40 and nothing in this draft code for 23.10 is proposed to supersede the regulations, requirements, or policies of chapter 23.40. These policies are not proposed for locations that are on a street, right-of-way, parking or planting strip or other public place that are regulated by Edmonds code chapter 18.85. Regulations for those areas are defined by chapter 18.85. These proposed changes to tree policies do not apply to locations that are commercial or multi- family -zoned properties. Tree regulations for those locations are stipulated by Edmonds code 20.13. These policies apply only to RS zones. The following two tables describe the recommended policies. Packet Pg. 75 ATTACHMENT 5 8.B.b NON -HAZARD, NON -NUISANCE, & NON-INVASIVE TREES < 6" V - 18" 18" - 30" 30"+ Permit / None Notification Permit w/o fees Notification Allowance No restric- While leaving at least one While leaving at least Prohi- tions 6"+ tree per 3,000 sq. ft. of one 6"+ per 3,000 sq. bited property, ft. of property, 2 trees per 12 months if no 1 per 12 months 18"-30" are removed, or 1 per 12 months if an 18"-30" is removed in the same 12 months Replacements None None required 3 trees, or 2 if conifers required HAZARD TREES, NUISANCE TREES, & INVASIVE TREES < 6" 6" - 18" 18" - 30" 30"+ Permit / None 1-2: Notification. Permit w/o Permit w/o Notification Required 3+: Permit w/o fees fees fees Allowance No No Restrictions No Restrictions No Restrictions Restrictions Replacements None None Required 3 trees, 4 trees, Required or 2 if conifers or 2 if conifers Permit w/o fees We recommend that inspections and permit processing for tree removal be provided by the City without charging fees. Tree maintenance is both a requirement of property ownership in Edmonds and a service to our neighbors. It is important that home owners with limited resources not be incentivized to leave hazardous trees standing. It seems reasonable that tree - removal permit costs would be covered by property taxes. Minimums Packet Pg. 76 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 We recommend that removals require leaving a minimum of one 6"+ tree per 3,000 sq ft of property. This provides an automatic grandfathering: A property that currently has no trees will not be required to add trees. Allowance for trees that are not nuisance trees, not hazard trees, and not invasive trees Each 12 months, property owners may: Remove up to two 6"-18" trees OR up to one 6"-18" tree and one 18"-30" tree. Limits are property related. For example, if someone removes two healthy non -nuisance and non-invasive trees in May and sells the property in July, the new owner is prohibited from removing more healthy non -nuisance and non-invasive trees until June of the following year. Prohibiting the removal of healthy, non -hazard, non-invasive 30"+ trees Planning board discussion focused on smaller trees. When trees of 30" in diameter or larger were discussed, it was recognized that these trees are extraordinary in the Edmonds area and are important historical and environmental assets that add substantial improvements to the beauty of Edmonds. 30"+ trees are almost all trees that were in Edmonds the last time that the Edmonds area was logged over roughly 100 years ago. Another factor is that trees accelerate how fast they grow throughout their lives. Unlike mammals, who slow down in growth and then stabilize, trees generally speed up in terms of how much wood they grow each year throughout their lives. This means that a large and mature tree takes much more carbon dioxide out of the air than a small and young tree. Citizen comments appeared to be in agreement that such trees are special assets that need protecting. One 18"-30" tree and one 6"-18" tree per 12 months We were concerned about the idea of three trees in 36 months, because of how it would limit new homeowners. With a 36-month requirement, if a seller cut the maximum allowance of trees in May and sold in June, the new buyer would have to wait three years before they could cut another tree for landscaping reasons. With the 12-month requirement, the new homeowner might be restricted up to 12 months, which seemed tolerable. Why one smaller and one larger tree per 12 months, when public comments were asking for the equivalent one tree per 12 months? Our judgment was that what mattered most to citizens and mattered most for tree canopy protection was the protection of larger trees. A request to be able to cut down two trees per 12 months was brought up during discussion. A compromise that seemed tolerable was to allow two trees, but not two larger trees. Packet Pg. 77 ATTACHMENT 5 8.B.b Language simplification This proposed language avoids the tree jargon, "DBH", which stands for "Diameter at Breast Height" and means "54 inches from the ground." This language, which misrepresents the variety of people's heights will have to be replaced everywhere. We might as well be the ones to stop using it in our code. Instead, this code refers to "measured at 54 inches from the ground." The proposed language avoids names for tree sizes that are not precise. Rather than referring to "significant", "heritage", or "landmark" trees to refer to different trees that are defined by their diameters, this code refers to trees by their diameters: "less-than-6" tree", "6"-18" tree", etc. Measurement This code adds direction for how to measure trees that divide into multiple trunks before 54" above the ground. This code also stipulates a measurement methodology that involves less judgment: This method requires measuring the circumference of the tree at 54" and then dividing by 3.14 (pi). IV. Proposed Code changes Proposed additions in underlined preen reigesed de'8tmE)RS in stF0kethrr)Y Qh ro Any text in black is supposed to match current code. Any difference between the black text here and the current code is a mistake and not a proposed change. Proposal Chapter 23.10 TREE RELATED REGULATIONS Sections: 23.10.000 Intent and purpose. 23.10.010 Administration authority. 23.10.020 Definitions. 23.10.025 Tree removal allowances. 23.10.030 Permits. 23.10.040 Exempt+e-Rs activities. 23.10.050 Tree removal prohibited. Packet Pg. 78 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 23.10.060 Tree retention associated with development activity. 23.10.070 Tree protection measures during development. 23.10.080 Tree replacement associated with development. 23.10.085 Protected trees — Notice on title. 23.10.090 Bonding. 23.10.100 Violation, enforcement and penalties. 23.10.110 Liability. 23.10.000 Intent and purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a process and standards to provide for the evaluation, protection, enhancement, preservation, replacement, and proper maintenance of significant trees. This includes the following: A. Implement the goals and objectives of the city's urban forest management plan; B. Implement the goals and objectives of the city's comprehensive plan; C. Implement the goals and objectives of the city's climate action plan; D. Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat; E. To promote the public health, safety, biodiversity, environmental health and general welfare of the residents of Edmonds, provide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and preserve the physical and aesthetic character of the city through the prevention of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover on improved or partially improved property; F. Preserve the maximum number of trees that are determined to be appropriate for preservation in the Edmonds urban environment and that have a reasonable chance of long- term survival; G. Promote site planning, building, and development practices that work to avoid removal or destruction of trees and vegetation, that avoid unnecessary disturbance to the city's natural vegetation, and that provide landscaping to buffer the effects of built and paved areas; H. Encourage tree retention efforts by providing design flexibility with respect to certain development requirements; I. Retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner and replanting when trees are removed during development; J. Promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the city's natural topographic and vegetation features while recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; and Packet Pg. 79 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 K. Mitigate the environmental and aesthetic consequences of tree removal in land development through on -site and off -site tree replacement to help achieve a goal of no net loss of tree canopy coverage throughout the city of Edmonds. L. Promote net ecological gain, a standard for a development project, policy, plan, or activity in which the impacts on the ecological integrity caused by the development are outweighed by measures taken consistent with the new mitigation hierarchy to avoid and minimize the impacts, undertake site restoration, and compensate for any remaining impacts in an amount sufficient for the gain to exceed the loss. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 20211. 23.10.010 Administering authority. The development services director ("director") or a designee shall have the authority and responsibility to administer and enforce all provisions of this chapter. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.020 Definitions. A. "Caliper" means the American Association of Nurserymen standard for trunk measurement of nursery stock. Caliper of the trunk shall be the trunk diameter measured six inches above the ground for up to and including four -inch caliper size and 12 inches above the ground for larger sizes. B. "Canopy" means the leaves and branches of a tree from the lowest branch on the trunk to the top. C. "Critical root zone" means the area surrounding a tree at a distance from the trunk, which is equal to one foot for every one inch of tree DBH. D. "Developable site" means the gross site area of a lot minus critical areas and buffers. E. "Diameter at breast height (DBH)" means the diameter or thickness of a tree trunk measured at four and one-half feet from the ground. DBH is also known as "diameter at standard height (DSH)." F. "Dripline" means the distance from the tree trunk that is equal to the furthest extent of the tree's crown. G. "Feasible" means, for the purpose of this chapter, the project applicant's primary intended legal use may be achieved. In cases where this chapter requires certain actions unless they are infeasible, the burden of proving infeasibility is placed on the applicant. H. "Hazard tree" means a tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective as determined by a qualified tree professional. I. "Grove" means a group of three or more significant trees with overlapping or touching crowns. J. "Improved lot" means a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located, and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to city subdivision regulations and zoning code. K. "Improvement" means and includes, but is not limited to, any building, structure, storm drainage facilities, road, driveway, utility and pedestrian facilities, or other object constituting a physical addition to real property. Packet Pg. 80 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 L. "Limits of disturbance" means the boundary between the area of minimum protection around a tree and the allowable site disturbance. M. Native Tree. Native trees are described in the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) as being well suited to our climate and tending to provide good habitat for local wildlife. The UFMP contains a partial list of species that are considered native trees. N. "Nuisance tree" means a tree that is causing significant physical damage to a private or public structure and/or infrastructure, including but not limited to: sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities, driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof. O. "Protected tree" means a tree identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention and protection plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction. P. "Pruning" means the proper removal of roots or branches of a tree according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards. Q. "Qualified professional" means an individual with relevant education and training in arboriculture or urban forestry, having two or more of the following credentials: 1. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist; 2. Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) as established by the ISA TRAQ (or equivalent); 3. American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered Consulting Arborist; 4. Society of American Foresters (SAF) Certified Forester for Forest Management Plans. For tree retention associated with a development permit, a qualified professional must have, in addition to the above credentials, a minimum of three years' experience working directly with the protection of trees during construction and have experience with the likelihood of tree survival after construction. A qualified professional must also be able to prescribe appropriate measures for the preservation of trees during land development. R. "Significant tree" means a tree that is at least six inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) as measured at four and one-half feet from the ground. For trees with multiple leaders at four and one-half feet height, the DBH shall be the combined cumulative total of branches greater than six inches diameter at four and one-half feet above the average grade. If a tree has been removed and only the stump remains that is below four and one-half feet tall, the size of the tree shall be the diameter of the top of the stump. S. "Specimen tree" means a tree of exceptional size or form for its species or rarity as determined by the city's qualified tree professional. T. "Tree" means a self-supporting woody plant characterized by one main trunk or, for certain species, multiple trunks, that is recognized as a tree in the nursery and arboricultural industries U. "Tree fund" refers to the fund created by Chapter 3.95 ECC. V. "Tree removal" means the direct or indirect removal of a tree(s) or vegetation through actions including, but not limited to: clearing, cutting, girdling, topping, or causing irreversible damage to roots or stems; destroying the structural integrity of trees through improper pruning, unless Packet Pg. 81 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 pruning back to the point where the tree has been previously topped; poisoning; filling, excavating, grading, or trenching within the dripline that results in the loss of more than 20 percent of the tree's root system; or the removal through any of these processes of greater than 50 percent of the live crown of the tree. W. "Tree topping" means the significant cutting back of the leader stem or major branches, resulting in severely altering the growth potential of a tree. This definition does not apply when the sole purpose is to create a snag or snags for wildlife habitat. X. "Viable tree" means a significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is windfirm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, and is a species that is suitable for its location. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. Y. "Diameter" means tree aiameier measured 54 incnes rrom the ground. Measurement is done by wrapping a tape measure around the tree at 54 inches and dividing the measured circumference by 3.14. For a tree that rests on a single trunk at ground level and divides into between two and six trunks below 54", the diameter is the sum of the diameters of all the trunks at 54", where each diameter is the circumference divided by 3.14. If a tree has more than 6 trunks at 54". the diameter of the tree is the sum of the diameters of the 6 laraest trunks. Y. "less-than-6" tree" means a tree with a diameter less than 6 inches. Z. "6"-18" tree" means a tree with a diameter between 6 inches and iust under 18 inches. A2. "18"-30" tree" means a tree with a diameter between 18 inches and iust under 30 inches. B2. "30"+ tree" means a tree with a diameter of 30 inches or areater. C2. "Developed property" means a lot that cannot be sub -divided given the requirements of its zone, and that has not had paving of more than 50 square feet installed and that has not had a structure with a footprint of more than 50 sauare feet built on it. 23.10.025 Tree removal allowances for privately owned developed property The tree removal allowances in this section (23.10.025) apply only to developed properties in IRS zones that are privately owned, and that are not in environmentally critical areas (as defined in ECDC 23.40), and that are not on a street, right-of-way, parking or planting strip or other public place that is regulated by ECDC 18.85. Hazard Trees, Nuisance Trees, Invasive Trees, and Less-Than-6" Trees A property owner may remove any hazard trees, nuisance trees, invasive trees, and less-than-6" trees from their property. Non -Hazard. Non -Nuisance. Non -Invasive Trees with Diameters over 6" For trees with diameters over 6" that are not hazard trees, not nuisance trees, and not invasive trees, as long as one such tree with diameter over 6" is left standing per 3,000 square feet, a property owner may remove, every 12 months, either a) up to one 18"-30" tree and one 6"-18" tree, or b) up to two 6"-18" trees and no 18"-30" trees. Packet Pg. 82 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 Removal is prohibited for anv 30"+ tree that is not a hazard tree. not a nuisance t and not an invasive tree. 23.10.030 Permits, Notification, and Replacement. This section (23.10.030) does not apply to vacant lots or subdividable properties. Tree removal requirements for vacant lots and subdividable properties appear in ECDC 23.10.060-080. Tree removal requirements associated with building permits, subdivision, or other land use approvals appear in ECDC 23.10.060-080. Nothing in this section (23.10.030) supersedes any of the regulations in ECDC 23.10.060-080. This section (23.10.030) applies onlv to developed properties in IRS zones that are orivatel owned, and that are not in environmentally critical areas (as defined in ECDC 23.40), and that are not on a street, right-of-way, parking or planting strip or other public place that is regulated c by ECDC 18.85 N N O A. The following activities require a permit. o 1. Removina anv tree with a diameter of 18" or areater. a N 2. Removing three (3) or more 6"-18" trees that are hazard trees, nuisance trees, or invasive trees. a� B. Notification: Whenever a 6"-18" tree is removed without a permit, the City of Edmonds E permitting department must be notified of the removal by reporting the removal date, size of each tree removed, and the property from which the tree was removed. o U C. Permit requirements for the removal of hazard and nuisance trees: a L 1. A permit for removing one or more hazard trees requires with a tree -risk -assessment form prepared by the applicant's qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. E 2. A permit for removing one or more nuisance trees requires documentation of the tree's nuisance damage and any tree work that has been attempted to rectify the Cn nuisance, and/or a statement from the applicant's qualified tree professional explaining m why no arboricultural practices can safely rectify the nuisance. a. N D. Replacements c a� E 1. Each removed 18"-30" tree must be replaced with 2 conifers, or with 3 trees if one of the replacements is not a conifer. a 2. Each removed 30"+ tree must be replaced with 2 conifers. or with 4 trees if one of the replacements is not a conifer 23.10.040 Exemptions Packet Pg. 83 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 SIN ._ ._ ... ._ ._ .__. . ..._. M.. ._ _. .. _. .41 NINE I Packet Pg. 84 8.B.b ATTACHMENT 5 23.10.050 Tree removal prohibited. A. Protected Trees. Removal of protected trees is prohibited, except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040, hazard and nuisance trees, or through an approved modification of a landscape plan. B. Vacant Lots. Removal of trees from a vacant lot prior to a project development is prohibited except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040, hazard and nuisance trees. C. Demolition of Structures. Tree removal shall be prohibited as part of a permitted demolition except as required to reasonably conduct demolition activities subject to approval of the director. Tree replacement shall be required for removed trees. D. In critical areas, critical area buffers, and in all native growth protection easements, tree removal is prohibited except as allowed per Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.080 Tree replacement related to development activity. Tree replacement requirements in this section (23.10.080) apply to tree removals associated with development and reaulated in ECDC 23.10.060-070. A. Replacement Required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by this chapter and/or for tree removal associated with the development types identified in EC'n(, 2'1. 1 0.060(A). Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows: 1. For each significant tree between six inches and 10 inches DBH removed, one replacement tree is required. 2. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 14 inches in DBH removed, two replacement trees are required. 3. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches and less the 24 inches in DBH removed, three replacement trees are required. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: 1. The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor, for reasons not attributable to the development. 2. The tree is proposed to be relocated to another suitable planting site; provided, that relocation complies with the standards in this section. C. Prior to any tree removal, the applicant shall demonstrate through a tree protection and replacement plan, critical area mitigation plan, or other plans acceptable to the director that tree replacement will meet the minimum standards of this section. Packet Pg. 85 ATTACHMENT 5 8.B.b D. Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. One -and -one -half -inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller -sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. 4. Replacement trees must be planted within the city of Edmonds or its urban growth area. E. Tree Replacement Fee In Lieu. After providing clear documentation to planning and development that all replacement options have been considered and are infeasible, including arborist reports as necessary, the developer shall pay a fee -in -lieu for each replacement tree required but not replaced. 1. The amount of the fee shall be $1,000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the city's tree fund. 2. The fee shall be paid to the city prior to the issuance of a tree removal permit or associated development permit. 3. For each significant tree greater than 24 inches in DBH removed, a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required. 4. In no case shall the fee -in -lieu payments required by this subsection exceed $2.00 per square feet of lot area. [Ord. 4299 § 66 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021 ]. (23.10.085 is regarding development activity and is omitted here.) Packet Pg. 86 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation Chapter 23.10 TREE RELATED REGULATIONS Note: blue/red text correlates to the code issues and sample draft code shown in the right column in Attachment 4. Grey/ghosted sections below are code provisions related to tree retention with development that were not discussed with property owner tree removal codes. Sections: 23.10.000 Intent and purpose. 23.10.010 Administration authority. 23.10.020 Definitions. 23.10.xxx Tree removal allowances (*) 23.10.030 Permits. 23.10.040 Exempt)a44s activities (*) 23.10.050 Tree removal prohibited. 23.10.060 Tree retention associated with development activity. 23.10.070 Tree protection measures during development. 23.10.080 Tree replacement associated with development. 23.10.085 Protected trees — Notice on title. 23.10.090 Bonding. 23.10.100 Violation, enforcement and penalties. 23.10.110 Liability. 23.10.000 Intent and purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a process and standards to provide for the evaluation, protection, enhancement, preservation, replacement, and proper maintenance of significant trees. This includes the following: A. Implement the goals and objectives of the city's urban forest management plan; B. Implement the goals and objectives of the city's comprehensive plan; C. Implement the goals and objectives of the city's climate action plan; D. Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat; E. To promote the public health, safety, biodiversity, environmental health and general welfare of the residents of Edmonds, provide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and preserve the physical and aesthetic character of the city through the prevention of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover on improved or partially improved property; F. Preserve the maximum number of trees that are determined to be appropriate for preservation in the Edmonds urban environment and that have a reasonable chance of long- term survival; Packet Pg. 87 ATTACHMENT 6 8.B.c Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation G. Promote site planning, building, and development practices that work to avoid removal or destruction of trees and vegetation, that avoid unnecessary disturbance to the city's natural vegetation, and that provide landscaping to buffer the effects of built and paved areas; H. Encourage tree retention efforts by providing design flexibility with respect to certain development requirements; I. Retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner and replanting when trees are removed during development; J. Promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the city's natural topographic and vegetation features while recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; and K. Mitigate the environmental and aesthetic consequences of tree removal in land development through on -site and off -site tree replacement to help achieve a goal of no net loss of tree canopy coverage throughout the city of Edmonds. L. Promote net ecological gain, a standard for a development project, policy, plan, or activity in which the impacts on the ecological integrity caused by the development are outweighed by measures taken consistent with the new mitigation hierarchy to avoid and minimize the impacts, undertake site restoration, and compensate for any remaining impacts in an amount sufficient for the gain to exceed the loss. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.010 Administering authority. The development services director ("director") or a designee shall have the authority and responsibility to administer and enforce all provisions of this chapter. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.020 Definitions. A. "Caliper" means the American Association of Nurserymen standard for trunk measurement of nursery stock. Caliper of the trunk shall be the trunk diameter measured six inches above the ground for up to and including four -inch caliper size and 12 inches above the ground for larger sizes. B. "Canopy" means the leaves and branches of a tree from the lowest branch on the trunk to the top. C. "Critical root zone" means the area surrounding a tree at a distance from the trunk, which is equal to one foot for every one inch of tree DBH. D. "Developable site" means the gross site area of a lot minus critical areas and buffers. Packet Pg. 88 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) — staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation x. "Develooed Drooerty" means anv size Drooertv with a structure on it. (* MT "Developed property" means a lot that cannot be sub -divided given the requirements of its zone and that has not had paving of more than 50 square feet installed and that has not had a structure with a footprint of more than 50 square feet built on it. (**) E. "Diameter at breast height (DBH)" means the diameter or thickness of a tree trunk measured at four and one-half feet from the ground. DBH is also known as "diameter at standard height (DSH)." Trees with trunks that split below ground level are considered separate trees. Trees with one trunk at ground level that split into two or more trunks above ground level use the following method to determine DBH: the DBH for a multiple-trunked tree is the square root of the sum of the diameters for each individual trunk, squared. Example with three trunks: DBH = square root of [(stem 1)2 + (stem2)2 + (stem 3)21. (*) Fer trees with Multiple leaders of fe it and six inches diameter of fear -and Ano_half foot-Plbeye the average grade. If a tree has been removed and only the stump remains that is below four and one-half feet tall, the size of the tree shall be the diameter of the top of the stump (moved from ECDC 23.10.020.R). "Diameter" means tree diameter measured 54 inches from the ground. Measurement is done by wrapping a tape measure around the tree at 54 inches and dividing the measured circumference by 3.14. For a tree that rests on a single trunk at ground level and divides into between two and six trunks below 54", the diameter is the sum of the diameters of all the trunks at 54", where each diameter is the circumference divided by 3.14. If a tree has more than 6 trunks at 54". the diameter of the tree is the sum of the diameters of the 6 laraest trunks. x. "less-than-6" tree" means a tree with a diameter less than 6 inches. xx. "6"-18" tree" means a tree with a diameter between 6 inches and just under 18 inches. xxx. 18"-30" tree" means a tree with a diameter between 18 inches and just under 30 inches. xxxx. "30"+ tree" means a tree with a diameter of 30 inches or greater. (**) F. "Dripline" means the distance from the tree trunk that is equal to the furthest extent of the tree's crown. G. "Feasible" means, for the purpose of this chapter, the project applicant's primary intended legal use may be achieved. In cases where this chapter requires certain actions unless they are infeasible, the burden of proving infeasibility is placed on the applicant. H. "Hazard tree" means a tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective as determined by a qualified tree professional. I. "Grove" means a group of three or more significant trees with overlapping or touching crowns. Packet Pg. 89 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation J. "Improved lot" means a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located, and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to city subdivision regulations and zoning code. K. "Improvement" means and includes, but is not limited to, any building, structure, storm drainage facilities, road, driveway, utility and pedestrian facilities, or other object constituting a physical addition to real property. x. "Landmark tree" means a tree that is at least twenty-four inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) as measured at four and one-half feet from the ground (*) (NEW). L. "Limits of disturbance" means the boundary between the area of minimum protection around a tree and the allowable site disturbance. M. Native Tree. Native trees are described in the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) as being well suited to our climate and tending to provide good habitat for local wildlife. The UFMP contains a partial list of species that are considered native trees. N. "Nuisance tree" means a tree that is causing significant physical damage to a private or public structure and/or infrastructure, including but not limited to: sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities, driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof. O. "Protected tree" means a tree identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention and protection plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction. P. "Pruning" means the proper removal of roots or branches of a tree according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards. Q. "Qualified professional" means an individual with relevant education and training in arboriculture or urban forestry, having two or more of the following credentials: 1. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist; 2. Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) as established by the ISA TRAQ (or equivalent); 3. American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered Consulting Arborist; 4. Society of American Foresters (SAF) Certified Forester for Forest Management Plans. For tree retention associated with a development permit, a qualified professional must have, in addition to the above credentials, a minimum of three years' experience working directly with the protection of trees during construction and have experience with the likelihood of tree survival after construction. A qualified professional must also be able to prescribe appropriate measures for the preservation of trees during land development. R. "Significant tree" means a tree that is at least six inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) as measured at four and one-half feet from the ground. Fer trees with multiple lea ors at fear and Packet Pg. 90 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) - staff recommendation Red (**) - PB subcommittee recommendation P-Re-half feet height, the DBH shall be the cembined cumulative te-tal ef. branches greater than six inches diameter -at feur -and e.ne-half feet -above the average grade. if a tree has, been feet tall, the size ef the tree shall be the diameter ef. the tep of the st Rp (moved to ECDC 23.10.020.E). (*) S. "Specimen tree" means a tree of exceptional size or form for its species or rarity as determined by the city's qualified tree professional. T. "Tree" means a self-supporting woody plant characterized by one main trunk or, for certain species, multiple trunks, that is recognized as a tree in the nursery and arboricultural industries. U. "Tree fund" refers to the fund created by Chapter 3.95 ECC. V. "Tree removal" means the direct or indirect removal of a tree(s) or vegetation through actions including, but not limited to: clearing, cutting, girdling, topping, or causing irreversible damage to roots or stems; destroying the structural integrity of trees through improper pruning, unless pruning back to the point where the tree has been previously topped; poisoning; filling, excavating, grading, or trenching within the dripline that results in the loss of more than 20 percent of the tree's root system; or the removal through any of these processes of greater than 50 percent of the live crown of the tree. W. "Tree topping" means the significant cutting back of the leader stem or major branches, resulting in severely altering the growth potential of a tree. This definition does not apply when the sole purpose is to create a snag or snags for wildlife habitat. X. "Viable tree" means a significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is windfirm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, is not listed as an invasive species by the State or county noxious weed control boards (*) and is a species that is suitable for its location. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.xxx Tree removal allowance (NEW) Any private property owner of developed property may remove up to 2 significant trees within a 12-month period with the submittal of a Tree Removal Notification form. (*) OR The tree removal allowances in this section (23.10.xxx) apply only to developed properties in RS zones that are privately owned, and that are not in environmentally critical areas (as defined in ECDC 23.40), and that are not on a street, right-of-way, parking or planting strip or other public place that is regulated by ECDC 18.85. Hazard Trees, Nuisance Trees, Invasive Trees, and Less-Than-6" Trees Packet Pg. 91 ATTACHMENT 6 8.B.c Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation A property owner may remove any hazard trees, nuisance trees, invasive trees, and less- than-6" trees from their property. Non -Hazard, Non -Nuisance, Non -Invasive Trees with Diameters over 6" For trees with diameters over 6" that are not hazard trees, not nuisance trees, and not invasive trees, as Iona as one such tree with diameter over 6" is left standina Der 3,000 square feet, a property owner may remove, every 12 months, either a) up to one 18rr-30rr tree and one 6rr-18rr tree, or b) uD to two 6rr-18rr trees and no 18rr-30rr trees. Removal is prohibited for any 30rr+ tree that is not a hazard tree, not a nuisance tree, and not an invasive tree. (**) 23.10.030 Permit and Tree Replacement Requirements. A. Applicability. Ne persen shall excessively er tep any significant tree except as provided by this chaptor r prune, A. The following property owner tree removal activities shall require a Type 1 permit and replacements as shown below. (*) Applicability Activity Reference Replacement Requirements ECC Title 18.85, Street See references for Street Trees, trees Pruning, removal, Tree Plan tree replacement located in ROW planting trees (CLARIFICATION) standards CLARIFICATION Critical areas: wetlands, streams ECDC 23.40.220.C.8 and associated buffers, high The proposed removal of (CLARIFICATION, landslide/erosion hazard and nuisance CONSOLIDATED 2:1 (CURRENT) hazard areas and trees only FROM 23.10.050.D slopes greater than AND 23.40.220.C.8). 25% Replacements Outside critical areas: The proposed removal of required only when to exceed the number hazard and nuisance ECDC 23.10.060.C.5 the number of trees of significant tree trees (CURRENT) remaining on lot fall removals below minimums. NEW Outside critical areas: The proposed removal of to exceed the number hazard and nuisance (NEW) 3:1 (CURRENT) of landmark tree landmark trees removals Determined under COMM, MF zoned Removal of any ECDC 20.13 landscaping and properties significant viable trees (CURRENT) buffer requirements CURRENT Vacant lots and/or Removal of any ECDC 23.10.060-080 Determined by the Packet Pg. 92 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) — staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation subdividable significant viable trees (CLARIFICATION)) development code properties standards CURRENT 1. Hazard tree removal permits require with a tree risk assessment form prepared by the applicant's qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree (moved from 23.70.040 Exemptions). 2. Nuisance tree removal permits require with documentation of the damage and any tree work that has been attempted to rectify the nuisance, and/or a statement from the applicant's qualified tree professional explaining why no arboricultural practices can safely rectify the nuisance (moved from 23.10.040 Exemptions). B. C—. °reced, ira' P-xe .,ptien. Tree removal associated with building permit, subdivision, or other land use approval will be reviewed with the associated project and will not require a separate tree removal permit. All clearing shall be consistent with and apply the standards established by this chapter. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. •- 23.10.030 Permits, Notification, and Replacement. This section (23.10.030) does not aooly to vacant lots or subdividable orooerties. Tree removal requirements for vacant lots and subdividable properties appear in ECDC 23.10.060-080. Tree removal requirements associated with building permits, subdivision, or other land use approvals appear in ECDC 23.10.060-080. Nothina in this section (23.10.030) supersedes anv of the reaulations in ECDC 23.10.060-080. This section (23.10.030) applies only to developed properties in RS zones that are privately owned, and that are not in environmentally critical areas (as defined in ECDC 23.40), and that are not on a street, right-of-way, parking or planting strip or other public place that is regulated by ECDC 18.85 A. The followina activities reauire a permit. 1. Removing any tree with a diameter of 18" or greater. 2. Removing three (3) or more 6"-18" trees that are hazard trees, nuisance trees, or invasive trees. B. Notification: Whenever a 6"-18" tree is removed without a permit, the City of Edmonds permitting department must be notified of the removal by reporting the removal date, size of each tree removed, and the property from which the tree was removed. Packet Pg. 93 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) -staff recommendation Red (**) - PB subcommittee recommendation C. Permit requirements for the removal of hazard and nuisance trees: 1. A permit for removing one or more hazard trees requires with a tree -risk -assessment form prepared by the applicant's qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. 2. A permit for removing one or more nuisance trees requires documentation of the tree's nuisance damage and any tree work that has been attempted to rectify the nuisance, and/or a statement from the applicant's qualified tree professional explaining why no arboricultural practices can safely rectify the nuisance. D. Replacements 1. Each removed 18"-30" tree must be replaced with 2 conifers, or with 3 trees if one of the replacements is not a conifer. 2. Each removed 30"+ tree must be replaced with 2 conifers, or with 4 trees if one of the replacements is not a conifer. (**) 23.10.040 ExemptiGm activities. The following activities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter pe ait: 1. That pertien of the preperty centaining a critical area A-.r its assecoated buffer. Critical area (clarification, moved to 23.70.030 Permits). A. Emergency tree removal (move from 23.40.220.C.8.b.vi and 23.40.220.C.8.c). (*) B. Public tree and utility maintenance. The maintenance and (*) removal of trees by the public works department, parks department, fire department, and/or franchised utilities for ewef the following purposes: 1. Installation and maintenance of public utilities or motorized or nonmotorized streets or paths. 2. In response to situations involving danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. Franchised utilities shall provide notification to the city prior to tree maintenance or removal. A separate right-of-way permit may be required. Packet Pg. 94 ATTACHMENT 6 8.B.c Blue (*) - staff recommendation Red (**) - PB subcommittee recommendation C.a. Removal and maintenance of trees within city of Edmonds' parks at the direction of the parks department. D €. Pruning, routine landscaping, tree maintenance, of vegetatien -And- Surah -asplanting, and the removal of invasivefexetic tree species listed under Washington state and county Noxious Weed Control boards, and management of brush and seedling trees are exempt activities except that portion of the property containing a critical areas, or its associated buffers and native _ growth protection easements. Pruning should comply with ANSI A300 (Part 1 - 2017), Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management - Standard Practices, to maintain long term health. This includes maintenance of trees and vegetation required to be retained or planted under the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. PF niRg existing trees bar-- +„ the 1. (moved to 23.70.030. Permits) hazard (moved to 23.70.030. Permits) _ (Att. . . -i to 23. 7 0.030. Permits) 23.10.040 Exemptions _ r •I IL r • r .. - • . _ . j ifilifine faxr • _ _ . _ - - . r . r r Packet Pg. 95 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) — staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation - - - - - - - - --- - - -- -- - -- - - ■ �_ ........................... ....... . ..... MINMI. .. .. .. _ .. .. .. .. 11 � • • •-111 0 Of ■ I • • • • I (Att.1 • • I • U-- Aff 1 • • 191Q C I tA++.1 •211. 1 1 1 Tree removalprohibited. A. Protected Removal of protected proh I bited, except provided for in ECDC 111I • and nuisance trees, or • • approved modification of • .•- B. Vacant Lots. Removal of trees from a vacant lot prior to a project development is prohibited except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040(F), hazard and nuisance trees. Packet Pg. 96 ATTACHMENT 6 8.B.c Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation C. Demolition of Structures. Tree removal shall be prohibited as part of a permitted demolition except as required to reasonably conduct demolition activities subject to approval of the director. Tree replacement shall be required for removed trees. D. In critical areas, critical area buffers, and in all native growth protection easements, tree removal is prohibited except as allowed per Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.060 Tree retention associated with development activity. A. Introduction. The city's objective is to retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing a feasible development proposal to move forward in a timely manner. To that end, the city requires approval of a tree retention and protection plan in conjunction with the following applications: 1. Short subdivision; 2. Subdivision; 3. New multifamily development; 4. New single-family development on a vacant lot or a demolition and replacement of a single-family house; and 5. Any tree removal on developed sites not exempted by ECDC 23.10.040. In order to make better decisions about tree retention, particularly during all stages of development, tree retention and protection plans will require specific information about the existing trees before removal is allowed. Specific tree retention and protection plan review standards provided in this section establish tree retention priorities, incentives, and variations to development standards in order to facilitate preservation of viable trees. B. Tree Retention and Protection Plan. 1. An applicant for a development identified in subsection (A) of this section must submit a tree retention and protection plan that complies with this section. A qualified professional may be required to prepare certain components of a tree retention and protection plan at the applicant's expense. 2. Tree Retention and Protection Plan Components. The tree retention and protection plan shall contain the following information, unless waived by the director: a. A tree inventory containing the following: i. A number system of all existing significant trees on the subject property (with corresponding tags on trees); ii. Size (DBH) and estimated tree crown diameter; Packet Pg. 97 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation iii. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained); iv. Brief general health or condition rating of trees (i.e., poor, fair, good, excellent, etc.); v. Tree type or species. b. A site plan depicting the following: i. Location of all proposed improvements, including building footprint, access, utilities, applicable setbacks, critical areas, buffers, and required landscaped areas clearly identified. If a short subdivision or subdivision is being proposed and the location of all proposed improvements has not yet been established, a phased tree retention and protection plan review is required as described in subsection (3)(a) of this section; ii. Accurate location of significant trees on the subject property and adjacent properties where the canopy and/or critical root zone of adjacent significant trees extend onto the subject property (surveyed locations may be required); iii. Trees labeled corresponding to the tree inventory numbering system; iv. Location of tree protection measures; v. Indicate limits of disturbance drawn to scale around all trees potentially impacted by site disturbances resulting from grading, demolition, or construction activities; vi. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained) noted by an "X" or by ghosting out; vii. Proposed locations of any required replacement trees as outlined in ECDC 23.10.080 and trees required to be planted in accordance with subsection (C)(5) of this section. Where replacement trees are proposed to be planted at a different location than the project site, a description of the alternate site and written approval from the property owner must be provided. c. An arborist report containing the following: i. A complete description of each tree's health, condition, and viability; ii. A description of the method(s) used to determine the limits of disturbance (i.e., critical root zone, root plate diameter, or a case -by -case basis description for individual trees); iii. Any special instructions specifically outlining any work proposed within the limits of the disturbance protection area (i.e., hand -digging, tunneling, root pruning, any grade changes, clearing, monitoring, and aftercare); Packet Pg. 98 ATTACHMENT 6 8.B.c Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation iv. For trees not viable for retention, a description of the reason(s) for removal based on poor health, high risk of failure due to structure, defects, unavoidable isolation (windfirmness), or unsuitability of species, etc., and for which no reasonable alternative action is possible must be given (pruning, cabling, etc.); v. Description of the impact of necessary tree removal to the remaining trees, including those in a grove; 3. Additional Tree Retention and Protection Plan Standards for Short Subdivisions and Subdivisions. a. Phased Review. i. If during the short subdivision or subdivision review process the location of all proposed improvements, including the building footprint, utilities, and access, have not yet been established, the applicant may submit a tree retention and protection plan that addresses the current phase of development and limits removal to the impacted areas. ii. A new tree retention and protection plan shall be required at each subsequent phase of the project as more information about the location of the proposed improvements is known subject to all of the requirements in this section. C. Tree Retention Requirements. 1. General Tree Retention Requirements. Significant trees on lots proposed for development or redevelopment, except as substituted under subsection (F)(3) of this section, shall be retained as follows: Table 23.10.060.0 Tree Retention Requirements for Proposed Development Development Retention Required New single-family, 30% of all significant short subdivision, trees in the developable or subdivision site Multifamily 25% of all significant development, unit trees in the developable lot short site subdivision, or unit lot subdivision 2. Trees that are located within native growth protection areas, critical areas and their associated buffers, or that have otherwise been designated for protection shall not be Packet Pg. 99 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation removed except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040(E), hazard and nuisance trees, and ECDC 23.40.220(C)(8), critical area hazard tree. 3. The director may require the retention of additional trees to meet the stated purpose and intent of this chapter, as required by the critical area regulations (Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC), or the shoreline master program (ECDC Title 24) or as site -specific conditions demand using SEPA substantive authority. 4. In addition to the tree retention requirements in subsection (C)(1) of this section, every significant tree that is removed under this chapter must be replaced consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.10.080. 5. For developed properties identified in 23.10.030 and (*) developing properties identified in subsection (A) of this section that have fewer than three significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that will result in the site having at least three trees, which will be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area. D. Priority of Tree Retention Requirements. Significant trees to be retained should be retained in the following order of priority: 1. Priority One. a. Specimen trees; b. Significant trees which form a continuous canopy; c. Significant trees on slope greater than 15 percent; d. Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and e. Significant trees over 60 feet in height or greater than 18 inches DBH. 2. Priority Two. a. Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; b. Trees within the required yard setbacks or around the perimeter; c. Trees that have a screening function or provide relief from glare, blight, or commercial development; d. Other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and e. Other significant nonnative trees. 3. Priority Three. Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained except where adjacent to open space, wetlands or creek buffers. Packet Pg. 100 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation E. In considering trees for retention, applicants and the city shall avoid, to the extent known, the selection of trees that are mature and may be a fall hazard, including trees adjacent to utility corridors where falling trees may cause power outages or other damage. F. Tree Retention Procedures. 1. If a revised improvement placement would result in the retention of more and/or higher priority trees, the tree retention and protection plan should be adjusted to: a. Maximize the retention of higher priority trees; and b. Satisfy the retention requirement in subsection (C) of this section. 2. This adjustment in subsection (F)(1) of this section must be done unless the applicant can demonstrate that actual compliance with subsection (C) of this section would make the proposed development infeasible. In documenting infeasibility, applicants of subdivision and short subdivision must consider implementing conservation subdivision design as provided for in ECDC 20.75.048. 3. Once the location of on -site improvements has been established through city review and applicant revision of the tree retention and protection plan, existing priority one trees not impacted by the installation of said improvements must be retained at least to the number of trees required by subsection (C) of this section, except for hazard trees and nuisance trees. 4. If there are not enough existing trees outside of the improved areas of the site to satisfy subsection (C) of this section through retention alone, the applicant shall be required to make up the deficiency as follows: a. Planting a number of new trees on -site in accordance with ECDC 23.10.080 that would be sufficient, in combination with the number of trees actually retained, to satisfy subsection (C) of this section; and b. If it is not feasible for planting under this subsection, to achieve the required number of trees, the applicant shall make a fee -in -lieu payment of $2,500 for every tree not planted pursuant to this subsection. G. If a development retains 50 percent of the significant trees on a site, the fee -in -lieu provisions of ECDC 23.10.080(E) do not apply. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.070 Tree protection measures during development. Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved in accordance with ECDC 23.10.060(B) shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: Packet Pg. 101 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) — staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate city staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows: 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines. B. Placing Materials Near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state, at a minimum, "Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited," and provide the city phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. Limit the time period that the critical root zone is covered by mulch, plywood, steel plates or similar materials, or by light soils, to protect the tree's critical root zone. Packet Pg. 102 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation 7. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand -excavating a two -foot -deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director's authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half of the area of the tree's critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree's survival. 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree's critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree's survival and to minimize the potential for root -induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree's survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. Packet Pg. 103 ATTACHMENT 6 8.B.c Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. F. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.080 Tree replacement. A. Replacement Required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by ECDC 23.10.030.A, vacant lots and subdividable properties this Chapte and/er for viable tree removal associated with the development types identified in ECDC 23.10.060(A) Each signific�^+ +roo to ho romAyPPI cho11 be repla.-o.J as follows. 1. For each SigRifiGaR+ tree between six inches and 4-0 12 inches DBH removed, one replacement tree � is required. 2. 2. For each significant tree between 12 4-0.1 inches and 23.9 (*) 4-4 inches in DBH removed, two replacement trees are required. 3. For each "„" tree greater than 14 ;r -hes -and loss the 24 inches in DBH removed, three replacement trees are required. M 23.10.080 Tree replacement related to development activity. Tree replacement requirements in this section (23.10.080) apply to tree removals associated with development and reaulated in ECDC 23.10.060-070. A. Replacement Required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by this chapter and/or for tree removal associated with the development types identified in ECDC 23.10.060(A). Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows: (**) 1. For each significant tree between six inches and 10 inches DBH removed, one replacement tree is required. 2. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 23.9 inches in DBH removed, two replacement trees are required. 3. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches and less the 24 inches in DBH removed, three replacement trees are required. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: Packet Pg. 104 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) — staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation 1. The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor, for reasons not attributable to the development. 2. The tree is proposed to be relocated to another suitable planting site; provided, that relocation complies with the standards in this section. C. Prior to any tree removal, the applicant shall demonstrate through a tree protection and replacement plan, critical area mitigation plan, or other plans acceptable to the director that tree replacement will meet the minimum standards of this section. D. Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. One -and -one -half -inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller -sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. 4. Replacement trees must be planted within the city of Edmonds or its urban growth area E. Tree Replacement Fee In Lieu. After providing clear documentation to development services that all replacement options have been considered and are infeasible, including arborist reports as necessary, the developer shall pay a fee -in -lieu for each replacement tree required but not replaced. 1. The amount of the fee shall be $1,000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the city's tree fund. 2. The fee shall be paid to the city prior to the issuance of a tree removal permit or associated development permit. 4. In no case shall the fee -in -lieu payments required by this subsection exceed $2.00 per square feet of lot area. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 20211. Packet Pg. 105 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation 23.10.085 Protected trees — Notice on title. The owner of any property that included a tree(s) identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention and protection plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction shall, as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice on title of the existence of such protected trees against the property with the Snohomish County auditor's office. The notice shall be approved by the director and the city attorney for compliance with this provision. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 23.10.090 Bonding. A. The director may require a performance bond for tree replacement and site restoration to ensure the installation of replacement trees, and/or compliance with other landscaping requirements as identified on the approved site plans. B. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the estimated cost of implementation of the tree replacement and/or site restoration including trees, irrigation and labor. C. A two-year maintenance bond shall be required after the installation of required site improvements and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or finalization of permit and following required landscape installation or tree replacement. The maintenance bond shall be in place to ensure adequate maintenance and protection of retained trees and site improvements. The maintenance bond shall be for an amount of 15 percent of the performance bond or estimate in subsection (B) of this section. D. The director shall exempt individual single-family lots from a maintenance bond, except where a clearing violation has occurred or tree replacement is located within critical areas or critical area buffers. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 20211. 23.10.100 Violation, enforcement and penalties. A. Noncompliance with any section of this chapter constitutes a violation of this code. B. A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as provided in Chapter 5.50 ECC. C. Penalties. 1. Aiding or Abetting. Any person who, through an act of commission or omission, procures, aids or abets in the violation shall be considered to have committed a violation for the purposes of the penalty. All persons who have been found to commit a violation under this chapter shall be responsible for an equal share of any penalties imposed under subsection (C)(2) of this section. 2. Civil Penalties. Any person violating any provisions of this chapter shall have committed a civil infraction and may be subject to civil penalties in addition to any criminal penalties. Packet Pg. 106 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation Pursuant to Chapter 64.12 RCW, the city may be entitled to triple the amount of civil damages claimed or assessed. The extent of the penalty shall be determined according to one or more of the following: a. An amount reasonably determined by the director to be equivalent to the costs estimated by the city to investigate and administer the infraction; b. The economic benefit that the violator derives from the violation (as measured by the greater of the resulting increase in market value of the property or the value received by the violator or savings of construction costs realized by the violator performing any act in violation of this chapter); c. Removal of existing 12-inch diameter or larger trees in violation of this chapter will require an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the person(s) who removed existing trees in violation of this chapter; d. Penalty for illegal removal of trees shall be $1,500 per tree less than 12 inches in diameter and the appraised value of trees 12 inches or more in diameter. Penalties shall be paid into the city tree fund. If diameter of removed tree is unknown, determination of the diameter size shall be made by the city arborist by comparing size of stump and species to similar trees in similar growing conditions; e. The cost of replacing and replanting the trees and restoring the disturbed area according to a specific plan approved by the city. Violators of this chapter or of a permit issued thereunder shall be responsible for restoring unlawfully damaged areas in conformance with a plan, approved by the director, that provides for repair of any environmental and property damage, and restoration of the site; and which results in a site condition that, to the greatest extent practical, is equivalent to the site condition that would have existed in the absence of the violation(s); f. If illegal tree topping has occurred, the property owner shall be required to have a certified arborist develop and implement a five-year pruning schedule in addition to monetary fines and/or required tree replacement. 3. Civil penalties under this section shall be imposed by a notice in writing, either by certified mail with return receipt requested or by personal service, to the person incurring the same from the city. The notice shall describe the violation, the approximate date(s) of violation, and shall order the acts constituting the violation to cease and desist, or, in appropriate cases, require necessary corrective action within a specific time. 4. Any fiscal penalty recovered under this section shall be deposited in the city's tree fund as established in Chapter 3.95 ECC. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. Packet Pg. 107 8.B.c ATTACHMENT 6 Blue (*) —staff recommendation Red (**) — PB subcommittee recommendation 23.10.110 Liability. A. Liability for any adverse impacts, damages or injury resulting from work performed in accordance with any permit issued by the city under ECDC 23.10.030 shall be the sole responsibility of the permit applicant and/or owner of the property or site for which the permit was issued, and shall not be the responsibility of the city of Edmonds. Issuance by the city of any permit under this chapter shall not be construed as an assumption of any risk or liability by the city of Edmonds, nor as a warranty or guarantee that the work authorized by the permit will have no adverse impact or will cause no damages or injury to any person or property. B. Issuance by the city of a permit under ECDC 23.10.030 and/or compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with any permit conditions therein shall not relieve an applicant and/or property owner from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for any adverse impacts, injury or damage to persons or property resulting from the work authorized by any permit issued under this chapter. C. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to relieve any property owner within the city limits from the duties imposed under Chapter 9.25 ECC to keep any tree or vegetation upon his property or under his control in such condition as to prevent it from constituting a hazard or a nuisance. D. The amount of any security required as part of any land development permit with which tree removal is associated shall not serve as a gauge or limit to the compensation that may be owed by a property owner as a result of injury or damages to persons or property resulting from any tree removal authorized under this chapter. [Ord. 4227 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4220 § 1 (Att. A), 2021; Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. Packet Pg. 108 9.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 10/25/2023 Parkland Acquisition Purchase & Sale Agreement - Mee Property Staff Lead: Angie Feser Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services Prepared By: Angie Feser The City of Edmonds has the opportunity to acquire a one -acre property in Southeast Edmonds adjacent to Mathay Ballinger Park which will preserve existing open space and a well -established tree canopy, expand the only small park in the underserved southern area of Edmonds and support a trailhead for the regional Interurban trail. Two parcels, known as the Mee property (more information below and in attached presentation), will provide a significant expansion of Mathay Ballinger Park, the only city -owned park in south Edmonds. The shared 260-foot long property line provides easy access to the adjacent park and provides a seamless transition between the existing park and this property's heavily treed perimeter with an open lawn area. Mathay Ballinger Park has a playground, basketball courts and parking and currently in the permitting process for $450,000 improvements including a permanent restroom and water fountain, paved path through the park connecting to the Interurban trail, picnic shelter, benches and picnic tables. With these improvements slated for completion in 2024, the addition of the Mee property supports and expands a rarely found trailhead for the Interurban trail as well. With demolition of the existing small, older dwelling and two out -buildings having no contributory value, this site will become an important 55% expansion of an existing passive -use city park. The willing owner, who has resided for on the site 50 years, has asked a purchase price of $925,000 which is below the value provided from a city -ordered real estate appraisal. Funding The Parks capital program has more than $1,000,000 available for acquisitions and sufficient funding for the asking price and related costs. The city has received a preliminary funding award through a successful Snohomish County Conservation Futures Program grant application which will reimburse 75% of purchase price and acquisition related costs up to $880,000 pending County Council approval scheduled for December this year. Purchase & Sale Agreement Council's approval of the attached Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) allows for up to 75 days (January 2024) for the city to perform due diligence such as a survey and Phase 1 ESA (Environmental Site Assessment). The PSA also allows time for the city receive confirmation of the Snohomish County grant funding by the end of the year. Packet Pg. 109 9.A This parkland acquisition is supported by numerous goals, objectives and recommendations found the recently adopted 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan including - Goal #3 - Parks, Trails & Open Space: Provide an interconnected park system that offers a wide variety of year-round recreation opportunities and experiences which support and enhance Edmonds' cultural identity and the natural environment. Objectives #3.1, 3.2 and 3.7. Goal #5 - Natural Resource & Habitat Conservation: Conserve and provide access to natural resource lands for habitat conservation, recreation, and environmental education. Objectives #5.1, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5. Recommendation #1 - Acquisitions to Fill Park System Gaps Sect. 1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas, such as the south Edmonds and the SR (Highway) 99 corridor. Recommendation #2 - Open Space and Conservation Acquisitions The City should continue to seek options to expand its open space holdings and pursue acquisitions that adjoin city properties or conserve unique natural areas, such as wetlands, forested areas and vistas. Recommendation #5: Trail Connections Sect 1. Pursue opportunities to acquire additional lands, easements and/or rights -of -way to continue the Interurban Trail, including more off -road segments. Sect 2. Repair and improve or extend trails and boardwalks to allow improved public access to natural areas for nature/ wildlife viewing, hiking, and outdoor experience. Staff Recommendation The Parks & Planning Board provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding their authorization to the Mayor to execute the attached Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Mee property. Background Basic property information includes - Parcel number: (West parcel) 00491100000805, (East parcel) 00491100000904 Address: 24024 76TH West, Edmonds, WA 98026 Owner: Gerald and Evelyn Mee Size: 0.99 Acre (0.87, 0.12) Zoning: R-8 Use Code: 111 Single Family Residence - Detached Utilities on site: Water (public), sewer Site location: Accessed off of 76th Avenue West at the western end of 240th Place SW. Conditions: Property is about 1 acre of land with an existing small, older dwelling and out- buildings having no contributory value. It has a flat, open lawn area and also located on the site are significant coniferous and deciduous trees, including a sequoia of substantial size and more than 20 significant and/or unique trees. The site is relatively flat, gently sloping down from northwest to southeast (6'). The site is not constrained by any mapped sensitive areas. Attachments: Purchase and Sale Agreement Mee Signed Packet Pg. 110 9.A.a REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN GERALD J MEE AND EVELYN M MEE AND CITY OF EDMONDS 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 111 9.A.a REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT THIS REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement') is made as of the day of , 2023 (the "Effective Date"), by and between Gerald J Mee and Evelyn M Mee, Husband and Wife ("Seller") and City of Edmonds, a Washington Municipal Corporation ("Purchaser'). ARTICLE I 1.1 Property Description. Seller owns that certain real property located at 24024 76th Avenue West, Washington, and as more particularly described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Real Property"). 1.2 Agreement of Purchase and Sale. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, Seller agrees to sell, convey, transfer, and assign, and Purchaser agrees to purchase, all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the Real Property, together with all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the following (collectively, the "Property'): (a) Real Property Rights. Any and all land lying in the bed of any street, road, highway or avenue, open or proposed, in front of, or adjoining all or any part of the Real Property, and all strips, gores or rights -of -way, lakebeds, streams, riparian rights, appurtenances, rights, licenses, and easements, in any way benefitting or otherwise in front of or adjoining all or any part of the Real Property (the "Real Property Rights'). (b) Improvements. Any and all buildings, fixtures, structures, landscaping, parking areas, improvements, and related improvements or amenities erected or located on, over, or beneath the Real Property (the "Improvements"). (c) Leases. Any and all leases of the Real Property, if any, including all leases, work letter agreements, improvement agreements, and other rental agreements with respect to occupancy or use of the Real Property by tenants, and such other leases, work letter agreements, improvement agreements, and other rental agreements as may be approved by Purchaser in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (the "Leases"). (c) Contracts. Any and all contracts, agreements, commitments, employment agreements, service contracts, utility contracts, construction contracts, maintenance agreements, leasing and brokerage agreements and all other contracts, agreements and obligations, whether or not in writing, which relate in any way to the ownership, development, operation, management, maintenance, use or occupancy of the Real Property (the "Contracts'). (d) Intangible Property. Any and all intangible property (other than the Real Property, Real Property Rights, Improvements, Leases, Contracts, and Personal Property) owned or held by Seller and used in connection with the ownership, development, operation, management, maintenance, use, or occupancy of the Property, including, to the extent such Intangible Property exists and without warranty or representation of any kind, without limitation, the plans and specifications relating to the Property, all engineering, soil, land use, pest control and all other non -confidential studies or reports relating to the Property, the Improvements and/or the Personal - 1 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 112 9.A.a Property, all pre -paid fees, utility agreements, and connections for water and sewer, if any, all rights to reimbursements and credits pertaining to the Real Property, including without limitation, all those from any governmental jurisdiction, all rights to development impact fee credits pertaining to the Real Property and the development thereof, all awards or payments made or to be made for or with respect to any taking in condemnation or eminent domain (including awards or payments for damage resulting from change of grade or impairment of access) of any part of the Property, the Improvements and/or the Personal Property prior to, on or after the date hereof, all rents, issues and profits therefrom and to the extent, if any, approved by Purchaser pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, all consents, licenses, franchises, permits, entitlements, approvals, utility and/or subdivision bonds or deposits, purchase or construction warranties or guarantees (the "Intangible Property'). (e) Sellers shall retain the right to remove any personal property, including any appliances, furniture, or furnishings whether inside the premises or outside on the Property. (f) Sellers reserve the right to remove any kitchen cabinets, whether the cabinets are fixtures or not. (g) Sellers reserve the right to remove any fencing on or around the Real Property (h) Sellers reserve the right to remove the brick from any pathways on the Real Property. 1.3 Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property is Nine Hundred and Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars and no cents ($ 925,000.00) (the "Purchase Price"). 1.4 Purchaser's Deposit; Escrow. Within three (3) business days after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall deliver to the Everett, Washington office of Chicago Title Insurance Company located at 3002 Colby Ave., Everett, Washington 98201 ("Escrow Agent" or "Title Company"), a cash deposit in the amount of Thirty Thousand Dollars and no cents ($30,000.00) (which, together with any interest earned thereon, is the "Earnest Money'). Escrow Agent shall invest the Earnest Money in an interest -bearing account as instructed by Purchaser. The Earnest Money shall be applicable to the Purchase Price at Closing, except as specifically provided elsewhere in this Agreement. If the Closing does not occur as the result of a breach or default by Seller, all of the Earnest Money, and all accrued interest thereon, shall be immediately refunded to the Purchaser, and the parties shall promptly execute and deliver cancellation instructions to the Escrow Agent. ARTICLE II TITLE REVIEW; SELLER'S CONDITIONS 2.1 Title Examination; Commitment for Title Insurance; Survey. Within two (2) business day after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall order from the Title Company a commitment for an extended coverage A.L.T.A. Policy of Title Insurance (the "Title Commitment"), and copies of all recorded instruments referenced in the Title Commitment, if any. Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days after the Effective Date to examine title to the Property (the "Title Review Period'). Purchaser may, in Purchaser's sole discretion and at Purchaser's sole cost and expense - 2 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 113 9.A.a during the Title Review Period, obtain an ALTA or other survey of the Property as required to obtain extended coverage (the "Survey'). 2.2 Title Obiections, Cure of Title Obiections. (a) Purchaser shall have until the expiration of the Title Review Period to give written notice to Seller of such objections as Purchaser may have to any exceptions to title insurance coverage as disclosed in the Title Commitment. Any such exception to title disclosed in the Title Commitment to which Purchaser does not object by timely written notice shall be a "Permitted Exception." Purchaser shall not be required to object to any mortgage or deed of trust liens, the lien of any financing of Seller, any exceptions related to Seller's authority to convey the Property, and the same shall not be deemed Permitted Exceptions. Following delivery of the Title Commitment, Seller shall not alter the condition of title to the Property without the written consent of Purchaser. (b) In the event Purchaser gives timely written notice of objection to any exceptions to title, Seller shall have the right, but not the obligation, to elect to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure ten (10) days prior to Closing any exceptions to title or matters identified on the Survey so objected to by Purchaser. Within five (5) business days after receipt of Purchaser's notice of objection, Seller shall give written notice to Purchaser informing Purchaser of Seller's election with respect to such exceptions. If Seller fails to give written notice of its election within such five (5) business day period, Seller shall be deemed to have elected not to cure any such exceptions or matters. (c) If Seller elects or is deemed to have elected not to cure any exceptions to title or matters identified on the Survey as objected to by Purchaser or if, after electing to cure, Seller determines and provides written notice to Purchaser that it is unwilling or unable to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure any such exceptions or matters by Closing, Purchaser's sole remedy hereunder in such event shall be either (i) to accept title to the Property subject to such exceptions as if Purchaser had not objected thereto and without reduction of the Purchase Price, or (ii) to terminate this Agreement, in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of this Agreement. Purchaser shall provide Seller with written notice of its election pursuant to this Section 2.2(c) prior to the end of the Inspection Period. If Purchaser fails to provide Seller with timely notice of its election to terminate this Agreement prior to the end of the Inspection Period pursuant to this Section 2.2(c), Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to purchase the Property in accordance with and as contemplated in this Agreement. Any exceptions to title to which Purchaser has objected and that Seller has elected or is deemed to have elected not to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure which is not otherwise removed from the Title Commitment or final Title Policy shall also be a "Permitted Exception." 2.3 Supplemental Title Report. If there are any changes or additions to the Title Commitment after the expiration of the Title Review Period, Title Company shall deliver to Purchaser a supplement to the Title Commitment (the "Supplemental Report'). Purchaser shall have the right to review and approve any new items appearing in the Supplemental Report. Purchaser shall deliver notice of approval or disapproval of the items set forth in the Supplemental - 3 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 114 9.A.a Report to Seller within five (5) business days after the delivery of the Supplemental Report. The failure of Purchaser to deliver notice of disapproval within said three (3) business day period shall be deemed to be Purchaser's approval of the Supplemental Report. In the event Purchaser delivers notice of disapproval, Seller shall have five (5) business days after receipt of Purchaser's notice to deliver notice as to whether Seller intends to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure any or all of the items in the Supplemental Report disapproved by Purchaser by Closing. Seller shall conclusively be deemed to have elected not to cure or remove each such item ("Disapproved Exceptions") for which Seller fails to notify Purchaser of its intention to cure or remove within such three (3) business day period. If Seller does not elect to cure or remove any Disapproved Exception within such three (3) business day period, Purchaser shall elect by notice to Seller within two (2) business days after expiration of such three (3) business day period to either (i) waive the Disapproved Exception, in which event the Disapproved Exception shall become a Permitted Exception (and failure of Purchaser to provide such notice within the two (2) business day period shall be deemed to be Purchaser's election to proceed under this clause (i)), or (ii) terminate this Agreement, in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of Agreement. Closing shall be extended as necessary to provide for the notice and response periods set forth above. 2.4 Conveyance of Title. At Closing, Seller shall convey and transfer to Purchaser title to the Property by Deed (as deemed in Section 4.2(a) subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the standard preprinted exceptions in the Title Company's standard form of owner's title policy. At Closing, Seller shall cause the Title Company to issue to Purchaser an A.L.T.A. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (or the Title Company's irrevocable commitment to issue such policy) in the same form as the Title Commitment, unless revised in accordance with this Agreement or otherwise upon Purchaser's prior written approval (the "Title Policy'), covering the Property in the full amount of the Purchase Price, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the standard preprinted exceptions in the Title Company's extended form of owner's title policy. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary specified herein, Purchaser shall be responsible for providing the Survey, delivering the same to the Title Company and providing any other information or documentation required by the Title Company in order for the Title Company to issue to Purchaser at Closing an extended coverage A.L.T.A. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (the "Extended Coverage Conditions"). Seller shall deliver to Escrow Agent such additional documents as the Title Company requires from Seller in order to issue Purchaser the Title Policy, including, but not limited to, an owner's/seller's affidavit. ARTICLE III PROPERTY DOCUMENTS; PURCHASER'S CONTINGENCIES 3.1 Property Documents. Within three (3) business days after the Effective Date, Seller shall provide to Purchaser disclosure materials made available by Seller pertaining to the - 4 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 115 9.A.a condition and/or operation of the Property, including, without limitation, all Contracts, Leases, and written evidence of Personal Property and Intangible Property, land use permits, studies, analyses and entitlements related to the Property (collectively, the "Property Documents"). 3.2 Inspection Period. Commencing on the Effective Date and continuing until l 1:59 P.M., Pacific time on the date that is seventy-five (75) days after the Effective Date (hereinafter referred to as the "Inspection Period"), Purchaser shall have the right, at Purchaser's expense, to make physical inspections of the Property pursuant to Section 3.3 below. 3.3 Property Inspection Conditions. Upon reasonable prior notice to Seller, Purchaser shall have the right, at Purchaser's expense, to make physical inspections of the Property at times and at locations reasonably convenient to Purchaser in order to make the determination of suitability as provided in this Section 3.3, provided that such inspection activities do not unreasonably interfere with Seller's use of, or obligations relating to, the Property. In addition, Purchaser and Purchaser's representatives and authorized agents shall have the right, upon reasonable prior notice to Seller, to enter on the Property from the Effective Date to the Closing Date (defined below) or the earlier termination of this Agreement, to undertake inspections and investigations and make such tests, surveys and other studies of the Property as Purchaser deems appropriate, provided that such inspections, investigations or tests do not unreasonably interfere with Seller's use of, or obligations relating to, the Property. Purchaser's physical inspection and testing activities of the Property shall be conditioned upon the following: (a) Purchaser shall cooperate with and adhere to all reasonable requirements of Seller that affect the timing of all such activities; (b) Purchaser shall not conduct any drilling or other invasive testing on the Property without the prior written consent of Seller, not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed; provided, however, that Purchaser may perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment; and (c) Seller shall provide Purchaser and Purchaser's representatives with reasonable access to the Property at reasonable business hours for such purposes; (d) prior to any entry upon the Property, Purchaser shall provide Seller with proof of commercial general liability insurance on an occurrence basis (CG 11-93 form including ISO 2010 11-85 or equivalent, if available) with limits not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or property damage and $2,000,000 aggregate, and naming Seller as additional insured; (e) Purchaser shall bear the entire cost of all tests and studies performed by Purchaser or at Purchaser's direction; and (f) Purchaser agrees at its sole cost to restore the Property to substantially the condition it was in immediately prior to such inspections, including, but not limited to the immediate removal of anything placed on the Property in connection with such inspections (Sections 3.3(a) - (f) shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property Inspection Conditions"). Seller shall permit and provide access for Purchaser, at Purchaser's sole cost and expense, to contact and have discussions with any contractors or consultants who have performed any work or inspections relating to the Property, and Seller shall permit Purchaser to contact and discuss development of the Property with the permitting jurisdiction and all relevant governmental agencies. For the avoidance of doubt, Purchaser shall pay all fees, costs and expenses of any contractors or consultants contacted by Purchaser as contemplated herein. Following Seller's written request, copies of any reports, letters or other written information, if any, generated as a result of such inspections shall be provided to Seller if the sale contemplated by this Agreement does not close for any reason. 3.4 Property Indemnity Conditions. Purchaser shall defend, indemnify and hold Seller and the Property harmless from any and all costs, expenses, claims, losses, liabilities and - 5 - 145960583A Packet Pg. 116 9.A.a demands arising from the exercise of these rights referred to in this Section 3.4, except with respect to Property conditions that existed before Purchaser's exercise of these rights (but, with respect to any such pre-existing conditions, Purchaser's indemnification obligations shall include any liabilities and expenses arising out of the exacerbation of such conditions caused by Purchaser's activities). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Purchaser's liability under this Section 3.4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 3.5 Right of Termination. Seller agrees that in the event Purchaser determines (such determination to be made in Purchaser's sole discretion, and which may be made for any reason or no reason at all) that the Property is not suitable for Purchaser's purposes, then Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period. If Purchaser fails to give a notice of approval of its review of the Property ("Approval Notice") to Seller within the Inspection Period, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to terminate this Agreement and the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser. If Purchaser does deliver to Seller the Approval Notice prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period, the Earnest Money shall be non-refundable and applicable towards the Purchase Price, except as otherwise expressly provided herein and this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 3.6 Seller Disclosure Statement. The Property constitutes "improved residential property" as defined in RCW 64,06.005. Pursuant to RCW 64.06.020, Seller shall provide to Purchaser the seller disclosure statement required pursuant thereto, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Disclosure Statement"). The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the Disclosure Statement shall be considered part of this Agreement. 3.7 Purchaser's Council Approval Contingency. Purchaser's performance under this Agreement is contingent on approval by resolution of the purchase of the Property by the Edmonds City Council ("Council Approval Contingency"). The Council Approval Contingency will be satisfied only if the Edmonds City Council (the "Council") adopts a resolution approving the purchase of the Property pursuant to the terms of this Agreement ("Resolution") no later than seventy-five (75) days after the Effective Date ("Council Approval Period"), (a) If the Council does not adopt this Resolution within the Council Approval Period, this Agreement and all of the City's obligations hereunder shall be rendered null and void and the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser. (b) If the Council does adopt this Resolution prior to the expiration of the Council Approval Period, the Earnest Money shall be non-refundable and applicable towards the Purchase Price, except as otherwise expressly provided herein and this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. ARTICLE IV CLOSING 4.1 Time and Place. (a) The consummation of the transactions contemplated hereunder ("Closing") shall occur on a date mutually agreed upon by Seller and Purchaser, but not later than the date that is thirty (30) days after the date on which Purchaser delivers the Approval Notice pursuant to - 6 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 117 9.A.a Section 3.5 and the Council Approval has been issued pursuant to Section 3.7 (the "Closing Late'). 4.2 Seller's Obligations at Closing. On or before the Closing Date, Seller shall: (a) Deliver to Escrow Agent a duly executed Statutory Warranty Deed (the "Deed") in recordable form, conveying the Real Property to Purchaser, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions; (b) Deliver to Escrow Agent such evidence as the Title Company may reasonably require as to the authority of the person or persons executing documents on behalf of Seller; (c) Delivery to Escrow Agent an affidavit duly executed by Seller stating that Seller is not a "foreign person" as defined in the Federal Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax; (d) Immediately after completion of the Closing, deliver to Purchaser possession and occupancy of the Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions; and (e) Deliver to Purchaser and Escrow Agent such additional documents as shall be reasonably required to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, including a standard Title Company form of owner's affidavit, but Seller makes no representation that the Title Company will be able to issue extended coverage to Purchaser and the Closing is not contingent on Purchaser being able to obtain extended coverage. 4.3 Purchaser's Obligations at Closing. On or before the Closing Date, Purchaser shall: (a) Pay to Escrow Agent the full amount of the Purchase Price as increased or decreased by prorations and adjustments as herein provided, less the Earnest Money, and less interest accrued thereon, by wire transfer of immediately available federal funds; (b) Deliver to Escrow Agent and Seller such evidence as the Title Company may reasonably require as to the authority of the person or persons executing documents on behalf of Purchaser; and (c) Deliver to Escrow Agent and Seiler such additional documents as shall be reasonably required to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 4.4 Credits and Prorations. Real estate property taxes shall be apportioned with respect to the Property as of 12:01 a.m., on the Closing Date, as if Purchaser were vested with title to the Property during the entire day upon which Closing occurs. Any taxes paid at or prior to Closing shall be prorated based upon the amounts actually paid. If taxes and assessments for the current year have not been paid before Closing, Seller shall be charged at Closing an amount equal to that portion of such taxes and assessments which relates to the period before Closing and Purchaser shall pay the taxes and assessments prior to their becoming delinquent. To the extent that the actual taxes and assessments for the current year differ from the amount apportioned at - 7 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 118 9.A.a Closing, the parties shall make all necessary adjustments by appropriate payments between themselves within thirty (30) days following Closing when such final amounts are known. 4.5 Closine Costs. (a) Seller shall pay (i) the fees of any counsel representing Seller in connection with this transaction; (ii) one-half ('/z) of any escrow fee which may be charged by the Escrow Agent or Title Company; (iii) the standard coverage portions of the Title Policy to be issued to Purchaser by the Title Company at Closing; and (iv) any real estate commissions owed by Seller pursuant to Section 8.1 below. (b) Purchaser shall pay (i) the fees of any counsel representing Purchaser in connection with this transaction; (ii) the extended coverage portion of the Title Policy to be issued to Purchaser by the Title Company at Closing as well as any additional endorsements issued by the Title Company; (iii) one-half ('/z) of any escrow fees charged by the Escrow Agent or Title Company; and (iv) the cost of any recording fees for recording the Deed. (c) All other costs and expenses incident to this action and the Closing shall be apportioned by the parties equally in accordance with local custom. ARTICLE V REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, COVENANTS AND INDEMNITIES 5.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller hereby makes the following representations and warranties to Purchaser as of the Effective Date and at Closing, except as otherwise disclosed to Purchaser in the Property Documents or discovered by Purchaser in connection with its inspections during the Inspection Period: (a) Authority and Ownership. Seller has the full right and authority to enter into this Agreement, to transfer all of the Property to Purchaser, and to consummate, or cause to be consummated, the transactions contemplated herein. The person or persons signing this Agreement on behalf of Seller are authorized to do so. (b) Pending Actions. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no actions, suits, arbitrations, unsatisfied orders or judgments, or governmental investigations pending or threatened in writing against the Property, or the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, except as disclosed in writing to Purchaser. (c) Leases. There are no parties other than Seller in possession of any portion of the Property or improvements thereon as lessees, licensees, tenants, claimants to any right of possession or ownership or trespassers. (d) Property Documents. The documents to be delivered to Purchaser under this Agreement, including the Property Documents, are complete and correct copies of the same. Seller has no actual knowledge of any other documents, correspondence, or other materials that could have a material impact on the Property except for the Property Documents. - 8 - 145960583-4 Packet Pg. 119 9.A.a (e) Outstanding Agreements. There are no outstanding agreements of sale, options or any other rights of third parties to acquire or use the Property or to any interest therein, except for the Permitted Exceptions. There are no contracts applicable to the Property that will survive Closing. (0 Hazardous Materials. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no, and have been no, releases of Hazardous Substances on or about the Property. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no pending proceedings or inquiries by any governmental body with respect to the Property. For purposes of this Agreement, "Hazardous Substances" shall refer to the definition provided under the Model Toxics Control Act, Chapter 70.105D RCW and Chapter 173-340 WAC, as amended or revised after the Effective Date. (g) Mechanic's Liens. There are no contractors, subcontractors, materials suppliers, or any other third parties that are unpaid, that have provided Seller with notice of a claim of lien, or that otherwise have any other rights to impose, enforce, file, record, or foreclose a lien against the Real Property pursuant to RCW 60.04 or otherwise. 5.2 Representations and Warranties of Purchaser. Purchaser hereby represents and warrants to Seller that Purchaser has the full right, power and authority to purchase the Property as provided in this Agreement, subject to Section 3.7 above, and to carry out Purchaser's obligations hereunder, and all requisite actions necessary to authorize Purchaser to enter into this Agreement and to carry out its obligations hereunder have been, or by Closing will have been, taken, and Purchaser has the financial capability to consummate the Closing. The person signing this Agreement on behalf of Purchaser is authorized to do so, subject to Section 3.7 above. 5.3 Indemnification by Seller. Seller agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser, its successors and assigns, members, managers, shareholders, officers, directors and/or employees of each of them, harmless for, from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, costs, expenses, damages and losses, cause or causes of action and suit or suits of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, arising from any misrepresentation or breach of any warranty or covenant by Seller in this Agreement. 5.4 Survival. The provisions of this Section 5 shall survive Closing and the delivery of the Deed for twelve (12) months. ARTICLE VI CONDEMNATION 6.1 Purchaser's Elections. In the event condemnation proceedings are commenced against all of the Property or any material portion thereof (and for this purpose, "material" is defined as a proposed condemnation which would reasonably be expected to be valued at more than Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000.00)) or would have a material adverse impact on Purchaser's intended development or use of the Property as communicated by Purchaser or Purchaser's Broker (as defined below) to Seller on or before the Effective Date hereof, Purchaser may elect, on notice to Seller within fifteen (15) days after receipt of notice of the commencement of such proceedings either: (i) to terminate this Agreement in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further - 9 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 120 9.A.a rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of Agreement; or (ii) to proceed to Closing in which case Seller shall at Closing assign to Purchaser all of Seller's right, title and interest to any claims and proceeds Seller may have with respect to any condemnation awards relating thereto, less any costs and expenses reasonably incurred by Seller from the date of the commencement of such condemnation through the date of Closing relating to such condemnation. If Purchaser does not make such an election within fifteen (15) days after the commencement of condemnation proceedings, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to proceed under clause (ii) above. ARTICLE VII DEFAULT 7.1 Liquidated Damages. IF THE CLOSING IS NOT CONSUMMATED DUE TO ANY DEFAULT BY PURCHASER HEREUNDER, AND PURCHASER FAILS TO CURE SUCH DEFAULT WITHIN FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS AFTER PURCHASER'S RECEIPT OF WRITTEN NOTICE FROM SELLER SPECIFYING SUCH BREACH (PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE FOREGOING NOTICE AND CURE RIGHTS SHALL NOT APPLY TO PURCHASER'S FAILURE TO CLOSE ON THE CLOSING DATE), THEN SELLER, AS ITS SOLE REMEDY, SHALL RETAIN THE EARNEST MONEY AND EXTENSION OPTION FEES (IF ANY) AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, WHICH RETENTION SHALL OPERATE TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT AND RELEASE PURCHASER FROM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY HEREUNDER, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT. THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT SELLER'S ACTUAL DAMAGES, IN THE EVENT OF A FAILURE TO CONSUMMATE THIS SALE DUE TO PURCHASER'S DEFAULT, WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT OR IMPRACTICABLE TO DETERMINE. AFTER NEGOTIATION, THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT, CONSIDERING ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE DATE OF THIS AGREEMENT, THE AMOUNT OF THE EARNEST MONEY AND EXTENSION OPTION FEES IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE DAMAGES THAT SELLER WOULD INCUR IN SUCH EVENT. EACH PARTY SPECIFICALLY CONFIRMS THE ACCURACY OF THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOVE AND THE FACT THAT EACH PARTY WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WHO EXPLAINED, AT THE TIME THIS AGREEMENT WAS MADE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES PROVISION. THE FOREGOING IS NOT INTENDED TO LIMIT PURCHASER'S SURVIVING OBLIGATIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ITS INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS, UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. 7.2 Seller Default. In the event of a Seller Default, Purchaser shall provide Seller with written notice of such default and Seller shall have five (5) business days after Seller's receipt from Purchaser of such written notice to cure such default, or if such default cannot be cured in such period, to commence the cure during such period and thereafter diligently complete such cure. If after such notice, the Closing fails to occur due to such Seller Default, Purchaser may elect to either (i) terminate this Agreement and receive the return of the Earnest Money and any Extension Option Fees paid to Seller; or (ii) commence an action against Seller for specific performance of its obligations under this Agreement. Any such action for specific performance must be commenced within sixty (60) days after the then scheduled Closing Date. In no event shall Seller - 10 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 121 9.A.a be liable to Purchaser for any lost profits or other consequential or special damages. If Purchaser elects to terminate this Agreement, (a) this Agreement shall not be terminated automatically, but only upon delivery to Escrow Agent and Seller of written notice of termination from Purchaser; and (b) Escrow Agent shall return all sums (including the Earnest Money and all interest earned thereon while held in escrow) deposited by Purchaser. As used in this Agreement, a "Seller Default" shall mean (i) the failure by the Seller to deliver the Deed; (ii) the failure by the Seller to discharge, satisfy, release or terminate the matters of record Seller is required to remove from title as set forth herein above; (iii) any material breach of representation, warranty or covenant of Seller hereunder, or (iv) the failure by the Seller to perform any of Seller's other obligations under this Agreement. ARTICLE V1II BROKERS 8.1 Brokers. Purchaser represents to Seller that Long Bay Enterprises Inc., ("Purchaser's Broker") is the only real estate broker that Purchaser has engaged or dealt with in connection with this transaction, and that Purchaser will compensate Purchaser's Broker pursuant to a separate agreement. Seller represents to Purchaser that Seller has not engaged a Seller's Broker in connection with this transaction, and that if Seller does engage a Seller's Broker Seller is obligated to pay a real estate brokerage commission to Seller's Broker pursuant to a separate agreement. Each party shall indemnify, defend and hold the other harmless with respect to claims for real estate brokerage commissions or finder's fee for which such party is allegedly obligated. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Seller shall indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser harmless with respect to any claims by Seller's Broker for real estate brokerage commissions or finder's fees. The provisions of this Section 8.1 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE IX AS -IS PURCHASE AND SALE 9.1 At or before the end of the Inspection Period, Purchaser will have approved the physical and environmental characteristics and condition of the Property, as well as the economic characteristics of the Property. Purchaser hereby waives any and all defects in the physical, environmental and economic characteristics and condition of the Property which would be disclosed by such inspection. Purchaser further acknowledges that neither Seller nor any other person or entity acting on behalf of Seller, except as otherwise expressly provided in Section 5.1, have made any representations, warranties or agreements (express or implied) by or on behalf of Seller as to any matters concerning the Property, the economic results to be obtained or predicted, or the present use thereof or the suitability for Purchaser's intended use of the Property, including, without limitation, the following: the size or acreage of the Property; the suitability of the topography; the availability of water rights or utilities; the present and future zoning, subdivision and any and all other land use matters; the condition of the soil, subsoil, or groundwater; the purpose(s) to which the Property is suited; drainage; flooding; access to public roads; or proposed routes of roads or extensions thereof. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that the Property is to be purchased, conveyed and accepted by Purchaser in its present condition, "AS -IS" and that no =0= 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 122 9.A.a patent or latent defect in the physical or environmental condition of the Property whether or not known or discovered, shall affect the rights of either party hereto. Any documents furnished to Purchaser by Seller relating to the Property including, without limitation, service agreements, management contracts, maps, surveys, reports and other information shall be deemed furnished as a courtesy to Purchaser but without warranty from Seller. All work done in connection with preparing the Property for the uses intended by Purchaser including any and all fees, studies, reports, approvals, plans, surveys, permits, and any expenses whatsoever necessary or desirable in connection with Purchaser's acquiring, developing, using and/or operating the Property shall be obtained and paid for by, and shall be the sole responsibility of, Purchaser. Purchaser has investigated and has knowledge of operative or proposed governmental laws and regulations including land use laws and regulations to which the Property may be subject and shall acquire the Property upon the basis of its review and determination of the applicability and effect of such laws and regulations. Purchaser has neither received nor relied upon any representations concerning such laws and regulations from Seller. Except for claims of fraud or willful misrepresentation on the part of Seller, and except for those representations and warranties expressly set forth herein, Purchaser, on behalf of itself and its employees, agents, successors and permitted assigns, attorneys and other representatives, and each of them, hereby releases Seller from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, obligations, damages and liabilities of any nature whatsoever, whether alleged under any statute, common law or otherwise, directly or indirectly, arising out of or related to the condition, operation or economic performance of the Property. ARTICLE X MISCELLANEOUS 10.1 Public Disclosure. Prior to Closing, any release to any third party, except for the Escrow Agent, the Title Company, the permitting jurisdiction and all relevant governmental agencies, or Seller's or Purchaser's attorneys, accountants, engineers and confidential advisors, of information with respect to the sale contemplated herein or any matters set forth in this Agreement, will be made only in the form approved by Purchaser and Seller and their respective counsel; provided, however, that Seller acknowledges that Purchaser is a public entity, that Purchaser will have already held public hearings concerning this transaction, and that Purchaser may be required to disclose or otherwise release information about this Agreement and this transaction pursuant to applicable public disclosure or other laws in the State of Washington. 10.2 Notices. Any notice pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in writing by (i) personal delivery, (ii) nationally recognized overnight delivery service with proof of delivery, or (iii) legible facsimile transmission sent to the intended addressee at the address set forth below and receipt confirmed by telephone, or to such other address or to the attention of such other person as the addressee shall have designated by written notice sent in accordance herewith, and shall be deemed to have been given either at the time of delivery or, in the case of facsimile transmission, as of the date of the facsimile transmission (or, if such date is not a business day, then on the next business day) provided that an original of such facsimile is also sent to the intended addressee by means described in clauses (i) or (ii) above. In addition, notice may be given by email at the email address set forth hereinbelow for the party to whom notice is given, and such notice shall be deemed given and served upon transmission so long as such notice is also given by no later than the following business day via a method provided for in (i) through (iii) above. Unless changed - 12 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 123 9.A.a in accordance with the preceding sentence, the addresses for notice given pursuant to this Agreement shall be: If to Purchaser: Angie Feser Angie. feser&edmondswa. og_v 425-771-0230 With a copy to: Jeff Taraday jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com If to Seller: Gerald and Evelyn Mee 24024 76th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 With a copy to: Joseph Rockne joseph@rocknelaw.com 10.3 Bindine Effect. This Agreement shall not be binding in any way upon Seller and Purchaser unless and until Seller and Purchaser shall execute and deliver this Agreement. The binding effect upon Purchaser is subject to Section 3.7 above. 10.4 Modifications. This Agreement cannot be changed orally, and no executory agreement shall be effective to waive, change, modify or discharge it in whole or in part unless such executory agreement is in writing and is signed by the parties against whom enforcement of any waiver, change, modification or discharge is sought. 10.5 Business Days. References to "business days" herein shall mean any day except Saturday, Sunday or day on which commercial banks located in Seattle, Washington, are authorized or required by law to be closed for business. If the Closing Date or the day for performance of any act required under this Agreement falls on a day which is not a business day, then the Closing Date or the day for such performance, as the case may be, shall be the next following regular business day. The final day of any such period shall be deemed to end at 5:00 p.m. Pacific time unless otherwise specifically stated. 10.6 Successors and Assigns. The terms and provisions of this Agreement are to apply to and bind the permitted successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 10.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the exhibits and documents to be delivered at Closing, contains the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof and fully supersedes all prior written or oral agreements and understandings between the parties pertaining to such subject matter. - 13 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 124 9.A.a 10.8 Further Assurances. Each party agrees that it will, without further consideration, execute and deliver such other documents and take such other action, whether prior or subsequent to Closing, as may be reasonably requested by the other party to consummate more effectively the purposes or subject matter of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Purchaser shall, if requested by Seller, execute acknowledgments of receipt with respect to any materials delivered by Seller to Purchaser with respect to the Property. The provisions of this Section 10.8 shall survive the Closing. 10.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and all such executed counterparts shall constitute the same agreement. It shall be necessary to account for only one such counterpart in proving this Agreement. Fax copies of signatures shall be treated for all purposes as original signatures. 10.10 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. 10.11 Applicable Law. This Agreement is performable in the state in which the Property is located and shall in all respects be governed by, and construed in accordance with the substantive federal laws of the United States and the laws of the State of Washington. Seller and Purchaser hereby irrevocably submit to the jurisdiction of any state or federal court sitting in the state in which the Property is located in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement and hereby irrevocably agree that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding shall be heard and determined in a state or federal court sitting in the state in which the Property is located. Purchaser and Seller agree that the provisions of this Section 10.11 shall survive Closing. 10.12 No Third Party Beneficiary. The provisions of this Agreement and of the documents to be executed and delivered at Closing are and will be for the benefit of Seller and Purchaser only and are not for the benefit of any third party, and accordingly, no third party shall have the right to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or the documents to be executed and delivered at Closing. 10.13 Survival. The terms of this Agreement shall survive the Closing, or any termination of this Agreement prior thereto, and shall not be merged into the execution and delivery of the Deed; provided, however, that the representations and warranties of Seller and Purchaser in Article 5 shall survive the Closing for a period of twelve (12) months. 10.14 Attorneys' Fees. In the event any dispute between Purchaser and Seller should result in litigation, arbitration or mediation, the substantially prevailing party shall be reimbursed for all reasonable costs incurred in connection with such action, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees. 10.15 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and each of its provisions. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank; separate signature page attached.] - 14 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 125 9.A.a IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. PURCHASER: By: City of Edmonds Name: Its: Date: SELLER: By: Gerald Evelyn Name: A n Its: Hu and and Wife Date: 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 126 9.A.a EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-008-05 ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 8 AND 9, LAKE MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACT, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS PAGE 48, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 375 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH 15 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 9,140 FEET; THENCE WEST TO EAST LINE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SEATTLE EVERETT INTERURBAN RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAD RIGHT-OF-WAY TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 8; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 8 TO A POINT WEST OF POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST TO POINT OF BEGINNING EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD ON EAST SIDE TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2*32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2°34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-009-04 THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2°32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2°34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 127 9.A.a EXHIBIT A to Disclosure Statement Legal Description ol'the Real Property For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-008-05 ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 8 AND 9, LAKE MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACT, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS PAGE 48, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 375 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH 15 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 9,140 FEET; THENCE WEST TO EAST LINE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SEATTLE EVERETT INTERURBAN RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAD RIGHT-OF-WAY TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 8; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 8 TO A POINT WEST OF POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST TO POINT OF BEGINNING EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD ON EAST SIDE TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2°32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2°34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-009-04 THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2°32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2'34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 24 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 128 9.A.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev, 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Pagel of 6 SELLER:'a Seller Seller _ 1 To be used in transfers of improved residential real property, including residential dwellings up to four units, new construction, 2 dwellings in a residential common interest community not subject to a public offering statement, condominiums not subject to a public 3 offering statement, certain timeshares, and manufactured and mobile homes. See RCW Chapter 64.06 for further information. 4 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE SELLER 5 Please complete the following form. Do not leave any spaces blank. If the question clearly does not apply to the property check 6 "NA." If the answer is "yes" to any asterisked (*) item(s), please explain on attached sheets. Please refer to the line number(s) of 7 the question(s) when you provide your explanation(s). For your protection you must date and initial each page of this disclosure 8 statement and each attachment. Delivery of the disclosure statement must occur not later than five (5) business days, unless 9 otherwise agreed, after mutual acceptance of a written purchase and sale agreement between Buyer and Seller. 10 NOTICE TO THE BUYER 11 THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES ARE MADE /BY THE SELLER ABOUT THE CONDITION O THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 '- r,1 `! l fr A P� V V , CITY �r .�cy )lam d � , 13 STATE , ZIP �(,��.�p COUNTY ` N- ?( YY - "i l �i� ("THE PROPERTY") OR AS 14 LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A. 15 SELLER MAKES THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES OF EXISTING MATERIAL FACTS OR MATERIAL DEFECTS TO BUYER BASED 16 ON SELLER'S ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME SELLER COMPLETES THIS DISCLOSURE 17 STATEMENT. UNLESS YOU AND SELLER OTHERWISE AGREE IN WRITING, YOU HAVE THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS FROM 18 THE DAY SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT DELIVERS THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT TO YOU TO RESCIND THE AGREEMENT 19 a BY DELIVERING A SEPARATELY SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RESCISSION TO SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT. IF THE 20 0 SELLER DOES NOT GIVE YOU A COMPLETED DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, THEN YOU MAY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO RESCIND 21 PRIOR TO OR AFTER THE TIME YOU ENTER INTO A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, 22 THE FOLLOWING ARE DISCLOSURES MADE BY SELLER AND ARE NOT THE REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY REAL ESTATE 23 a LICENSEE OR OTHER PARTY. THIS INFORMATION IS FOR DISCLOSURE ONLY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A PART OF 24 Q ANY WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN BUYER AND SELLER. 25 c CU FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION OF THE SPECIFIC CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY YOU ARE ADVISED 26 -,e TO OBTAIN AND PAY FOR THE SERVICES OF QUALIFIED EXPERTS TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY, WHICH MAY INCLUDE, 27 a WITHOUT LIMITATION, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, PLUMBERS, ELECTRICIANS, ROOFERS, 28 BUILDING INSPECTORS, ON -SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT INSPECTORS, OR STRUCTURAL PEST INSPECTORS. 29 THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER AND SELLER MAY WISH TO OBTAIN PROFESSIONAL ADVICE OR INSPECTIONS OF THE 30 PROPERTY OR TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PROVISIONS IN A CONTRACT BETWEEN THEM WITH RESPECT TO ANY 31 ADVICE, INSPECTION, DEFECTS OR WARRANTIES. 32 a� Seller ❑ is / ❑ is not occupying the Property. 33 1. SELLER'S DISCLOSURES: 34 *If you answer "Yes" to a question with an asterisk (*), please explain your answer and attach documents, if available and not 35 otherwise publicly recorded. If necessary, use an attached sheet. 36 YES NO DONT N/A 37 Q 1. TITLE KNOW 38 A. Do you have legal authority to sell the property? If no, please explain ........................................... CI LI ❑ 39 N *B. Is title to the property subject to any of the following? 40 M (1) First right of refusal..................................................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 41 coo (2) Option ❑ ❑ ❑ 42 N ............................................................................................................ (3) Lease or rental agreement.......................................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 43 (4) Life estate?...............................................................................................................................❑ �d, ❑ ❑ 44 *C. Are there any encroachments, boundary agreements, or boundary disputes? ................................❑ �1 ❑ ❑ 45 a *D. Is there a private road or easement agreement for access to the property?....................................❑I ❑ LI 46 *E. Are there any rights -of -way, easements, or access limitations that may affect the Buyer's use of 47 E theproperty?.......................................................................... *F. Are there any written agreements for joint maintenance of an easement or right-of-way? ...... ......... ❑ 'tjr ❑ ❑ 49 *G. Is there any study, survey project, or notice that would adversely affect the property? ...................❑ )' ❑ ❑ 50 Q *H. Are there any pending or existing assessments against the property? ............................................❑ ❑ ❑ 51 A.'' Are there any zoning violations, nonconforming uses, or any unusual restrictions on the 52 nerhat would affect future construction or remodeling?.........................................................❑ � El ❑ 53 SELLE INITIALS ate SELLER'S INITIALS Date � Packet Pg. 129 9.A.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 2 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DON'T WA 54 KNOW 55 *J. Is there a boundary survey for the property?...................................................................................❑ ❑ R, ❑ 56 *K. Are there any covenants, conditions, or restrictions recorded against the property? ......................❑ 2-1 U ❑ 57 NOTICE TO BUYER: Covenants or deed restrictions based on race, creed, sexual orientation, 58 or other protected class were voided by RCW 49.60.224 and are unenforceable. Washington 59 law allows for the illegal language to be struck by bringing an action in superior court or by the 60 free recording of a restrictive covenant modification document. Many county auditor websites 61 provide a short form with instructions on this process. 62 2. WATER 63 A. Household Water 64 (1) The source of water for the property is: ')¢ ( Private or publicly owned water system 65 ❑ Private well serving only the subject property *❑ Other water system 66 *If shared, are there any written agreements?.........................................................................❑ U U 67 *(2) Is there an easement (recorded or unrecorded) for access to and/or maintenance of the 68 watersource? ................... ........................................................................................................ U �y ❑ ❑ 69 *(3) Are there any problems or repairs needed?.............................................................................❑ P. ❑ ❑ 70 (4) During your ownership, has the source provided an adequate year-round supply of potable water? ..U. ❑ ❑ ❑ 71 If no, please explain: (? r/ c t 72 *(5) Are there any water treatment systems for the property? ................ ......................................... ❑ ® U U 73 If yes, are they: ❑ Leased ❑ Owned 74 *(6) Are there any water rights for the property associated with its domestic water supply, such 75 as a water right permit, certificate, or claim?............................................................................ ❑ 0' ❑ ❑ 76 (a) If yes, has the water right permit, certificate, or claim been assigned, transferred, or changed? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0. 77 *(b) If yes, has all or any portion of the water right not been used for five or more successive years? U ❑ U 0, 78 *(7) Are there any defects in the operation of the water system (e.g. pipes, tank, pump, etc.)? ......❑ ❑ ❑ 'GJ 79 B. Irrigation Water 80 (1) Are there any irrigation water rights for the property, such as a water right permit, 81 certificate, or claim?.................................................................................................................❑l ❑ ❑ 82 *(a) If yes, has all or any portion of the water right not been used for five or more 83 successiveyears? .................... ......................................................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ "0 84 *(b) If so, is the certificate available? (If yes, please attach a copy.) ........................................❑ U U 8s *(c) If so, has the water right permit, certificate, or claim been assigned, transferred, or changed? ...❑ ❑ ❑ �, 86 *(2) Does the property receive irrigation water from a ditch company, irrigation district, or other entity...... ❑ ❑ ❑ 87 If so, please identify the entity that supplies water to the property: 88 , t 89 C. Outdoor Sprinkler System 90 (1) Is there an outdoor sprinkler system for the property?.............................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 91 yes, are there any defects in the system?............................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ �4 92 *(3) If yes, is the sprinkler system connected to irrigation water`? ................... ......... I............................ ❑ ❑ ❑ 93 3. SEWER/ON-SITE SEWAGE SYSTEM 94 A. The property is served by: 95 0 Public sewer system ❑ On -site sewage system (including pipes, tanks, drainfields, and all other component parts) 96 t) Other disposal system 97 Please describe: (y �`t JI G-i'7' b lyne�t'—98 B. If public sewer system service is available to the property, is the house connected to 99 thesewer main?......................................................................................... ...................< ❑ ❑ ❑ 100 f no, please explain: 101 SE R`S INITIALS D t SELLER'S a T S e INI IAL Date Packet Pg. 130 9.A.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT @Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 3 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DON'T N/A 102 *C. Is the property subject to any sewage system fees or charges in addition to those covered KNOW 103 in your regularly billed sewer or on -site sewage system maintenance service? ...............................❑ i� ❑ ❑ 104 D. If the property is connected to an on -site sewage system: 105 C *(1) Was a permit issued for its construction, and was it approved by the local health 106 a department or district following its construction?.......................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 107 a (2) When was it last pumped? 108 4) *(3) Are there any defects in the operation of the on -site sewage system? .....................................❑ ❑ ❑I 109 (4) When was it last inspected? 110 = \ m By whom: �� 111 m (5) For how many bedrooms was the on -site sewage system approved? bedrooms ❑ S�l 112 E. Are all plumbing fixtures, including laundry drain, connected to the sewer/on-site 113 sewagesystem?............................................................................................................................ ❑ ❑ 114 ca If no, please explain:115 ,d *F. Have there been any changes or repairs to the on -site sewage system? .......................................❑ ❑ ❑ ,4' 116 G. Is the on -site sewage system, including the drainfield, located entirely within the 117 L boundaries of the property?.............................................................................................................❑ ❑ El118 a If no, please explain: C 1�cr3 119 = *H. Does the on -site sewage system require monitoring and maintenance services more frequently 120 thanonce a year?..............................................................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 121 = 3 a NOTICE: IF THIS RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY DISCLOSURE IS BEING COMPLETED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION 122 Q WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED, SELLER IS NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS LISTED IN ITEM 4 123 (STRUCTURAL) OR ITEM 5 (SYSTEMS AND FIXTURES). 124 r- 19 4. STRUCTURAL 125 . ca *A. Has the roof leaked within the last 5 years?.....................................................................................❑ J ❑ ❑ 126 a *B. Has the basement flooded or leaked .............❑( ❑ ❑ 127 *C. Have there been any conversions, additions or remodeling?......................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 128 am *(1) If yes, were all building permits obtained?...................................................... ..........................❑ )81' ❑ El129 m *(2) If yes, were all final inspections obtained?...............................................................................❑ �° ❑ ❑ 130 D. Do you know the age of the house? ............................................................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 131 If yes, year of original construction:` 132 E *E. Has there been any settling, slippage, or sliding of the property or its improvements? ...................❑ ❑ ❑ 133 *F. Are there any defects with the following: (If yes, please check applicable items and explain) .........❑ ❑ ❑ 134 Q ❑ Foundations ❑ Decks ❑ Exterior Walls 135 ❑ Chimneys ❑ Interior Walls ❑ Fire Alarms 136 U) ❑ Doors ❑ Windows ❑ Patio 137 ❑ Ceilings ❑ Slab Floors ❑ Driveways 138 = ❑ Pools ❑ Hot Tub ❑ Sauna 139 c) d ❑ Sidewalks ❑ Outbuildings ❑ Fireplaces 140 ❑ Garage Floors ❑ Walkways ❑ Siding 141 ❑ Wood Stoves ❑ Elevators ❑ Incline Elevators 142 L 3 ❑ Stairway Chair Lifts ❑ Wheelchair Lifts ❑ Other 143 a *G. Was a structural pest or "whole house" inspection done?................................................................❑ , ❑ ❑ 144 If yes, when and by whom was the inspection completed? 145 E t y a 146 ca H. During your ownership, has the property had any wood destroying organism or pest infestation? .......... ❑ ,0J. ❑ ❑ 147 Q I. Is the attic insulated?...................................................................................................................... `lac ❑ ❑ ❑ 148 Isthe basement insulated?..............................................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 149 _xT �Z 9 _.ZV'` �2 3 SE LEtf'S INITIALS Date SELLER'S INITIALS Date V Packet Pg. 131 9.A.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Seller Disclosure Statement Northwest ©Copyright2021 Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 IMPROVED PROPERTY ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 4 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DON'T WA 150 5. SYSTEMS AND FIXTURES KNOW 151 *A. If any of the following systems or fixtures are included with the transfer, are there any defects? 152 If yes, please explain: 153 3, Electrical system, including wiring, switches, outlets, and service ........................ .................... ❑ ',N ❑ ❑ 154 1= m Plumbing system, including pipes, faucets, fixtures, and toilets ............................................... ❑ ! ❑ ❑ 155 Q Hotwater tank...........................................................................................................................0 Garbagedisposal �, -�I. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 156 157 d ......................................................................................................................0 Appliances.................................................................................................................................❑ 4 ❑ ❑ 158 Sumppump .............. ..................... ............................................................................................ ❑ ❑ ❑ 159 Heating and cooling systems ❑ .................................................................................................... �d ❑ ❑ 160 = Security system: ❑ Owned ❑ Leased....................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ J4 161 Other ...............❑ ❑ ❑ 162 *B. If any of the following fixtures or property is included with the transfer, are they leased? 163 (If yes, please attach copy of lease.) 164 Q Security System: ..................0 ❑ ❑ 'P 165 Tanks (type): ❑ ❑ D 166 N Satellite dish: ..................❑ ❑ ❑ �jlf 167 ca Other: ......................❑ 0 ❑ C� 168 d *C. Are any of the following kinds of wood burning appliances present at the property? 169 (1) Woodstove?............................................................................................................................... U ❑ ❑ 170 L (2) Fireplace insert?.......................................................................................................................0 �T ❑ ❑ 171 a (3) Pellet stove?.............................................................................................................................0 U. ❑ ❑ 172 c (4) Fireplace?............................................................................................................................... .. d U ❑ Ct 173 0 If yes, are all of the (1) woodstoves or (2) fireplace inserts certified by the U.S. Environmental 174 in Protection Agency as clean burning appliances to improve air quality and public health? .....................❑ ❑ ❑ 175 D. Is the property located within a city, county, or district or within a department of natural 176 Cr Q resources fire protection zone that provides fire protection services? ..............................................❑ ❑ ❑ 177 E. Is the property equipped with carbon monoxide alarms? (Note: Pursuant to RCW 19.27.530, Seller 178 must equip the residence with carbon monoxide alarms as required by the state building code.) ........... ❑ ❑ ❑ 179 CU Y F. Is the property equipped with smoke detection devices?................................................................� ❑ ❑ ❑ 180 a (Note: Pursuant to RCW 43.44.110, if the property is not equipped with at least one smoke 181 . . detection device, at least one must be provided by the seller.) 182 -0 G. Does the property currently have internet service? m Provider: 1)ID l ," 184 6. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION/CO MON INTERESTS 185 A. Is there a Homeowners' Association?......................................................... .......... .......................... U U ❑ 186 Name of Association and contact information for an officer, director, employee, or other authorized 187 C agent, if any, who may provide the association's financial statements, minutes, bylaws, fining policy, 188 m E and other information that is not publicly available: 189 a) B. Are there regular periodic assessments? ...................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 190 a� $ per 0 month ❑ year 191 Q ❑ Other: 192 *C. Are there any pending special assessments? .....................' U) *D. Are there any shared "common areas" or any joint maintenance agreements (facilities 194 such as walls, fences, landscaping, pools, tennis courts, walkways, or other areas 195 w co -owned in undivided interest with others)?...................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 196 7. ENVIRONMENTAL 197 L *A. Have there been any flooding, standing water, or drainage problems on the property 198 a that affect the property or access to the property? ..................... *B. Does any part of the property contain fill dirt, waste, or other fill material? ................... .................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 200 *C. Is there any material damage to the property from fire, wind, floods, beach movements, 201 E earthquake, expansive soils, or landslides. ?.................................................................................... ❑ Uf ❑ ❑ 202 M D. Are there any shorelines, wetlands, floodplains, or critical areas on the property? ..........................0 ❑ ❑ 203 Q *E. Are there any substances, materials, or products in or on the property that may be environmental 204 concerns, such as asbestos, formaldehyde, radon gas, lead -based paint: fuel or chemical storage tanks, or contaminated soil or water?..................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 205 206 *F. H the property been used for commercial or industrial purposes? ................................................❑ `�' ❑ El L E S INI ALS Date SELLER'S INITIALS Date Packet Pg. 132 9.A.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 5 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DONT WA 208 KNOW 209 . Is there any soil or groundwater contamination?..................................................... ........................❑ C�J ❑ ❑ 210 *H. Are there transmission poles or other electrical utility equipment installed, maintained, or 211 buried on the property that do not provide utility service to the structures on the property? .............❑ E ❑ ❑ 212 *I. Has the property been used as a legal or illegal dumping site? ......................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 213 *J. Has the property been used as an illegal drug manufacturing site? ........ .............. .......................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 214 *K. Are there any radio towers in the area that cause interference with cellular telephone reception? .......... ❑ LI ❑ 215 8. LEAD BASED PAINT (Applicable if the house was built before 1978).................................................... ❑ 216 A. Presence of lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards (check one below): 217 LI Known lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards are present in the housing 218 (explain). 219 Seller has no knowledge of lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards in the housing. 220 B. Records and reports available to the Seller (check one below): 221 ❑ Seller has provided the purchaser with all available records and reports pertaining to 222 lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards in the housing (list documents below). 223 224 Seller has no reports or records pertaining to lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards in the housing. 225 9. MANUFACTURED AND MOBILE HOMES 226 If the property includes a manufactured or mobile home, 227 *A. Did you make any alterations to the home?....................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 228 If yes, please describe the alterations: *B. `14 229 Did any previous owner make any alterations to the home?...........................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 230 *C. If alterations were made, were permits or variances for these alterations obtained? ...................... El ❑ ❑ 231 10. FULL DISCLOSURE BY SELLERS 232 A. Other conditions or defects: 233 *Are there any other existing material defects affecting the property that a prospective 234 buyershould know about?................................................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 235 B. Verification 236 The foregoing answers and attached explanations (if any) are complete and correct to the best of Seller's knowledge and 237 Seller has received a copy hereof. Seller agrees to defend, indemnify and hold real estate licensees harmless from and 238 against any and all claims that the above information is inaccurate. Seller authorizes real estate licensees, if any, to deliver a 239 ,copy of this i clo a statement to other real estate licensees and all prospective buyers of the property. 240 _p , eller Date 241 eller U Date If the answer is "Yes" to any asterisked (*) items, please explain below (use additional sheets if necessary). Please refer to the line 242 number(s) of the question(s). 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 Packet Pg. 133 9.A.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8121 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 6 of 6 (Continued) II. NOTICES TO THE BUYER 257 1. SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION 258 INFORMATION REGARDING REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 259 AGENCIES. THIS NOTICE IS INTENDED ONLY TO INFORM YOU OF WHERE TO OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION AND IS NOT 260 AN INDICATION OF THE PRESENCE OF REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS. 261 2. PROXIMITY TO FARMINGlWORKING FOREST 262 THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE REAL PROPERTY YOU ARE CONSIDERING FOR PURCHASE MAY LIE IN 263 CLOSE PROXIMITY TO A FARM OR WORKING FOREST. THE OPERATION OF A FARM OR WORKING FOREST 264 INVOLVES USUAL AND CUSTOMARY AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES OR FOREST PRACTICES, WHICH ARE PROTECTED 265 UNDER RCW 7.48.305. THE WASHINGTON RIGHT TO FARM ACT. 266 3. OIL TANK INSURANCE 267 THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT IF THE REAL PROPERTY YOU ARE CONSIDERING FOR PURCHASE UTILIZES 268 AN OIL TANK FOR HEATING PURPOSES, NO COST INSURANCE MAY BE AVAILABLE FROM THE POLLUTION LIABILITY 269 INSURANCE AGENCY. 270 III. BUYER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1. BUYER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT: 271 272 A. Buyer has a duty to pay diligent attention to any material defects that are known to Buyer or can be known to Buyer by 273 utilizing diligent attention and observation. 274 B. The disclosures set forth in this statement and in any amendments to this statement are made only by the Seller and 275 not by any real estate licensee or other party. 276 C. Buyer acknowledges that, pursuant to RCW 64.06.050(2), real estate licensees are not liable for inaccurate information 277 provided by Seller, except to the extent that real estate licensees know of such inaccurate information. 278 D. This information is for disclosure only and is not intended to be a part of the written agreement between the Buyer and Seiler. 279 E. Buyer (which term includes all persons signing the "Buyer's acceptance" portion of this disclosure statement below) has 280 received a copy of this Disclosure Statement (including attachments, if any) bearing Seller's signature(s). 281 F. If the house was built prior to 1978, Buyer acknowledges receipt of the pamphlet Protect Your Family From Lead in Your Home. 282 DISCLOSURES CONTAINED IN THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ARE PROVIDED BY SELLER BASED ON SELLER'S 283 ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME SELLER COMPLETES THIS DISCLOSURE. UNLESS BUYER 284 AND SELLER OTHERWISE AGREE IN WRITING, BUYER SHALL HAVE THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DAY 285 SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT DELIVERS THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT TO RESCIND THE AGREEMENT BY 286 DELIVERING A SEPARATELY SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RESCISSION TO SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT. YOU 287 MAY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO RESCIND PRIOR TO OR AFTER THE TIME YOU ENTER INTO A SALE AGREEMENT. 288 BUYER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT OF A COPY OF THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGES 289 THAT THE DISCLOSURES MADE HEREIN ARE THOSE OF THE SELLER ONLY, AND NOT OF ANY REAL ESTATE 290 LICENSEE OR OTHER PARTY. 291 Date 292 293 2. BUYER'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO REVOKE OFFER 294 Buyer has read and reviewed the Seller's responses to this Seller Disclosure Statement. Buyer approves this statement and 295 waives Buyer's right to revoke Buyer's offer based on this disclosure. 296 Date Buyer Date 297 298 3. BUYER'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO RECEIVE COMPLETED SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 299 Buyer has been advised of Buyer's right to receive a completed Seller Disclosure Statement. Buyer waives that right. 300 However, if the answer to any of the questions in the section entitled "Environmental" would be "yes," Buyer may not waive 301 the receipt of the "Environmental" section of the Seller Disclosure Statement. 302 Date Buyer Date 303 304 S , R'S INITIALS Date -Z?n 1�7 1 „1 v _ 1 SELLER'S INITIALS Date Packet Pg. 134 10.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 10/25/2023 October 25 Extended Agenda Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Staff Recommendation Review and discuss the October 25 version of the Planning Board extended agenda. Narrative Attachments: October 25 Extended Agenda Chart Packet Pg. 135 10.A.a Planning Board Extended Agenda - October 25, 2023 6 O a -I 4 4 N 4 4 c-I 0 00 N N c-I l6 N Q M Q m N v n m c-I N v� m rl N L� r, N V O .� c-I U O Ln N > o Z 00 > O Z N N > O z m U v Ln U v p to 1-4 U v p ri N O O c-I O 4 N v LL -Cl- c-I N LL 00 N BN Zone Use Change (Citizen -initiated Code Amendment) PH Tree Code Update (Property Owner/Development - Code Amendment) D/R D/R* D/R D/R D/R Prop I Devt D/R Devt PH Prop & Devt Critical Aquifer Recharge (Code Amendment) I D/R PH PH PH D/R PH Recommendation on Athletic Field Use & Reservation Policy D/R- 6 pm Special Meeting with Council - 2023 Housing Legislation Comprehensive Plan Discussion I D/R D/R D/R D/R D/R Design Standards and Processes, Impact of HB 1293 1 Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Update D/R D/R Parks, Recreation & Human Services Quarterly Report (^ Biannual presentations) R R R^ Capital Improvement Program/Capital Facilties Plan I PH D/R Planning Board report to City Council PLN2023-0024 - Rezone Proposal from RM-EW to BC-EW I PH PH Detached Accessory Dwelling Units I D/R PH Annual Retreat I Climate Legislative Package I Highway 99 Landmark Site Discussion I Parks Acquistion I D/R * Joint Meeting with Tree Board September 19 Joint Special Meeting with Council (5:00 pm) November 29 special meeting in lieu of November 22 KEY I- Introduction & Discussion PH- Public Hearing D/R- Discussion/Recommendation B- Briefing R- Report with no briefing/presentation Future Items Neighborhood Center Plans Additional Code Modernization Projects Comp Plan Goal/Policy Review Housing Bills Policy Implementation Packet Pg. 136