The Edmonds City Council will hold a public hearing next Tuesday, March 15 to consider proposed amendments to the draft critical area regulations. The amendments were adopted by the Edmonds City Council Dec. 15, 2015 in Ordinance No. 4017 and were subsequently vetoed by Mayor Dave Earling.

The critical areas ordinance is aimed at protecting the city’s critical areas, which include wetlands, streams and geologically hazardous and frequently flooded areas. The State Growth Management Act requires jurisdictions to review, evaluate and, if necessary, revise their critical areas ordinances every 10 years. The last time Edmonds’ was updated was in 2005.

At its Feb. 2 meeting, the city council discussed returning to the Dec. 15, 2015 version of the critical area regulations and providing staff-proposed amendments for discussion at the next council meeting.  An initial set of proposed council amendments were discussed at the Feb. 23 council meeting. The council decided to hold another public hearing on potential amendments to the draft critical area regulations.

The proposed amendments to be considered March 15 are summarized below:

1. ECDC 23.40.220.C.4 – Physically Separated/Functionally Isolated Buffers

a. Require determination of physically separated/functionally isolated buffers to be made by a qualified critical area consultant.

b. Rename provision to physically separated/potentially isolated or “interrupted buffer”

2. Council Review/Critical Area Decision Processes

a. Include the City Council in the decision-making process for certain critical area decisions such as physically separated/functionally isolated buffers, restoration projects, and exemptions.

b. Consider adding a decision matrix or some threshold for which projects would include the City Council in the decision-making process

c. Consider amending the decision process for certain types of critical area decisions (i.e. Type I, Type II, Type III or other new process type).

3. ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b.iv – Hazard Tree Replacement

Change the required diameter of deciduous replacement trees from one inch dbh to one to two inches dbh

4. Definitions

a. ECDC 23.40.320 – Normal Maintenance of Vegetation Definition

Change the diameter of trees from three to four inches dbh which may be removed as “normal maintenance.”

b. Add definition for Council to reflect Edmonds City Council

c. Add definition for Best Available Science

d. Move definitions from Part IV to ECDC 23.40.010 after Purpose section.

5. ECDC 23.90.040.C – Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable and Undeveloped Parcels

a. Include RS-8 and RS-10 in addition to RS-12 and RS-20 zones to where this provision would apply

b. Consider requiring a different percentage of coverage for the RS-8 and RS-10 (existing is 30% for RS-12 and RS-20 zones).

c. Change “…native trees over 10 inches in dbh make up more than 70 percent of the canopy cover” to “…native trees over 6 inches in dbh make up more than 40 percent of the canopy cover.”

6. Frequently Flood Area Amendments in ECDC 19.00.025 and ECDC 21.40.030

Do not consider the frequently flooded amendments in the building code at ECDC 19.00.025 and definition of height at ECDC 21.40.030 with the critical areas update.

7. Council Status Reports

Require the administration to provide the City Council with periodic reports on implementation of the critical area regulations.

8. Appendices

a. Make new Appendix A formally adopting critical areas maps

b. Make new Appendix B with an inventory of all critical areas within the City of Edmonds, including buffer widths

9. ECDC 23.15.215 – Restoration Projects

Modify the Restoration projects provision to remove specific buffer reduction allowances, and have project proponents propose buffer width necessary to ensure success of the proposed project.

10. ECDC 23.40.00.C – Areas subject to the provision of the CAO

Replace this section to refer to new appendices if appendices are adopted

11. ECDC 23.40.040.D – Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas

Keep only first sentence and delete the remainder of the section

12. ECDC 23.40.090.D – Minimum Report Contents

Require critical area reports to identify the location of all native and non-native vegetation of 6 inch dbh or larger.

Note: The following is a list of ideas compiled by a councilmember gleaned from comments submitted on the critical area regulations update. The items with asterisks (*) are currently present in the draft critical area regulations.

a. Increase the tree removal threshold from 3” dbh to 6” dbh.

b. Allow removal of inappropriate trees such as alders, cottonwoods and willows in critical areas.

c. Compensatory mitigation should apply to streams in addition to wetlands.*

d. Provide for 100% of buffer, where available for enhancement projects.

e. Identify biodiversity areas and corridors.

f. The footprint of development should include compacted gravel areas.*

g. There are Inconsistencies between allowed activities in Wetlands and allowed activities in Critical Areas.

h. Add presence of railroad tracks as an example of physically separated but functional isolated conditions.

i. Allow healthy trees to be removed from critical areas on private land.

For detailed background information and history, review the Nov. 2, 2015 City Council meeting minutes and/or video link in the list of attachments. You can search for all minutes at this link.