Bothell City Council AGENDA BILL SUMMARY

Transcription

1 Bothell City Council AGENDA BILL SUMMARY Meeting Date: November 15, 2016 AB # Action Item: X Study Session Item: Special Presentation: Subject: Sixth Public Hearing Regarding Plan and Code Amendments to the Fitzgerald/35 th SE and Canyon Creek/39 th SE Subarea Plans and BMC and Budget Impact and Source of Funds: No impact, part of the 2016 Plan and Code update. Staff Presenter/Department: Tom Burdett, Director, Community Development Bruce Blackburn, Senior Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this Public Hearing is for Council to review and direct staff to prepare an ordinance consistent with the second draft of Plan and Code amendments outlined within Attachment 2 which, will be provided via a supplemental packet Monday, November 14, Attachment 2 will contain: A second draft of Code amendments to BMC the Fitzgerald/35 th SE Subarea Regulations (the Council reviewed the first draft at its October 18, 2016 public hearing) A first draft of Code amendments to BMC the Canyon Creek / 39 th SE Subarea Regulations (The Council has not reviewed this Chapter yet, but it parallels BMC A first Draft of the Fitzgerald / 35 th SE and Canyon Creek / 39 th SE Subarea Plans (The Council has also not reviewed these Subarea Plans yet.) Pursuant to Council direction of November 8, 2016 Staff has: Instructed Parametrix to complete its Best Available Science (BAS) gap analysis of the second review draft for the Fitzgerald Subarea Regulations of BMC The review is being done but, due to the tight turn-around time (24 hours), and the Friday holiday this review could not be provided with this packet. Sent letters to the four Zone 1 property owners affected by the location of the Cole/Woods Creek Sub-basin boundary. Prepared and posted a number of documents to the City s Fitzgerald Subarea web page which is: The Staff report contains additional information re: the potential for an incentive-based clustering mechanism which is a preview of the anticipated Code language Subarea (See Attachment 1) At its November 15, 2016 public hearing Council is asked to: 1. Review the proposal to incentivize clustering; 2. Review the second draft of Subarea and Plan amendment language; 3. Council majority direction to Staff on these proposals; 4. Direct Staff to prepare an Ordinance and Council Findings, Conclusions and Decision for review at its continued public hearing on December 6, Clustering The Council directed staff to investigate an incentive-based clustering mechanism to encourage clustering and to encourage substantial preservation of forest lands. Staff is recommending a program which implements the following incentive options: November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 123 of 134

2 Agenda Bill Summary Subject: Sixth Public Hearing Regarding Plan and Code Amendments to the Fitzgerald/35 th SE and Canyon Creek/39 th SE Subarea Plans and BMC Chapters and Meeting Date: November 15, 2016 Allow a 10% bonus to the overall lot yield for preserving 10 percent or more of the net buildable area: o 17 lots would become 18 lots; or Allow a 15% bonus to the overall lot yield for preserving 20 percent or more of the net buildable area: o 17 lots would become 19 lots (See Figure 1 Attachment 1), or Allow a 20% bonus to the overall lot yield for preserving 25 percent or more of the net buildable area o 17 lots would become 20 lots (See figure 3 Attachment 1) or Allow a 25% bonus to the overall lot yield for preserving 30 percent or more of the net buildable area o 17 lots would become 21 lots (See figure 3 Attachment 1). COUNCIL PROCESS: Public Hearing Mayor opens the Public Hearing Staff presentation by Tom Burdett, Community Development Director, and Bruce Blackburn, Senior Planner Council questions of staff Public Testimony Council deliberations and direction Continue the hearing to December 6, 2016 HISTORY: June 14, 2016: Council conducted a Study Session on the results of the engagement process June 21, 2016: Council conducted its first Public Hearing June 28, 2016: Council conducted second Public Hearing July 19, 2016: Council conducted its third Public Hearing September 20, 2016: Council conducted a Study Session to receive additional information on zoning for the Zone 1 lands and provided direction regarding clustering October 18, 2016: Council conducted its fourth public hearing November 8, 2016 Council conducted its fifth public hearing. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Review the proposal to incentivize clustering 2. Review the second draft of Subarea and Plan amendment language 3. Council majority direction to Staff on these proposals 4. Direct Staff to prepare an Ordinance and Council Findings, Conclusions and Decision for review at its continued public hearing on December 6, 2016 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report Asst. City Manager Approval: Date: November 10, 2016 Page 2 of 2 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 124 of 134

3 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report Subject: Sixth Public Hearing Regarding Plan and Code Amendments to the Fitzgerald/35 th SE and Canyon Creek/39 th SE Subarea Plans and BMC Chapters and Meeting Date: November 15, 2016 Staff Contact: Tom Burdett, Director, Community Development, Bruce Blackburn, Senior Planner Introduction The purpose of this Staff Report is to provide additional information regarding establishing an incentivebased clustering mechanism for Zone 1 lands. Summary Recommended Action: Direct Staff to craft an incentive-based clustering mechanism for the Zone 1 lands similar to that outlined within this Staff Report. The mechanism contained herein would be a graduated scale of increased lot yield for increased open space provided. Incentive based clustering Council directed Staff to investigate potential incentives for a clustering mechanism. After investigating incentives provided by other jurisdictions (Bellevue - 20%; Sammamish 20 to 30%; Kirkland - 10%; Snohomish County - 20%), and discussing potential incentives with members of the development community, and consultants to the development community Staff prepared these incentives options for Council consideration. As briefly described above, the concept here is to create a graduated scale of increased lot yield in exchange for increased open space preserved Just to note, the development industry representatives who spoke with Staff identified that to incentivize clustering the City should offer bonus lots. Other incentives such as expedited permit review, waiving permit fees, and other administrative carrots simply are not to as important to the development community as additional lots. All of the development community representatives Staff spoke with identified that a 20% bonus density increase is the most common bonus they encounter and does serve as a meaningful incentive. Accordingly, staff is providing the following incentive options for Council consideration: 1. Establish a floor bonus yield of 10% for any clustered subdivision provided at least 10% of the net buildable area is preserved as open space. In other words, any clustered development would be allowed to increase its calculated lot yield by 10 percent (17 lots would become 18 lots) provided the clustered development provided the 10% open space minimum; or 2. Allow a clustered development to increase its lot yield by 15% (17 lots would become 19 lots) provided the clustered development preserved at least 20% of its net buildable area as open space; or Page 1 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 125 of 134

4 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report 3. Allow a clustered development to increased its lot yield by 20% (17 lots would become 19 lots) provided the clustered development preserved at least 25% of its net buildable area as open space; or 4. Allow a clustered development to increase its lot yield by 25% (17 lots would become 21 lots) provided the clustered development preserved at least 30 percent of its net buildable area as open space. The tables below indicated the number of potential increased lots that may occur with the application of these bonus lot yields. Table 1 Net Buildable land within the revised (November 8) Zone 1 Gross Area (acres) Critical Areas (wetlands / streams) Critical Area Buffers Street / ROW deduction (Assume 10%) Net buildable area Table 2 Potential lot yield increases under the different clustering incentives R 9,600 Zoning Classification Potential Number of Lots Straight net area calculation 85 Real World figures Bonus lots for preserving 10% (10% bonus yield) Bonus lots for preserving 20% (15% Bonus yield) Bonus lots for preserving 25% (20% bonus yield) Bonus lots for preserving 30% (25% bonus yield) Table 3 Land area preserved under each bonus percentage Percentage of Net Area Preserved Acreage of net open space preserved Acres of critical areas and buffers Zone Total Acres preserved Critical Areas plus net preserved Percentage of Zone 1 preserved Existing N/A acres N/A 36% conditions Preserve 10% % Preserve 20% % Preserve 25% % Preserve 30% % Page 2 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 126 of 134

5 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report Staff apologies for all of the numbers but the numbers demonstrate that there is a potential that an increase of 21 lots across the 35 acres of the entire Zone 1 could result in preservation of as much as 52% of the Zone 1 area as forest/lid forest equivalent facilities (open space) with an aggressive bonus lot yield provision. These bonus options and lot yield incentives were applied to the test site to determine their feasibility under the R 9,600 zoning classification. Figure 1 depicts a 10% lot bonus with 10% open space; Figure 2 depicts a 15% lot bonus with 20 % open space, Figure 3 depicts a 20% lot bonus with 25% open space, and Figure 4 depicts a 25% lot bonus with 30% open space. All three scenarios accommodate the minimum open space required for each and the designated bonus lot yield incentives. Figure 1 10% bonus lots applied Meeting the10% net open space requirement Open Space provided 0.44 acres 11% of net 18 lots after a 10% lot bonus (15% of 17 = 1.7 or 1 lot) - 19,300 sf or 11.6 % of net buildable area preserved plus 50,150 sf of critical area and buffer = 69,450 sf or 1.59 acres of total open space Lot circles of 60 feet and lot area of 6,500 to 7,200 sf. Page 3 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 127 of 134

6 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report Figure 2 15% bonus lots applied Meeting the 20% net open space requirement Open Space provided 1.01acres 26% of net 19 lots after a 15% bonus (15% of 17 = 2.55 or 2 lots) 44, 031 sf or 26% of net buildable area preserved plus 50,150 sf of critical area and buffer = 94,181 sf or 2.16 acres of total open space Lot circles of 50 feet and lot area of 5,200 to 6,000 sf. Page 4 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 128 of 134

7 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report Figure 3-20% bonus lots applied Meeting the minimum 25% net open space requirement Open Space provided 1.24 acres 32% of net 20 total lots with a 20% bonus (20% of 17 = 3.34 or 3 lots) - 32% of net buildable area preserved combined with the critical areas and buffer open space that is 104,164 sq. ft. or 2.39 acres of total open space or 45% of the gross site area preserved - Lot circles of 45 feet and lot areas of 4,900 to 5,200 sq. ft. Page 5 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 129 of 134

8 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report Figure 4-25% bonus lots applied Meeting the 30% net open space requirement Open Space provided 1.28acres 33% of net 21 total lots with a 25% bonus (25% of 17 = 4.25 or 4 lots) 56,160 sf or 33% of the net buildable area preserved combined with the critical areas and buffer open space that is 106,310 or 2.44 acres of total open space or 46% of the gross site preserved - Lot circles of 40 feet and lot areas of 4,400 to 5,000 sq. ft. Note: a 40 foot lot circle is understood to be rather narrow for a detached single family residential development. The purpose of depicting this lot circle is to visually show what the conceptual maximum lot circle and area reductions would be at 50% of the underlying zone minimums of 80 feet and 9,600 sq. ft., respectively. Page 6 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 130 of 134

9 ATT 1 Agenda Bill Staff Report Figure 5 - Zoning Classifications Council Directed Page 7 November 15, 2016 Agenda Packet Page 131 of 134

10 The following language contains new and deleted language from BMC Deleted language his shown as red strikethrough and new language is shown as red underline. Areas of blue highlight indicate areas with a code reference which may change in subsequent versions of the regulations. Text in green highlight are changes made since the 10/18/16 Draft One item the reader will observe immediately is a proposal to change the name of the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area or the NCFWCHPA to a shorter term which would be the North Creek Protection Area or NCPA. Note 11/08/16 Parametrix within its Draft GAP Analysis States: We support renaming the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) to North Creek Protection Area (NCPA). This change will reduce confusion and perceived conflicts between BMC and BMC (Critical Areas Regulations). The area presently identified as North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area is not a designated critical area under BMC It is our opinion that renaming the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) to North Creek Protection Area (NCPA) will reduce confusion regarding which areas in the subarea may or may not be regulated as designated critical areas. It is our opinion that this proposed name change will have no material effect on protections for sensitive areas or water quality. For purposes of this draft, the term NCPA is being used. If Council selects another term, subsequent versions of this draft will be revised. It is important to recognize that some lands within the Fitzgerald / 35 th SE Subarea are subject to the NCPA and other lands within the Subarea are not. Chapter FITZGERALD/35TH AVENUE SE SUBAREA REGULATIONS Sections: Purpose R 5,400a zoning at south end of subarea Regulation of uses for protection of groundwater resources R 9,600 zoning in the eastern portion of subarea Preservation of the hydrologic cycle within the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) Wildlife standards within the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) Definitions Purpose. Subarea zoning regulations implement subarea-specific policies in the Imagine Bothell... Comprehensive Plan. The subarea zoning regulations in this chapter apply specifically to land within the Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea. Subarea zoning regulations are in addition to city-wide zoning regulations or, where Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 1

11 more restrictive or if these subarea regulations provide a specific provision, take the place of city-wide zoning regulations R 5,400a zoning at south end of subarea. Development shall incorporate the installation of a minimum 50-foot-wide vegetated buffer adjacent to detached residential areas with a zoning classification of R 40,000 (LID), utilizing fences, walls, berms, existing mature vegetation or Type III landscaping, or other noise-absorbing or sight-obscuring techniques. The exact width and planting materials to be used in the buffer will be determined in conjunction with development plan review. Part of this action includes reducing the length, complexity and duplication of this code language. It is important to note that this chapter often repeats or mirrors other mandatory code requirements which lends to the confusion applicant experience when reading this chapter because they are wondering which regulation applies. An example of this is the introductory paragraph below which identifies the purpose of the groundwater protection provisions, which is appropriate, but then goes on to describe what the critical area regulations, hillside development provisions and surface water manual standards regulate. This type of language is unnecessary and adds to the perceived complexity and confusion of these regulations. The following section is proposed to be retained even though many of the prohibited uses listed below are also prohibited under any of the zoning classifications proposed for this area, and would, therefore not be allowed in any case. However, the Council has indicated its support for groundwater protections, which the following section implements. Accordingly, the following section as modified as outlined below, is proposed to be retained Regulation of uses for protection of groundwater resources. The Palm, Woods and Cole Creek drainage basins within the Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea have been identified as particularly important sources of cool water for North Creek, via groundwater and surface water movement. Cool water promotes the long-term vitality of the fisheries resources found in North Creek. Chapter BMC, Critical Area Regulations, establishes regulations applicable city-wide for the protection of surface water bodies such as wetlands and streams. BMC (C), Development on Hillsides, establishes regulations applicable city-wide for the protection of groundwater movement as it may be affected by hillside development. The Bothell Surface Water Design Manual, Chapter 4 of the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications, establishes regulations applicable citywide for the control and discharge of surface water. This chapter augments and amends other development codes by establishing regulations for specific uses which pose potential risk of discharge into groundwater inconsistent with the protection of groundwater resources specifically within the Palm, Woods, Cole and North Creek drainage basins. A. Uses or Activities with Special Requirements. 1. Vehicle Repair and Servicing. a. Vehicle repair and servicing must be conducted over impermeable pads and within a covered structure capable of withstanding normally expected weather conditions. Chemicals used in the process of vehicle repair and servicing must be stored in a manner that protects them from weather and provides containment should leaks occur. b. No dry wells shall be allowed in the subarea on sites used for vehicle repair and servicing. Dry wells existing on the site prior to facility establishment must be abandoned using techniques approved by the State Department of Ecology prior to commencement of the proposed activity. 2. Aboveground Tanks. All new aboveground storage facilities proposed for use in the storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and constructed so as to: Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 2

12 a. Not allow the release of a hazardous substance to the ground, groundwaters, or surface waters; and b. Have a primary containment area enclosing or underlying the tank or part thereof. 3. Underground Tanks. All new underground storage facilities proposed for use in the storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and constructed so as to: a. Prevent releases due to corrosion or structural failure for the operational life of the tank; b. Be protected against corrosion, constructed of noncorrosive material, steel clad with a noncorrosive material, or designed to include a secondary containment system to prevent the release or threatened release of any stored substances; and c. Use material in the construction or lining of the tank that is compatible with the substance to be stored. An item that is proposed for removal is the regulations regarding residential use of pesticides and nutrients. The City simply does not have the resources, expertise or regulatory authority to monitory or enforce this provision. This type of regulation is better addressed through the City s general pollution control regulations of BMC Chapter which contains a comprehensive list of prohibited discharges into surface waters. 4. Residential Use of Pesticides and Nutrients. Application of household pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers shall not exceed times and rates specified on the packaging. Parametrix also identified a potential inconsistency between the language below and the new 2016 Bothell Surface Water Manual. The new SWM will contain provisions related to the discharge of captured surface waters into the ground water table. The new Manual will require special protocols that must be implemented regarding groundwater infiltration proposals (injections). Further, under both the current and proposed zoning and permitted use tables of BMC 12.06, injection facilities are not a permitted use within the NCPA. Parametrix believes this issue is addressed by the process identified within C Finally, many LID practices, in particular bio-infiltration and rain gardens, rely upon water infiltration into the soil and groundwater. To avoid a potential conflict between a desire to infiltrate groundwater and this section which could be interpreted in a manner that prohibits such infiltration, this section is proposed to be removed meaning the provisions of the new 2016 SWM would apply. 5. Use of Reclaimed Water for Surface Percolation or Direct Recharge. Water reuse projects for reclaimed water must be in accordance with the adopted water or sewer comprehensive plans that have been approved by the State Departments of Ecology and Health. a. Use of reclaimed water for surface percolation must meet the groundwater recharge criteria given in RCW (10) and (1). The State Department of Ecology may establish additional discharge limits in accordance with RCW (2). b. Direct injection must be in accordance with the standards developed by authority of RCW Parametrix identified a concern with the existing section below and suggests revisions. As currently written, the language appears to prohibit most impervious surfaces - which should not be the intent. Perhaps the original intent was to prohibit direct injection from pollution generating surfaces. However, Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 3

13 such surfaces are not permitted under the current and proposed zoning classifications (all residential) or would be pollution generating surfaces which are not allowed under the new 2016 Bothell SWM. The protections inherent in the new 2016 Bothell SWM, Title 18 of the BMC, and the type of permitted uses allowed by the current and potential zoning classifications all indicate that pollution generating surfaces would not be located within the NCPA or Zone 1 area. The Parametrix Recommendation is to remove this language. 6. Uses identified by Chapter 4 of the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual as pollutiongenerating impervious or pervious surfaces shall be subject to the water quality treatment and containment provisions of the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. The following language is duplicative in nature but does put applicants on notice that construction activities are subject to state and federal regulations for the protection of groundwater. B. State and Federal Regulations. All activities, uses, and construction activities shall be in accordance with applicable state and federal regulations for groundwater protection. C. Site and Building Design Review Criteria. 1. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the infiltration and recharging of the groundwater table. 2. The proposed activity must comply with the water source protection requirements and recommendations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Health, Washington State Department of Ecology, and the King and Snohomish County health districts. Consistent with Council direction from its July 19, 2016 public hearing, the following new section would separate the Zone 1 or hillside areas located east of 39 th Avenue SE from the NCPA (formerly the NCFWCHPA). The following quote is from Parametrix experts who have reviewed and provided input on this draft. It is the opinion of Parametrix hydrogeologist, biologists and engineers that these combined provisions would result in protections for surface and groundwater within the Subarea that are commensurate with the currently codified regulations (Ordinance 1988) in regards to conserving and protecting water quality within North Creek within the NCPA. In light of: The pending adoption of a new 2016 Bothell Surface Water Design Manual (SWM) which will be equivalent to the 2012 Ecology SWM as amended (2014); The new information about area-specific soil and surface water developed after the completion of the 2006 Parametrix Study ; The requirement to use forest equivalent LID techniques; The application of the City s critical areas regulations; and The groundwater protection language which has been modified or retained The Parametrix opinion is subject to the following assumptions: The City will complete a BAS gap analysis of the proposed Plan and Code amendments once Council provides final direction (expected at the November 1, 2016 public hearing); The City will consider potential alterations to address any identified BAS gaps at its December 13, 2016 public hearing; and The final proposed regulations are materially consistent with this First Draft dated 10/18/2016. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 4

14 These combined provisions justify the proposed adjustments of the NCPA within the subarea, which includes the provision that the hillside Zone 1 area would be removed from the NCPA. The section immediately following this note box contains draft clustering regulations as directed by the Council at its July 19, hearing and discussed at the September 18, Study Session. The language below would implement a clustering mechanism to achieve a number of objectives identified by the Council with regards to the preservation of forests, mature vegetation and other forms of open space. These clustering provisions include: Reduced lot areas and lot circle dimensions equivalent up to a maximum of 50% of the underlying zoning classification minimum lot area; OR Establish a minimum lot area of, say 4,000 sq. ft. Allow an increase in the building coverage percentage to prevent an unintended disincentive to clustering; Amend the side yard setback requirement by allowing the 5 foot side yard setback to apply to both side yards (i.e. do not require that both side yards add up to 15 feet in total; Preserve 15 to 30 percent of the net buildable area of the site (the actual figure is to be determined by the City Council); A hierarchical list of preferred open space (this is based on Council direction of September 18, 2016; Include the special street standards of the NCPA as a mechanism to reduce hard surface cover; and Establish special surface water standards to use forest equivalent LID. Note 11/15/16 Parametrix identifies within its draft GAP Analysis: A small portion of the Zone 1 area along the northern border of the subarea is mapped in the City s 2015 Stormwater Master Plan update as located within the Cole Creek subbasin. Available soil maps are not precise in this area, but some areas west of 39th Avenue SE may not be included in the mapped Qvt (glacial till) unit. We recommend that the City revise the text of this section and other descriptions related to the re-designation of the NCPA to clearly specify that the only those areas located in the Spring Creek subbasin, which do not contribute surface flows Cole Creek, and that area underlain by Qvt (glacial till) soil types are outside the NCPA. If future site specific analysis shows that a site is, in fact, within the Cole Creek subbasin and/or may supports base flow in Cole Creek, these areas should not be excluded from the NCPA. Accordingly, staff is proposing a caveat provision which specifies that, through the special studies required to be submitted for this area, if the property is actually within the Cole/Woods Creek drainage basin (a small possibility) the NCPA provisions shall be applied R 9,600 zoning in the eastern portion of the Subarea Lands located east of 39 th Avenue SE that are within the Spring Creek Drainage basin and are located outside the Palm and Cole/Woods Creek drainage basins have been removed from the NCPA and zoned R 9,600. However, these lands have an important role in maintaining a healthy hydrologic regime for North Creek and shall be subject to the following special regulations. Provided, however, that if site specific analysis as required within (C) identify that any portion of this area is within the Cole/Woods Creek or Palm Creek drainage basins or supports base flow to the Cole / Woods Creek basin, the special provisions of the NCPA as promulgated within BMC and shall be applied. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 5

15 The draft proposes to use the Planned Unit Development process of BMC as the review process to implement a clustering mechanism for the Fitzgerald / 35 th SE Subarea. A. Special clustering provisions allowed under the Planned Unit Development process of Chapter BMC. Within the Fitzgerald / 35 th SE Subarea, on lands with an R 9,600 zoning classification, an applicant may request the following special modifications under the Planned Unit Development process of Chapter BMC. Specifically, Section (A) (B) and (C) is modified as follows: 1. Special lot yield calculation for properties within the Fitzgerald/35 th SE Subarea with a zoning classification of R 9,600: a. The net buildable area of the development site shall be calculated pursuant to BMC (B)(3) wherein land area in roads and other rights-of-way, critical areas, critical area buffers, or land dedicated to the city for other purposes, shall be deducted from the gross site area, unless otherwise stated in the approved planned unit development, in accordance with Chapter BMC; The paragraph below would implement a straight forward calculation method based upon BMC (B)(3). How this would work would be: A gross site area of 5 acres (217,800 sq. ft.) has 1.5 acres (65,340 sq. ft.) of critical areas and critical area buffers and 0.50 acres (21,780 sq. ft.) of street right-of-way resulting in a net buildable area of 3.0 acres (130,680 sq. ft.). The net buildable area (130,680 sq. ft.) is then divided by the minimum lot area of the underlying zoning classification, say R 9,600 which results in a maximum lot yield of 13 lots. b. To determine the maximum permitted number of lots upon the subject property, the net buildable area shall be divided by the underlying zoning classification s minimum lot area thereby deriving the allowed maximum number of lots. Portions of the net buildable area placed into a dedicated open space tract pursuant to (A)(3) may be credited toward the lot yield calculation. The objective of the clustering mechanism is to preserve existing vegetation. There is a direct relationship between the size of the lot and the amount of open space preserved and there are three items to consider: Lot size and circle. The proposal is to allow up to a 50% reduction in lot area and lot circle similar to that which has already been established within Ordinance 1988 (Original LID Overlay provisions). Building Coverage. Clustering would reduce lot sizes in exchange for open space. However, because building coverage and hard surface coverage is calculated based upon a percentage of the lot size a smaller lot results in a smaller building footprint. For example, the building (lot) coverage for a 9,600 sf lot at 35% allows a building footprint of 3,360 sf. A lot of, say, 6,000 sf at 35% allows a building footprint of 2,100 sf or 1,260 sf less building cover. Hard Surface Coverage. Recent Code amendments for LID Integration limit hard surface cover in the R 9,600 zone to 45% or 4,320 sf. A lot of 6,000 sf at a 45% hard surface cover results in a hard surface cover of 2,700 sf or 1,620 sf less hard surface cover for patios, driveways, etc. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 6

16 These items may prove to be a potential disincentive to builders who may like the idea of clustering but become concerned in that it reduces the allowed size of the buildings. Modification of the building and hard surface cover for individual lots is appropriate. 11/15/16 Consistent with Council Direction from the October 18 public hearing, the following section has been revised to allow a 45% building coverage and 55% hard surface cover for clustered lots. 11/15/16 Parametrix identified it was appropriate to ensure that the overall building coverage and hard surface coverage should not be greater than what would occur with no clustering. Accordingly, the language now includes a provision to cap the total building and hard surface coverage at the underlying zoning classification s building and hard surface coverage limitations as applied to the net buildable area. 2. Lot area, lot circles, side yard setbacks, building coverage and hard surface coverage modifications The minimum lot area, lot circles, side yard setbacks and building coverage provisions of Section (A) BMC may be modified as follows: a. Lot area. The minimum lot area per single-family lot may be reduced by as much as 50 percent of the underlying zoning minimum lot area; b. Lot circle. The minimum lot circle for each single family lot may be reduced by as much as 50 percent of the underlying zoning minimum lot circle; c. Side yard setbacks. Side yard setbacks may be modified such that the minimum side yard setback shall be 5 feet for both side yards meaning that both side yard setbacks may add up to 10 feet instead of the 15 feet required under BMC (A); d. Building Coverage. The maximum building coverage percentage for each single family lot may be increased up to 45 percent of the lot area, provided, however that the total building coverage allowed on the total development site shall be no greater than 35 percent of the net buildable area; and e. Hard Surface Cover. The maximum hard surface cover per single family residential lot may be increased up to 55 percent of the lot area provided, however that the total hard surface cover allowed on the total development site shall be no greater than 45 percent of the net building area. 3. Open space / forest preservation a. Utilizing the PUD process of Chapter BMC, developments may implement the special clustering provisions of this Chapter provided the development reserves a portion of the site as dedicated, permanent open space not available for future development consistent with the following criteria: The quantity of land to preserve should be based upon the net buildable area of a site because preservation of the net buildable area (lands that would ordinarily be developed) is where the most bang for the buck will occur regarding the preservation of open space. Any percentage selected would be the minimum acceptable. Type of preserved land. The type of land to be preserved utilizes a hierarchical preference list that favors forest lands. The applicant would complete the special study / site assessment which would then guide the development design and City review. Ultimately, the City s independent Hearing Examiner would determine whether the hierarchical list has been complied with. 11/15/16 Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 7

17 Added introductory language from the mitigation sequencing provisions of as a means of demonstrating that the type of landscape features desired to be preserved are indeed preserved. Adjusted the hierarchical preference list consistent with the preliminary Parametrix BAS Gap analysis which suggests that forest equivalent LID facilities should be just beneath preserving existing intact forest areas in importance of preservation. Note 11/15/16 The clustering provision below has been substantially re-configured to implement an incentive- based approach to preserving forest lands and accommodate the type of forest equivalent LID facilities that Parametrix is recommending. This mechanism is explained in the Staff Report prepared for the November 15, 2016 Public Hearing.. a. Amount of land to be preserved: i. A minimum of 10 percent of the net buildable area of the site shall be placed within a dedicated forest or forest equivalent surface water facility tract to be preserved in perpetuity consistent with the special provisions of Section (D)(3)(e); or ii. The City may approve an increase in the number of lots beyond the number allowed by the special calculated lot yield pursuant to (A)(1) provided additional land is dedicated as a forest or forest equivalent surface water facility tract consistent with the following: 1. Preserving at least 20 percent of the net buildable area consistent with this chapter, an increase of 15 percent of the calculated lot yield; or 2. Preserving at least 25 percent of the net buildable area consistent with this chapter, an increase of 20 percent of the calculated lot yield; or 1.3. Preserving at least 30 percent of the net buildable area consistent with this chapter, an increase of 25 percent of the calculated lot yield. Note 11/15/16 At the 11/8/16 hearing, public testimony suggested the language should include the term or between each hierarchical preferred element as a means of ensuring that applicants follow the preference list. However, the language selected needs to be crafted with care and using the term or indicates that either hierarchical choice would be acceptable. For example, You may preserve intact forest or restored forest. The use of the term or indicates that either intact forest or restored forest has an equal preference. In this situation it is better to clarify that the list is hierarchical and that the City will follow that list as preferences. b. Type of land to be preserved The type of open space shall be based upon the following hierarchical preference. Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been made to design the development in a manner that preserves the types of lands listed herein consistent with these hierarchical preferences: i. Intact forest areas as defined herein; ii. Lands containing forest equivalent surface water facilities such as Bioinfiltration facilities, or intact forest areas accepting dispersed surface water iii. Rehabilitated or restored forest areas as defined herein; and iv. Lands adjacent to critical area buffers. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 8

18 The following standards would be applied uniformly to the Zone 1 lands whether they implement a clustering PUD or not. B. Special Street Standards To accommodate clustering and the preservation of forest lands and other open space, the public works director, in consultation with the Fire Marshal, is authorized to modify the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications (Bothell Standards) as adopted in BMC and as described within (C)(2). Note 11/15/16 Parametrix requested additional clarity regarding the preferred type of LID facilities to be used within Zone 1. C. Supplemental requirements regarding the use of specific types of Low Impact Storm Drainage facilities. Within lands zoned R 9,600 within the Fitzgerald / 35 th SE Subarea, Public Works Director shall specify the following forest equivalent stormwater facilities in order of preference: 1. Bioretention 2. Dispersion into intact forest areas For situations where Bioretention or dispersion are determined to be unfeasible due to site conditions allowable stormwater facilities may be, in order of preference 3. Infiltration 4. Other approved LID measures, provided the applicant demonstrates that such measures meet the forest equivalency performance standard stated in the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. 5. A combination of infiltration and/or other approved LID measures to reduce the requirement for stormwater detention facilities such that the combined system meets the forest equivalency performance standard stated in the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual; 6. Forest equivalent stormwater detention. These special stormwater treatment requirements shall be applied to the entire subject property or site and shall not be limited to the developable area, or actually developed area of the subject site. D. Developments implementing the clustering provisions of this Chapter shall provide the supplemental submittal documents identified within (C). : The need for the exception for arterials and collectors should be removed to be consistent with the BAS review performed for this area Preservation of the hydrologic cycle within the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA). The North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) is assigned to properties within the Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea as a special regulation to protect the known critical fish and wildlife habitat present in this subarea through special low impact development (LID) Overlay and other regulations. The Palm, Woods and Cole Creek drainage basins within the Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea have been identified as particularly important sources of cool water for North Creek, via groundwater and surface water movement. Cool water promotes the long-term vitality of the fisheries resources found in North Creek. Chapter BMC, Critical Area Regulations, establishes regulations applicable city-wide for the protection of surface water bodies such as wetlands and streams. BMC Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 9

19 (C), Development on Hillsides, establishes regulations applicable city-wide for the protection of groundwater movement as it may be affected by hillside development. BMC , Building and impervious surface coverage, and BMC , Residential area and dimensions, and BMC , Commercial and industrial dimensions, establish standards for maximum impervious surface. This chapter augments and amends other development codes by establishing regulations for the maintenance and restoration of the hydrologic cycle, particularly as it affects protection of surface and groundwater resources specifically within the Palm, Woods, Cole and North Creek drainage basins. This land use section shall be used in conjunction with LID Supplement to the latest version of the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual as contained within the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications (Bothell Standards). A. Intent and Application. These standards are applied in addition to zoning and other code regulations. In the event of a conflict with another code regulation, the provision which provides the greater protection to the resource shall be applied. Authority is provided for the community development director and public works director to allow modification of the specific design and construction standards and regulations identified in this chapter to accommodate these provisions of low impact development as provided in this chapter. B. ExceptionsExemptions. The special provisions of the NCPA shall not be applied to the following activities or developments, provided, however, that all activities and developments shall fully comply with the City s critical areas regulations of Chapter BMC, the Bothell Design and Construction Standards, including the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual, the tree retention requirements of Chapter BMC and all other applicable city-wide regulations: 1. Arterials and collector streets dedicated to the City, including the area of any arterial right-of-way dedicated to the city as part of a private residential or commercial project; 2.1. Existing development on and lots of record in existence on or before March 15, 2008, Note 10/1816 The provisions below propose to implement the opt-out or Pathway 1 exception to the NCPA where certain types of minor development actions such as one single family residence or short subdivisions (Short plats) where the lots are at least 40,000 sq. ft. or greater. All of these applications would still be fully subject to the groundwater protection provisions of and all City-wide regulations including the critical areas regulations of BMC and the LID standards of the new Bothell Surface Water Manual (SWM). Note 11/08/16 A couple of clarifications are necessary to fill-in potential gaps identified by Parametrix in its BAS GAP analysis. 2. Construction of one single family residence on any lot of record legally established on or before March 15, 2008; 3. Short Subdivisions within lands zoned R 9,600 (LID) and R 40,000 (LID) proposing a lot area of 40,000 sq. ft. or greater may be exempt from the special provisions of this section ( ) provided the short subdivision: a. Creates no more than 4 lots; b. Complies with the area, dimensional, setback, building coverage, hard surface coverage, building height and other standards of the City s R 40,000 zoning classification as stipulated within BMC 12.14; and c. Complies with all other City-wide regulations including the Critical Areas Regulations, the tree retention requirements of BMC 12.18, other applicable provisions of the zoning code, the latest edition of the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual and other City-wide standards; and d. The maximum lot area provisions of BMC (B)(2)(c) shall not apply to such short subdivisions, however the provisions of (B)(2)(c) subsections (1) through (4) shall apply. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 10

20 The special submittal requirements are proposed to be placed within one location to assist applicants in understanding the process and making the required submittal information easier to locate. This is similar information as currently required under the Ordinance 1988 version it has been re-located here and includes some clarity and consistency amendments. Note 11/15/16 Parametrix concurs. CB. Special Submittal requirements In addition to submittals required by applicable City-wide regulations, applications for subdivisions, building permits, grading permits within the NCPA shall submit the following special studies, information, and evaluations: 1. A Special Site Study which describes the natural processes existing on and around the site. The applicant may include this information on site maps, site plans, or reports prepared to meet other submittal requirements. Information shall include: a. Topography and natural runoff patterns; b. Soil type and infiltration potential; c. Vegetation cover, including type, density and ability to intercept, retain and retard surface water movement; d. Streams and overland water flow patterns; and e. Wetlands and other critical areas. 2. Special Fish and Wildlife Habitat Study. A special study which evaluates project impacts on any critical fish and wildlife habitat existing on and in the vicinity of the subject property shall be submitted as part of the application. The special study shall meet the following criteria: a. The report shall be prepared in conformance with the general critical areas report requirements of Chapter BMC and in addition shall address the existing and potential wildlife use of required forest cover. b. Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment shall be included as part of the special study and shall include: i. The location of any intact forest areas and/or forest cover; ii. iii. iv. Detailed description of forest areas, forest cover, and other vegetation cover types; Discussion of existing development including buildings, roads, lawn and maintained landscaping including site percentages for total impervious area and EIA, if different. The special study may reference a drainage report or other submittal that contains this information Identification of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with habitat on or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potential project impacts to the use of the site by the species; v. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management recommendations, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat management recommendations, that have been developed for species or habitats located on or adjacent to the project area; vi. vii. A detailed discussion of the direct potential impacts on habitat by the project, including potential impacts to water quality; A discussion of specific measures and design features proposed by the applicant to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts to habitat, including buffers wider than those required in Chapter BMC, if found to be warranted; Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 11

21 viii. A discussion of the specific storm water facilities proposed by the applicant to provide for protection of surface water and groundwater in the vicinity of the development; and ix. A discussion of management practices that will protect habitat after the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance. 3. Additional Information. The community development director may also require the following: a. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional of the applicant s analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, which evaluation may include any recommendations for alternative mitigating measures or programs; and b. Consultation with other agencies such as the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or Washington State Department of Ecology or other appropriate agencies as deemed appropriate. D. Site and Building Design Regulations. 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed activity will not adversely affect the infiltration and recharging of the groundwater table in a manner that will result in decreases in groundwater interflow to surface water. b. The proposed activity must comply with the water source protection requirements and recommendations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Washington State Department of Health, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the King and Snohomish County health districts. c. Site design and storm water facilities shall be designed in accordance with these low impact development regulations as provided herein, the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards, and the 2016 Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. The current impervious surface coverage within the Cole/Woods Creek drainage basin has been calculated at approximately 20% (See Parametrix Reports dated May 20, 2016). Accordingly, it is appropriate to establish a maximum effective impervious surface cover of 20%. This section includes a requirement to construct forest equivalent stormwater facilities to the maximum extent feasible. The existing Ord 1988 language that gives contrary direction to the use of non-forest equivalent LID facilities is proposed to be updated to reflect current LID BMPs. Note 11/08/16 Consistent with the clarification above, specific types of forest equivalent surface water facilities are listed below. Further, Parametrix has identified that the goal of the EIA provisions below should be to have a no net increase in undetained and untreated impervious surface cover. Accordingly, Parametrix has requested that the goal of the EIA provisions be stated within this section to provide context and direction as the Code is implemented. 2. Effective Impervious Surface Coverage. Within the NCPA, the goal is to have no net increase in undetained and untreated Effective Impervious Area (EIA) through the application of these requirements and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. a. Effective impervious area (EIA) shall not exceed 20 percent for lands zoned R 9,6005,400a (LID) and R 9,600 (LID) and 15 percent for lands zoned R 40,000 (LID). EIA shall be based upon the gross area of the total site. b. Within the NCPA, the Director of Public Works shall specify the following forest equivalent stormwater facilities in order of preference: i. Bioretention Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 12

22 ii. Dispersion into intact forest areas For situations where Bioretention or dispersion are determined to be unfeasible due to site conditions allowable stormwater facilities may be, in order of preference i. Infiltration ii. Other approved LID measures, provided the applicant demonstrates that such meaures meet the forest equivalency performance standard stated in the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. iii. A combination of infiltration and/or other approved LID measures to reduce the requirement for stormwater detention facilities such that the combined system meets the forest equivalency performance standard stated in the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual; iv. Forest equivalent stormwater detention. These special stormwater treatment requirements shall be applied to the entire subject property or site and shall not be limited to the developable area, or actually developed area of the subject site. Measures to achieve this effective impervious surface standard shall include, but are not limited to, the following; provided, that a combination of measures may be used on any site to best accomplish this requirement: (1) Minimization of impervious area from roadways and other sources through site layout; (2) Employment of pervious surfaces on sidewalks, trails and nontraveled portions of roads; (3) Dispersion of surface water within preserved forest area through gravity systems; (4) Infiltration of runoff through bioretention facilities adjacent to impervious surfaces consisting of swales with amended soils, or similar facilities; (5) Infiltration of runoff from roof areas including dispersion to soil amended lawn areas, downspout infiltration or bioretention facilities; (6) Employment of vegetated roofs; (7) Engineered infiltration systems other than bioretention. Note 11/08/16 Parametrix has raised concerns regarding the EIA transference provisions. Parametrix identifies there may be a possibility, under the transference provision, that EIA could exceed the maximum allowed 20% EIA level with transference. Another concern identified by Parametrix is that not all EIA is created equal (some impervious surfaces derive from clean surfaces such as roofs and footing drains areas and some come from dirty surfaces such as driveways and parking areas) and there is no evaluative comparison language within the regulations. Finally, Parametrix states the EIA transference regulation is a complex provision that does not have a clear analogous in existing regulatory guidelines or adopted code in other jurisdictions. As a result, this makes it difficult to point to the transference provisions and say this is a demonstrated measure that will effectively manage EIA in the NCPA. As crafted, staff believes the transference regulations are adequately provisioned to prevent an excess of EIA within the overall sub basin because the transference is based upon a square footage trade where the EIA increases on one property but is decreased on another. In other words, it would only be potential impervious area that would be allowed to be transferred. However, given the potential that the EIA and forest cover transference provisions may result in reduced functions within the NCPA the transference language is proposed to be removed. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 13

23 b. Transfer of Credit for Effective Impervious Area. Any property within the Fitzgerald Subarea with NCFWCHPA LID zoning may transfer credits for effective impervious surface to other sites within the Fitzgerald Subarea with NCFWCHPA LID zoning subject to the following provisions. All EIA transfers, allocations, limitations, provisions and stipulations shall be identified within a covenant document which is reviewed and approved by the community development director. The covenant document shall be a permanent covenant running with the land in perpetuity filed and recorded with the Snohomish County auditor: (1) EIA credits may be transferred from undeveloped sending properties and shall be in the form of square feet of EIA allocation, provided the following are met: (A) The EIA allocation for the sending property as a whole shall be calculated and the amount to be retained for the sending property and the amount to be transferred to the receiving property shall be clearly described within the covenant document; (B) The future development limitations proposed for the sending property transferring the credits shall be described including the specific number of units and total impervious surface needed to support any future development. The feasibility of meeting EIA standards shall be demonstrated for the nontransferred allocation, unless all development potential and all forest cover allocation are also transferred in the covenant document; (C) At least 3,000 square feet of EIA credit shall be retained for every property or sending site proposing to transfer EIA credits unless the property owner voluntarily waives all development potential and designates the entire site as nonbuildable. (2) EIA credits may be transferred from sending properties containing existing development in the form of square feet of EIA allocation, provided the following are met: (A) (B) (C) The EIA allocation of the sending property as a whole shall be calculated, and the amount utilized by existing development, the amount to be retained for future development, and the amount to be transferred to the receiving property shall be clearly described. If existing development exceeds allocated EIA, specific facilities to achieve a specific proposed level of EIA shall be constructed and successfully operated for three years prior to approval of any transfer to demonstrate compliance with the EIA levels proposed; The future development limitations proposed for the sending property including the specific number of future units shall be described, total impervious surface shall be designated, and feasibility of meeting EIA standards shall be demonstrated with the nontransferred allocation within the covenant document; At least 3,000 square feet of EIA credit shall be retained for every property or sending site proposing to transfer EIA credits unless the property owner voluntarily waives all development potential and designates the entire site as nonbuildable. (43) EIA credits may be transferred only from a property that meets all criteria of forest cover, described in subsection (B)(3) of this section, or includes provisions for forest rehabilitation or reestablishment. (4) Detention and treatment must be provided for each site in accordance with the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual; detention and treatment facilities must be sized for all of the EIA on a site. (5) A covenant document shall be filed and recorded with the Snohomish County auditor on the sending property indicating that the credits have been transferred and may Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 14

24 not be used in the future to support development of additional areas of impervious surface. The Bothell Design and Construction Standards and BMC Title 18 Utilities contain sufficient requirements to ensure that properties maintain, in good order, surface water runoff facilities, including ownership, maintenance, and responsibilities. A reference to Title 18 is more efficient and reduced duplication and uncertainty. dc. ed. A maintenance/management plan addressing the proposed surface water facilities consistent with the Bothell Standards and BMC Title 18 shall accompany all proposals. for facilities to meet the effective impervious surfaces standards addressing: (1) Ownership of facilities, which may include: (A) Private ownership and management of facilities on individual lots or parcels that do not serve public roads or other public facilities and are of a nature that maintenance can most effectively be provided by a homeowner or association. A management manual or guidelines may be required to be prepared by the applicant and shall be filed with the city in order to assure that it is available to the future landowner. Any such facilities shall be identified by a recorded easement or plat restriction that provides: (1) The location and function of the facility; (2) A list of required management activities, or reference to a management manual that may be recorded separately and referenced; (3) The right of the city to enforce the terms of the restriction, including the right to require alteration of the facility if it does not perform according to the approved specifications. (B) Dedication of the facility within a separate tract or within an easement containing the facility to the city for operation and maintenance. This will generally be employed when the facility serves public roads or other public facilities and is of a nature that maintenance can most effectively be provided by the city. (2) A management plan for the facility shall include all periodic maintenance required for function according to the approved performance specifications and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. (3) The city shall require a performance security in the form of a surety bond, performance bond, assignment of savings account, or an irrevocable letter of credit to assure installation, maintenance and other performance standards in accordance with the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications (Bothell Standards). Public development proposals shall be relieved from having to comply with the bonding requirements of this section if public funds have previously been committed for mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration. Application of the standards for effective impervious area (EIA) shall be limited by the following: (i1) The effective impervious area standard shall not apply to arterials and collector streets, including the area of any arterial right-of-way dedicated to the city as part of a private residential or commercial project; provided, that the maximum feasible reduction of surface water runoff is achieved in project design in accordance with the 2016 Bothell Surface Water Manual, as amendedcriteria in subsection (B)(2)(a) of this section. (ii2) The effective impervious surface area standard shall not apply to eexisting development, lots of record in existence that exists on or before March 15, 2008, and other development activities as identified in Section (B).shall be Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 15

25 governed by the provision for nonconforming uses in Chapter BMC except for the following: (A) A one-time expansion of impervious surface of up to 750 square feet. Expansions of more than 750 square feet shall include provision for the maximum feasible reduction of surface water runoff in accordance with the criteria in subsection (B)(2)(a) of this section. (B) Any existing lot of record which exists on or before March 15, 2008, may be developed with one single-family residence with up to 3,000 square feet or less of total impervious surface without meeting the standard for maximum effective impervious area; provided, that development shall include provision for the maximum feasible reduction of surface water runoff in accordance with the criteria in subsection (B)(2)(a) of this section. Parametrix has requested the placement of a note here to identify that forest cover in the context of this section is not a BAS issue except: 1. In relation to the preservation, restoration, or creation of forest equivalent units for stormwater and 2. Protecting the function of critical areas and critical area buffers. In terms of BAS/LID forest equivalent LID is the same as retaining actual forest areas, although retaining intact forest has the highest performance and lowest risk of all forest equivalent stormwater BMPs. The forest cover provisions have been revised to implement a number of objectives and to clarify the requirements. First, lands within the NCPA will continue to require that 60% of the site be in a forested condition. This is the current standard of Ordinance 1988 (2008). Second, the type of forest areas to be preserved has been revised to be simpler and includes: 1. Preserve existing, intact forests; 2. Rehabilitate existing treed or partially forested areas by augmenting the area with trees and understory vegetation; 3. Restore forests on former forest lands (as determined through aerial photography).; and 4. Lands containing Forest equivalent LID facilities. Third, insert language clarifying that 100% of all forest areas (and all existing vegetation) located within critical areas and buffers must be preserved. Fourth, if a forest rehabilitation or forest restoration program is proposed, there is a requirement to submit a performance bond equal to 120% of the cost of the rehabilitation or restoration and there is an added requirement for the preparation of a special contingency plan. Fifth, an applicant has the ability to transfer forest cover from a sending site if none of the above mechanisms work for their particular situation. Finally, it is important to include a provision that specifically identifies that forest retention areas may also be applied/used as part of a LID stormwater forest equivalent treatment area. Consistent with the underpinnings of modern LID stormwater management, forest equivalent stormwater treatment is measured the same as a forest. Though it may be the least palatable option, from a BAS standpoint the City should allow for this in this section. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 16

26 Note 11/08/16 Parametrix offered the following clarification within its BAS Gap Analysis: The allowance for forest equivalent LID to be credited as forest was included at our (Parametrix) recommendation to facilitate the implementation forest equivalent LID that would have a high potential to function as a forest in terms of protecting the hydrologic cycle and other habitat benefits consistent with forest rehabilitation or forest restoration. We recommend that the City consider specifying that only LID stormwater facilities planted with predominantly woody vegetation and that are part of a bioretention and/or dispersion system qualify as meeting forest cover requirements. It was not our intent that other stormwater management facilities, which may technically meet the forest equivalent flow control standard but would do not provide other functions, be permitted to be credited toward the forest cover requirement. 3. Forest Cover Requirements. a. Within lands zoned R 9,600 (LID) and R 40,000 (LID), an area equal to 60% of the gross site area shall be preserved as permanent forest cover. Areas allowed to be credited as forest cover include: i. Those portions of the site that contain intact forest lands as defined within this chapter; or ii. Intact forest areas within critical areas and critical area buffers as defined by Chapter BMC, provided however, that lands within a critical area or a critical area buffer shall retain 100 percent of any intact forest and vegetation; or iii. Forest rehabilitation or forest restoration lands subject to the following: (A) Forest rehabilitation is preferred over forest restoration. Forest rehabilitation occurs on lands which contain existing stands of mature (50 or more years old) trees with or without a middle layer of plants (understory plants), where soil types are capable of infiltration or are suitable for dispersion of project surface water through gravity systems, and shall be consistent with the following: (1) A forest rehabilitation or restoration plan prepared by a qualified expert in forestry, forest rehabilitation or restoration, landscape architecture or another field familiar with forest rehabilitation within which the expert shall make specific recommendations regarding the type of plant materials, the number of plants to be installed, any soil amendments that are needed to rehabilitate the forest, a maintenance and management plan consistent with (B)(3)(e) and a contingency plan to be implemented should the forest rehabilitation not meet its objectives; (2) The forest rehabilitation plan shall be fully implemented or bonded prior to the issuance of any final occupancy permits for the subject property; or (B) Forest restoration which occurs on lands containing immature trees (less than 50 years old) with or without a middle layer of plants (understory plants) where historic aerial photos show the presence of forested conditions, where soil types are capable of infiltration or are suitable for dispersion of project surface water through gravity systems, and shall be consistent with the following: (1) A forest restoration plan prepared by a qualified expert in forestry, forest rehabilitation or restoration, landscape architecture or another field familiar with forest restoration within which the expert shall make specific recommendations regarding the type of plant materials, the number of plants to be installed, any soil amendments that are needed to restore the forest, a maintenance and management plan consistent with (B)(3)(e) and shall include a contingency plan which will be Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 17

27 (C) implemented should the forest rehabilitation not meet the performance objective of the restoration plan; and (2) The forest restoration plan shall be fully implemented or bonded prior to the issuance of any final occupancy permits for the subject property. Lands used for forest equivalent low impact development stormwater facilities that have a high potential for functioning as a forest in terms of protecting the hydrological cycle and other habitat benefits consistent with forest rehabilitation or restoration including planting with predominantly woody vegetation and that the LID facility is part of a bio-retention and/or dispersion system as outlined within the Bothell Surface Water Manual. Forest cover on site shall not be less than 50 percent for lands zoned R 5,400a (LID) and 60 percent for lands zoned R 9,600 (LID) and R 40,000 (LID). Forest cover shall be based upon the gross area of the total site and may include critical areas and critical area buffers as defined by Chapter BMC. b. Preservation or restoration of forested cover shall meet the following criteria in order of priority: (1) Preservation or restoration of forest areas within critical areas or their buffers or adjacent to those buffers required for critical areas pursuant to Chapter BMC; (2) Preservation of existing forested areas with a relative tree density of 20 or more on soil types with the highest potential for infiltration of project surface water through gravity systems; (3) Preservation and restoration of existing areas with a relative tree density between 10 and 20 on soil types with the highest potential for infiltration and providing the potential for dispersion of project surface water through gravity systems; (4) Restoration of existing areas with a relative tree density of less than 10, or nonforested areas on soil types with the highest potential for infiltration and providing the potential for dispersion of project surface water through gravity systems; (5) Preservation of existing forested areas with a relative tree density of 20 or more not meeting the criteria above; (6) Preservation and restoration of existing areas with a relative tree density of less than 20, or non-forested areas not meeting the criteria above. b. A bond equal to 120 % of the cost of installing the forest rehabilitation or restoration plan shall be submitted to the City pursuant to BMC if the applicant proposes to request occupancy of the development prior to completion of the plan. c. Improvements Facilities allowed within forest areas are limited to: (1) Surface water dispersion systems as described in the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual; (2) Recreational trails not exceeding three feet in width and not requiring more than 18 inches of cut or fill and shall be constructed of a pervious surface consisting of wood chips, native soils, or similar materials. An example of how the forest cover transference provision would work follows: A 5 acre (217,800 square feet) property propose to send forest credits to a receiving property. The sending property must retain for itself a minimum of 3 acres (60%) of intact forest within its boundaries. The sending property has a total of 4 acres of intact forest meaning up to 1 acre of forest credit is available to transfer to a receiving property The receiving property also covers 5 acres and also requires at least 3 acres of forest cover. With the sending of 1 acre of forest cover credit to the receiving property, the receiving property may now reduce its Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 18

28 forest cover by 1 acre to 2 acres of forest cover thereby increasing the development area of the receiving property by one acre. Note 11/15/16 Parametrix identified concerns with the forest transference provisions and is recommending removal of the transference provision for a number of reasons however the primary reason being a concern that the transference may create a conflict between the desire to retain or increase forest cover in the NCPA. Parametrix States: Similar to the EIA transfer credit program, it is unclear that the forest cover transfer provisions would result in a net increase or, at least, no net reduction in forest area within the NCPA. What is effectively being traded is a reduction in forest cover on one site in exchange for preserving forest on another site. This type of preservation always results in a net reduction in resource area. Preservation is allowed in some mitigation programs, like with wetlands, because the assumption is that the preserved areas will result in a higher level of function than the impacted resource. We do not know of an analogous forest cover transfer program in place related at this scale. The city has not administered this forest transference provision and the development community has expressed little interest in this program. The City Council has clearly expressed its objective to create regulations which are useful, easy to administer and are fully protective of this area. With the issues identified by Parametrix and the lack of apparent interest in the transference program Staff recommends removing the transference regulations from the NCPA. d. Transfer of Credit for Forest Cover. Any property within the Fitzgerald Subarea with NCFWCHPA LID zoning may transfer credits for preservation and restoration of forest area to other sites within the NCFWCHPA LID zoning portion of the Fitzgerald Subarea subject to the following provisions. All forest cover transfers, allocations, limitations, provisions and stipulations shall be identified within a covenant document which is reviewed and approved by the community development director. The covenant document shall be a permanent covenant running with the land in perpetuity filed and recorded with the Snohomish County auditor: (1) Credits shall be in the form of square feet of forest area. Transfer may only be in an amount in addition to the minimum forest cover for a site provided in subsection (B)(3)(a) of this section; provided, that: (A) Forest cover areas used for storm water dispersion or other storm water management facilities shall not be transferred. (B) Forest cover areas with a relative tree density of 20 or greater that meet the additional criteria in the definition of forest area or cover shall be granted 100 (C) percent credit. Forest cover areas with a relative tree density of 20 or greater that do not meet all standards for native species or understory may be granted 100 percent credit upon completion of forest restoration, with the provisions for monitoring survival and replacement. (D) Forest cover areas with a relative tree density between 10 and 20 with completion of forest restoration shall be granted no more than 80 percent credit if the restoration was established less than three years previously or has not been monitored and met success standards after a period of three years. If forest rehabilitation has been completed and monitored for at least three years and meets standards for success, 100 percent credit may be granted. (E) Forest cover areas with a relative tree density of less than 10 with completion of forest restoration shall be granted no more than 60 percent credit if the restoration was established less than five years previously or has not been Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 19

29 monitored and met success standards after a period of five years. For forest cover areas in which forest restoration has been completed and monitored for at least five years and meets standards for success, 100 percent credit may be granted. (F) Areas that are non-forested with completion of forest restoration shall be granted no more than 50 percent credit, if the restoration was established less than five years previously or has not been monitored and met success standards after a period of five years. On sites in which forest restoration has been completed and monitored for at least five years and meets standards for success, 100 percent credit may be granted. (2) A covenant shall be filed and recorded with the Snohomish County auditor on the sending property from which forest cover credit is transferred indicating that the credits have been transferred and may not be used for future development. The specific limit to the remaining developable area shall be attached to the site as a permanent covenant to run with the land. (3) Any land subject to transfer for forest cover credit shall provide for permanent preservation and management consistent with the requirements in subsection (B)(3)(f) of this section. e. In order to inform subsequent purchasers of real property of the requirements for preservation or restoration of forest cover, the owner of any property subject to these requirements shall file and record a covenant document with the Snohomish County auditor on a form approved by the city that shall state the presence of forest cover requirements, the requirement for preservation of forest cover and implementation of any required restoration and enhancement, the location on a site plan of the area of required forest cover, place such forest areas into separate tracts and provide for dedications for management and that the covenant shall run with the land in perpetuity. df. All preserved, rehabilitated, or retained, and restored forest areas must be accompanied by a management plan addressing: (1) Ownership of the forest area, which may include: (A) Private ownership and management for forest area on individual lots or parcels that are not of sufficient size and character to allow effective management by the city or other public entity. Any such forest area shall be preserved within a recorded separate tract with a plat restriction that provides: (1) An assurance that native vegetation will be preserved or restored to meet the criteria of this chapter; and (2) The right of the city to enforce the terms of the restriction. (B) Private ownership by an individual lot owner, undivided interest by each owner of a building lot within the development with the ownership interest passing with the ownership of the lot, or held by an incorporated homeowners association within a separate tract with a plat condition providing for management by a public entity when the city determines that: (1) The forest area is of sufficient size and character to allow effective management by the city or other public entity; or (2) The forest area contains critical areas that are best managed by a public (C) entity in conformance with criteria in BMC Dedication of a separate tract containing the forest area to the city, another a public agency, or conveyance to a legal entity such as an incorporated land trust, which ensures the ownership, protection and maintenance, and protection of the forest cover. (2) A management plan for the forest cover area shall include: (A) Marking of the boundaries of the area, which includes open rail fencing to provide for ready field identification and prevent encroachment upon the area Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 20

30 and signage which shall describe the purpose of the forest area and identify ownership and which shall be placed no more than 100 feet apart around the entire forest area boundary; (B) Provisions for installation and monitoring of any required rehabilitation or restoration and enhancement plantings, including monitoring of the survival of plantings for a five-year or longer period where dead or dying plants shall be replaced as needed; (C) Control of invasive species; (D) Management of any storm water management facilities allowed within the forest area; (E) The city shall require a performance security in the form of a surety bond, performance bond, assignment of savings account, or an irrevocable letter of credit to assure installation, maintenance and other performance standards in form and amount deemed acceptable by the city in the amount of 125 percent of the estimated cost of the performance that shall remain in effect until the city determines, in writing, that the requirements have been met. Bonds or other security shall be held by the city for a minimum of three years and may be held for longer periods when deemed necessary by the community development director. Public development proposals shall be relieved from having to comply with the bonding requirements of this section if public funds have previously been committed for mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration. g. Application of forest cover requirements shall be limited by the following: (1) The forest cover standard shall not apply to arterials and collector streets, including the area of arterial right-of-way dedicated as part of a private residential or commercial project; (2) Existing development shall be governed by the provision for nonconforming uses in Chapter BMC, except that a one-time exception may be granted for the following: (A) Any expansion of impervious surface of more than 500 square feet shall include a requirement to provide forest cover on up to 50 percent of the lot area not covered by impervious surface. (B) Any existing lot of record which exists on or before March 15, 2008, may be developed with one single-family residence with an allowance of up to a total of 3,500 square feet of non-forest cover. 4. Site Design Regulations. Site design shall consider the information gathered in the follow a procedure to include: a special site study assessment to identify and describe the natural processes existing on and around the development site and how the site; design, layout and arrangement of site improvements in a manner that preserves natural processes to the maximum extent feasible; and design infrastructure improvements in a manner that includes integrated storm water management. a. The site assessment evaluation shall identify: (1) Topography and natural runoff patterns; (2) Soil type and infiltration potential; (3) Vegetation cover, including type, density and ability to intercept, retain and retard surface water movement; (4) Streams and overland water flow patterns; (5) Wetlands and other critical areas. Given the fact that the following provisions are already outlined above, this section appears to be duplicative and unnecessary and only leads to uncertainty. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 21

31 11/15/16 A change as requested by Parametrix has been inserted to clarify that any impacts to critical areas and buffers must be mitigated for as provided for by Critical Areas Regulations of Chapter ab. Site design shall locate all land alteration on the least sensitive portions of the site, and cluster developed areas to achieve the following: (1) Preservation or restoration of forest areas; (2) Preservation and buffering of critical areas as provided in Chapter BMC; (3) Preservation of existing patterns of overland water flow and patterns of groundwater interflow; (4) Preservation or restoration of patterns of wildlife movement. bc. Vehicle and pedestrian circulation systems shall be designed to minimize alteration of topography and natural hydrologic features and processes through: (1) Roads, walkways and parking areas shall be designed to follow natural contours, avoid changes to the existing flow patterns of surface water, and maintain consolidated areas of natural topography and vegetation. Vehicle access shall be located in the least sensitive area of the site to the maximum extent feasible; (2) Road location and circulation patterns shall reduce or eliminate stream crossings and encroachment on critical areas and their buffers or, if impacts occur, any impacts are mitigated consistent with Chapter BMC; (3) Graded slopes and alteration of vegetation cover shall be avoided by road placement, and through use of retaining walls, which allow the maintenance of existing natural slope areas and shall be preferred over graded artificial slopes; (4) Utilities shall be located within roadway and driveway corridors and rights-of-way to the maximum extent feasible to avoid additional clearing for multiple corridors. cd. Layout of lots or structures shall: (1) Avoid portions of the site that provide for important hydrologic and critical area functions; (2) Minimize access roadway or driveway length and area and use common access drives. The following special building design provisions are proposed to be retained within the NCPA. de. Design of structures and improvements shall minimize alteration of existing topography, minimize disturbance to soils and native vegetation, and provide for water infiltration and interflow consistent with these regulations and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. (1) Excavation shall be prohibited from intruding into that part of the groundwater table which experiences saturated soil conditions, as measured during the dry season. (2) Building location and design shall allow the maintenance of existing topography through: (A) Use of pole or pin-type construction which conforms to the existing topography (B) is preferred. Structures shall be tiered to conform to existing topography and to minimize topographic modification. Piled deck support structures are preferable for parking or garages to fill-based construction types. (BC) Use of foundation walls as retaining walls is preferable to rock or concrete walls built separately and away from the building. Freestanding retaining devices are Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 22

32 only permitted when they cannot be designed as structural elements of the building foundation. (CD) Standard prepared building pads (slab on grade) resulting in grading more than five feet outside the building footprint area or more than fivethree feet of topographic modification are prohibited. (3) Under-structure parking and multilevel structures shall be incorporated where feasible. (4) Retaining walls and exposed foundations more than three feet in height shall be screened by vegetation. The existing Ordinance 1988 permitted lot area and circle modifications which have been retained with a few revisions to improve clarity. However, one difference would allow lots within the R 40,000 (LID) zoning classification to reduce lot area by as much as 60% instead of the current 50%. This proposal is derived from the clustering layouts that were prepared for the City Council. Within the R 40,000 zone, a lot area and lot circle reduction of 60% results in a lot of 16,000 sf and 90 foot of circle which could result in large portions of preserved lands. The R 40,000 (LID) lands are the most sensitive within the NCPA and it makes sense to preserve as much of these lands in a natural condition as feasible. C. Modification of Development Regulations. 1. To accommodate low impact development, the community development director is authorized to modify Chapters 12.14, 12.18, and BMC, as specifically described below without the need for a variance as provided for in Chapter BMC. The city of Bothell shall decline to approve modifications in cases where conflicts occur with Imagine Bothell... Comprehensive Plan and Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea plan policies or if the public health, safety and welfare would not be furthered by the proposed modification. a. BMC (A) may be modified pursuant to the following: (1) Within the R 40,000 (LID) zoning classification, the minimum lot area may be reduced by as much as 60 percent and R 9,600 (LID) zoning classifications, the minimum lot area per single-family dwelling unit may be reduced by as much as 50 percent. For example, properties with a zoning classification of R 40,000 may have a minimum lot area of 16,000 square feet and properties with a zoning classification of R 9,600 (LID) may have a minimum lot area of 4,800 square feet. (2) Within the R 40,000 (LID) the minimum lot circle may be reduced by as much as 60 percent and within the R 9,600 (LID) zoning classifications, minimum lot circle diameter may be reduced by as much as 50 percent. For example, properties with a zoning classification of R 9,600 (LID) may have a minimum lot circle diameter of 40 feet. (3) Lots which are modified under subsections (C)(1)(a)(1) and (2) of this section shall provide for a special setback of 25 feet along common property lines whenever such lots are located within 50 feet of an existing primary single-family building. b. Parking lot landscaping location and dimensional requirements in BMC may be modified by the community development director to consolidate parking lot landscaping areas to allow landscape areas to function as dispersion or bioretention facilities. The required perimeter landscaping and the amount of internal parking lot landscaping shall not be varied by this provision. c. In addition to the circumstances within BMC where the community development director may grant modification to the required landscape standards of Chapter BMC, the community development director may also grant modification to accommodate Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 23

33 dispersion and bio-retention facilities within required landscape areas. All landscape areas shall be graded to provide for water retention where feasible. Except as accessory to single-family dwellings, turf shall be discouraged and limited to recreation or community gathering areas. The R 5,400a zoning classifications will no longer be applied within the NCPA meaning the following language is moot. d. Recreation area standards of Chapter BMC which are applicable to the R 5,400a (LID) zone may be varied according to the following: (1) The minimum recreation area required in BMC may be modified by the community development director when trails and viewing platforms or facilities of a similar nature are provided within or adjacent to retained forest areas. (2) Single purpose facilities may account for up to 80 percent of the required recreation area. (3) Location, layout and dimensions of required recreation areas in BMC may be varied to accommodate the use of trails and other linear facilities located within forest retention areas. 2. To accommodate low impact development the public works director, in consultation with the fire marshal, is authorized to modify the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications (Bothell Standards) as adopted in BMC as specifically described below without the need for a variance as provided for in Chapters and BMC. a. Bothell Design and Construction Standards. (1) Public street width standards may be reduced pursuant to the following: (A) Streets classified by the city as public local access streets (ADT less than 500) will be allowed to be constructed as two-lane, two-way, 20-foot-wide clear, drivable surface constructed of a standard paving material; provided, that a prohibition for on-street parking is provided on both sides of the street with appropriate signage. (B) Should on-street parking on one side of the street be desired, a six-foot-wide parking area will be added to the 20-foot-wide drivable surface for a total width of 26 feet. The six-foot-wide parking area may be constructed of a pervious material as approved by the public works director. (C) Should on-street parking on both sides of the street be desired, a six-foot-wide parking area will be added to both sides of the 20-foot-wide drivable surface for a total width of 32 feet. The six-foot-wide parking area may be constructed of a pervious material as approved by the public works director. (D) Local access streets (ADT less than 500) may be allowed to be constructed as one-way looped road sections under the direction of the public works director and the city fire marshal. (E) Guest parking must be provided when on-street parking is not constructed. One guest parking stall shall be provided for every four dwelling units. All guest parking will be clearly identified with signage and striping. (2) Private streets and fire department access drives may be reduced to the following: (A) Local access streets (ADT less than 500) will be allowed to be constructed as a 16-foot-wide clear, drivable surface constructed of standard pavement materials, with an additional three-foot pervious material shoulder capable of supporting the imposed weight of a fire apparatus on each side; provided, that a prohibition for on-street parking is provided on both sides of the street with appropriate signage. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 24

34 (B) Guest parking must be provided when on-street parking is not constructed. One guest parking stall shall be provided for every four dwelling units. All guest parking will be clearly identified with signage and striping. b. Roadway materials standards may be varied according to the following: (1) Pervious pavement may be allowed on road shoulders subject to specific standards established by the public works department to ensure serviceability and durability. (2) Pervious pavement on emergency vehicle turnouts and traveled ways may be allowed on a case-by-case basis by the public works director in consultation with the fire marshal based on specific plans and information regarding roadway serviceability and durability. c. Cul-de-sac and turn-around dimensions may be varied to provide a hammerhead type of design to reduce impervious surface and may be constructed of pervious pavement pursuant to the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards. Provided, however, that the Fire Marshal may stipulate the use of special fire prevention facilities such as sprinklers in buildings, special fire hydrant spacing, or other fire prevention facilities. d. Pedestrian facility placement, design, and materials standards may be varied according to the following: (1) A single sidewalk or trail on one side of the street may be allowed on public roads and private roads and driveways if the following criteria are met: (A) The sidewalk is not designated as a primary pedestrian access route to schools; (B) The sidewalk does not serve more than 100 dwelling units as the single point of pedestrian access between the residential unit and other elements of the (C) pedestrian circulation system; Marked crosswalks are provided to allow pedestrians to safely cross the street to the pedestrian facility at safe locations. (2) Pedestrian facilities may utilize pervious pavement subject to specific standards to ensure serviceability and durability. e. Parking lot standards may be varied to allow pervious pavement throughout the parking lot, provided drive aisles are capable of supporting the weight of fire apparatus. Pervious pavement shall be required on all portions of the parking lot other than the drive aisle when soil conditions warrant. As identified by Parametrix experts, certain types of LID practices such as vegetated roofs and reverse slope sidewalks are not forest equivalent and, while appropriate, do not significantly contribute to groundwater recharge as well as forest equivalent LID practices. Note 11/15/16 During its BAS Gap analysis, Parametrix identified that the 65/10 flow control standard has been eclipsed by the 2012 Ecology Surface Water Design Manual s (SWM) requirement to model the site surface water runoff as if the site was in a 100% forested condition. In other words, the 2012 Ecology SWM (the city will be adopting an equivalent SWM later this year) provides for a higher Best Management Practice (BMP) standard than modeling the site at a 65% forest condition. Accordingly, Parametrix is recommending the 65/10 flow control standard NOT be applied within the NCPA in favor of the new 2016 SWM. Further, Parametrix recommends the language for forest equivalent LID facilities be consistent throughout. Accordingly, the provisions implemented above for the clustering provisions are duplicated here. D. Supplemental requirements regarding the use of specific types of Low Impact Development Storm Drainage facilities within the NCPAStandards. The public works director is directed to implement Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 25

35 forest equivalent stormwater facilities to the maximum extent feasible. Within the NCPA, forest equivalent stormwater facilities includes bio-infiltration facilities, surface water dispersion into forest areas, appropriately-sized rain gardens, and other facilities which emphasize infiltration and evapotranspiration pursuant to the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. Within the NCPA, the Director of Public Works shall specify the following forest equivalent stormwater facilities in order of preference: 1. Bioretention 2. Dispersion into intact forest areas For situations where Bioretention or dispersion are determined to be unfeasible due to site conditions allowable stormwater facilities may be, in order of preference 3. Infiltration 4. Other approved LID measures, provided the applicant demonstrates that such meaures meet the forest equivalency performance standard stated in the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. 5. A combination of infiltration and/or other approved LID meaures to reduce the requirement for stormwater detention facilities such that the combined system meets the forest equivalency performance standard stated in the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual; 6. Forest equivalent stormwater detention. These special stormwater treatment requirements shall be applied to the entire subject property or site and shall not be limited to the developable area, or actually developed area of the subject site. E. The Public Works Director may allow variation in the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications (Bothell Standards) as provided for in BMC to accommodate low impact development as provided below: 1. Application of Standards. a. Stormwater Manual. Within the areas identified for LID development within the Fitzgerald/35th Avenue Subarea, the city of Bothell shall require the use of the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual, Chapter 4, and the LID Supplement, Chapter 7, of the Bothell Design and Construction Standards. b. Supplemental. This section describes how various LID techniques are employed to meet effective impervious surface requirements. It must be used in conjunction with the Low Impact Development Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and Specifications (LID Supplement) and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. c. Best Available Information. The public works director may approve alternatives to these standards upon review of evidence submitted by the applicant that such modifications are equal to or better than the requirements in these regulations and meet the specific criteria in Section 1-7 of the Bothell Design and Construction Standards. Note 11/08/16 Parametrix is recommending removing these special references to LID Best Management Practices BMPs because the current language is based upon obsolete provisions of Ordinance At that time (2008) these terms were not adequately described within the applicable surface water manuals and the language served a purpose by being here. However, the 2016 new Surface Water Design Manual will include updated descriptions of allowed best management practices. Parametrix recommends removing the discussion of the specific best management practices in this section to avoid potential conflicts with the descriptions that will be placed within the new Surface Water Design Manual. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 26

36 bd. ce. ATT-2 Best Management Practices. This paragraph section identifies five six categories of low impact development (LID) best management practices (BMPs) for the North Creek Protection Area that may be used in defining specific credits for determining effective impervious surfaces and required storm water control facilities. Additional practices may be approved by the public works director in accordance with the Bothell Surface Water Design Manualsubsection (D)(1)(c) of this section. (1) Bioretention/Bioinfiltration (2) Dispersion into forest areas (3) Rain Gardens (4) Porous asphalt and pavement (5) Permeable pavers (1) Porous asphalt and pavement; (2) Permeable pavers; (3) Dispersion; (4) Vegetated roofs; (5) Reverse slope sidewalks; (6) Bioretention. For each category, the basic design criteria and the amount of credit received for reduced effective impervious area are provided in the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards. It is likely that more than one LID technique will be used on a site. Notice, Ownership and Management. In order to inform subsequent purchasers of real property of the requirements for low impact development, the owner of any property subject to these requirements shall file and record a covenant document with the Snohomish County auditor, according to the direction of the city, that shall address the following: (1) Designation of Easements or Tracts. All storm water management facilities shall be designated on a site plan filed for record with the surveyed boundaries and legal descriptions of storm water facilities. The owner shall dedicate either easements or tracts to the city of Bothell, as specified by the public works director, for long-term operation and maintenance of storm water management facilities. (2) Responsibilities for management of ornamental vegetation or other features within the storm water management facilities shall be specified, together with the provision that if owners do not adequately manage such vegetation, the city may provide written notice to the landowner to remove, modify and replace vegetation within 30 days. Should the landowner fail to comply with the stipulations of the written notice, the city may complete the work at the expense of the landowner. f. The city shall require a performance security to assure facilities meet the standards for achieving effective impervious surface standards as provided for in Section 1-5 of the Bothell Design and Construction Standards. 2. Specific Best Management Practices for the NCPA. a. Bioretention / Bioinfiltration Areas. Bioretention / Bioinfiltration areas are designed to provide infiltration of surface water runoff from impervious surfaces into the ground water table in locations with the appropriate type of soils. Porous Asphalt and Pavement. Porous asphalt can be used on private streets and on nontraveled portions of local access public streets and on driveways, street shoulders, sidewalks, parking lots and other facilities as determined appropriate by the public works director. The specific design criteria and associated credit toward reduced impervious surface area are found in the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. b. Permeable Pavers. Permeable pavers include grid/lattice systems (non-concrete) and paving blocks. Permeable pavers may be used on portions of local public and private Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 27

37 bc. ATT-2 streets and driveways not designated as traveled ways, such as street shoulders, sidewalks and parking areas, as well as for other facilities as determined by the public works director. An approved list of permeable pavers and the specific design criteria and associated credit toward reduced impervious surface area are found in the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. Dispersion into Preserved Forest. Dispersion of runoff from an impervious surface into retained forest areas may utilize several facilities subject to approval by the public works director. The LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual describes different methods for implementing dispersion on a site to reduce EIA and provide credits for treatment and flow control. c. Rain Gardens. Rain Gardens are similar to bioretention facilities except they are on a smaller scale and infiltrate runoff from smaller impervious areas or individual properties. Rain Gardens also rely upon the appropriate type of soils. d. Porous asphalt and concrete. Porous asphalt and concrete may be used on private streets and on non-traveled portions of local access public streets and on driveways, street shoulders, sidewalks, parking lots and other facilities as determined appropriate by the public works director. The specific design criteria and associated credit allowed for porous asphalt and concrete are found within the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. e. Permeable Pavers. Similar to porous asphalt and concrete, permeable pavers may be used on private streets and on non-traveled portions of local access public streets and on driveways, street shoulders, sidewalks, parking lots and other facilities as determined appropriate by the public works director. The specific design criteria and associated credit allowed for permeable pavers are found within the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. d. Vegetated Roofs. Vegetated roofs may be used to reduce the amount of effective impervious surface area of a roof. (1) Vegetated roofs design criteria and associated credit toward reduced impervious surface area are specified in the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. (2) Notice, Ownership and Management. Vegetated roofs shall be owned and maintained by the building owner. To inform subsequent purchasers of real property of the requirements for operation and maintenance, the owner of any property utilizing vegetated roofs shall file and record a notice with the Snohomish County auditor according to the direction of the city describing operation and maintenance requirements of the facility and holding the city of Bothell harmless for any liability resulting from the use of said facility. e. Reverse Slope Sidewalks. Reverse slope sidewalks are sloped to drain away from the road and disperse runoff into adjacent vegetated areas. Several facility alternatives are addressed within the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual with specific application and design criteria and credits for treatment and flow control. f. Bioretention Areas. Bioretention areas are designed to provide areas where runoff from impervious surfaces can be infiltrated to appropriate soils. Parametrix has identified that the proposed amendments to this section move the special study requirements into a single section and updates code references. The main purpose of the remaining code is to identify that the critical areas and buffers regulated and protected under BMC are designated as Wildlife Corridors. This designation does not provide for additional protection of these areas under BMC nor BMC It should be noted that the substantive provisions in this section related to the preservation of wildlife habitat, including wildlife corridors, are also fully enabled by BMC Parametrix further suggests that these wildlife standards would be best addressed under the Critical Areas Regulations Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 28

38 of BMC as protection of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas of local importance. The primary Parametrix concern is that this section establishes an additional category of regulation that seems redundant in the context of the current BAS Critical Areas requirements and the proposed forest retention requirements of this Chapter. However, this provision does provide direction to the Director that, within corridors, buffer widths may not be varied, averaged, or reduced in width. And this section provides for the continuation of a wildlife corridor in the event that a contiguous buffer is not provided through application of the CAO as a special zoning provision. Accordingly, staff recommends there is merit to retaining this section Wildlife standards within the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCH). The North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) is assigned to properties within the Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea as a special regulation to protect the known critical fish and wildlife habitat present in this subarea. NCFWCHPA This special regulations is are intended to augment the fish and wildlife protections afforded under BMC , Regulation of uses for protection of groundwater resources; Chapter BMC, Critical Area Regulations; and BMC Title 13, shoreline master program, where applicable. The primary emphasis of this section shall be the application of best available science for the protection of any critical fish and wildlife habitat present on or in the vicinity of the subject property. All development occurring within the NCFWCHPA shall be subject to the following special provisions: A. Designation of Wildlife Corridors. 1. All critical areas and buffers providing a continuous connection to North Creek along Cole/Woods Creek are designated a special wildlife corridor and may not be varied, averaged or reduced in width.except where specific findings are made that such variation will not compromise their function as a wildlife corridor. 2. Additional wildlife corridors are designated on the zoning map to provide additional connections between critical areas that may not be provided by contiguous critical areas or critical area buffers. These wildlife corridors shall follow critical areas and will be invoked by the Director of Community Development when a contiguous corridor is not provided by the application of the Critical Areas Regulations of BMC Wildlife corridors are shown on the zoning map. and to provide corridors to the rural and resource areas of unincorporated Snohomish County to the north and east. The section below has been re-located to (C) above B. Special Fish and Wildlife Habitat Study. A special study which evaluates project impacts on critical fish and wildlife habitat existing on and in the vicinity of the subject property shall be submitted as part of the application. The special study shall meet the following criteria: 1. The report shall be prepared in conformance with the general critical areas report requirements of Chapter BMC and in addition shall address the existing and potential wildlife use of required forest cover. 2. Location of Fish and Wildlife Habitat. The study shall depict the location of all streams, floodplains, wetlands, riparian areas, forested areas and all other critical areas and associated buffers as required by Chapter BMC on and within 300 feet of the project area. 3. Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment shall be included as part of the special study. A habitat assessment is an investigation of the project area to evaluate the fish or wildlife species and habitats present on or near the subject property. The special study shall contain an assessment of habitats including the following site- and proposal-related information: Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 29

39 a. Detailed description of vegetation on and adjacent to the project area; b. Identification of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with habitat on or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potential project impacts to the use of the site by the species; c. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management recommendations, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat management recommendations, that have been developed for species or habitats located on or adjacent to the project area; d. A detailed discussion of the direct and indirect potential impacts on habitat by the project, including potential impacts to water quality; e. A discussion of specific measures and design features proposed by the applicant to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts to habitat, including buffers wider than those required in Chapter BMC, if found to be warranted; f. A discussion of the specific storm water facilities proposed by the applicant to provide for protection of surface water and groundwater in the vicinity of the development; and g. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect habitat after the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance. 4. Additional Information. The community development director may also require the following: a. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional of the applicant s analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, which evaluation may include any recommendations for alternative mitigating measures or programs; and b. Consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or other appropriate agency. BC. Director s Authority. The director of community development is authorized to evaluate, assess, and approve any specific measures determined by the director to be necessary to preserve or enhance fish and wildlife habitat and wildlife movement corridors on the subject property, in accordance with applicable comprehensive plan policies, pursuant to the following criteria: 1. All specific habitat-related measures proposed in the special study required under (B) shall be based upon documented best available science for the specific type of habitat and plant and animal species located on the subject property; 2. The habitat-related measures proposed in the special study are consistent with guidance and recommendations of the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; 3. The habitat-related measures proposed are consistent with applicable Imagine Bothell... Comprehensive Plan policies; 4. Stream and wetland critical area buffers may be required to be wider than required under Chapter BMC if such wider buffers are found to be warranted based on best available science; no reductions of stream or wetland critical area buffer widths as established under Chapter BMC shall be permitted, except in circumstances of reasonable use; 5. Uses shall be consistent with Chapter BMC; 6. The proposed habitat-related measures do not modify the area, dimension and design standards of Chapter BMC; and 7. The director may require modifications to the development layout, design, proposed location of buildings or other improvements to ensure consistency with best available science and/or to protect the fish and wildlife habitat present on the subject property Definitions. Adjacent impervious surfaces means roofs, parking areas, and other impervious surfaces closer to each other than 100 feet apart. These shall be considered adjacent impervious surfaces. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 30

40 Best management practices (BMPs) means specific practices and facilities used to control the adverse effects of alteration of the natural environment by elements of the built environment such as additional runoff from impervious surfaces. Dispersion means distribution of runoff to a system that or land area that does not allow any downstream concentration of flow into a discrete channel. Drainage collection system means a system for conveying, treating and detaining storm water runoff including but not limited to facilities such as catch basins, drains, swales, ponds, and outfalls. EIA (effective impervious area) credit means a reduction in effective impervious area as a result of incorporation of facilities or systems that infiltrate water or precipitation such that it ceases to be surface water. Forest area or cover means an area of intact forest, or lands where forest cover can be rehabilitated or restored to establish forest areas mature vegetation typical of a climax evergreen or mixed forest, characteristic of forest conditions that predated European settlement., that meet the following criteria: 1. Relative tree density of greater than 20; 2. No area of more than 1,000 square feet is outside of the dripline of an evergreen or deciduous tree; 3. No more than 10 percent of trees are nonnative; 4. Understory density of not less than 75 percent of ground coverage. Areas not meeting the above criteria may qualify as forest area through successful implementation of forest restoration. While looking for a definition of intact forest a number of authorities were consulted including a range that included the University of Washington School Of Environmental and Forest Sciences, the United States Department of Agriculture - National Forest Service even the United Nations Forest Resources Assessment program. After this review it became apparent there are many different types of forests even within the fairly limited geographic area of the Puget Sound trench or lowland (includes Bothell area). The basic characteristics for intact forests within the Puget Sound area (or what is known as the Vancouverian Forest and Woodland area under the United States National Vegetation Classification System) is that forests contain a primary or upper layer of coniferous or deciduous trees, a secondary layer of shrub/understory plants, a tertiary layer of small emergent plants and a final or ground layer of organic matter often referred to as duff. It makes sense to craft a simplified description of these types of features for this effort Keen observers will note that this definition closely matches conditions found within Bothell s second and third growth forest areas such as those found in Blyth Park, the North Creek Forest and the Department of Natural Resources property on 7 th Avenue West. Finally, it may be appropriate to insert a photograph of a forest that matches the description below. 11/18/16 Testimony has identified that the proposed definition of forest is, not a best available science definition. However, a different BAS definition of forest has not been offered. Staff is certainly willing to consider any better or more science based definition than the United States National Vegetation Classification System s Douglas-fir, Western Hemlock Vancouverian Forest & Woodland Division definition which is included within the proposed new definition as an alternative to the more layperson description also proposed below. The US National Vegetation Classification System is a BAS program and could be invoked should the need arise. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 31

41 Forest, intact means a stand of coniferous or deciduous trees characteristic of conditions that predated European settlement that contain the following characteristics: 1. Trees such as, Douglas Fir, Western Red Cedar, Western Hemlock, Red Alder, Big Leaf Maple, and other indigenous tree species, that are 8 inches in diameter or greater that provide a tree canopy cover greater than 30 percent, 2. A shrub/understory layer of plants between 4 to 15 feet in height such as Vine Maple, Salal, Salmonberry, Evergreen Huckleberry, and other plants; 3. An emergent layer of plants less than 4 feet in height such as Sword Fern, Cascades Grape, Trillium, and other forbs, grasses, and plants; and 4. A layer of organic material commonly referred to as forest duff comprising needles, leaves, branches, twigs and organic matter laying upon the soil surface. As an alternative to the above description, an applicant may propose use of the United States National Vegetation Classification System s Douglas-fir, Western Hemlock Vancouverian Forest & Woodland Division definition pursuant to Division Detail Report: D192 as it exists or may be amended in the future. An intact forest is representative of the photo below: Source: Forest re-habilitation and forest restoration means the process of rehabilitating or restoring native vegetation and soils on disturbed land with the intent of eventually achieving the an intact forested condition. Forest rehabilitation and restoration shall consist of: 1. Forest rehabilitation consists of interplanting within an area containing of existing trees that are at least 25 feet in height, and have an existing tree crown or canopy cover between 10 and 30 and percent the and understory in plants and emergent vegetation have been removed or cover less than 40% of the area. a forest with a relative tree density of less than 20 but greater than 10. Plantings to rehabilitate a forest shall consist of exclusively native or indigenous trees, understory and emergent Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 32

42 plantsseedlings at not less than 300 trees per acre, with no more than 40 percent native nonconiferous trees together with understory plantings in any areas greater than 500 square feet not characterized by native understory. 2. Forest restorationre-establishment consists of planting an area with an existing tree canopy cover of less than 10% where understory and emergent vegetation has been removed or covers less than 10% of the area.relative tree density of less than 10, or that has been substantially cleared or is characterized by introduced vegetation other than trees. Plantings to restore a forest shall consist of exclusively native or indigenous trees, understory and emergent plants.seedlings at not less than 600 trees per acre, with no more than 40 percent native non-coniferous trees together with understory plantings and soil enhancement meeting the standards of the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards. 3. Larger specimens may be substituted for seedlings at a ratio of one gallon (two feet tall) or greater size counting for three seedlings each, and five gallons (four feet tall) or greater size counting for five seedlings each. 4. All uunderstory plants shall consist of native shrubs and groundcover planted at a sufficient density to provide an immediate surface cover of at least 40 percent with 75 percent cover within three years and 100 percent cover within five years. Groundcover in areas that are substantially cleared of trees may consist of seeding. Impervious area, effective means the component of impervious surface that is connected to surface water directly, or with a conveyance device (such as a ditch, pipe or retention/detention facility) and excludes the component of total impervious area (TIA) that drains into systems that infiltrate water such that it ceases to be surface water. The measure of effective impervious area requires reliable projections of the effectiveness of facilities designed to intercept and infiltrate runoff from the total impervious area. Impervious area, total means the sum of all areas on a site that inhibit the infiltration of storm water and result in surface water runoff. For the purpose of low impact development, areas that produce runoff include, but are not limited to, paved areas including roads, sidewalks, driveways, parking areas, roofs, patios, concrete or asphalt paving, gravel roads, packed earthen materials and may include landscaped areas including turf that do not contain sufficiently pervious or amended soils, but not including forested areas. Relative tree density is a method for evaluating the density of trees in relation to the theoretical maximum density for trees of the same size and species. Relative tree density equals the basal area of all trees in the stand divided by the square root of the quadratic mean diameter. Relative tree density shall be determined by applying the following formula: Relative Tree Density = G/QMD1/2 where G is basal area square feet/acre and QMD is the square root of the quadratic mean diameter (inches). This method is more fully explained in the publication, A Simple Index of Stand Density for Douglas-Fir, Robert O. Curtis, Forest Science, Vol. 28, No. 1, 1982, pp , Copyright 1982, by the Society of American Foresters, and in the publication, Family Forest Habitat Conservation Plan, prepared by The Family Forest Foundation, Chehalis, Washington, December 2006, This method is preferable to a simple density (trees/acre) calculation because it is a more accurate measure of occupied growing space and suppression mortality. Storm water detention means a system that provides temporary storage and controlled release of storm water. Vegetated roof means a vegetated roof carrying, and designed to carry, at least 18 inches of soil supporting plant life, built by a licensed roofing contractor meeting the criteria of the LID Supplement to the Bothell Design and Construction Standards and the Bothell Surface Water Design Manual. Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 33

43 Revised Zoning Map - The following map illustrates the potential zoning map amendments Note 11/8/16 The Zoning Map below was authorized by the City Council on November 8, 2016 Fitzgerald / 35 SE Subarea Regulations BMC Page 34

44 DRAFT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 2016 TO: Bruce Blackburn, Senior Planner FROM: Benn Burke, Senior Consultant SUBJECT: Bothell Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea Regulations Gap Analysis CC: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: City of Bothell BAS LID Update 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Parametrix reviewed the proposed amendments to Bothell Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter Fitzgerald/35 th Avenue SE Subarea Regulations dated October 10, 2018 as presented to the City Council at their regular meeting on October 18, The currently enabled BMC includes the codified portions of Ordinance 1988 that apply to the Fitzgerald/35th SE Subarea The City of Bothell regulates land use and development through city-wide standards and regulations in addition to planning area overlays for each of the City s 17 subareas. The subarea regulations are the implementing regulations for the individual subarea plans included in its Comprehensive Plan, Imagine Bothell Comprehensive Plan, most recently updated in The City s subareas are of similar size and population. Subareas plans are developed to be consistent with overall city-wide goals and policies, countywide planning policies, multi-county policies, and the goals of the Growth Management Act (GMA). The implementing regulations are codified as chapters within BMC Title 12 Zoning. Although the regulations are included in the Zoning title, these chapters include provisions related to the environment, subdivisions, transportation, utilities infrastructure, and buildings and construction The code language in currently enabled BMC was established by the City s passage of Resolution 1332 in 2015, which declared that the provisions included in Ordinance 1988 (2008) were in full force and effect. This determination was upheld following a review by the GMHB in early The Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) concluded that by passage of Resolution 1332, the City has ensured that its subarea plan provisions comply with the GMA by protecting sensitive ecosystems and water quality (GMHB No Order Finding Compliance).

45 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM (CONTINUED) Parametrix reviewed the draft BMC code amendments dated October 18, 2016 to identify areas where proposed updates or amendments may be inconsistent with the regulations and goals as declared in the currently enabled BMC and those policies in the Fitzgerald/35 th Avenue SE Subarea Plan that are most relevant to the protection of sensitive areas and water quality. These include: Subarea Policy LU-2 - Land within the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA), land within the Low Impact Development (LID) portions of the NCFWCHPA, and lands containing a critical area or areas are subject to regulations which may reduce the density or intensity of development allowed to less than that indicated by the plan designation. Subarea Policy NE-1 - Protect and preserve the wetlands, streams and steep slope critical areas in accordance with the City's Critical Area Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program. Subarea Policy NE-2 Improve protect and preserve North Creek as fish habitat to the greatest extent possible. Subarea Policy NE-3 Protect the quantity and quality of cool groundwater inputs into Palm, Woods and Cole Creeks. Implementing regulations should include provisions requiring all development activities which may affect groundwater to follow the existing topographic contours, minimize changes to preexisting ground elevations, minimize cut and fill earthwork volumes and preserve natural foliage and vegetation. Excavation shall be prohibited from intruding into that part of the groundwater table which experiences saturated soil conditions, as measured during the dry season. Subarea Policy NE-4 Within the implementing development regulations applicable to the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) include special provisions concerning critical areas and buffers, surface water runoff standards, groundwater infiltration protections, implementation of special stormwater design standards, creation of special surface water management practices, cooperation with surrounding jurisdictions and agencies, and other measures as may be appropriate. Subarea Policy NE-7. Designate, protect and enhance wildlife corridors within the NCFWCHPA between North Creek and the eastern planning area boundary Our review focused on revisions that, based on our experience and judgement, are substantively material to the preservation of sensitive ecosystems and water quality. Proposed code revisions that appear to be clerical, clarifying, or incidental were not evaluated in detail. The scope of this review does not include an evaluation or gap analysis of the City s Critical Areas Regulations (BMC 14.04) or other Chapters of BMC. DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION This document mirrors the organization of the draft amended BMC Chapter Fitzgerald/35th Avenue SE Subarea Regulations dated October 18, This technical memorandum includes a summary and discussion of the various code sections, identifies potential gaps that could result in a reduction of protection or could be perceived to do so, and includes recommendations for the City to consider for addressing the gap or issue. Specific recommendations to resolve the gaps are also summarized in the attached Code Review Matrix. 2

46 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM (CONTINUED) CODE REVIEW DISCUSSION Purpose No revisions to BMC are proposed in the October 18, 2016 draft code, but this section includes a provision that might affect other proposed revisions by stating that the subarea regulations are in addition to city-wide zoning regulations or, where more restrictive, take the place of city-wide zoning regulations. We make no recommendations specifically related to the language in ; however, we recommend that the City review all proposed revisions and new sections to determine if the changes are not inadvertently disallowed by the language in this section For example, the revised code includes a provision for clustered development (address in detail in in the discussion of Section ). If these provisions were liberally construed, certain elements of clustering, such as allowances for modification of street standards, lot areas, setbacks and building coverage standards could be considered less restrictive than the associated city-wide standard Regulation of uses for protection of groundwater resources The City is proposing amendments to this section for the purpose of reducing the length, complexity and duplication of this code language. The City has stated it is not the intent of the proposed amendments to reduce or change the material provisions of this section. Residential Pesticides and Nutrients In their code revision notes, the City states they do not have a practical mechanism to enforce this provision as a zoning code provision. The action prohibited by this section is also otherwise prohibited by BMC We reviewed the requirements BMC and concur with this statement. Off label uses of regulated pastiches and fertilizers are also prohibited by federal law. The Washington State Pesticide Control Act (RCW 15.58) and Washington State Pesticide Application Act (RCW 17.21) control the use and application of pesticides and herbicides. Pesticides can only be applied in aquatic areas, including wetlands, riparian areas, and buffers, by a state licensed applicator with a specific aquatic area endorsement. It is our opinion that the changes reflected in this section do not materially alter the level of protection of groundwater resources within the subarea. Use of Reclaimed Water for Surface Percolation or Direct Discharge The City is proposing to remove language related to the Use of reclaimed water for surface water percolation or direct recharge. These facilities are not allowed under the current zoning. Parametrix reviewed a preliminary draft of the amended code and recommended these references be removed because if they were liberally applied they might be construed to restrict some elements related to low impact development and green infrastructure. 3

47 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM (CONTINUED) [R 5,400d - R 7,200 - R 8,400 - R 9,600] zoning in the eastern portion of the Subarea The City is proposing to redesignate the boundaries of the NCFWCHPA/NCPA following Council direction following the July 19, 2016 public hearing. The direction was to separate hillside areas located east of 39th Avenue SE (referred to as the Zone 1 area) from the NCPA. The October 18, 2016 amended draft of BMC included a revised zoning map that identifies the Zone 1 area (below). While this was a direct outcome of Parametrix s best available science and LID Stormwater support work, the decision to remove Zone 1 area from the NCPA was not originally part of the scope of planned revisions to BMC Proposed NCPA redesignation and zoning change areas. 97 Changing Name of North Creek Protection Area We support renaming the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) to North Creek Protection Area (NCPA). This change will reduce confusion and perceived conflicts between BMC and BMC (Critical Areas Regulations). The area presently identified as North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area is not a designated critical area under BMC It is our opinion that renaming the North Creek Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Protection Area (NCFWCHPA) to North Creek Protection Area (NCPA) will reduce confusion regarding which areas in the subarea may or may not be regulated as designated critical areas. It is our opinion that this proposed name change will have no material effect on protections for sensitive areas or water quality. 4