Laserfiche WebLink
Ordinance No. 3323-13 Elk )IET <br /> An Ordinance Amending Section 2 and Section 6 of Ordinance No. 2909-06, Critical Areas <br /> (EMC 19.37) Concerning Pruning and Removal of Non-Hazardous Trees <br /> in Critical Area Buffers outside of Shoreline Jurisdiction, and Amending Section <br /> 3B of Chapter 4 of Ordinance No. 2530-01, as amended (EMC 15.16.080). <br /> WHEREAS, the City Council finds the following: <br /> 1. The City of Everett adopted Ordinance No. 2909-06 establishing new standards, codified <br /> as EMC Chapter 19.37, for the protection of Critical Areas pursuant to the Growth <br /> Management Act RCW Chapter 36.70A; <br /> 2. The standards of EMC 19.37 are based upon"best available science" and any <br /> amendments to Critical Areas regulations must also be based upon best available science; <br /> 3. The City's Critical Areas regulations pertaining to management of vegetation within <br /> critical areas and buffer areas are among the most restrictive among peer jurisdictions <br /> within the central Puget Sound; <br /> 4. The City may not authorize the removal of non-hazardous trees in critical areas under <br /> most circumstances under the current regulations; <br /> 5. This rigid regulation has resulted in numerous instances of illegal tree cutting, pruning <br /> and removal within critical area buffers; <br /> 6. The City proposes to establish more flexibility through a permit system to allow for the <br /> pruning of trees and, under certain circumstances, the removal and replacement of trees <br /> within critical area buffers to reduce the instance of illegal cutting and impacts to critical <br /> area resources and habitat in Everett; <br /> 7. The Planning Department, with assistance from an environmental consultant, conducted <br /> peer research of other municipal and county critical area regulations that were adopted <br /> under the standards of best available science to determine if other jurisdictions' critical <br /> area regulations provided the flexibility desired; <br /> 8. The City did find several examples of critical area regulations that allow for a more <br /> flexible approach to the pruning or removal and replacement of trees within critical area <br /> buffers; <br /> 9. The Planning Commission held several public workshops and hearings to gather input <br /> from staff and the public concerning possible amendments to the City's Critical Areas <br /> regulations; <br /> 10. The City conducted a SEPA environmental review of the proposed changes to its Critical <br /> Areas regulations, including review by the Washington State Department of Ecology; and <br /> 11. Based on public comment during the Planning Commission public planning process, <br /> several revisions were made to ensure adequate flexibility and sufficient safeguards to <br /> balance the desired flexibility with environmental protection and monitoring of properties <br /> that have been permitted to prune or remove and replace trees in critical area buffers. <br /> 1 <br />