Most Endangerd Properties List

WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION

NOMINATION TO 2007 MOST ENDANGERED PROPERTIES LIST

THE HEWITT AVENUE RAILROAD BRIDGE AND UNDERLYING STREET

EVERETT, WASHINGTON

Describe the current use and condition of the site.

Our nomination involves two aspects of an interconnected site: a bridge and the street below.

The railroad bridge is on a main Amtrak Line and BNSF freight line where Hewitt Avenue meets the waterfront as it crosses under the bridge. It most likely replaced a wooden bridge built in 1902 that marked the western terminus of the Great Northern Railroad. The bridge is virtually unchanged since its construction in 1910. It is structurally sound, but in need graffiti removal, cleaning and a coat of paint.

The street portion is a City owned approximately one-half acre of right-of-way that has been crudely fenced off since 2001 as part of past policies and concerted efforts by the Port and BNSF to close the docks to the public while eliminating traffic conflicts with the trains. Currently, the area is an unsightly mess complete with chain link fencing, broken pavement, tall weeds and windblown garbage.

The setting provides a panoramic view of the commercial activity that has been and continues to be one of the hallmarks of Everett.

What is the historical significance of the property? Has it been placed on a national, state or local register? If not, has it been determined eligible for the National Register?

The bridge is an increasingly rare steel girder bridge and in fact may be the last surviving one in Everett, a town known as the place where rail meets sail.

For hundreds of years native people spent summers at this site since fresh water flowed down nearby Forgotten Creek and in an unnamed stream that flowed down Everett Avenue. About 1861, the first non-native settler in Everett, Dennis Brigham, built a cabin very near and possibly on the site.

Originally paved in locally manufactured red brick, Hewitt Avenue has been “Main Street” for Everett since its incorporation in 1893. Historically, Hewitt Avenue marked the entrance to the Port and crossing under the bridge provided the link for people between downtown and The City Dock where many goods, services and passengers arrived and departed to and from Everett. The west end of Hewitt Avenue and a half block to the south on Bond Street was the heart of commerce and activity when Everett was young. The surrounding property included many no longer surviving significant structures: The Bayview Hotel on Bond Street which also acted as the rail depot until a proper one was constructed across the street to the west. Directly adjacent to the bridge is Mulligan Saloon built in 1906. Renamed the Anchor Tavern when prohibition was repealed, it has survived as one of a handful of continuously operating saloons in a city known as a hard drinking, hard working logging and mill town. Although some people in Everett are trying to obliterate history by ignoring the Everett Massacre of 1916, the labor conflict which took place only a few hundred feet from the site, inspires inquiries to this day about the struggles that workers and business owners encountered in the early 20^th century. In the Historical Survey Report of November, 1973 prepared by David Dilgard and Margaret Riddle of the Northwest Room of the Everett Public Library, the suggestion was made that this site ought to be placed on the National and State Historic Register. The recommendation was never acted on.

Give a brief history of the property and tell us why it continues to be important to your community.

For all of the reasons mentioned above, this site reminds people of the City’s connection to the waterfront, and their own relationships to the people who lived before. Of what it must have been like to be a new person in the last of the American Frontier. Considering its blue collar origins - what an exciting place Everett must have been.

Why do you consider the property to be endangered? Please be specific about impending threats to the property.

No reason has ever been given for the need for replacement, but on October 2, 2006 BNSF made application to the City of Everett to demolish the bridge and replace it with a 45 foot wide earth berm. The City has issued a Final Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance allowing

construction of the berm and demolition of the bridge. Mitigation was minimal and allowed only for landscaping of the berm, a vaguely described pedestrian walkway in the berm and a viewing stand to be placed alongside the tracks. In their environmental review, BNSF attached no historic value to the site or the structure.

What is currently being done currently to save the property? Who is involved and what resources, financial or otherwise have been directed toward this effort.

We have filed an appeal with the City challenging the Final MDNS. A group has formed consisting of prominent citizens, business people, The Pt. Gardner and Bayside Neighborhood Associations, property owners in the immediate vicinity and Historic Everett. The neighborhoods have agreed to adopt the site and will apply for Office of Neighborhoods matching grants funds to help with restoration and maintenance. We have participated in meetings with City Planning Staff. We are working with Parks and Recreation Staff. And they have assured us they will help with the design, construction and maintenance of the site as a park. Both local newspapers, The Daily Herald and The Everett Tribune, have written supportive articles about preserving the site and the attendant history as recently as December 2006.

What is your long term goal for this property?

Immediate preservation of the steel plate bridge along with continued maintenance. Preservation of the turn of the 20^th Century brick street. To create a more visually pleasing setting on the publicly owned property. Honor the place with historical markers that educate the public about the early railroad, the Everett Massacre and the original industrial waterfront and its connection to Downtown. Create open space for the people who live and work in the increasingly dense downtown core. Ensure visual and physical public access to the waterfront and related shorelines of statewide significance.

Green Drinks to be at Anchor Tavern

ERIKA SCHULTZ / THE SEATTLE TIMES

The historic Anchor Tavern in Everett is located on the western end of Hewitt Avenue in a "flatiron" building that dates back to 1906.

June 10th 5:30pm The SDTF is hosting the second Green Drinks in Snohomish County at the Anchor Tavern, 1001 Hewitt Avenue, Everett, WA 98201 ....

Come socialize with Everett professionals and community members about environmental issues. Excerpt from the Seattle Times on the Anchor Tavern from July 4, 2007...

From decades past

The west end of Hewitt still reflects the city's working-class, mill-town roots.

Four one-time tavern buildings remain between the bridge and Marine View Drive. The Anchor occupies a classic "flatiron" brick building, which opened as an office in 1906, then converted one year later to Mulligan's Saloon. It has been the Anchor since 1934; the actual anchor on its sidewalk dates to its founding.

Seamen based at nearby Naval Station Everett "borrowed" the anchor several months ago, then returned it with a new blue-and-yellow paint job.

Two storefronts up, a Hawaiian restaurant that relocated from the downtown core has taken over an historic two-story wooden building that once housed another saloon.

And Anchor regular David Williams, a 26-year-old artist, remembers a childhood spent skateboarding past the old Blue Diamond, in a small building that now houses a Thai restaurant.

He would make faces through the window, he recalls, prompting pub patrons to come outside and watch him skate down the block and beneath the trestle.

"This is Everett," he said, nodding at the industrial-looking bridge. "It's been here forever; why take it down?"

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/snohomishcountynews/2003773074_hewitt04n1.html?syndication=rss

Builders Learn About Going GREEN

Companies and contractors learn how to build their business by embracing environmentally friendly practices.

By Michelle DunlopHerald Writer

EVERETT -- If you're planning to do construction work for the state or federal government, you might want to brush up on your green skills."It's getting easier to build green," said Scott Schreffler, a project designer with Dykeman, an architecture and design firm in Everett.Building green is in demand, participants at the Green Conference, held Tuesday in Everett, found out.

Private companies and individual home buyers are looking for environmentally friendly elements in their buildings. Governments -- including the city of Mukilteo and the state of Washington -- increasingly are incorporating green standards into their new projects.

read more
Reporter Michelle Dunlop: 425-339-3454 or mdunlop@heraldnet.com.

Puget Sound Ecosystem

You are invited to participate in a series of topic forums to help inform the development of the Action Agenda. The forums will help synthesize the region’s knowledge on key aspects of the Puget Sound ecosystem. All information gathered during these forums and from comments and input from interested parties will be synthesized and discussed at a broad, ecosystem-wide forum May 28.

During these all-day work sessions, science and policy experts will:

§ Review Sound-wide status and threats analyses;

§ Discuss the technical understanding of the problem; and

§ Identify policy strategies needed to help achieve a healthy Puget Sound.

Each of the following topic forums will be held from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.:

Species/Biodiversity – May 1

TOC Conference Center, 5799 – 23^rd Drive W., Everett

Water Quantity – May 5

Edmonds Conference Center, 201 Fourth Ave. N., Edmonds

Synthesis Forum – May 28^th

Location TBD

Detailed materials developed for each topic forum will be posted on the Partnership’s Web site on or before April 14.

Attendees should be able to share their scientific and policy expertise on each of the topic areas. The meetings are open to the public. If you cannot attend a forum but would like to participate, you can submit comments electronically by May 6.

For more information about the topic forums process, visit http://www.psp.wa.gov/aa_topic_forums.php.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Linda Lyshall

Regional Liaison | Puget Sound Partnership

State of Washington

Office: 425-640-3557

Cell: 425-457-1157

www.psp.wa.gov

Public Forum: Unified Development Code Update Project

Public Forum: Unified Development Code Update Project

Please join us for a discussion of two topics that will lead to amendments to the Snohomish County Unified Development Code (UDC):

1. Urban Centers: Creating welcoming places for pedestrians

2. Forest Practices: County permits for cutting trees

When: Thursday, May 1, 2008*

Morning Session: 9:00 a.m. – Noon

Evening Session: 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

*The same agenda is repeated at both sessions.

Where: Snohomish County Campus, 3000 Rockefeller Ave., Everett

Administration Building East, Meeting Room 1

We welcome and invite public feedback and questions. Come share your concerns and make suggestions in the early stages of these important regulatory updates.

1. Urban Centers: Creating welcoming places for pedestrians.

This will be a continuation of discussions begun in UDC Update Public Forums last May and December. Regulations governing the development of Urban Centers most directly affect residents within or near areas designated as Urban Center, Urban Village and Transit/Pedestrian Village in the comprehensive plan. These regulations are of importance to anyone planning to design or build a mixed use/multiple family residential project in an unincorporated urban growth area; cities considering annexing the unincorporated area and public service providers. Currently the County has designated the areas around the following intersections for such development: 164th & I-5; 128th & I-5; State Route 527 and 196th St; State Route 99 and State Route 525; State Route 99 and 152nd St; I-5 and 44th Ave W; and scattered smaller sites throughout the unincorporated Southwest UGA.

Snohomish County planners will lead a group discussion of policy issues and are looking for feedback to help answer key questions captured under several broad themes. Themes to date include public realm, neighborhood compatibility, development character, circulation (roads and sidewalks), and the review process. Additional themes to be explored include density, master plans and allowable uses.

2. Forest Practices: County permits for cutting trees.

The forest practices regulations in RCW 76.09 were changed last year to require a transfer of authority from State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to local jurisdictions for the review and permitting of certain types for forest practice activities.

These regulations affect individuals planning to remove trees within the urban growth area or for the purpose of converting the land use from a natural forested condition. The County will be taking over the review and permit issuance responsibilities for all forest practice activities within the unincorporated urban growth areas and for all forest practices related to land conversion countywide.

Snohomish County planners will present an overview of the scope of the forest practice responsibilities shifting from DNR to the County. The presentation will focus on the statutory basis for the shift in jurisdictional responsibility, what types of forest practice activities the County will be responsible for and how the forest practices regulations will be meshed with other regulatory requirements.

UDC Update Project Public Forums are held the first Thursday of each month (unless otherwise noted). Forums are offered in the morning and evening to ensure as much public participation as possible.

For more information or to sign up for monthly or quarterly email notices and news about specific issues pertaining to the UDC Update Project, visit the UDC Update Project web page at www.snoco.org, or call UDC Planning and Development reception at 425-388-3311 ext. 2203 to be directed to a project team member.

For more information or to sign up for monthly or quarterly e-mail notices and news about specific issues pertaining to the Update Project, visit the UDC Update web page or call the UDC Planning and Development reception at 425-388-3311 ext. 2203 to be directed to a project team member.

Rescue Plan for Sound Falls Short

Scientists: Rescue plan for Sound falls short

New blueprint neglects stormwater, critics say

By ROBERT McCLURE
P-I REPORTER

For a quarter-century, government agencies have been birthing plans to rescue ecologically ailing Puget Sound. They didn't work.

And neither will the latest blueprint, a brand-new stab at the task unveiled by a brand-new agency that fails to deal with the biggest source of pollutants entering the Sound, leading scientists charged on Friday.

That pollution source is stormwater, the fetid mixture flowing off streets and parking lots and other hard surfaces, carrying oil, pesticides, antifreeze, pet waste and so much more into the Sound and its tributaries.

The Puget Sound Partnership's 43-page "internal discussion draft" on how to start cleaning up the waters of Puget Sound devotes just one tentative paragraph to what scientists advising the agency identified as the best solution: "low-impact development."

That involves steps such as "green roofs" that soak up rainwater, "rain gardens" that intercept water before it flows onto hard surfaces, cisterns and porous pavement that allows rainwater to soak into the ground.

None is mentioned in the draft paper, surprising even the group of scientists whose expertise the Partnership supposedly tapped to produce the report. They leveled their critique Friday at a meeting of about 180 scientists, regulators and activists at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center

"It's as disappointing to some of you as it is to us not to see those (concepts) pop up as action items," said Derek Booth, a stormwater expert with Stillwater Sciences. "The time is past to be scratching our heads about every step."

Another panel member, Bill Derry of CH2MHill, a consulting firm, said the techniques need to be put into effect not just in newly developing areas but also in already-built cities such as Seattle.

"Retrofit has to be a major focus," Derry said. "Focusing on new development ... just slows the decline."

State Department of Ecology regulator Bill Moore stunned some participants with his straight-ahead admission that his agency has failed to fix the problem, calling the regulatory system for stormwater "fractured and incomplete and frankly not very effective as a consequence."

Moore, head of Ecology's stormwater unit, said solving the problem "probably means behavioral changes" by citizens, "which the regulatory system is not very well suited to."

A prime culprit in polluting stormwater is cars, which shed pollutants even when they are functioning perfectly -- not to mention leaking oil, antifreeze, steering fluid and numerous other pollutants as they age.

Development patterns also will have to change, said scientists on the panel. And, said panel member Anne Fairbrother, a toxicologist, businesses must minimize wastes.

"Many businesses have found that not only is that better for the environment, but it's also better for business," she said.

David Dicks, director of the partnership, said he was not dismayed to hear complaints -- the whole point of the meeting was critiquing the document.

"This is what we want to happen," Dicks said.

In fact, the document discussed on Friday isn't in itself a plan, Dicks said, but rather an attempt to get people talking about the issue.

The Partnership, which was created by the Legislature last year and got rolling in late 2007, has only until later this year to produce an "action agenda" to save the Sound, complete with surefire methods to check on progress and hold accountable people, businesses and agencies getting in the way.

"We're still figuring this out at the same time we are engaging the public," Dicks said.

The draft document pilloried Friday is one of six coming out to tell people how the agency is thinking about a series of topics. Meetings to discuss these early drafts continue Monday in Bremerton, with an all-day session on land use and habitat preservation at the Kitsap Conference Center, 251 First St.

P-I reporter Robert McClure can be reached at 206-448-8092 or robertmcclure@seattlepi.com.

Green Drinks in Snohomish County

SAVE THE DATE –

MAY 13, 2008 from 5:30 to 7:30

THE VERY FIRST EVER GREENDRINKS IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY!!!

Let’s raise a toast to the planet while we figure out ways not to toast the planet. Never heard of Greendrinks? It began in Europe and now sustainability people in over 342 cities all over the globe meet monthly for libations.

It is a lively mixture of people from non-profits, academia, government and business and is a great way of catching up with folks you know and for making new contacts. Greendrinks is simple, unstructured and rather organic. People have found jobs, developed new ideas, done deals and had epiphanies at Greendrinks.

Check out all the ways to have Greendrinks at http://www.greendrinks.org/. Greening Properties http://www.greeningproperties.com/, is hosting the debut for Snohomish County at their downtown Everett office - 2817 Rucker Avenue.

Greening Properties is a small, locally owned independent real estate company that is committed to building communities that honor the past, protect the future and support healthy living for the present. Historic Everett http://www.historiceverett.org/ is our featured non-profit. Historic Preservation and sustainability are natural partners – it has been said that the greenest building is one that already exists.

To make the first Greendrinks a very special event, the extremely talented local artist, Mary Coss will be showing some of her latest work.

Visit http://www.marycoss.com/ to see how art builds community. If you’ve got questions, call Valerie or Mary at 425-252-7601. This is going to be over the top, so bring a friend.

Environmental Superhero: Snohomish County

Elizabeth Armstrong /The Herald/ Deanna Carveth, a hazardous waste chemist for the county, talks a little "trash" with Deanna Clark Willingham (left) and Tom Stowe at a meeting of the International Right of Way Association.


Employee spreads Green Know-How

By Jeff Switzer
Herald Writer

Before long, Deanna Carveth will have to be fitted with a cape. It would be one woven using renewable materials, of course.

"I've packaged a lot of household hazardous waste, rendering people's garages safer from the toxic goo that lived within," Carveth said in her best superhero voice. "I get a cape."

Carveth is a hazardous waste chemist working for Snohomish County's public works department -- in other words, a chemical geek.

After years of tackling pesticides and paints elsewhere, she's been helping Snohomish County's environmental effort.

Her work earned her a big award. She was recently anointed a "Built Green Pioneer" by the Master Builders of King and Snohomish Counties, which represents the region's home building industry.

read more

Reporter Jeff Switzer: 425-339-3452 or jswitzer@heraldnet.com.

Building industry info at builtgreen.net.

Green Conference

http://www.snoedc.org/

Low Impact Development Workshop Series

Puget Sound Low Impact Development Technical Workshop Series

This series is developed by Curtis Hinman with WSU (the author of the LID Technical Guidance Manual) and sponsored by the Puget Sound Partnership. The cost to you is only $50 for each 2-day workshop. These two-day workshops, with instruction by regional and national experts, will provide the current state of knowledge on the following topics:

May 6-7 Permeable paving specifications for permeable asphalt, concrete, interlocking concrete pavers, and other paving systems, as well as subgrade preparation, base material specifications, modeling, and maintenance.

May 28-29 Bioretention siting, sizing and modeling techniques, designing surface and subsurface drainage components, and soil mixes.

June 4-5 Vegetated roof modeling (aka green roofs), cistern design, rainwater collection, and low impact PIN foundations design.

June 25-26 Site planning, clearing and grading, LID construction sequencing, and inspection.

This series will be held in Sequim at the Jamestown Tribal Center. The same series of workshops will be also be provided in Bellingham (September and October 2008) and Seattle (February and March 2009)

For more information and registration see: http://capps.wsu.edu/conferences/lidworkshops/

Rural Housing Issue to the Forefront

Ecoterror attack brings rural housing issue to the forefront
By Jeff Switzer, Herald Writer

When ecoterrorists torched a pocket of multimillion-dollar luxury houses near rural Echo Lake, it highlighted an ongoing debate in Snohomish County over how to keep suburbia from shifting into the rural areas.The county is considering stricter limits on the number of houses built in rural areas, and might require builders to preserve and replant trees when constructing new neighborhoods on the county's scenic back roads.The rules target rural cluster subdivisions, where houses are built close together and large swaths of open space around them are preserved.The Street of Dreams, struck by arson, was part of a future 48-house rural cluster near Maltby called Quinn's Crossing.A banner left at the Street of Dreams arsons said "McMansions in RCDs r not green," believed to be a criticism of rural cluster developments.

In these projects, large homes often are built on suburban-style lanes and cul de sacs instead of being more spread out on traditional rural homesteads.The arsons raise the profile of the debate, but don't push the county toward any course of action, County Council chairman Dave Somers said."We can't respond to terrorist attacks," Somers said. "We need to do what's right for the county."The fires "make it much harder to take a reasoned look at land-use," Somers said. "It detracts from the debate about what is appropriate in terms of rural and urban development."

read more

Reporter Jeff Switzer: 425-339-3452 or jswitzer@heraldnet.com.

Tiny House Cramps Style?

Danny Westneat

Seattle Times staff columnist

MARK HARRISON / THE SEATTLE TIMES

This 230-square-foot rental on Lake Union used to house your columnist, who didn't feel especially confined.

Renting for $800 a month, it may not be the cheapest house in Seattle. But I bet it's the tiniest.

At 230 square feet, it's no bigger than some tool sheds. In fact, that's what it was before someone converted the wedge-shaped shack into a stand-alone home, complete with amenities of houses 10 times the size. It has a bathroom with a shower, a dishwasher, a four-burner stove, a pantry, built-in dressers. Even a closet.Seattle's Smallest House — I don't actually know if it's the very smallest, but the city planning department doesn't keep a list by size so I've decided to call it that until you readers prove otherwise — is so micro and oddly-shaped it's a bit of a tourist attraction.

At one end, in the kitchen, it's less than 5 feet wide. It sits on a dock on Lake Union. Duck Boat tour operators sometimes point it out as they gurgle by.

Whoever lives there becomes a Seattle curio. Strangers float by and lob questions. What's it like in that skinny place? Isn't it claustrophobic? What did you do with all your stuff — throw it in the lake?

I know all this because I used to live in Seattle's Smallest House. It was in the 1990s, when apparently I owned nothing bigger than a toaster. A friend called the other day to say it was for rent.

That espresso hut you used to live in is available, he said.

I went by and peered inside. Empty, it looks smaller than I remember. When I lived there I don't recall lacking for space. The walls never closed in. At 230 square feet it was plenty big to have guests over for dinner. Once I even hosted a Fourth of July party for two dozen (could they possibly have all come inside?).

Looking back it makes me wonder: Why are the rest of our houses — including the one I have now — so gargantuan?

Richard Waits, a 52-year-old furniture maker, has been mulling the same thing. He lives in a 10-by-12 cabin on Vashon Island. That's right — only 120 square feet (though it doesn't have a bathroom, so it isn't a complete house).

It was described in a rental ad as "tiny and magical." Waits says living small is cathartic. You free yourself of your junk. You spend little time cleaning. You don't use much energy.

He never feels cramped, except "when my four grown kids visit me all at once." To him it's the mega-mansion trend that seems freakish. And maybe temporary.

"Everything being huge is a part of our culture, but I think it's a part that's shifting," Waits said. "I would encourage everyone to try a little downsizing. Not just because you should, but because it feels good.

The house I live in now is 2,500 square feet — the U.S. average, but 11 times larger than Seattle's Smallest. Yes, I'm now married with two kids. But it's also true we have rooms nearly 230 square feet that we scarcely use.

When I was peeking in at Seattle's Smallest and its 3-foot-wide bathroom, I wondered: What if I moved back here, family in tow? Would we go crazy? Or could we fit?

I guess I'd go crazy. But there's a guy in California, Jay Shafer of Tumbleweed Tiny House Co., who sells and lives in 100-square-foot houses. He says that while micro is not exactly the new mega, the space you need truly is a state of mind.

"You can only take up 12 square feet at a time," he told American Profile magazine. "Everything beyond that is just elbow room."

Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com.

Hospitals GO Greener to Improve Bottom Line

Composting, recycling can cut their costs

By CHERIE BLACK
P-I REPORTER

Jim Overton admits he isn't very popular at home when his two daughters want to go somewhere.

From his Bothell home, he rides his bike the few miles to work as a registered nurse at Evergreen Medical Center in Kirkland -- and pretty much everywhere else he needs to go. So, he expects his girls, ages 13 and 10, to do the same or walk.

"I've tried to scale back on that and drive them places more," Overton said.

When he went to Evergreen 12 years ago, Overton was impressed that some of the hospital floors had recycling systems. But other floors didn't, and he discovered it was individuals making the effort.

So Overton began sending e-mails. First to co-workers, then to department heads and other hospital administrators, suggesting ways to do more. Last spring he formed the "Green Team," three registered nurses who met quarterly to develop environmental programs for the hospital. Now, 10 of his co-workers are members of the voluntary team.

Hospitals have long been seen as one of the top waste-producing industries. In 1998, the American Hospital Association and the Environmental Protection Agency agreed on goals to reduce the effect of health care facilities on the environment. The goals included nearly eliminating mercury-containing waste by 2005 and reducing hospital waste 50 percent by 2010.

Evergreen and other hospitals in the Seattle area are taking steps to not only protect the environment, but cut costs, as well.

Overton's "Green Team" expanded the hospital's battery recycling program and collected 1,200 pounds of batteries during the past year. The hospital also collects used and unused-but-opened medical supplies, such as oxygen and blood tubes considered "contaminated" under U.S. regulations. The supplies are sent to Third World countries where they are sterilized and reused for patients there.

The team put up more recycling signs and bins and got the hospital's recycling container emptied three times a week instead of two. Containers for used needles are sterilized and reused, instead of being thrown away with the needles.

Overton started an internal Web site so staff could learn to become more environmentally friendly.

The team gives a monthly "Green Stewardship Award" to a staff-nominated co-worker who gives extra effort to the hospital's environmental progress. Local restaurants donated gift certificates as prizes.

Other Seattle-area hospitals are improving their bottom line by going greener.

Virginia Mason Medical Center's cafeteria has no garbage cans, since 100 percent of the cafeteria's waste is recycled, said Steve Grose, administrative director for process improvement. The hospital composts 750 pounds of food a day instead of grinding it in garbage disposals, which had needed 4,000 gallons of water a day. The water savings pays for the bags and composting, he said. In January, Virginia Mason began recycling 70 percent of the plastic used in about 70 surgeries a day.

The hospital hopes to eventually eliminate garbage cans throughout the hospital and recycle everything.

The University of Washington Medical Center recently started a paper-shredding program with Weyerhaeuser that the hospital estimates will save $70,000 a year. Surgical instruments are now disinfected with a less hazardous chemical. In 2006, the medical center began buying 100 percent renewable energy from Seattle City Light, which cost the hospital an extra $40,000 a year, but was worth the added expense, said hospital officials.

In two years, a water reuse system at UW Consolidated Laundry has saved 12 million gallons of water for a cost saving of $140,000 in water and $79,000 in natural gas.

Swedish Medical Center estimates saving more than $ 1 million since 2001 by recycling, said Michael Smith, the hospital's waste compliance manager. Swedish eliminated blood pressure monitors containing about 180 pounds of mercury -- and recycles all paper, cardboard, metals, batteries, lamps and printer toner cartridges, he said.

Food composting will begin at the end of March. It is working on a better way to dispose of expired medications and chemotherapy waste.

Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center recycled more than 40 tons of computer monitors in 2006 and composts food, saving about $8,000 on water a year. Using new technology for cleaning and sterilizing surgical instruments, which uses more high heat and steam, Children's saves 4,100 gallons of water per day and more than $18,000 per year.

At Evergreen, Overton said even though progress has been slow, and the hospital hasn't kept records to compare its improvement, administration has been responsive to his efforts.

Next week, he will propose a part-time position dedicated to making the hospital greener. He has been voluntarily implementing the current programs in his spare time.

"I call it baby steps -- you come up with an idea and you don't hear back right away," Overton said. "They're business people and that's their first focus when it comes to the hospital. I'm passionate about health care, but I'm also passionate about the environment."

P-I reporter Cherie Black can be reached at 206-448-8180 or cherieblack@seattlepi.com. Read her To Your Health blog at blog.seattlepi.com/toyourhealth.

Selling Green Homes Isn't Golden Yet!

(Photo from the Washington Post)

Builders who are adding increased efficiency and eco-friendly features into homes attract lookers but not many buyers.

By Jim Carlton
The Wall Street Journal

More builders are adding "green" features to their new homes. It is a strategy born out of necessity.

In October, the Trilogy division of Shea Homes rolled out a program dubbed Shea Superiology for its 1,500 to 2,000 new homes this year. The homes will have environmentally friendly features such as increased insulation and energy-efficient electronic appliances. KB Home this year also began including appliances awarded the federal Energy Star rating for high energy efficiency as standard in homes, even though they cost more than those without the designation. And Pulte Homes Inc. is adding more insulation and energy-saving appliances at some of its subdivisions in the southwestern U.S.

Interest in green homes was high at the International Builders Show in Orlando, Fla., where the National Association of Home Builders declared Feb. 14 "Green Day" and announced a national green building program that enables builders to achieve certifications they can advertise to the public. The numerous environmental sessions included: "Ride the Green Wave or Be Swept Away."

The push for environmentally friendly construction comes as the housing industry remains mired in a deep and protracted slump, with single-family housing starts off more than a third from 2005 and widely expected to keep sliding this year. To stand out from the crowd, big home builders are going green for the first time or are expanding their existing programs -- a departure from previous practice, when environmentally friendly building was mainly limited to a niche of smaller builders. But results so far are mixed: some developments report increased traffic but no pickup in sales. Other builders say sales are on the upswing but it is too early to tell whether it is at a faster pace than their comparable, nongreen developments. And the higher cost of green construction is proving a hurdle for some companies.

Overall, as much as 10 percent of all housing starts, at a market value of $38 billion, are expected to include environmentally friendly construction by 2010 -- up from 2 percent of starts, or $7.4 billion, last year, according to the National Association of Home Builders. The trend is also getting a boost from the federal government: The Department of Housing and Urban Development has in the last year sponsored "concept homes" in Omaha, Neb., and Charleston, S.C., that include various green features.

"We definitely think (green building is) a selling point, and we think it's here to stay," says Jeffrey Mezger, president and chief executive officer of Los Angeles-based KB Home, which built about 23,000 homes last year.

There is some evidence that the green push is working. In KB's Orlando division, for instance, officials say 35 percent more buyers have opted for upgrades such as better-insulated rooftops and higher-efficiency washing machines since the program started.

Consumers have also responded favorably to Shea Homes' new green program. Although sales prices of the homes with environmentally friendly features run 3 percent to 4 percent higher than those of comparable properties, buyers told the Scottsdale, Ariz., builder in surveys that they would be willing to pay more for a green home in return for energy savings. In one Phoenix-area subdivision, Encanterra, Trilogy officials say they have sold 83 homes since opening it in November, or twice as fast as the local market.

And in California, OCR Solar and Roofing Inc., a contractor that installs solar panels, says that at least two of its builder customers switched to making solar power a standard feature rather than an upgrade when they were each midway into building tracts in Northern California late last year.

But home builders face substantial financial hurdles. KB Home, for instance, posted a 32 percent drop in revenue to $6.4 billion in 2007, and analysts expect revenue to decline 41 percent this year. A spokeswoman for Shea's Trilogy, a unit of J.F. Shea Co., Walnut Creek, Calif., says it is too early to compare sales against nongreen Shea homes.

Among other obstacles, green building can be costly. Industry experts figure that features such as energy-efficient appliances and better insulation can add 3 percent to 5 percent to the cost of a home. Ed Nardi, president of Cresset Group, is constructing three condominium projects in the Boston area with features including thicker windows and less power-consuming heating and air-conditioning systems. But he says the Boston market is so soft that his company is unable to pass on its added 2 percent to 3 percent costs for going green.

Such costs have taken a toll. Pardee Homes, a Seattle-based builder that is owned by forest-products giant Weyerhaeuser Co., is backing off a green program it started last year to include Energy Star appliances as a standard feature in its homes. It costs about $50 more for an Energy Star dishwasher than a conventional model. Dan Fulton, Weyerhaeuser's president, cites falling home prices for the move, although he stressed the company remains committed to an overall green strategy.

Environmentally friendly building doesn't always result in immediate new sales. At its 78-home Timber Creek development in Las Vegas, which opened in April, Pulte Homes had retrofitted in January the models to be certified as green under local green building standards. Features include ultraefficient air conditioners, dual-pane windows with a metallic coating that blocks out the sun's heat and low-flow toilets.

The Bloomfield Hills, Mich., builder says visitor traffic to the development has since increased, with customers drawn in part by estimated monthly savings of $60 to $80 on their power bills because of increased insulation in the Nevada heat. Still, Pulte officials say it is too early to tell what impact the move will have on sales; to date, 50 of the homes in the Las Vegas development have sold.

Overall, Pulte remains on a downward track, with analysts expecting another 27 percent drop in revenue this year after a 35 percent decline in 2007 to $9.3 billion.

Meanwhile, some environmentalists accuse builders of hypocrisy in labeling homes as environmentally friendly. Authorities suspect ecoterrorism in fires Monday that gutted three homes and damaged two others under construction in a Seattle suburb where the builder was promoting the green practices used in constructing them. The development in Woodinville, Wash., had been opposed by some residents and environmentalists for being too close to sensitive areas like a pristine stream.

Nonetheless, a whole cottage industry has sprung up to help builders design green. Hilltribe Homes, an Ontario, Canada, green designer, said that after starting business in December, it has signed a contract of approximately $500 million to provide services for a development of 6,500 green homes in Victoria, B.C.

Meanwhile, Cherokee Investment Partners, a private-equity fund in Raleigh, N.C., in December opened a show home that has been certified by the builders' association as the first green home built in an existing development. Officials of the equity fund, which specializes in socially-responsible investments, say they built the five-bedroom, $500,000 home with traditional-looking designs to show other builders it could be done.

Among its features: a wheat kitchen cabinet coated with a cherry veneer, and solar shingles that match the look of shingles of older homes in the neighborhood. Jonathan Philips, senior director for the firm, has moved into the home and says builders from all over the country have come to tour it.

"This green revolution is coming, whether the builder likes it or not," says Ed Sullivan, chief economist for the Portland Cement Association, an industry trade group based in Skokie, Ill. "The consumer wants it."

Clean Water and a Thriving Economy

GUEST COMMENTARY

By Diana Gale

Dozens of organizations and hundreds of volunteers are working to restore and protect the Snohomish River estuary and the Stillaguamish River Watershed. It's a race against the clock as Snohomish County's population is projected to grow by more than 50 percent during the next 20 years.

The Snohomish River basin is an abundant ecological system. More than 1,700 rivers and streams drain 2,000 square miles of terrain. The Stillaguamish River Basin is the fifth-largest tributary draining into Puget Sound. Both provide habitat for birds, fish and animals -- and jobs, natural resources and recreational opportunities for people.

But after a century of human intervention, these rivers are suffering. They pick up pollution -- chemicals and toxins -- from roads and roofs, and carry them to Puget Sound. Habitat has been lost to dikes, levees and canals that create farmland and protect homes.

What is ailing these river systems is what is ailing all of Puget Sound -- too much pollution over too much time by too many people.

That's why Gov. Chris Gregoire and the Legislature created the Puget Sound Partnership: to figure out what's wrong, and create an Action Agenda that leads to a clean and healthy Puget Sound.

Many initiatives have aimed at Puget Sound environmental issues, and progress has been made. But work has been uncoordinated and results uncertain. So we are doing something never before attempted: Our Action Agenda is a long-range, broad-based strategy for all of Puget Sound -- from the snow caps to the white caps.

Government cannot do this alone. Everyone must be part of the solution. The Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum, the Stillaguamish Implementation Review Committee and the Marine Resources Committee serve as examples of the cooperation we need to apply throughout Puget Sound.

The scale and complexity of Puget Sound demand that to be successful, our entire region must work together. There are 2,500 miles of shoreline. Fourteen major rivers, and thousands of streams, feed into its waters. It is home to literally thousands of species of wildlife and marine life.

Despite its size, this vast estuary is ecologically delicate; and hidden from our picture postcard views are signs of serious trouble.

Maybe you remember walking or boating around Whidbey and Camano islands when you were a child -- and seeing herons, sandpipers and other shorebirds. Today there are far fewer marine birds -- nearly a 50 percent decline in the past two decades.

Commercial shellfish beds are closed because the clams, mussels and oysters aren't safe to eat. Some beaches aren't safe for swimming. Our local icons -- salmon and orcas -- are barely surviving.

For more than 100 years we relied on streams, rivers and Puget Sound to dispose of our waste -- everything from industrial byproducts to raw sewage.

Nearly 4 million people live around the Sound now, and 1.5 million more are expected in the next 15 years. With all these people, our need for food, houses, roads and jobs is putting stress on Puget Sound.

But it is also we, the people who live here and care about Puget Sound, who can restore it. Our population is a resource -- full of smart, creative people who know a clean and healthy Puget Sound improves our quality of life and supports our economy.

The Puget Sound Partnership is a community effort of elected and public officials, tribal and business leaders, scientists, environmentalists, parents, friends and neighbors -- all of whom are committed to an effective Action Agenda for a cleaner Puget Sound.

The Partnership is a comprehensive effort that includes local input from every part of Puget Sound. It is a strategic effort that uses science to inform decisions and focus limited resources. And it is a responsible effort with built-in accountability to ensure our cleanup and restoration efforts achieve the intended results.

With a coordinated and strategic effort, we will define what is needed to make Puget Sound healthy again, and create a roadmap for how to get it done.

Your input is important. On Wednesday, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., we will hold a public meeting in Everett about the status of Puget Sound's health and the greatest threats to it. More information can be found online at www.psp.wa.gov/actionagenda3.html.

Everything around Puget Sound is connected: How we build our homes and businesses, protect our streams and forests, and react to climate change will affect how we leave Puget Sound for future generations.

Working together, we can have both a thriving economy and healthy Puget Sound waterways.



Diana Gale is a member of the Leadership Council, the Puget Sound Partnership's governing body.

We Can't Put the Fire Out with Gasoline

By Dave Somers and Valerie Steel


The choices made now in local land-use and zoning plans, about where our growing population will live and work and how we will get around, will lock us into development patterns that will determine our contribution to rapid, extreme climate change.

According to numerous studies, vehicle emissions comprise half of the state's greenhouse gases that fuel global warming. As Washington continues to grow, it is essential that we devise ways that allow us to live prosperously while driving less. Car-dependent sprawl is the leading cause of decreased farm and forest land, and depletion of carbon-cleaning, oxygen-producing vegetation is another factor in global warming. In the U.S., residential and commercial buildings account for approximately 65 percent of electricity consumption, 36 percent of energy use and 30 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Integrating sustainable building design along with smart land use planning can reduce this consumption by up to 50 percent.

Transportation, farm and forest conversion, car-dependent land use planning and outdated construction techniques are serious issues in Snohomish County. Last year in Snohomish County, 18 percent of all new homes were built out in our rural areas, eating up valuable rural lands, creating conflicts with working forests and farms, and creating longer commutes and clogged roads. Unfortunately, the trend in rural development is increasing, not decreasing.

In order to achieve the state's goal to significantly reduce global warming pollution, fact-based, responsible decisions need to be made now so we may thrive in a way that reduces driving and meets the increasing demand for sustainable neighborhoods that are walkable and bikeable, well served by mass transit, employ low-impact development techniques and are a joy to be in.

Land use is at heart a local issue and local leadership is essential if we are going to reduce greenhouse gas emission related to how we live on the land. There will be no national solution to this part of the problem. We must come up with solutions here in Washington -- in our own communities, cities and counties.

Fortunately, local jurisdictions representing nearly 70 percent of the state's population have committed to major reductions in their carbon footprints, including Everett and Edmonds. Additionally, Snohomish and six other counties have joined ICLEI -- Local Governments for Sustainability -- which seek to implement local solutions to global problems like unnatural climate change.

Because Washington has already adopted smart growth strategies through the adoption and implementation of the Growth Management Act, we are poised to be national leaders in figuring out sustainable land-use policies that will help reduce global warming emissions. The GMA recognizes the state's diversity from urban to rural and east to west and puts forward statewide goals that require cities in more populated areas to plan for future population growth, establish urban growth areas, ensure adequate infrastructure, protect environmentally critical areas and preserve agricultural and forest lands for local renewable resource production. The GMA is an excellent framework for tackling atmospheric calamity at both the state and local levels.

The challenge of successfully confronting global warming -- reducing our future emissions, adapting to anticipated impacts and possibly reversing damage -- will require coordinated effort and support statewide. That is why we are working to pass a bill during this year's legislative session, Local Solutions to Global Warming (SHB 2797 and SSB 6580), which will provide local governments with the tools and support needed to address and reduce land-use contributions to global warming pollution.

Specifically, the bill adds a goal to the GMA of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to expected impacts of global warming. It directs the state to provide cities and counties with a tool to inventory, measure and estimate land-use-related greenhouse gas emissions. Through a competitive grants program, funds will be available for municipalities that are already taking action or are interested in beginning to address climate change through land use and planning.

To learn more about Local Solutions to Global Warming and to read the bill in its entirety, please visit: www.futurewise.org/LocalSolutions.

We urge the Legislature to pass this bill and support local governments so we can stop adding fuel to the fire and before we all get burned.



Dave Somers is a Snohomish County Council member, representing District 5. Valerie Steel owns Greening Properties, a real estate firm in Everett.

Native Plant Society Course 2008

WA Native Plant Society stewardship course this Spring in Everett. I wanted to let
you know about it in case you or a co-worker, friend or neighbor might be interested in learning about native plants, local westside ecosystems and restoring them. I've enclosed the news release and a flyer.

The course runs Fridays, April 4 - June 6 from 8:30am-4:30pm.
Applications are due by March 12 at 5pm, It's 100 hours of free, expert
training in exchange for 100 hours of volunteer service restoring or
monitoring urban forests, wetlands, or streamsides plus participating in
some community educational events.

Please feel free to pass on the information. Thanks for helping spread
the word!

Donna Gleisner, coordinator
Native Plant Stewardship Program
Snohomish County
425-252-4185

Step to Make State Greener

Bill orders firm steps to make state 'greener'
It targets miles driven, gases emitted, boosts earth-friendly jobs
By LISA STIFFLER AND CHRIS McGANN
P-I REPORTERS

After last-minute, closed-door deal-making that included arm-twisting by Gov. Chris Gregoire, the state House took a step Tuesday toward ushering in what some are calling the "sustainable revolution."

Brushing up against a deadline for bill passage, lawmakers approved legislation to cut greenhouse gas emissions and provide more "green economy" jobs. It would prepare the state for a regional climate initiative in which pollution rights potentially worth billions of dollars could be traded.

The legislation would provide a framework and goals, including one to cut the number of miles driven by state residents. Details would be worked out later.

Drawing parallels to the Industrial Revolution at the turn of the 19th century, those for and against the legislation predicted big changes in the economy as cities, states and nations try to slash their greenhouse gas emissions. The pollutants are blamed for warming the planet, resulting in higher sea levels, shrinking glaciers and more wildfires.

"We are moving into a sustainable age, and all those industrial folks are worried, but at this point, they're basically just worried about the unknown," said Rep. Hans Dunshee, a Snohomish Democrat and prime sponsor of the legislation.

"There is tremendous opportunity for Washington businesses and Washington workers," said Becky Kelley of the nonprofit Washington Environmental Council. "There are good jobs to be had. There's economic development to be accomplished. That's a very hopeful message."

Others saw the situation differently.

"I'm a little bit more cynical than that," said House Minority Leader Richard DeBolt, R-Chehalis. He pointed to unfilled promises of a booming biodiesel industry fueled with Washington-grown canola.

"The sound bite is great," DeBolt said. "The implementation is different."

"We've got big changes coming our way, and they're going to be really, really expensive," warned Grant Nelson of the Association of Washington Business. "Consumers should be ready for the prices of their goods and services and electricity -- which has been historically lower than most any other state in the nation -- brace yourself for some significant cost increases."

The legislation, which Gregoire supports, now goes to the Senate, where approval is expected.

Gregoire got involved at the last minute when it appeared that the legislation was bogged down over how much power was to be granted to the state Ecology Department to take action to meet climate-change goals. The final version would reduce the department's authority.

A prime goal of the bill is to prepare the state for working with the Western Climate Initiative, a coalition of seven states and two Canadian provinces trying to cut greenhouse gas emissions regionally.

This summer, initiative members will negotiate a regional, market-based approach for cutting carbon dioxide. It likely will be a cap-and-trade system that sets emissions limits and allows polluters to barter for the right to pollute above those limits. State lawmakers must approve the system before Washington participates.

With Tuesday's legislation, "we are giving the negotiators the strongest hand possible so they can design a cap and trade that works for the Washington economy while reducing the negative impacts of global warming," said Cliff Traisman, lobbyist for Washington Conservation Voters and the Washington Environmental Council.

House Bill 2815 would give the Ecology Department the authority to require the state's largest polluters to report their emissions beginning in 2010, a key component of cap and trade.

The reporting rules would apply to at least 80 businesses and utilities, including refineries, pulp and paper mills, cement kilns, lumber mills, large manufacturers and food processors.

The reporting rules also apply to motor vehicle fleets producing at least 2,500 tons of carbon dioxide, which equals about 250,000 gallons of fuel burned annually. That includes truck and delivery fleets, rental car companies, phone and cable companies and government-agency fleets.

How much these different entities would be allowed to pollute will be hammered out by the Western Climate Initiative.

One of the biggest battles over the legislation was waged by the timber and agriculture industries. Because plants and trees capture carbon dioxide, lobbyist for those industries asked for their sectors to be given credit explicitly for those benefits.

"We are not emitters. We are net positive for carbon. We help make up for others." John Stuhlmiller, director of state affairs for the Washington Farm Bureau.

But Rep. Dunshee said he didn't want to establish specific rules before the whole thing is worked on by the Western Climate Initiative.

Another controversial matter was a set of goals for reducing the number of vehicle miles driven by state residents, which could take some of the pressure off industry for reducing emissions. Critics questioned the logic of a total-miles-traveled approach for cutting carbon dioxide.

"Vehicle miles traveled does not distinguish between a hybrid and a Hummer," said Todd Myers, environmental director for the Washington Policy Center, a conservative think tank.

The legislation also sets a goal of increasing the number of "green economy" jobs to 25,000 by 2020 by investing in worker training. There are currently as many as 6,000 workers in that sector in the Puget Sound region, said Steve Gerritson, a green technology expert with Enterprise Seattle, a nonprofit promoting job growth.

"This is just exploding, this particular sector," Gerritson said.

He gave much of the credit to sustained high oil prices. Environmentalists say the creation of a cap-and-trade market will spur it on further.

"The whole idea here is getting the market to work and to create incentives" by limiting emissions, said Kelley of the Washington Environmental Council. "We're talking about remaking the economy of the nation, the whole globe."



AT A GLANCE

House Bill 2815 lays an important foundation for addressing climate change statewide. The House approved it 64-31 Tuesday and moved it to the Senate. Gov. Chris Gregoire supports the legislation. Here's what it would do:


Require the state to meet greenhouse-gas reduction goals set last year.


Give the state Ecology Department the authority to require the largest producers of greenhouse gases to report their emissions beginning in 2010.


Instruct Ecology to come back to lawmakers later this year with the state's part of the Western Climate Initiative's plan for reducing carbon dioxide release (likely some form of "cap and trade").


Create an initiative for increasing the number of clean-energy jobs through job training.


Set statewide goals for cutting the amount of miles driven per person.


P-I reporter Lisa Stiffler can be reached at 206-448-8042 or lisastiffler@seattlepi.com. Read her blog on the environment at datelineearth.com.

Storm Water Poisoning Puget Sound?

Storm water poisoning Puget Sound

Associated Press

OLYMPIA -- Pollution pours into Puget Sound every time it rains.

There's oil and grease from parking lots, driveways and roads, fertilizers and pesticides from lawns, heavy metals from the wear and tear on brakes and tires, and animal waste.

Storm water runoff is considered the No. 1 pollution problem for the urban Puget Sound region.

"In the face of population growth and development, storm water may be the biggest challenge we face in the effort to clean up and protect Puget Sound," state Department of Ecology director Jay Manning told The Olympian newspaper.

The state Department of Ecology has estimated that storm water runoff sends more contamination into Puget Sound than any other pollution pathway. It delivers 22,580 metric tons of oil and petroleum each year, more than 20 times the volume of direct oil spills entering the sound.

Toxic storm water is a problem for about one-third of the state's water bodies that don't meet federal Clean Water Act standards. Marine sediments near storm water discharge pipes in urban bays are among the most polluted in Puget Sound.

Severe storms, like the one that walloped Western Washington in early December, create storm water runoff that overwhelms regional sewage treatment plants, sending untreated human waste into Puget Sound.

Storm water erodes stream banks, especially after heavy rains. It dumps sediment in the water and scours gravel from streams, hampering efforts to recover salmon and the 40 other imperiled species in Puget Sound.

As heavy metals and other pollutants build up in salmon, they have trouble reproducing or fending off predators. The accumulating toxins place humans at risk when they eat contaminated fish and shellfish.

"We need to address storm water pollution, if we are to have any hope of restoring the Puget Sound ecosystem," said Bruce Wishart, policy director for the conservation group People for Puget Sound.

Forested property and other undeveloped land soaks up most rainfall. Cut down trees, scrape away and pave over the vegetation, add rooftops, parking lots and driveways, and the storm water problems mount.

"Once you've cleared the site, you've lost the battle," said Tom Holz, an Olympia-area storm water engineer. "It's very unlikely we will meet Gov. Chris Gregoire's goal of a clean, healthy Puget Sound without some radical changes in land use."

Most new development in the region must capture storm water, then either treat and infiltrate it back into the ground, or release it slowly. That practice has been in vogue only since the mid-1980s.

While new storm water management techniques are debated and litigated, older developments send the storm water they generate to the nearest ditch or stream. "Older developments and neighborhoods are sitting out there like a bleeding sore," Holz said.

There's no official estimate of what it would cost to retrofit older developments to control storm water.

Simply replacing a storm water pipe serving one development, Tanglewilde near Lacey, with grass-lined ditches to soak up the water would cost an estimated $750,000.

The storm water from Tanglewilde contributes bacteria and nitrogen to lower Henderson Inlet, a public and environmental health problem that makes shellfish unfit to eat. It also contributes to oxygen-robbing algal blooms in the marine waters of South Sound.

There are hundreds of developments with similar storm water problems stretching from Olympia to Bellingham. The state highway system is another major source of storm water runoff.

The damage and economic costs of storm water runoff in the Puget Sound region will total at least $1 billion in the next decade, according to a 2006 study by the University of Washington's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

Those costs include degraded water quality, landslides, flooding, shellfish harvest closures and habitat losses and repairs.

"We can't keep stripping land bare and then paving it over," Wishart said. "We need to do land-use planning in a different way that takes into account water quality."

LID Storm Management Workshop

Greetings! We would like to invite you to our first LID stormwater management workshop. Please forward this email to your colleagues or associates who would be interested in attending.


City of Puyallup and Washington State University-Puyallup

Low Impact Development

Stormwater Research and Demonstration Workshop

March 6, 2008

WSU Puyallup Allmendinger Center 8 AM – 1PM



Join us to determine research needs and help develop research plans to assess the performance of low impact development stormwater management practices at WSU Puyallup. ATTENDANCE IS LIMITED and pre-registration is required. So please register for “Puyallup Event” at http://www.ogrd.wsu.edu/workshops.asp



8:00-8:25: Registration



8:25- 8:30: Welcome, Jon Newkirk, Director, WSU - Puyallup Research

and Extension Center



8:30-8:45: Overview of WSU Puyallup Storm Water retrofit project,

Curtis Hinman, WSU Extension Faculty



8:45-9:30: Overview of Low Impact Development Research in the

Puget Sound, Curtis Hinman, WSU Extension Faculty



9:30-10:30: Overview of Rain Garden Research in Wisconsin, Nick Balster,

Assistant Professor, Department of Soil Science, University of

Wisconsin



10:30-10:45: Break and site walk around



11:00-Noon: Small group research brain-storming



Noon-12:45: Lunch provided



12:45-1:00: Wrap-up



1pm: Departure


City of Puyallup/WSU Stormwater Management Implementation Grant Project Summary:



The City of Puyallup, in partnership with the WSU Puyallup Research and Extension Center has received a Department of Ecology grant to significantly reduce stormwater volumes and improve water quality treatment at the Center using low impact development (LID) management practices.

The retrofit project includes a significant research / monitoring component to measure the impacts of various LID practices. We are inviting interested parties to take place in a collaborative planning process to gather input and outline specific areas where research is needed.

The Center has been in operation for over 100 years. No stormwater flow control or treatment exists on the site and stormwater is discharged directly from these surfaces to Woodland Creek which confluences with Clark’s Creek and eventually the Puyallup River. Clark’s Creek is a salmon bearing stream and is a 303(d) water body. LID integrated management practices including bioretention and permeable paving will be installed to reduce impacts to receiving waters, as well as provide performance monitoring and public education for the Puget Sound region. The location of the WSU Puyallup Center affords the Puget Sound region with a sustainable opportunity to continually research and demonstrate LID stormwater management methods by viewing a system at work.


Tanyalee Erwin

Project Manager

Washington State University Puyallup Research and Extension Center

Solutions for the region; programs for its people

7612 Pioneer Way E.

Puyallup, WA 98371-4998

253-445-4504

253.445.4571 fax

terwin@wsu.edu

http://puyallup.wsu.edu

Advanced Buildings Core Performance

February 28, 8:00AM - 12:30PM
Snohomish PUD

Everett, Washington

Participants in this half-day workshop will learn how to use Advanced Buildings Core Performance. Core Performance is the enhanced prescriptive path for commercial buildings that results better energy performance without the time and expense of modeling.

The Core Performance Guide includes a set of strategies, related to building envelope, lighting, HVAC, power systems and controls, that when taken together provide a prescriptive path for design teams to create buildings up to 30% more energy efficient than ASHRAE 90.1 2004.

Core Performance has also been adopted by USGBC as a prescriptive option for up to five LEED points. Presented will be the energy-saving benefits of using Core Performance as well as non-energy benefits such as corporate productivity, occupant satisfaction, risk management and environmental stewardship.

Case study examples will focus on the Core Performance path to high performance buildings. The Advance Building Core Performance Guide, a $95 value is included in the $99 workshop fee.

Register for this event!


http://www.advancedbuildings.net/training.php

Wastershed Steward Snohomish County

Craig Young, South County Watershed Steward,
Snohomish County Surface Water Management


Craig Young has been a watershed steward for Snohomish County for 17 years. He is a subcommittee member for the American Public Works Association working toward developing new standards and regulations, and propose projects and activities to achieve water quality and sustainable watershed health.

He co-founded, is on the executive board, and has been Project Technical Advisory Group leader on the Sustainable Development Task Force for 5 years, promoting Low Impact Development (LID).

Why Not plan Low Impact?

Scott Pesznecker, Herald Writer reports Builder has plans for Japanese Gulch and this alerts preservation advocates in Everett and Mukilteo.

EVERETT -- Runners, bicyclists and hikers who live in Mukilteo have spent years encouraging city leaders to preserve Japanese Gulch, a steep swath of woods and wetlands.A development company in California has other plans.

The company, Birtcher Development & Investments, wants to build a light industrial park by Japanese Gulch on the edge of Everett city limits, said Jim Edwards, senior vice president for the company's Northwest region.The proposed development would be built on roughly 55 acres of a 160-acre site on the west side of the gulch.

That's an area where nearby residents have trespassed for years to enjoy a network of trails on privately owned land.Birtcher Development already has an agreement in place to buy the land from four property owners, assuming the company likes what it sees from an ongoing feasibility study.

The study has been under way for six months, Edwards said."We're pursuing our original intent, which is to buy and develop the property," Edwards said.The company specializes in building state-of-the-art industrial and business parks to be sold or leased, and is responsible for developing thousands of acres of land on the West Coast, Edwards said.Mukilteo City Councilman Kevin Stoltz is among the avid runners who frequent the trails and slopes of Japanese Gulch. He jogs through the woods there about four times a week, and almost always encounters four or five people along the way.

Lately, Stoltz said, he's noticed survey flags and other indications that the gulch is under study."The whole area up there is full of trails," he said. "That would really impact people greatly who have been using it over the years."Birtcher Development representatives have been discussing their plans with Everett and Mukilteo officials for the past few months. Although the gulch property is in Everett, the land can only be accessed through Mukilteo.

A group of Mukilteo residents who are determined to try to prevent development in the gulch recently voiced their displeasure at an Everett City Council meeting.If the developer winds up dropping its plans to build an industrial park, the citizens group wants the city of Everett to have a plan in place for keeping the gulch green."We realize that other developers have looked at this property over the past 30 years, and they've all backed out, but it might turn out that some developer won't," said Mukilteo resident Richard Emery, the group's leader. "We realize that may be this developer, and we may have waited too long."Everett Mayor Ray Stephanson and

Council President Drew Nielsen said they would prefer that the site be preserved as open space. However, they said they will not commit money for a park there because doing so would not fit into Everett's long-term parks plan. Everett's plan focuses on using land that already is public, such as utility rights-of-way and school sites.

The developer has offered to give the Japanese Gulch acreage that it can't build on to be used as parkland by the city of Everett."We understand the Mukilteo citizens' appreciation for the woods that they've enjoyed for a long time. We're not insensitive to their feelings about it," Edwards said.

Everett officials said they would be willing to clear the way for Mukilteo to annex Japanese Gulch land now in Everett, but only if Mukilteo officials pledge to preserve the land as a park.Mukilteo still would have to come up with the money to buy the land, and that is a problem, Mukilteo Mayor Joe Marine said.Also, most of the land the developer has offered to provide the city of Everett is either wetlands or steep hillside, and could not be used as a park, Marine said."The area they can't develop is basically the gully part," he said. "It doesn't matter whether they gift it to Everett or keep it for themselves. It's trees. It's a slope."Preserving the interior of the gulch would be better than nothing, Stoltz said. He believes there is support on the Mukilteo City Council to find a way to obtain the land if plans for the industrial park fall through.

There is definitely support in the community to preserve the gulch, Emery said."There's nothing like it in south Snohomish County at this point," he said. "If it goes away, it's irreplaceable. It never comes back."