Citizen Portal
Sign In

Resident urges PFAS testing at DTG site, warns of risks to Redmond aquifer

Redmond Planning Commission · February 11, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the Feb. 11 Planning Commission meeting, resident David Morton asked commissioners to advise council to require PFAS testing at the former DTG all‑wood recycling site before any ground disturbance, citing PFOS readings over EPA guidance in Wells 1 and 2 and the site's location in Redmond's Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA 1).

David Morton, a Redmond resident, told the Planning Commission on Feb. 11 that firefighting foam and other historic contamination at the former DTG all‑wood recycling site could have introduced PFAS into groundwater that feeds Redmond’s municipal wells.

"PFOS levels exceeding EPA's 4 parts per trillion standard" were found in Wells 1 and 2, Morton said, and the DTG property sits within Redmond’s Critical Aquifer Recharge Area 1, where groundwater contamination can reach drinking‑water wells in under five years. He urged the commission to advise the mayor and City Council to require PFAS testing at the DTG site before any soil disturbance connected with the Evans Creek relocation project.

Morton also noted a 2013 firefighting response at the site and cited a former city natural‑resources manager’s statement that firefighting foam had been used during that multi‑day event. He said prior soil sampling by the state Department of Ecology in 2022 did not include PFAS tests and called that omission a "significant gap in the environmental review process." He asked the commission to recommend strengthening critical‑area protections and to require PFAS assessment for projects in CARA zones, particularly where there are documented environmental violations or known foam use.

Commissioners and staff discussed how to advance the request. Commissioner Copley suggested the matter could be raised during commissioner comment or in a letter to council. Staff member Glenn Coyle said individual commissioners could submit letters to City Council as residents or raise the issue at council public comment; he said the logistics of a collective commission letter would need to be developed in a public forum.

There was no formal commission motion or vote on PFAS testing during the meeting. The commission asked staff to clarify the appropriate procedural steps and to place the PFAS topic on a future agenda or issue matrix if a collective action were pursued.