HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2009-11-23 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETTukwila City Council Agenda
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Jim Haggerton, Mayor Councilmembers: Joe Duffie Pamela Linder
Rhonda Berry, City Administrator Dennis Robertson Verna Griffin
Joan Hernandez, Council President Kathy Hougardy De'Sean Quinn
To be followed by a Special Meeting
Monday, November 23, 2009, 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall; Council Chambers
1. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Kids Without Borders
2. CITIZEN At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda (please limit
COMMENT your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this
agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion.
3. PUBLIC An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Washington increasing the Pg.1
HEARINGS regular propertytax levy 1% from the previous year, commencing 1/1/2010, on all property,
both real and personal, in compliance with RCW 84.55.120.
4. SPECIAL a. Tax Levy Items: Pg.1
ISSUES 1. An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City of Tukwila in King County for
the fiscal year commencing 1/1/2010, on all property, both real and personal.
2. A resolution declaring a finding of substantial need relating to the City of Tukwila
property tax levy commencing 1/1/2010.
3. An ordinance increasing the regular property tax levy 1% from the previous year
commencing 1/1/2010, on all property, both real and personal.
b. A resolution adopting the 2010 -2015 Financial Planning Model and the Capital Pg.13
Improvement Program.
c. A contract with Phillip Hallstrom PJKH, LLC for the Seattle Southside Visitor Services Pg.25
Center (SSVS) website re- design in the amount of $52,920.00.
d. A contract with Lunar Cow for the Seattle Southside Visitor Services Center vacation Pg.41
planner re- design in the amount of $50,910.00.
e. An Interlocal Agreement with King County for services provided by the King County Pg.57
Road Services Division.
f. An ordinance adopting all King County Zoning, Land Use, Shoreline and other Pg.73
development regulations for any work related to the South Park Bridge.
g. A supplement to Contract #05 -071 with HNTB for the Tukwila Urban Center Access Pg.91
Project (Klickitat) in the amount of $147,384.00.
h. An amendment to Contract #06 -059 with Commercial Development Solutions for 2010 Pg.115
project management services in the amount of $132,000.00.
i. Shoreline Master Program Ordinances: Pg.125
1. An ordinance approving and adopting a Shoreline Master Program update for the Pg.129
City of Tukwila to incorporate new State requirements.
2. An ordinance updating Comprehensive Plan policies for areas subject to shoreline Pg.371
jurisdiction to incorporate new State requirements.
3. An ordinance updating requirements for shoreline regulations to incorporate new Pg.383
State requirements regarding "Shoreline Overlay."
4. An ordinance updating definitions for shoreline regulations to incorporate new State Pg.431
requirements.
j. An ordinance establishing new regulations regarding City cash reserves. Pg.441
5. REPORTS a. Mayor c. Staff e. Intergovernmental
b. City Council d. City Attorney
Tukwila City Council Agenda
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Page 2
6. MISCELLANEOUS
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION
8. ADJOURN TO SPECIAL MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL
2. CONSENT Approval of vouchers.
AGENDA
3. UNFINISHED a. Tax Levy Items: Pg.1
BUSINESS 1. An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City of Tukwila in King
County for the fiscal year commencing 1/1/2010, on all property, both real and
personal.
2. A resolution declaring a finding of substantial need relating to the City of
Tukwila property tax levy commencing 1/1/2010.
3. An ordinance increasing the regular property tax levy 1% from the previous
year commencing 1/1/2010, on all property, both real and personal.
b. Authorize the Mayor to sign Supplement #8 to Contract #05 -071 with HNTB for Pg.91
the Tukwila Urban Center Access Project (Klickitat) in the amount of
$147,384.00.
4. ADJOURNMENT
SPECIAL MEETING
Ord #2262 Res #1701
Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible.
Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance
notice to the City Clerk s Office 206 433 1800 /TDD 206 248 -2933. This notice is available at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us. and
in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities.
Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped.
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
J -4 Inztials
\y ITEM ND,
:`err Z 1 Mee ting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Counczl
F 11/23/09 1 SH 1 3 f y? COW
1 P�
1 2 90
ITE INFORMATION-'
CAS NUMBER: 09-162 ORIGINAL AGENDA DA 1E..: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
AGENDA ITEM TITLE An ordinance setting the 2010 property tax levy amount, an ordinance setting the
2010 levy rate, and a resolution of finding of substantial need.
CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date
;PONSOR Council Ma Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P &R Police PW/
;PONSOR'S This agenda item includes an ordinance setting the amount of the 2010 property tax levy
iUMMARY change, an ordinance setting the 2010 property tax levy rate, and a resolution of finding of
substantial need as it relates to an increase in property taxes of 1 over the 2009
property tax levy.
The Council is being asked to approve the ordinances related to the 2010 property tax
levy. and adopt the resolution of findina of substantial need.
ZEVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte /1 F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: 11/17/09
1ECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Finance Department
COMMITTEE Unanimous approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole
COST IMPACT/ FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
'und Source:
'omments:
MTGe- DATE '.;r=', RECORD OF COUNC ACTION
11/23/09 j
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 J Informational Memorandum dated 11/12/09
Ordinance Levying General Taxes for 2010
Resolution Finding of Substantial Need
Ordinance Increasing the Tax Levy by 1%
Historical Levy Rates spreadsheet
Minutes of the 11/17/09 Finance and Safety Committee Meeting
1
2
TO:
City of Tukwila
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Rhonda Berry
Finance and Safety Committee
FROM: Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director
DATE: November 12, 2009
SUBJECT: 2010 Property Tax Levy
ISSUE
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
The Council must consider and pass a property tax levy for 2010 by November 30,
2009.
BACKGROUND
A Public Hearing for adoption of the 2010 property tax levy is required by RCW
84.55.120. The Hearing is scheduled for November 23, 2009. Adoption of the 2010
property tax levy is currently scheduled for the same evening at a Special Meeting of
the City Council.
DISCUSSION
The increase in levy rate for 2010 is limited by statute to the lesser of one percent or the
change in the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD). Because the IPD for property tax purposes is
0.85 the lesser of these two factors is a negative number. City Council may, upon a
finding of substantial need, levy the full one percent increase in accordance with RCW
84.55.0101. This will insure no decrease in the levy for 2010 due to the negative IPD.
Assessed value overall declined from $5,175,709,975 for the 2009 levy to
$4,964,257,830 for the 2010 levy. This decline of $211,452,145 represents a 4.26%
decrease in the 2010 assessed value.
The proposed levy rate for 2010 is $2.52 per $1,000 of assessed value. This is an
increase of $0.14676 per $1,000 of assessed value, or 6.18 For an average home of
$250,000 in value, the City portion of property taxes would be $630, an increase of
$36.69 over 2009. The City's portion of the overall total levy rate in 2009 was 21.98
If Council were to not pass the resolution of finding of substantial need, the levy limit
factor would be -0.85% of the 2009 levy rate. This would result in a levy rate of $2.47
per $1,000 of assessed value. The resulting decline in property tax revenue for the City
for 2010 would be approximately $250,000.
3
4
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
Council is being asked to approve the ordinance adopting the General Tax Levy, the
ordinance adopting the Regular Levy, and the resolution establishing a finding of
substantial need.
This item is scheduled to be discussed at the November 23, 2009 Committee of the
Whole meeting. A Public Hearing will also be held that evening, as well as a Special
Meeting for adoption of the 2010 levy.
ATTACHMENT
Regular Levy Ordinance in draft form
General Tax Levy Ordinance in draft form
Substantial Need Resolution in draft form
Historical Levy Rates spreadsheet
C:Itemp\XPg rpwiselI nfoMemo2010PropertyTaxLevy. doc
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
W Word Processing Ordinances \General Tax Levy 2009.doc
SH:ksn 11/18/2009
;;—IM
City of Tukwila
Washington
Ordinance No.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, LEVYING THE GENERAL TAXES FOR THE CITY OF
TUKWILA IN KING COUNTY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING
JANUARY 1, 2010, ON ALL PROPERTY, BOTH REAL AND PERSONAL, IN SAID
CITY, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO TAXATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING
SUFFICIENT REVENUE TO CARRY ON THE SERVICES OF THE SEVERAL
DEPARTMENTS OF SAID CITY FOR THE ENSUING YEAR, AS REQUIRED BY
LAW; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila has considered the City's anticipated
financial requirements for 2010 and the amounts necessary and available to be raised by ad
valorem taxes on real, personal and utility property; and
WHEREAS, the final assessed valuation calculation has been determined;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Regular Tax Levy.
A. There shall be and hereby is levied on all real, personal and utility property in the City
of Tukwila, in King County, whose estimated assessed valuation is $4,965,087,948, current taxes
for the ensuing year commencing January 2010, in the amount and at the rates specified below.
Rate Amount
Regular Tax Levy $2.52 $12,500,000
B. The said taxes herein provided for are levied for the purpose of payment upon the
general bonded indebtedness of the City of Tukwila, the General Fund, and for the maintenance
of the departments of the municipal government of the City of Tukwila for the fiscal year
beginning January 1, 2010.
Section 2. Collection. This ordinance shall be certified to the proper County officials, as
provided by law, and taxes here levied shall be collected to pay to the Finance Director of the City
of Tukwila at the time and in the manner provided by the laws of the State of Washington for the
collection of taxes for non chartered code cities.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of
this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force and effect January 1, 2010.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Passed by the City Council.
Published:
Effective Date:
Office of the City Attorney Ordinance Number:
Page 1 of 1
5
6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, DECLARING A FINDING OF SUBSTANTIAL NEED
RELATING TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA PROPERTY TAX LEVY,
COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2010, ON ALL PROPERTY, BOTH REAL AND
PERSONAL, IN COMPLIANCE WITH RCW 84.55.120.
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has properly given notice of a public hearing held on
November 23, 2009, pursuant to RCW 84.55.120; and
WHEREAS, due to declining sales tax revenue and general maintenance and operation
expenses, the City Council finds there is a substantial need to increase the budget by 1.0% and
to set the levy limit at 101%, pursuant to RCW 84.55.0101;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An increase of 1.0% in the regular property tax levy, in addition to any amount
resulting from the addition of new construction and improvements to property and any
increase in the value of State assessed property, is hereby authorized for the 2010 levy. This
increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements to
property, any increase in the value of State- assessed property, any annexations that have
occurred and refunds made.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY.
Office of the City Attorney
City of Tukwila
Washington
Resolution No.
W \Word Processing \Resolutions \Property Tax Levy Substantial Need.doc
SH:ksn 11/18/2009
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number
Page 1 of 1
7
8
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
44#
City of Tukwila
Washington
Ordinance No.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, INCREASING THE CITY OF TUKWILA REGULAR LEVY
FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR, COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2010, ON ALL
PROPERTY, BOTH REAL AND PERSONAL, IN COMPLIANCE WITH RCW
84.55.120; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has properly given notice of a public hearing held on
November 23, 2009, pursuant to RCW 84.55.120; and
WHEREAS, after hearing and duly considering all relevant evidence and testimony
presented, the City Council has determined in order to discharge its expected expenses and
obligations the City requires an increase in property tax revenue from the previous year, in
addition to the increase resulting from the addition of new construction and improvements to
property and any increase in the value of State- assessed property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined it is in the City's best interest and necessary
to meet its expenses and obligations for the property tax revenue to be increased for 2010, and
the final assessed valuation calculation has been determined;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An increase in the regular property tax levy, in addition to any amount
resulting from the addition of new construction and improvements to property and any
increase in the value of State- assessed property, is hereby authorized for the 2010 levy in the
amount of $111,251, which is a percentage increase of 1.0% from the previous year. This
increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements to
property, any increase in the value of State assessed property, any annexations that have
occurred and refunds made.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in
the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force and effect
January 1, 2010.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Regular Tax Levy 2009.doc
SH:Jsn 11/18/2009
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council.
Published.
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number
Page 1 of 1
9
10
2000 3.10000 3.30278 S 1.68951 0.21585 0.27299 5.91717 0.05209 0.11830 14.66869
2001 3.11256 0.4052% 3.14502 2.10955 0.19029 0.24624 5.54167 0.04957 0.09873 14.49363
2002 2.94537 5.3715% 2.98946 1.97530 0.18956 0.25000 5.11395 0.04665 0.09643 13.60672
2003 2.91064 -1.1791% 2.89680 1.34948 0.25895 0.24143 4.85812 0.04688 0.09254 12.65484
2004 3.10754 6.7648% 2.75678 1.96799 0.25402 0.23717 5.05267 0.04669 0.09200 13.51486
2005 3.11712 0.3083% 2.68951 1.91484 0.25321 0.23182 5.04535 0.04658 0.09039 13.38882
2006 3.03706 2.5684% 2.49787 1.86293 0.23330 0.21982 5.01637 0.04482 0.59000 13.50217
2007 2.84033 -6.4776% 2.32535 1.75139 0.23158 0.20621 4.78874 0.04212 0.55652 12.74224
2008 2.56911 9.5469% 2.13233 0.98437 0.22359 0.30000 4.73164 0.10000 0.50854 11.54958
2009 2.37324 7.624016 1.96268 1.30431 0.19700 0.27404 4.12360 0.09123 0.47141 10.79751
of Total 21.98% 18.18% 12.08% 1.82% 2.54% 38.19% 0.84% 4.37% 100.00
(4 Includes King County Library District tax.
Source: King County Department of' Assessments
CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
HISTORICAL LEVY RATES
(PER $1,000 OF ASSESSED VALUATION)
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
11
12
Finance Safety Committee Minutes November 17. 2009 Paco 2
C. Contract Amendment for Commercial Development Solutions
Administration is seeking full Council approval for a contract amendment for Commercial Development
Solutions (Lisa Verner, Tukwila South Project Manager).
Due to Commercial Development Solutions in -depth and on -going involvement in the project, as well as
efforts to keep the continuity of work moving forward, Administration is requesting Council approval of a
contract amendment that will extend the current Commercial Development Solutions contract through
December 31, 2010 (see Finance Safety Committee minutes dated, October 6, 2009).
Activities relative to this project have increased, requiring Ms. Verner to spend additional time (billable
hours) working on project management; therefore, the contract amendment calls for increase in the
monthly billing limit from $8,000 to $11,000.
In response to Committee member questions regarding other alternatives for management of this
project (due to the current financial situation of the City), staff replied that a major information
exchange would need to take place prior to the end of the year and a staff person would need to be
indentified to take over the project.
The Committee acknowledges the priority of managing this project prior to construction, as well as
the City's current budgetary concerns, and made special note of the contract's 30 -day termination
clause. The termination clause could allow the City to revisit priorities and take appropriate action if
necessary. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
D. 2010 Property Tax Lew
Staff is seeking full Council approval of an ordinance increasing the City's Regular Property Tax Levy
from the previous year; an ordinance levying the General Taxes and a resolution declaring a finding of
substantial need relating to the Property Tax Levy.
Shawn Hunstock reported that assessed values have decreased by over 4 however, several neighboring
communities have experienced decreases as high as 10
Staff is recommending levying full 1% increase to property taxes due to a negative Implicit Price Deflator
and a decline in assessed values which would result in levy rate that would result in a decline of property
tax revenue to the City of approximately $250,000.
This will be the first increase in the levy rate since 2005. Due to increased values over the past 4 or 5
years, no increase was necessary. The proposed levy rate for 2010 is $2.52 per $1,000 of assessed value
as compared to $2.39 in 2009.
In order to levy the full 1 Council will need to pass a resolution declaring a finding of substantial
need relating to the property tax levy. A public hearing is scheduled for November 23, 2009.
UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
E. A Resolution Adootine the 2010 -2015 CIP
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a resolution adopting the 2010 -2015 CIP.
Based on information that was requested at the November 5 Council Budget Update and CIP Review,
staff has provided Council with three versions of Attachment A of the CIP:
Scenario #1 Current Draft Attachment A which reflects two consecutive years with
Accumulated Totals below $3 million.
Scenario #2 Draft Attachment A with additional revenues and/or expenditure reductions of
approximately $3 million each year and refunds to the Utility Enterprise Funds.
Scenario #3 Draft Attachment A with additional revenues and/or expenditure reductions of
approximately $5 million each year with a CIP that returns levels of service to the pre-
existing level prior to recent budget cuts.
CouNcIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
1LQ y
J E f Inetialr ITEM NO.
4 1 1 Meettnn Date Prepared by 1 Mayor's review Council review
—1I .4 11/23/09 1 GL I I .;�x
v�\ f 12/07/09 1 GL 1 1 f
4.
_'-;'ITEM INFORMATION-
CAS NUMBER: 09-163 ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
A GENDA ITEM TITLE Resolution adopting the 2010 -2015 Financial Planning Model and Capital
Improvement Program
2ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
>PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P &R Police PW/
;PONSOR'S This Resolution will adopt the 2010 2015 Financial Planning Model and Capital
;UMMARY Improvement Program. Council reviewed the Proposed 2010 2015 CIP at the Budget
Workshop held 11/5/09. The City's Fund Balance Policy (page V, 2010 Proposed CIP)
states that accumulated totals within the six -year Financial Planning Model may not
recede below $3 million.
LEV EWE D BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DA'Z'E: 11/17/09
tECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works
COMMITTEE Forward to Committee of the Whole for discussion
COST IMPACT /.FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
'und Source:
7omrents:
MTG,: DATE) RECORD,OF,COUNCIL ACTION
11/23/09
12/07/09 f
MTG. DATE) 'ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/10/09
Draft Resolution
Attachment A (3 versions)
Minutes from the Finance Safety Committee meeting of 11/17/09
12/07/09 1
13
14
TO:
ISSUE
Attachments: Resolution
Attachment A (3 versions)
H: \CIP \Resolution 2010 -2015 Info Memo.doc
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
FINANCE SAFETY COMMITTEE
FROM: 4g:5 Interim Public Works Director Finance Director
DATE: November 10, 2009
SUBJECT: 2010 2015 Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program
Resolution
Approve Resolution adopting the 2010 2015 Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement
Program (CIP).
BACKGROUND
The City now has a biennial budget for 2009 2010 so we do not have to review the budget for
2010, however the six -year 2010 2015 Financial Planning Model and CIP still have to be
approved.
The Council reviewed the Attachments and the CIP projects at the CIP Workshop held on November
5, 2009. Council requested some additional options for Attachment A in order to adhere to the policy
that the accumulated totals do not recede below $3 million.
ANALYSIS
The first Attachment A is what is currently in the Proposed 2010 2015 CIP with a deficient of
$11.629 million in 2015. The second Attachment A has additional revenue or reduced expenditures
of approximately $3 million each year in order to balance Attachment A with $3 million in 2015, as
City policy requires. This second Attachment A also refunds the Utility Enterprise Funds for the utility
tax that was implemented in October, 2009, should Council decide to repay this money. Both of
these Attachments have very limited Capital projects that show no significant improvements in the
years 2013 through 2015.
The third Attachment A shows additional revenue or reduced expenditures of approximately $5
million each year with a "realistic" CIP that includes additional capital projects to maintain service
levels from before recent budget reductions and project deferrals. This version also refunds the
Utility Enterprise funds in 2014 and 2015.
Also under consideration is the Attachments D through F for the Water, Sewer and Surface Water
funds with the new utility tax. Future rate increases will have to be determined depending if the
enterprise funds are refunded in 2014 and 2015.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to approve the Resolution for the 2010 2015 Financial Planning Model
and Capital Improvement Program for consideration at the November 23, 2009 Committee of the
Whole meeting and subsequent December 7, 2009 Regular Meeting.
15
16
A cT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2010 -2015 FINANCIAL PLANNING
MODEL AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR GENERAL
GOVERNMENT AND THE CITY'S ENTERPRISE FUNDS.
WHEREAS, when used in conjunction with the biennial City budget, the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) and the Financial Planning Model for the period 2010 -2015
are resource documents to help plan directions the City will consider for the future; and
WHEREAS, the Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program are
not permanent fixed plans, but are guidelines or tools to help reflect future goals and
future resources at the time budgets are being planned; and
WHEREAS, the commitment of funds and resources can only be made through the
budget process;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the 2010 -2015 Financial Planning Model
and accompanying Capital Improvement Program, incorporated by this reference as if
fully set forth herein.
Section 2. A copy of the 2010 -2015 Financial Planning Model and accompanying
Capital Improvement Program shall be kept on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Section 3. The assumptions, revenues and expenditures will be reviewed and
updated annually, or as necessary, by the City Council.
Section 4. The detail of Capital Improvement Program projects will be reflected in the
published Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program 2010 -2015.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2009
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
W. \Word Processing Resolutions \2010 -2015 Financial Planning Model CIP.doc
GLksn 11/18/2009
Joan Hernandez, Council President
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council.
Resolution Number
Attachment: Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program 2010 -2015
Page 1 of 1
17
18
REVENUES (see A -1)
General Revenues
Sales Tax 15,502 15,967 16,446 16,940 17,448 17,971 100,274
Property Taxes 12,400 12,710 13,028 13,353 13,687 14,029 79,208
Utility Taxes 4,747 4,889 5,036 5,187 5,343 5,503 30,706
Interfund Utility Taxes 2,600 900 900 0 0 0 4,400
Gambling Taxes 2,099 2,162 2,227 2,294 2,362 2,433 13,577
Contract Agreement SCL 1,976 2,035 2,096 2,159 2,224 2,291 12,782
Charges /Fees for Services 5,273 5,431 5,594 5,762 5,935 6,113 34,108
Transfers In Other Funds 2,493 2,568 2,645 2,724 2,806 2,890 16,126
Intergovernmental Revenue 922 950 978 1,007 1,038 1,069 5,964
Other Taxes /Miscellaneous 1,640 1,689 1,740 1,792 1,846 1,901 10,608
Subtotal 49,652 49,302 50,690 51,219 52,689 54,201 307,752
Dedicated Revenues (Capital)
Real Estate Taxes 500 515 530 546 563 580 3,234
Motor Vehicle Taxes 455 469 483 497 512 527 2,943
Investment Interest/Misc. 500 515 530 546 563 580 3,234
Property Taxes 130 130 130 130 130 130 780
Parking Taxes 140 140 140 140 140 140 840
Transfers from Golf Course 0 0 150 150 175 175 650
Subtotal 1,725 1,769 1,964 2,010 2,083 2,132 11,682
TOTAL REVENUE AVAILABLE 51,377 51,070 52,654 53,229 54,771 56,333 319,434
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF TUKWILA
TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES
2010 2015 Analysis in 000's
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Totals
EXPENDITURES
Operations Maintenance: 45,376 49,652 51,680 54,221 56,900 59,175 317,005
(See Attachment B)
Howard Hanson Dam Response 2,500 2,500 300 300 300 300 6,200
Debt Service 2,466 2,464 2,460 2,467 2,457 1,974 14,288
Admin /Engineering Overhead 300 309 318 328 338 348 1,941
Subtotal Available 735 (3,855) (2,104) (4,088) (5,223) (5,464) (20,000)
Capital Attachment C
Residential Streets 0 0 0 0 150 300 450
Bridges 245 145 205 205 270 270 1,340
Arterial Streets 3,515 2,444 1,580 1,355 1,355 1,365 11,614
Parks Trails 624 459 284 390 237 274 2,268
General Government
Facilities 121 (2,177) (2,178) 0 110 140 (3,984)
General Improvements 200 535 500 500 500 500 2,735
Fire Improvements (50) (50) 0 0 0 (55) (155)
Subtotal Capital 4,655 1,356 391 2,450 2,622 2,794 14,268
Balance by Year
Carryover from 2009
(3,920) (5,211) (2,495) (6,538) (7,845) (8,258) (34,268)
22,639 0 0 0 0 0 22,639
Accumulated Totals 18,719 13,508 11,013 4,475 (3,370) (11,629)
2010 2015 Financial Planning Model
'Original "Draft"
VII 11/09/2009
19
REVENUES (seeA -1)
General Revenues
Sales Tax
Property Taxes
Utility Taxes
Interfund Utility Taxes
Gambling Taxes
Contract Agreement SCL
Charges /Fees for Services
Transfers In Other Funds
Intergovernmental Revenue
Other Taxes /Miscellaneous
Subtotal
Dedicated Revenues (Capital)
Real Estate Taxes
Motor Vehicle Taxes
Investment Interest/Misc.
Property Taxes
Parking Taxes
Transfers from Golf Course
Subtotal
TOTAL REVENUE AVAILABLE
EXPENDITURES
Operations Maintenance:
(See Attachment B)
Howard Hanson Dam Response
Debt Service
Admin /Engineering Overhead
Subtotal Available
Capital Attachment C
Residential Streets
Bridges
Arterial Streets
Parks Trails
General Govemment
Facilities
General Improvements
Fire Improvements
Subtotal Capital
Balance by Year
Carryover from 2009
Accumulated Totals
20
2010 2015 Financial Planning Model
ATTACHMENT A With Additional Revenue 1
CITY OF TUKWILA
TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES
2010 2015 Analysis in 000's
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
15,502
12,400
4,747
2,600
2,099
1,976
5,273
2,493
922
1,640
52,652
121
200
(50)
4,655
22,639
15,967
12,710
4,889
,jt
900
2,162
2,035
5,431
2,568
950
1,689
52,377
(2,177)
535
(50)
1,356
16,446
13,028
5,036
900
2,227
2,096
5,594
2,645
978
1,740
53,842
(2,178)
500
0
391
16,940 17,448 17,971
13,353 13,687 14,029
5,187 5,343 5,503
0
2,294 2,362 2,433
2,159 2,224 2,291
5,762 5,935 6,113
2,724 2,806 2,890
1,007 1,038 1,069
1,792 1,846 1,901
54,449 53,800 55,395
500 515 530 546 563 580
455 469 483 497 512 527
500 515 530 546 563 580
130 130 130 130 130 130
140 140 140 140 140 140
0 0 150 150 175 175
1,725 1,769 1,964 2,010 2,083 2,132
54,377 54,145 55,806 56,459 55,883 57,527
45,376 49,652 51,680 54,221 56,900 59,175
2,500 2,500 300 300 300 300
2,466 2,464 2,460 2,467 2,457 1,974
300 309 318 328 338 348
3,735 (780) 1,048 (857) (4,112) (4,270)
0 0 0 0 150 300
245 145 205 205 270 270
3,515 2,444 1,580 1,355 1,355 1,365
624 459 284 390 237 274
0 110 140
500 500 500
0 0 (55)
2,450 2,622 2,794
(920) (2,136) 657 (3,307) (6,734) (7,064)
0 0 0 0 0
21,719 19,583 20,239 16,933 10,199 3,134
VII 11/09/2009
Totals
100,274
79,208
30,706
iotitt
13,577
12,782
34,108
16,126
5,964
10,608
322,515
3,234
2,943
3,234
780
840
650
11,682
334,197
317,005
6,200
14,288
1,941
(5,237)
450
1,340
11,614
2,268
(3,984)
2,735
(155)
14,268
(19,505)
22,639
Accumulated Totals
2010 2015 Financial Planning Model
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF TUKWILA
TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES
2010 2015 Analysis in 000's
23,369 21,685 23,072 18,597 9,606 3,138
With Additional Revenue
"Realistic" CIP
REVENUES (see A -1) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Totals
General Revenues
Sales Tax 15,502 15,967 16,446 16,940 17,448 17,971 100,274
Property Taxes 12,400 12,710 13,028 13,353 13,687 14,029 79,208
Utility Taxes 4,747 4,889 5,036 5,187 5,343 5,503 30,706
SR
ev Esc Redgt flr� a 5 =t 0 y e
vn,. y :5 ,28 ,58 5929`= 5,fi29 x5,774 ,,577.,
Interfund Utility Taxes 2,600 900 3 900 0 s 2,20U TAT
Gambling Taxes 2,099 2,162 2,227 2,294 2,362 2,433 13,577
Contract Agreement SCL 1,976 2,035 2,096 2,159 2,224 2,291 12,782
Charges /Fees for Services 5,273 5,431 5,594 5,762 5,935 6,113 34,108
Transfers In Other Funds 2,493 2,568 2,645 2,724 2,806 2,890 16,126
Intergovernmental Revenue 922 950 978 1,007 1,038 1,069 5,964
Other Taxes /Miscellaneous 1,640 1,689 1,740 1,792 1,846 1,901 10,608
Subtotal 54,752 54,529 56,048 56,711 56,118 57,771 335,930
Dedicated Revenues (Capital)
Real Estate Taxes 500 515 530 546 563 580 3,234
Motor Vehicle Taxes 455 469 483 497 512 527 2,943
Investment Interest/Misc. 500 515 530 546 563 580 3,234
Property Taxes 130 130 130 130 130 130 780
Parking Taxes 140 140 140 140 140 140 840
Transfers from Golf Course 0 0 150 150 175 175 650
Subtotal 1,725 1,769 1,964 2,010 2,083 2,132 11,682
TOTAL REVENUE AVAILABLE 56,477 56,298 58,012 58,721 58,201 59,903 347,611
EXPENDITURES
Operations Maintenance: 45,376 49,652 51,680 54,221 56,900 59,175 317,005
(See Attachment B)
Howard Hanson Dam Response 2,500 2,500 300 300 300 300 6,200
Debt Service 2,466 2,464 2,460 2,467 2,457 1,974 14,288
Admin /Engineering Overhead 300 309 318 328 338 348 1,941
Subtotal Available 5,835 1,373 3,254 1,405 (1,794) (1,894) 8,178
Capital Attachment C
Residential Streets 250 400 100 150 150 175 1,225
Bridges 245 145 205 205 270 270 1,340
Arterial Streets 3,715 2,744 2,480 4,305 5,180 2,790 21,214
Parks Trails 624 459 585 435 782 719 3,604
General Government
Facilities 121 (2,177) (2,178) 110 140 0 (3,984)
General Improvements 200 1,535 675 675 675 675 4,435
Fire Improvements (50) (50) 0 0 0 (55) (155)
Subtotal Capital 5,105 3,056 1,867 5,880 7,197 4,574 27,679
Balance by Year 730 (1,683) 1,387 (4,475) (8,991) (6,468) (19,501)
Carryover from 2009 22,639 0 0 0 0 0 22,639
VII 11/09/2009
21
22
Finance Safety Committee Minutes November 17. 2009 Pao 2
C. Contract Amendment for Commercial Development Solutions
Administration is seeking full Council approval for a contract amendment for Commercial Development
Solutions (Lisa Verner, Tukwila South Project Manager).
Due to Commercial Development Solutions in -depth and on -going involvement in the project, as well as
efforts to keep the continuity of work moving forward, Administration is requesting Council approval of a
contract amendment that will extend the current Commercial Development Solutions contract through
December 31, 2010 (see Finance Safety Committee minutes dated, October 6, 2009).
Activities relative to this project have increased, requiring Ms. Verner to spend additional time (billable
hours) working on project management; therefore, the contract amendment calls for increase in the
monthly billing limit from $8,000 to $11,000.
In response to Committee member questions regarding other alternatives for management of this
project (due to the current financial situation of the City), staff replied that a major information
exchange would need to take place prior to the end of the year and a staff person would need to be
indentified to take over the project.
The Committee acknowledges the priority of managing this project prior to construction, as well as
the City's current budgetary concerns, and made special note of the contract's 30 -day termination
clause. The termination clause could allow the City to revisit priorities and take appropriate action if
necessary. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
D. 2010 Property Tax Lew
Staff is seeking full Council approval of an ordinance increasing the City's Regular Property Tax Levy
from the previous year; an ordinance levying the General Taxes and a resolution declaring a finding of
substantial need relating to the Property Tax Levy.
Shawn Hunstock reported that assessed values have decreased by over 4 however, several neighboring
communities have experienced decreases as high as 10
Staff is recommending levying full 1% increase to property taxes due to a negative Implicit Price Deflator
and a decline in assessed values which would result in levy rate that would result in a decline of property
tax revenue to the City of approximately $250,000.
This will be the first increase in the levy rate since 2005. Due to increased values over the past 4 or 5
years, no increase was necessary. The proposed levy rate for 2010 is $2.52 per $1,000 of assessed value
as compared to $2.39 in 2009.
In order to levy the full 1 Council will need to pass a resolution declaring a finding of substantial
need relating to the property tax levy. A public hearing is scheduled for November 23, 2009.
UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
E. A Resolution Adopting the 2010 -2015 CIP
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a resolution adopting the 2010 -2015 CIP.
Based on information that was requested at the November 5 Council Budget Update and CIP Review,
staff has provided Council with three versions of Attachment A of the CIP:
Scenario #1 Current Draft Attachment A which reflects two consecutive years with
Accumulated Totals below $3 million.
a Scenario #2 Draft Attachment A with additional revenues and/or expenditure reductions of
approximately $3 million each year and refunds to the Utility Enterprise Funds.
Scenario 113 Draft Attachment A with additional revenues and/or expenditure reductions of
approximately $5 million each year with a CIP that returns levels of service to the pre-
existing level prior to recent budget cuts.
23
24
Finance Safety Committee Minutes November 17. 2009 Paae 3
Council will need to determine which of the above scenario's to adopt as Attachment A. For
informational purposes, staff reminded the Committee that there is a Financial Planning Model Policy
(Policy FP -7) that indicates the Accumulated Totals within the 6 -Year Financial Planning Model
may not recede below $3 million in Attachment A, Total Revenues and Expenditures. The draft CIP,
as presented with Scenario #1, does not comply with the document's policy objectives. NO
COMMITTEE RECCOMENDATION. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
B. 2009 3r Ouarter Reports
The Committee had no questions regarding the status of program goals as outlined in the 2009 3r Quarter
Report. INFORMATION ONLY.
III. MISCELLANEOUS
Meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
Next meeting: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:00 p.m. Conference Room #3
Committee Chair Approval
Minutes by KAM. Reviewed by RB and SH.
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
IM �►JILA h' ITEMNO.
ILA Initials
Lt f;
ti Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review 1 Council revp`ew 1
Z
1 11/23/09 I KK I 1E-4...-6 L-
a� 1 12/07/09 I KK
ag
4 0
ITEM INFOR 1,,,
cAS NUMBER: 09-164 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
kGENDA ITEM TITLE A contract with PJKH, LLC on behalf of Seattle Southside Visitor Services (SSVS) for
website redesign and production.
:ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bic1Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
:PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PTY/
;PONSOR's The Council is being asked to authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with PMKH, LLC on
,UMMARY behalf of Seattle Southside Visitor Services (SSVS) for website redesign and production in
an amount not to exceed $52,920.
:EVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: 11/17/09
LECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Mayor's Office
COMMITTEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole
COST 11PACTS /YF,U :S OURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$52,920 $100,000
urid Source: LODGING TAX FUND 101.00.557.301.44.12 (NOT GENERAL FUND)
'omments: Unanimous Approval by the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee; Forward to Finance Safety
VITG. DATE I RECORD OF: COUNCIL ACTION
11/23/09 J
VITG. DATE I ATTA
11/23/09 1 Informational Memorandum dated 11/18/09
Proposal from PJKH, LLC
Minutes from the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee meeting of 10/29/09
Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 11/17/09
12/07/09
9
26
City of Tukwila
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Haggerton
FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
FROM: Katherine Kertzman
TOURISM PROGRAM MANAGER
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2009
SUBJECT: SEATTLE SOUTHSIDE WEBSITE REDESIGN
ISSUE
The council is being asked to authorize a contract with PJKH, LLC on behalf of Seattle Southside
Visitor Services (SSVS) for website redesign and production.
DISCUSSION
The website is a component of Seattle Southside's current project to enhance its brand and will work in
conjunction with a new advertising strategy directing users to the website. The enhanced website will
greatly increase the end user's ability to search for relevant information, create a visitor profile to
encourage them to revisit, create travel itineraries and utilize an interactive map. User stories, photo
tour and a new events calendar will encourage the user to stay in the website longer resulting in the
increased likelihood of a booked vacation. The new website will provide an internet booking engine
called Global Distribution System (GDS) allowing users to book hotel rooms, rental cars, and airline
tickets thereby reducing staff time by managing availability, inventory and rates of different extranets in
"one -go
Though it is not included in this contract, in the future we plan to provide translations into Spanish and
Japanese along with a version adapted to mobile devices.
Staff requested proposals from three website developers: Green Rubino, Exclaim, and PJKH, LLC.
Green Rubino did not respond to the request. Exclaim's proposal totaled $73,150 and included full
design. The proposal from PJKH totaled $50,400 but did not include full design. If we select the PJKH
proposal and separately contract with Exclaim for the design portion (which would add $17,000) the
total cost would be $67,400. We recommend adding 5% to the proposals to cover related expenses.
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
The current website (www.SeattleSouthside.com) is now 7 years old. While it was innovative at the time
of its creation, the site now lacks functionality for users and is not comparable to competitors.
Redesigning the Seattle Southside website was recommended by the Tukwila, SeaTac, Kent and Des
Moines Lodging Tax Advisory Committees.
Seattle Southside's website currently receives on average 14,346 unique visitors monthly since
implementing a new search engine optimization campaign in June 2009; that is up 180% from the same
timeframe last year. With an updated website that utilizes the current standards for online marketing
built in to the backend these numbers will increase.
27
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
Staff recommends PJKH, LLC because the firm is highly qualified to perform the work and provided the
lowest cost proposal.
Budget impacts: There is no additional budget request for this item. The cost for this work is included
within the Council approved 2009 -2010 budget; however, because the proposed contract is over
$40,000, it requires Council approval.
Since this is a tourism program item, this item will be paid out of lodging taxes, not the City's general
fund.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to authorize the mayor to sign a contract with PJKH, LLC for website
production in an amount not to exceed $52,920. The Council is also asked to consider this item at the
November 23, 2009 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent December 7, 2009 Regular
Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
PJKH, LLC Web Development Proposal
U.12009 InfoMemos\Memo to Fin Safety 2009 Website (Version4).doc
SSVS Wepsite Re
Prepared for: Katherine Kertzman,
Seattle Southside Visitor Services
Prepared by: Philip Hallstrom
PJKH, LLC
Prepared on: October 14, 2009
�ova
A 3106 60th Loop SE Olympia, WA 98501 T 360.480.1209 E philip @pjkh.com W www.pjkh.com
PJKH, LLC
29
30
Su
T
T ary
PJKH, LLC
Objective
Extend and enhance the existing seattlesouthside.com website to provide a richer experience for its visitors and increase
overall site utilization and visitor retention.
Timeline
The timeline for this project has not currently been defined and is dependent upon completion of website graphical
redesign.
Solution
Develop the website using the Ruby on Rails framework. RoR allows for very fast development and provides many nice
features that can be implemented easily. A general purpose content management tool for pages that are "mostly static"
will be built. Additionally, custom tools will be built for areas of the site that require them. The design will be executed by
third -party resources and will be implemented as part of this project.
A note on "Entities"
Throughout this document the word "entity" or "entities" refers to a restaurant, shop, hotel, attraction, meeting space,
transportation company, etc.
Re
ovatio
s
PJKH, LLC
General
Design of the website will be handled by a third party, most likely by internal committee resources.
Site will be developed using the Ruby on Rails framework (www. nihvonrails.nrn).
Hosting will be managed by a third party provider. I will provide recommendations and oversee site deployment.
All forms will use a captcha system to reduce the amount of spam (www.recaptcha.net).
Site will be tested for compliance against the Firefox 2.0, 1E6, IE7, and Safari web browsers.
Graphical Refresh
The current look and feel of the website, while having served its purpose well, is beginning to show its age. It has been
requested that a new design be implemented to bring the site up to date with current design practices. While the final
design will be a result of interaction between the designer and SSVS staff, the following goals should be realized:
Widen the overall page width from it's current 730px to 900px. Currently 95% of visitors have a screen width of
1024px or greater. This will provide more room "above the fold" for valuable content.
Create two distinct areas; one for the general public, one for businesses and press. The latter would contain the
majority of information currently residing in the right navigation bar.
Make it more apparent to visitors where and how they can interact with the site (i.e. newsletters, RSS, travel itineraries,
trip advisors, user stories, etc.)
Make the entity directories less like a directory listing and more categorical and browsable. One way to do this would
be to create a page for each entity "feature" (i.e. /hotels /with pools/ would list all hotels with a pool).
Organize packages based on category and have featured ones that rotate on the home page.
Brochure and info request needs to be more compact and customizable.
Have feature stories on local people, business, stores, festivals, activities, artists that rotate on the homepage with links
to an archive.
Photographic tour of the area. Allow staff to upload images, set captions, determine the order. System will generate a
slideshow of uploaded photos.
Hotel reservation button on home page with search for all different aspects. Search will utilize the Jack Rabbit
reservation system.
Create "printer friendly" version of all pages.
31
32
Entity Enhancements
Create system to allow SSVS staff to associate entities with one another to indicate a relationship between them. On
the entity detail page these related entities would appear in list format and be linked to their own detail page.
Enhance the current entity models to allow an unlimited number of photos to be attached. These photos would
display as a slideshow on the detail page.
Enhance the current entity model to allow an unlimited number of YouTube videos to be attached. These videos would
display as a slideshow on the detail page (perhaps via an overlay similar to how many Apple movie trailers play).
Create RSS feeds to provide information on new entities, updated entities, promotions, coupons, etc.
Have different sections for groups and meeting planners.
Add functionality to handle transportation needs via a 'Need Transportation' link/button.
Free e- postcards.
Jack Rabbit booking agent.
Improve entity searching to utilize full text and fuzzy match algorithms.
Allow for multiple languages. This will require the assistance of a third -party translator.
SEC) Enhancements
Dynamically generated sitemap.xml file used by search engines in real time.
Ensure that every entity has fields that apply to the page title, meta keywords, and meta description.
Modify all URLs to include entity title in SEC) friendly format (i.e. "Family Fun Center" attractions /family- fun center
Radius Searches
Using the address information provided for each entity create search mechanism that can answer the question "What
is near my hotel Allow user to filter on restaurants, attractions, and shops.
On hotel detail pages automatically show several nearby restaurants, attractions, and shops.
Create a single "map" page which would show all entities in an embedded Google map. Allow user to filter types of
entities shown (i.e. "show only restaurants This may require some testing to determine feasibility due to density of
entities in /around Westfield Southcenter.
Photo Tool
Redo the existing photo tool to streamline the administrative process and ease of use for the end user.
PJKH, LLC
Staff would upload a single high resolution JPEG image, provide meta information (title, description, category, etc.).
System will generate appropriate thumbnails for end user browsing.
End users, once authenticated, would be able to download high resolution JPEG images after answering a simple
questionnaire about the intended usage.
This questionnaire would be purely for informational purposes and would not prevent the download.
Create RSS feed to alert users to new images.
PJKH, LLC
Events Calendar
Update the events calendar UI to encourage users to book a hotel for the duration of the event. System could display
hotels physically near the event itself. Alternatively, if legal, the list could be generated from a list of featured hotels. Or
the list could be comprised of hotels that meet a certain AAA rating.
Create an embed -able calendar widget that other sites could use to quickly and easily have a Seattle Southside events
calendar. All links in widget would take user to SeattleSouthside.com.
Create an RSS feed for upcoming events. This could be used by the general public as well as embedded into other
sites with links back to SeattleSouthside.com.
Allow users to indicate a desire to be reminded about specific events before they happen. User would be able to
specify their email address and how early to be reminded (i.e. one day one week one month An email would
be sent at that time reminding them of the upcoming event.
Visitor Profile
The visitor profile would let end users register for a SSVS account and provide information that would tailor their
experience by auto suggesting entities that may be of interest to them. A small set of questions would need to be asked
to determine their preferences (Le. "Do you like small and quaint or large and luxurious which would be applicable to
every entity type. Entities would then be similar tagged and /or rules would be built in (i.e. All hotels whose nightly rate is
$200 or higher is "large and luxurious This information would then be used to build a user specific page with
recommendations for entities that user might be interested in. Additionally this information could be used to send emails
about upcoming events that match their preferences.
Travel Itineraries
Create a system that allows registered users the ability to add entities to an itinerary and provide notes for each.
Users would be able to save these itineraries as well as print them.
Integrate Google Maps to plot entities on the itinerary and provide driving directions from one to the next.
System would allow SSVS staff to easily copy a user's itinerary, make changes, and publish it to a central location for
other users to see.
User Stories
There might be an issue with allowing users to write comments about a specific entity due to legal ramifications and the
need to be an unbiased source of information. User stories are an attempt to circumvent that while still providing
valuable user generated content and source of interaction.
Users would be able to write a story/anecdote about their visit to the area. The idea is that this would be similar to the
guest books found in many bed and breakfasts where people indicate why they were there (i.e. it was our 10th
anniversary and we stayed at and had a wonderful dinner at after which we went dancing at
These stories would be submitted to SSVS staff for review and possible publication.
SSVS staff would be able to edit and associate the story with related entities (for cross linking purposes).
33
34
Once SSVS staff approves the story it would appear in a blog like format in a dedicated section of the website.
Additionally it would appear as a link on all entity detail pages it is related to.
PJKH, LLC
e
cget
PJKH, LLC
Descri
st
Site Foundation
Data Migration
Site Testing
Server Setup /Provisioning
Entity Enhancements
Jack Rabbit Integration
SEO Enhancements
Radius Searching
Google Entity Map
Photo Tool
Events Calendar
Advanced Search (full text, phrase matching, etc.)
Travel Itineraries
Blog
Business /Member Area
$4,800
$2,400
$4,000
$1,600
$8,000
$1,600
$1,600
$1,600
$1,600
$2,400
$2,400
$1,600
$3,200
$1,600
$3,200
Subtotal $39,200
Optional Functionality
Visitor Profiles $3,200
Photo Tour $1,600
E- Postcards $1,600
Calendar Widget I $800
User Stories I $1,600
Total including optional functionality I $50,400
35
36
Co
PJKH, LLC
3106 60th Loop SE
Olympia, WA 98501
T 360.480.1209
philip@pjkh.com
www.pjkh.com
tact nfor
ratio
PJKH, LLC
City of Tukwila
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
October 29, 2009 Thursday
12:00 p.m. 1:30 p.m.
Meeting Notes
Location: DoubleTree Guest Suites
Tukwila, WA 98188
Chair: Council President Joan Hernandez
DRAFT
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Members Present: Chair, Council President Joan Hernandez, Mike Miller;
Mike Hansen; Tom Dezutter; Andrew Ciarrocchi; Michael Schabbing
Absent: Brad Knutson
Others Present: Katherine Kertzman, SSVS; Meilee Anderson, SSVS; Ashley Comar, SSVS; Kristina Thorne,
SSVS; Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator, City of Tukwila; Rhonda Berry, City Administrator,
City of Tukwila; Ken Grant, Brand Strategist and John Schuler, Creative Director with Exclaim.
Meeting Duration: 12:00 1:30
Staff Coordinators: Katherine Kertzman, Tourism Marketing Manager; Kristina Thorne, Visitor Information
Specialist
1. Welcome and Introductions
Council President Joan Hernandez called the meeting to order.
2. SSVS Brand Rejuvenation Update
Katherine Kertzman introduced Ken Grant, Brand Strategist and John Schuler, Creative Director with Exclaim.
Mr. Grant proceeded with a status report on the contract, concept, and presented a draft for a campaign look
and feel. John Schuler reviewed current identity, graphic mark for logo and its potential uses both electronically
online and in print. Mr. Schuler pointed out three examples of concepts capable of integration with other
campaigns for group or business travel.
3. Approval of the Minutes
Mike Hansen moved to approve the minutes as presented. Andrew Ciarrocchi seconded. Motion passed all in
favor.
4. Budget
Katherine Kertzman stated approximately half of the budget has been spent and reviewed the Tukwila only
expenditures related to the Rock N Roll Marathon.
5. Funding Requests 2010
Katherine Kertzman reviewed the list of funding requests for 2010. Discussion ensued. Mike Schabbing moved
to support all requests with the exception of Sister Communities for All Nations Cup. Mike Hansen seconded
with an amendment that a letter be sent to the Sister Communities Management informing the organization their
request is not endorsed by LTAC.
6. Visitor Center Lease in SeaTac
Derek Speck provided an update regarding lease negotiations for the 3100 Building in SeaTac. Lease
negotiations are taking longer than anticipated. Katherine Kertzman introduced the temporary office space
rented in SeaTac. Ms. Kertzman informed the group due to the relocation into temporary office space SSVS
contracted with the SWKC Chamber of Commerce to service walk -in visitors during this transition. Ms.
Kertzman informed the group that Meilee Anderson had secured corporate sponsor for the flat- screen television
SSVS will display in the reception area when the new Visitor Center space is completed.
7. Visitor Guide Development
Katherine Kertzman reported previous editions to the current Visitor Guide received minor updates over the
years and is now outdated. Ashley Comar recommended an Interactive Online Guide be implemented to stay
37
38
DRAFT
current with consumer expectations. Ms. Comar recommended SSVS hire Lunar Cow to create an updated
Visitor Guide both in print and online. In addition Lunar Cow will work with SSVS on ad sales to generate
revenue to help cover the costs of the updated version. Tom Dezutter moved to accept Ms. Comar's
recommendation. Joan Hernandez seconded. Motion to approve Lunar Cow for Visitor Guide carried all in
favor. None opposed.
8. Website Development
Katherine Kertzman discussed the history of the SSVS website. Ashley Comar reported after reviewing
proposals from vendors and developers her recommendation is to hire Philip Hallstrom for development and
Exclaim for the creative. Andrew Ciarrocchi motioned to approve Ms. Comar's recommendation. Mike Hansen
seconded. Motion to hire Philip Hallstrom for web development and Exclaim for creative content carried all in
favor, none opposed.
9. Special Projects
Katherine Kertzman reported on her role in the Governor's Tourism Commission and expressed a desire to see
Washington State Destination Marketing Organizations work in cooperation with Washington State Hotel
Lodging Associations to host a Governor's Tourism Conference. Ms. Kertzman stated the importance of
bringing the entire tourism industry together. Kristina Thorne reported the last Governor's Conference was in
2005. Ms. Thorne is serving on a committee to plan a 2010 Conference in Washington State. Ms. Thorne
provided a brief outline of the tentative plans for key note speaker, guest speakers, awards banquet, networking
opportunities, break out sessions.
Meilee Anderson reported on a cooperative effort to host a Conference /Familiarization trip to introduce the area
to Military Reunion Planners. Meilee facilitated a joint effort and generated sponsorships from hotels,
attractions, restaurants and transportation providers to provide Reunion Planners with a 3 night/4 day
experience in the region.
Ashley Comar reported the first Voluntourism package promoted on the SSVS website has generated bookings
for the Homewood Suites.
Meilee Anderson updated the group on the annual winter promotion "Shop Like a Rockstar."
Ashley Comar updated the Committee on recent PR efforts.
Ashley Comar and Meilee Anderson served on a committee for the Washington State Tourism Office's
sweepstakes "Experience More." Ashley reported the State Tourism Office agreed to invest $22,500 monthly in
advertising from November 2009 thru April 2010 to promote travel to Washington State during the non -peak
winter months. Each CVB and DMO has an opportunity to participate. Ms. Anderson secured packages
sponsored by hotels, restaurants and attractions to promote the Seattle Southside region in the state
sweepstakes.
10. Suggested Nominees
Katherine Kertzman reported there are two empty positions on the LTAC available and requested nominees for
consideration. Ms. Kertzman suggested three possible candidates for consideration: Miesa Berry, General
Manager, Homewood Suites; Maureen Huffman, General Manager, Embassy Suites; and Mike Bush, Marketing
Director, The Museum of Flight. Tom Dezutter mentioned Maureen Huffman had been trained by former LTAC
member Donna Rios and she would probably make a strong addition to the committee.
11. Other Business
Council President Joan Hernandez stated her term as the Chairperson for the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
was nearing its end and that it has been her pleasure to serve on the Committee.
12. Future Agenda Items
Mike Hansen suggested the 2010 Rock N Roll Marathon be an agenda item at the next LTAC meeting.
13. Meeting Adjourned at 1:30pm
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Members: Tom Dezutter, Mikel Hansen, Michael Miller, Michael
Schabbing, Andrew Ciarrocchi, Council President Joan Hernandez,
PRESENT
Councilmembers: Pam Linder, Chair; Joe Dune and De' Sean Quinn
Staff: Shawn Hunstock, Gail Labanara, Nick Olivas, Derek Speck, Mary Miotke, Katherine
Kertzman, Ashley Comar, Jack Pace, Rhonda Berry and Kimberly Matej
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Linder called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m.
I. PRESENTATIONS
No presentations.
II. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Seattle Southside Visitors Services Website Redesien
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into a contract with PJKH, LLC (Philip Hallstrom) in the
amount of $50,400 plus expenses in an amount not to exceed 5% of the contract total for the web
redevelopment (coding and language) of seattlesouthside.com website.
FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
November 17, 2009 5.00 p.m., Conference Room #3
City of Tukwila
Finance and Safety Committee
PJKH will work in cooperation with Exclaim, LLC in redesign of Seattle Southside's website in order to
increase the site's functionality and usability. The contract with Exclaim, for the creative development of
the site is within the limits of the Mayor's signing authority and does not require Council approval.
This item is included in the Tourism program budget which is funded with lodging tax monies, not the
City's General Fund.
Committee members requested an updated memo from staff to the COW, providing clarification on
specific contract cost breakdowns and justification of bidder selection. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
B. Seattle Southside Visitors Services Vacation Planner Redesien
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into a contract with Lunar Cow in the amount of $48,484
plus expenses in an amount not to exceed 5% of the contract total for the new design and printing of the
2010 Vacation Planner.
The Vacation Planner is the official visitors' guide of Seattle Southside which is produced in cooperation
with the Seattle Southside Cities Tukwila, SeaTac, Kent and Des Moines. The proposal calls for
complete redesign of the guide including new data incorporation and an online guide. The guide redesign
has been approved and supported by each city's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee.
Although Lunar Cow is the highest proposal that was received, total expenses are offset by ad sales and
the costs may end up reducing costs.
This item is included in the Tourism program budget which is funded with lodging tax monies, not the
City's General Fund. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
39
40
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
W 1LA ITEM NO.
r Initialr A.
r I Meeting Date Prepared by 1 Mayor review 1 Counczl review
=f 1 11/23/09 1 KK arm
2 12/07/09 KK
ITEM INFORMATION
cAS NUMBER: 09-165 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
gGENDA ITEM TITLE A contract with Lunar Cow on behalf of Seattle Southside Visitor Services to
redesign and print the vacation planner.
2ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
;PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW
iPONSOR'S The Council is being asked to authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Lunar Cow on
iUMMARY behalf of Seattle Southside Visitor Services (SSVS) to re- design, print and create an online
version of the vacation planner in an amount not to exceed $50,910.
ZEVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte 111 Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DA 1'L;: 11/17/09
tECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Mayor's Office
COMMII'1'LE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole
COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$50,910 $70,000
'und Source: LODGING TAX FUND 101.00.557.301.44.15 (NOT GENERAL FUND)
'omments: Unanimous Approval by the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee; Forward to Finance Safety
`REC OF COUNCIL ACTION
MT G =DATE
11/23/09
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/18/09
Proposal from Lunar Cow
Vacation planner proposal matrix
Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 11/17/09
12/7/09
41
42
City of Tukwila
TO: Mayor Haggerton
FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
FROM: Katherine Kertzman
TOURISM PROGRAM MANAGER
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2009
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: SEATTLE SOUTHSIDE VACATION PLANNER REDESIGN
ISSUE
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
The Council is being asked to authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Lunar Cow on behalf of Seattle
Southside Visitor Services to redesign and print the vacation planner.
DISCUSSION
The vacation planner is the official visitor guide for Seattle Southside. It continues to be one of Seattle
Southside Visitor Services' (SSVS) most successful ways to provide visitor information.
Success is evidenced by the number of vacation planner requests received through the
SeattleSouthside.com website, toll -free line, convention and groups, hotel concierge and walk -ins
generated and tracked through the Visitor Center. Additionally, the publication offers excellent visibility
for Seattle Southside Visitor Services within the local community and tourism industry.
The current vacation planner is a 2 year publication and the 2008/09 issue will be out of date at the end
of this year. The remaining quantity is less than 50,000 which should last another 4 or 5 months. In the
past the vacation planner has been refreshed with new data but the design has not changed.
Revising the vacation planner will support Seattle Southside's current project to enhance its brand and
will work in conjunction with a new advertising strategy directing users to the website. The revision will
include an online version which will reduce printing costs, create more user tracking methods, and allow
tourism business associates to have more of a presence.
Redesigning the Seattle Southside vacation planner was recommended by the Tukwila, SeaTac, Kent
and Des Moines Lodging Tax Advisory Committees.
Staff received proposals from three vendors: Exclaim, Heckler Associates, and Lunar Cow (see
attached matrix). Staff determined Heckler Associates' proposal did not meet the qualification criteria
because it did not include redesign of the publication. Exclaim's proposal cost was $46,332 and Lunar
Cow's cost was $48,484. Although Lunar Cow's proposal is $2,152 higher than Exclaim's proposal,
staff recommends selection of Lunar Cow for three reasons. First, Lunar Cow's approach will enable
SSVS to receive revenue from advertisements in the publication which will reduce the net cost. Second,
Lunar Cow has more experience in producing an online version of the vacation planner than Exclaim.
43
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
Third, staff appreciates the quality of other visitor guides produced by Lunar Cow. Staff recommends
adding 5% to Lunar Cow's proposal to cover expenses for a total of $50,910.
Budget impacts: There is no additional budget request for this item. The cost for this work is included
within the Council approved 2009 -2010; however, because the proposal amount is over $40,000, it
requires Council approval.
Since this is a tourism program item, the costs will be paid out of lodging taxes, not the City's general
fund.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Lunar Cow on behalf of Seattle
Southside Visitor Services to redesign and print the vacation planner in an amount not to exceed $50,910.
The Council is also asked to consider this item at the November 23, 2009 Committee of the Whole
meeting and subsequent December 7, 2009 Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Lunar Cow Proposal
Vacation Planner Proposal Matrix
4 #12009 InfoMemosIMemo to Fin Safety Vacation Planner 2009 (Version4).doc
t5�7En
wWw L.+ are6W C
yarding utdocatt mg uflalicimg ,9nte+actiu¢ ��ttnt L1uCf medCa
Seattle Southside CVB October 19, 2009
2010 Visitors Guide
BilSi Tie S',th'Pr Se
The Seattle Southside CVB (SSCVB) has asked Lunar Cow to highlight the costs and benefits of
designing and printing its 2010 Visitors Guide, as well as converting its Visitors Guide into a page
turning, interactive guide (Lunar Cow GoGuide Lunar Cow has quoted on a 52pg cover option
under this proposal, but the page count may need to be adjusted once the ad sales campaign is
complete. The SSCVB will also be responsible for providing the files for the map that was used in the
previous Visitors Guide, or Lunar Cow will design fresh new maps that the SSCVB will have full
rights to. If this option is selected, Lunar Cow will create a separate agreement. The Campaign
Objectives are listed below:
(.am!saigo t hj ctivTs
Consulting/planning session to lay the foundation to what has been done in the past, how that
can be taken further and what new goals are in place for the Visitors Guide. The session will
determine key contact people and the scope of content on this project. Design and Ad Sales project
calendars with detailed milestones will be defined shortly after the planning session. Special care
will be given in planning Ad Sales, due dates and payment due dates to assure ad sales, collections
and publication go smoothly.
Design and print the 2010 Visitors Guide. Design objectives will focus on creating high
impact and response. Through the 2010 Visitors Guide, we will motivate viewers to find out
more about the area and plan trips and events in and around the Seattle Southside area. The
publication will highlight the diversity and great number of entertainment options located in
the region. Lunar Cow will work with the SSCVB to identify these key factors of influence.
The goal of the SSCVB and Lunar Cow is to create more of a Lifestyle publication, utilizing
more photos, better maps, introducing new ideas and sections such as pre planned itineraries,
and creating a more engaging piece that better tells the story of the Seattle Southside region.
The new guide will feature Seattle Southside as the home base of the Pacific Northwest where
visitors can stay and experience the surrounding areas within a day's trip. The SSCVB will
provide all content and photos for the 2010 Visitors Guide. Additional goals include:
Increase Travel, Tourism and Commerce within the Seattle Southside
Increase awareness of the SSCVB visitor destination brand
Stimulate Seattle Southside destination travel spending
Create awareness of the GoGuide available to compliment the SSCVB Visitors Guide.
Bring innovation to the guide that offers more value for travelers and travel planners.
Maximize brand impact and immersion to excite travelers and potential travelers about
the region.
Produce a professional and easy -to -use visitors guide
Delivering the guide on time and within budget
Lunar Cow will secure photos from local photographers supplied by the SSCVB if needed.
Lunar Cow will provide copywriting services when needed. This service, if needed, will be
billed at an hourly rate.
Convert the Visitors Guide into an online GoGuide By designing your visitors guide and
converting it into an online GoGuide Lunar Cow will give your Visitors Guide additional
value, impact and functionality. Lunar Cow will design your visitors guide in a way that will
not only WOW! your target audience and provide ease of use, but will further expand its
message online.
Convert printed Visitors Guide to GoGuide
Optimize images, copy and guide content
Create links to external URLs
LC- 2;JUSSSSCV 'ih
Tiaudtng I ,aldvotl,nig 1 _lAallectiug I ,Qnleiaclmc
%4ww.LI1n rCow:corn
Value
Visitors Guide will enjoy new innovation and a fresh design that will better attract prospective
visitors and assist current travelers to maximize their visit.
o Improved branding
o Better positioning against competition
o Drives recipients to the online GoGuide for additional information and trip
planning functionality
Online GoGuide' expands the message of the Visitors Guide and adds valuable functionality.
o Brings Visitors Guide to the Web in a powerful format optimized for interactivity
o Downloads on- demand for efficient bandwidth usage
o Convenient one -click jump to desired page
o Easy -to -use interface, getting started/welcome page, table of contents, help resources
and tool bar allows viewers to instantly begin using the guide
o Page flip animations simulates magazine experience
o The content of the guide is searchable which offers quick access to specific content
o Zoom tool allows for detailed magnification
o Powerful print and save functionality offer viewers valuable output options
o Advertisements are linked directly to each advertiser's website
o Internal linking allows for interactive table of contents and easy navigation of guide
o Google integrated articles allow for easy language translation of your guide
o Videos can be imbedded within your guide, opening up new advertising opportunities
o Forward to a Friend features stimulates viral marketing and expands audience
potential
o Analytics Software tracks all visits and clicks within the guide
o Monthly Reporting provides valuable data about visitors to your region
o Hosting is included for up to 3 years
Added Value
We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to quote on designing and printing the SSCVB 2010 Visitors
Guide. To show our appreciation and commitment to the SSCVB, Lunar Cow will convert the SSCVB
Visitors Guide into an online, interactive guide absolutely FREE! (A $1,400 value!) with the purchase
of both design and print services for the 2010 Visitors Guide.
Lc..2oo4SSC 3 -1b
2
800- 594 -96ao
,,0 s
Lunar Cow will provide the experience and expertise necessary to design, develop, implement and
manage your Campaign. Your project will be divided into 5 easily managed Milestones to ensure clear,
one -to -one communication with your team and our dedicated Project Manager. Each Milestone is
assigned specific deliverables and timelines, and Lunar Cow will not move on to the next Milestone
until we have exceeded your expectations. This approach guarantees that we will exceed your
expectations at the completion of the project. Milestones are deliverables and are listed below.
MISSION SCHEDULE: 2010 Visitors Guide Design, Print and Digital Guide
`s'fi cswiii' 1 (Cons €thing, fiegniri:rcni and Planning)
Estimated time of completion: 1 -2 weeks
Our team of design professionals will work with your staff to establish objectives, goals and
communication styles for the project. We will explore your business and the market place to become
thoroughly educated to the essence of your brand. During this foundational stage we will discuss,
advise and present the full range of possibilities that can be implemented. We look for ways in which
your company distinguishes itself in the existing marketplace to successfully position strong brand
separation.
Highlights on Milestone 1:
Project kick -off exploratory meeting /conference call
Create a client contact through which all approvals will be obtained
Cover needed materials or discuss how they will be generated if not currently in place
Consult with the SSCVB on campaign goals
Photography consultation (if needed)
Copywriting Services (if needed)
libestone 2 (Milk!! Design (alteration)
Estimated time of completion: 1 -2 weeks
In this stage we formulate the key elements that will drive the visual elements of your project. This
stage takes the plan and explores effective visual resolutions. Multiple thumbnail concepts are created
to showcase a range of potentially successful systems This stage completes with the approval of a
defined concept that will be evolved into a prototype model in the next stage.
Highlights on Milestone 2:
Inventory images and content. Images and copy must be provided in a digital format. Images
should be 300dpi or greater and in a file format supported by Adobe Photoshop, preferably a TIF
file or high resolution JPG.
Optimize, color correct digital images. Proposal includes up to 100 images.
Photo, print or slide scanning is not included and will be billed as line item addendum to this
proposal if needed.
Lunar Cow will present 1 -3 concepts for the Visitors Guide as needed to gain final approval.
Concepts will include a cover page and interior page to demonstrate publication styles Additional
concepts requested beyond 3 will be billed at $125/hour. One round of revisions to a concept
included. Additional rounds of revisions billed at $125/hour.
,Nificsrofrc: (Prototypc)
Estimated time of completion: 2 -3 weeks
Once an approved concept is in place, Lunar Cow will develop a preprint prototype of the Visitors
Guide. Approval will take place at this stage.
Highlights on Milestone 3:
Visitors Guide: Place provided copy and layout pages. Provided copy must be proofed by SSCVB
prior to sending to Lunar Cow. Publication may be broken down into 2 portions for presentation
and approval. Up to two rounds of revisions included as necessary to gain final approval.
Additional rounds of revisions billed at $125/hour.
1riitcstone .i (i)A, Proofing and Printing)
Estimated time of completion: 1 -2 weeks
The approved files are prepared and sent to print. Lunar Cow will handle review and approval of all
press proofs to ensure the highest level of quality output.
Highlights on Milestone 4:
Visitors Guide is converted into an online, interactive guide and sent to the SSCVB.
Milestone :3 (!)rlivcrv)
The final print product will be delivered via the shipping company of our printer.
NOTE: Estimated timelines are based on the minimum amount of time needed to complete a given
milestone. The first number indicates a forecasted time based on gaining full approval of the first draft
of the milestone presented by Lunar Cow. The second number indicates an estimate based on 1 round
of revisions to gain approval. Additional rounds of revisions will delay the projects initial forecasted
timelines. Up to 2 rounds of revisions for Milestones 1 -3 are included in this estimate. Lunar Cow is
committed to delivering all presentations to your satisfaction; however Lunar Cow reserves the right to
bill for additional rounds of revisions beyond the budgeted 2 at a rate of $125/hr. No credit is earned
for revisions not used in a given milestone. Each milestone features a presentation window where
Lunar Cow will present all or a portion of the components for a given milestone.
Client will have three days to either make an approval or submit revisions to gain approval. If client
exceeds three days to send approval or revisions, the project will delay by each day extended beyond the
allotted three days for that review. Timelines are based on receipt of all content necessary to complete a
given milestone. Timelines will not begin until ALL content required for a given milestone has been
submitted to Lunar Cow in the proper format as instructed by Lunar Cow. All milestones are
concurrent and a delay in any given milestone affects all subsequent milestones.
LC- 2 COS SCVFi -1h
B+onrling I old ektisnig cMortkef4,g I ,4ntetacfwe (P.+int I erupt +media
Lkia
e COfitaet
WW. Lim Cc3lti'.Ccrm
800-594-9620
fr,
Oni;eting
,911tenneCtue �ln
Ya-
Or-
s Itrwi maar Com
'd
Ong
Lunar Cow's Experience
Lunar Cow is an award winning, visual communications firm specializing in assisting companies to solve
problems and grow their business by strengthening brand communication over the Web, in print and
through multimedia. Our Creative Business Professionals have backgrounds in graphic design, technology
marketing and business. Each team member blends an energetic passion for success with proven market
research, strategic planning and best practices program development to achieve brand communications that
"get noticed" and deliver measurable response. Our client- centric philosophy and proven, 5 -Step Mission
Schedule guarantee your complete satisfaction.
Lunar Cow has 10 years of national and international experience working with destination marketers
Lunar Cow has helped these attractions best realize their brand to enjoy strong market positioning. We
understand the unique marketing considerations that go into positioning and promoting a destination and
have built a strong portfolio of experience. Our destination experience covers convention and visitor
bureaus, theme parks, performing art centers, theatres, specialty animal attractions, zoos, museums and
historic societies. A sampling of some of the clients we have worked for in this group can be found in the
Abbreviated Client List below.
Abbreviated Client List
Akron Symphony Orchestra
Allegheny National Forest Vacation Bureau
Ashtabula County CVB
Bakersfield, CA CVB
Brown County CVB
Burlington/Alamance County CVB
Butler County 01-1 Visitors Bureau
Carroll County CVB
Cayuga County Office of Tourism
Chester County's Brandywine Valley
Cleveland Cinemas
Cleveland Play House
Chicago Southland CVB
Clinton County CVB
Currituck County Department of Travel
Darke County OH Visitors Bureau
DeKalb County Tourist Association
Dolphin Quest
Fairmont Chamber of Commerce
Finger Lakes Visitors Connection
Flint Area CVB
Fond Du Lac CVB
Fort Collins CVB
Franklin County CVB
Front Royal Tourism
Geneva -on- the -Lake Visitors Bureau
Huntingdon County Visitors Bureau
Huntington County VCB
Indiana State Festival Association
IMATA
Kalamazoo County CVB
Lake Erie Shores Islands
Manhattan CVB
Marineland
McPherson CVB
Miami Seaquarium
Mountain Arts Center, KY
North of Boston CVB
Pikeville/Pike County Tourism
Pittsboro -Siler City CVB
Sandusky/Erie County VCB
Santee Cooper Counties Promotion
Commission
Six Flags Theme Parks
Statesville CVB
Staunton CVB
St. Augustine, Ponte Vedra The Beaches CVB
Summersville CVB
Valdosta CVB
Vinton County CVB
Visit Bend, OR
Visit Chicagoland
Wabash County CVB
Warren County OH CVB
Wayne County CVB
Woodfield Chicago NW CB
Summary
Strong team dynamic is built on synergy. Our team's goal is to collaborate with your team and act as an
extension of your operation by providing vision, leadership, implementation and complete integration of
our service platforms into your marketing plans to maximize your campaign results. Each campaign begins
with clearly defined objectives and identification of the issues and challenges that confront progress. Our
approach builds substantial value to your business and assigns a tangible measurement of success to clearly
evaluate how each campaign impacts your business.
000-594-9620
ate:
B aiiding l 4d "ue��tsfi
an'
PAnice ,'ununa/t
DESIGN SERVICES
Design of 2010 Visitors Guide
52pg cover
GOGUIDE
Online GoGuide
Convert 2010 Visitors Guide into an interactive online guide
PHOTOGRAPHY
Photography services billed at local photographer rate
COPYWRITING
Copywriting services if needed billed at $125/hr
PRINTING SERVICES
Pages: 52 cover
Size: 8 3/8 x 10 7/8
QTY. 100,000
Color: 4/4 PC, full bleeds
Binding: Saddle Stitch and trim and pack in small cartons
Shipping: Included in price below
Stock: Cover 80# Gloss Text; Body 60# Gloss Text
TOTAL PROJECT COST $48,484
(Includes design, printing, shipping and GoGuide)
Online GoGuide
Standard After Special Rate*
$1,400 FREE!
*SSCVB will receive a FREE Online GoGuidde design, valued at $I,400, when choosing to have Lunar Cow
design and print your 2009 Visitors Guide if this agreement is signed by October 31st, 2009!
LC 2409SSCVt3•ih
6
T.+anding ,_idvoticaig 1 JIAalkailig ,gorlactiac I 'Mint I JiWitwdia
a[ eoti .e
"w\'.L1marC0
800-594-9620
1=11 t ;)w 1Sf S ?ryti i'!'ap, +Sa{ rt:ntts:., nd
These Lunar Cow Design Proposal Terms and Conditions (the "Terms and Conditions are attached to the Lunar Cow Design
Proposal (the "Proposal that will act as the agreement between Lunar Cow Design, Inc. "Lunar Cow and you "Customer for
purposes of the transactions referenced in the Proposal.
1. ',Pft.111r' ;i tit t \'S, Any products and/or services to be supplied by Lunar Cow under the Proposal will provided in accordance
with the specifications set forth in the Proposal. Any dates or schedules specified in the Proposal for the delivery of any products or
services by Lunar Cow are only estimates and shall not be binding upon Lunar Cow Lunar Cow shall not incur any liability, either
directly or indirectly, nor shall any engagement be canceled as a result of any delays in meeting such dates or schedules.
2. E'i;it.iN "s 'i i sit• \T, The products and/or services set forth in the Proposal will be provided by Lunar Cow to Customer at the
prices in the Proposal. Any products or services provided by Lunar Cow not listed in the Proposal shall be billed at Lunar Cow's
customary charges or rates. Further, expedited or rush service by Lunar Cow will be subject to additional charges as established by
Lunar Cow from time to time. All prices will be exclusive of expenses incurred by Lunar Cow in providing the products and/or
services under the Proposal. Customer shall be responsible for all out -of- pocket expenses incurred by Lunar Cow in providing the
products and/or services, including, but not limited to, copy charges, travel costs, model and other talent fees, equipment use and
rental fees, disk charges, shipping charges and other related costs and expenses. Invoices are due upon Customer's receipt thereof.
Customer shall pay interest of one and one -half percent (12 per month on all amounts due but not paid within thirty (30) days of
the invoice date. Lunar Cow retains the right to cease all work and deliverables for Customer under the Proposal until overdue
amounts are paid.
3 1.1X1 i Customer is solely responsible for payment of any taxes (including sales or use taxes, excise taxes, intangible and
property taxes and similar taxes) resulting from products and services provided under the Proposal, excluding, however, any taxes
payable by Lunar Cow due to income earned by it or withholding taxes to its employees.
4 IA '.I:. 1?t VIi•s'. With respect to any design work performed by Lunar Cow under the Proposal, Lunar Cow will present
Customer an initial concept design. Upon presentment of this concept design, Customer will have the opportunity to work with
Lunar Cow in its redesign. The prices set forth in the Proposal are based upon a maximum of two (2) requests for changes to the
initial concept design. Any changes to the initial concept design requested by Customer in excess of such amount or any changes
requested after acceptance of the concept design will be billed by Lunar Cow at its customary rates for such services.
5 1;!"'li'..' OF 1)1.1 Upon the completion of any deliverable in the Proposal, Customer will have three (3) business
days to review or test the deliverable and notify Lunar Cow of any problems with such deliverable. If Customer does not timely notify
Lunar Cow in writing of any problem, such deliverable will be deemed to be accepted by Customer. In the event of any delay caused
by Customer's failure to timely make any delivery set forth in the Proposal or respond to Lunar Cow in a timely manner, Lunar Cow
will not be responsible to meet any due dates set forth in the Proposal, which shall be extended in Lunar Cow's discretion.
6. i r'_1 Sk 1 In the event Customer requests any changes or modifications to the products or services provided under the
Proposal, Customer will be responsible for all charges reasonably incurred by Lunar Cow with respect to such changes. Further, any
times scheduled in the Proposal for the delivery may be extended by Lunar Cow upon any such requested changes or modifications.
7 "I! ila1'11 i 'tl F'Sil S11? 1IONS Customer represents and warrants to Lunar Cow that:
a. No content or information or materials delivered by Customer to Lunar Cow will: (i) be libelous, defamatory,
obscene, profane, threatening, harassing or offensive or otherwise violate the privacy or publicity rights of any third party;
(ii) constitute a fraud or other unlawful business practice, (iii) infringe on any copyright, patent, trade secret or other
proprietary right held by any third party, or (iv) violate any federal, state or local law, regulation or orders,
b. Customer has secured all necessary licenses and clearances for use of the content, including all rights to copy,
distribute, modify, perform and display the content and to create derivative works of the content. Unless otherwise agreed
by Lunar Cow in the Proposal, all content will be supplied by Customer
c. Lunar Cow may refrain from starting any work under the Proposal until such time as Customer has delivered to Lunar
Cow all required content, including, but not limited to, copy, image files, logos and reference materials. Any delays in
providing such content by Customer will extend the time period for the delivery Lunar Cow has no obligation to review
any content, information or other materials supplied by Customer and does not assume any liability therefor
d. Lunar Cow shall not be responsible for any delays or inability of third parties used by Lunar Cow to provide the
products and/or services under the Proposal. Any price estimates in the Proposal may be based on a quote from a third
party Lunar Cow shall not be bound by any price quote in the Proposal if any such third party fails to provide the
products or services as agreed.
8. Lit r'.1? i'la' .t Nl\ 1 Lunar Cow represents and warrants to Customer that the graphics, scripts, text, source code, software
and other materials supplied or prepared by Lunar Cow under the Proposal will not infringe on any trademark, copyright, patent or
other proprietary right held by any third party
9 1 SF;11 A 1 o t Lunar Cow shall have the right to terminate the agreement under the Proposal and all work to be performed
thereunder (i) in the event of Customer's breach of any provision hereof, or (ii) in the event a petition seeking composition of
creditors, the protection afforded by the United States Bankruptcy Code or benefit of other laws affecting the rights of creditors
generally is filed by or against Customer Upon termination by Lunar Cow, any and all work to be performed by Lunar Cow under
the Proposal shall immediately terminate; whereupon Lunar Cow will have no responsibility to refund any payments made to it prior
to such date of termination.
13,nnding I, Ackcatrstng 1 0idaakeffng I,9ntevacfwc
.f
WWW.1,1111Ur Cow. r om
10. 1N( t 1'I'ION In the event Customer cancels the engagement contemplated under the Proposal or fails to deliver any items
set forth in the Proposal or these Terms and Conditions after written request by Lunar Cow, Customer shall pay to Lunar Cow all
charges and fees incurred by Lunar Cow through the date of termination. In addition, without limiting the availability of any and all
other legal or equitable remedies, Customer shall pay a cancellation fee, depending upon the date of cancellation, equal to the
following schedule: (a) cancellation during Milestone 1 (or equivalent period) 50% of total estimated fees; (b) cancellation during
Milestone 2 (or equivalent period) 75% of total estimated fees; and (c) cancellation during Milestone 3 (or equivalent period)
100% of total estimated fees.
11. 0\•1 N1 1ZS1II I' Any content or materials supplied by Customer shall remain the property of Customer. Any image, graphics,
coding, scripts, text, source code, software or other materials supplied or prepared by Lunar Cow, and any derivative works there
from, shall remain the property of Lunar Cow; provided Lunar Cow shall grant to Customer the limited right to use such materials,
on a non transferable basis on its Web site or as otherwise contemplated in the Proposal. Notwithstanding any other provision of the
Proposal or these Terms and Conditions, Customer shall not be permitted to modify, reverse engineer, disassemble or decompile any
software or source code supplied by Lunar Cow for any Web site developed by Lunar Cow.
12, klt 111' 1 t t 1 >ISPI Al Notwithstanding any other provision hereof, Lunar Cow will have the right to publicly display any Web
site, including any components or content therein, and any design prepared or developed by Lunar Cow under the Proposal to any
third parry, including, but not limited to, to potential clients in person, by advertisements or trade shows, or through contest
submissions.
13. 1 1)1•\i"ti11 It ..1 I I()\' Customer shall indemnify and hold Lunar Cow, and its directors, officers, employees and agents, harmless
from and against any claims, losses, damages, liabilities, costs or expenses of any nature (including reasonable attorney's fees) suffered
or incurred by any of them to the extent that such are caused by (i) a breach of the Proposal or these Terms and Conditions by
Customer, or (ii) any content or materials supplied by Customer
14. i 1 01. 1 I,t1111 1I'I F4, LUNAR COW SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO CUSTOMER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR SPECIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, LOSS
OF DAIA, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF LUNAR COW'S BREACH OF CONTRACT OR WARRANTY, NEGLIGENCE, OR OTHERWISE
(EVEN IF LUNAR COW HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH LOSS OR DAMAGE) CUSTOMER'S SOLE REMEDY
UNDER THE AGREEMENT FOR A BREACH BY LUNAR COW SHALL BE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SAME OR REPLACEMENT
SERVICES AND /OR THE DELIVERY OF REPLACEMENT PRODUCTS BY LUNAR COW
15. f)i`,t 1 Al ‘11 1; 01 1 WA Ftk 1�' 1 11 S EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED HEREIN, THE PRODUCTS AND
SERVICES PROVDIED BY LUNAR COW ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. LUNAR COW EXPRESSLY
DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT
THERETO, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING BY LAW, CUSTOM, USAGE OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT
LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
16. (,it\ i'I {I I:V( 1 1\C' l I.N1 1 1. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Ohio, without reference to any conflict
of laws principles, and all claims, actions and other proceedings relating to the subject matter hereof shall be brought and heard
exclusively in the courts of Summit County, Ohio. Customer hereby consents to jurisdiction and venue of such courts and waives any
right to object to such jurisdiction or venue.
17 'al f )1tN1 1 1.1 If Lunar Cow is required to resort to legal action for the redress of a breach hereof by Customer, Lunar
Cow, if successful, shall be entitled to an award of all of its reasonable attorney fees and costs.
18. \,',14 ,NAI I This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the parties and their respective successors
and assigns. Customer may not assign this Agreement or any of its rights or duties hereunder (including the sale or transfer of
majority control of the ownership of Customer) without the prior written consent of Lunar Cow Nothing in the Proposal or these
Terms and Conditions shall be construed as creating any act or beneficial right in or on behalf of any third party
19 l'tht( I. NI IJ1'111t1• To the extent Lunar Cow is prevented from performing any of its obligations hereunder due to
circumstances beyond its control (including, but not limited to, the action or inaction of any governmental, civil or military authority;
a strike, lockout or other labor dispute; or a fire, flood, war, riot, theft, earthquake or other natural disaster, acts of terrorism or
other civil disturbance), Lunar Cow shall not be liable to Customer for any losses or damages arising out of such non performance.
20. 4 t t1`.1'11 zl d 11 11 1 Customer shall treat all confidential and proprietary information and materials of Lunar Cow strictly
confidential and shall not disclose such information or materials to any third party
21. ■tl I 1 1 1" f 4411' No provision hereof shall be deemed waived, amended or modified by either party, unless it is in writing
and signed by the party against whom it is sought to be enforced. The failure of a party to enforce any provision hereof shall in no way
be construed to be a waiver of such provision, nor in any way affect the ability of a party to enforce the same or other provisions
thereafter. The Proposal and these Terms and Conditions represent the complete agreement of the parties with respect to the subject
matter hereof and supersedes any prior or contemporaneous agreements, written or oral, between the parties. Lunar Cow shall be
deemed an independent contractor of Customer and neither party shall be, nor hold itself out as being, an employee or agent of the
other party Any notice to be given hereunder shall be given in writing and delivered personally, by overnight courier, by U.S. certified
mail, postage prepaid, written receipt requested, or by facsimile with confirmation.
C -.2 W9SSC;V;i• Ib
oae
800 -594 -9620
Yes, I authorize Lunar Cow to begin development on the design and printing of the 2010 Visitors
Guide and GoGuide as outlined by the above terms. Please initial ALL of the services below that you
wish to have implemented by Lunar Cow.
2010 Visitors Guide Design (Included in Total Project Cost)
2010 Visitors Guide Printing (Included in Total Project Cost)
Please provide photography services
Please provide Copywriting services
Online GoGuide (Included in Total Project Cost)
Please Quote Map Design
3';t1 meat Schedule
Half the cost of the project will be invoiced upon signing of agreement.
The remaining balance will be billed at the start of Milestone 3 and must be paid in full prior
to sending the guide to print.
Project must be paid in full before delivery of final product will occur.
Prices contained in this proposal are guaranteed for 30 days.
Accepted By:
Seattle Southside CVB Ashley Comar PH: 206 -575 -2489 ashlev @seattlesouthside.com
14220 Interurban Ave S R Suite 130 Tukwila, WA 98168
Signature:
Printed Name:
Date:
Title:
Proposal Provided By:
Lunar Cow 137 South Main Street, Suite 202 Akron, Ohio 44308
PH: 330 253.9000 FX: 330.253.9001 TF: 800.594 9620
LC -2 9SSC VLa _b
'B+a iding ,�idoottsmg I 4laliefing 14
enncfi u`j r Prnt dl uCime
Vacation Planner
Creative Production
Ad Sales*
Saddle Stitch
Copywriting
Subtotal
Printing 100,000 (Journal
Graphics)
Photography
Online Guide
Total
'comments:
54
Vacation Planner Proposal Matrix
Exciaim ec er ssociates Lunar Cow
New Design
N/A
Yes
Included
$17,700.00
$26,782.00
TBD
$1,850.00
$46,332.00
Updated Existing Publication
N/A
Yes
Minor editing and proofing
$7,000.00
$26,782.00
TBD
$33,782.00
Created SSVS's new
brand guidelines Updated SSVS existing guide
Produced past 2 issues
EXCLAIM has
identified one of the 3
online vendors guide
producers as a *No online guide experience or
subcontractor relationship with vendor
New Design
Included
Yes
Minor editing and proofing
Included
To be supplied by SSVS
Complimentary
$48,484 or
*Ad sales will reduce overall
cost of guide and make
partners feel more involved
*There are only 3 vendors that
produce the online guides,
Lunar Cow is one of the three
***SSVS staff really
appreciates other visitor guides
produced by Lunar Cow
FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
November 17, 2009 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3
City of Tukwila
Finance and Safety Committee
PRESENT
Councilmembers: Pam Linder, Chair; Joe Duffle and De'Sean Quinn
Staff: Shawn Hunstock, Gail Labanara, Nick Olivas, Derek Speck, Mary Miotke, Katherine
Kertzman, Ashley Comar, Jack Pace, Rhonda Berry and Kimberly Matej
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Linder called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m.
I. PRESENTATIONS
No presentations.
II. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Seattle Southside Visitors Services Website Redesign
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into a contract with PJKH, LLC (Philip Hallstrom) in the
amount of $50,400 plus expenses in an amount not to exceed 5% of the contract total for the web
redevelopment (coding and language) of seattlesouthside.com website.
PJKH will work in cooperation with Exclaim, LLC in redesign of Seattle Southside's website in order to
increase the site's functionality and usability. The contract with Exclaim, for the creative development of
the site is within the limits of the Mayor's signing authority and does not require Council approval.
This item is included in the Tourism program budget which is funded with lodging tax monies, not the
City's General Fund.
Committee members requested an updated memo from staff to the COW, providing clarification on
specific contract cost breakdowns and justification of bidder selection. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
B. Seattle Southside Visitors Services Vacation Planner Redesign
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into a contract with Lunar Cow in the amount of $48,484
plus expenses in an amount not to exceed 5% of the contract total for the new design and printing of the
2010 Vacation Planner.
The Vacation Planner is the official visitors' guide of Seattle Southside which is produced in cooperation
with the Seattle Southside Cities Tukwila, SeaTac, Kent and Des Moines. The proposal calls for
complete redesign of the guide including new data incorporation and an online guide. The guide redesign
has been approved and supported by each city's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee.
Although Lunar Cow is the highest proposal that was received, total expenses are offset by ad sales and
the costs may end up reducing costs.
This item is included in the Tourism program budget which is funded with lodging tax monies, not the
City's General Fund. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
55
56
COUNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS
�11LA _W ITEM NO.
J- ,4S' Initialr
1 Meeting Date 1 frepareci by 1 Mayor's review 1 Council revze)v 1
0 Rl j El 1 11/23/09 11W RT 1 A,44P 44 v
Q,' O 1 12/07/09 Prim RT
90= I I I 1
ITEM INFORIIlIATION
cAS NUMBER: 09-166 'ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
LGENDA ITEM TITLE Interlocal Agreement with King County Road Services Division
;ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance BidAzvard Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
PONSOR Council Ma Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R 111 Police PW
PONSOR'S This Interlocal Agreement with King County Road Services Division will enable the City to
UMMARY use King County services in the event of an emergency or disaster where cleanup,
maintenance, or construction work is necessary. The type of services requested of King
County may be too large or cannot be completed by our City staff due to limited time and
available personnel. This is a no cost commitment from the City and all requested work
with the scope and cost must accepted by the City.
EVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: 11/16/09
;ECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works
COMMrITEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole
CO ST IMPACT 1.FUND -SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ind Source:
omments: Master agreement with no cost commitment, each service will be specifically submitted.
JITG: DATE RECORD OF 'COUNCIL ACTION
11/23/09 1
12/07/09
1TG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 1 Informational Memorandum dated 11/12/09
Interlocal Agreement
Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 11/16/09
12/07/09 1
58
TO:
City of Tukwila
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Transportation Committee
FROM: Interim Public Works Director
DATE: November 12, 2009
SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement with King County
Services Provided by the Road Services Division
ISSUE
Execute an Interlocal Agreement with King County to allow the City to request services to be
performed by the King County Road Services Division.
ANALYSIS
RECOMMENDATION
attachments: Interlocal Agreement
W\PW Eng1OTHER\Robin Tischmak12009 KC Interlocal TC memo.doc
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
BACKGROUND
King County Road Services Division has the personnel and the ability to perform a broad range
of services related to maintenance and construction that they are currently providing to local
agencies throughout King County. These services are provided only at the request of a local
agency and are limited to a specific scope of work. The type of services generally requested are
consistent with the services performed by the City maintenance staff, but may be too large or
cannot be completed by the City due to limited time and available personnel.
This agreement will enable the City to use King County services in the event of an emergency
or disaster where clean up, maintenance or construction work is necessary. An example list of
services provided by the County is included as an attachment to the Interlocal Agreement.
King County has prepared the attached master agreement to perform services as requested by
the City. There is no cost commitment from the City by execution of this agreement; rather, the
City will determine the scope of any requested work and must agree to accept or not accept the
cost as estimated by the County.
Council is being asked to consider the Interlocal Agreement with King County Road Services
Division at the November 23, 2009 Committee of the Whole and subsequent December 7, 2009
Regular Meeting.
59
60
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN KING COUNTY AND
THE CITY OF TUKWILA FOR PROVISION OF SERVICES BY
THE KING COUNTY ROAD SERVICES DIVISION
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between King County, hereinafter called the
"County," and the City of Tukwila, hereinafter called the "City."
RECITALS
A. The City owns public roads and traffic devices which require maintenance and/or other
improvements.
B. The City wishes the County Road Services Division to provide or perform certain services for
the City.
C. The parties can achieve cost savings and benefits in the public's interest by having the County
complete those services for the City at the City's expense.
D. This Agreement establishes the City's role and responsibilities as the recipient of such services
and the County's role and responsibilities as the provider of such services.
E. The parties are authorized by RCW Chapter 39.34 to enter into an interlocal cooperation
agreement of this nature.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
1. Services
1.1
The County Road Services Division will, upon the City's request, provide the City
with Traffic Maintenance, Road Maintenance, Construction Management and
Engineering, Environmental services and other road related services. Examples of
the types of Traffic and Road Maintenance services to be provided are contained in
Exhibit 1 of this Agreement. The services provided to the City shall be any service
that the City requests to the extent that the County Road Services Division is able to
provide such service.
1.2 The County shall only perform services as requested by the City through the
procedure described in Section 2 below.
1.3 The County shall act as a contractor of services only and will not purport to
represent the City professionally other than in providing the services requested.
i
61
62
1.4 The County shall be the lead agency for the completion of work items requested by
the City. The County shall provide services in the type, nature, and magnitude
requested by the City.
1.5 In the event either party decides to make changes to the work items requested that
alters the original scope of work, written notification from the City authorizing such
changes shall be required preceding any such work.
2. Procedure for Reauestina Services
2.1 The City shall request services furnished by the County through the procedure
identified in Exhibit 2 of this Agreement.
2.2 The County shall provide the City with a cost estimate for individual service
requests.
3. County and City Coordination
3.1 The City and County shall notify each other in writing of their respective operations
liaison(s) responsible for administering day -to -day operational activities related to
the provision of services under this Agreement.
3.2 The County and City liaisons shall meet as needed to review performance or to
resolve problems or disputes. Any problems or disputes which cannot be resolved
by the City and County liaisons shall be referred to the authorized City
representative and the Road Services Division Director.
4. Personnel and Eauinment
4.1 The County is acting hereunder as an independent contractor so that:
a. control of personnel standards of performance, discipline, and all other aspects
of work shall be governed entirely by the County;
b. except as described in 4.3 below, all persons rendering service hereunder shall
be for all purposes employees of the County.
4.2 The County shall furnish all personnel, resources, and materials deemed by the
County to be necessary to provide the services herein described and subsequently
requested and authorized by the City.
4.3 In the event the County uses a contractor to perform one or more of the services
requested by the City, the appropriate supervision and inspection of the contractor's
work will be performed by the County.
2
5. Compensation
5.1 Costs. The City will pay the County for actual costs (direct labor, employee benefits,
equipment rental, materials and supplies, utilities, permits, and administrative
overhead costs) for the services provided by the County as set forth herein.
Administrative overhead costs for each work item shall be charged as a percentage
of direct labor costs.
5.2 Billing. The County shall bill the City monthly for the costs of services provided.
The monthly bill will reflect actual costs plus the administrative overhead set forth
in Section 5.1 above. Payments are due within 30 days of the City's receipt of said
invoice.
5.3 Extraordinary Costs. Whenever the City desires to modify a requested service, it
shall notify the County in writing of that desire, and the County shall, before
providing the modified service, advise the City in writing as to whether the
modification would result in any increased or extraordinary costs and the amount
thereof. If, after receiving such notification, the City authorizes the modification of
service in writing then it shall be responsible for any increased or extraordinary
costs in the amount specified by the County. If the City decides not to authorize the
modification of service, it shall notify the county in writing, and advise the county
whether service shall continue as originally requested or the city cancels the request.
If the City cancels the request, the City shall be responsible for all cost incurred by
the County prior to and in connection with the cancellation.
6. City Responsibilities
6.1 The City hereby gives authority to the County to perform services within the City
limits for the purposes of carrying out this Agreement.
6.2 The City is responsible for obtaining any permits or other authorizations that may be
necessary for the County to carry out the work under this Agreement.
6.3 Nothing in this Section shall alter the status of the County and the Road Services
Division as an independent contractor of the City, and the County's actions shall not
be deemed to be those of the City when exercising the authority granted in this
Section 6.
7. County Responsibilities
7.1 The County shall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, machinery,
equipment, materials, and supplies to perform the services requested by the City.
7.2 The County shall make every effort to recognize pertinent City deadlines for
completion of services, and shall notify the City of any hardship or other inability to
perform the services requested, including postponement of work due to
3
63
64
8. Duration
8.1 This Agreement is effective upon signature by both parties, and shall remain in
effect for the remainder of the calendar year in which it is signed and throughout the
following calendar year.
8.2 Thereafter, this Agreement shall renew automatically from year to year effective
January 1 to December 31 of each calendar year, unless either party notifies the
other in writing to terminate or make substantial changes to this Agreement by April
1 of the preceding calendar year.
9. Indemnification
circumstances requiring the County to prioritize its resources toward emergency-
related work outside of the City limits.
Washington State law shall govern the respective liabilities of the parties to this Agreement
for any loss due to property damage or injury to persons arising out of activities conducted
pursuant to it.
10. Insurance
The County certifies that it is fully self insured.
11. Audits and Inspections
The records and documents pertaining to all matters covered by this Agreement shall be
retained and be subject to inspection, review, or audit by the County or the City during the
term of this Agreement and for three (3) years after termination.
12. Entire Agreement and Amendments
This Agreement contains the entire written agreement of the parties hereto and supersedes
any and all prior oral or written representations or understandings. This Agreement may be
amended at any time by mutual, written agreement between the parties.
13. Invalid Provisions
If any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid, the remainder of the Agreement
shall not be affected if such remainder would then continue to serve the purposes and
objectives of the parties.
14. Other Provisions
14.1 Nothing contained herein is intended to, nor shall be construed to, create any
4
rights in any party not a signatory to this Agreement, or to form the basis for any
liability on the part of the City and the County, or their officials, employees,
agents or representatives, to any party not a signatory to this Agreement.
14.2 Waiver of any breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to
be a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a
modification of the terms of this Agreement.
14.3 The headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and do not in any way
limit or amplify the provisions of this Agreement.
14.4 This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and any
representations or understandings, whether oral or written, not incorporated herein
are excluded.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the
date last written below.
KING COUNTY CITY OF TUKWILA
King County Executive City Mayor
Date Date
Approved as to Form Approved as to Form
King County Deputy Prosecuting City Attorney
Attorney
5
65
66
Exhibit 1
1. Traffic Services: The following are examples of traffic services provided by the County.
Actual services provided will be those requested by the City, and the County shall
provide such services in the magnitude, nature, and manner requested by the City. The
City shall set its own service level standards and policies for all roadway features. The
County is merely a contractor for the purpose of implementing City roadway service
standards and policies.
1.1
Sign Maintenance: Replacing faded sign faces and rotten posts, straightening
leaning posts, cleating uncleated posts, relocating signs for visibility or pedestrian
safety, maintenance of vandalized signs or signs damaged by vehicle accidents,
inspection of signs to check for reflectivity, cutting or trimming bushes or limbs
blocking visibility, removal of signs when appropriate, installation of new signs
upon City request.
1.2 Signal Maintenance: Replacing and cleaning light systems for signal and flasher
displays and signs, installation and repair of vehicle detector loops, checking and
adjusting signal timing, examining traffic signal operation to assure it is operating
as intended, inspecting hardware for wear or deficiencies, testing and repairing of
electronic control devices and components, repair or replacement of signal and
flasher displays and supports or wiring external to controller cabinets, modification
of controller cabinets, testing of new and modified cabinets and control devices,
traffic counter testing and repair, preventative maintenance.
1.3 Sign Fabrication: Design and fabricate signs of any size as needed by the City.
1.4 Crosswalks: Refurbishing with thermoplastics and temporary tape and removal
when appropriate.
1.5 Stop Bars: Refurbishing with thermoplastics and temporary tape and removal when
appropriate.
1.6 Arrows/Legends: Remarking worn arrows and removing when appropriate.
1.7 Curb Painting: Maintenance of curbing, islands, and parking stalls.
1.8 Raised Pavement Markers: Removal and replacement of raised pavement markers
or rumble bars.
1.9 Striping: Painting linear road stripes on pavement, such as centerlines, edge lines,
radius and channelization, removal of lines, stripes, or symbols.
1.10 Street Lights: Replacement of light bulbs in existing street lights not maintained by
power companies, repair and replacement of street light heads, poles, or wiring.
6
1.11 Utility Locating: Locating underground traffic facilities for utilities or other
digging operations.
1.12 Flasher /Crosswalk Preventative Maintenance Examining to assure equipment is
operating as intended and inspecting hardware for wear or deficiencies.
2. Roadway Maintenance: The following are examples of roadway maintenance services
provided by the County. Actual services provided will be those requested by the City,
and the County shall provide such services in the magnitude, nature, and manner
requested by the City. The City shall set its own service level standards and policies for
all roadway features. The County is merely a contractor for the purpose of implementing
City roadway service standards and policies.
2.1 Traveled Roadway Surface: Patching, crack pouring, pre -level work, pavement
replacement, grading, dust control.
2.2 Shoulders: Restoration construction, paving, curb and gutter repair, spraying,
extending pavement edge.
2.3 Drainage: Installation of drainage pipe, curb, catch basins, culvert headers /trash
racks; hand ditching, drainage pipe repair, catch basin and manhole cleaning, blade
ditching/shoulder pulling, drainage systems cleaning, pipe marking, drainage
preparation, catch basin repair, culvert header /trash rack replacement and repair,
bucket ditching, catch basin replacement, erosion control, catch basin/manhole
cover replacement, silt removal, Ditchmaster ditch cleaning.
2.4 Structures: Installation of rock, gabion and rip -rap walls, guardrails, fencing,
median barrier walls; rock wall repair or replacement, guidepost installation,
guardrail repair, retaining wall repair, median barrier replacement, guardrail post
removal, fencing repair, bridge repair.
2.5 Traffic and Pedestrian Facilities: Concrete sidewalk installation, sidewalk/walkway
repair, hazardous material cleanup, street sweeping, street flushing, snow and ice
control, maintaining traffic control barricades.
2.6 Roadside: Landscape restoration, slope /shoulder mowing, litter pickup, hand
brushing, danger tree removal, landscape maintenance, slide removal, ornamental
tree maintenance, tree trimming, hand mowing, roadside spraying, tansy ragwort
spraying, washout repair.
7
67
68
Exhibit 2
Services Reauest Process
1. City liaison completes a "Request and Approval for Services" (Form A attached).
2. City Mayor, or designee, signs under the heading "Authorization for Request of Services"
on the Form B.
3. The Form A is transmitted to the County liaison.
4. The County liaison delegates the request to the appropriate Section for review.
5. A County Section representative will complete Form A of the "Request and Approval for
Services." Form B will include the recommended action, cost estimate, and proposed
schedule. If the Road Services Division is unable to provide the requested service, a
notation will be made on the Form B, and the form will be returned to the City in a timely
manner.
6. The County's cost estimate will include all applicable costs for the service requested as
described in Section 5.1 of the Agreement.
7. If the cost estimate is $500 or less, the County may proceed with the requested service as
authorized by the city representative on Form A. If the cost estimate is over $500, Form
B is transmitted to the City liaison for authorization. The signed Form B is then
transmitted back to the County.
8. The County shall complete the requested work upon receipt of the signed Form B. If the
County is unable to compete the work in accordance with the proposed schedule, it shall
notify the city immediately.
9. The County and City liaisons maintain a file of all service requests.
10. The County liaison maintains a tracking system of all the service requests and provides
the City with an updated report at least quarterly.
8
Request Number:
Date:
Nature of Request:
Location:
Requester Name:
Address:
Telephone:
Authorization for Request of Services:
Cost Estimate:
Proposed Schedule:
Authorization to Proceed:
Director, Road Services Division
City Authorized Signature
(if cost estimate over $500)
REQUEST AND APPROVAL FOR SERVICES
CITY OF TUKWILA
FORM A
City Authorized Signature Date
FORM B
Date: Project/Work Order Number:
Recommended Action:
9
Date
Date
Date Completed:
69
70
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
November 16, 2009 5:00 p.m. Conference Room 1
City of Tukwila
Transportation Committee
PRESENT
Councilmembers: Dennis Robertson and Verna Griffin
Absent: De' Sean Quinn, Committee Chair, was unable to make it on time for the meeting due to traffic
Staff: Bob Giberson, Jack Pace, Robin Tischmak, Pat Brodin, Cyndy Knighton, Gail Labanara and
Kimberly Matej
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:07 p.m.
L PRESENTATIONS
No presentations.
H. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Interlocal Agreement with King County Road Services Division
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into an interlocal agreement with King County Road Services
Division which will allow the City to request services from King County relative to traffic and road
maintenance, construction management and engineering, environmental services and other road related
services.
There is no cost associated with the execution of this agreement. The agreement will allow the City to use
King County Road Services Division in circumstances where a project is too large for the City to complete,
or there is limited time or staff availability. The agreement allows for contracting with the County on short
notice essentially to act on behalf of City staff. Additionally, County services can be contracted and used in
the event of an emergency and /or disaster for things such as clean -up, maintenance and construction. Costs
would only be incurred when the City requests service work. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD
TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
B. Ordinance for King County South Park Bridge Adopting King County Development Regulations
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a draft ordinance which adopts all King County development codes
for the South Park Bridge Replacement project.
On November 4, 2002, the City Council passed Resolution 1508 which authorized an interlocal agreement
between the City and King County for the transfer of responsibilities relating to the maintenance, operation,
rehabilitation and/or replacement of the South Park Bridge. A section of the interlocal agreement required
that the City adopt all County zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations and fees for work
related to the replacement design and construction of the South Park Bridge.
This draft ordinance adopts all requirements related to the South Park Bridge authorized by the interlocal
agreement. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
C. Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) Proiect Supplemental Agreement No. 8 with HNTB
Staff is seeking full Council approval for Supplemental Agreement No. 8 with HNTB Corporation in the
amount of $147,384 for final design and final bid documents associated with the Tukwila Urban Center
Access (Klickitat) Project.
This supplemental agreement will include completion of the project design and preparation of ad -ready
contract documents for project bid. Additionally, in the interest of time and efficiency, this agreement
includes anticipated WSDOT redesign requirements that have been pre negotiated with HNTB in order to
71
72
COUNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS
oILA h,
,<J fi tly Initials ITEM NO.
lc Tips Z 1 Mee Date ,grepared by 1 Mayor's review Council ret zew
O x e GI 1 11/23/09 k BG 1 1
Q' e' `i
tl1 Vi'`'\ i 1 12/07/09 I' BG
906 1 I 1 1- P'
ITEM INFORMATION
cAS NUMBER: 09-167 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
.GENDA ITEM TITLE Ordinance Authorizing the Use of King County Standards for the
South Park Bridge Replacement Project
ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal Pent Police PTV
PONSOR'S This Ordinance will adopt all King County development codes for the South Park Bridge
JMMARY Replacement Project. In 2001, King County and the City reached an agreement (see
Resolution 1508 and Interlocal Agreement) for the transfer of the South Park Bridge.
Section 4.4 requires the City to enact an ordinance that adopts all King County zoning,
land use, shoreline and development regulations and fees for the South Park Bridge.
EVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: 11/16/09
ECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works
COMMITTEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole
COST�IMPACT FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ind Source:
omments:
ATG. DATE RECORD COUNCIL ACTION
11/23/09
12/07/09
ATG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/13/09
Draft Ordinance
Resolution 1508
Interlocal Agreement 03 -032
Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 11/16/09
12/07/09
7Q
74
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Transportation Committee
FROM: Interim Public Works Director
DATE: November 13, 2009
SUBJECT: South Park Bridge Replacement Design
Ordinance Authorizing King County to use their Standards
ISSUE
Approve ordinance adopting all King County development codes for the South Park Bridge
replacement project.
BACKGROUND
In 2003, King County and the City of Tukwila reached an agreement (see attached Resolution
No. 1508 and Interlocal Agreement) for the transfer of responsibilities for the operation,
maintenance, rehabilitiation and /or replacement of the South Park Bridge.
DISCUSSION
Section 4 of the Interlocal Agreement transfers all City authority to review and process permit
applications to King County. However, subsection 4.4 requires the City to enact an ordinance
that adopts all County zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations and fees for any
work related to the South Park Bridge replacement design and construction.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to approve this ordinance adopting all King County zoning, land use,
shoreline and development regulations for any work related to the South Park Bridge, as
authorized by the Interlocal Agreement.
Attachment: Ordinance
Resolution 1508 and lnterlocal Agreement
C \DOCUME- 1 \susan \LOCALS-- 1 \Temp\XPGrpWise \Info Memo King County S Pk Br Ordinance.doc
75
76
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING ALL KING COUNTY ZONING, LAND USE,
SHORELINE AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR ANY WORK
RELATED TO THE SOUTH PARK BRIDGE THAT IS AUTHORIZED BY AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND KING
COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila wishes to divest itself of responsibility for that portion of
the South Park Bridge that is located within its corporate boundary; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila accordingly entered into an Interlocal Agreement (ILA)
with King County for the transfer of responsibilities for the operation, maintenance,
rehabilitation and/or replacement of the South Park Bridge; and
WHEREAS, the ILA transferred all City authority to review and render decisions on land
use, building and other development permit applications related to the South Park Bridge to
King County; and
WHEREAS, in reviewing permit applications related to the South Park Bridge, King
County is required to apply the King County Code; and
WHEREAS, the terms of the ILA required the City of Tukwila to enact an ordinance
adopting all County zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations for any work
related to the South Park Bridge;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Regulations Adopted. The City of Tukwila hereby adopts all King County
zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations for any work related to the South Park
Bridge as authorized by the "Interlocal Agreement between King County and the City of
Tukwila Relating to the Maintenance, Operation, Rehabilitation and /or Replacement of the
South Park Bridge," a copy of which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A."
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of
this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage
and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2009
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachment: Exhibit A Interlocal Agreement
W: \Word Processing Ordinances \South Park Bridge.doc
BG:ksn 11/18/2009
D AF T
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Page 1 of 1
77
78
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR THE
TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITIES RELATING TO THE
MAINTENANCE, OPERATION, REHABILITATION AND /OR
REPLACEMENT OF THE SOUTH PARK BRIDGE.
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila wishes to divest itself of responsibility for that
portion of the South Park Bridge that is located within its corporate boundary; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila and King County have reached an agreement
for the transfer of responsibilities for the operation, maintenance, rehabilitation and /or
replacement of the South Park Bridge; and
WHEREAS, the agreement involves the transfer of the aforementioned
responsibilities in exchange for $3,000,000 (three million dollars) and other
considerations enumerated within an Interlocal Agreement between the parties,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Mayor is authorized to execute the Interlocal Agreement attached
and identified as Attachment A to this resolution.
Section 2. The Finance Director is authorized to satisfy the monetary obligation
contained within the Interlocal Agreement effective January 2, 2003
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting this day of
J�_l r mt Leh 2002.
ATTEST AUTHENTICATED
Rol.--) 6ri .rce h
t Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk
PPROVED AS TO FORM BY
Office of the City Attorney
South Park Bridge
City of Tukwila
Washington
Resolution No. 15d
Richard Simpson, e President
Filed with the City Clerk ID-31-
Passed by the City Council. 1 J 02,
Resolution Number
79
80
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
Between
KING COUNTY and the CITY of TUKWILA
Relating to the Maintenance, Operation, Rehabilitation and /or
Replacement of the South Park Bridge
RECITALS
o3-6,82,
cc'
1602
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between King County (hereinafter "the County
and the City of Tukwila (hereinafter "the City regarding the South Park Bridge (hereinafter "the
Bndge The County and the City are referred to collectively as "the Parties."
A. The Bridge is located on 14 /16 Avenue South across the Duwamish River,
placing the north half of the Bridge in Tukwila and the south half of the Bridge in unincorporated
King County The County and Tukwila each own the half of the Bridge that is located within its
respective jurisdiction.
B The County and the City previously entered into the interlocal agreement titled An
Agreement for Interjurisdictional Cooperation Between King County and the City of Tukwila
Concerning the 16 Avenue South Bridge and Roads Operation and Maintenance in Fire
District #1, which was executed by the City on November 6, 1989, and by the County on
December 5, 1989 "the 1989 Agreement concerning the maintenance and operation of the
Bridge
C The Bridge's age, condition and susceptibility to future seismic events, may
necessitate immediate capital planning and projects to extend the useful Iife of the Bridge.
D The City does not have a sufficient, stable source of revenue to provide for the
capital funding necessary to extend the useful life of the Bridge.
E. The City now desires to permanently divest itself of responsibility for the
management and financial obligation for its half of the Bridge in lieu of closing the Bridge.
F Bridge rehabilitation or replacement is an identified capital project in the King
County Roads Capital Improvement Program for the years 2002 -2007
G The County has a vested interest in keeping the Bridge open and making
associated road improvements as it provides a vital link in the regional transportation system for
freight mobility to the region's industrial and commercial centers. The Bridge also serves
unincorporated King County and the cities of Seattle and Tukwila.
H. The County now desires to assume the maintenance and operation of the City's
half of the Bridge.
lnterlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridge
Between King County and City of Tukwila
1
I It is in the best interest of the public that the City and the County take the actions
herein as necessary to keep the Bridge open and to maintain the Bridge m safe operational
manner
J The County and the City are authorized, pursuant to RCW Chapter 39.34 and
Article 11 of the Washington State Constitution, to enter into this interlocal agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and
other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby
acknowledged, the City and County agree as follows.
1 Purpose
The purpose of this Agreement is to define the County's and City's future roles and
responsibilities regarding the operation and maintenance of the Bridge and to establish the
entirety of the City's financial obligation toward the Bridge's annual operation, routine and major
maintenance, or capital projects beginning in the year 2003
2. Definitions
2 1 "Bridge" means the South Park Bridge located on 14 /16 Avenue South across
the Duwamish River and is defined as the structure between the points that the roadway leaves
grade. This includes the supporting piers, towers, foundations, mechanical and electrical
systems, and the pier protection system.
2.2 "Operation" means the labor, equipment, materials and maintenance necessary to
keep both the roadway in service and the bascule lift portion of the Bridge operable to raise and
lower the Bridge for marine traffic.
2.3 "Capital Project" means aproject to replace or reconstruct the entire bridge, or a
major portion thereof, to significantly extend the life of the Bridge.
2.4 "Major maintenance" means painting, redecking, widespread concrete repairs, and
other work necessary to preserve the structural integrity and normal predictable operation of the
Bridge or to repair the Bridge.
2.5 "Project" means preparation of plans and specifications, property acquisition,
including, but not limited to, appraisal and negotiations, construction, construction inspection
and other miscellaneous administrative duties consistent with overseeing the design and
construction of major capital, rehabilitation or replacement of the Bridge and associated roadway
improvements.
2 6 "Routine maintenance" means scheduled minor cleaning, minor
electrical /mechanical tasks, State of Washington Inventory of Bridges and Structures (SWIBS)
inspections, and other minor scheduled repairs.
Interlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridee
8 2 Between king. County and City of Tukwila
2
3 Financial Arrangement and Other Considerations
3 1 The City agrees to make a one time financial contribution of $3,000,000 to the
County payable no later than December 31, 2002 The City will have no obligation to provide
any further financial consideration to the County, for any reason, at any time, and irrespective of
any emergency, except as provided for in Section 8
3 3 The County agrees to assume sole responsibility for operating, maintaining,
repairing, and /or replacing the Bridge and to relieve Tukwila of any further obligation for
operating, maintaining, repairing, and/or replacing the Bridge unless this Agreement is
terminated by the written agreement of the Parties.
34
manner
3.2 The City agrees to engage in the following actions:
3.2.1 The City agrees to assist the County in securing state and federal funding
for Bridge Capital Projects and to enter into any agreements to secure such funding or to
carry out such projects.
3.2.2 The City hereby grants to the County right of entry into the corporate
limits of the City for all purposes related to the maintenance, operation, rehabilitation,
repair or replacement of the Bridge.
The County agrees to expend the City's financial contribution m the following
3 4 1 The County intends to pursue a Capital Project that will extend the useful
life of the Bridge either through rehabilitation or replacement of the Bridge.
3 4.2 The County may, at its sole discretion, use all or a portion of the City's
financial contribution for operation and maintenance, routine or major maintenance, or
completion of a Capital Project.
3 4.3 The County agrees that the City's financial contribution will be spent
solely on the Bridge. The funds will not be used for any other County road capital or
maintenance project.
3 4 4 Should the County close and/or decommission the Bridge, any unspent
funds contributed by the City pursuant to this agreement will be remitted to the City by
the County after the closure /decommissioning. The City's financial obligation may be
spent to accomplish such closure or decommissioning.
4 County to Process and Decide Bridge Permits on Behalf of the City
4 1 All City authority to review and render decisions on land use, building and other
development permit applications related to the Bridge is hereby transferred to the County Such
Inter Agreement 3
For South Park Brid^_e
Between King County and City of Tukwila
83
authority includes, but is not limited to, fee collection, application intake and review, application
engineering review, permit decision making, permit inspections, issuance of final approvals, and
all other permit processing on behalf of the City
4.2 Administrative or quasi judicial appeals of County decisions rendered for permits
related to the Bridge, if any, shall be heard and decided by the County
4.3 In reviewing permit applications pursuant to this Agreement, the County will
apply the King County Code.
4 4 In order to enable the County to process permit applications, the City shall enact
an ordinance adopting all County zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations,
including related fees, as currently adopted or hereafter amended, for any work related to the
Bridge that is authorized by this Agreement.
5. SEPA Compliance
5 1 In order to satisfy the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the County shall serve as the lead agency for
all work and permitting related to the Bridge and the City and the County will, if necessary,
execute a lead agency agreement to implement this paragraph.
5.2 Administrative or quasi-judicial appeals of County SEPA decisions related to the
Bridge, if any, shall be heard and decided by the County to the extent allowed by law
6. Duration
6 1 This Agreement will become effective when duly executed by both parties and
shall remain in effect unless terminated by the written agreement of the Parties.
6.2 If any portion of the Bndge is annexed into the jurisdiction of the City of Seattle
the County may assign its rights and obligations in this Agreement to the City of Seattle. Any
other assignment of the rights and obligations in this Agreement may be made only if the Parties
agree to such assignment in writing.
6.3 The County's authority and obligations under this Agreement shall commence,
and the 1989 Agreement shall terminate on January 1, 2003 (the "Commencement Date
provided that the City has given its financial contribution to the County as set forth in Section
3 1 If the City has not given its financial contribution to the County by that date, the
Commencement Date will be the day on which such payment is made. The County's authority
and obligations under this Agreement shall not commence until such payment is made.
6 4 The terms of the 1989 Agreement governing indemnification will apply to any and
all costs, expenses, claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, judgments, attorney's fees and /or awards
of damages arising out of or in any way resulting from any act of the Parties and their officers,
intcrlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridge
84 Between King County and City of Tukwila
4
agents and employees that occurred pnor to the Commencement Date The terms of this
Agreement governing indemnification will apply to any and all costs, expenses, claims, actions,
suits, liability, loss, judgments, attorney's fees and /or awards of damages arising out of or in any
way resulting from any act of the Parties and their officers, agents and employees that occurred
on or after to the Commencement Date
7 County Authority
7 1 The County shall have the sole authority to operate, maintain, repair, and/or
replace the Bridge
7.2 With regard to the operation, maintenance, repair and /or replacement of the
Bridge, the County shall be responsible for performing design, engineering, grant funding,
administrative and clerical services, for obtaining any necessary property, for reviewing any
permits for work on the Bridge, and for all other matters necessary to operate, maintain, repair
and/or replace the Bridge.
7.3 The County will have full authority to make any decisions related to the operation,
maintenance and management of the Bridge to the same extent as if the entire Bridge were part
of the County road system including, without limitation, the authority to close and/or
decommission the Bridge at any time if, in the County's judgment, closing and /or
decommissioning the Bridge is necessitated by earthquake, vandalism, ship collision, settlement,
fire, extraordinary natural events or weather conditions, riots, irreparable degradation or
destruction of the Bridge, imminent safety considerations, or other causes beyond the reasonable
control of the County In addition, the County may close and /or decommission the Bridge if, in
the County's judgment, it is unreasonably costly to keep the Bridge open, provided that the
County gives the City one year's notice of its intent to close and /or decommission the Bridge for
that reason.
7 4 In implementing this Agreement for the portion of the Bndge and immediately
adjacent roadways within the City, the County Road Engineer may exercise all the powers and
perform all the duties vested by law or ordinance in the City Engineer or other City officer or
department charged with street administration.
7.5 The County shall be responsible for the acquisition of all property and easements
necessary to implement this Agreement. The City agrees to use its best efforts to assist and
cooperate with the County's efforts to acquire property and easements that lie within the City
Through the execution of this Agreement, the City authonzes the County to exercise eminent
domain within the corporate limits of the City necessary to implement this Agreement. The
County shall furnish the City with all necessary legal property descriptions for any property or
easements requiring action by the City Title to all property and easements that are located within
the City shall be in the City The County, and not the City, will be solely liable for all costs
associated with the procurement of such property and easements, including all legal costs,
attorneys' fees, and condemnation damages, if any
lnterlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridge
Between King County and City of Tukwila
5
85
8. Liability to Third Parties
8 1 To the extent permitted by law, each party shall protect, defend, indemnify and
save harmless the other party, its officials, employees and agents, from any and all costs,
expenses, claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, judgments, attorney's fees and /or awards of
damages ansing out of or in any way resulting from the indemnifying party's, or its officials',
employees' and agents', acts, errors or omissions related to the Bridge If such costs, expenses,
claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, judgments, attorney's fees and /or awards of damages are
caused by, or result from, the concurrent negligence of the parties, or their officials, employees
and agents, this Section shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of
each party, its officials, employees and agents.
8.2 The foregoing indemnity is specifically and expressly intended to constitute a
waiver of indemnifying party's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, RCW
Title 51, as respects the indemnified party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the
indemnified party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's
employees. The parties acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and
agreed by them.
9 General Provisions
9 1 Administration. The Parties to this Agreement shall appoint a contact person or
persons to act as liaisons between the parties. For the purposes of Chapter 39.34 RCW, the
County shall be the Administrator of this Agreement.
9.2 Records and Accounting. The Parties' records related to any matters covered by
this Agreement and not otherwise privileged shall be subject to inspection, review, and/or audit
by the other Party at the requesting Party's sole expense. Such records shall be made available for
inspection during regular business hours within a reasonable time of the request.
9.3 Independent Contractor The County shall be deemed an independent contractor
for all purposes and the employees of the County, or any of its contractors, subcontractors and
their employees, shall not in any manner be deemed to be employees or agents of the City
Neither the County, nor any employee of the County shall be entitled to any benefits accorded
City employees by virtue of the services provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be
responsible for withholding or otherwise deducting federal income tax or social security or
contributing to the State Industrial Insurance Program, or otherwise assuming the duties of an
employer with respect to the County, or any employee of the County
9 4 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement has been executed under and shall
be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. If there is any
litigation or other proceeding to enforce or interpret any provisions within this Agreement,
jurisdiction shall be m the courts of the State of Washington and venue shall be in King County
except if there is a federal claim involved, in which case jurisdiction shall be as allowed by
federal law
interlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridge
8 6 Between king. County and City of Tukwila
6
9.5 No Third Party Rights Nothing contained herein is intended to, nor shall be
construed to, create any rights in any person or entity not a signatory to this Agreement, or to
form the basis for any liability on the part of the City, the County, or their officials, employees,
agents or representatives, to any person or entity not a signatory to this Agreement.
9 6 Notice. All notices provided for in this Agreement may be telecopied/faxed, sent
by recognized overnight courier, personally delivered, or mailed by first class 1.1 S Mail, postage
prepaid, to the individuals at the following addresses.
King County
ATTN Manager, King County Roads
201 S Jackson Street
Seattle, WA. 98104
City of Tukwila
ATTN City Administrator
6200 Southcenter Blvd
Tukwila, WA 98188
9 8 Waiver. Waiver of any breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be
deemed to be a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a
modification of the terms of this Agreement.
9 9 Headings. The headings of the various sections and subsections of this
Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not be deemed to expand, limit, or
otherwise affect its terms and conditions.
9 10 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties
and any representations or understandings, whether oral or wntten, not incorporated herein are
excluded.
9 11 Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended, modified or changed, nor
shall any provision hereof be deemed waived, except by an instrument in writing signed by both
parties.
9 12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, if so signed,
shall be deemed one integrated agreement.
9 13 SeverabiIity If any provision of the Agreement is found by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable as written, then the Parties intend and desire that such
provision be enforceable to the full extent permitted by law if it would then continue to serve the
purposes and objectives of the Parties, and that the invalidity or unenforceability of such
provision shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement if such
remainder would then continue to serve the purposes and objectives of the parties.
9 14 Recording. Pursuant to RCW 39.34 040, upon the execution of this Agreement
the County will cause this Agreement to be recorded with the King County Office of Records and
Elections
lnterlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridge
Between King County and City of Tukwila
7
87
88
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the
date last written below
KING COUNTY CITY OF TUKWILA
King County Execut$ e Mayor
Date 0/9
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney City Attorn
Date 3 /6 3 Date rest? /vZ-
k
Interlocal Agreement
For South Park Bridge
Between King County and City of Tukwila
8
Date 1
APPROVED AS TO FORM
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
November 16, 2009 5:00 p.m. Conference Room 1
PRESENT
Councilmembers:
Absent:
Staff:
I. PRESENTATIONS
No presentations.
City of Tukwila
Transportation Committee
Dennis Robertson and Verna Griffin
De'Sean Quinn, Committee Chair, was unable to make it on time for the meeting due to traffic
Bob Giberson, Jack Pace, Robin Tischmak, Pat Brodin, Cyndy Knighton, Gail Labanara and
Kimberly Matej
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:07 p.m.
II. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Interlocal Agreement with King County Road Services Division
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into an interlocal agreement with King County Road Services
Division which will allow the City to request services from King County relative to traffic and road
maintenance, construction management and engineering, environmental services and other road related
services.
There is no cost associated with the execution of this agreement. The agreement will allow the City to use
King County Road Services Division in circumstances where a project is too large for the City to complete,
or there is limited time or staff availability. The agreement allows for contracting with the County on short
notice essentially to act on behalf of City staff. Additionally, County services can be contracted and used in
the event of an emergency and/or disaster for things such as clean -up, maintenance and construction. Costs
would only be incurred when the City requests service work. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD
TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
B. Ordinance for King County South Park Bridge Adopting King County Development Regulations
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a draft ordinance which adopts all King County development codes
for the South Park Bridge Replacement project.
On November 4, 2002, the City Council passed Resolution 1508 which authorized an interlocal agreement
between the City and King County for the transfer of responsibilities relating to the maintenance, operation,
rehabilitation and/or replacement of the South Park Bridge. A section of the interlocal agreement required
that the City adopt all County zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations and fees for work
related to the replacement design and construction of the South Park Bridge.
This draft ordinance adopts all requirements related to the South Park Bridge authorized by the interlocal
agreement. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
C. Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) Proiect Supplemental Agreement No. 8 with HNTB
Staff is seeking full Council approval for Supplemental Agreement No. 8 with HNTB Corporation in the
amount of $147,384 for final design and final bid documents associated with the Tukwila Urban Center
Access (Klickitat) Project.
This supplemental agreement will include completion of the project design and preparation of ad -ready
contract documents for project bid. Additionally, in the interest of time and efficiency, this agreement
includes anticipated WSDOT redesign requirements that have been pre- negotiated with HNTB in order to
89
90
COUNCIL AGENDA Siwosis
y41LA
lnztzalr _V
s II�Nr
O Z 1 Meetinx Date Prepared by 1 Mayor's review I Council repo/ I
61 I 11/23/09 y CK I 1.6 I ni 1
11/23/09 ICK I I 1
190 1 1 1 3P& 3 6
`E. ITEM.INFORM4TIQN
cAS NUMBER: 09-168 f ORIGINAL AGENDA DA'ZE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
1GENDA ITEM TITLE Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) Project
Design Supplement No. 8 with HNTB
:ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Avard Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PTV
PONSOR'S The design of the Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) Project has a number of
UMMARY outstanding issues requiring this additional Supplement No. 8 with HNTB. There are
extensive coordination and negotiation issues with WSDOT as well as difficulties in
obtaining right -of -way. This supplement is for final design and bid documents. Council is
being asked to approve Supplement No. 8 for $147,384.00 with HNTB.
EVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DAI'E: 11/16/09
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works
COMMrI.1'EE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole Special
COST�IMPACT FUN SOU
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$147,384.00 $0.00 $0.00
and Source: 104.02 ARTERIAL STREETS (NEW PAGE 15, PROPOSED 2010 CIP)
omments:
VITG.' RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
11/23/09 1
11/23/09 i
VITG. DATE s ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 J Informational Memorandum dated 11/12/09 (revised after TC)
2009 CIP page 15 (revised from Proposed 2010 2015 CIP)
HNTB Supplement No. 8
Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 11/16/09
11/23/09
91
92
TO:
City of Tukwila
Mayor Haggerton
Transportation Committee
FROM: Interim Public Works Director
DATE: November 12, 2009
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) Project
Project No. 84 -RW19, Contract No. 05 -071
Supplemental Agreement No. 8
ISSUE
Approve Supplemental Agreement No. 8 to the HNTB contract #05 -071 for final design and final bid documents
associated with the Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) Project.
BACKGROUND
The design of the Tukwila Urban Access Project was shelved at the 100% design in May of 2007 At the time it
was shelved, there were a number of outstanding issues requiring resolution once the project design efforts
resumed. Those issues included: WSDOT approvals, design of the buttonhook ramp, right of way acquisition,
property coordination and associated design efforts, construction phasing and staging.
The Supplemental Agreement is for the work necessary to complete the project design and prepare ad -ready
contract documents. It also includes the work to redesign certain aspects of the project as required by WSDOT and
any potential changes to existing conditions which may have occurred since the project was shelved.
Delays in the project timeline have been primarily associated with extensive coordination and negotiation with
WSDOT on certain design issues as well as difficulties in obtaining right -of -way. The right -of -way acquisition is
essentially complete and agreement between the City and WSDOT on the outstanding design requirement issues
is imminent. However, WSDOT is requiring certain changes to the project design in order to accommodate
movement of large trucks through the Southcenter Parkway Klickitat Drive intersections. Those changes have
resulted in additional design and permitting work not originally anticipated when the project was shelved.
DISCUSSION
Because of the extremely tight timeline to bring this project to construction in 2010, staff has negotiated the
Supplemental Agreement with HNTB in a highly unusual manner. Although staff feels that agreement between
Tukwila and WSDOT on the design changes is imminent, the final details are not yet known. The attached
Supplemental Agreement is based on certain assumptions of what the final requirements will be by WSDOT.
Waiting for final agreement with WSDOT before beginning negotiations with HNTB would have resulted in a long
delay in the project schedule, possibly resulting in not being able to construct the project in 2010. Waiting until the
Supplemental Agreement included all necessary work that may be required by WSDOT before bringing to the
Transportation Committee for review would have also resulted in a long delay in getting the designers working on
the final product. The attached supplemental agreement does not include anything but the most simple redesign
efforts. It is anticipated that substantial redesign of certain elements may still be required by WSDOT
The additional design fees have been incorporated into a revised CIP page (see attached).
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Supplement #8 with HNTB for final design and PS &E work in the amount of $147,384 consider this item at
the November 23, 2009 COW followed by a Special Meeting that same evening.
attachments: Supplemental Agreement No. 8
C:ID000ME -11 GAIL- 1. TUKILOCALS- 11Temp\XPGrpWise \INFOMATION MEMO Supplement #8 Final PS &E 11- 12- 09.doc
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
93
PROJECT:
DESCRIPTION:
JUSTIFICATION:
STATUS:
MAINT. IMPACT:
COMMENT:
FINANCIAL
(in $000's)
EXPENSES
Design
LID Expenses
Land (R/W)
Const. Mgmt.
Construction
TOTAL EXPENSES
FUND SOURCES
Awarded Fed Grant
Earmark future)
Awarded State Grant
LID
Mitigation Actual
ROW Donation
Impact Fees
City Oper. Revenue
TOTAL SOURCES
94
Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat -S \C Pkwy)''
LINE ITEM: 104.02.595. .20 PROJECT NO. 98410419
Improve traffic flow on Southcenter Parkway, Klickitat Drive and Strander Boulevard by constructing an
underpass for the southbound lane on Southcenter Pkwy. Coordinate with WSDOT on 1 -5 on- ramps.
Provide needed future traffic capacity, safety improvements and reduce accidents.
Design Report completed in 2005, design in 2006 2007, and LID formation in 2009. Proposed Southcenter
Pkwy /Klickitat road closure for duration of construction will save a significant amount of costs.
Overlay on a 10 -20 year cycle.
Project is on Impact Fee List under Zone 1. Federal funds for $3.1m. Westfield Mali mitigation $653k cash and
$846k ROW, Boeing (Longacres) mitigation is $65k, ACME Bowling $103k. Construction grants; State TIB $5m,
Federal STP $3m, and State funds $250k. Local Improvement District (LID) is a range from $6.5 to $10.5 million.
Through Estimated
2008 2009 2010
3,188 90 573 3,851
135 85 230 450
12 2,434 2,446
2,272 2,272
15,145 15,145
18,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 24,164
3,335 2,609
974 195
1,674 600
Project Location
2010 2015 Capital Improvement Program
CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY
2010 to 2015
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 BEYOND TOTAL
2,805 3,974
2,274
5,250 5,250
8,921 8,921
827 827
846 846
1,127 5 1,132
(2,113) 1,809 1,244 0 0 0 0 0 0 940
3,335 2,609 18,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 24,164
15
Aar
Washington State
Department of Transportation
Supplemental Agreement
Number 8
Original Agreement Number
Project Number
Project Title
Klickitat/Southcenter Parkway Access
Improvement Project
Description of Work
Final Design Services
Total Amount
Authorized
Management
Reserve Fund
Maximum
Amount Payable
05-071
84 -RW19
Agreement 1 2 3
$50,000 $0 $0
Organization and Address Phone:
City of Tukwila
Public Works Department
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100
Tukwila, WA 98188
206 -431 -3665
Execution Date
New Maximum Amount Payable
III
I I
Completion Date
June 30, 2010
$3,426,398
The Local Agency of Tukwila desires to supplement the agreement entered into with HNTB Corporation and
executed on April 6, 2005 and identified as Agreement No. 05 -071. All provisions in the Agreement remain in effect
except as expressly modified by this supplement. The changes to the Agreement are described as follows:
Section 11, SCOPE OF WORK, shall be amended as follows:
The scope of work for this project is supplemented as detailed in the attached Exhibit A, and by this
reference made part of the Agreement.
11
Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, shall be amended as follows:
All work under this Agreement shall be completed by the date shown in the heading of this
Supplemental Agreement Number 8 under Completion Date.
Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows:
Compensation due to Consultant for work performed or services rendered for this project is
supplemented as detailed in the attached Exhibit B, and by this reference made part of this
Agreement.
Original Supp. No. Supp. No. Supp. No. Supp. No. Supp. No. Supp. No. Supp. No. Supp. No.
4 5 6 7 8
TOTAL
$1,168,322 $1,956,680 $17,200 $0 $14,759 $63,350 $4,500 $4,200 $147,387 $3,376,398
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000
$1,218,322 $3,175,002 $3,192,202 $3,192,202 $3,206,961 $3,270,311 $3,274,811 $3,279,011 $3,426,398 $3,426,398
Page 1 of 2
95
If you concur with this Supplemental Agreement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the
appropriate spaces below and return to this office for final action.
By: HNTB Corporation By: City of Tukwila
James E. Thomson, Vice President Approving Authority Signature
Date Date
DOT Form 140 -063 EF
Revised 9/2005
96
Page 2 of 2
Scope of Work
Final Design /PS &E
Tukwila Urban Access Improvement Project
Supplement 8
November, 2009
INTB
97
98
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. SUPPLEMENT PURPOSE 1
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
III. PROJECT GOALS 3
IV. DESIGN CRITERIA 3
V. PROJECT SCHEDULE 4
VI. ITEMS AND SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CITY 5
VII. ABBREVIATIONS 5
VIII. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION 6
IX. WORK TASKS 6
TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 8
Task 1.1 Issues Resolution 8
Task 1.2 Measure Project Requirements 9
Task 1.3 Measure Budget Conformance 9
Task 1.4 Measure Schedule Conformance 9
Task 1.5 Communicate Progress 9
Task 1.6 Lead the Project CONSULTANT Team 9
Task 1.7 Manage Quality 9
Task 1.8 Manage Change 10
TASK 2 COORDINATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION 10
Task 2.1 Coordinate Activities with Southcenter Place Building, Doubletree Hotel and
McDonald's restaurant and other property owners 10
3.0 WSDOT COORDINATION 11
Task 3.1 WSDOT Coordination 11
TASK 4 DEVELOP CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN AND SCHEDULE 12
Task 4.1 Construction Staging and Scheduling 12
TASK 5 UPDATE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE 12
Task 5.1 Construction Cost Estimate 12
TASK 6 REVIEW OF DRAINAGE DESIGN 12
Task 5.1 Review of Drainage Design Concepts 12
c: \docume -1 \cyndy -1.tuk \locals 1\ temp \xpgrpwise \exhibit_a_scope_of work_sup8_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
a1NTB
Page i
During the term of this Agreement, the engineering Consultant (CONSULTANT) shall perform
professional services for the CITYfinal design and assistance during construction, in connection
with the:
Tukwila Urban Access Improvement:
Klickitat Drive /Southcenter Parkway Area Project
This document shall be used to plan, conduct and complete the work on the project.
I. SUPPLEMENT PURPOSE
The design of the Tukwila Urban Access Improvement Project was shelved at the 100% design in
May of 2007. The purpose of this supplement is to finalize the project specifically: 1) complete
the work not completed at the time the project was schelved; 2) updating the shelved design to
reflect changes in standards and specifications and 3) design revisions required to meet WSDOT
design approval requirements. Specific items to be addressed in finalizing the design from May
2007 include:
WSDOT approval materials including deviations and channelization plans.
Acquiring permits and revising permit conditions for improvements made after the
project was shelved.
Updates to project specifications.
Structural analysis and design of overhead sign supports
Design changes at the south buttonhook ramp to accommodate a WB -67 design vehicle
and related potential impacts to Hydrology report, drainage design, plans, grading,
removals, erosion control and site preparation plans for project.
Design work at McDonald's entrance and parking.
Design work on Doubletree and Legacy properties.
Maintenance of Traffic and Construction Phasing and Staging plans.
Design updates to reflect changed conditions in project area.
Coordmation with property owners adjacent to the project to convey the current design
which has new curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway and storm sewer reconstruction on the
west side of the project
Address the removal and re- setting of private business monument signs on the project.
(These are located on the Doubletree and Legacy properties)
Confirm final paving limits between disciplines.
WSDOT review and approval of signing plans.
In addition, at the time this scope was developed for the City of Tukwila, WSDOT and the HNTB
design team coordinated to develop design modifications to accommodate a WB 67 design
vehicle. The WB 67 design vehicle was a change over the original project assumption of a WB
50 design vehicle. This change in design vehicle has so far resulted in the following changes to
the shelved project design which are used as the basis of redesign. Tese changes reflect
modifications resulting from meetings between the City, WSDOT and the Consultant on
November 3 2009. Any subsequent changes will require this scope of work to be revised.
c: \docume -1 \cyndy- I.tuk\locals -1\ temp \xpgrpwiselexhibit_a_scope_of work_sup8_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
INTB
Page 1
99
1
Elimination and reduction of landscape islands at the intersection of Klickitat Drive and
Southcenter Parkway.
Widening of the southwest quadrant of the Klickitat Drive and Southcenter Parkway.
intersection resulting in additional impervious area, modifications to the intersections
curb radius, ADA ramp modifications, relocation of existing traffic signal, controller
cabinet, conduit, pavement markings, possible new retaining wall, additional grading,
changes to site preparation.
Traffic signal timing/synchronization modifications.
Relocation of traffic signal pole Type III at Sta. 16 +08.
Crosswalk modifications.
Modifications to traffic island at the north buttonhook reduce island size and associated
landscaping.
Addition of a fillet on the north bridge abutment providing a cantilever to accommodate
wider truck tuming movements.
Extension of c -curb on Southcenter Parkway.
ROW and Limited Access line locations will be as shown on the 100% shelf submittal.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Southcenter Access Improvement: Kliclitat Drive /Southcenter Parkway Area Project,
hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT, consists of the following features:
A two lane widening of northbound Southcenter Parkway. Widening will be supported
by construction of a new retaining wall along the existing slope east of Southcenter
Parkway.
Grade separation of southbound Southcenter Parkway. Grade separation will be
accomplished by depressing the southbound alignment under the Klickitat intersection
using a bridge structure and retaining walls.
Reconstruction of the northbound lanes of Southcenter Parkway, south of Strander
Boulevard. This construction is required to channelize traffic to the new northbound
widening.
Safety and pedestrian improvements.
Signal modifications at the Klickitat Drive intersection and signal coordination between
Strander Blvd., Klickitat Drive, and the Nordstrom shopping entrance intersection.
New signal at westbound Klickitat Drive and southbound Interstate 5 on ramp.
Horizontal and vertical alignment consistent with current design speed standards.
Utility adjustments and relocations associated with the new improvement.
Construction of detention and water quality facilities.
c: \docume- 1 \cyndy -1.tuk \locals -1\ temp \xpgrpwise \exhibit_a_scope_o1 work_sup6_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
INTB
Page 2
III. PROJECT GOALS
The specific goals for the project are:
Improve traffic flow in the project area
Improve operations at area traffic signals
Minimize delay for motorists
Improve safety
Benefit transit route efficiency and allow for future transit improvements
Provide a solution compatible with WSDOT and I-405 and I -5 improvements
Minimize impacts on current business and property owners
Maintain or improve freight access
Develop a design that creates a visual signature for the Urban Center
IV. DESIGN CRITERIA
Documents developed as part of this scope of work will be in accordance with the latest edition
and amendments to the following documents, as of the date the AGREEMENT is signed.
Changes in any design standards or requirements after work has begun may result in the need for
Extra Work.
City of Tukwila Publications:
a. Year 2004 Comprehensive Plan
b. City of Tukwila Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards, 2003
WSDOT Publications:
a. Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction, English edition
(2008) (M41 -10)
b. Standard Plans for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction, English edition (M21 -01)
c. Design Manual, (M22 -01)
d. Hydraulic Manual, (M23 -03)
e. Plans Preparation Manual, (M22 -31)
f. Bridge Design Manual, (M23 -50)
g. Amendments and General Special Provisions
c:ldocume 1 \cyndy -1.tuk \locals- 1\templxpgrpwse \exhibit a_scope_of work_sup8_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
a1NTB
Page 3
101
102
h. Standard Item Table
i. Traffic Manual, (M51 -02)
j. Highway Runoff Manual, (M31 -16)
k. Utilities Manual, (M22 -87)
1. Local Agency Guidelines, (M36- 63(PA))
m. Environmental Procedures Manual, (M31 -11)
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Publications:
a. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5 Edition (2004)
b. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, Seventeenth Edition, (2002)
c. Highway Design and Operational Practices Related to Highway Safety, (1997)
U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Publications:
a. Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2001
b. Highway Capacity Manual
Other Publications/Design Guides:
a. National Electrical Code
b. Standards of the American Waterworks Association
c. Book of American Society for Testing and Materials Standards
d. American Public Works Association standards
e. Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
f. General Electric's ALADAN program (Illumination design)
V. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The preliminary project schedule will be developed upon notice to proceed.
The duration of the reviews by the CITY, and by others, will be given in the project schedule.
Mutually agreeable changes to the project schedule, whether initiated by the CITY or
CONSULTANT, may be the basis for adjustments in the project budget.
c: \docume -1 \cyndy -1.tuk \locals -1\ temp \xpgrpwise \exhibit_a_scope_of work_sup8 v1a_l.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
G INTB
Page 4
VI. ITEMS AND SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CITY
The CITY will provide the following items and services to the CONSULTANT that will facilitate
the preparation of the documents for work within the limits of the PROJECT. The
CONSULTANT is entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness of this and other data
furnished and represented by the CITY and others, including but not limited to, survey and traffic
data.
The City will be responsible for leading WSDOT coordination, permitting, preparation of
agreements and private property coordination.
Reviews of CONSULTANT submittals at the mutually agreed upon times set forth in the
project schedule and the consolidation of all review comments by others onto one review
set prior to return to the CONSULTANT.
Lighting requirements and design criteria per CITY requirements, if available (DCD).
CITY will prepare and provide documents for rights -of -entry upon all lands necessary for
the performance of the design work. Official notices to property owners and agencies.
Arrangements for the public meetings, including meeting place, announcements, etc.
Assistance with public involvement and information for the PROJECT, including the
responsibilities discussed in Task 4.0.
Payment of all review and/or permit fees.
Computer generated files supplied by the CITY will be in AutoCAD, and in a format
compatible with the CONSULTANT's hardware /software. Any reformatting or
reconfiguration or hardware /software purchase necessary to make the supplied files
compatible will be considered Extra Work.
VII. ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations are referred to throughout this scope of work:
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
BDM WSDOT Bridge Design Manual
DCE Documented Categorical Exemption
DFW Washington State Department of Fish and Wild Life
DNR Washington State Department of Natural Resources
DOE Washington State Department of Ecology
ESA Endangered Species Act
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
c:\ docume 1lcyndy- 1. 1uk11ocals- 1\temp\xpgrpwise \exhibit_a scope_of work_supB_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
INTB
Page 5
103
104
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
LOS Level of service
NEPA National Environmental Projection Act
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
ROW Right -of -way
PS &E Plans, specifications, and estimates
SEPA State Environmental Protection Act
TDM Transportation Demand Management
TS &L Type, Size and Location
WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VIII. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION
The documents listed as "Deliverables" in the Work Tasks, Section IX of this scope of work, and
other exhibits or presentations for the work covered by this AGREEMENT and associated
supplements, if necessary, will be furnished by the CONSULTANT to the CITY upon completion
of the various tasks of work. Whether the documents are submitted in electronic media or in hard
copy, any use of the materials on another project or on extensions of this project beyond the use
for which they were intended, or any modification of the materials or conversion of the materials
to an alternate system or format will be without liability or legal exposure to CONSULTANT.
The CITY will assume all risks associated with such use, modifications, or conversions. The
CONSULTANT may remove from the electronic materials delivered to the CITY, all references
to the CONSULTANT involvement and will retain a tangible copy of the materials delivered to
the CITY which will govern the interpretation of the materials and the information recorded.
Electronic files are considered working files only; the CONSULTANT is not required to maintain
electronic files beyond 90 days after the project final billing, and makes no warranty as to the
viability of electronic files beyond 90 days from date of transmittal.
IX. WORK TASKS
General Assumvtions:
The level of effort for each phase and task of work is limited to the amount of labor and
expenses indicated in Exhibit C. These costs are itemized in Exhibit C to aid in project
tracking purposes only. The budget may be transferred between tasks, provided the total
c:\docume -1 \cyndy- 1.tuk\ locals -1\ temp \xpgrpwise \exhibil_a_scope_of work_sup6 vla_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
a1 NTB
Page 6
contracted amount is not exceeded. Additional services beyond these limits will be
considered Extra Work.
The preliminary project schedule is as shown in Exhibit B.1. The CONSULTANT is
responsible for meeting deadlines for their tasks only; having no control over those portions
of the schedule related to the tasks performed by the CITY or any third party.
Subsurface investigation and remedial action associated with hazardous wastes located within
the project limits are not within this scope of services. No hazardous, dangerous, or
contaminated soil/ground water is anticipated on or within the project limits. Should any of
these materials be encountered, it will be considered Extra Work.
Electronic files of PS &E contract documents will be delivered to the CITY in AutoCAD
format (latest version) at the conclusion of Phase 2 Final Design. Preparation of the record
drawings (as builts) will be the responsibility of the CITY.
The analyses, design, plans, specifications, and estimate performed or prepared as part of the
PROJECT will be in English units. Metric units will not be used on this PROJECT.
The plans will be prepared in accordance with City of Tukwila drafting standards, with
WSDOT /APWA standards being the default standards to follow.
c: \docume -1 \cyndy -1.tuk \locals -1\ temp\ xpgrpwise\ exhibit_a_scope_of_work_supB_v a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
INTB
Page 7
105
106
TASK 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
In this task are described those services necessary to plan, perform, and control the various
elements of the project so that the needs and expectations of the CITY and other project
stakeholders will be met or exceeded.
Assumvtions:
To accurately establish and manage the total project budget, the CITY will provide to the
CONSULTANT their anticipated administrative costs through construction. The
CONSULTANT shall generate the estimated right -of -way acquisition costs.
The CONSULTANT's Project Manager and/or deputy Project Manager will meet with the
CITY's Project Manager on biweeldy basis throughout Phases the completion of the project.
The Consultant shall submit monthly invoices with a written summary of project progress to -date
and activities expected for the next month.
The workplan components developed in Phase 1 of the project will be used as the guidelines for
performing the work in this supplement. Issues may arise that are beyond the provisions of this
scope of work. Flexibility will be maintained in the workplan to address these urgent project
issues; however, the reallocation of resources may result in justification for Extra Work.
Internal project team coordination meetings will be held on an as- needed basis.. These meetings
will be in addition to the coordination meetings held with the CITY, but budgeted as part of the
specific work tasks, separate from Task 1 Project Management.
The project duration will be 5 months.
Task 1.1 Issues Resolution
In accordance with the Change Management Plan, this task may involve:
Identifying and assessing a given issue relative to schedule, budget, resources,
and risk.
Initiating the appropriate action(s) by assigning the issue to specific team
member(s) for resolution using the Communication Plan provisions as a
guideline.
Monitors the issue resolution progress.
Providing assurance for the timely resolution of issues.
Adjusting the project work plan components as required.
The level of effort associated with each individual issue is contained within the appropriate
task(s) available to the team member(s) responsible for its resolution.
c:\ docume -1\ cyndy- 1. tuk\l ocal s- 1\t emp \xpgrpwlse\exhibit_a_scope_of work_sup13_v1a 1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
aINTB
Page 8
Task 1.2 Measure Project Requirements
Maintain the focus of the team members on satisfying the project purpose, objectives, and scope
of work. Monitor and confirm that the technical aspects of the project are being performed and
prepared in compliance with the CITY's expectations. Verify that the information generated on
the project is being filed.
Task 1.3 Measure Budget Conformance
On a monthly basis, monitor the Phase 1 engineering budget. Monitor the planned versus actual
rate of expenditure for each element, and identify trends, taking corrective actions if necessary by
implementing the applicable provisions of the Change Management Plan.
Task 1.4 Measure Schedule Conformance
Monitor and modify the Project Schedule on a monthly basis or as needed to determine potential
impacts of proposed changes. Adjust the durations, predecessor relationships, constraints,
linkages, deliverable descriptions and dates, reviews, percent completes, milestones, cntical path,
and task completion dates to reflect the current status of the project and the revisions made to the
work breakdown structure.
Task 1.5 Communicate Progress
Conduct ongoing, proactive, responsive communications with the CITY staff involved in the
direction and execution of the project. Coordinate the schedule of the reviews to be performed by
the CITY. Prepare and submit a monthly progress report that will mclude identification of work
performed in the previous month's schedule, measures for mitigating schedule slippage and
identification and discussion of potential problems that may arise. Prepare meeting minutes if
necessary and distribute to attendees.
Task 1.6 Lead the Project CONSULTANT Team
Provide direction to the project CONSULTANT team. Conduct project coordination meetings as
required with appropriate task leaders. Monitor the planned versus actual rate of expenditure for
each task and take corrective actions if necessary. Collect from each task leader, the percent
complete as measured by how much work is left to be accomplished on a task by task basis.
Maintain a high exposure to the project team of the issues to be resolved and their potential
impacts to the measures of success for the project.
Task 1.7 Manage Quality
Implement the processes described in the Quality Management Plan to meet the project objectives
established by the stakeholders. Perform continual Quality Planning to reaffirm which quality
standards are relevant and how they are to be satisfied. Verify that Quality Control has been
provided for each technical specialty to evaluate the overall project performance on a regular
basis and to build confidence that the project will satisfy the current quality standards for the
design, drawings, specifications, and cost estimates. Confirm that specific project results are
being monitored by each technical specialty through Quality Control activities to determine if
they are in compliance with the quality standards and, if not, that potential solutions to eliminate
the cause(s) of unsatisfactory performance have been identified and implemented. Facilitate the
c: \docume -1 \cyndy- 1.tuk\Iocals -1\ temp \xpgrpwise \exhibit_a_scope_of work_sup8_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
•INTB
Page 9
107
108
identification and assignment of appropriate senior reviewers for each technical specialty.
Confirm that the current Quality Control activities are clearly indicated in the Project Schedule.
Task 1.8 Manage Change
Based on the project budget established by the CITY:
1. Identify, Analyze Develop Change Strategies. Orchestrate the Change Management
Plan by logging and tracking potential changes identified from any source (Step 1);
facilitating the analysis of the change and determination of its impacts (Step 2), and
facilitating the development of a response strategy (Step 3). The specific activities
associated with completing Steps 2 3 on a given potential change will be largely the
responsibility of each technical specialty staff.
2. Identify Analyze Risk of Change. Identify and analyze the likelihood of the potential
change introducing risk into the project. Characterize the risk to the extent possible and
outline control measures for minimizing its negative effects.
3. Change Authorization. Communicate the proposed strategy(s) to resolve the change and
make appropriate revisions as necessary to gain endorsement for the change (Step 4).
Obtain a written change authorization from the CITY, by the City Public Works Director,
and from the CONSULTANT, by its Project Manager, as representatives of the project
stakeholders.
4. Workplan Revisions. Prior to undertaking the work as a result of the change, revise the
project workplan (Step 5) to avoid misunderstandings, discontent, and poor project
performance. Monitor the implementation of the change using the standard project tools
and techniques.
TASK 2 COORDINATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
The objectives of this task are: the development of a successful design through coordination with
project stakeholders.
Task 2.1 Coordinate Activities with Southcenter Place Building,
Doubletree Hotel and McDonald's restaurant and other property
owners
Assumvtions:
The Consultant shall schedule and conduct one meeting with McDonalds and one joint meeting
with the Doubletree Hotel and Legacy Partners during the Final Design of the project. The
purposes of the meetings are: to solicit input on the reconfiguration of parking, right -of -way
impacts and pedestrian facilities on each owner's property and to describe impacts during
construction. This task shall include the development of one sketch for each property to showing
the agreed upon parking lot configuration.
c: \docume- 1\cyndy- 1.tuk\ locals- 1\t emp \xpgrpwise \exhibit_a_scope_of work_sup8_v1a_l.docx
Pdnted 11/13/2009
C•INTB
Page 10
Deliverables:
One sketch for each revised parking lot layout for the three parcels.
Prepare meeting minutes for two meetings.
3.0 WSDOT COORDINATION
Task 3.1 WSDOT Coordination
WSDOT coordination and approvals will be required on several items including channelization
and signing plans, limited access issues, deviations or evaluate upgrades and other project
elements potentially within WSDOT's purview.
Assumptions:
The City of Tukwila will write and assemble any deviations required for the project.
WSDOT design coordination assume coordination and approvals are only required for
the Buttonhook Ramp design, Klickitat Dr. Southcenter Parkway Intersection geometry,
northern I -5 ramp terminal intersection with Southcenter Parkway, and areas of
Southcenter Parkway within WSDOT limited access boundaries that require WSDOT
review and approval.
WSDOT design coordination assumes that the 2007 100% plans will only require
minimal changes.
WSDOT design coordination assumes there will no redesign or reconstruction of existing
WSDOT interstate ramp elements beyond the intersection returns with Southcenter
Parkway.
Four Channelization plan sheets plus 4 design vehicle intersection turning template sheets
will be required and prepared for WSDOT approval.
It is estimated that up to seven design deviations or evaluate upgrades will be required
and prepared by the CITY for WSDOT approval.
For budgeting purposes 48 hours have been included to support the CITY in the
preparation of design deviations and the project analysis report, including the preparation
of exhibits. Time required beyond 48 hours shall be considered Extra Work.
Attendance will be required at meetings with WSDOT to present information and discuss
design issues. It is assumed that two CONSULTANT staff will attend 4 meetings with
WSDOT staff. Each meeting is assumed to be 4 hours duration including preparation and
travel time.
Deliverables:
WSDOT Channelization Plans for Approval and preparation of Project Development
Package.
Prepare meeting minutes for up to four meetings.
c:\docume- 1 \cyndy- 1.tuk \f orals- 1\tempixpgrpwiselexhibit_a scope_of work_sup8_vla_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
a1NTB
Page 11
109
110
TASK 4 DEVELOP CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN AND
SCHEDULE
Task 4.1 Construction Staging and Scheduling
The purpose of this task is to develop a feasible approach to staging the construction over a two
year period. The two year construction period will meet the requirements of the City's
construction moratorium. In this task the consultant shall:
Develop one staging concept.
Identify potential cost savings or escalation for staging concept at a planning level of cost
estimation.
Identify traffic impacts for staging concept developed.
Develop a critical path schedule for the each staging concept.
Deliverables:
Technical memorandum of construction staging concept, related impacts and critical path
schedules.
TASK 5 UPDATE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Task 5.1 Construction Cost Estimate
The CONSULTANT shall update the Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost
developed for the 2007 shelf submittal with current unit bid prices.
The costs shown in the estimate represent an estimate of probable costs prepared in good faith
with reasonable care. HNTB has no control over the costs of construction labor, materials or
equipment, nor over competitive bidding or negotiating methods and does not make any
commitment or assume any duty to assure that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from this
estimate.
Deliverables:
Updated Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost.
TASK 6 REVIEW OF DRAINAGE DESIGN
Task 5.1 Review of Drainage Design Concepts
c: \docume -1 \cyndy- 1.tukMocals -1\ temp \xpgrpwise \exhibit_a_scope_of work_sup8_v1a_1.docx
Printed 11/13/2009
a1NTB
Page 12
The CONSULTANT shall review the drainage design from the 2007 shelf submittal to identify
opportunities to optimize drainage facilities based on current drainage requirements from
Washington State DOE and WSDOT FIRM.
Deliverables:
Brief Technical Memorandum documenting potential cost savings opportunities.
c: \docume- 1\cyndy- 1.tuk\ locals- 1 \temp\xpgrpwise\ exhibit_ a_scope_of_work_sup
Printed 11/13/2009
INTB
Page 13
111
M
M
M
Exhibit C1
HNTB Corporation
Consultant Fee Determination
Summary Sheet (Lump Sum)
Tukwila Urban Center Access Project: Klickitat/Southcenter Parkway
Supplement No. 8 Final Design
DIRECT SALARY COSTS
Staff Classification Hours Rate Total Cost
Principal 8 $269.34 $2,155
Project Manager 230 $186.65 $42,929
Construction Program Manager 40 $233.60 $9,344
Sr. Engineering Manager 0 $158.38 $0
Sr. Architectural Manager 0 $175.43 $0
Senior Project Engineer 176 $177.54 $31,246
Project Engineer 24 $137.12 $3,291
Design Engineer/Traffic Engineer 32 $90.87 $2,908
Landscape Architect 0 $92.97 $0
Technician 24 $96.48 $2,315
Project Administrator 38 $113.06 $4,296
Admin. Asst. /Clerical 0 $67.74 $0
Total Hours
TOTAL SALARY COSTS
REIMBURSEABLE COSTS
572
Local Travel (Mileage /Parking): $100
Reproduction: $400
Other: $100
TOTAL REIMBURSEABLE COSTS $6001
SUBCONSULTANT COSTS
HDR Engineering, Inc. $48,303!
TOTAL FEE $147,3871
C: \DOCUME -1 \CYNDY- 1.TUK\ LOCALS -1 Temp\ XPgrpwise \Exhibits_B_ &_C_supp8_v1 a
Exhibit_C- 1_HNTB
1 1 1 123/200911:50 AM
$98,484!
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
November 16, 2009 5:00 p.m. Conference Room 1
PRESENT
Councilmembers:
Absent:
Staff:
I. PRESENTATIONS
No presentations.
City of Tukwila
Transportation Committee
Dennis Robertson and Verna Griffin
De'Sean Quinn, Committee Chair, was unable to make it on time for the meeting due to traffic
Bob Giberson, Jack Pace, Robin Tischmak, Pat Brodin, Cyndy Knighton, Gail Labanara and
Kimberly Matej
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:07 p.m.
IL BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Interlocal Agreement with Kine County Road Services Division
Staff is seeking full Council approval to enter into an interlocal agreement with King County Road Services
Division which will allow the City to request services from King County relative to traffic and road
maintenance, construction management and engineering, environmental services and other road related
services.
There is no cost associated with the execution of this agreement. The agreement will allow the City to use
King County Road Services Division in circumstances where a project is too large for the City to complete,
or there is limited time or staff availability. The agreement allows for contracting with the County on short
notice essentially to act on behalf of City staff. Additionally, County services can be contracted and used in
the event of an emergency and /or disaster for things such as clean -up, maintenance and construction. Costs
would only be incurred when the City requests service work. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD
TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
B. Ordinance for Kine County South Park Bridge Adopting Kina County Development Regulations
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a draft ordinance which adopts all King County development codes
for the South Park Bridge Replacement project.
On November 4, 2002, the City Council passed Resolution 1508 which authorized an interlocal agreement
between the City and King County for the transfer of responsibilities relating to the maintenance, operation,
rehabilitation and/or replacement of the South Park Bridge. A section of the interlocal agreement required
that the City adopt all County zoning, land use, shoreline and development regulations and fees for work
related to the replacement design and construction of the South Park Bridge.
This draft ordinance adopts all requirements related to the South Park Bridge authorized by the interlocal
agreement. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
C. Tukwila Urban Center Access Klickitat) Proiect Supplemental Agreement No. 8 with HNTB
Staff is seeking full Council approval for Supplemental Agreement No. 8 with HNTB Corporation in the
amount of $147,384 for final design and final bid documents associated with the Tukwila Urban Center
Access (Klickitat) Project.
This supplemental agreement will include completion of the project design and preparation of ad -ready
contract documents for project bid. Additionally, in the interest of time and efficiency, this agreement
includes anticipated WSDOT redesign requirements that have been pre- negotiated with HNTB in order to
113
114
Transportation Committee Minutes November 16. 2009 Paae 2
avoid potential construction delays. Although staff is working with WSDOT, WSDOT has not made any
specific decisions, and their changes are currently estimated between $300,000 $400,000 additional for
consultant charges and changes.
This additional contract funding is not currently budgeted and is anticipated to be taken from current
transportation impact fees and the LID. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23
COW FOR DISCUSSION.
D. 2009 3rd Ouarter Reports
The Committee had no questions regarding the status of program goals as outlined in the 2009 3` Quarter
Report.
III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 5:28 p.m.
Next meeting: Monday, December 7, 2009 5:00 p.m. Conference Room 1
Committee Chair Approval
Minute 1,y KAM. Reviewed by GL.
Reviewed by Verna Griffin for De'Sean Quinn.
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
A N, Imtialr ITEM NO.
O Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review J Counci renew
6 11/23/09 1 SO 1
kOzt 1331 v, 12/07/09 1 SO
9o.. I 1 I i4.
ITEM INFORMATION
cAS NUMBER: 09-169 1 ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
k.GENDA ITEM TITLE Contract with Commercial Development Solutions for management of the Tukwila
South project.
:ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PTV
PONSOR'S The Council is being asked to authorize the Mayor to approve the extension of a contract
UMMARY with Commercial Development Solutions through December 2010 at a rate of $11,000 per
month.
.EVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: 11/17/09
tECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Review and approval
COMMITTEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole
COST IMPACT./ FUND_SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$11,000 /month
and Source: 000.03.513.100.41.01
`omments:
VITG: =DATE RECORD "OE COUNCIL `ACTION,
11/23/09 1
12/07/09 1
VI TG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/9/2009
Contract with Commercial Development Solutions
1 Minutes from the Finance Safety Committee meeting of 11/17/09
1
1 1S
116
TO: Finance and Safety Committee
FROM: Mayor's Office
DATE: November 9, 2009
SUBJECT: Contract Extension
Commercial Development Solutions
ISSUE
The contract with Lisa Verner, dba Commercial Development Solutions, Project Manager for the
Tukwila South project, will expire December 31, 2009.
BACKGROUND
Due to the need for concentrated focus on negotiation of the Tukwila South Development
Agreement, the City contracted with Commercial Development Solutions to manage that project.
With the culmination and signing of the development agreement, there are many tasks yet to be
accomplished, a list of which is attached.
DISCUSSION
Approval of the development agreement with La Pianta has set into motion a series of activities,
including establishment of an escrow account, initiation of the annexation process, and many
other items. Because of Lisa's background in having negotiated the agreement and intimate
awareness of the details of the agreement, we believe it is in the City's best interest to continue
the contract with her at least until commencement of the construction of Southcenter Parkway
Extension.
The last time this contract was extended it was at a rate of $8,000 per month. Activities
underway as of this writing require that Ms. Verner work more hours than in the past. For the
last three months her billings have averaged approximately $11,000 per month. It is expected
that the same level of activity will be necessary through the next several months, but billable
hours should decrease as the project unfolds.
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
City of Tukwila
Contract Amendment
List of Remaining Project Activities
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
It is recommended that the contract be extended through December 2010, at a rate of $11,000
per month and that the Council consider this issue at the November 23, 2009 Committee of the
Whole Meeting and subsequent December 7, 2009 Regular Meeting.
117
118
Commercial Development Solutions
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
Date Approved by City Council
CITY OF TUKWILA
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Amendment to #06- 059thg)
That portion of Contract No. AG06 -059 between the City of Tukwila and Commercial
Development Solutions is amended as follows:
Under Section 2, Compensation and Method of Payment: Total amount to be paid shall
not exceed $401269,000 (an addition of $13222,000 to the previous contract amount of
$269247,000).
Under Section 4, Duration of Agreement: This Agreement shall be in full force and
effect for a period ending December 31, 201089 unless sooner terminated under the
provisions hereinafter specified.
All other provisions of the contract shall remain in full force and effect.
Dated this day of 2009.
CONTRACTOR CITY OF TUKWILA
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City Attorney
119
120
Tukwila South: Items to implement Development Agreement
9 -29 -09
1. Focal point/liaison with City and La Pianta
2. Escrow account
a. Contract and establishment
b. ROW vacation deeds
c. Southcenter ROW possession use, deeds
d. Letters of credit
e. Fire Station land deed (complete site identification process)
3. Accounting firm (Benson McLaughlin)
a. Complete contract and commence
b. Monitor development of Protocols and signed agreement
c. Conform to timelines in Development Agreement
4. Grant contracts
a. TIB
b. CERB
c. Capital Projects
5. Complete Tukwila South annexation
a. BRB public hearing
b. Council resolution, after negotiating effective date with KC departments
c. Work with Fire District 24 on interlocal agreement for reserve funds
6. Island annexation (remainder of PAA between 1 -5 and Orillia Rd)
a. Council adoption of resolution
b. Negotiate interlocal agreement with King County
c. Address participation of Fire District 24 in Interlocal Agreement
d. Council review and adoption of Interlocal
e. Notice to property owners concerning appeal opportunities
7. Shoreline designation through Department of Ecology
8. Levee modification/ "404" permit issuance
a. Monitor independent peer review
b. Changes to levee design, as needed
c. Coordination between Corps, City
9. Southcenter Parkway Extension
a. David Evans and Associates contract extension and completion of design,
bid documents
b. ECS revisions
c. Highline Water District
i. Interlocal agreement
d. PSE
i. Series of agreements
ii. Coordination of design/construction
e. Monitor and maintain schedule to start of construction
f. Wetlands mitigation
121
122
Tukwila South Project
Items to Implement the Development Agreement
9 -29 -09
10. Monitor KPFF and Anchor QEA
i. Levee
ii. Stonn ponds
iii. Clearing grading permit
iv. Southcenter Parkway review
v. Coordination with city staff
11. Develop reference materials on Tukwila South Project for DCD
12. Monitor /assist Parks Department with pedestrian bridge grants
Finance Safety Committee Minutes November 17. 2009 Pape 2
C. Contract Amendment for Commercial Development Solutions
Administration is seeking full Council approval for a contract amendment for Commercial Development
Solutions (Lisa Verner, Tukwila South Project Manager).
Due to Commercial Development Solutions in -depth and on -going involvement in the project, as well as
efforts to keep the continuity of work moving forward, Administration is requesting Council approval of a
contract amendment that will extend the current Commercial Development Solutions contract through
December 31, 2010 (see Finance Safety Committee minutes dated, October 6, 2009).
Activities relative to this project have increased, requiring Ms. Verner to spend additional time (billable
hours) working on project management; therefore, the contract amendment calls for increase in the
monthly billing limit from $8,000 to $11,000.
In response to Committee member questions regarding other alternatives for management of this
project (due to the current financial situation of the City), staff replied that a major information
exchange would need to take place prior to the end of the year and a staff person would need to be
indentified to take over the project.
The Committee acknowledges the priority of managing this project prior to construction, as well as
the City's current budgetary concerns, and made special note of the contract's 30 -day termination
clause. The termination clause could allow the City to revisit priorities and take appropriate action if
necessary. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
D. 2010 Property Tax Levy
Staff is seeking full Council approval of an ordinance increasing the City's Regular Property Tax Levy
from the previous year; an ordinance Ievying the General Taxes and a resolution declaring a finding of
substantial need relating to the Property Tax Levy.
Shawn Hunstock reported that assessed values have decreased by over 4 however, several neighboring
communities have experienced decreases as high as 10
Staff is recommending levying full 1% increase to property taxes due to a negative Implicit Price Deflator
and a decline in assessed values which would result in levy rate that would result in a decline of property
tax revenue to the City of approximately $250,000.
This will be the first increase in the levy rate since 2005. Due to increased values over the past 4 or 5
years, no increase was necessary. The proposed levy rate for 2010 is $2.52 per $1,000 of assessed value
as compared to $2.39 in 2009.
In order to levy the full 1 Council will need to pass a resolution declaring a finding of substantial
need relating to the property tax levy. A public hearing is scheduled for November 23, 2009.
UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 23 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
E. A Resolution Adopting the 2010 -2015 CIP
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a resolution adopting the 2010 -2015 CIP.
Based on information that was requested at the November 5 Council Budget Update and CIP Review,
staff has provided Council with three versions of Attachment A of the CIP:
Scenario #1 Current Draft Attachment A which reflects two consecutive years with
Accumulated Totals below $3 million.
Scenario #2 Draft Attachment A with additional revenues and/or expenditure reductions of
approximately $3 million each year and refunds to the Utility Enterprise Funds.
o Scenario #3 Draft Attachment A with additional revenues and/or expenditure reductions of
approximately $5 million each year with a CIP that returns levels of service to the pre-
existing level prior to recent budget cuts.
123
124
COUNCIL AGENDA S ®PSIS
LA t
s; q Inztzals ITEM No.
O Meeting Date 1 Prepared by 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review 1
11/23/09 JP 1 fs4 1
12/07/09 1 JP 1
`P 12/14/09 1 JP 1 1 t
190 1 1
j'� I EII
�--7
cAS NUMBER: 09-170 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
AGENDA ITEM TITLE Four ordinances adopting a new Shoreline Master Program, revisions to
Comprehensive Plan policies on the shoreline, a new shoreline overlay disctrict, TMC
18.44 to replace the existing 18.44, and new definitions to be added to TMC 18.06.
2ATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Date 11/23 .12/7 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 4/20/09, Mtg Date
PONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire El Legal P&R Police PW
.PONSOR'S The council has held ten work sessions over the past five months to consider the Planning
UMMARY Commission recommended Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The Council has made
revisions to this draft which are reflected in the revised SMP, the revised Comprehensive
Plan policies, a new TMC 18.44, the Shoreline Overlay district of the Zoning Code, and new
or revised definitions to be added to TMC 18.06. The Council is being asked to consider and
approve these ordinances and the new Shoreline Master Program.
.EVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DA'Z 10 work sessions over the past 5 months, concluding 11/17/09
►ECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development
COMMII Ten Council work sessions to review SMP 7/07/09 11/17/09
x
,COST,:I;MPACT% FUND-
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
and Source:
'omments:
VITG. DATE ::',..'RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
07/24/08 Joint City Council /Planning Commission briefing on staff recommended SMP
03/23/09 Committee of the Whole briefing on Planning Commission recommended Draft SMP
04/20/09 Public Hearing
JITG: DATE ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/19/09
Ordinance adopting Shoreline Master Program
City Council Draft Shoreline Master Program
Draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis
Ordinance Adopting Revisions to Comprehensive Plan Policies and attached policies
Ordinance Adopting a new TMC 18.44, Shoreline Overlay District
Ordinance Revising TMC 18.06, new shoreline definitions 1 9
126
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
RECOMMENDATION
City of Tukwila
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Committee of the Whole
Jack Pace, Director, Department of Community Development
November 19, 2009
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Ordinances Adopting a new Shoreline Master Program, Revised
Comprehensive Plan Policies, a new Shoreline Overlay District and New or
Revised Definitions
ISSUE
Consideration of four ordinances:
1. An ordinance to adopt a new shoreline master program;
2. An ordinance to adopt revised Comprehensive Plan policies for the shoreline;
3. An ordinance to adopt a new shoreline overlay district, TMC 18.44 to replace the current
18.44; and
4. An ordinance to amend TMC 18.06 adding new or revised definitions
Review of the Draft Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update began on July 24, 2008 with a
joint City Council /Planning Commission briefing on the major aspects of the proposed program.
The Planning Commission then met over a period of six months during which it reviewed the
document in detail, held three Open Houses and conducted a public hearing on August 2, 2008
that was continued to October 9, 2008 to allow additional time for public review and comment of
the document. The Planning Commission approved a Shoreline Master Program on February
5, 2009 and forwarded it to the Council for its review.
The City Council was briefed on the Planning Commission Recommended Draft SMP March 23,
2009 and then met from July 7, 2009 to November 17, 2009 for a total of ten work sessions to
review the Planning Commission Recommended SMP. The work sessions were concluded on
November 17, 2009 and staff was directed to prepare ordinances to adopt and implement a new
shoreline master program.
The Council will have an opportunity to review the draft ordinances to ensure all changes have
been included as directed.
The Council is being asked to consider the 4 ordinances at the November 23, 2009 Committee
of the Whole meeting and the December 7, 2009 Regular Meeting, and adopt the ordinances at
the December 14, 2009 Special Meeting.
CL Page 1 of 2
P: \Long Range Projects\Shoreline\Council Review \COW 11/19/09 Memo
11/19/2009 12:29:00 PM
127
Committee of the Whole
Informational Memo
November 19, 2009
ATTACHMENTS
1. An ordinance to adopt a new shoreline master program with the SMP document,
Revised Restoration Plan and draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis attached;
2. An ordinance to adopt revised Comprehensive Plan policies for the shoreline and
attached Comprehensive Plan policies;
3. An ordinance to adopt a new shoreline overlay district, TMC 18.44 to replace the current
18.44; and
4. An ordinance to amend TMC 18.06 adding new or revised definitions
1 2 8 cL Page 2 of 2
P: \Long Range Projects \Shoreline \Council Review \COW 11 -19 -09 Memo
11/19/2009 12:29:00 PM
DAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, APPROVING AND ADOPTING A SHORELINE MASTER
PROGRAM UPDATE FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA TO INCORPORATE
NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; REPEALING THE SHORELINE MASTER
PROGRAM ADOPTED BY REFERENCE IN SECTION 5 OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADOPTED IN SECTION 1.A OF
ORDINANCE NO. 1757; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the
goals and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County
County -wide Planning Policies; and
WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State, regulated
pursuant to RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and
WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995
Comprehensive Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and
WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the State Legislature has found that
shorelines of the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources
and unrestricted construction on privately -owned and publicly -owned shorelines of the
State is not in the best public interest; and
WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020 the State Legislature directed local governments
developing Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give
preference to the following uses which, in order of preference, which. 1) recognize and
protect State -wide interests over local interests; 2) preserve the natural character of the
shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit; 4) protect the resources and
ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly -owned areas of shoreline;
6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and 7) provide for
any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100, deemed appropriate or necessary; and
WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) adopted
new rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline
Management Act; and
WHEREAS, DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules
provide direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines
of the State; and
WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their
shoreline master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines
adopted by DOE, in accordance with a schedule established in that section; and
WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of
Tukwila to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and
W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Master Program Adoption.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 1 of 3
129
130
WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998,
established a Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance,
prepared background studies and used consultant services to prepare technical
documents; and
WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master
Program in 2008; and
WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline
Master Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an
"Inventory and Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a
Determination of Non Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master
Program, held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9,
2008 to allow additional public input, and recommended adoption of a revised
Shoreline Master Program to the City Council in February 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the
hearing to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009 and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to
review the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 173 -26 -186, City staff has analyzed the cumulative
impacts of the staff draft Shoreline Master Program, the Planning Commission
Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program, and the Council revisions to the
Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program and determined
that the Shoreline Master Program and accompanying goals, policies and regulations
will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, as compared to current
"baseline" conditions; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 173 -26 -186, the proposed Shoreline Master Program
contains policies and regulations to ensure to net loss of shoreline ecological functions,
to address adverse cumulative impacts and to fairly allocate the burden of addressing
cumulative impacts among development opportunities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved
revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program
to address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers, staff and the
Department of Ecology; and
WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a
variety of methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along
the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including mailings to
property owners and tenants, notice boards along the Green River Trail, postings on the
City's web site, creation of a broadcast email group who received updates of the
shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter; and
WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of
Commerce, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Shoreline Master Program Established. The Shoreline Master Program,
with accompanying maps, attached hereto as "Attachment A," is hereby adopted and
shall become binding, as of the effective date of this ordinance, on all properties within
the shoreline jurisdiction.
W. Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Master Program Adoption.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 2 of 3
Section 2. Repealer. The Shoreline Master Program, adopted by reference in
Section 5 of the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in Section 1.A of Ordinance No
1757, is hereby repealed.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in
the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after
passage and publication as provided by law, or approval of the Shoreline Master
Program set forth in "Attachment A" by the Washington State Department of Ecology
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009.
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published.
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Attachment: "Attachment A" Shoreline Master Program
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Master Program Adoption.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 3 of 3
131
132
TUKWILA SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
xt.Klre`iR F1f.IL
RFf L!1Vlk'
E[oL f1Gt'
December 14. 2009
Prepared by Tukwila Department of Community Development
with the assistance of ESA Adolfson
Attachment A
This report was funded in part through a grant from the Washington State Department of
Ecology.
133
134
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
2008 Draft Shoreline Master Program
ii 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Purpose and Background 1
1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction 2
2. TUKWILA'S SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 5
2.1 SMP Components 5
2.2 SMP Elements 5
2.3 History of SMP Planning in Tukwila 6
2.4 Current SMP Update Process 6
2.5 Citizen Review Processes 7
3. DEFINITIONS 9
4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY 19
4.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications 19
4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions 20
4.3 Land Use 21
4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts 23
4.5 Conclusions 25
5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN SUMMARY 27
5.1 Background 27
5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions 27
5.3 Plans, Programs, and Completed Projects 29
5.4 Restoration Opportunities 30
5.5 Potential Projects and Priorities 30
6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES 33
6.1 Shoreline Environment Designations, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.1 33
6.2 Shoreline Planning and Management, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.2 35
6.3 Land Development Use and Economic Vitality, Comprehensive Plan
CL
i
P: \Shoreline\PC Action\PC recommended Draft SMP Strikeout/Underline
135
136
Goal 5.3 36
6.4 Private Property Rights, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.4 37
6.5 Shoreline Design Quality, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.5 38
6.6 Access and Recreational Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.6 39
6.7 Transportation within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, Comprehensive Plan
Goal5.7 42
6.8 Historical Resource Use and Archaeological Protection,
Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.8 43
6.9 Natural Environment and Habitat Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.9 43
6.10 Water Quality, Surface Water and Flood Control Use, Comprehensive
Plan Goal 5.10 44
6.11 Public Health, Safety and Welfare, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.11 45
7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS 47
7.1 Existing Regulatory Framework 47
7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory Characterization Report and
Restoration Plan 48
7.3 State Environment Designation System 49
7.4 Proposed Environment Designations 51
7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers 55
7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment 60
7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment 63
7.8 High Intensity Environment 67
8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS 71
8.1 General Use Regulations 71
8.2 Shoreline Residential Environment -Uses 71
8.3 Urban Conservancy Environment Uses 74
8.4 High Intensity Environment Uses 76
9. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 79
9.1 Applicability 79
9.2 Shoreline Residential Development Standards 79
9.3 High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development
Standards 80
CL ii 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
9.4 Surface Water and Water Quality 82
9.5 Flood Hazard Reduction 83
9.6 Shoreline Stabilization 84
9.7 Archaeological, Cultural and Historical Resources 86
9.8 Environmental Impact Mitigation. 87
9.9 Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements 88
9.10 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping 89
9.11 Land Altering Activities 97
9.12 Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks and
Other Over -water Structures 98
10. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE
JURISDICTION. 103
10.1 Purpose 103
10.2 Applicability, Maps and Inventories 103
10.3 Best Available Science 104
10.4 Sensitive Area Studies 104
10.5 Procedures 107
10.6 Wetland Determinations and Classifications 107
10.7 Watercourse Designation and Ratings 109
10.8 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 110
10.9 Wetland Watercourse, and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation
Area Buffers 110
10.10 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability 113
10.11 Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses and Alterations. 116
10.12 Sensitive Areas Mitigation 120
11. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE 126
11.1 Applicability 127
11.2 General Standards 128
11.3 Requirements for Shoreline Trails 129
11.4 Publicly -Owned Shorelines 129
11.5 Public Access Incentives 130
11.6 Exemptions from Provision of On -Site Public Access 131
CL iii 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
137
138
12. SHORELINE DESIGN GUIDELINES 133
12.1 Relationship of Structure to Site 133
12.2 Building Design 134
12.3 Design of Public Access 134
13. SHORELINE RESTORATION 137
13.1 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Not Required 137
13.2 Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction due to Restoration 137
14. ADMINISTRATION 141
14.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial
Development Permit 141
14.2 Substantial Development Permit Requirements 141
14.3 Shoreline Conditional Use Permit 142
14.4 Shoreline Variance Permits 144
14.5 Non conforming Development 146
15. APPEALS 153
16. ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES 153
16.1 Violations 153
16.2 Enforcement 153
16.3 Inspection Access 153
16.4 Penalties 154
16.5 Remedial Measures Required 154
16.6 Injunctive Relief 154
16.7 Abatement 155
17. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS 155
18. LIABILITY 155
LIST OF FIGURES
CL iv 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Figure 1. Current Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP, TMC 18.44) 48
Figure 2. Minimum Levee Profile 60
Figure 3. Schematic of Proposed Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer 62
Figure 4. Schematic of Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban
Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees 64
Figure 5. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High
Intensity Environment 68
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila 28
Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System WAC 173 -26 -211 (5) 50
Table 3: Summary of Buffer Widths 53
Table 4. Tree Replacement Requirements 92
Table 5. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities 96
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1. Potential Annexation Areas
Map 2. Transition Zone
Man 3. Annexation History
Map 311. Proposed Shoreline Environments
Map 45. Shoreline Armoring
Map 56: Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline
Map 67. Shoreline Public Access
APPENDICES
4-A. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report
2,B. Shoreline Restoration Plan
Cumulative Impacts Analysis
CL v 11/19/2009 1255 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
139
140
1. INTRODUCTION
February, 2009 Planning Commission Recommended
Shoreline Master Program
1.1 Purpose and Background
This document presents the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) for the City of Tukwila. It is
an update to Tukwila's existing SMP, originally adopted in 1974. The SMP is intended to
guide new shoreline development, redevelopment and promote reestablishment of natural
shoreline functions, where possible. It was prepared in conformance with the Washington
State Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) and its implementing regulations
(WAC 173 -26).
This Shoreline Master Program represents the first substantial amendment to the existing
SMP since its adoption in 1974, and reflects changes n.aocal .conditions and priorities and
the evolving State regulatory environment. An example of changes in local conditions is
that Tukwila has annexed significant amounts of shoreline:s,.from 42nd Avenue South
northward and is evaluating additional annexation of King County shoreline areas upstream
of the southern City limits (Potential Annexation Area Map, Map 1). On these portions
of the shoreline, since the SMP was not Updated concurrently with the annexations,
regulators still use the King County SMP and not T ikWlla's.
An example of changes in the State's regulatory environment is seen in the series of
regulations adopted in 19951?y the Washington State Legislature intended to simplify and
streamline the development process. This effort included amendments to RCW 36.70A
requiring that goals and policies of local SMPs be integrated into local Growth Management
Act (GMA) supportive> plans. 'Consistency between the Shoreline Master Program, the
Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations is required. The GMA also requires that
land use planning efforts be coordinated among all involved citizens, local, regional and
Tribal goveriitiirits and businesses. The new Tukwila Master Program complies with these
state requirements..
New guidance issued by the Department of Ecology for local governments updating their
SMPs adds newrequirements to the preparation process, including a Shoreline Restoration
Plan and a Cuitulative Impacts Analysis.
This Shoreline Master Program presents background information on the Shoreline
Management Act, describes shoreline jurisdiction in Tukwila, summarizes the amendment
process carried out to date, presents a summary of the Shoreline Inventory and
Characterization, presents a summary of the Shoreline Restoration Plan, proposes shoreline
environments, and establishes goals, policies and regulations, which apply to all activities on
all affected lands and waters within the shoreline jurisdiction. In addition, there is a chapter
CL 1 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
1 P \Shoreline;- \Council Review \Document\ te- nde4Council Recommended SMP-Gle- an -4ep}
141
142
that establishes design guidelines. Maps are provided to illustrate shoreline jurisdiction and
environments. The Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report is provided in
Appendix A. The Restoration Plan is provided in Appendix B. A Cumulative Impacts
Analysis is provided as a stand -alone document.
1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction
A. Jurisdiction under the Shoreline Management Act
The Shoreline Management Act, or SMA, (RCW 90.58) establishes regulations for the
management and protection of the state's shoreline resources and requires planning for
reasonable and appropriate uses. The Act calls for a joint planning effort between state and
local jurisdictions, requiring local government to develop its own Shoreline Master Program
based on state guidelines.
The SMA requires that local governments establish shoreline jurisdiction for those bodies
of water and lands that are considered to be "shorelines of the state" or "shorelines of
statewide significance." Shorelines of the state include rivers with a mean annual flow of
at least 20 cubic feet per second (cfs). Shorelines of statewide significance in western
Washington include rivers with a mean annual flow of at least 1,000 cubic feet per
second (cfs). The minimum shoreline environment required by the SMA includes all
lands 200 feet from the "ordinary high water mark" or floodway of a state shoreline,
whichever is greater, and all wetlands associated with these state shorelines and located
within the 100 -year floodplain. The following graphic illustrates the jurisdiction of the
Shoreline Management Act.
Ordinary high
water mark
(OHWM)
11 11
-1111-
=1111 -1111-
1111 1111 =1111
1111. =1111_1111 -1111- 1111 °1111 -11
1111 1111 1111 011 011 011 III
1 200'
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
200' from OHWM or flood way and
all marshes, bogs, and swamps in
100 year flood plain
Wetland in 100 year
Flood plain
IIII =IIII= III =IIII= _III =IIII =1111
1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 =1111:
200' from OHWM and 100 year flood plain
I
1111 1111 1111 111 IIII IIII IIII 1111 IIII
200'
Flood wav
100 Year Flood Rain
Figure 1.1 Lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act
2 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
B. Shoreline Jurisdiction in Tukwila
The Green/Duwamish River is the only "shoreline of statewide significance" in the city
(RCW 98.58.030). Throughout the SMP document, the term "Shoreline Jurisdiction" is
used to describe the water and land areas subject to shoreline jurisdiction in Tukwila.
Based on SMA guidelines for shoreline jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is
defined as follows:
The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the
Green/Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends
from the ordinary high water mark landward for 200 feet on each
side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its
floodplain. For the vurvose of determininz shoreline jurisdiction
only. the floodwav shall not include those lands that have
historically been vrotected by flood control devices and, therefore,
have not been subject to flooding with reasonable rezularity.
The Tukwila SMP applies to all development activity occurring within the Shoreline
Jurisdiction, which corresponds to the Shoreline Overlay District as established by
Chapter 18.44 of the Tukwila Municipal Code.
The use of the ordinary high water mark, or OHWM, represents a change from the
previous Master Program, which used the mean- high -water mark (MHWM). The
MHWM is the elevation of the surface of Green River and Duwamish River waters when
the discharge rate at the U.S. Geological survey Stream Gauging Station near Auburn is
9,000 cfs. Locating the MHWM requires the skills of a surveyor. The OHWM is used to
define the usual height of water, as evidenced by soil and vegetation conditions. It may
be visually located based on the line between flood tolerant and non flood tolerant
vegetation along the riverbank. Due to the relative ease of locating the OHWM, this
measure is preferred and therefore implemented in this SMP. The Shoreline
Management Act also requires the use of the OHWM as the means by which location of
the shoreline environment is determined.
All proposed uses and activities under its jurisdiction must be reviewed for compliance with
the goals, policies and regulations herein. All proposed uses and development occurring
within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline
Management Act and this Master Program whether or not a permit is required.
This Master Program includes the two proposed annexation areas indicated in the
Comprehensive Plan (Map 1). The north annexation area is located between the
Green/Duwamish River on the east, Military Road to the west, and from S. 128th Street
north to S. 96th Street. The south annexation area is located between I -5 and the Green
River, south of the City limits to S. 204th Street. Adoption of shoreline policies and
CL 3 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
143
144
environment designations for newly annexed areas would require an amendment to the
Shoreline Master Program. To avoid having to amend the SMP later, these potential
annexation areas are considered here and the environmental designations and regulations
will apply upon annexation.
In response to regional policies of the King County Growth Management Planning Council,
Tukwila designated two key areas as its Urban Center and its Manufacturing Industrial
Center (MIC). The Southcenter area, from I -405 south to S. 180 Street was designated the
"Urban Center," and the Duwamish Corridor, an area where existing industrial employment
is concentrated, was designated as Tukwila's "Manufacturing Industrial Center." Both of
these areas have lands adjacent to the river and are identified on Map 1.
The Tukwila Urban Center is continuing to expand and intensify the Westfield Southcenter
Mall recently completed the addition of 475,000 sq. ft. of retail space and a new 220,000
square foot shopping center along Southcenter Parkway, Southcenter Plaza recently was
completed. This SMP assumes the re- development of Tukwila's Urban Center and the MIC
will affect the character of the river, as it has in the past.
The City Council adopted a Strategic Implementation Plan for the MIC on November 2,
1998. The Plan includes an analysis of existing conditions along the shoreline, narratives of
various habitats, current regulations, proposed requirements and prototypes for future
development along the shoreline in the MIC. The Strategic Plan was prepared in
conjunction with a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement that analyzed
development alternatives in the MIC area and streamlined SEPA review for development in
that corridor for the past 10 years. These documents are now 9 -12 years old. Where
changed circumstances dictate, the SMP will provide updated guidance and regulations for
the MIC area. The MIC area has significant potential for redevelopment.
CL 4 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
2. TUKWILA'S SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
2.1 SMP Components
To comply with the SMA, Tukwila has included the following components in development
of this draft Shoreline Master Program (SMP):
Outreach including a citizen participation process, coordination with state
agencies, Indian tribes, and other local governments (see Section 2.4 below)
Inventory, analysis and characterization of shoreline conditions, environmental
functions and ecosystem -wide processes
Analysis of potential shoreline restoration opportunities
Establishment of shoreline environments
Development of goals and policies
Preparation of regulations
Preparation of Shoreline Design Guidelines
Evaluation and consideration of cumulative impacts
2.2 SMP Elements
The SMA includes eight main issues, or "elements," to be addressed in each local shoreline
master program (RCW 90.58.100). To implement these elements, shoreline policies and
regulations are to be developed for each. The policies are found in The Shoreline Goals and
Policies Section of this SMP and the regulations in the following sections: Shoreline Use
Regulations; Shoreline Development Standards; Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the
Shoreline; Public Access to the Shoreline; Shoreline Design Guidelines; and Habitat
Restoration. The policies will be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan and the
regulations into the Zoning Code. The elements required by the SMA are:
Economic Development
Public Access
Recreation
Circulation
Shoreline Uses
Conservation
Historical, cultural, educational and scientific element
Preventing or minimizing flood damage
Consistent with the Growth Management Act requirement to integrate the SMP and the
Comprehensive Plan, the City adopted its updated Comprehensive Plan in 1995 and
incorporated the required elements of a SMP noted above into its Plan. Further direction
for implementation of the required elements of SMPs is provided through Zoning Code
and Design Review requirements.
CL 5 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
145
146
2.3 History of SMP Planning in Tukwila
Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) was first adopted in 1974, in response to the
passage of the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58). The SMP was later updated
through minor amendments in 1982 and 1987, none of which required the adoption of a new
SMP.
In 1992 -93, as part of the preparation for a major revision to the City's Comprehensive Plan,
the City completed a Shorelines Background Report (1993), with the participation of the
Tukwila Tomorrow Citizen's Committee. This report established the basis for the shoreline
comprehensive plan goals and policies. The report was reviewed and approved by citizens
and officials as part of the entire Comprehensive Plan adoption process. The
Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995.
While effective in setting the stage for the development of a new Shoreline Master Program
(SMP), the policies adopted as part of the 1995 Comprehensive Plan were only the first step.
Staff began the process to prepare a new SMP in the spring of 1999, based on the draft
shoreline guidelines that were in the process of adoption by the Department of Ecology at
the time.
A grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology provided funding for a
Shoreline Inventory and Shoreline Design Manual. The City completed an inventory of
all parcels within the 200 foot Shoreline jurisdiction in 2000. Based on that inventory
and the policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, staff prepared a draft Shoreline
Master Program, which also incorporated citizen comments from meetings.
As the Planning Commission was nearing completion of its review of the draft SMP, the
new shoreline regulations were approved by Ecology in November, 2000. The new
regulations were immediately appealed and ultimately invalidated by the Shoreline Hearings
Board in August, 2001. As a result, the City opted to defer completing its SMP update
process until new guidelines were issued by Ecology, which occurred in 2003.
2.4 Current SMP Update Process
In 2003 the legislature established funding and timelines for all jurisdictions to undertake
comprehensive master program amendments. In 2005, Tukwila received a grant (SMA
Grant No. 0600234) to complete a comprehensive update, including new technical analyses
of shoreline conditions, restoration planning, and the preparation of revised SMP goals,
policies, and regulations. The overall update process is described further below.
In order to capitalize on previous citizens' involvement in the planning process, the City
decided to start the current SMP update with the work that had been prepared to date.
CL 6 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Therefore, this draft document represents the work begun in 1999, with revisions to address
new Ecology regulations and guidance, as well as changed conditions in the City's shoreline
area.
The development of any SMP, as required by new shoreline regulations, involves three
specific steps
Shoreline inventory and characterization, preparation of a restoration plan,
preparation of a cumulative impacts analysis;
Citizen involvement in development of policies and regulations; and
Review by interested parties, including adjacent jurisdictions.
As part of this renewed SMP update process, the City has:
Continued the previously started citizen involvement program utilizing the
Planning Commission, which serves as the City's permanent citizen advisory
body for land use issues, holding Open Houses and public hearings
Coordinated and shared information with neighboring jurisdictions
Updated and expanded the Shoreline Inventory and mapping (included as
Appendix A to this document)
Prepared a Shoreline Restoration Plan (Appendix B)
Proposed shoreline environment designations
Proposed shoreline development policies
Proposed shoreline development regulations
Prepared a draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis
Coordinated with Department of Ecology, submitting a staff draft SMP for
review and comment and meeting with Ecology staff
2.5 Citizen Review Processes
The citizen review component of the SMP amendment process began in 1992 in concert
with the development of a Revised Comprehensive Plan. Tukwila Tomorrow, a citizen's
advisory group, met to determine shoreline issues, develop draft policies for the
Comprehensive Plan, and prepare a Shoreline Background Report (2/93) for review by
elected and appointed officials, a citizens committee and interested parties. The City
Council adopted revised shoreline policies in the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, which in turn
have formed the basis for the policies in the updated SMP.
In 1999, a Shoreline Advisory Panel was appointed by the Mayor's Office, comprised of
two citizens living within the Shoreline jurisdiction and two representatives of businesses
within the shoreline jurisdiction. The Panel reviewed a staff draft SMP and forwarded a
Draft SMP to the Planning Commission for its review in March, 2000. The Planning
Commission began its review in May, 2000 and continued until October, 2000 when
review on the Draft SMP was suspended to allow staff time to review the new Ecology
CL 7 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
147
148
shoreline regulations. The new regulations were appealed and invalidated by the
Shoreline Hearings Board in August, 2001. Revised shoreline regulations, based on a
mediated settlement among the appealing parties, were adopted by Ecology in December
2003.
Rather than establish a new Shoreline Advisory Panel, tThe citizen involvement process has
continued utilizing the Planning Commission, as the Commission composed of Tukwila
residents and a business representative serves as the volunteer land use review body for
the City. Other outreach activities have included: city newsletter articles, establishment of
an SMP update page on the City's website, and informational displays at local events and
fairs. A series of public meetings were held on the SMP, along with informational mailings
sent to shoreline property owners, and finally public hearings held before the City's
Planning Commission and City Council prior to SMP adoption.
CL 8 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
3. DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall be used in the administration of the Master Program and
will be incorporated into the Definitions Chapter of the Zoning Code, TMC 18.10.
Appurtenance: means a structure that is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment
of a single family residence, including a garage, deck, driveway, utilities, fences,
installation of a septic tank and drain field and grading which does not exceed 250 cubic
yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the
ordinary high water mark (WAC 173 -27 -040 (2) (g)).
Armoring: means the control of shoreline erosion with hardened structures, such as
bulkheads, sea walls, and riprap.
Bank: means the rising ground bordering a water body and forming an edge or slope.
Bioengineering: Means integrating living woody and herbaceous materials with organic
(plants, wood, jute mats, coir logs, etc) and inorganic materials (rocks, soils) to increase
the strength and structure of the soil along a riverbank, accomplished by a dense matrix
of roots which hold the soil together. The above ground vegetation increases the
resistance to flow and reduces flow velocities by dissipating energy.
Buffer: means an area separating two different types of uses or environments for the
purpose of reducing incompatibilities between them or reducing the potential adverse
impacts of one use or environment upon the other.
Bulkhead: means vertical structures erected parallel to and near the ordinary high water
mark for the purpose of protecting adjacent uplands from erosion, from the action of
waves or currents.
Channel migration zone: means the area along a river within which the channel(s) can
be reasonably predicted to migrate over time as a result of natural and normally occurring
hydrological and related processes when considered with the characteristics of the river
and its surroundings.
Dike: means an embankment or structure built in the river channel to contain or redirect
flow within the channel and prevent shoreline destabilization.
Development, shoreline: means a use consisting of the construction or exterior
alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel,
or minerals; construction of bulkheads; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any
project of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal public use of
the waters overlying lands subject to the Shoreline Management Act at any stage of water
CL 9 11/19/2009 12 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
149
150
level.
Ecological/ecosystem functions (or shoreline functions): means the work performed or
role played by the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the
maintenance of the aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's
natural ecosystem. See WAC 173 -26 -200 (2)(c).
Ecosystem -wide processes: means the suite of naturally occurring physical and geologic
processes of erosion, transport, and deposition; and specific chemical processes that
shape landforms within a specific shoreline ecosystem and determine both the types of
habitat and the associated ecological functions.
Environment designation: means the term used to describe the character of the
shoreline in Tukwila based upon the recommended classification system established by
WAC 173 -26 -211 and as further refined by Tukwila's SMP.
Feasible: means, for the purpose of the Shoreline Master Program, that an action, such
as a development project, mitigation, or preservation requirement, meets all of the
following conditions:
1. The action can be accomplished with technologies and methods that have been
used in the past in similar circumstances, or studies or tests have demonstrated in
similar circumstances that such approaches are currently available and likely to
achieve the intended results;
2. The action provides a reasonable likelihood of achieving its intended purpose; and
3. The action does not physically preclude achieving the project's primary intended
legal use.
In cases where these guidelines require certain actions unless they are infeasible, the
burden of proving infeasibility is on the applicant. In determining an action's
infeasibility, the reviewing agency may weigh the action's relative public costs and public
benefits, considered in the short- and long -term time frames.
Flood plain: means that land area susceptible to inundation with a one percent chance of
being equaled or exceeded in any given year (synonymous with one hundred -year flood
plain). The limit of this area shall be based upon flood ordinance regulation maps or a
reasonable method which meets the objectives of the Shoreline Management Act..
Flood hazard reduction: means actions taken to reduce flood damage or hazards. Flood
hazard reduction measures may consist of nonstructural or indirect measures, such as
setbacks, land use controls, wetland restoration, dike removal, use relocation,
bioengineering measures, and storm water management programs; and of structural
measures such as dikes and levees intended to contain flow within the channel, channel
realignment, and elevation of structures consistent with the National Flood Insurance
Program.
CL 10 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
Floodway: means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas
that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively
increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot.
Grading: means activity that results in change of the cover or topography of the earth, or
any activity that may cause erosion, including clearing, excavation, filling, grading and
stockpiling
Large Woody Debris (LWD): means whole trees with root wads and limbs attached,
cut logs at least 4 inches in diameter along most of their length, root wads at least 6.5 feet
long and 8 inches in diameter. Large woody debris is installed to address a deficiency of
habitat and natural channel forming processes.
Levee: means a broad embankment of earth built parallel with the river channel to
contain flow within the channel and prevent flooding from a designated design storm.
Levee. Minimum Profile: means, where there is room, the minimum levee profile for
any new or reconstructed levee is the King County "Briscoe Levee" profile 2.5:1
overall slope with 15 foot mid -slope bench for maintenance access and native vegetation
plantings. Where there is insufficient room for a levee backslope due to the presence of
legal nonconforming structures existing at the time of the adoption of this SMP. a
floodwall may be substituted. The figure below illustrates the minimum levee profile.
18'
—18'—
Maintenance Easement
Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas-Width Will Vary
Reconfigured Levee
15'
`Reconfigured Slope averages 2.5:1 with bench
1.5
Minimum Levee Profile
Not To Scale
Vegetated Bench
Willows
.Existing Levee
Ordinary High
Water Mark
OHWM
CL 11 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
151
152
Mean Higher High Water (MHHW): means the average of the higher high water
height of each tidal day, and used in determining the OHWM for the tidally influenced
portions of the river.
Native Vegetation: means vegetation with a genetic origin of Western Washington,
Northern Oregon and Southern British Columbia, not including cultivars.
No Net Loss: means a standard intended to ensure that shoreline development or uses,
whether permitted or exempt, are located and designed to avoid loss or degradation of
shoreline ecological functions that are necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. In
cases where unavoidable loss results from allowed uses or developments, the standard is
met through appropriate mitigation, consistent with the provisions of this master
program.
Nonconforming: means a use or development which was lawfully constructed or
established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or the Shoreline
Master Program or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present
regulations or standards of the program.
Non water- oriented uses: means those uses that are not water dependent, water related,
or water enjoyment.
Ordinary high water mark: means that mark that will be found by examining the bed
and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters (all lakes, streams,
and tidal water) are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as
to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to
vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter,
or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or
the Department of Ecology. In any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be
found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher
high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean
high water.
Overwater Structure: means any device or structure projecting over the OHWM,
including, but not limited to bridges, boat lifts, wharves, piers, docks, ramps, floats or
buoys.
Pre existing Structure: means a structure legally established prior to the effective date
of the Shoreline Master Program, but which does not conform to present regulations or
standards of the program.
Pre existing Use: means a use legally established prior to the effective date of the
Shoreline Master Program, but which does not conform to present regulations or
standards of the program.
CL 12 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Public Access: means the ability of the general public to reach, touch or enjoy the
water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline
from adjacent locations. Public access may be provided by an owner by easement,
covenant, or similar legal agreement of substantial walkways, corridors, parks, or other
areas serving as a means of view and/or physical approach to public waters. The Director
may approve limiting public access as to hours of availability, types of activity permitted,
location and area.
Regional Detention Facility: means a stormwater detention and/or retention facility that
accepts flow from multiple parcels and/or public ROW. The facility may be public or
private. The facilitv shall be designed such that a fence is not required, planted with
native vegetation, designed to blend with the surrounding environment, and provide
design features that serve both public and private use, such as an access road that also can
serve as a trail. The facility shall also be designed to locate access roads and other
impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical.
Revetment: means a sloping structure built to increase bank strength and protect an
embankment, or shore against erosion by waves or river currents. A revetment is usually
built of rock rip -rap, wood, or poured concrete. One or more filter layers of smaller rock
or filter cloth and "toe" protection are included. A revetment typically slopes and has a
rough or jagged face. The slope differentiates it from a bulkhead, which is a vertical
structure.
Riparian: means the land along the margins of rivers and streams.
Riverbank analysis and report: means a scientific study or evaluation conducted by
qualified experts and the resulting report to evaluate the ground and/or surface hydrology
and geology, the geomorphology and hydraulic characteristics of the river, the affected
land form and its susceptibility to mass wasting, erosion, scouring and other geologic
hazards or fluvial processes. The report shall include conclusions and recommendations
regarding the effect of the proposed development on geologic and/or hydraulic
conditions, the adequacy of the site to be developed, the impacts of the proposed
development, alternative approaches to the proposed development, and measures to
mitigate potential site specific and cumulative geological, hydrological and hydraulic
impacts of the proposed development, including the potential adverse impacts to adjacent
and down current properties. Geotechnical/Hydrological /Hydraulic reports shall conform
to accepted technical standards and must be prepared by qualified professional engineers
or geologists who have professional expertise about the regional and local shoreline
geology and processes.
Shorelands or shoreland areas: means those lands extending Landward for two hundred
feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high watermark;
floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such
floodways; and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes and tidal
waters which are subject to the provisions of the SMA.
CL 13 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
153
154
Shoreline areas and shoreline jurisdiction: means all "shorelines of the state" and
"shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030.
Shoreline functions: see Ecological functions.
Shoreline Jurisdiction: means an ar a rcoasurcd from the Ordinary High Water Mark
and all wetlands- associated with this ar a and located within the 100 year floodplain. the
channel of the Green/Duwamish River. its banks. the upland area, which extends from the
ordinary high water mark landward for 200 feet on each side of the river. floodways and
all associated wetlands within its floodplain. For the purpose of deterininina shoreline
iurisdiction the floodwav shall not include those lands that have historically been
protected by flood control devices and therefore have not been subiect to flooding with
reasonable reuularity.
Shoreline modifications: means those actions that modify the physical configuration or
qualities of the shoreline area, through the construction or alteration of a physical element
such as a dike, breakwater, pier, weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline
structure. They can include other actions, such as clearing, grading, or application of
chemicals.
Shoreline restoration or ecological restoration: means the re- establishment or
upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes functions or habitats, including any
project approved by the Federal, State, King County, or City government or the WRIA 9
Steering Committee with the intent of providing habitat restoration and where the future
use of the site is restricted through a deed restriction to prohibit non habitat uses.. This
may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to, re- vegetation,
removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials.
Restoration does not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or
pre European settlement conditions
Shoreline Significant Tree: means a single trunked tree that is 4 inches or more in
diameter at a height of 4 feet above the ground or a multi trunked tree with a diameter of
2 inches or more (such as willows or vine maple).
Shoreline Stabilization: means actions taken to protect riverbanks or adjacent uplands
from erosion resulting from the action of waves or river currents. "Hard" structural
stabilization includes levees, bulkheads and revetments. "Soft" shoreline stabilization
includes use of bioengineering measures where vegetation, logs, and/or certain types of
rock is used to address erosion control and/or slope stability.
Shorelines: means the line at ordinary high water surrounding any body of water of 20
acres or larger or where the mean annual flow is 20 cubic feet per second or greater.
CL 14 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Significant vegetation removal: means the removal or alteration of trees, shrubs, and/or
ground cover by clearing, grading, cutting, burning, chemical means, or other activity
that causes significant ecological impacts to functions provided by such vegetation. The
removal of invasive or noxious weeds does not constitute significant vegetation removal.
Tree pruning, not including tree topping, where it does not affect ecological functions,
does not constitute significant vegetation removal.
Substantial development: means any development of which the total cost or fair market
value exceeds five thousand dollars or as adjusted by the State to account for inflation, or
any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or
shorelines of the state. The following shall not be considered substantial developments
for the purpose of the Shoreline Management Act, but are not exempt from complying
with the substantive requirements of this SMP:
1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments,
including damage by accident, fire, or elements;
2. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the
elements;
3. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and
ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on
shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures
including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation
channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a
commercial nature, alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or
filling other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be
considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall
be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock
hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for
growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it
include normal livestock wintering operations;
4. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and
anchor buoys;
5. Construction on shorelands by an owner, Lessee, or contract purchaser of a
single family residence for his own use or for the use of his or her family,
which residence does not exceed a height of thirty -five feet above average
grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or Local
government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed
pursuant to this chapter;
6. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure
craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract
purchaser of single and multiple family residences. This exception applies if
either: (A) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed
two thousand five hundred dollars; or (B) in fresh waters, the fair market
value of the dock does not exceed ten thousand dollars, but if subsequent
construction having a fair market value exceeding two thousand five hundred
CL 15 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
155
156
dollars occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the
subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the
purpose of this chapter;
7. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains,
reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or
developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making
use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater
for the irrigation of lands;
8. The marking of property lines or corners on state owned lands, when such
marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface
of the water;
9. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other
facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or
utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system;
10. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation
of an application for development authorization under this chapter, if:
a. -The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the
surface waters;
b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the
environment including, but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or
wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values;
c. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon
completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the
site are restored to conditions existing before the activity;
d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section
first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial
responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored
to preexisting conditions; and
e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW
90.58.550 (Oil and Natural Gas exploration in marine waters);
11. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in
RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods
applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental
impact statement published by the department of agriculture or the department
jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21C RCW.
12. Watershed restoration projects, which means a public or private project
authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the
plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following
activities:
a. A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which
less than twenty -five cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed,
imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation
is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional
plantings;
b. A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that
CL 16 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock
as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary
emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of
flowing water; or
c. A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat,
remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the
fishery resource available for use by all of the citizen of the state,
provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream
habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than
two hundred square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary
high water mark of the stream.
13. Watershed restoration plan, which means a plan, developed or sponsored by
the department of fish and wildlife, the department of ecology, the department
of natural resources, the department of transportation, a federally recognized
Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county or a
conservation district that provides a general program and implementation
measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re- creation, or
enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream,
stream segment, drainage area or watershed for which agency and public
review has been conducted pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act.
14. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat
or fish passage, when all of the following apply:
a. The project has been approved in writing by the department of fish and
wildlife;
b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the department
of fish and wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW; and
c. The local government has determined that the project is substantially
consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local
government shall make such determination in a timely manner and
provide it by letter to the project proponent.
Additional criteria for determining eligibility of fish habitat projects are found
in WAC 173 -27 -040 2 (p) and apply to this exemption.
Water- dependent: means a use or portion of a use which cannot exist in a location that
is not adjacent to the water and which is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic
nature of its operations. Examples of water dependent uses include ship cargo terminal
loading areas, marinas, ship building and dry docking, float plane facilities, sewer
outfalls, and shoreline ecological restoration projects.
Water enjoyment: means a recreational use or other use that facilitates public access to
the shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use. The use must be open to the general
public and the shoreline- oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific
aspects of the use that fosters shoreline enjoyment. Examples of water enjoyment uses
include parks, piers, museums, restaurants, educational /scientific reserves, resorts and
mixed use projects.
CL 17 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
157
158
Water- oriented: means a use that is water dependent, water related or water enjoyment
or a combination of such uses.
Water related: means a use or portion of a use which is not intrinsically dependent on a
waterfront location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location
because:
1. The use has a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival
or shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or
2. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water dependent uses and
the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive and/or
more convenient.
Examples of water related uses are warehousing of goods transported by water, seafood
processing plants, hydroelectric generating plants, gravel storage when transported by
barge, log storage or oil refineries where transport is by tanker.
WRIA: means Water Resource Inventory Area river basin planning and management
areas formalized under Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173 500 -04 and
authorized under the Water Resources Act of 1971, Revised Code of Washington (RCW)
90.54. WRIA 9 refers to the Green/Duwamish River Basin within which Tukwila is
located.
CL 18 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION
SUMMARY
Local jurisdictions updating their Shoreline Master Program (SMP) are required to
prepare an inventory and characterization of the shoreline resources within their
boundaries. As part of the City's SMP update, a Draft Inventory and Characterization
Report and Map Folio was prepared in December 2006, and finalized in the spring of
2007 following technical review by Ecology and King County. The final report and map
folio are included as Appendix A to this SMP.
The purpose of the inventory and characterization report was to conduct a baseline
inventory of conditions for water bodies regulated as "shorelines of the state" located in
the City of Tukwila. The area regulated under Tukwila's SMP is approximately 12.5
linear miles along the banks of the Green/Duwamish River.
For the baseline inventory, the river shoreline was divided into four reaches: 1) Reach
G 1 -PAA (southern Potential Annexation Area); 2) Reach G1 (from the southern City
boundary downstream to the Black River /Green River confluence); 3) Reach G2 (from
the Black River /Green River confluence downstream to the northern City limits); and 4)
Reach G2 -PAA (the northern Potential Annexation Area). The reaches are depicted on
Map 3.
The shoreline characterization identifies existing conditions, identifies current uses and
public access, evaluates functions and values of resources in the shoreline jurisdiction,
and explores opportunities for conservation and restoration of ecological functions. The
findings are intended to provide a framework for updates to the City's shoreline
management goals, policies, and development regulations. Key findings of the inventory
and characterization are summarized below.
4.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications
The City of Tukwila includes approximately 12.5 miles of the Green/Duwamish River
and is situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands at the transition from the fresh water Green
River to the tidally influenced Duwamish estuary ecosystem. The Green River basin is
part of the Green/Duwamish Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9).
Historically, the Green/Duwamish River drained a significantly larger area than it does
today. The Green/Duwamish River has undergone extensive modifications in the past to
reduce channel migration and limit the extent and duration of valley flooding. The
modifications include both natural river course changes and major engineering projects in
the early part of the 20 century that diverted the White, Black and Cedar Rivers to
neighboring basins. As a result, the overall freshwater discharge in the Green/Duwamish
CL 19 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
159
160
River has been reduced to around a third of the pre- diversion era.
Seven pump stations also modify flows into the Green and Duwamish Rivers. Three of
the pump stations, Black River, P -17, and Segale, are operated by the Green River Flood
Control District, and four stations, Lift Stations 15, 17, 18, and 19 are operated by the
City of Tukwila. The Black River pump station is the largest station discharging flows to
the Duwamish River. This station is approximately 1,000 feet upstream of the Green
Black River confluence, and is intended to both block floodwaters from the Green from
inundating the Black River and Springbrook Creek in the City of Renton, and also
regulates flows from Springbrook Creek into the Duwamish River. The P -17 pump
station drains the P -17 Pond that collects surface water from a majority of the Urban
Center. The Segale pump station was installed to regulate soil saturation and piping
during high river events but does not add new flows to the river. The remaining City
pump stations only operate when gravity discharge to the river is prevented by high river
events.
Levees and/or revetments were constructed along much of the Green/Duwamish River
through the City of Tukwila to increase bank strength and reduce flooding. In addition,
flows within the Green/Duwamish River were greatly modified by the construction of the
Howard A. Hansen Dam and installation of water diversions. These modifications
significantly reduced the severity of floods that historically covered much of the valley
bottom. The condition of the current system of levees and revetments is a growing
source of concern for King County and the cities involved, as many of the levees are
aging and would not meet current standards for either flood conveyance or stability.
4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions
The Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila provides important habitat for
several fish and some wildlife species, such as osprey. The aquatic environment within
the channel is an important corridor located at the transition from the freshwater riverine
environment to tidal estuarine environment of Elliott Bay. Almost every species of
anadromous fish migrates through this transition zone. The entire length of the
Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila has been declared "critical habitat"
for Chinook salmon and bull trout. Both species are listed as threatened under the
Federal Endangered Species Act.
One particularly important feature of Tukwila's shorelines is the habitat functions
provided by the transition zone between fresh and salt water associated with the
Duwamish estuary. In Tukwila, this area generally extends from the East Marginal Way
bridge to the city's northern limits The transition zone between fresh and salt water has
effectively been pushed upstream from its historic location due to: (1) a significant
reduction (70 of fresh water flowing into the Duwamish estuary (owing to the
diversion of the White and Cedar/Black Rivers), (2) channel dredging, and (3) reduction
of flows as a result of the construction of the Howard A. Hanson Dam. The
CL 20 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
establishment of heavy industrial uses in the transition zone has replaced wetlands with
impervious surfaces, and the stream banks have been replaced by levees and other
armoring, eliminating edge habitat which slows flows and creating unrestrained rapid
downstream flows. Spatial structure, residence time, and the habitat available for fish
refugia and rearing functions in the Duwamish estuary have therefore been reduced and
constrained. High densities of fish have been observed utilizing what is left of this
specific habitat. At the watershed scale, overall increases in salmonid survival rates are
dependent on the availability of sufficient transition zone habitat to accommodate fish
while they adjust from fresh to salt water (WRIA 9 Steering Committee, 2005).
Modifications to the river system have resulted over time in reduced levels of ecosystem
functioning, including hydrology, water quality, riparian habitat, and in- stream habitat.
Changes to hydrology are the result of modified flow regime due to dam construction,
diversion, and urban development. River management and levees have reduced the
connection between the rivers and their floodplains, changing the spatial extent of
habitats, and increasing the potential for negative water quality impacts. Disturbances to
the channel banks have resulted in areas that are dominated by non native invasive
species. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in- channel wood, is generally lacking
throughout the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic habitats.
4.3 Land Use
A. A History of the Green/Duwamish River and Tukwila's Shoreline: Origins of Land
Development Patterns
The Green River drains 492 square miles extending from the western Cascade Mountains to
Elliott Bay. The City of Tukwila lies at the lower 1 /4 of the overall watershed. As the Green
River flows into the southern boundary of the City of Tukwila, it has drained approximately
440 square miles, or about 78 percent of its total drainage basin. Approximately 12.5 river
miles of the Green/Duwamish River are included within the City of Tukwila, from about
River Mile (RM) 16 to RM 3.7.
The Green/Duwamish River channel has been highly modified during the last 150 years.
Modifications range from the installation of levees and revetments to straightening and
dredging for navigation purposes. In general, the level of physical modification to the
system increases with distance downstream, culminating at the artificial Harbor Island that
supports industrial activities at the Port of Seattle. Several turning basins are maintained by
periodic dredging throughout the straightened reach. The highly modified portion of the
Green/Duwamish has also been the location of significant discharge of pollutants, resulting
in portions of the river being designated as Federal Superfund sites. Remediation, source
control and disposal activities are ongoing throughout the area.
Prior to European settlement of the Lower Green River Valley, the floodplain likely
consisted of a highly interspersed pattern of active and temporarily abandoned meandering
CL 21 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
161
162
channels, secondary channels, logjams, riparian forest, and scrub -shrub wetlands. The
proportion of open channel to forest in the floodplain appears to have varied depending on
the severity and timing of floods. High flows resulted in wider channels and the creation of
new channels across the floodplain. Accounts of the channel systems indicate that major
floods resulted in channel avulsion (abrupt change in the course of a river), rerouting around
logjams, and the formation of new logjams. The area presently occupied by the City of
Tukwila appeared historically to contain oxbow channels, secondary and backwater
channels, and extensive floodplain wetlands.
As part of regional flood control and river management efforts, significant watershed -scale
changes occurred to the major river drainages south of Elliott Bay, including changes to the
alignments and discharge points of the Cedar, Black, Green and White Rivers. In general,
these changes have reduced the amount of water flowing through the Green/Duwamish
River to about one third of historic conditions.
Land use changes between European settlement and the current day have occurred in two
general phases. From the mid 1800s to World War II, agriculture and timber harvesting
dominated the Lower Green River Valley. Population densities in the Lower Green River
Valley remained low until the Howard A. Hanson Dam project was completed in 1962,
providing flood protection for the valley. Levees have also been constructed along the
banks of the Green/Duwamish River, ranging from federally- certified levees to non
engineered agricultural berms. Since the dam and levee systems have significantly
decreased the extent of flooding within the Lower Green River Valley, land development
and urbanization have occurred. For more discussion on the character of the
GreenlDuwamish River and an inventory of river conditions, see the Shoreline Inventory
and Characterization Report, prepared by ESA/Adolfson, May, 2007 found in Appendix A.
Historically, the GreenlDuwamish River valley was known for its farmland. Farming was
established in the early 1900's after forested areas were cleared and transportation to the area
was improved. In 1906, construction of the Lake Washington ship canal eliminated flows of
the Black River into the valley, reducing valley flooding. As a result, the river valley
developed into highly productive farmland for the region.
In the early 1950's, the Port of Seattle proposed to convert much of the Green/Duwamish
River valley to intensive industrial uses. These plans included converting the river into a
shipping canal, possibly reaching as far south as the City of Auburn. Valley landowners
countered this proposal by annexing large tracts of land into Tukwila to retain more control
over future land use decisions. With the construction of Howard Hanson Dam in 1962 on
the upper Green River, flooding in the valley was further reduced. Much of the river is now
contained within levees and surrounded by commercial and industrial development.
The Port's actions in the northern part of the River and drastic reduction in river flooding
have had a major influence on the development of the river valley. Today, Tukwila's
portion of the Green/Duwamish River is known as a center for retail, commercial and
industrial uses. The river remains inaccessible to shipping activity south of the Turning
CL 22 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Basin, where it can be accessed primarily by small water craft, kayaks and canoes only.
Land uses along the river are mostly commercial and industrial activities, with a few
residential areas. With the designation of the Southcenter area as an Urban Center and the
Duwamish Corridor as a Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC), this development pattern is
expected to continue, and to intensify as redevelopment occurs.
B. Riverbank Vegetation
The natural environment along the river has been significantly altered from its original
riparian corridor by intense urban development and river bank modification due to the
construction of levees, revetments or other shoreline armoring. Most native stands of trees
are gone, but have been replaced by new trees and plants in some areas. Landscaping with
native and non- native plantings have also been completed in conjunction with new
development along the corridor. Birds and small mammals are supported in both habitats.
While more natural habitat is found up stream, re- development of the shoreline has the
potential to provide appropriate landscaping and restoration of habitat that are more
attractive to wildlife, people and a more environmentally sensitive form of development
C. Public Access
The regional Green River Trail provides public access to existing shoreline amenities and
plans anticipate future linkages to Seattle's system. As redevelopment occurs, there will be
opportunities to provide other types of public access, including viewing platforms, boat
ramps and fishing areas_
4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts
Past restoration work focused on the Green \Duwamish River (in Water Resource
Inventory Area 9) has resulted in good data collection and identification of potential
restoration opportunities. Significant restoration activities along the Green \Duwamish
River are already underway in the form of the multi- agency Green River Ecosystem
Restoration Project. Several opportunities have been identified on the river as part of the
recently adopted King County Flood Hazard Management Plan. Restoration
opportunities focus on several key elements:
Removing non native, invasive plant species and re- vegetating with native
riparian forest species;
Removing artificial debris and walls that harden channel banks;
Integrating the reconnection of floodplains, levee setbacks, and other ecosystem
restoration techniques with future flood and river management efforts; and
Property acquisition to allow for levee setbacks, side channel reconnection, and
channel migration.
CL 23 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline\Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
163
164
Two key issues illustrate constraints to implementing restoration and potential use
conflicts in Tukwila: 1) levee maintenance and management; and 2) existing
development patterns and anticipated redevelopment.
Discussion of shoreline planning for the Green River in Tukwila must acknowledge the
fact that, in light of the existing system of levees (including the federally certified "205"
levees) and revetments, the City cannot act alone. There are a variety of regulatory
jurisdictions outside of the City with different responsibilities for maintenance and
management of the levee system, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the
Corps), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), King County River and
Floodplain Management Unit (acting as part of the Green River Flood Control Zone
District), and private property owners. The City of Tukwila Public Works Department
has overall responsibility for maintenance of all levees, including the federally certified
levee, which extends from about the I -405 crossing to the south City limits. The actual
maintenance work on this levee is contracted by the City to King County.
The restoration of native tree and shrub species along the levees would increase riparian
habitat ecological functioning of this reach of the Green/Duwamish River, benefiting
salmonids as well as other species. However, the Corps of Engineers (responsible for
certifying the federal levee) believes that the root system of these trees could destabilize
levees, resulting in water piping (e.g., water infiltrating into and through levees along
root pathways at higher rates than it could through root free soil) at high flows, and
potential levee failure if trees fall. For the Vegetation Free Zone of the levee, current
Corps guidance only allows grass as vegetative cover on the levees (USACOE,
Engineering Manual 1110 -2 -301). Current guidance also specifies a root -free zone where
plantings can occur, but roots will generally not penetrate this structural zone. Therefore,
under current regulations, to meet the requirements for federal levee certification, some
vegetation was recently removed and ongoing vegetation management will be required to
maintain the levee certification.
Under the SMA, removing trees and vegetation from the riparian zone of shoreline of the
state is in conflict with policies for vegetation conservation and enhancement. A possible
solution is to step back and re -slope the levees to create mid -slope benches where
vegetation can be planted that will not interfere with the levee prism as the levee system
is reconstructed to improve its stability. This would require additional easement area
beyond the existing maintenance easements that have been acquired along the length of
the system.
The existing development pattern also represents constraints to implementing restoration
projects, including levee setbacks, off channel habitat restoration, wetland and stream
restoration, and riparian zone enhancements. Most of Tukwila is fully developed, with
portions having a dense, urbanized land use pattern. The City's SMP, in place since
1974, establishes a 40 -foot setback from the mean high water line. In many places, there
is little more than this 40 -foot zone that is not intensely developed. Some places have
somewhat more open space and less development and thus have greater flexibility to
accommodate potential habitat restoration actions. The City's vision for future land use,
CL 24 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
based on its comprehensive plan, includes maintenance and further development of its
urban character, particularly its identity as a regionally significant center for
manufacturing, industrial, and commercial development. A challenge lies ahead in
determining how best to accommodate new and redevelopment near the shoreline in a
manner consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Master Program
in order to achieve "no net loss" of shoreline function.
4.5 Conclusions
Like many rivers in the Puget Sound region, the course and dynamics of the
Green/Duwamish River has changed significantly as a result of development and
alteration of its watershed over the past century or so. Characteristic of many cities in the
region, Tukwila has grown and become highly urbanized. Continued growth is
anticipated and the City is planning for that growth. To a significant degree, the City has
envisioned and maintained a development pattern that preserved public access to the
Green River and assured setbacks of new buildings from the shoreline. Issues of concern
today are focused on uncertainties about the ability of existing levees and revetments to
protect existing development from flood hazards. There are many opportunities for
conservation and restoration actions in the City to restore or replace habitat while
managing natural hazard areas.
CL 25 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
165
166
CL 26 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN SUMMARY
5.1 Backeround
The state guidelines require that local governments develop SMP policies that promote
"restoration" of impaired shoreline ecological functions and a "real and meaningful"
strategy to implement restoration objectives. The City's shoreline inventory and
characterization report identifies which shoreline ecological functions and ecosystem
processes have been impaired. Local governments are further encouraged to contribute
to restoration by planning for and supporting restoration through the SMP and other
regulatory and non regulatory programs. As part of the SMP update process, the City
developed a Draft Shoreline Restoration Plan in February 2007. The draft plan was
finalized in May, 2008 following technical review by King County and Ecology and has
since been updated to include additional potential projects, address Ecology coininents
and refocus priorities to projects within the Transition Zone. It is included as Appendix B
to the SMP.
The restoration plan builds on the Inventory and Characterization Report and provides a
framework to:
Identify primary goals for ecological restoration of the Green/Duwamish
ecosystem;
Identify how restoration of ecological function can be accomplished;
Suggest how the SMP update process may accomplish the restoration of
impaired shoreline functions associated with the Green/Duwamish ecosystem;
and
Prioritize restoration projects so that the highest value restoration actions may
be accomplished first.
5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions
As summarized in the previous section, the Inventory and Characterization analysis
examined riverine and estuarine ecosystem processes that maintain shoreline ecological
functions, and identified impaired ecological functions. The inventory report identified
key ecosystem processes, and provided a qualitative assessment of their levels of
functioning at both a watershed and city reach scale. Key ecosystem functions identified
in the inventory, their level of alteration, and potential restoration actions are summarized
in Table 1.
As noted in the Inventory and Characterization Report and summarized in the Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization Summary Section, many of the alterations to shoreline
functions and ecosystem processes in the Green/Duwamish River are due to watershed
CL 27 11/19/2009 12 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
167
168
scale issues within the upper watershed which cannot be fully restored or addressed in the
lower river section through Tukwila. However, hydrologic, water quality, and habitat
restoration measures in the City do have the potential to improve the overall functioning
of this important section of the Green/Duwamish River ecosystem that includes the
transition zone from fresh to salt water.
Function
Category
Hydrologic
Hydrologic
Water
Quality
Water
Quality
Large Woody
Debris
(LWD) and
Organics
LWD and
Organics:
Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila
Function
Channel Floodplain
Interaction
Upland sediment
generation
Retention of
particulates and
contaminants
Nutrient cGycling
Maintain
cGharacteristic
R1 cGommunity
Source of LWD
Alterations to natural functioning
Presence of flood protection structures
(e.g., levees, river bank revetments,
flood gates) and significant fill and
development along the shoreline limit
channel floodplain interactions in
Tukwila.
Fine sediment contribution to the river
is increased due to build -up and wash
off from surrounding urban land uses.
Levees and revetments are virtually
continuous along the riverbanks,
limiting the potential to retain
particulates or contaminants contained
in stormwater sheet flows in the
fluvially dominated reaches.
Particulates, including sediment, are
retained in the tidally dominated
reaches, as evidenced by the need to
dredge the estuary turning basin.
As channel floodplain interaction was
reduced, the channel became a conduit
for nutrients, offering little opportunity
for contact time with soils.
The majority of the shoreline within the
City of Tukwila is currently dominated
by non native invasive weed species
(Himalayan blackberry, reed canary-
grass, and Japanese knotweed). Some
higher quality areas of cottonwood,
alder, and willow exist in riparian areas
bordering open space, parkland, and
residential zones.
Despite the lack of many sources for
LWD, there are some large
cottonwoods and big leaf maples occur
along the levees and revetment system.
'Potential,Resto ration Action within the
City,
1. Modify current levees and revetments to
increase channel and floodplain interaction;
2. Excavate back or side channels;
-1— Implement enhanced stormwater BMPs
for fine sediment removal in stormwater
runoff.
1. Modify current levees and revetments to
increase channel and floodplain area;
2. Install native riparian species to increase
bank roughness.
1 Increase riverine wetland area;
2. Install native riparian plant species.
3. Set back banks (revetments and levees).
1. Remove invasive plants and install native
riparian species;
2. Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization
and restoration projects;
3. Institute programmatic weed control
activities along shoreline.
4. Promote bioengineering techniques for
shoreline stabilization projects.
1. Install native riparian species;
2. Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization
and restoration projects.
CL 28 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
5.3 Plans, Programs. and Completed Projects
The importance of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem within the Puget Sound has resulted
in significant focus on this area in terms of restoration potential. With the federal listing
of Chinook and bull trout as endangered species, watershed planning in the region (e.g.,
WRIA 9) has focused on developing a Salmon Habitat Plan (WRIA 9, 2005), to which
the City of Tukwila is a party. The plan establishes goals, objectives, and programmatic
and site specific actions to address restoration of habitat critical to salmon species in the
Green/Duwamish watershed.
Tukwila has already engaged in the greater regional restoration effort for the
Green/Duwamish River. The City Council has ratified the WRIA 9 Plan and contributes
resources to maintain operating staff Tukwila has worked within the larger
Green/Duwamish River Ecosystem restoration project to acquire or donate properties that
are either currently functioning (Cecil B. Moses Park, Codiga Farm), or have the
potential for restoration (North Winds Weir. Duwamish Gardens). WRIA 9 and other
regional partners are currently working together to monitor baseline conditions. Several
projects from the WRIA 9 Plan are included on the City's Capital Improvement Program
list; other projects will be added as CIP projects are completed and funds are identified
for new projects.
The restoration plan identifies several projects that have already been completed in the
Green/Duwamish River. These projects provide an excellent opportunity to learn about
what river restoration measures are the most effective. For example, it appears that the
back channel that was excavated at Codiga Farm provides important habitat for migrating
juvenile fish.
CL 29 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
169
170
5.4 Restoration Onnortunities
Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be two
five specific types of restoration actions that will most benefit the Green/Duwamish
ecosystem in Tukwila. These actions are intended to boost the levels of ecosystem
functioning as part of a self sustaining ecosystem that will limit the need for future
manipulation. While these projects are intended to restore many ecosystem functions, the
restoration activities will occur in the highly urban valley bottom, and as a result, cannot
fully achieve pre- disturbance channel conditions. In addition, some restoration actions
must occur at the watershed scale, which will restore ecosystem functions that cannot be
addressed solely within Tukwila or as part of the SMP.
Enlarging channel cross sectional area. This action could include setting back
levees and re- sloping banks to reduce steepnessrevctments, and the excavation of
historic fill or floodplain materials to create back channels. Th }ese actions will
increase flood storage, allow for more stable levees, restore some floodplain area,
provide a larger intertidal zone in this important transitional area, and provide a
more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. The Transition Zone is
identified in leMap 2.
Enhancinge existing habitats. These actions could include the removal of non-
native invasive vegetation, installation of native riparian vegetation, and
installation of LWD below Ordinary High Water. This action will improve the
functioning of the aquatic, riverine wetland, and riparian habitats that currently
exist along the Green/Duwamish River.
Creating off channel habitat areas. This action would create off channel areas
through the excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to create back
channels as fish foraging and refugia areas.
Reconnecting wetland habitat to the river. This action would reconnect an old
oxbow wetland to the river. allowing for off channel habitat (Nelson Side
Channel).
Removing fish barriers where tributary streams discharge to the river. This
action would remove flap gates and install fish friendlv flap gates at the mouths
of Tukwila's three manor streams (Gilliam, Southgate and Riverton) and possibly
restore habitat area at these locations in the shoreline iurisdiction.
5.5 Potential Proiects and Priorities
The restoration plan summarizes 26 potential projects as specific restoration projects
within the shorelines of Tukwila. Most of the restoration projects are part of ongoing
restoration planning through the WRIA 9 watershed planning process. Additionally,
opportunities exist to enhance riparian vegetation along the majority of the
CL 30 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Green/Duwamish River.
The restoration plan provides a preliminary qualitative (high, medium, low) project
ranking system. Within this ranking system. the highest priority location for restoration
nroiects is within the transition zone. The Transition Zone is manned in Map 2.
High priority projects will typically:
Address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions;
Have opportunity for multiple funding sources;
Include freshwater tributary channels; and/or
Not require additional property acquisition.
Medium priority projects will typically:
Address limited ecosystem functions; and
Be eligible for multiple funding sources, and/or require property acquisition.
Low priority projects will typically:
Only focus on habitat enhancement;
Will be used as mitigation to offset impacts elsewhere; or
Not be eligible for multiple funding sources.
CL 31 11/19/2009 12.55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
171
172
CL 32 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES
The goals and policies listed below are taken from the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan.
Strikeout/underlining has been used to indicate proposed revisions to the original 1995
text to reflect changed circumstances or newer requirements. The goals and policies are
found in Chapter 5 of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan will be
amended to reflect these changes to goals and policies.
6.1 Shoreline Environment Designations, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.1
Goal: Shoreline Environment designations that meet Washington State Shoreline
Management Act requirements, and reflect local conditions and Tukwila's long -term
vision for its shoreline. The shoreline jurisdiction generally extends for 200 feet on either
side of the Ordinary High Water mark, consistent with the Washington State Shoreline
Management Act. In order to implement this goal, the SMP proposes three Environment
Designations: Shoreline Residential, Urban Conservancy, and High Intensity (as detailed
in the Shoreline Environment Section) that comply with the Washington State Shoreline
Management Act and function well for the City.
Policies:
New Policy 5.1.1: Shoreline Residential Environment. In the Shoreline
Residential Environment, priority shall be given to the following:
o Uses that preserve or restore the natural character of the shoreline or
promote preservation of vegetation, open space, flood plain or
sensitive area lands; and
o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological
limitations of the land and water and that will not require extensive
alteration of the shoreline or new "hard" structural shoreline
stabilization. Where possible the removal of bulkheads, revetments,
levees or other "hard" structural shoreline stabilization is required.
Hard structural shoreline stabilization may be replaced with alternative
bioengineered bank stabilization; and
o On publicly owned property, water dependent or water related
recreational activities that are compatible with the character of the
shoreline residential areas.
o Maintenance of existing single family residential development patterns
and public open space and recreation uses;
o Residential and recreational development that promotes vegetation
conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and
maintenance of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions;
o Residential and recreational development that contributes to the
restoration of ecological functions over time in areas where ecological
degradation has occurred.
CL 33 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
173
174
Policy 5.1.2, Urban Conservancy Environment: In the Urban Conservancy
Environment priority shall be given to the following:
o Development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement,
sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water quality to assure
no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
o Water enjoyment uses
o Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline
dependent use;
o Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided
by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands;
o Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control,
consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed
passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on
migration;
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated;
o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological
limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive
alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for
restoration projects.
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated;
o Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and
o Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of commercial
and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are minimized and
where there is no net loss of shoreline functions.
New Policy 5.1.3, High Intensity Shoreline Environment: In the High
Intensity Environment, priority shall be given to the following:
o Water dependent commercial and industrial uses;
o Development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement,
sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water quality to assure
no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
o Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline
dependent use;
o Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided
by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands;
o Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control,
consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed
passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on
migration;
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated;
CL 34 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Policies:
o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological
limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive
alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for
restoration projects.
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated;
o Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and
o Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of intensive
commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are
minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions.
6.2 Shoreline Planninu and Manauement. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.2
Goal: Expanded value of the river as a community and regional resource through
regional coordination of shoreline management programs and through programs that
foster river appreciation and awareness, involving partnerships among businesses,
schools, government and community organizations.
Policy 5.2.1: Coordinate shoreline planning and management activities with
other local jurisdictions and their plans such as the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat
Plan and the King County Flood Hazard Management Plan to establish
region -wide consistency in addressing river issues with regional implications,
such as economic development, public access, wildlife habitat, water quality
control and flood control.
Policy 5.2.2: Promote river stewardship and increase river awareness through
actions which further shoreline goals, such as educational programs,
community activities, and partnerships with Tukwila residents, businesses,
schools, government, and community organizations.
New Policy 5.2.3: Promote and participate in the implementation of the
Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan, including supporting the
recommended projects located in Tukwila to improve the habitat functions of
the Green/Duwamish River, as well as the Plan policies and goals.
C. Implementation Strategies:
WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan
Tukwila SMP Restoration Plan
CL 35 11/19/2009 12.55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
175
176
6.3 Land Development Use and Economic Vitality, Comnrehensive Plan Goal
5.3
Goal: Development along the shoreline that fosters the economic vitality of Tukwila
while preserving the long -term benefits of the river.
Policies:
Policy 5.3.1: Implement Shoreline Design Guidelines to:
o Encourage design that views the river as an amenity;
o Guide the design of multiple shoreline uses;
o Establish techniques for increasing multiple shoreline use;
o Prioritize locations for use;
o Encourage removal of invasive species with nonchemical methods and
maintenance of native planted vegetation to minimize the presence of
invasive species.
Policy 5.3.2: Design and locate all shoreline development to minimize impacts
on areas identified as important for other river uses, such as wildlife and
aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, historical
resource and flood control.
Policy 5.3.3: When no other feasible alternative exists, aAllow structures for
water dependent uses to be placed in the water, or structural reinforcement of
the riverbank, only when this provides a significant, long -term public benefit,
does not interfere with navigation or flood management, does not cause a loss
of shoreline function or is essential to a water dependent use.
Policy 5.3.4: Prohibit the construction of new flood control facilities unless
constructed to incorporate habitat restoration features and work to remove
existing shoreline armoring where possible— to restore habitat functions.
Policy 5.3.5: Recognize and promote the river's contribution to the economic
vitality of Tukwila, as a valuable amenity for existing and future businesses
which depend on or benefit from a shoreline location.
Policy 5.3.6: Ensure that shoreline development does not diminish the
commercial navigability of the River.
Policy 5.3.7: Tukwila Urban Center Development Policy: Design and locate
shoreline development in the Tukwila Urban Center to encourage water
enjoyment uses that:
o Provide for shoreline multiple uses that are consistent with the
underlying zoning;
CL 36 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
o Provide additional benefits, such as riverbank restoration, fishing
piers, non motorized boat launches, river views, or interpretive signs;
o Support public access to and along the shoreline;
o Provide water enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and
non -water dependent uses;
o Encourage efficient use of land, through such techniques as clustering,
mixed use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under
principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors.
o Ensure that new development and re- development in the Urban Center
acknowledges the goal of a continuous street facade along Christensen
Road and the riverfront and locates parking facilities to the interior of
the lot.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.3.7:
o .Shoreline Design Guidelines
o Development Standards
o Tukwila Urban Center Plan
MIC Development Policy 5.3.8: Ensure that non -water dependent shoreline
development in the MIC provides for shoreline multiple uses to the extent that
site security and the success of industrial operations are not jeopardized;
ensures no net loss of shoreline function and provides adequate mitigation for
the loss of shoreline multiple use opportunities.
MIC Development Policy 5.3.9: Allow opportunities for commercial and
recreational marinas to locate in Tukwila downstream of the turning basin,
where compatible with existing and future navigability and existing and future
ecological restoration projects.
Policy 5.3.10: Development outside the Tukwila Urban Center or MIC:
Design and locate shoreline development outside of the Tukwila Urban Center
and the MIC to:
o Provide for multiple shoreline uses;
o Provide water enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and
non -water dependent uses;
o Encourage efficient use of land through such techniques as clustering,
mixed -use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under
principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors;
o Treat the river as an amenity in the design and location of the project.
6.4 Private Propertv Rights. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.4
Goal: Protect rights of property owners to reasonable use and enjoyment of private
CL 37 11/19/2009 1255 00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
177
178
property, through appropriate location, access to, and design of shoreline uses.
Policies
Policy 5.4.1: Design, locate and manage shoreline uses in a manner which
maintains reasonable use and enjoyment of private property.
Policy5.4.2: Design and locate public access in a way that is appropriate for
the site, depending on site conditions and private property concerns.
Policy 5.4.3: Special sensitivity is required for residential property; therefore,
all single family residential development of four or fewer single family
residential lots is excluded from requirements to provide private or public
access. Single family property owners are not exempt from the responsibility
to improve the habitat value of the shoreline environment.
Policy 5.4.4. Maintain flexibility in methods of obtaining public access, to
allow for different site conditions and private property concerns that might
conflict with public access, such as privacy, safety, and security.
New Policy 5.4.5: Obtain additional easement area to permit the improvement
of river habitat by setting back levees or removing revetments and other hard
shoreline armoring and replacing with more habitat friendly shoreline
treatment.
6.5 Shoreline Design Quality, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.5
Goal: Enhanced identity of the river as a unique community asset through high quality
development and public activities that reflect Tukwila's history and sense of community
pride.
CL 38 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Policies:
Policy 5.5.1: Require that shoreline development outside of the MIC:
o Ensures no net loss of shoreline function;
o Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design
Guidelines;
o Reflects principles of high quality design, in such areas as site
planning, architecture and landscaping;
o Includes setbacks, bulk, height, density, landscape buffers and
provisions for open space that enhance the shoreline environment.
Implementation Strategies for P -1 `.S
_,Ign guidelines
o Shoreline development standards
o Tukwila Urban Center Plan
Policy 5.5.2: Require that shoreline development in the MIC:
o Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design
Guidelines;
o Maintains or enhances the existing visual quality along the river;
o Provides trees and other landscaping to buffer industrial uses that are
incompatible with other river uses;
o Provides amenities that enhance enjoyment of the river by employees.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.2:
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline development standards
6.6 Access and Recreational Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.6
Goal: Increase the amount and diversity of opportunities for public recreation and access
to and along the river, including visual and cultural access, access to the water's edge,
opportunities for small boat navigation and access, and connections to other
neighborhoods, consistent with the shoreline character.
Policies:
Policy 5.6.1: Retain and improve areas identified as important in the network
of public access to the river, including cross -town connections, former
railroad right -of -ways and unimproved street -end right -of -ways, historic sites,
unique natural features or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential.
New Policy 5.6.2: Maintain existing parks along the shoreline and acquire
additional park land to increase access and recreation opportunities.
CL 39 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
179
180
Policy 5.6.3: Incorporate river access requirements to guide the design,
location and management of shoreline public access in short plats over 4 lots
and all subdivisions as well as multi family, commercial and industrial
development; to identify types of access appropriate and feasible for various
site conditions and locations; and to establish strategies, funding sources and
priorities for acquisition and enhancement of shoreline public access.
Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.1 5.6.3:
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline access guidelines
o Shoreline development standards
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space Plan
Policy 5.6.4: Design, locate and manage public access for diverse types and
variable levels of intensity in order to minimize impacts on vulnerable
features of the natural environment and to minimize conflicts with private
property uses.
Policy 5.6.5: Where shoreline development provides public access areas,
reserve such areas for use by the public through the means most appropriate
for the type, scale and impacts of the development, such as dedication,
donation or sale of an easement or right -of -way to the City.
Policy 5.6.6: Support the implementation of the King County Green River
Trail, per the existing King County Green River Trail Master Plan as well as
pedestrian/bicycle connections with the Trail from properties on the opposite
bank and the expansion of this trail where appropriate.
Policies for Development outside MIC:
Policy 5.6.7: Require subdivisions, multi family residential uses and
commercial and industrial uses along the shoreline to provide a trail for public
access along the river in areas identified for trail connections, consistent with
the King County Green River Trail Master Plan, Shoreline Master Program or
any other approved access plan.
CL 40 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.7
o King County Green River Trail Master Plan
o Shoreline public access standards
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space Plan
e• Policy 5.6.8: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is
designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as
benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access, and
appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.8
o King County Green River Trail Master Plan
o Shoreline public access standards
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space Plan
Policy 5.6.9: Except for single- family residential development of four or
fewer single family residential lots, shoreline development shall maintain and
encourage views of the water from the shoreline and from upland area,
through design of building height, bulk and modulation, and windows,
breezeways and outdoor spaces.
Implementation Strategies
o Shoreline design guidelines
New Policy 5.6.10: Public access improvements should be designed and
constructed to:
o Look and "feel" welcoming to the public;
o Connect to public areas, street ends, and other pedestrian or public
throughfares;
o Enhance the character of Tukwila;
o Avoid conflicts with water dependent uses;
o Provide for public safety and minimize impacts to private property
and individual privacy and security;
o Require a low level of operation and maintenance;
o Ensure that construction (i.e. structures and access pathways)
incorporates environmentally sensitive design and materials (e.g.,
non toxic, natural materials)
Policy 5.6.11: Improve pedestrian connections between the river, Green River
Trail and the planned Riverwalk and the Urban Center's commercial, office
and residential uses.
CL 41 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
181
182
Policies for Development in MIC
Policy 5.6.12: For MIC properties included in the King County Green River
Trail Master Plan or other approved access plan, require shoreline
development to provide a trail for public access along the river.
Policy 5.6.13: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is
designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as
benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access and
appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines.
Policy 5.6.14: For MIC properties not included in the King County Green
River Trail Plan, require shoreline development to provide public access or a
private natural area in lieu of public access, or otherwise mitigate the loss of
public access.
Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.12 -14
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline access guidelines
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space
6.7 Transportation within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Comprehensive Plan
Goal 5.7
Goal: Safe corridors and amenities for pedestrians, cyclists and users of public
transportation, allowing more citizens to access and enjoy the river.
Policies:
Policy 5.7.1: Design and locate transportation uses within the shoreline
jurisdiction to be compatible with shoreline vegetation or other habitat
features, turn-outs or parking areas for public access, biofiltration swales to
protect water quality, public art or interpretive signs.
Policy 5.7.2: Ensure the transportation uses within the shoreline jurisdiction
and within those corridors identified as river cross connections provide safe,
convenient and attractive pedestrian, bicycle and boater access and facilities
for public transportation.
Policy 5.7.3: Minimize transportation impacts to the natural environment
(such as air, noise, odor or water pollution) and enhance the natural
environment wherever possible through planting trees and other habitat
features.
Policy 5.7.4: Encourage maintenance of the river's navigability up to the
CL 42 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Turning Basin, where this achieves a greater public interest and a balance
between costs and benefits to the broader community and impacts to the
habitat functions of the river, in recognition of the historical significance of
navigation and its importance to the economic vitality of water dependent
uses and the MIC
6.8 Historical Resource Use and Archaeological Protection. Comprehensive
Plan Goal 5.8
Goal: Recognition of the river's contribution to Tukwila history and community identity
through identification, enhancement, restoration, and protection of sites with historic and
cultural value and through development of interpretive and educational programs
Policies
Policy 5.8.1: Ensure that shoreline development reflects the river's important
role in Tukwila's history and that long -term public use of the river as an
historical resource is protected by providing for the identification, protection
and interpretation of unique historic and archaeological features.
Policies
Policy 5 8 2• Ensure that public shoreline development reflects the river's
natural features and community traditions.
New Policy 5.8.3: Ensure that archaeological artifacts and sites are protected
when development takes place in the shoreline jurisdiction.
6.9 Natural Environment and Habitat Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.9
Goal: Restored, enhanced, and protected natural environment resources along the river,
including trees, wildlife habitat and features with value for long -term public, scientific
and educational uses.
Policy 5.9.1:Ensure that shoreline development results in no net loss of
shoreline ecological function, minimizes impacts on wildlife and that
significant vegetation, sandbars, wetlands, watercourses, and other critical
areas identified as important for habitat are maintained through the proper
location, design, construction, and management of all shoreline uses and
activities.
Policy 5.9.2: Ensure that shoreline development and activities protect
riverbank vegetation and, where feasible, restore degraded riverbanks in
accordance with the vegetation management provisions of the Shoreline
Master Program, in order to minimize and compensate for impacts to fish and
wildlife habitat.
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
43 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
183
184
Policy 5.9.3: Mitigate unavoidable disturbances of significant vegetation or
habitat through replacement of habitat and provision of interpretive features
consistent with the shoreline access guidelines.
New Policy 5.9.4: Support relief from certain shoreline master program
requirements for properties affected by habitat restoration projects that result
in the movement of the ordinary high water mark.
New Policy 5.9.5: Support establishing the Transition Zone as the priority
area for habitat restoration oroiects given its importance for subtidal and
intertidal habitats to allow salrnonids to gradually adiust to the change
between fresh and saltwater conditions.
6.10 Water Oualitv. Surface Water and Flood Control Use, Comprehensive
Plan Goal 5.10
Goal: Improved water quality and quantity control programs affecting the
Green/Duwamish River that improve the river's water quality, provide habitat for fish and
wildlife, protect public health and safety, and enhance public enjoyment of the river.
Policies:
Policy 5.10.1: Design, locate, and manage shoreline development including
streets, flood control projects, surface water drainage and sewer systems,
clearing and grading activities, and landscaping in a manner which minimizes
opportunities for pollutants to enter the river, provides erosion control and
otherwise protects water quality.
Policy 5.10.2: Design, manage, and mitigate flood control uses to minimize
impacts to other shoreline uses such as trees and riverbank vegetation, public
access and recreation, and fish habitat; and set them back from the river,
where feasible for the project, with land areas between the water and the levee
set aside as open space for public recreation or wildlife habitat.
Policy 5.10.3: Consistent with project feasibility, mitigate unavoidable
negative impacts on other shoreline uses owing to flood control uses through
such measures as restoration of trees and native riverbank vegetation,
provision of public access to the water's edge, interpretive features, or other
mitigation of loss of opportunities for shoreline multiple uses.
New Policy 5.10.4: Obtain additional easements, where needed, from property
owners to set back levees to improve shoreline habitat functions. As
redevelopment occurs, replace bulkheads, revetments or other hard bank
stabilization with more natural riverbanks to improve ecological functions and
habitat where possible.
C. Implementation Strategies
Increase levee setback to incorporate vegetated mid -slope benches
Shoreline access guidelines
Surface Water Management Plan
CL 44 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
6.11 Public Health. Safety and Welfare. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.11
Goal: Shoreline uses that do not endanger public health, safety and welfare, or the
capacity of the river to provide long -term benefits and resources to the community.
Policies:
WRIA 9 Plan water quality policies
Shoreline Restoration Plan
Policy 5.11.1: Design, locate, and manage shoreline uses, such as capital
improvement projects and private development, in a manner that does not
endanger public health, safety and welfare, and enhances the capacity of the
river to provide long -term benefits and resources to the community and the
environment.
CL 45 11/19/2009 12.55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
185
186
CL 46 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS
The City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) establishes a system to classify
shoreline areas into specific "environment designations." This system of classifying
shorelines is established by the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) and Master
Program Guidelines (WAC 173 -26 -211). The purpose of shoreline environment
designations is to provide a uniform basis for applying policies and use regulations within
similar shoreline areas. Generally, shoreline designations should be based on existing
and planned development patterns, biological and physical capabilities and limitations of
the shoreline, and a community's vision or objectives for its future development.
7.1 Existinn Retulatory Framework
Tukwila's current SMP, first adopted in 1974, designates all shorelines as "Urban." At
the time the 1974 SMP was developed, all of the land in Tukwila's shoreline jurisdiction
was either zoned commercial /industrial or was developed with urban uses. The SMP
defines the Urban Environment as "areas to be managed in high intensive land uses,
including residential, commercial, and industrial development and accessory uses, while
providing for restoration and preservation to ensure long -term protection of natural and
cultural resources within the shoreline" (Tukwila, 1974). The SMP further states that the
management objectives for the shoreline "are directed at minimizing adverse impacts on
the river and shoreline ecology, maximizing the aesthetic quality and recreational
opportunities of the river shore, and recognizing the rights and privileges of property
owners" (Tukwila, 1974). Within the Urban Environment, Tukwila's SMP employs a
tiered system of regulations based on the distance from the Green/Duwamish River mean
high water mark (MHWM). These tiered management zones are generally described
below and illustrated on Figure 1:
River Environment/Zone: a 40 -foot wide zone extending landward from
MHWM and having the most environmentally protective regulations;
Low Impact Environment/Zone: the area between the River Environment and
100 feet from the MHWM; and
High Impact Environment/Zone: the area between 100 and 200 feet from the
MHWM.
The City also administers the King County Shoreline Master Program for the areas which
have been annexed since the adoption of the City's SMP in 1974. These areas are
designated Urban and the setbacks from Ordinary High Water Mark vary from 20 feet to
50 feet depending on whether the use is water dependent, single family or
1 commercial /industrial. See Annexation History Map, Map 32 for an identification of
the areas where the City administers the County's SMP.
CL 47 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
187
188
LOW
IMPACT
ZONE
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
1 1
RIVER 1 LOW
ZONE I IMPACT f:
ZONE I,
,I 1
1
200'
MEAN HIGH WATER LINE
Figure 1. Current Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44)
7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory Characterization Report and
Restoration Plan
This section summarizes findings from the Inventory and Characterization Report and
Restoration Plan elements of the SMP update (Appendices A and B). These findings
inform the goals, policies, regulations, and the development and application of
environment designations. In this context, the key findings can be summarized as
follows:
The Green/Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource,
particularly in the Transition Zone portion of the river that extends from the East
Marginal Way South bridge through the north City limits (see Man 2). where
juvenile salmon adjust from fresh to salt water habitat. The river provides
migratory habitat for numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a
variety of wildlife.
The river is a critical resource for Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing.
The river is a critical resource for some water dependent uses north of the
Turning Basin.
The river is an important recreational resource for sport fishing, small water craft
and Green River Trail users.
At an ecosystem scale, the habitat is largely homogenous throughout the city.
In addition. many ecosystem processes are largely controlled by up -river
characteristics, particularly the Howard Hanson Dam and are little affected by
actions in the City, except for such functions as water aualitv (especially fine
sediment capttue and filterina of contaminants in stormwater), local surface
hvdroloav (stormwater from increasing amounts of impervious surfaces and
contribution to peak flows of the river), riparian habitat, and temperature control
(shading from riparian habitat).With the exception of the functions provided by
the transitional mixing zone from salt to fresh water, habitat conditions and
functions are relatively similar throughout the shoreline. That is,The transition
48 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
zone there are not specific ecc:ions of Tukwila' c shorelines that—needs greater
protection ef-and restoration focus than other sections of the shoreline in the city.
In addition, ecosystem processes, are largely aentrelled by up river
Restoration opportunities are numerous and spatially distributed throughout
Tukwila's shoreline. Activities that provide restoration of both floodplain
functions and habitat functions should be prioritized, particularly those nroiects
in the transition zone. Policies should promote and regulations should enable the
City to accomplish restoration goals and actions.
7.3 State Environment Designation System
State Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173 -26 -211) establish the environment
designation system for shorelines regulated by the Shoreline Management Act. The
guidelines (WAC 173 -26 -150 and 176 -26 -160) give local jurisdictions the option to plan
for shorelines in designated Urban Growth Areas (UGA) and Potential Annexation Areas
(PAA) as well. The City can "pre- designate" shoreline environments in its designated
PAA as part of this planning process. However, shorelines in the PAA would continue to
be regulated under the provisions of the King County SMP until the City annexes those
areas. King County's SMP designates the City's north PAA "Urban" and the south PAA
as "Rural." King County is also in the process of updating its SMP, so these designations
may change when the County adopts an updated SMP, expected sometime before
December 2009. The County's Draft SMP designates the City's North PAA and the
South PAA as High Intensity.
The guidelines (WAC 173 -26 -211 (4)(b)) recommend six basic environment
designations: high intensity; shoreline residential; urban conservancy; rural conservancy;
natural resource; and aquatic. Local governments may establish a different designation
system, retain their current environment designations and/or establish parallel
environments provided the designations are consistent with the purposes and policies of
the guidelines (WAC 173 -26 -211 (4)(c)). The guidelines also note that local shoreline
environment designations should be consistent with the local comprehensive plan (WAC
173 -26 -211 (3)).
For each environment designation, jurisdictions must provide a purpose statement,
classification criteria, management policies and environment specific regulations. Table
2 describes the purpose for each of the recommended designations in the state guidelines.
For each designation, the potential applicability to Tukwila is noted.
CL 49 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
189
190
Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System WAC 173 -26 -211 (5)
ica
x ytronme l
Asi atio
Aquatic
Natural
Rural
Conservancy
Urban
Conservancy
Shoreline
Residential
High Intensity
The purpose of the "aquatic" environment is to
protect, restore, and manage the unique
characteristics and resources of the areas
waterward of the ordinary high -water mark.
The purpose of the "natural" environment is to
protect those shoreline areas that are relatively
free of human influence or that include intact or
minimally degraded shoreline functions
intolerant of human use.
The purpose of the "rural conservancy"
environment is to protect ecological functions,
conserve existing natural resources and
valuable historic and cultural areas in order to
provide for sustained resource use, achieve
natural flood plain processes, and provide
recreational opportunities.
The purpose of the "urban conservancy"
environment is to protect and restore ecological
functions of open space, flood plain and other
sensitive lands where they exist in urban and
developed settings, while allowing a variety of
compatible uses.
The purpose of the "shoreline residential"
environment is to accommodate residential
development and appurtenant structures that
are consistent with this chapter. An additional
purpose is to provide appropriate public access
and recreational uses.
The purpose of the "high- intensity"
environment is to provide for high- intensity
water- oriented commercial, transportation, and
industrial uses while protecting existing
ecological functions and restoring ecological
functions in areas that have been previously
degraded.
The City does not currently utilize an
Aquatic designation. Uses or activities
waterward of OHWM are regulated
according to the provisions of the
associated upland designation. The
aquatic designation appears to have limited
utility for Tukwila, as the management
policies and objectives for aquatic areas
can be met through the adjacent upland
designation.
While the Green River shorelines in
Tukwila provide some important
ecological functions, the river and adjacent
uplands throughout Tukwila have been
significantly altered by dense urban
development and are generally armored or
otherwise modified.
Not applicable to Tukwila. All of the
City's shorelines are urbanized. Potential
annexation areas are either urbanized or
proposed for intensive development.
This designation is applicable in that the
Green River is an important natural
resource. The most significant shoreline
function provided in Tukwila is related to
fish and wildlife habitat. Open space is
limited by the existing development
pattern and flood plains are largely
disconnected by a series of levees,
revetments, and other infrastructure.
This designation is most applicable for
those portions of Tukwila's shorelines
where the existing and planned
development pattern is for low density
(i.e., predominantly single family)
residential uses or public recreation uses.
This designation is applicable along only
part of Tukwila's shorelines, in the
Manufacturing and Industrial Center
(MIC) north of the Turning Basin. Water
dependent uses are currently limited, as
only a small portion of the river in Tukwila
is navigable for commercial purposes, and
much of the river has levees, thus
restricting use immediately adjacent to the
river.
CL 50 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
7.4 Proposed Environment Designations
The Aquatic, Natural and Rural Conservancy Environments are not well suited to a
highly developed, urbanized river that is navigable for only a small portion of the system
and is significantly constrained by levees for flood management, such as the
Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila. The City's Proposed Shoreline Environments,
which are identified on Map 4J, are:
Shoreline Residential Environment
Urban Conservancy Environment, and
High Intensity Environment
The City proposes to designate a buffer to replace the current system of parallel shoreline
management zones. Instead of the current River Environment a minimum buffer will be
established for each shoreline environment and allowed uses will be designated for the
buffer area along the river and the remaining shoreline jurisdiction. This system is
intended to facilitate the City's long -range objectives for land and shoreline management,
including:
Ensuring no net loss of ecological shoreline functions;
Providing for habitat protection, enhancement, and restoration to improve
degraded shoreline ecological functions over time and protection of already
restored areas;
Allowing continued and increased urban development in recognition of
Tukwila's role as a regionally significant industrial and commercial center;
and
Providing for improved flood control in coordination with King County and
the Army Corps of Engineers.
Table 3, on the following page, provides a summary of the characteristics of the river
shoreline in Tukwila to set the stage for the discussion in Section 7.5 on the
determination of shoreline buffers.
CL 51 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
191
Area
MIC/H MIC /L
Zoned property from
North City Limits to
EMWS Bridge, and
North Potential
Annexation Area
LDR Zoned property
w/o levees from
EMWS to 1 -405
Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions
Modificatltet.
The Director may Yec1uce the standard buffer on a case -by-
case basis by up to 5(1,°10; upon construction of the
followinQpefeived cross section:
1. reslope bank from OHWM (not toe) to be no
steeuer than at- -3:1, using bioengineering
techniques
2. Minimum 20' buffer landward from op bank
of of b ba
a
3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted
species with high habitat value
Continent: Maximum slope is reduced
d ui the Trans r
from OHWM and to recogniz e location
Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below
OHWM difficult.
Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Director that it ai to the ruler. direct, ect,
indirect or long -term adverse imp
cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and
roved an lam must
of native veg
implemented as a condietationnthat i proves tion of the
include using a variety provides
additional protection the funcrion attributes
for the shorelshoreline anao o °ical,
wetemeurse-fluictionses. with native
Removal of invasive s ecies and replanting triggered by
p p
Distance unless trigg
required to species of high habitat value voluntary
set back requirement for a Shoreline Substantial Development
slope from permit
toe at 2.5:1
plus 20'
setback,
Min. 50'
width
Characteristics
Fresh/Salt water Transition
Zone, Lower flooding risk,
Less than 20' difference fi
OHWM to top of bank,
influence
February, 2009 planning Commission Recommended
Shoreline Master Program
Moderate flooding risk, Less Shai' ime Residential
than 25' d ffetek e=<frPm
OHWM'to top of batilda
influence,on northern section
Environment
High Intensity
Buffer
100'
11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
52
CL �1lecommen9 Couneil Recommended SMP-C
1 P:\ShorelineV\Council Revie� +lDocumentc {�'t
LDR Zoned property
with levees from
EMWS to 1 -405
Commercially zoned
propel` from 4o 1
Ave S. Bridg e
405
West River bank
from 1-405 ��w 1
City Limit,
205 Levee and South
Annexation Area
Moderate flooding risk, Less
than 25' difference from
01-1W01-1W W t to p of bank., tidal
influence on northern section
Moderate flooding risk, Less
than 25' difference from
OHWM to top of bank
Hi flooding risk, Federally
certified and County levee,
large water level fluctuations
CL
W\Shoteline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Shoreline Residential 125'
Urban Conservancy
Urban Conservancy
100'
reconstruction of levee in accordance with app ed o
Upon rec e
minimum profile,
t h e Director may reduce the buff
aire owned property at Fort Dent.
actual width is lies to City-owned buffer fer on a case -by'
Comment: this agU
Director may reduce the standard of the
The basis to 50% upomco
case basis by up
followi cross section.
nap�d toe to be no steewC1it anat
reslope bank from ioengineering techn q es bank
m 2 5 using
um 20' buffer with
Minimum buffer landward from b
Bank and remaining buffer to be p habitat value
native species with high
Ally buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the
faction of the Director that will not
o shoreline direct,
s advers p
indirect or long-term In all cases a buffer
ecological functions us Q'be approved and
e The plan
implemented condition of the m e reduction.
co etation that
implemented as a a variety of native veg
must include using
improves the functional
bates of the buffer and l
provides additional protectiecti
on for the sly ica
lme eCOlo
functions rr}
i�ldanc e
of levee in accordance
Upon tion or reconstxuC t��it�ck�, duce the
125' n unimum -p
with CiIY P the Director may
be actual width required.
buffer to the
53
11/19(2009 12 :55.00 PM
East River bank
without levee from I-
405 south to City
Limits
East River bank with
levee from I-405 to
South City Limit
Any shoreline
environment where
street or road runs
parallel to the river
through the buffer
Moderate flooding risk, 20 to
25' difference from OHWM
to top of bank, Moderate
slumping risk, large water
level fluctuations
Moderate flooding risk, 20 to
25' difference from OHWM
to top of bank, Moderate
slumping risk, large water
level fluctuations
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Urban Conservancy The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by-
100' case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the
followingpreferred cross section:
1._reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than at max
2.5:1, using bioengineering techniques
2. Minimum 20' buffer landward from top of bank
3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with
native species with high habitat value
Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct,
indirect or long -term adverse impacts to shoreline
ecological functionsthe -rte. In all cases a buffer
enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented
as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include
using a variety of native vegetation that improves the
functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional
protection for the shoreline ecological watercourse
functions amend;;.
Urban Conservancy 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in accordance with City
approved minimum profile
10' acco: ::sement, the Director may reduce the buffer to
the actual width required for the levee.
End buffer on river side of existing improved street or
roadway.
54 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
February, 2009 Planning Commission Recommended
Shoreline Master Program
7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers
The determination of the buffer distances for each shoreline environment was based on
several factors including the analysis of buffer functions needed for protecting and
restoring shoreline ecological function (as presented in the Shoreline Inventory and
Characterization Report) and the need to allow space for bank stability and for protecting
human life and structures from damage from high flows, erosion and bank failures.
Safety of residents and People who work in buildings along the shoreline has become,
even more important in recent nears due to the increase in stormwater entering the river
from increasing impervious surfaces throughout the watershed and the regent Problems
with the Howard Hanson Dam, which Preclude being able to store as much flood water
behind the dam in the winter until the dam is repaired, and the freciuencv and
intensity of flows during high rain events. These higher and more freouent flows will Put
more stress on over steepened banks all along the river, increasing the Possibility of bank
erosion, levee failures, and bank failures. Thus, ensuririg°lhat new structures are not built
too close to the river's edge is crucial to avoid loss of
Staff also reviewed the rationale for the buffer widths established for watercourses under
TMC 18.45, the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, as well as buffer widths recommended by
resource agencies, such as the State Department.-of Fish and Wildlife. Department of
Natural Resources and the recent Biological: Opinion issued by National Marine Fisheries
Service in relation to FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program,.
The final buffer widths. proposed by staff for each shoreline environment attempted to
balance shoreline ecological ;function needs, human life and property protection needs
(including future levee :repairlreconstruction) existing land use patterns, and state
and federal agency policies
The following:<nfprmation suninarizes the analysis carried out and the rationale used for
determining buffer widths.
A. Buffer Functions Supporting Shoreline Ecological Resources, Especially
Salmonids
Buffers play an important role in the health of any watercourse and an even more
important role when considering the health of salmonids in the Green/Duwamish River
system. The key buffer functions for the river are summarized below.
The Shoreline Management Act and the Department of Ecology regulations require
evaluation of ecological functions and that local SMPs ensure that the policies and
regulations do not cause any net loss of shoreline ecological function. In addition, the
CL 55 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
1 P \Shoreline\- \Council Review Document �efion =RE' Rcc:. ,...andecICouncil Recommended SMP -Clean Copy
195
196
SMP must identify mechanisms for restoration of lost ecological functions.
The crucial issue for the Green/Duwamish River is the presence of salmonids that are on
the Endangered Species list. To protect and restore ecological functions related to these
species it is important to provide for the installation of native vegetation along the
shoreline. Such vegetation provides shade for improving temperature conditions in the
river and habitat for insects on which fish prey. Trees along the shoreline also provide a
source of large woody debris (tree trunks, root wads, limbs, etc. that fall into the water),
which in turn provides pooling and areas of shelter for fish and other animals. In order to
allow for planting of native vegetation, banks need to be set back to allow for less steer
and more stable (reauirinl7 less armoring) more natural slopes, so that they can be
planted. The Corps of Engineers does not allow planting on levees unless they are set
back to an average slope of 2.5:1 and constructed with a mid -slope bench. Plantings are
allowed on the mid -slope bench and this is crucial for improving shoreline ecological
functions that are needed in the river.
The buffer widths needed to achieve a particular buffer function vary widely by function
type from as little as 16 feet for large woody debris recruitment (assuming the buffer has
large trees) to over 400 feet for sediment removal. The Washington State Department of
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommends a riparian buffer width of 250 feet for
shorelines of statewide significance (this applies to the Green/Duwamish River). The
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) recommends a riparian buffer of
200 feet for Class 1 Waters (the Green/Duwamish River is a Class 1 Water under the
WDNR classification scheme). The National Marine Fisheries Service (responsible at the
federal level for overseeing protection of endangered salmonids under the Endangered
Species Act) has recommended a buffer of -1-250 feet in mapped floodplain areas to allow
for protection of shoreline functions that support salmonids. Tukwila's Sensitive Areas
Ordinance (TMC 18.45) has established a 100 foot buffer for Type 2 watercourses in the
city (those that bear salmonid species).
The key buffer functions for the river are summarized below.
1. Maintenance of Water Quality
Salmonid fish require water that is both colder and has lower nutrient levels
than many other types of fish. Vegetated shoreline buffers contribute to
improving water quality as described below.
a. Water Temperature: The general range of temperatures required to
support healthy salmonid populations is generally between 39 degrees
and 63 degrees. Riparian vegetation, particularly forested areas can
Endanaered Species Act Section 7 Consultation. Final Bioloaical Opinion and Magnuson Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation. Implementation of the
Flood Insurance Program in the State of Washington. Phase One Document.. Puget Sound Region,
September. 2008.
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
56 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
affect water temperature by providing shade to reduce exposure to the
sun and regulate high ambient air temperatures.
b. Dissolved Oxygen: dissolved oxygen is one of the most influential
water quality parameters for aquatic life, including salmonid fish. The
most significant factor affecting dissolved oxygen levels is water
temperature cooler streams maintain higher levels of oxygen than
warmer waters.
c. Metals and pollutants: Common pollutants found in streams,
particularly in urban areas, are excessive nutrients (such as
phosphorous and nitrogen), pesticides, bacteria and miscellaneous
contaminants such as PCBs and heavy metals. Impervious surfaces
collect and concentrate pollutants from different sources and deliver
these materials to streams during storm events. The concentration of
pollutants increases in direct proportion to the total amount of
impervious area. Undisturbed or well vegetated riparian buffer areas
can retain sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens and other
pollutants, protecting water quality in streams. Elevated nitrogen and
phosphorus levels in runoff are a typical problem in urban watersheds
and can lead to increased in- stream plant growth, which results in
excess decaying plant material that consumes oxygen in streams and
reduces aquatic habitat quality.
2. Contributing to in- stream structural diversity
a. Large woody debris (LWD) refers to limbs and tree trunks that
naturally fall into the stream bed from a vegetated buffer. LWD serves
many functions in watercourses. LWD adds roughness to stream
channels, which in turn slows water velocities and traps sediments.
Sources of LWD in urban settings are limited where stream corridors
have been cleared of vegetation and developed and channel movement
limited due to revetments and levees. Under natural conditions, the
normal movement of the stream channel, undercutting of banks, wind
throw, and flood events are all methods of LWD recruitment to a
stream channel.
b. LWD also contributes to the formation of pools in river channels that
provide important habitat for salmonids. Adult salmonids require
pools with sufficient depth and cover to protect them from predators
during spawning migration. Adult salmon often hold to pools during
daylight, moving upstream from pool to pool at night.
3. Providing Biotic Input of Insects and Organic Matter
a. Vegetated buffers provide foods for salmonids and other fish, because
insects fall into the water from overhanging vegetation.
b. Leaves and other organic matter falling into stream provide food and
C 57 11/19/2009 12:55.00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
197
198
nutrients for many species of aquatic insects which in turn provide
forage for fish.
B. Bank Stability and Protection of Human Lives and Structures
The main period of runoff and major flood events on the Green River is from November
through February. The lower Green and Duwamish levees and revetments form a nearly
continuous bank protection and flood containment system. Farmers originally
constructed many of these levees and revetments as the protection to the agricultural
lands of the area and this original material is still in place as the structural core. In
particular, these protection facilities typically have over steepened banks, areas with
inadequate rock buttressing at the toe, and lack habitat enhancing features such as
overhanging vegetation or in -water large woody debris. Because of these design and
construction shortcomings, the protection to river banks has not always performed as
intended. Instead, there have been bank failures that have threatened structures and
infrastructure; erosion of banks making them even steeper; and damage to levees that
has required a series of repair projects.
The damage to the levee system in recent storm events lead to discussions among the
City, US Army Corps of Engineers and the King County Flood Control District to
determine the best levee profile to use to prevent the recurring problem of continued
levee repairs. The criteria used to determine the best profile were:
Public Safety;
Maintaining levee certification;
Solutions that eliminate or correct factors that have caused or contributed to the
need for the levee repair;
Levee maintenance needs; and
Environmental considerations.
To overcome the existing problems and to reduce future maintenance and repair costs, the
Corps chose to lessen the overall slope to a stable grade. This selected method is
consistent with recommendations set forth in the Corps of Engineers' Manual for Design
and Construction of Levees (EM 1110 -2 -1913) for slope stability. It also is consistent
with the levee rehabilitation project constructed on the nearby Briscoe School levee that
has proven to be a very effective solution to scour problems the design slows the river
down, provides additional flood storage and allows a vegetated mid -slope bench for
habitat improvements. The Corps indicated that this type of profile would become the
template for future levee repair and construction projects. King County also plans to use
the 2.5:1 overall slope with a mid -slope bench incorporated for planting vegetation for its
future levee repairs. This profile was used to repair two areas of the federally- certified
levee in Tukwila the Lilv Point project and the Segale project. which were about 2,000
linear feet of repairs. Costs of these repairs were around $7 million dollars. not including
anv costs of land acauisition for laving back the levees. It is expected that the use of this
levee design will reduce the need to continually repair the levee in those areas, thus
CL 58 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
avoidine such high expenditures in the future and saving money in the long run.
The profile discussed above is the Tukwila minimum profile for levee reconstruction as
illustrated in Figure 2 below:
—18'�
—10'— 2 2.
tf�'?r I —7 1
F fi r. r n Y r e- -J C
Maintenance Easement
Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas -Width Will Vary
Reconfigured Levee
Minimum Levee Profile
Reconfigured Slope averages 2.5:1 with bench
Not To Scale
Vegetated Bench
Willows
1.5 Existing Levee
Ordinary High
Water Mark
OHWM
Figure 2. Minimum Levee Profile
Because of the similarities in the soil conditions and taking into consideration the tidal
influence, the Green/Duwamish River can be divided into three areas South of I -405;
North of I -405; and areas around residential neighborhoods. Looking at the slope
geometry and the difference in height between the ordinary high water mark and the 100
year flood elevation for these three areas, it was found that 125 -feet of setback distance
(buffer) is needed to accommodate the "lay back" of the levee in the area south of I -405
and around Fort Dent Park. During high flow events_ the water surface can be as much
as 16 feet above the OHWM in these areas. At locations further downriver, the water,
surface elevation difference is much less pronounced due to the wider channel and
proximity to Pueet Sound. For areas without levees, north of I -405 and those areas south
of 1 -405 on the east side of the river (right bank), a 100 -foot setback distance is required
to accommodate the slopes needed for bank stability. Within residential neighborhoods,
a minimum 50 -foot setback is justified because of the less intense land use associated
with single family home construction and the estimated amount of space needed to
achieve the natural allele of repose for a more stable slope.
Even though the above explanation for determining appropriate buffer distance used
2 The 125 foot distance includes a 2.5.1 overall ;lope with a amid -slope bench Incorporated. 20 feet at the
toll of the levee and 10 feet on the back side of the levee for access and ins0ection.
CL 59 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W•\Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
199
200
levee design as the example, the same problems exist where there are no levees. The
river makes no distinction between an over steepened slope associated with a levee or a
riverbank. Scouring within the river will cause sloughing and slope stability will be
weakened, potentially resulting in the loss of structures. In fact, the non leveed riverbank
can be more prone to these problems since they tend to be steeper and consist mainly of
sand and silt. This makes them susceptible to erosion. Because the non leveed
riverbanks are for the most part privately owned, they are not actively monitored for
damage by the City or County.
Appendix D is a chart that presents a Net Loss Analysis and identifies risks to ecosystem
restore some ecosystem functions.
C. Conclusions
The determination of buffer widths was based on two important criteria: the need to
achieve bank stability and protect structures along the shoreline from damage due to
erosion and bank failures and to protect and enhance shoreline ecological function.
Applying the 200 to 250 foot buffer widths recommended by WDFW and WDNR would
not be practical given the developed nature of the shoreline. It was also felt that a buffer
less than that already established for Type 2 Watercourses under the City's SAO would
not be sufficiently protective of shoreline functions, unless those functions were
enhanced through various restoration options. Therefore, 100 feet was established as the
starting point for considering buffer widths from the standpoint of shoreline ecological
function in each of the Shoreline Environments. Between 100 and 125 feet was the
starting point for buffer widths from the standpoint of bank stability and property
protection.
Thus buffers were established taking into account (as explained in the following sections)
the characteristics of each Shoreline Environment, needs for protection/restoration of
shoreline ecological functions, and needs for stable banks and human life and property
protection.
7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment
A. Designation Criteria: All properties zoned for single family use from the ordinary
high water mark landward two- hundred (200) feet. In addition, those areas zoned for
single family use but developed for public recreation or open space within 200 feet of the
shoreline shall also be designated Shoreline Residential, except Fort Dent Park.
B. Purpose of Environment and Establishment of River Buffer: The purpose of the
Shoreline Residential Environment is to accommodate urban density residential
development, appurtenant structures, public access and recreational activities. However,
CL 60 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction in the Shoreline Residential Environment there
will be a protective buffer along the river, where development will be limited to protect
shoreline function.
The purpose of the river buffer in the shoreline residential environment is to:
Ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions;
Help protect water quality and habitat function by limiting allowed uses;
Protect existing and new development from high river flows by ensuring
sufficient setback of structures;
Promote restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment; and
Allow room for reconstructing over steepened river banks to achieve a more
stable slope and more natural shoreline bank conditions and avoid the need for
shoreline armoring.
C. Analysis of Development Character of Residential Shoreline
An analysis was prepared that looked at the residential properties along the shoreline and
identified the number of parcels with structures within 50 feet and 100 feet of the
OHWM. This analysis showed the following:
Number Number
ZONE of parcels of vacant
within 50 parcels
feet of within 50
OHWM feet
LDR I 135 12
Number of
parcels with
structures
within 50
feet/%
67/49%
Number Number
of parcels of vacant
within 100 parcels
feet of within 100
OHWM feet
Number of
parcels with
structures
within 100
feet
201 25 1 165/82%
As can be seen from the chart above, almost half of the parcels in the residential
neighborhoods have a structure within 50 feet of the OHWM a direct result of the
current King County regulations. To apply a buffer width that is consistent with the
City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) of 100 feet would create a situation where 82%
of the properties along the river would have nonconforming structures as they relate to
the proposed shoreline buffer.
Expansion of single family pr€- e?-istinenonconformin structures in the proposed SMP
buffer would be governed by Section 14.56 of the SMP, which permits an expansion of
only 50% of the square footage of the current area that intrudes into the buffer and only
along the ground floor of the structure. For example, if 250 square feet of a building
extended into the proposed buffer, the ground floor could be expanded a maximum of
125 feet in total area along the existing building line.
CL 61 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
201
202
A buffer of 100 feet was considered for the shoreline residential properties, with the
potential of a property owner applying for a buffer reduction of 50 however, under the
Shoreline Management Act, this would have required an application for a shoreline
variance for each requested buffer reduction, a process that requires review and approval
both at the local and state level (Ecology must review and approve the variance in
addition to the City of Tukwila). This did not seem a reasonable process to require of so
many property owners. Since the proposed minimum buffer is the maximum reduction
b
icy to achieve mitigation for the lower
buffer width.
The river bank in the Shoreline Residential Environment is typically in a modified and
degraded state but generally not stabilized with revetments, dikes or levees. Based on an
analysis of the river elevations and existing banks, a 50 foot minimum buffer in the
Shoreline Residential Environment would allow room to achieve a 2.5:1 bank slope with
an additional 20 foot setback from the top of the slope a distance that will allow for
bank stability and in -turn, protection of new structures from high flows, and bank
failures. A schematic of the shoreline jurisdiction showing the buffer is provided in
Figure 3.
200'
Shoreline Residential
Environment 1 50'
min
Buffer
2O H
Ordinary High Water Mark
Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer
The proposed buffer area for the Shoreline Residential Environment will allow for
removal of invasive plants, planting of native vegetation in the riparian zone and
inclusion of other features to improve shoreline habitat. It also will prevent the
placement of any structures in an area that could potentially prove unstable. In the event
of bank erosion or slope failures, the buffer will provide sufficient space for re- sloping
the bank to a more stable 2.5:1 slope, either through bank stabilization projects or through
1 natural bank failures that result in the natural angle of repose (2.5:1 or areater).
CL 62 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment
A. Designation Criteria: This environment will be designated in the area between the
Ordinary High Water Mark and 200 feet landward as regulated under the Shoreline
Management Act and applied to all shorelines of the river except the Shoreline
Residential Environment and the High Intensity Environment. The Urban Conservancy
Environment areas are currently developed with dense urban multifamily, commercial,
industrial and/or transportation uses or are designated for such uses in the proposed south
annexation area. This environment begins at the southern end of the Turning Basin and
includes portions of the river where levees and revetments generally have been
constructed and where the river is not navigable to large water craft. Uses will be
restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective
buffer.
B. Purpose of Environment
The purpose of the Urban Conservancy Environment is to protect ecological functions
where they exist in urban and developed settings, and restore ecological functions where
they have been previously degraded, while allowing a variety of compatible uses.
C. Establishment of River Buffers
The Urban Conservancy This environment will have two different buffers, depending on
the location along the river and whether or not the shoreline has a flood control levee.
The purpose of Urban Conservancy River Buffers is to:
Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space,
flood plain and other sensitive lands in the developed urban settings;
Ensure no net loss of shoreline function when new development or re-
development is proposed;
Provide opportunities for restoration and public access;
Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of
property, while accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting
restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment, wherever
possible;
Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and
Protect existing and new development from high river flows.
Buffer in Non -Levee Areas:
A buffer width of 100 feet is established for the Urban Conservancy Environment for all
non residential areas without levees. This buffer width is consistent with that established
by the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance for Type 2 streams that support salmonid use,
which is based on Best Available Science. In addition, as noted above, looking at the
slope geometry and the difference in height between the ordinary high water mark and
CL 63 11/19/2009 12:55 00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
203
204
the 100 -year flood elevation for these areas, it was found that a 100 -foot setback distance
is required to accommodate the slopes needed for bank stability.
The buffer width of 100 feet allows enough room to reconfigure the river bank to achieve
a slope of 2.5:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope and allow
for some restoration and improvement of shoreline function through the installation of
native plants and other habitat features. The actual amount of area needed to achieve a
2.5:1 slope may be less than 100 feet, depending on the character of the river bank and
can only be determined on a site -by -site basis.
As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the river bank to
2.5:1, provide a 20 foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the river
bank and the 20 foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation
Protection and Landscaping Section. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to
the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long -term
adverse impacts to shoreline ecosystem functionsthc river. In all cases a buffer
enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the
reduction. The plan must include removal of invasive plants, and plantings using a
variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and
provides additional protection for the watercourse functions.
In areas of the river where this condition currently exists or where the property owner has
constructed these improvements, the buffer width will be the actual distance as measured
from the ordinary high water mark to the top of the bank plus 20 feet.
The shoreline jurisdiction and buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment are
depicted in the schematic in Figures 4 and 5 below.
Allow room to
reconfigure
river bank to
2.5:1 slope
200' al
Urban Conservancy Environment
100'
Ordinary High Water Mark
q
Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban
Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees
Buffer in Levee Areas:
CL 64 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
For properties located behind the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Certified 205 levee
and County constructed levees, the buffer will extend 125 feet landward from the
ordinary high water mark, determined at the time of development or redevelopment of the
site or when levee replacement or repair is programmed. This buffer width is the
maximum needed to reconfigure the river bank to the minimum levee profile and to
achieve an overall slope of 2.5:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable
slope. The establishment of the 2.5:1 slope along the Corps certified 205 levee in the
Tukwila Urban Center will allow for incorporating a mid -slope bench that can be planted
with vegetation to improve river habitat. The mid -slope bench also will allow access for
maintenance equipment, when needed. As the Corps of Engineers does not permit
planting on the levee prism, the only way to improve habitat along the 205 levee portion
of the river is to create a bench that can be vegetated that will not create a hazard for the
stability of the levee. A ten foot easement necessary to allow access for levee inspection
is required on the landward side of the levee at the toe. As -meted earlier, Tthe ACOE has
indicated the 2.5:1 levee profile with the mid -slope bench will be the template for future
levee repairs.
As an alternative to the 125 foot buffer for leveed areas, a property owner may construct
levee or riverbank improvements that meet the Ailey Corps of Engineers, King County
Flood Control District, and City of Tukwila minimum levee standards profile. These
standards at a minimum shall include an overall slope of 2.5:1 from the toe of the levee to
the riverward edge of the crown, a 15 foot mid slope bench, 2018' access across the top
of the levee, a 2:1 back slope, and an additional 10 foot no -build area measured from the
landward toe for inspection and repairs. In instances where an existing building that has
not lost its nonconforming status prevents the complete construction of the minimum
levee profile, achieving an overall slope of 2.5:1 may be difficult however_ the slope
should be as close to 2.5:1 as possible.
A floodwall is not the preferred back slope profile for a Levee and may be substituted for
all or a portion of the back slope only where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage
to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this Master Program and
which has not lost its nonconforming status and to preserve access needed for building
functionality. The floodwall shall be designed to be the minimum necessary to provide
10' (ten foot) clearance between the levee and the building or the minimum necessary to
preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety
standards, provided that minor variations of the profile may be allowed in order to
A floodwall may also be used, and other minor
variations made, where necessary to avoid encroachment on a railroad easement.
In areas of the river where the this condition minimum levee profile currently exists or
where the property owner or a government agency has constructed the minimum profile se
improvements, the setbackbuffer will be reduced to the actual distance as measured from
the ordinary high water mark to the landward toe of the levee or face of a pre—existing
floodwall, plus 10 feet. In the event that the owner provides the City and /or applicable
CL
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
65 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
205
206
agency with a 10 -foot levee maintenance easement measured landward from the
landward toe of the levee or levee wall (which easement prohibits the construction of any
structures and allows the City and /or applicable agency to access the area to inspect the
levee), then the buffer shall be reduced to the landward toe of the levee, or landward edge
of the levee floodwall, as the case may be.
In cases where fill is placed along the back slope of the levee. the shoreline buffer may be
further reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope. The area
between the landward edge of the buffer and a point ten (10) feet landward of the
underground levee toe shall be covered by an easement prohibiting the construction of
any structures and allowing the City and /or applicable agency to access the area to
inspect the levee and/or floodwall and make any necessary repairs. See Figure 5 below.
Buffer that could
Be Replaced
by Easements
New Ground
Plane..
Figure 5.
Slope
Fill
N
10') 2
nspe on 1
Buffer Reduction
cZ
/t_
Proposed Levee
18' Top Width
l ccs 2
I1 =_i i=
,(t- _;11—i 1... �r= _lil_11T� iii- ifi- 71_.ur 1
hi-- .1.1 ni== iil -`>11- ji j =1�
i_ f (11 1 1_ID__;T»l �ii_r d. =:Iii..:.1r_
c:
Landward 'fit- i I
i
�',;T1il7. I
Levee Toe
Buffer Reduction with Backfill Option
Not To Scale
Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placing of Fill on Levee Back
CL 66 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
7.8 Hiih Intensity Environment
200'
Urban Conservancy Environment
l=evee_
125'
Ordinary High Water Mark
J
Figure 6. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban
Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees
A. Designation Criteria: The High Intensity Shoreline Environment area is currently
developed with high intensity urban commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or
is designated for such uses in the proposed north annexation area. This environment
begins at the Ordinary High Water Mark and extends landward 200 feet and is located
from the southern edge of the Turning Basin north to the City limits and includes the
North PAA. This Environment is generally located along portions of the Duwamish
River that are navigable to large watercraft. Uses will be restricted immediately adjacent
to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer.
The transition zone is located partly in the High Intensity Environment. The transition
zone is the location where freshwater from a river and saltwater from the marine salt
wedge mix creating brackish conditions. Often it is also where the river widens, stream
velocities decrease and estuarine mudflats begin to appear. Habitat associated with the
transition zone is particularlycritically important for juvenile Chinook and chum smolts
making the transition to salt water. The transition zone moves upstream and downstream
in response to the combination of stream flow and tidal elevations and as a result varies
over a twenty -four hour period and seasonally. The transition zone is an extremely
important crucial habitat for sahnonids.
B. Purpose of Environment and Establishment of River Buffer The purpose of the
Urban High Intensity Environment is to provide for high intensity, commercial,
transportation and industrial uses and to promote water dependent and water oriented
uses while protecting existing shoreline ecological functions and restoring ecological
functions in areas that have been previously degraded.
CL 67 11/19/2009 12:55 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
207
208
The purposes of the High Intensity River Buffer is to:
Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space,
flood plain and other sensitive lands in the developed urban settings;
Ensure no net loss of shoreline function when new development or re-
development occurs;
Provide opportunities for shoreline restoration and public access;
Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of
property, while accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting
restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment, wherever
possible;
Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and
Protect existing and new development from high river flows.
A buffer of 100 feet is established, which allows enough room to reconfigure the river
bank to achieve a slope of 3:1, (starting at the OHWM rather than the toe) the "angle of
repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope and allow for some restoration and
improvement of shoreline function through the installation of native plants and other
habitat features. The actual amount of area needed to achieve a 3:1 slope may be less
than 100 feet, depending on the character of the river bank and can only be determined on
a site -by -site basis.
Allow room to
reconfigure
river bank to
3:1 slope
200'
High Intensity Environment
I
100'
Ordinary High Water Mark
1
1
Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for
the High Intensity Environment
As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the river bank to a
maximum -3:1, provide a 20 foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both
the river bank and the 20 foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the
Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. The property owner must also
demonstrate that this approach will not result in a loss of ecological functions of the
shoreline. In areas of the river where this condition currently exists or where the property
CL 68 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
owner has constructed these improvements, the buffer width will be the actual distance as
measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark to the top of the bank plus 20 feet.
In any shoreline environment where an existing improved street or road runs parallel to
the river through the buffer, the buffer would end on the river side of the street or road.
CL 69 11/19/2009 12:55.00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
209
210
CL 70 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS
This section specifies the uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use,
Unclassified Use or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment. Also
included are special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These
regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment
designation adopted with this SMP and will be codified in TMC 18.44. Additional
regulations and performance standards that apply to all Shoreline Environments are
included in Sections 9 -14 of this SMP. These will also be codified in TMC 18.44.
8.1 General Use Regulations
A. All shoreline uses shall meet the requirements listed below.
B. The first priority for City -owned property within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be
reserved for water- dependent uses including but not limited to habitat restoration,
followed by water enjoyment uses, public access, passive recreation, passive open space
uses, or public educational purposes.
C. No hazardous waste handling, processing or storage is allowed within the SMA
shoreline jurisdiction, unless incidental to a use allowed in the designated shoreline
environment and adequate controls are in place to prevent any releases to the
shoreline /river.
D. Overwater structures, shall not cause a net loss of ecological function, interfere with
navigation or flood management, or present potential hazards to downstream properties
or facilities. They shall comply with the standards in the Overwater Structures Section.
E. Parking as a primary use is not permitted, except for existing Park and Ride lots,
where adequate stormwater collection and treatment is in place to protect water quality.
Parking is permitted only as an accessory to a permitted, conditional or unclassified use
in the shoreline jurisdiction.
F. All development, activities or uses unless it is an approved over water, flood
management structure, or shoreline restoration project shall be prohibited waterward of
the OHWM.
8.2 Shoreline Residential Environment -Uses
A. Shoreline Residential Buffer Permitted Uses
The Shoreline Residential River Buffer shall consist of the area identified in the
Shoreline Environment Designation Section of the SMP and the uses shall meet the
CL 71 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
211
212
purposes and criteria established therein.
1. Permitted Uses: No uses or structures are permitted in the Shoreline
Residential Buffer except for the following:
a. Shoreline Restoration Projects;
b. Over -water structures subject to the standards in the Over -water
Structures section associated with water dependent uses, public access,
recreation, flood control or channel management. Private, single
residence piers for the sole use of the property owner shall not be
considered an outright use on the shoreline. A dock may be allowed
when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the
following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or
feasible:
1). commercial or marina moorage;
2). floating moorage buoys;
3). joint use moorage pier /dock.
c. Public parks, recreation and open space;
d. Public pedestrian bridges
e. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails;
f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic
shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height or 25
square feet in area or block views to the shoreline from adjacent
properties;
g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code;
h. Maintenance or redevelopment of levees for flood control purposes,
provided a mid -slope vegetated bench and native plantings along the
toe of the levee are incorporated into any redeveloped levee wherever
feasible;
i. Vehicle bridges, only if connecting public rights -of -way;
j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution,
collection, transmission or disposal of refuse;
k. Fire lanes when co- located with levee maintenance roads;
1. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the
Shoreline Stabilization section of this SMP.
m. Water dependent uses and their structures, as long as there is no net
loss of shoreline ecological function;
n. Fences, provided the maximum height of a fence along the shoreline is
four feet and the fence does not extend waterward beyond the top of
the bank; chain link fences must by vinyl coated.
o. Existing essential streets, roads and rights of way may be maintained
or improved;
p. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use.
a. Support facilities for above or below around utilities or pollution
control, such as runoff ponds. filter systems. detention ponds and
outfall facilities. provided they are located at or below grade and as far
CL 72 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
from the OHWM as technically feasible;
r. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground; and
s. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of
capping contaminated sediments.
t. Patios, or decks not exceeding 18- inches in height, limited to a
maximum 200 square feet and 50% of the width of the river frontage.
Decks or patios must be located landward of the top of the bank and be
constructed to be pervious and of environmentally friendly materials.
2. Conditional Uses: Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional
Use in the Shoreline Residential buffer subject to the requirements,
procedures and conditions established by this proQramTMC 18.62 and
shall be reviewed through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit:
a. Dredging activities when in compliance with all federal and state
regulations, when necessary for navigation or remediation of
contaminated sediments.
b. Dredging for navigational purposes is permitted where necessary for
assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational
uses and then only when significant ecological impacts are minimized
and when mitigation is provided. Maintenance dredging of established
navigation channels and basins is restricted to maintaining previously
dredged and /or existing authorized location, depth and width.
Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is
prohibited.
c. New private vehicle bridges.
Unclassified US33:
re a
conditions established by TMC 18.6'1: Mass transit facilitiesinvited to river
crossing structures.
CL 73 11/19/2009 12 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
213
214
B. Shoreline Residential Environment Uses
The Shoreline Residential Environment shall consist of the remaining area within the 200
foot shoreline jurisdiction that is not within the Shoreline Residential River Buffer. Uses
shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Shoreline Residential Development Zone as
established in the Shoreline Environment Designation section.
1. Permitted Uses: The Shoreline Residential Environment shall contain
residential, recreational and limited commercial uses and accessory uses as
allowed in the underlying zoning district. In addition, the Shoreline
Residential Environment shall allow the following uses:
a. All uses permitted in the Shoreline Residential River Buffer;
b. For non residential uses, parking/loading and storage facilities located
to the most upland portion of the property and adequately screened
and/or landscaped in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and
Landscaping section;
c. Railroad tracks; and
d. Public or private roads.
2. Conditional uses: All uses listed as conditional uses in the Shoreline Use
Table underlying zone may be allowed subject to the requirements,
procedures and conditions established by this pros? ram. TMC 18.62. A
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is required.
r Unclassifie Useo: All uses listed as Unclassifie
may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by
a Shoreline Unclassified Use Permit.
1
8.3 Urban Conservancy Environment Uses
The Urban Conservancy Environment shall consist of the areas identified in the Shoreline
Environment Designations sections of this SMP. Uses shall meet the purposes and
criteria of the Urban Conservancy Environment established therein.
A. Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer Uses
1. Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted in the Urban Conservancy
River Buffer:
a. Shoreline Restoration Projects.
b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over
water Structures Section that are associated with water dependent
uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or
ecological restoration;
c. Public parks, recreation and open space
CL 74 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
d. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails;
e. Public pedestrian bridges;
f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic
shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and
25 square feet in area and views of the shoreline are not blocked from
adj acent properties;
g. Signs confoiiiiing to the Sign Code;
h. Maintenance or redevelopment of levees for flood control purposes,
provided that any redevelopment of a levee shall incorporate a mid
slope vegetated bench wherever feasible;
i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of-
way; existing public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or
replaced.
j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution,
collection, transmission or disposal of refuse;
k. Levee maintenance roads;
1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the
height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and
enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping
purposes.
m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the
Shoreline Stabilization Section.
n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights of way may be maintained
or improved.
o. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted
by the underlying zoning district;
p. Regional detention facilities that meet the Citv's Infrastructure Design
and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such
as ponds, Dining, filter systems and outfalls.
prq.Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control,
such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall
facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the
OHWM as technically feasible;
q-r. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use.
E}-s. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground.
q-t. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of
capping contaminated sediments.
2. Conditional Uses: Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in
the Shoreline Urban Conservancy Environment buffer subject to the
requirements, procedures and conditions established by this program: TMC
a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient
accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when
CL 75
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
11/19/2009 12:55 PM
215
216
Shoreline Urban Conservancy Environment buffer subject to the requirements,
procedures and conditions established by TMC 18.. ias, limited to
river crossing structures only. A Shoreline Unclassified Use Permit shall be required.
B. Urban Conservancy Environment Uses
1. Permitted Uses: All uses permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment
Buffer and/or the underlying zoning district may be allowed.
2. Conditional Uses: All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone
Shoreline Use Table may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures
and conditions of this nroaram. established by TMC 18.61. A Shoreline
Conditional Use Permit shall be required.
Unclassified Usaa:
be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC
classified Use Pcrrnit shall be required.
significant ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is
provided;
b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation
is provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining
fill material is prohibited. Dredging activities must comply with all
federal and state regulations.
c. New private vehicle bridges.
8.4 High Intensity Environment Uses
The High Intensity Environment Buffer shall consist of the area identified in the Shoreline
Environment Designations section. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of established
therein.
1 A. High Intensity Environment Buffer Uses
1. Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted in the High Intensity River
Buffer:
a. Shoreline Restoration Projects.
b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over
water Structures Section that are associated with water dependent
uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or
ecological restoration;
c. Public parks, recreation and open space;
d. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails;
CL 76 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
e. Public pedestrian bridges;
f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic
shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and
25 square feet in area and no views of the shoreline are blocked from
adjacent properties;
g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code;
h. Maintenance or redevelopment of levees for flood control purposes,
provided that any redevelopment of a levee shall incorporate a
vegetated bench wherever feasible;
i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of-
way; existing public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or
replaced.
j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution,
collection, transmission or disposal of refuse;
k. Levee maintenance roads;
1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the
height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and
enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping
purposes.
m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the
Shoreline Stabilization section of this SMP.
n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights of way may be maintained
or improved.
o. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted
by the underlying zoning district;
p. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design
and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such
as ponds. piping. filter systems and outfalls.
g Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control,
such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall
facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the
OHWM as technically feasible;
p_:r. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use.
r7s. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground.
jt. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of
capping contaminated sediments.
2. Conditional Uses: Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in
the Shoreline High Intensity Environment buffer subject to the requirements,
procedures and conditions of this program. established by TMC 18.62. A
a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient
accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when
significant ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is
CL 77 11/19/2009 12.5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Docu nent \Council SMP
217
218
provided;
b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation
is provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining
fill material is prohibited. Dredging activities must comply with all
federal and state regulations.
c. New private vehicle bridges.
requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC 18.61: Mass
1 B. Shoreline High Intensity Environment Uses
The Shoreline High Intensity Environment shall consist of the remaining area within the 200
foot shoreline jurisdiction that is not within the Shoreline High Intensity Environment
Buffer area. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Shoreline Environment
Designations section.
1. Permitted Uses: All uses permitted in the High Intensity Environment Buffer
and/or the underlying zoning district may be allowed.
2. Conditional Uses: All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the Shoreline Use
Table underlying zone may be allowed subject to the requirements,
procedures and conditions established by this nroe. TMC 18.61. A
Shoreline Conditional Use Pcrmit shall be required.
may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures end conditions
established by TMC 18.61. A Shoreline Unclassified Use Pen shall be
required.
CL 78 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
9. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
9.1 Applicability_
The development standards of this chapter apply to work that meets the definition of
substantial development except for vegetation removal per section 9.10, which applies to
all shoreline development. The term "substantial development" applies to nonconforming.
pre existing, new or re- development.
Pre existing Nonconforming uses, structures, parking lots and landscape areas, will be
governed by the standards in Section 14.56, Pre existing Nonconforming Development.
9.2 Shoreline Residential Development Standards
A shoreline substantial development permit is not required for construction within the
Shoreline Residential Environment by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single
family residence for his/her own use or for the use of a family member. Such
construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to this Master
Program and the Shoreline Management Act. Short subdivisions and subdivisions are not
exempt from obtaining a shoreline substantial development permit.
A. Shoreline Residential Environment Standards
Permitted uses and approved Conditional
Residential Environment are subject to the following:
pal Code) shall apply.
Uses in the Shoreline
21 .New development and uses must be sited so as to allow natural bank
inclination of 2.5:1 slope. A river bank analysis may be required as part of
any development proposal.
32.Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc., shall be suitably screened with native
vegetation per the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping
section;
43.New shoreline stabilization, repair of existing stabilization, or modifications
to the riverbank must comply with the standards in the Shoreline Stabilization
section.
5- :4.Short plats of 5 -9 lots or formal subdivisions must be designed to provide
public access to the river in accordance with the Public Access Section.
Signage is required to identify the public access point(s).
CL 79 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
219
220
6- 5.Parking facilities associated with single family residential development or
public recreational facilities are subject to the specific performance standards
set forth in the Off Street Parking section.
6. Fences, freestanding walls or other structures normally accessory to
residences must not block views of the river from adjacent residences or
extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain link fencing must be
vinyl coated.
7. Recreational structures permitted in the buffer must provide buffer mitigation.
8. The outside edge of surface transportation facilities, such as railroad tracks,
streets, or public transit shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the
ordinary high water mark, except where the surface transportation facility is
bridging the river.
9. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water
dependent uses and their structures, the maximum height for structures shall
be as established by the underlying zone.
B. Design Review
Design review is required for non residential development in the Shoreline Residential
Environment.
9.3 Hieh Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development
Standards
A. Standards
The following standards apply in the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy
Environment.
The development standards for the applicable underlying zoning district (Title 18,
Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply.
2 1.A11 new development performed by public agencies, or new multi family,
commercial, or industrial development shall provide public access in
accordance with the standards in the Public Access Section.
2. Development or re- development of properties in areas of the shoreline
armored with revetments or other hard armoring other than levees, or with
non armored river banks must comply with the Vegetation Protection and
CL 80 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
Landscaping Section.
3. Any new shoreline stabilization or repairs to existing stabilization must
comply with Shoreline Stabilization Section.
4. Over -water structures shall be allowed only for water dependent uses and the
size limited to the minimum necessary to support the structure's intended use
and shall result in no net loss to shoreline ecological function. Overwater
structures must comply with the standards in the Overwater Structures
Section.
B. Setbacks and Site Configuration
1. The yard setback adjacent to the river is the buffer width established for the
applicable shoreline environment.
2. A fishing pier, viewing platform or other outdoor feature that provides access
to the shoreline is not required to meet a setback from the OHWM.
C. Height Restrictions
Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water dependent uses
and their structures, the maximum height for structures shall be as follows to preserve
visual access to the shoreline and avoid massing of tall buildings within the shoreline
jurisdiction:
1. 15 feet where located within the River Buffer;
4 2.45 feet between the outside landward edge of the River Buffer and 200' of the
OHWM.
Provided, no permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of more than 35
feet above average grade level on shorelines of the state that will obstruct the view of a
substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines. The Director may approve a
15% increase in height if the protect proponent provides substantial additional restoration
and /or enhancement of the shoreline buffer. beyond what may otherwise be required.
The enhancement and/or restoration is subject to the standards of Section 9.10.
Vegetation Protection and Landscaping. If the required buffer has alreadv been restored,
the proiect proponent may provide a 20% wider buffer which has been restored and /or
enhanced in order to obtain the 15% increase in height. These incentives may not be
combined to achieve a greater than 15% height increase. The enhancement /restoration is
subject to the standards of Section 9.10. Vegetation Protection and Landscaping.
D. Lighting
CL
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
81
Lighting for
11/19/2009 12:55.00 PM
221
222
the site or development shall be designed and located so that:
2,1 .The minimum light levels in parking areas and paths between the building and
street shall be 1 foot candle;
4- 2.Lighting shall be designed to prevent light spillover and glare on adjacent
properties and on the river channel, be directed downward so as to illuminate
only the immediate area; and be shielded to eliminate direct off -site
illumination;
3.The general grounds need not be lighted;
6:4.The lighting is incorporated into a unified landscape and/or site plan.
9.4 Surface Water and Water Quality
The following standards apply to all shoreline development.
A. New surface water systems may not discharge directly into the river or streams
tributary to the river without pre- treatment to reduce pollutants and meet State water
quality standards.
B. Such pre- treatment may consist of biofiltration, oil /water separators, or other methods
approved by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department.
C. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface
runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for storm water detention/infiltration.
D. Stormwater outfalls must be designed so as to cause no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions or adverse impacts where functions are impaired. New stormwater
outfalls or maintenance of existing outfalls must include shoreline restoration as part of
the project.
E. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary
sewer.
F. Solid and liquid wastes and untreated effluents shall not be allowed to enter any
bodies of water or to be discharged onto shorelands.
G. The use of low impact development techniques is required, unless such techniques
conflict with other provisions of the SMP or are shown to not be feasible due to site
conditions.
CL 82 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
9.5 Flood Hazard Reduction
The following standards apply to all shoreline development.
A. New structural flood hazard reduction structures shall be allowed only when it can be
demonstrated by a Riverbank Analysis that:
1. They are necessary to protect existing development;
2. Non structural measures are not feasible; and
3. Impacts to ecological functions and priority species and habitats can be
successfully mitigated so as to assure no net loss.
Flood hazard structures must incorporate appropriate vegetation restoration and
conservation actions consistent with the standards of the Vegetation Protection and
Landscaping Section.
B. Levees, berms and similar flood control structures, whether new or redeveloped, shall
be designed in such a way as to ensure structural stability while incorporating mid -slope
benches planted with native vegetation suitable for wildlife habitat wherever feasible.
Where not feasible to incorporate a mid -slope bench with vegetation, other appropriate
habitat improvements must be provided.
C. Publicly funded structural measures to reduce flood hazards shall improve public access
or dedicate and provide public access unless public access improvements would cause
unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security
problems, or significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated.
D. Rehabilitation or replacement of existing flood control structures, such as levees, with
a primary purpose of containing the 1- percent annual chance flood event, shall be
allowed where it can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis that the existing
structure:
1. Does not provide an appropriate level of protection for surrounding lands; or
2. Does not meet appropriate engineering design standards for stability (e.g.,
over steepened side slopes for existing soil and/or flow conditions); and
3. Repair of the existing structure will not cause or increase significant adverse
ecological impacts to the shoreline.
E. Rehabilitated or replaced flood control structures must achieve a maximum side slope
angle of 2.5:1 (H:V) or if that is not possible, achieve an angle as close to 2.5:1 as
possible. Rehabilitated or replaced structures shall not extend the toe of slope any further
waterward of the OHWM than the existing structure.
F. New structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as levees, berms and similar
flood control structures shall be placed landward of the floodway as determined by the
T.S. t. .best
CL 83
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
223
224
available information.
G. New, redeveloped or replaced structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be
placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas.
H. No commercial, industrial, office or residential development shall be located within a
floodplain without a Flood Control Zone Permit issued by the City. No development
shall be located within a floodway except as otherwise permitted.
9.6 Shoreline Stabilization
The provisions of this section apply to those structures or actions intended to minimize or
prevent erosion of adjacent uplands and/or failure of riverbanks resulting from waves,
tidal fluctuations or river currents. Shoreline stabilization or armoring involves the
placement of erosion resistant materials (e.g., large rocks and boulders, cement, pilings
and/or large woody debris) or the use of bioengineering techniques to reduce or eliminate
erosion of shorelines and risk to human infrastructure. This form of shoreline
stabilization is distinct from flood control structures and flood hazard reduction measures
(such as levees). The Shoreline Armoring Map, Map 54, identifies the location of both
types of river bank modifications. The terms shoreline stabilization, shoreline protection
and shoreline armoring are used interchangeably
A. Shoreline protection shall not be considered an outright permitted use and shall be
permitted only when it has been demonstrated through a Riverbank Analysis and Report
that shoreline protection is necessary for the protection of existing legally established
structures and public improvements.
B. New development and re- development shall be designed and configured on the lot to
avoid the need for new shoreline stabilization. Removal of failing shoreline stabilization
shall be incorporated into re- development design proposals wherever feasible.
C. Replacement of lawfully established, existing bulkheads or revetments are subject to
the following priority system:
1. The first priority for replacement of bulkheads or revetments shall be
landward of the existing bulkhead.
2. The second priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments shall
be to replace in place (at the bulkhead's existing location).
D. When evaluating a proposal against the above priority system, at a minimum the
following criteria shall be considered:
1. Existing topography;
2. Existing development;
3. Location of abutting bulkheads;
CL 84 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
4 Impact to shoreline ecological functions; and,
5. Impact to river hydraulics, potential changes in geomorphology, and to other
areas of the shoreline.
E. Proponents of new or replacement hard shoreline stabilization (e.g. bulkheads or
revetments) must demonstrate through a documented river bank analysis that
bioengineered shoreline protection measures or bioengineering erosion control designs
will not provide adequate upland protection of existing structures or would pose a threat
or risk to adjacent property. The study must also demonstrate that the proposed hard
shoreline stabilization will not adversely affect other infrastructure or adjacent shorelines.
F. Where allowed, shoreline armoring shall be designed, constructed and maintained in
a mariner that does not result in a net loss of ecological function, including fish habitat,
and shall conform to the requirements of the 2004 Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife (or as amended) criteria and guidelines for integrated streambank
protection, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and other regulatory requirements. The hard
shoreline stabilization must be designed and approved by a qualified engineer.
G. Shoreline armoring shall be designed to the minimum size, height, bulk and extent
necessary to remedy the identified hazard.
H. An applicant must demonstrate the following in order to qualify for the RCW
90.58.030(30(e)(iii)(ii) exemption from the requirement to obtain a shoreline substantial
development permit for a proposed single family bulkhead and to insure that the
bulkhead will be consistent with the SMP:
1. Erosion from currents or waves is imminently threatening a legally established
single family detached dwelling unit or one or more appurtenant structures;
and
2, The proposed bulkhead is more consistent with the City's Master Program in
protecting the site and adjoining shorelines and that non structural alternatives
such as slope drainage systems, bioengineering or vegetative growth
stabilization, are not feasible or will not adequately protect a legally
established residence or appurtenant structure; and
3. The proposed bulkhead is located landward of the OHWM or it connects to
adjacent, legally established bulkheads; and
4. The maximum height of the proposed bulkhead is no more than one foot
above the elevation of extreme high water on tidal waters as determined by
the National Ocean Survey published by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
I. Bulkheads or revetments shall be constructed of suitable materials that will serve to
accomplish the desired end with maximum preservation of natural characteristics.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and US Fish
and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington.
CL 85 11/19/2009 12.55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
225
226
Materials with the potential for water quality degradation shall not be used. Design and
construction methods shall consider aesthetics and habitat protection. Automobile
bodies, tires or other junk or waste material that may release undesirable chemicals or
other material shall not be used for shoreline protection.
J. The builder of any bulkhead or revetment shall be financially responsible for
determining the nature and the extent of probable adverse effects on fish and wildlife or
on the property of others caused by his/her construction and shall propose and implement
solutions approved by the City to minimize such effects.
K. When shoreline stabilization is required at a public access site, provision for safe
access to the water shall be incorporated in the design whenever possible.
L. Placement of bank protection material shall occur from the top of the bank and shall
be supervised by the property owner or contractor to ensure material is not dumped
directly onto the bank face.
M. Bank protection material shall be clean and shall be of a sufficient size to prevent its
being washed away by high water flows.
N. When riprap is washed out and presents a hazard to the safety of recreational users of
the river, it shall be removed by the owner of such material.
0. Bank protection associated with bridge construction and maintenance may be
permitted subject to the provisions of the SMP and shall conform to provisions of the
State Hydraulics Code (RCW 77.55) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineer regulations.
9.7 Archaeological, Cultural and Historical Resources
In addition to the requirements of TMC 18.50.110, Archaeological /Paleontological
Information Preservation Requirements, the following regulations apply.
A. All land use permits for projects within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be coordinated
with affected tribes.
B. If the City determines that a site has significant archaeological, natural scientific or
historical value, a substantial development that would pose a threat to the resources of the
site shall not be approved. The City may require that development be postponed in such
tion of public acquisition potential, retrieval and preservation of
Gignificant artifacts andlor development of a mitigation plan.
C. Permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological resources require a site
inspection or evaluation by a professional archaeologist in coordination with affected
Indian tribes. The City may reauire that development be postponed in such areas to allow
investigation of public acauisition potential. retrieval and preservation of significant
artifacts and/or development of a mitigation plan. Areas of known or suspected
archaeological middens shall not be disturbed and shall be fenced and identified during
construction proiects on the site.
D. Developers and property owners shall immediately stop work and notify the City of
CL 86 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
Tukwila. the Washin;ton Department of Archaeolo6v and Historic Preservation and
affected Indian tribes if archaeological resources are uncovered during excavation.
E. In the event that unforeseen factors constituting an emergency, as defined in RCW
90.58.030, necessitate rapid action to retrieve or preserve artifacts or data identified
above, the project may be exempted from any shoreline permit requirements. The City
shall notify the Washington State Department of Ecology, the State Attorney General's
Office and the State Department of Archaeoloav and Historic Preservation Office of such
an exemption in a timely manner
F. Archaeological excavations may be peunitted subject to the provision of the Master
Program.
G. On sites where Identified historical or archaeological resources have been identified
and will be preserved in situ, shall be considered in park, open space and public access
site planning with public access to such areas shall be designed and managed so as to
give maximum protection to the resource and surrounding environment.
H. Interpretive signs of historical and archaeological features shall be provided subject to
the requirements of the Public Access Section when such signage does not compromise
the protection of these features from tampering, damage and /or destruction.
fenced and identified during construction projects on the site.
9.8 Environmental Impact Mitigation.
A. All shoreline development and uses shall occur in a manner that results in no net loss
of shoreline ecological functions through the careful location and design of all allowed
development and uses. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from
allowed development and uses are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated
according to the provisions of this section.
B. To the extent Washington's State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA), chapter
43.21C RCW, is applicable, the analysis of environmental impacts from proposed
shoreline uses or developments shall be conducted consistent with the rules implementing
SEPA (TMC 21.04 and WAC 197 -11).
C. Where required, mitigation measures shall be applied in the following sequence of
steps listed in order of priority.
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action;
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps
to avoid or reduce impacts;
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment;
4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations;
CL 87 11/19/2009 12:55.00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
227
228
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments; and
6. Monitoring the impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate
corrective measures.
D. In determining appropriate mitigation measures applicable to shoreline development,
lower priority measures shall be applied only where higher priority measures are
determined by the City to be infeasible or inapplicable.
E. When mitigation measures are appropriate pursuant to the priority of mitigation
sequencing above, preferential consideration shall be given to measures that replace the
impacted functions directly and in the immediate vicinity of the impact. However, if
mitigation in the immediate vicinity is not scientifically feasible due to problems with
hydrology, soils, waves or other factors, then off -site mitigation within the shoreline
jurisdiction may be allowed if consistent with the Shoreline Restoration Plan. Mitigation
for projects in the Transition Zone must take place in the Transition Zone. In the event
that a site is not available in the Transition Zone to carry out required mitigation. the
nroiect proponent rav contribute funds eauival.ent to the value of the required mitigation
to an existing or future restoration proiect identified in the CIP to be carried out by a
public agency in the Transition Zone.
9.9 Off Street Parking and Loading Reauirements
A. In addition to the parking requirements in TMC 18.56, the following requirements
apply to all development in the shoreline jurisdiction.
B. Any parking, loading, or storage facilities located between the river and any building
must incorporate additional landscaping in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and
Landscaping Section, or berming or other site planning or design techniques to reduce
visual and/or environmental impacts from the parking areas utilizing the following
screening techniques:
1. A solid evergreen screen of trees and shrubs a minimum six -foot in height; or
2. Decorative fence a maximum of six feet high with landscaping. Chain link
fence, where allowed, shall be vinyl coated and landscaped with native
trailing vine or an approved non native vine other than ivy, except where a
security or safety hazard may exist; or
3. Earth berms at a minimum of four feet high, planted with native plants in
accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section.
B. Where a parking area is located in the shoreline jurisdiction and adjacent to a public
access feature, the parking area shall be screened by a vegetative screen or a built
structure that runs the entire length of the parking area adjacent to the amenity. The
landscape screening shall comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping
Section.
CL 88 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
C. Where public access to or along the shoreline exists or is proposed, parking areas
shall provide pedestrian access from the parking area to the shoreline.
D. Parking facilities, loading areas and paved areas shall incorporate low impact
development techniques wherever feasible, adequate storm water retention areas,
oil /water separators and biofiltration swales, or other treatment techniques and shall
comply with the standards and practices formally adopted by the City of Tukwila Public
Works Department.
9.10 Vegetation Protection And Landscaping
A. Purpose, Objectives and Applicability
1. The purpose of this section is to:
a. Regulate the protection of existing trees and native vegetation in the
shoreline jurisdiction;
b. Establish requirements for removal of invasive plants at the time of
development or re- development of sites;
c. Establish requirements for landscaping for new development or re-
development;
d. Establish requirements for the long -term maintenance of native
vegetation to prevent establishment of invasive species and promote
shoreline ecosystem processes.
2. The City's goal is to preserve as many existing trees as possible and increase
the number of native trees, shrubs and other vegetation in the shoreline
because of their importance to shoreline ecosystem functions as listed below:
a. Overhead tree canopy to provide shade for water temperature control;
b. Habitat for birds, insects and small mammals;
c. Vegetation that overhangs the river to provide places for fish to
shelter;
d. Source of insects for fish;
e. Filtering of pollutants and slowing of stormwater prior to its entering
the river; and
f. A long -term source of woody debris for the river.
In addition, trees and other native vegetation are important for aesthetics it is
the City's goal that unsightly invasive vegetation, such as blackberries, be
removed from the shoreline and be replaced with native vegetation to promote
greater enjoyment of and access to the river.
CL 89 11/19/2009 12 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
229
230
B.
The City will provide information and technical assistance to property owners
for improving vegetation in the shoreline jurisdiction and will work
collaboratively with local citizen groups to assist property owners in the
removal of invasive vegetation and planting of native vegetation, particularly
for residential areas.
3. With the exception of residential development/re- development of 4 or fewer
residential units, all activities and developments within the shoreline
environment must comply with the landscaping and maintenance requirements
of this section, whether or not a shoreline substantial development permit is
required. Single family residential projects are not exempt if implementing a
shoreline stabilization or overwater structure project on the shoreline.
4. The tree protection and retention requirements and the vetetation
manaaelnent reauirelnents apply to existing uses as well as new or re-
development.
Tree Protection, and-Retention and Replacement
1. As many significant trees and as much native vegetation as possible are to be
retained on a site proposed for development or re- development, taking into
account the condition and age of the trees. As part of design review, the Director
of Community Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require
alterations in the arrangement of buildings, parking or other elements of proposed
development in order to retain significant non invasive trees, particularly those
that provide shading to the river. Trees located on properties not undergoing
development or re- development may not be removed except those that interfere
with access and passage on public trails or that present an imminent hazard to
existing structures or the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City
may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA)- certified
arborist.
2. To protect the ecological functions that trees and native vegetation provide to the
shoreline, removal of any significant tree in the shoreline jurisdiction or native
vegetation in the buffer requires a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation
Clearing Permit and is generally only allowed on sites undergoing development or
redevelopment. Only trees that interfere with access and passage on public trails
or trees that present an imminent hazard to existing structures or the public may
be removed from sites without an issued building permit or Federal approval.
Factors that will be considered in approving tree removal include but are not
limited to: tree condition and health, age, risks to structures, and potential for root
or canopy interference with utilities.
3. Prior to any tree removal or site clearing, a Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and
Vegetation Clearing Permit application must be submitted to DCD containing the
CL 90 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
following infouuation:
a) A vegetation tree survey that shows the diameter, species and
location of all significant trees and all existing native
vegetation on a site plan;
b) A site plan that shows trees and native vegetation to be retained
and trees to be removed and provides a table showing the
number of significant trees to be removed and the number of
replacement trees required;
c) Tree protection zones and other measures to protect any trees
that are to be retained for sites undergoing development or re-
development;
d) Location of the OHWM, river buffer, shoreline jurisdiction
boundary and nay sensitive areas with their buffers;
e) A landscape plan that shows diameter, species name, spacing
and planting location for any required replacement trees and
other proposed vegetation;
f) An arborist evaluation justifying the removal of hazardous
trees if required by the Department; and
g) An application fee per the current Land Use Permit Fee
resolution.
4. Where permitted, significant trees that are removed from the shoreline shall be
replaced pursuant to the replacement ratios in Table 4 up to a density of 100 trees
per acre (including existing trees). The Director or Planning Commission may
require additional trees or shrubs to be installed to mitigate any potential impact
from the loss of this vegetation as a result of new development.
Table 4. Tree Rep lacement Requirements
Diameter* of Tree No. of Replacement
Removed Trees Required
4 -6 inches (single trunk) 3
2 inches (any trunk of a
multi -trunk tree)
Over 6 8 inches 1 4
Over 8 20 inches 6
Over 20 inches 1 8
measured at height of 4 feet from the ground
-1-5.The property owner is reauired to ensure the viability and long term health of
trees planted for replacement through Proper care and maintenance for the life of
the proiect. Replaced trees that do not survive must be replanted at the next
appropriate season for Planting.
2- 6.If all replacement trees cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site, off -site
tree replacement within the shoreline jurisdiction may be allowed at a site
approved by the City. Priority for off -site tree planting will be at locations within
CL 91 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
231
232
the Transition Zone. If no suitable off -site location is available, the applicant
shall pay into a tree replacement fund. The fee shall be based on the value of the
replacement trees and their delivery, labor for site preparation and plant
installation, soil amendments, mulch, and staking supplies.
3,7.When a tree suitable for large woody debris is permitted to be removed from the
shoreline buffer. the tree trunk and root ball (where possible) will be saved for use
in a restoration proiect elsewhere in the shoreline iurisdiction. The applicant will
be responsible for the cost of moving the removed trees to a location designated
by Tthe City. If no restoration Droiect or storalse location is available at the time,
the Director may waive this requirement.
anchoring of removed trots as habitat f natures along the river bank for
development of over '1 residential lots and all non residential development, aJ
permitted by shoreline conditions, and taking into account potential hazards to
boaters, and in accordance with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Hydraulics Authorization and Corps of Engineers permit condition. When
conditions prevent placement of tree trunks on site along the shoreline as large
woody debris, the City shall attempt to find an off site location for eventual
the cost of thc initial moving of thc rem
Trees removed in the shoreline jurisdiction outside the buffer shall either be
placed as large woody debris in non bank portion ef-the buffer (not on the bank).
Of if not feasible, transported to a location designated by the City for future use in
a restoration project. Priority for LWD placement Droiects will be in the
Transition Zone.
4:8.Dead or dying trees located within the buffer or undeveloped upland portion of
the shoreline jurisdiction shall be left in place as wildlife snags, unless they
present a hazard to structures, facilities or the public.
5.9.Topping of trees is prohibited unless absolutely necessary to protect overhead
utility lines. Topping of trees will be regulated as removal and tree replacement
will be required.
5-10. For new development or redevelopment where trees are proposed for
retention, tree protection zones shall be indicated on site plans and shall be
established in the field prior to commencement of any construction or site clearing
activity. A minimum 4 ft high construction barrier shall be installed around
significant trees and stands of native trees or vegetation to be retained. Minimum
distances from the trunk for the construction barriers shall be based on the
approximate age of the tree (height and canopy) as follows
a. Young trees (have reached less than 20% of life expectancy): 0.75
a Modified from: Trees and Develonment. A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees Durine Land
Development. Nelda Metheny and James R. Clark, 1998.
CL 92 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
C. Landscaping
feet per inch of trunk diameter
b. Mature trees (have reached 20 80% of life expectancy): 1 foot per
inch of trunk diameter.
c. Over mature trees (have reached greater than 80% of life expectancy):
1.5 feet per inch of trunk diameter.
This section presents landscaping standards for the Shoreline Jurisdiction and is divided
1 into a general section and separate sections for the River Buffer and for the remaining
part of the Shoreline Jurisdiction for each Environment Designation.
1. General Requirements
a. The landscaping reauirements of this subsection apply Ffor any new
development or redevelopment in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except_
single family residential development of 4 or fewer lots. The extent of
landscaping required will depend on the size of the proposed project.
New development or full redevelopment of a site will require
landscaping of the entire site. For smaller projects. the Director will
review the intent of this section and the scone of the project to
determine a reasonable amount of landscaping to be carried out.
b. ilnvasive vegetation must be removed as part of site preparation and
native vegetation planted and maintained in the River Buffer,
including the river bank, to improve the ecological functions of the
shoreline.
c. On properties located behind Publicly maintained levees, property
owners will not be responsible for removal of invasive vegetation. or
Planting of native vegetation within the buffer.
d. Removal of invasive species shall be done by hand or with hand -held
power tools. Where not feasible and mechanized equipment is needed,
the applicant must obtain a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation
Clearing Permit and show how the slope stability of the bank will be
maintained and a plan must be submitted indicating how the work will
be done and what erosion control and tree protection features will be
utilized. Federal and State permits may be required for vegetation
removal with mechanized equipment.
e. Trees and other vegetation shading the river shall be retained or
replanted when riprap is placed per the approved tree permit, if
required.
f. Removal of invasive vegetation may be phased over several years
prior to planting if part of an approved plan to allow for alternative
approaches, such as sheet mulching and goat grazing. The method
selected shall not destabilize the bank or cause erosion.
CL 93 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
233
234
A combination of native trees, shrubs and groundcovers (including
grasses, sedges, rushes and vines) shall be planted. The plants listed in
the Riparian Restoration and Management Table of the 2004
Washineton Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines (as amended)
shall provide the basis for plant selection. Site conditions, such as
topography, exposure, and hydrology shall be taken into account for
plant selection. Other species may be approved if there is adequate
justification.
h. Non native trees may be used as street trees in cases where conditions
are not appropriate for native trees (for example where there are space
or height limitations or conflicts with utilities).
i. Plants shall meet the current American Standard for Nursery Stock
(American Nursery and Landscape Association ANLA).
Plant sizes in the non buffer areas of all Shoreline Environments shall
meet the following minimum size standards:
g.
J•
Deciduous trees:
Conifers:
Shrubs:
Groundcover /grasses:
2" caliper
6 -8' height.
24" height
4 -inch or 1 gallon container
Smaller plant sizes (generally one gallon, bareroot, plugs, or stakes,
depending on plant species) are preferred for buffer plantings. Willow
stakes must be at least '/z-inch in diameter.
k. Site preparation and planting of vegetation shall be in accordance with
best management practices for ensuring the vegetation's long -term
health and survival.
1. Plants may be selected and placed to allow for public and private view
corridors and/or access to the water's edge.
m. Native vegetation in the shoreline installed in accordance with the
preceding standards shall be maintained by the property owner to
promote healthy growth and prevent establishment of invasive species
for the life of the project. Invasive plants (such as blackberry, ivy,
knotweed, bindweed) shall be removed accordine to the approved
maintenance planon a regular basis.
n. Areas disturbed by removal of invasive plants shall be replanted with
native vegetation where necessary to maintain the density shown in
Table 4 and must be replanted in a timely manner, except where a long
term removal and re- vegetation plan, as approved by the City, is being
implemented.
o. The following standards apply to utilities and loading docks located in
the shoreline jurisdiction.
5 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and US Fish and
Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington
CL 94 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
1) Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc. shall be suitably screened
with native vegetation;
2) Utility easements shall be landscaped with native,
groundcover, grasses or other low- growing plants as
appropriate to the shoreline environment and site conditions;
3) Allowed loading docks and service areas located waterward of
the development shall have landscaping that provides extensive
visual separation from the river.
2. River Buffer Landscaping Requirements in all Shoreline Environments
The River Buffer in all shoreline environments shall function, in part, as a
vegetation management area to filter sediment, capture contaminants in
surface water run off, reduce the velocity of water run off, and provide fish
and wildlife habitat.
a. A planting plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect or an
approved biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval that
shows plant species, size, number and spacing. The reauirement for a
landscape architect or biologist may be waived by the Director for
single family property owners (when planting is being required as
mitigation for construction of overwater structures or shoreline
stabilization), if the property owner accents technical assistance from
City staff.
b. Plants shall be installed from the OHWM to the upland edge of the
River Buffer (where not otherwise prohibited unless site conditions
would make planting unsafe).
c. Plantings close to and on the bank shall include native willows, red
osier dogwood and other native vegetation that will extend out over
the water, to provide shade and habitat functions when mature.
Species selected must be able to withstand seasonal water level
fluctuations.
d. Minimum plant spacing in the buffer shall follow Table 5. Existing
non invasive plants may be included in the density calculations.
e. Irrigation for buffer plantings is required for at least two dry seasons or
until plants are established. An irrigation plan is to be included as part
of the planting plan.
f. In the event that a development project allows for setback and
benching of the shoreline along an existing levee or revetment, the
newly created mid -slope bench area shall be planted and maintained
with a variety of native vegetation appropriate for site conditions.
Table 5. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities
1 Plant Material Type 1 Planting Density 1
1 Stakes /cuttings along river bank (willows, red 1 1 -2 ft on center or per bioengineering method 1
CL 95 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
235
236
1 osier dogwood)
1 Shrubs
1 Trees
Groundcovers, grasses,
herbaceous plants
1 Native seed mixes
D.
1 3 -5 ft on center, depending on species
1 15 20 ft on center, depending on species
sedges, rushes, other 1 1.5 ft on center, depending on species
1 5 -25 lbs per acre, depending on species
3. Landscaping Requirements for the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity
Environments Outside of the River Buffer
For the portions of property within the Shoreline Jurisdiction landward of the
River Buffer the landscape requirements in the General section of this SMP
and the requirements for the underlying zoning as established in TMC Chapter
18.52 shall apply except as indicated below.
a. Parking Lot Landscape Perimeters: One native tree for each 20 lineal
feet of required perimeter landscaping, one shrub for each 4 lineal feet
of required perimeter landscaping, and native groundcovers to cover
90% of the landscape area within 3 years, planted at a minimum
spacing of 18 inches on- center.
b. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: Every 300 square feet of paved
surface requires 10 square feet of interior landscaping within
landscape islands separated by no more than 150 feet between islands.
c. Landscaping shall be provided at yards not adjacent to the river, with
the same width as required in the underlying zoning district. This
standard may be reduced as follows:
1) Where development provides public access corridor between
off -site public area(s) and public shoreline areas, side yard
landscaping may be reduced by 25 percent to no less than 3
feet; or
2) Where development provides additional public access area(s)
(as allowed by the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy
Environment Development Standards) equal in area to at least
2.5% of total building area, front yard landscaping may be
reduced by 25 percent.
Vegetation Management in the Shoreline Jurisdiction
The requirements of this section apply to all existing and new development within the
shoreline jurisdiction.
CL 96 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
1. Trees and shrubs may only be pruned for safety, to maintain view or access
corridors and trails by pruning up or on the sides of trees, to maintain
clearance for utility lines, and/or for improving shoreline ecological function.
This type of pruning is exempt from any permit requirements. Topping of
trees is prohibited except where absolutely necessary to avoid interference
with existing utilities.
2. Plant debris from removal of invasive plants or pruning shall be removed from
the site and disposed of properly.
3. Use of pesticides
a. Pesticides (including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides) shall not
be used in the shoreline jurisdiction except where:
1) Alternatives such as manual removal, biological control, and
cultural control are not feasible given the size of the
infestation, site characteristics, or the characteristics of the
invasive plant species
2) The use of pesticides has been approved through a
comprehensive vegetation or pest management and monitoring
plan;
3) The pesticide is applied in accordance with state regulations;
4) The proposed herbicide is approved for aquatic use by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and
5) The use of pesticides in the shoreline jurisdiction is approved
in writing by the City and the applicant presents a copy of the
Aquatic Pesticide Pennit issued by the Department of Ecology
or Washington Department of Agriculture.
b. Self contained rodent bait boxes designed to prevent access by other
animals are allowed.
c. Sports fields, parks, golf courses and other outdoor recreational uses
that involve maintenance of extensive areas of turf shall provide and
implement an integrated turf management program or integrated pest
management plan designed to ensure that water quality in the river is
not adversely impacted.
9.11 Land Altering Activities
All land altering activities in the shoreline jurisdiction shall be in conjunction with an
underlying land development permit, except for shoreline restoration projects. All
activities shall meet the following standards:
A. Clearing, Grading and Landfill
1. Land altering shall be permitted only where it meets the following criteria:
a. The work is the minimum necessary to accomplish an allowed
shoreline use;
b. Impacts to the natural environment are minimized and mitigated;
c. Water quality, river flows and/or fish habitat are not adversely
affected;
d. Public access and river navigation are not diminished;
CL 97 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
237
238
B. Dredging
2. Clearing, grading and landfill activities, where allowed, shall include erosion
control mechanisms, and any reasonable restriction on equipment, methods or
timing necessary to minimize the introduction of suspended solids or leaching
of contaminants into the river, or the disturbance of wildlife or fish habitats in
accordance with the standards in the Grading Chapter, TMC 16.54,.
1. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations.
Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins must be
restricted to maintaining previously dredged and/or existing authorized
location, depth, and width.
2. Where allowed, dredging operations must be designed and scheduled so as to
ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes.
9.12 Marinas. Boat Yards. Dry Docks. Boat Launches. Piers. Docks and Other
Over -water Structures
A. General Requirements
e. The project complies with all federal and state requirements;
f. The project complies with the vegetation protection criteria of the
Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section; and
g. Documentation is provided to demonstrate that the fill comes from a
clean source.
1. Prior to issuance of a shoreline substantial development permit for
construction of piers, docks, wharves or other over -water structures the
applicant shall present approvals from State or Federal agencies, as applicable.
2. Structures must be designed by a qualified engineer and must demonstrate the
project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological function and will be
stable against the forces of flowing water, wave action and the wakes of
passing vessels.
3. In -water structures shall be designed and located to minimize shading of
native aquatic vegetation and fish passage areas. Removal of shoreline,
riparian and aquatic vegetation shall be limited to the minimum extent
necessary to construct the project. All areas disturbed by construction shall be
replanted with native vegetation as part of the project.
4. New or replacement in -water structures shall be designed and located such
that natural hydraulic and geologic processes, such as erosion, wave action or
CL 98 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
floods will not necessitate the following:
a. reinforcement of the shoreline or stream bank with new bulkheads or
similar artificial structures to protect the in -water structure; or
b. dredging.
5. No structures are allowed on top of over -water structures except for properties
located north of the Turning Basin.
6. Pilings or other associated structures in direct contact with water shall not be
treated with preservatives unless the applicant can demonstrate that no
feasible alternative to protect the materials exists and that non -wood
alternatives are not economically feasible. In that case, only compounds
approved for marine use may be used and must be applied by the
manufacturer per current best management practices of the Western Wood
Preservers Institute. The applicant must present verification that the best
management practices were followed. The preservatives must also be
approved by the Washington Department of Ffish and Wildlife.
7. All over -water structures shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and
sound condition. Abandoned or unsafe over -water structures shall be
removed or repaired promptly by the owner. Accumulated debris shall be
regularly removed and disposed of properly so as not to jeopardize the
integrity of the structure. Replacement of in -water structures shall include
proper removal of abandoned or other manmade structures and debris.
8. Boat owners who store motorized boats on -site are encouraged to use best
management practices to avoid fuel and other fluid spills.
B. Marinas, Boat yards and Dry Docks
1. All uses under this category shall be designed to achieve no net loss of
shoreline ecological functions.
2. Commercial /Industrial marinas and dry docks shall be located no further
upriver than Turning Basin #3.
3. Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed and operated to avoid or
minimize adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, water quality, native shoreline
vegetation, navigation, public access, existing in -water recreational activities
and adjacent water uses.
4. Marinas shall submit a fuel spill prevention and contingency plan to the City
for approval. Haul -out and boat maintenance facilities must meet the City's
CL 99 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W' \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
239
240
stormwater management requirements and not allow the release of chemicals,
petroleum or suspended solids to the river.
5. Marinas, boat yards and dry docks must be located a minimum of 100 feet
from Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas (see Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline
Map, Map 5).
6. New marinas, launch ramps and accessory uses must be located where water
depths are adequate to avoid the need for dredging.
C. Boat Launches and Boat Lifts
1. Boat launch ramps and vehicle access to the ramps shall be designed to not
cause erosion; the use of pervious paving materials, such as grasscrete, are
encouraged.
2. Boat launch ramps shall be designed to minimize areas of landfill or the need
for shoreline protective structures.
3. Access to the boat ramp and parking for the ramp shall be located a sufficient
distance from any frontage road to provide safe maneuvering of boats and
trailers.
4. Launching rails shall be adequately anchored to the ground.
5. Launch ramps and boat lifts shall extend waterward past the OHWM only as
far as necessary to achieve their purpose.
6. Boat lifts and canopies must meet the standards of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Regional General Permit Number 1 for Watercraft Lifts in Fresh
and Marine/Estuarine Waters within the State of Washington.
D. Over -water Structures
Where allowed, over -water structures such as piers, wharves and docks shall meet the
following standards:
1. The size of new over -water structures shall be limited to the minimum necessary
to support the structure's intended use and to provide stability in the case of
floating docks. Structures must be compatible with any existing channel control
or flood management structures. No dock or pier on residential properties,
than four feet.
2. Over -water structures shall not extend waterward of the OHWM any more than
necessary to permit launching of watercraft, while also ensuring that watercraft do
CL 100 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
not rest on tidal substrate at any time.
3. Adverse impacts of over -water structures on water quality, river flows, fish
habitat, shoreline vegetation, and public access shall be minimized and mitigated.
Mitigation measures may include joint use of existing structures, open decking or
piers, replacement of non native vegetation, installation of in -water habitat
features or restoration of shallow water habitat.
4. Any proposals for in -water or over -water structures shall provide a pre
construction habitat evaluation, including an evaluation of salmonid and bull trout
habitat and shoreline ecological functions and demonstrate how the project
achieves no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
5. Over -water structures shall obtain all necessary state and federal permits prior to
construction or repair.
6. All over -water structures must be designed by a qualified engineer to ensure that
they are adequately anchored to the bank in a manner so as not to cause future
downstream hazards or significant modifications to the river geomorphology and
are able to withstand high flows.
7. Over -water structures shall not obstruct nomnal public use of the river for
navigation or recreational purposes.
8. Shading impacts to fish shall be minimized by using grating on at least 30% of the
surface area of the over -water structure on residential areas and at least 50% of
the over -water structure on all other properties. The use of skirting is not
permitted.
9. If floats are used, the flotation shall be fully enclosed and contained in a shell
(such as polystyrene) that prevents breakup or loss of the flotation material into
the water, damage from ultraviolet radiation, and damage from rubbing against
pilings or waterborne debris.
10. Floats may not rest on the tidal substrate at any time and stoppers on the piling
anchoring the floats must be installed to ensure at least 1 foot of clearance above
the substrate. Anchor lines may not rest on the substrate at any time.
11 The number of pilings to support over -water structures, including floats shall be
limited to the minimum necessary. Pilings shall conform to the pilings standards
contained in the US Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit No. 6.
12. No over -water structure shall be located closer than five (5) feet from the side
property line extended, except that such structures may abut property lines for the
common use of adjacent property owners when mutually agreed upon by the
CL 101 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
241
242
property owners in an easement recorded with the King County. A copy of this
agreement shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development and
accompany an application for a development permit and/or Shoreline Permit.
CL 102 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
10. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS WITHIN THE
SHORELINE JURISDICTION.
10.1 Purpose
A. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) requires protection of critical areas
(sensitive areas), defined as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded areas,
geologically hazardous areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife
conservation areas, and abandoned mine areas.
B. The purpose of protecting environmentally sensitive areas within the shoreline
jurisdiction is to:
1. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural functions and values of these
areas.
2. Protect quantity and quality of water resources.
3. Minimize turbidity and pollution of wetlands and fish bearing waters and
maintain wildlife habitat.
4. Prevent erosion and the loss of slope and soil stability caused by the removal
of trees, shrubs, and root systems of vegetative cover.
5. Protect the public against avoidable losses, public emergency rescue and relief
operations cost, and subsidy cost of public mitigation from landslide,
subsidence, erosion and flooding.
6. Protect the community's aesthetic resources and distinctive features of natural
lands and wooded hillsides.
7. Balance the private rights of individual property owners with the preservation
of environmentally sensitive areas.
8. Prevent the loss of wetland and watercourse function and acreage, and strive
for a gain over present conditions.
9. Give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary
to protect or enhance anadromous fisheries.
10. Incorporate the use of best available science in the regulation and protection
of sensitive areas as required by the state Growth Management Act, according
to WAC 365- 195 -900 through 365 -195 -925 and WAC 365 -190 -080.
C. The goal of these sensitive area regulations is to achieve no net loss of wetland,
watercourse, or fish and wildlife conservation area or their functions.
10.2 Applicability, Maps and Inventories
A. Sensitive areas located in the shoreline jurisdiction will be governed by the Shoreline
Management Program and not the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. However, the level
of protection for the critical areas shall be equal to that provided in the Sensitive Areas
section of the Zoning Code (TMC18.45).
CL 103 11/19/2009 1255:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
243
244
B. Sensitive areas currently identified in the shoreline jurisdiction are discussed in the
Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of this Shoreline
Management Program. The locations are mapped on the Sensitive Areas in the
Shoreline Jurisdiction Map Map 65. This map is based on assessment of current
conditions and review of the best available information. However, additional sensitive
areas may exist within the shoreline jurisdiction and the boundaries of the sensitive areas
shown are not exact. It is the responsibility of the property owner to determine the
presence of sensitive areas on the property and to verify the boundaries in the field.
Sensitive area provisions for abandoned mine areas do not apply as none of these areas is
located in the shoreline jurisdiction.
C. Frequently flooded areas and areas of seismic instability will be governed by the
Flood Zone Management Code (TMC 16.52) and the Washington State Building Code.
10.3 Best Available Science
Policies, regulations and decisions concerning sensitive areas shall rely on Best Available
Science to protect their functions and values. Special consideration must be given to the
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish
and their habitats. Nonscientific information may supplement scientific information, but
is not an adequate substitution for valid and available scientific information.
10.4 Sensitive Area Studies
An applicant for a development proposal that may include a sensitive area and/or its
buffer shall submit those studies as required by the City and specified below to
adequately identify and evaluate the sensitive area and its buffers.
A. General Requirements
1. A required sensitive areas study shall be prepared by a person with experience
and training in the scientific discipline appropriate for the relevant sensitive
area. A qualified professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent
degree in ecology or related science, engineering, environmental studies,
fisheries, geotechnical or related field, and at least two years of related work
experience.
2. The sensitive areas study shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in
the analysis of sensitive area data and shall use field reconnaissance and
reference the source of science used. The sensitive area study shall evaluate
the proposal and all probable impacts to sensitive areas.
3. It is intended that sensitive areas studies and information be utilized by
CL 104 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
applicants in preparation of their proposals and therefore shall be undertaken
early in the design stages of a project.
B. Wetland, Watercourse and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area Sensitive Area
Studies
At a minimum, the sensitive area study shall contain the following infonuation, as
applicable:
1. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the
proposal, and identification of the permit requested;
2. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal showing: sensitive areas
and buffers and the development proposal with dimensions; clearing limits;
proposed storm water management plan; and mitigation plan for impacts due
to drainage alterations;
3. The dates, names and qualifications of the persons preparing the study and
documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site;
4. Identification and characterization of all sensitive areas, water bodies, and
buffers adjacent to the proposed project area or potentially impacted by the
proposed project;
5. A statement specifying the accuracy of the study and assumptions used in the
study;
6. Deter nination of the degree of impact and risk from the proposal both on the
site and on adjacent properties;
7. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to sensitive areas, their
buffers and other properties resulting from the proposal;
8. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing to
avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to sensitive areas;
9. Plans for adequate mitigation to offset any impacts;
10. Recommendations for maintenance, short-term and long -term monitoring,
contingency plans and bonding measures; and
11. Any technical information required by the director to assist in determining
compliance.
C. Geotechnical Studies
1. A geotechnical study appropriate both to the site conditions and the proposed
development shall be required for development in Class 2, Class 3, and Class
4 Areas.
2. All studies shall include at a minimum a site evaluation, review of available
information regarding the site and a surface reconnaissance of the site and
adjacent areas. For Class 2 areas, subsurface exploration of site conditions is
at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. In addition, for Class 3 and
Class 4 Areas, the study shall include a feasibility analysis for the use of
infiltration on -site and a subsurface exploration of soils and hydrology
CL 105 11/19/2009 12.55 00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
245
246
conditions. Detailed slope stability analysis shall be done if the geotechnical
engineer recommends it in Class 3 areas, and must be done in Class 4 areas.
3. Applicants shall retain a geotechnical engineer to prepare the reports and
evaluations required in this subsection. The geotechnical report and completed
site evaluation checklist shall be prepared in accordance with generally
accepted geotechnical practices, under the supervision of and signed and
stamped by the geotechnical engineer. The report shall be prepared in
consultation with the appropriate City department. Where appropriate, a
geologist must be included as part of the geotechnical consulting team. The
report shall make specific recommendations concerning development of the
site.
4. The opinions and recommendations contained in the report shall be supported
by field observations and, where appropriate or applicable, by literature
review conducted by the geotechnical engineer which shall include
appropriate explorations, such as borings or test pits, and an analysis of soil
characteristics conducted by or under the supervision of the engineer in
accordance with standards of the American Society of Testing and Materials
or other applicable standards. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations
or interpretations, the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geotechnical
engineer.
D. Modifications or Waivers to Sensitive Area Study Requirements
1. The Director may limit the required geographic area of the sensitive area
study as appropriate if:
a. The applicant, with assistance from the city, cannot obtain permission
to access properties adjacent to the project area; or
b. The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the site.
2. The Director may allow modifications to the required contents of the study
where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is
required to adequately address the potential sensitive area impacts and
required mitigation.
3. If there is written agreement between the Director and the applicant
concerning the sensitive area classification and type, the Director may waive
the requirement for sensitive area studies provided that no adverse impacts to
sensitive areas or buffers will result. There must be substantial evidence that
the sensitive areas delineation and classification are correct, that there will be
no detrimental impact to the sensitive areas or buffers, and that the goals,
purposes, objectives and requirements of the Shoreline Management Program
will be followed.
CL 106 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
10.5 Procedures
When an applicant submits an application for any building permit, subdivision, short
subdivision or any other land use review that approves a use, development or future
construction, the location and dimensions of all sensitive areas and buffers on the site
shall be indicated on the plans submitted. When a sensitive area is identified, the
following procedures apply.
A. The applicant shall submit the relevant sensitive area study as required by this
chapter.
B. The Department of Community Development will review the information submitted
in the sensitive area studies to verify the information, confirm the nature and type of the
sensitive area, and ensure the study is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. At
the discretion of the Director, sensitive area studies may undergo peer review, at the
expense of the applicant.
C. Denial of use or development: A use or development will be denied if the Director
determines that the applicant cannot ensure that potential dangers and costs to future
inhabitants of the development, adjacent properties, and Tukwila are minimized and
mitigated to an acceptable level.
D. Preconstruction meeting: The applicant, specialist(s) of record, contractor, and
department representatives will be required to attend pre construction meetings prior to
any work on the site.
E. Construction monitoring: The specialist(s) of record shall be retained to monitor the
site during construction.
F. On -site Identification: The Director may require the boundary between a sensitive
area and its buffer or between the buffer and the development and any development or
use to be permanently identified with fencing, or with a wood or metal sign with treated
wood, concrete or metal posts. Size will be determined at the time of permitting, and
wording shall be as follows: "Protection of this natural area is in your care.
Do not alter or disturb. Please call the City of Tukwila (206- 431 -3670) for more
information."
10.6 Wetland Determinations and Classifications
A. Wetlands and their boundaries are established by using the Washington State Wetland
and Delineation Manual, as required by RCW 36.70A.175 (Ecology Publication #96 -94)
and consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
CL 107 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
247
248
B. Wetland determinations shall be made by a qualified professional (certified Wetland
Scientist or non certified with at least 2 years of full -time work experience as a wetland
professional).
C. Wetland areas within the City of Tukwila have certain characteristics, functions and
values and have been influenced by urbanization and related disturbances. Wetland
functions include, but are not limited to the following: improving water quality;
maintaining hydrologic functions (reducing peak flows, decreasing erosion,
groundwater); and providing habitat for plants, mammals, fish, birds, and amphibians.
Wetland functions shall be evaluated using Washington State Functional Assessment
Method_, egu_ alent
-L"
D. Wetlands shall be designated in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands
Rating System (Washington Department of Ecology. August 2004. Publication #93 -74)
as Category Type 1I, Type 2II, or Type 3III, or IV as listed below:
1. Category ITvi e 1 wetlands are those that a) represent a uniaue or rare wetland
type; or b are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands: or c) are
relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to
replace within a human lifetime: or d) provide a high level of functions. The
following types of wetlands listed by Washington Department of Ecology and
potentially found in Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction are Category I:
a. Estuarine wetlands (Estuarine wetlands are deenwater tidal habitats
with a range of fresh brackish- marine water chemistry and daily tidal
cycles, salt and brackish marshes. intertidal mudflats. mangrove
swamps, bays. sounds. and coastal rivers.
b. Wetlands that perform many functions well and score at least 70. points
in the Western Washington Wetlands Rating System.
more classes of vegetation;
Of
2. Category IlTvpe 2wetlands are difficult. though not impossible, to replace.
and provide high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more
commonly than Category I wetlands. but still need a relatively high level of
protection. Category II wetlands potentially in. Tukwila's Shoreline
Jurisdiction i nclude:
CL 108 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
a. Estuarine Wetlands Any estuarine wetland smaller than an acre, or
those that are disturbed and larger than 1 acre are category II wetlands.
b. Wetlands That Perform Functions Well Wetlands scoring between
51 -69 points (out of 100) on the Questions related to the functions
present are Category II wetlands. -wetlands are thecc wetlands that
meet any of the following criteria:
aThe wetland is equal to or greater than one acre in size;
M=- w., rescIIec c` nesting site:; fef
cies as listed by the Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife; or
d. The wetland is hydrologically connected (non isolated) to a Type 1 or
Typo, 2 watercourse.
3. Category III wetlands have a moderate level of functions (scores between 30
50 points). Wetlands scoring between 30 -50 points generally have been
disturbed in some ways, and are often less diverse or more isolated from other
natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands.
4. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scores less than 30,
points) and are often heavily disturbed. While these are wetlands that should
be able to be replaced or improved, they still need protection because they
may provide some important functions, Any disturbance of these wetlands
must be considered on a case by case basis.
10.7 Watercourse Designation and Ratings
A. Watercourse ratings are based on the existing habitat functions and are rated as
follows:
1. Type 1 Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State,
under RCW 90.58 (Green/Duwamish River).
2. Type 2 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have either perennial (year
round) or intermittent flows and support salmonid fish use.
3. Type 3 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial flows and are
not used by salmonid fish.
4. Type 4 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have intermittent flows and are
not used by salmonid fish.
B. Watercourse sensitive area studies shall be performed by a qualified professional
(hydrologist, geologist, engineer or other scientist with experience in preparing
watercourse assessments).
CL 109 11/19/2009 12 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
249
250
10.8 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
A. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas within the shoreline jurisdiction include
the habitats listed below:
1. Areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a
primary association;
2. Habitats and species of local importance, including but not limited to bald
eagle habitat, heron rookeries, osprey nesting areas;
3. Waters of the State (i.e., the Green Duwamish River itself);
4. State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas; and
5. Areas critical for habitat connectivity.
B. The approximate location and extent of known fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas are identified in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report
and are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction map Fish and
wildlife habitat conservation areas correlate closely with the areas identified as regulated
watercourses and wetlands and their buffers, as well as off channel habitat areas created
to improve salmon habitat (shown on the Sensitive Areas Map) in the Shoreline
jurisdiction. The Green/Duwamish River is recognized as the most significant fish and
wildlife habitat corridor. In addition Gilliam Creek, Riverton Creek, Southgate Creek,
Hamm Creek (in the north PAA), and Johnson Creek (South PAA) all provide salmonid
habitat.
10.9 Wetland Watercourse. and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area
Buffers
A. Purpose and Intent of Buffer Establishment
1. A buffer area shall be established adjacent to designated sensitive areas. The
purpose of the buffer area shall be to protect the integrity, functions and
values of the sensitive areas. Any land alteration must be located out of the
buffer areas as required by this section.
2. Buffers are intended in general to:
a. Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing
sensitive areas;
b. Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development;
c. Preserve the edges of wetlands and the banks of watercourses and fish
6 Note that only the salmon habitat enhancement project sites completed or underway
are shown as Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas on the Sensitive Areas in the
Shoreline Jurisdiction Map. Streams are shown as watercourses. The river is not shown
as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area for the sake of simplicity.
CL 110 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
and wildlife habitat conservation areas for their critical habitat value;
d. Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high
water events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system
boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects;
e. Provide shading to watercourses and fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas to maintain stable water temperatures and provide
vegetative cover for additional wildlife habitat;
f. Provide input of organic debris and nutrient transport in watercourses;
g. Reduce erosion and increased surface water runoff;
h. Reduce loss of or damage to property;
i. Intercept fine sediments from surface water runoff and serve to
minimize water quality impacts; and
j. Protect the sensitive area from human and domestic animal
disturbances.
C. Establishment of Buffer Widths
The following standard buffers shall be established:
1. Wetland buffers (measured from the wetland edge):
a. Categories I and II TypeWetlands; 100 foot buffer.
b. Cateeory IIIType-2 Wetland; 80 -foot buffer.
c. Cate2ory IVType 3 Wetland; 50 -foot buffer.
2. Watercourse buffers (measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark):
a. Type 1 Watercourse: The buffer width for the Green/Duwamish River
is established in the Shoreline Environment Designations of this SMP
for the three designated shoreline environments.
b. Type 2 Watercourse: 100 -foot -wide buffer.
c. Type 3 Watercourse: 80- foot -wide buffer.
d. Type 4 Watercourse: 50- foot -wide buffer.
3. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas: the buffer will be the same as
the river buffer established for each Shoreline Environment measured from
the OHWM, unless an alternate buffer is established and approved at the time
a Fish and Wildlife Habitat restoration project is undertaken.
D. Sensitive Area Buffer Setbacks
All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set back 15 feet and all other
development shall be set back ten feet from the sensitive area buffer's edge. The building
setbacks shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge. Building plans shall
also identify a 20 -foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of
development will be reviewed. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site
plan demonstrates there will be no adverse impacts to the buffer from construction or
occasional maintenance activities.
CL 111 11/19/2009 12:55 PM
W 1Shoreline\Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
251
252
E. Reduction of Standard Buffer Width
Except for the Green/Duwamish River (Type 1 watercourse for which any variation in
the buffer shall be regulated under the shoreline provisions of this Program), the buffer
width may reduced on a case -by -case basis, provided the reduced buffer area does not
contain slopes 15% or greater. In no case shall the approved buffer width result in
greater than a 50% reduction in width. Buffer reduction with enhancement may be
allowed as part of a Substantial Development permit if:
1. Additional protection to wetlands or watercourses will be provided through
the implementation of a buffer enhancement plan;
2. The existing condition of the buffer is degraded;
3. Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to the following:
a. Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife
habitat or improve water quality;
b. Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are
likely to be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes,
snags, root wads /stumps, birdhouses and heron nesting areas; or
c. Removing non native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer
area and replanting the area.
F. Increase in Standard Buffer Width
Buffers for sensitive areas will be increased when they are determined to be particularly
sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development will create unusually adverse
impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required only after completion of
a sensitive areas study by a qualified biologist that documents the basis for such increased
width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when:
1. The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant
adverse impacts upon the sensitive area that can be mitigated by an increased
buffer width; or
2. The area serves as habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive or monitor
species listed by the federal government or the State.
G. Maintenance of Vegetation in Buffers
Every reasonable effort shall be made to maintain any existing viable native plant life in
the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an enhancement plan
approved by the Director Enhancements will ensure that slope stability and wetland or
watercourse quality will be maintained or improved. Any disturbance of the buffers shall
be replanted with a diverse plant community of native northwest species that are
appropriate for the specific site as determined by the Director. If the vegetation must be
removed, or because of the alterations of the landscape the vegetation becomes damaged
or dies, then the applicant for a permit must replace existing vegetation with comparable
CL 112 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
specimens, approved by the Director, which will restore buffer functions within five
years.
10.10 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability
A. Classification
Areas of potential geologic instability are classified as follows:
1. Class 1 area, where landslide potential is low, and which slope is less than
15
2. Class 2 areas, where landslide potential is moderate, which slope is between
15% and 40 and which are underlain by relatively permeable soils;
3. Class 3 areas, where landslide potential is high, which include areas sloping
between 15% and 40 and which are underlain by relatively impenneable
soils or by bedrock, and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than
40
4. Class 4 areas, where landslide potential is very high, which include sloping
areas with mappable zones of groundwater seepage, and which also include
existing mappable landslide deposits regardless of slope.
B. Exemptions
The following areas are exempt from regulation as geologically hazardous areas:
1. Temporary stockpiles of topsoil, gravel, beauty bark or other similar
landscaping or construction materials;
2. Slopes related to materials used as an engineered pre -load for a building pad;
3. Any temporary slope that has been created through legal grading activities
under an approved peitnit may be re- graded.
4. Roadway embankments within right -of -way or road easements; and
5. Slopes retained by approved engineered structures, except riverbank structures
and armoring.
C. Geotechnical Study Required
1. Development or alterations to areas of potential geologic instability that form
the river banks shall be governed by the policies and requirements of the
Shoreline Stabilization section of this SMP. Development proposals on all
other lands containing or threatened by an area of potential geologic
instability Class 2 or higher shall be subject to a geotechnical study. The
geotechnical report shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for
and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to insure slope stability
Development proposals shall then include the buffer distances as defined
within the geotechnical report. The geotechnical study shall be performed by
a qualified professional geotechnical engineer, licensed in the State of
Washington.
CL 113 11/19/2009 12.55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
253
254
2. Prior to permitting alteration of an area of potential geologic instability, the
applicant must demonstrate one of the following:
a. There is no evidence of past instability or earth movement in the
vicinity of the proposed development, and where appropriate,
quantitative analysis of slope stability indicates no significant risk to
the proposed development or surrounding properties; or
b. The area of potential geologic instability can be modified or the
project can be designed so that any potential impact to the project and
surrounding properties is eliminated, slope stability is not decreased,
and the increase in surface water discharge or sedimentation shall not
decrease slope stability.
D. Buffers for Areas of Potential Geologic Instability
1. Buffers are intended to:
a. Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing
sensitive areas;
b. Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development;
c. Prevent loading of potentially unstable slope formations;
d. Protect slope stability;
e. Provide erosion control and attenuation of precipitation, surface water
and storm water runoff;
f. Reduce loss of or damage to property; and
g. Prevent the need for future shoreline armoring.
2. Buffers may be increased by the Director when an area is determined to be
particularly sensitive to the disturbance created by a development. Such a
decision will be based on a City review of the report as prepared by a
qualified geotechnical engineer and by a site visit.
E. Additional Requirements
1. Where any portion of an area of potential geologic instability is cleared for
development, a landscaping plan for the site shall include tree replanting in
accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping chapter of this
SMP. Vegetation shall be sufficient to provide erosion and stabilization
protection.
2. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to submit, consistent with the
findings of the geotechnical report, structural plans which were prepared and
stamped by a structural engineer. The plans and specifications shall be
accompanied by a letter from the geotechnical engineer who prepared the
geotechnical report stating that in his/her judgment, the plans and
specifications conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report; the
CL 114 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
risk of damage to the proposed development site from soil instability will be
minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the report; and the proposed
development will not increase the potential for soil movement.
3. Further recommendations signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer shall
be provided should there be additions or exceptions to the original
recommendations based on the plans, site conditions or other supporting data.
If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the plans and specifications is not
the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer
shall, in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express
his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the
geotechnical report and state that the plans and specifications conform to his
or her recommendations.
4. The architect or structural engineer shall submit to the City, with the plans and
specifications, a letter or notation on the design drawings at the time of permit
application stating that he or she has reviewed the geotechnical report,
understands its recommendations, has explained or has had explained to the
owner the risks of loss due to slides on the site, and has incorporated into the
design the recommendations of the report and established measures to reduce
the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by any earth
movement predicted in the report.
5. The owner shall execute a Sensitive Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless
Agreement running with the land, on a form provided by the City. The City
will file the completed covenant with the King County Department of Records
and Elections at the expense of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded
covenant will be forwarded to the owner.
6. Whenever the City determines that the public interest would not be served by
the issuance of a permit in an area of potential geologic instability without
assurance of a means of providing for restoration of areas disturbed by, and
repair of property damage caused by, slides arising out of or occurring during
construction, the Director may require assurance devices.
7. Where recommended by the geotechnical report, the applicant shall retain a
geotechnical engineer (preferably retain the geotechnical engineer who
prepared the final geotechnical recommendations and reviewed the plans and
specifications) to monitor the site during construction.. If a different
geotechnical engineer is retained, the new geotechmical engineer shall submit
a letter to the City stating whether or not he /she agrees with the opinions and
recommendations of the original study. Further recommendations, signed and
sealed by the geotechnical engineer, and supporting data shall be provided
should there be exceptions to the original recommendations.
CL 115 11/19/2009 12:55 00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
255
256
8. During construction the geotechnical engineer shall monitor compliance with
the recommendations in the geotechnical report, particularly site excavation,
shoring, soil support for foundations including piles, subdrainage installations,
soil compaction and any other geotechnical aspects of the construction. Unless
otherwise approved by the City, the specific recommendations contained in
the soils report must be implemented. The geotechnical engineer shall provide
to the City written, dated monitoring reports on the progress of the
construction at such timely intervals as shall be specified. Omissions or
deviations from the approved plans and specifications shall be immediately
reported to the City. The final construction monitoring report shall contain a
statement from the geotechnical engineer that, based upon his or her
professional opinion, site observations and testing during the monitoring of
the construction, the completed development substantially complies with the
recommendations in the geotechnical report and with all geotechnical- related
permit requirements. Occupancy of the project will not be approved until the
report has been reviewed and accepted by the Director.
9. Substantial weight shall be given to ensuring continued slope stability and the
resulting public health, safety and welfare in determining whether a
development should be allowed.
10. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could
include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation
to the dry season, or sequencing activities such as installing erosion control
and drainage systems well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied
if it is determined by the Director that the development will increase the
potential of soil movement that results in an unacceptable risk of damage to
the proposed development, its site or adjacent properties.
10.11 Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses and Alterations.
A. General Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses
1. All uses permitted in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Buffers are allowed in
sensitive area buffers within the jurisdiction except:
a. Promenades
b. Recreational structures
c. Public pedestrian bridges
d. Vehicle bridges
e. New utilities
f Plaza connectors
g. Water dependent uses and their structures
h. Essential streets, roads and rights of way
i. Essential public facilities
j. Outdoor storage
CL 116 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
2. In addition, the following uses are allowed:
a. Maintenance activities of existing landscaping and gardens in a
sensitive area buffer including but not limited to mowing lawns,
weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops and pruning and
planting of vegetation. The removal of established native trees and
shrubs is not permitted. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their
buffers is not allowed without written permission of the City.
b. Vegetation maintenance as part of sensitive area enhancement,
creation or restoration. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their buffers
is not allowed without written permission of the City.
B. Uses Requiring a Type II permit
1. Maintenance and repair of existing uses and facilities where alteration or
additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used.
2. Construction of new essential streets and roads, rights -of -way and utilities.
3. New surface water discharges to sensitive areas or their buffers from detention
facilities, pre settlement ponds or other surface water management structures
may be allowed provided that the discharge meets the clean water standards of
RCW 90.48 and WAC 173.200 and 173.201 as amended, and does not
adversely affect water level fluctuations in the wetland or adversely affect
watercourse habitat and watercourse flow conditions relative to the existing
rate.
4. Plaza connectors
5. Essential public facilities
6. Overwater structures
7. Recreation structures
C. Conditional Uses
Dredging, where necessary to remediate contaminated sediments, if adverse impacts are
mitigated.
D. Wetland Alterations.
Alterations to wetlands are discouraged, are limited to the minimum necessary for project
feasibility, and must have an approved mitigation plan developed in accordance with the
standards in this chapter.
1. Mitigation for wetlands shall follow the mitigation seauencing steps in this
chapter and may include the following types of actions:
a. Creation the manipulation of the physical. chemical or biological
characteristics to develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site,
CL 117 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
257
258
where a biological wetland did not previously exist;
b. Re- establishment the manipulation of the physical. chemical or
biological characteristics of a site with the goal of restoring wetland,
functions to a former wetland. resulting in a net increase in wetland
acres and functions;
c. Rehabilitation the manipulation of the physical. chemical, or
biological characteristics with the goal of repairing historic functions
and processes of a degraded wetland. resulting in a gain in wetland
function but not acreage;
d Enhancement the manipulation of the physical. chemical or
biological characteristics to heighten. intensify. or improve specific
functions (such as vegetation) or to change the growth stage or
composition of the vegetation present, resulting in a change in wetland
functions but not in a gain in wetland acreage; or
e. A combination of the three types. Mitigation for any alteration to a
restoration and 3:1 for enhancement
2. Allowed alterations per wetland type and mitigation ratios are as follows:
a. Alterations are not permitted to Category I or II Type 1 wetlands
unless specifically exempted under the provisions of this Program.
Mitigation will still be required at a rate of 3:1 for creation or re-
establishment, 4:1 for rehabilitation. and 6:1 for enhancement.
b. Alterations to Category IIIType 2 wetlands are prohibited except
where the location or configuration of the wetland provides practical
difficulties that can be resolved by modifying up to .10 (one- tenth) of
an acre of wetland. Mitigation for any alteration to a Category IIIType
2 wetland must be located contiguous to the altered wetland.
Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III wetland must be
provided at a ratio of 2:1 for creation or re- establishment, 4:1 for
rehabilitation and 8:1 for enhancement alone.
c.. Alterations to Category IVTypc 3 wetlands are allowed, where
unavoidable and adequate mitigation is carried out in accordance with
the standards of this section. Mitigation for alteration to a Category IV
wetland will be 1.5:1 for creation or re- establishment and 3:1 for
rehabilitation or enhancement.
d. Isolated wetlands formed on fill material in highly disturbed
environmental conditions and assessed as having low overall wetland
functions (scoring below 20 points) may be altered and/or relocated
with the permission of the Director. These wetlands may include
artificial hydrology or wetlands unintentionally created as the result of
construction activities. The determination that a wetland is isolated is
made by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
CL 118 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
D. Watercourse Alterations
All impacts to a watercourse that degrade the functions and values of the watercourse
shall be avoided. If alternation to the watercourse is unavoidable, all adverse impacts
shall be mitigated in accordance with the approved mitigation plan as described in this
chapter. Mitigation shall take place on -site or as close as possible to the impact location,
and compensation shall be at a minimuml:1 ratio. Any mitigation shall result in
improved watercourse functions over existing conditions.
1. Diverting or rerouting may only occur with the permission of the Director and
an approved mitigation plan. Any watercourse that has critical wildlife habitat
or is necessary for the life cycle or spawning of sahnonids, shall not be
rerouted, unless it can be shown that the habitat will be improved for the
benefit of the species. A watercourse may be rerouted or day- lighted as a
mitigation measure to improve watercourse function.
2. Piping of any watercourse should be avoided. Relocation of a watercourse is
preferred to piping; if piping occurs in a watercourse sensitive area, it shall be
limited and shall require approval of the Director. Piping of Type 1
watercourses shall not be permitted. Piping may be allowed in Type 2, 3 or 4
watercourses if it is necessary for access purposes. Piping may be allowed in
Type 4 watercourses if the watercourse has a degraded buffer, is located in a
highly developed area and does not provide shade, temperature control etc. for
habitat. The applicant must comply with the conditions of this section,
including: providing excess capacity to meet needs of the system during a
100 -year flood event; and providing flow restrictors, and complying with
water quality and existing habitat enhancement procedures.
3. No process that requires maintenance on a regular basis will be acceptable
unless this maintenance process is part of the regular and normal facilities
maintenance process or unless the applicant can show funding for this
maintenance is ensured for as long as the use remains.
4. Piping projects shall be performed pursuant to the following applicable
standards:
a. The conveyance system shall be designed to comply with the standards
in current use and recommended by the Department of Public Works.
b. Where allowed, piping shall be limited to the shortest length possible
as determined by the Director to allow access onto a property.
c. Where water is piped for an access point, those driveways or entrances
shall be consolidated to serve multiple properties where possible, and
to minimize the length of piping.
d. When required by the Director, watercourses under drivable surfaces
shall be contained in an arch culvert using oversize or super span
culverts for rebuilding of a streambed. These shall be provided with
check dams to reduce flows, and shall be replanted and enhanced
according to a plan approved by the Director.
e. All watercourse crossing shall be designed to accommodate fish
CL 119 11/19/2009 12:55 00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
259
260
E. Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area Alterations
Alterations to the Green/Duwamish River are regulated by the shoreline provisions of this
SMP. Alterations to Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas that have been created as
restoration or habitat enhancement sites and that are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the
Shoreline Jurisdiction Map are prohibited and may only be authorized through a shoreline
variance procedure.
10.12 Sensitive Areas Mitigation
Mitigation shall be required for any proposals for dredging, filling, piping, diverting,
relocation or other alterations of sensitive areas in as allowed in this chapter and in
accordance with mitigation sequencing and the established mitigation ratios. The
mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a sensitive area study by a qualified
specialist.
A. Mitigation Sequencing.
passage. Watercourse crossings shall not block fish passage where the
streams are fish bearing.
f. Storm water runoff shall be detained and infiltrated to preserve the
watercourse channel's dominant discharge.
g. All construction shall be designed to have the least adverse impact on
the watercourse, buffer and surrounding environment.
h. Piping shall be constructed during periods of low flow, or as allowed
by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
i. Water quality must be as good or better for any water exiting the pipe
as for the water entering the pipe, and flow must be comparable.
Applicants shall demonstrate that reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent
to avoid and minimize impacts to sensitive areas and buffers. When an alteration to a
sensitive area or its required buffer is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided,
minimized or compensated for in the following order of preference:
1. Avoidance of sensitive area and buffer impacts, whether by finding another
site or changing the location of the proposed activity on -site;
2. Minimizing sensitive area and buffer impacts by limiting the degree of impact
on site;
3. Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or
substitution.
B. Criteria for Approval of Alterations and Mitigation
Alterations and mitigation plans are subject to Director approval, and may be approved
only if the following findings are made:
CL 120 11/19/2009 12 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
1. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality;
2. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat;
3. The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and/or stormwater
detention capabilities;
4. The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion
hazard or contribute to scouring actions;
5. The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property; and
6. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas or the
shoreline.
7. The mitigation will result in improved functions such as water quality, erosion
control, wildlife and fish habitat.
C. Mitigation Location
1. On -site mitigation shall be provided, except where it can be demonstrated
that:
a. On -site mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with
hydrology, soils, or other factors; or
b. Mitigation is not practical due to potentially adverse impacts from
surrounding land uses; or
c. Existing functional values created at the site of the proposed
restoration are significantly greater than lost sensitive area functions;
or
d. Established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat
or other sensitive area functions have been established and strongly
justify location of mitigation at another site.
2. Off -site mitigation shall occur within the shoreline jurisdiction in a location
where the sensitive area functions can be restored. Buffer impacts must be
mitigated at or as close as possible to the location of the impact.
3. Wetland creation, relocation of a watercourse, or creation of a new fish and
wildlife habitat shall not result in the new sensitive area or buffer extending
beyond the development site and onto adjacent property without the
agreement of the affected property owners, unless otherwise exempted by this
Shoreline Master Program.
D. Mitigation Plan Content and Standards
The scope and content of a mitigation plan shall be decided on a case -by -case basis. As
the impacts to the sensitive area increase, the mitigation measures to offset these impacts
will increase in number and complexity. The minimum components of a complete
mitigation plan are listed below. f�wsFor wetland mitigation plans, the format
should follow that established in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State. Part 2
Developing Mitigation Plans (Washington Department of Ecology, Corns of Engineers,
EPA, March 2006, as amended).
1. Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis
of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation
CL 121 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
261
262
site.
2. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the
mitigation measures. This should include a description of site selection
criteria, identification of target evaluation species, and resource functions.
3. Performance standards for the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental
goals, and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. They may
include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat
diversity indices, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. The
following shall be considered the minimum performance standards for
approved sensitive area alterations:
a. Sensitive area functions and improved habitat for fish and wildlife are
improved over those of the original conditions.
b. Hydrologic conditions, hydroperiods and watercourse channels are
improved over existing conditions and the specific performance
standards specified in the approved mitigation plan are achieved.
e. Acreage requirements for enhancement or creation are met.
f. Vegetation native to the Pacific Northwest is installed and vegetation
survival and coverage standards over time are met and maintained.
g. Buffer and bank conditions and functions exceed the original state.
h. Stream channel habitat and dimensions are maintained or improved
such that the fisheries habitat functions of the compensatory stream
reach meet or exceed that of the original stream.
4. A detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of
mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction
sequence and construction management, and be accompanied by detailed site
diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development
proposal.
5. Monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the approach and
freauencv for assessing a- progress ofd the completed project. An outline
shall be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated and
reporteding, and frequency.
6. Maintenance plan that outlines the activities and frequency of maintenance to
ensure compliance with performance standards.
7. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action and any corrective
measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project
performance standards have not been met.
8. Performance security or other assurance devices.
E. Mitigation Timing
1. Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently
disturb sensitive areas or their buffers and either prior to or immediately after
activities that will temporarily disturb sensitive areas.
2. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to
CL 122 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
3. Monitoring of buffer alterations shall be required for three to five years. All
other alterations shall be monitored for minimum of five years.
F. Corrective Actions and Monitoring
The Director shall require subsequent corrective actions and long -term monitoring of the
project if adverse impacts to regulated sensitive areas or their buffers are identified.
G. Recording
The property owner receiving approval of a use or development pursuant to the Shoreline
Master Program shall record the City- approved site plan clearly delineating the sensitive
area and its buffer with the King County Division of Records and Elections. The face of
the site plan must include a statement that the provisions of this Chapter, as of the
effective date of the ordinance from which the Shoreline Management Program derives or
thereafter amended, control use and development of the subject property, and provide for
any responsibility of the latent defects or deficiencies.
H. Assurance Device
existing wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use
or occupancy of the activity or development. The Director may allow
activities that permanently disturb wetlands or watercourses prior to
implementation of the mitigation plan under the following circumstances:
a. To allow planting or re- vegetation to occur during optimal weather
conditions;
b. To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or
c. To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing
or phasing.
1. The Director may require a letter of credit or other security device acceptable
to the City, to guarantee performance and maintenance requirements. All
assurances shall be on a form approved by the City Attorney.
2. When alteration of a sensitive area is approved, the Director may require an
assurance device, on a form approved by the City Attorney, to cover the
monitoring costs and correction of possible deficiencies for the term of the
approved monitoring and maintenance program. 3. The assurance device
shall be released by the Director upon receipt of written confirmation
submitted to the Department from the applicant's qualified professional that
the mitigation or restoration has met its performance standards and is
successfully established. Should the mitigation or restoration meet
performance standards and be successfully established in the third or fourth
year of monitoring, the City may release the assurance device early. The
assurance device may be held for a longer period, if at the end of the
CL 123 11/19/2009 12.55 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
263
264
monitoring period, the performance standards have not been met or the
mitigation has not been successfully established.
3. Release of the security does not absolve the property owner of responsibility
for maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies or other duties
under law.
CL 124 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
CL 125 11/19/2009 12:5500 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
265
2
11. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE
Public access to the shorelines of the state is one of the key goals of the Shoreline
Management Act of the seven uses identified in RCW 90.58.020 as having preference
in the shoreline, two relate to public access and recreational opportunities along the
shoreline.
The City of Tukwila is fortunate to have a number of public access sites already along the
Green/Duwamish River in addition to the Green River Trail, which runs along almost the
entire length of the river through the City. Other public access points are available at the
North Winds Wier, the Tukwila Community Center, Codiga Park, Bicentennial Park at
Strander Boulevard and parking available on Christianson Road and at S. 180 Street. A
future habitat restoration project is planned at Duwamish Riverbend Hill, on South 115
Street, which will also include public access to the river. The Public Access Map (Map 6)
identifies several street ends that could be improved or to which amenities could be added
that would offer opportunities for neighborhood access to the river and/or the Green
River Trail.
The Shoreline Public Access Map identifies several potential trail sites on the river to
supplement the existing Green River trail system. The largest stretch of potential trail
runs from S. 180 on the left bank to the end of south annexation area. A pedestrian
bridge to link the area south of S. 180 Street to the existing trail on the right bank is
being discussed as well. A second area where improvement is needed in public access
relates to boat launches for small hand launched boats. Several potential sites have been
identified in the Tukwila Parks Department Capital Improvement Program to address this
need at City -owned sites.
CL 126 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
267
268
11.1 Applicability_
A. Public access to or along the shoreline as described in Section 11 shall be provided on
all property that abuts the Green/Duwamish River shoreline in accordance with this
section as further discussed below where any of the following conditions are present.
1. Where a development or use will create increased demand for public access to
the shoreline, the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate
this impact.
2. Where a development or use will interfere with an existing public access way,
the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact.
Impacts to public access may include blocking access or discouraging use of
existing on -site or nearby accesses.
3. Where a use or development will interfere with a public use of lands or waters
subject to the public trust doctrine, the development shall provide public
access to mitigate this impact.
4. Where the development is proposed by a public entity or on public lands.
5. Where identified on the Shoreline Public Access Map.
For the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is determined
by evaluating whether the development reflects an increase in the land use intensity, for
example converting a warehouse to office or retail use, or a significant increase in the
square footage of an existing building. A significant increase is defined as an increase of
3,000 square feet. The extent of public access required will be proportional to the amount
of increase in the demand for public access. For smaller projects. the Director will
review the intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable
amount of public access to be carried out. Depending on the amount of increase. the
proiect may utilize the alternative provisions for meeting public access in Section 11.6.0.
The terms and conditions of Section 11.1 and 11.2 shall be deemed satisfied if the
applicant and the City agree upon a master trail plan providing for public paths and trails
within a parcel or group of parcels.
B. The provisions of this section do not apply to the following:
1. Short plats of four or fewer lots;
2. Where providing such access would cause unavoidable health or safety
hazards;
3. Where providing such access would create inherent and unavoidable security
problems; or
CL 127 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
4. Where providing such access would cause significant ecological impacts that
cannot be mitigated.
For items 2 -4 above, to qualify for an exemption, the procedures in 11.6 must be met.
11.2 General Standards
A. To improve public access to the Green/Duwamish River, sites shall be designed to
provide:
1. Safe, visible and accessible pedestrian and non motorized vehicle connections
between proposed development and the river's edge particularly when the site
is adjacent to the Green River Trail or other approved trail system; and
2. Public pathway entrances that are clearly visible from the street edge; and
3. Clearly identified pathways that are separate from vehicular circulation areas.
This may be accomplished through the use of special paving materials such as
precast pavers, bomonite, changes in color or distinct and detailed scoring
patterns and textures.
4. Site elements that are organized to clearly distinguish between public and
private access and circulation systems.
B. Required public access shall be fully developed and available for public use at the
time of occupancy in accordance with development permit conditions except where the
decision maker determines an appropriate mechanism for delayed public access
implementation is necessary for practical reasons. Where appropriate, a bond or cash
assignment may be approved, on review and approval by the Director of Community
Development, to extend this requirement for 90 days from the date the Certificate of
Occupancy is issued.
C. Public access easements and related permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed
of title or the face of the plat, short plat or approved site plan as a condition tied to the use
of the land. Recording with the County shall occur prior to the issuance of an Occupancy
Permit or final plat approval. Upon redevelopment of such a site, the easement may be
relocated to facilitate the continued public access to the shoreline.
D. Approved signs indicating the public's right of access and hours of access, if
restricted, shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the applicant in conspicuous
locations at public access sites. Signs should be designed to distinguish between public
and provide private areas. Signs controlling or restricting public access may be approved
as a condition of permit approval.
E. Required access must be maintained throughout the life of the project.
F. Public access features shall be separated from residential uses through the use of
CL 128 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
269
270
setbacks, low walls, berms, landscaping, or other device of a scale and materials
appropriate to the site.
E,GShared public access between developments is encouraged. Where access is to be
shared between adjacent developments, the minimum width for the individual access
easement may be reduced; provided that the total width of easements contributed by each
adjacent development equals a width that complies with Fire Department requirements
and/or exceeds the minimum for an individual access.
F H. Public access sites shall be connected directly to the nearest public area (e.g., street,
public park, or adjoining public access easement), typically the newest public ar a.
Where connections are not currently possible, the site shall be designed to accommodate
logical future connections.
11.3 Requirements for Shoreline Trails
A. Development on Properties Abutting Existing Green River Trail
Development on properties abutting the existing trail shall upgrade the trail along the
property frontage to meet the standards of a 14 foot wide trail with 2 foot shoulders on
each side.
B. Development on Properties Where New Trails are Planned
An 18 -foot wide trail easement dedicated to the City for public access along the river
shall be provided in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments (Shoreline Public
Access Map, Map-67).
11.4 Publiclv -Owned Shorelines
A. Shoreline development by any public entities, including but not limited to the City of
Tukwila, King County, port districts, state agencies, or public utility districts, shall
include public access measures as part of each development project, unless such access is
shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety, security, impact to the shoreline
environment or other provisions listed in this section.
B. The following requirements apply to street ends and City -owned property adjacent to
the River, as shown in Public Access Map, Map 76.
1. Public right -of -way and "road- ends," or portions thereof, shall not be vacated
and shall be maintained for future public access.
CL 129 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
e2. Unimproved right -of -ways and portions of right -of -ways, such as street ends
and turn-outs, shall be dedicated to public access uses until such time as the
portion becomes improved right -of -way. Uses shall be limited to passive
outdoor recreation, car top boat launching, fishing, interpretive /educational
uses, and/or parking, which accommodates these uses, and shall be designed
so as to not interfere with the privacy of adjacent residential uses.
3. City -owned facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall provide new
trails and trail connections to the Green River Trail in accordance with
approved plans and this SMP.
4. All City -owned recreational facilities within the shoreline jurisdiction, unless
qualifying for an exemption as specified in this Chapter, shall make adequate
provisions for
a. Nonmotorized and pedestrian access;
b. The prevention of trespass onto adjacent properties through
landscaping, fencing or other appropriate measures;
c. Signage indicating the public right -of -way to shoreline areas; and
d. Mechanisms to prevent environmental degradation of the shoreline
from public use.
11.5 Public Access Incentives
A. The minimum yard setback for buildings, uses, utilities or development from non-
riverfront lot lines may be reduced as follows:
1. Where development provides a public access corridor between off -site areas,
or public shoreline areas to public shoreline areas, one side yard may be
reduced to a zero lot line placement; or
2. Where development provides additional public access area(s) equal in area to
at least 2.5% of total building area, the front yard (the landward side of the
development) may be reduced by 50 percent.
B. The maximum height for structures may be increased by one story] 5%
when:
1. Development devotes at least 5% of its building or land area to public
shoreline access; or
2. Development devotes at least 10% of its land area to employee shoreline
access.
C. The maximum height for structures may be increased by a maximum of 25% when:,
1. One of the criteria under 11.5 B. is met; and
2. The applicant restores or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but,
not limited to paved areas no longer in use on the property to offset the impact of
the increase in height. Buffer restoration/enhancement oroiects undertaken to
CL 130 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
271
272
meet the requirements at 11.6 C. are not eligible for this incentive.
3. No combination of incentives from 11.5 B. 11.5 C or 9.3 C rav be used to
gain more than a 25% height increase.
FD. The maximum height for structures may be increased to the height
permitted in the underlying zoning district for properties that construct a 14' wide paved
trail with a two -foot wide shoulder on each side for public access along the river in areas
identified for new shoreline trail segments, or where, in the case of properties containing
or abutting existing public access trails, the existing trail either meets the standard of a 14
foot wide trail with two foot shoulders on either side or the property owner provides any
necessary easements and improvements to upgrade the existing trail to that standard
along the property frontage.
11.6 Exemptions from Provision of On -Site Public Access
A. Requirements for providing on -site general public access, as distinguished from
employee access, will not apply if the applicant can demonstrate one or more of the
following:
1. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist related to the primary
use that cannot be prevented by any practical means;
2 Inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the
application of alternative design features or other solutions;
3. The cost of providing the access, easement or other public amenity on or off
the development site is unreasonably disproportionate to the total long -term
cost of the proposed development.
4. Unavoidable environmental harm or net loss of shoreline ecological functions
that cannot be adequately mitigated will result from the public access.
5. Access is not feasible due to the configuration of existing parcels and
structures, such that access areas are blocked in a way that cannot be remedied
reasonably by the proposed development.
6. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between the proposed access and
adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated.
7. Space is needed for water dependent uses or navigation.
B. In order to meet any of the above referenced conditions, the applicant must first
demonstrate, and the City determine in its findings through a Type II decision, that all
reasonable alternatives have been exhausted, including but not limited to:
1. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and/or limiting hours
of use;
2. Designing separation of uses and activities through fencing, terracing, hedges
or other design features; or
3. Providing access on a site geographically separate from the proposal such as a
street end cannot be accomplished.
CL 131 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
C. If the above conditions are demonstrated, and the proposed development is not
subject to the Parks Impact Fee, alternative provisions for meeting public access are
required and include:
1. Development of public access at an adjacent street end;
2. Protection through easement or setbacks of landmarks, unique natural
features or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential
3. Contribution of materials and/or labor, toward shoreline projects identified
in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the Shoreline Restoration Plan, or
other City adopted plan; or
4. At the Director's discretion. the applicant may provide
restoration /enhancement of the shoreline jurisdiction to a scale commensurate
with the foregone public access in lieu of public access.
CL 132 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W\ Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
273
274
12. SHORELINE DESIGN GUIDELINES
The Green/Duwamish River is an amenity that should be valued and celebrated when
designing projects that will be located along its length. If any portion of a project falls
within the shoreline jurisdiction, then the entire project will be reviewed under these
guidelines as well as the relevant sections of the Design Review Chapter of the Zoning
Code (TMC 18.60). The standards of TMC Chapter 18.60 shall guide the type of review,
whether administrative or by the Board of Architectural Review.
The following standards apply to development, uses and activities in the Urban
Conservancy and High Intensity Environments and non residential development in the
Shoreline Residential Environment.
12.1 Relationshin of Structure to Site
Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the
following:
A. Respect and reflect the shape of the shoreline;
B. Orient building elements to site such that public river access, both visual and physical
is enhanced;
C. Orient buildings to allow for casual observation of pedestrian and trail activity from
interior spaces;
D. Site and orient buildings to provide maximum views from building interiors toward
the river and the shoreline;
E. Orient public use areas and private amenities to the river;
F. Clearly allocate spaces, accommodating parking, vehicular circulation and buildings
to preserve existing stands of vegetation or trees so that natural areas can be set aside,
improved, or integrated into site organization and planning;
G. Clearly define and separate public from non public spaces with the use of paving,
signage, and landscaping.
CL 133 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
12.2 Building Design
Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the
following:
A. To prevent building mass and shape from overwhelming the desired human scale
along the river, development shall avoid blank walls on the public and river sides of
buildings.
B. Buildings should be designed to follow the curve of the river and respond to changes
in topography; buildings must not "turn their back" to the river.
C. Design common areas in buildings to take advantage of shoreline views and access;
incorporate outdoor seating areas that are compatible with shoreline access.
D. Consider the height and scale of each building in relation to the site.
E. Extend site features such as plazas that allow pedestrian access and enjoyment of the
river to the landward side of the buffer's edge.
F. Locate lunchrooms and other common areas to open out onto the water -ward side of
the site to maximize enjoyment of the River.
G. Design structures to take advantage of the river frontage location by incorporating
features such as:
1. plazas and landscaped open space that connect with a shoreline trail system;
2. windows that offer views of the river; or
3. pedestrian entrances that face the river.
H. View obscuring fencing is permitted only when necessary for documentable use
requirements and must be designed with landscaping per the Vegetation Protection
and Landscaping Section. Other fencing, when allowed, must be designed to
complement the proposed and/or existing development materials and design; and
I. Where there are public trails, locate any fencing between the site and the landward
side of the shoreline trail.
12.3 Design of Public Access
Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the
following:
A. Public access shall be barrier free, where feasible, and designed consistent with the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
CL 134 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
2 755
276
B. Public access landscape design shall use native vegetation, in accordance with the
standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Additional landscape
features may be required where desirable to provide public /private space separation and
screening of utility, service and parking areas.
C. Furniture used in public access areas shall be appropriate for the proposed level of
development, and the character of the surrounding area. For example, large urban
projects should provide formal benches; for smaller projects in less developed areas,
simpler, less formal benches or suitable alternatives are appropriate.
D. Materials used in public access furniture, structures or sites shall be:
1. Durable and capable of withstanding exposure to the elements;
2. Environmentally friendly and take advantage of technology in building
materials, lighting, paved surfaces, porous pavement, etc, wherever practical;
and
3. Consistent with the character of the shoreline and the anticipated use.
E. Public- Private Separation
1. Public access facilities shall look and feel welcoming to the public, and not
appear as an intrusion into private property.
2. Natural elements such as logs, grass, shrubs, and elevation separations are
encouraged as means to define the separation between public and private
space.
CL 135 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
CL 136 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
277
278
13. SHORELINE RESTORATION
The Shoreline Restoration Plan, found in Appendix B. identifies the sites that have been,
identified to -date as possible locations for habitat restoration along the Green /Duwalnish
River. The City will continue to add sites to the Restoration Plan as they are identified
and will include them in the Citv's Capital Improvement Program for acauisition and
improvement. Project sites in the Transition Zone have the highest priority for
acquisition. Amendments or revisions to the Restoration Plan do not require an
amendment to the Shoreline Master Prog. am.
13.1 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Not Required
Shoreline restoration projects shall be allowed without a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit when these projects meet the criteria established by WAC 173-27
040(o) and (p) and H.B. 2199.
613.2 Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction due to Restoration
Relief may be granted from shoreline master Program standards and use regulations iln_
cases where shoreline restoration projects result in a change in the location of the OHWM
and associated shoreline jurisdiction on the subject property and/or adjacent properties
and where application of shoreline master Program
regulations would preclude or interfere with the uses permitted by the underlying zoning,
thus presenting a hardship to the project proponent.
CL 137 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
279
280
A. Applications for relief. as specified on subsection B below must meet the
following criteria:
1. The proposed relief is the minimum necessary to relieve the hardship;
2. After granting the proposed relief. there is net environmental benefit from
the restoration proiect; and
3. Granting the proposed relief is consistent with the obiectives of the
shoreline restoration protect and with the shoreline master program.
Where a shoreline restoration proiect is created as mitigation to obtain a
development permit. the protect proponent reauired to perform the mitigation is
not eligible for relief under the provisions of this section.
B. The portion of property that moves from outside shoreline jurisdiction to inside
shoreline jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project:
1. may be developed for the full range of uses of the underlying zoning
consistent with the zoning code, including uses that are not water
oriented;
2. is not required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit;
3. is not subject to the SMP provisions for public access;
4. may be developed for the full range of uses of the underlying zoning is
not subject to shoreline design review; and
5. while required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit if
over the thresholds, is not subiect to the development standards set forth
in this Program. except as set forth in Section 13.2 C.
The intent of the exemptions identified in A 1 -4 is to implement the restoration projects
of the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan, which reflect the projects identified in
the Water Resource Inventory (WRIA) 9 Plan pursuant to Policy 5.2 of this Master
Program. Proiects will continue to be added to the Restoration Plan as they are
identified.
C. Consistent with the provisions of subsection A. above. tThe Shoreline Residential
Environment Buffer, High Intensity or Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer width
may be reduced to no less than 25 feet measured from the new location of the OHWM for
the portion of the property that moves from outside the shoreline jurisdiction to inside
shoreline jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project, subject to the
following standards:
1. The 25 foot buffer area must be vegetated according to the requirements of the
Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section or as otherwise approved by
the City; and
2. The proponents of the restoration project are responsible for the installation
and maintenance of the vegetation.
CL 138 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
D. The habitat restoration project proponents must record with King County a survey
that identifies the location of the OHWM location prior to implementation of the
shoreline restoration project, any Dronerties and structures that fall within the shoreline
jurisdiction and the new location of the OHWM once construction of the shoreline
restoration project is completed and any nronerties that are brou:tht under shoreline
iurisdiction due to the restoration nroiect. As the location of the OHWM is not static. it
may be necessary for future r'roiects to re- survey the location of the OHWM.
D. Shoreline restoration projects must obtain all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife approvals as well as written approval
from the City.
CL 139 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
281
282
CL 140 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
14. ADMINISTRATION
The Administrative procedures below are designed to:
Assign responsibilities for implementation of the Master Program and
Shoreline Permit
Establish an orderly process by which to review proposals and permit
applications
Ensure that all persons affected by this Master Program are treated in a fair
and equitable manner
14.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development
Permit
A. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction
Based on guidelines in the Shoreline Management Act for a minimum shoreline
jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows:
B. Applicability
The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the
Green/Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends
from the ordinary high water mark landward for 200 feet on each
side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its
floodplain. The floodwav shall not include those lands that have
historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore
have not been subject to floodint with reasonable rerulcirity.
The Tukwila Shoreline Master Program applies to uses, change of uses, activities or
development that occurs within the above defined Shoreline jurisdiction. All proposed
uses and development occurring within the shoreline jurisdiction must conform to chapter
90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act and this master program whether or not a
permit is required.
14.2 Substantial Development Permit Requirements
A. Permit Application Procedures
Applicants for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall comply with permit
application procedures. in—TMC 1- 8.1 -04:
CL 141 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
283
284
B. Exemptions
A. Purpose
1. To qualify for an exemption, the proposed use, activity or development must
meet the requirements for an exemption as described in WAC 173 -27 -040,
except for properties that meet the requirements of the Shoreline Restoration
Section. The purpose of a shoreline exemption is to provide a process for uses
and activities which do not trigger the need for a substantial development
permit, but require compliance with all provisions of the City's SMP.
2. The Director may impose conditions to the approval of exempted
developments and or uses as necessary to assure compliance of the project
with the SMA and the Tukwila SMP, per WAC 173- 27- 040(e). For example,
in the case of development subject to a building permit, but exempt from the
shoreline permit process, the Building Official or other permit authorizing
official, through consultation with the Director, may attach shoreline
management terms and conditions to Building Permits and other permit
approvals pursuant to RCW 90.58.140.
14.3 Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
As stated in WAC 173 -27 -160, the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is
to allow greater flexibility in the application of use regulations of the Shoreline
Master Program in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. In
authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by
the City or the Department of Ecology to prevent undesirable effects of the
proposed use and/or assure consistency of the project with the SMA and the
City's SMP. Uses which are specifically prohibited by the Shoreline Master
Program may not be authorized with approval of a CUP.
B. Application
Applicants for a Shoreline Conditional Use Permits shall comply with all current permit
application procedures. are a Type 1 Permit proccsseed un e C 1- 8.1104.
C.
Applicants must mcct all requirements for permit application and approvals
indicated in TMC 18.104 and the SMP.
D. Approval Criteria
1. Uses classified as conditional uses may be authorized, provided that the
CL 142 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
a. That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW
90.58.020 and the policies of the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program;
b. That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of
public shorelines
c. That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be
compatible with other permitted uses within the area and with uses
planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and SMP;
d. That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the
shoreline environment in which it is to be located; and
e. That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
2. In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to
the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For
example, if conditional use permits were granted to other developments in the
area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall
also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and all local
ordinances and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline
environment.
11.1 ohoreline Unclassified Permits
A. Purpose
B A pp l; a ti,
L'• I�IIlZTCGnTII
permit.
D,Approval-GFiteria
can demonstrate all of the following:
CL 143
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
;c cale�
f use as set forth in this- shoreline master program.
11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
285
286
the policies of thc Tukwila Shoreline Master Program.
a with the normal public use of public
shorelines
other permitted uses within the ar and with uses planned for the arca under
the comprehensive plan and SMP;
That thc proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline
environment in which it is to be located;
That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity;
district it will occupy.
In the event that a proposed essential public facility of a countywide or statewide
nature cr ates an unavoidable significant adverse environmental or economic
-'ty, :,orpensatory mitigation shall be required.
Compensatory mitigation shall include public amenities, incentives or other
public benefits a
essential public facility. Where appropriate, compensatory mitigation shall be
provided as close to the affected ar as possible; and
For uscs in residential ar -c, applicants shall demonstrate that there is no
14.45 Shoreline Variance Permits
A. Purpose
B. Application requirements
.58.920-and
The purpose of a Shoreline Variance Permit is strictly limited to granting relief from
specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this Master Program
where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the physical character
or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of the Master Program
will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the Shoreline Management
Act policies as stated in RCW 90.58.020. Reasonable Use requests that are located in the
shoreline must be processed as a Variance, until such time as the Shoreline Management
Act is amended to establish a process for reasonable uses.
Applicants for a Shoreline Variance shall comply with all current permit application
proceduresmust meet all requirements for a Typc 3 permit application and approvals
indicated in TMC 18.101..
CL 144 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
C. Shoreline Variance permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the
permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all
instances the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and the
public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
D. Approval Criteria
A Shoreline Variance Permit for a use, activity or development that will be located
landward of the ordinary high water mark and/or landward of any wetland may be
authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional, or performance standards
set forth in the Master Program preclude or significantly interfere with a
reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by the Master
Program;
2. That the hardship described above is specifically related to the property and is
the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural
features and the application of the Master Program, and not from the owner's
own actions or deed restrictions; and that the variance is necessary because of
these conditions in order to provide the owner with use rights and privileges
permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
situated;
3. That the design of the project will be compatible with other authorized uses
within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive
plan and SMP and will not cause adverse impacts to adjacent properties or the
shoreline environment;
4. That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed
by other properties in the area;
5. That the variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief; and
6. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
CL 145 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
287
288
E. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM
1. Shoreline Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located
either waterward of the ordinary high water mark or within any sensitive area
may be authorized only if the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
a. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance
standards set forth in this Master Program preclude all reasonable
permitted use of the property; and
b. That the proposal is consistent with the criteria established under D
above; and
c. The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be
adversely affected by the granting of the variance.
2. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area such that
the total of the variances would remain consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and
not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
3. Variances from the use regulations of the master program are prohibited.
14.65 Non conforming Develonment
A. Pie existing Non- conformine Uses
Any preexisting lawful use of land that would not be allowed under the terms of this SMP
may be continued as an allowed, legal pre existingnon conforming use, defined in TMC
Chapter 18.06, or as her ter amended, so long as that use remains lawful, subject to the
following:
1. No such prc existing non- confonninu use shall be enlarged, intensified,
increased or extended to occupy a greater use of the land, structure or
combination of the two, than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of
this SMP unless TMC 18.66.120 applies;
2. No prc existing non- confonnin2 use shall be moved or extended in whole or
in part to any other portion of the lot or parcel occupied by such use at the
effective date of adoption or amendment of this SMP;
3. If any such prc existing non- confonnina use ceases for any reason for a period
of more than 24 consecutive months, any subsequent use shall conform to the
regulations specified by this SMP for the shoreline environment in which such
use is located. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24
consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may
grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months, Der 14.5 C.
The City Council shall consider special circumstances and economic effects in
CL 146 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
4. If a change of use is proposed to a use determined to be pre existingnon-
confonning by application of provisions in this SMP, the proposed new use
must be a permitted use in the SMP or a use approved under a Conditional
Use or Unclassified Use Permit process,. For purposes of implementing this
section, a change of use constitutes a change from one Permitted, Conditional
or Unclassified Use category to another such use category as listed within the
zoning code.
5. A structure that is being or has been used for a nonconforming use may be
used for a different nonconforming use after demonstrating the following
criteria have been met only upon the approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use
before
findings must be made:
a. No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical;
b. The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and
provisions of the SMP and as compatible with the uses in the area as the
preexisting use:
c. The use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to
the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional
purpose_.
d. The structure(s) associated with the non conforming use shall not be
expanded in a manner that increases the extent of the nonconformity:.
e. The change in use will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological
functions and /or processes;
f. The applicant restores and or /enhances the entire shoreline buffer,
including but not limited to raved areas no longer in use on the property.
to offset the impact of the change of use Per the vegetation management
standards of this program. This may include the restoration of paved
areas to vegetated area if no longer in use: and
g. The use complies with the conditional use permit criteria of this
Program.
The preference is to reduce exterior uses in the buffer to the maximum
extent possible.
B. Pre cxistingNon- conformin>3 Structures
Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption of the SMP that could not
be built under the terms of the SMP by reason of restrictions on height, buffers or other
CL 147 11/19/2009 12:55.00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
289
290
characteristics of the structure, it may be continued as an allowed, legal structure so long
as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the following provisions:
1. No such structure may be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its
degree of nonconformity or increases its impacts to the functions and values
of the shoreline environment. Ordinary maintenance and repair of and
upgrades to a pre existingnon- conforming structure is permitted, including
but not limited to painting, roof repair and replacement, plumbing, wiring,
mechanical equipment repair /replacement, repaving and weatherization. These
and other alterations, additions or enlargements may be allowed as long as the
work done does not extend further into any required buffer, increase the
amount of impervious surface, or increase the impacts to the functions and
values of the shoreline environment. Complete plans shall be required of all
work contemplated under this section.
2. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means the structure may
be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided
application is made for permits within twelve (12) months of the date the
dainaae occurred and all reconstruction is completed within two years of
permit issuance. In the event that the property is redeveloped, such
redevelopment must be in conformity with the provisions of this SMP.
3. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance whatsoever, it
shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this SMP after it is moved.
4. When a pre cxistingnon- conforming structure, or structure and premises in
combination, is vacated or abandoned for 24 consecutive months, the
structure, or structure and premises in combination, shall thereafter be
required to be in conformance with the regulations of the SMP. Upon request
of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, and upon
reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time
beyond the 24 consecutive months per 14.5 C. The City Council shall
consider special circumstances and economic impacting the sale or ]case of
said structure.
5. Residential structures and uses located in any single family or multiple family
residential zoning district and in existence at the time of adoption of this SMP
shall not be deemed nonconforming in terms of height, use, or location
provisions of this title. Such buildings may be rebuilt after a fire or other
natural disaster to their original dimensions, location and height, but may not
be changed except as provided in the pre -end ngnon- conforming uses section
of this chapter.
6. Single family structures in single- or multiple family residential zone districts,
which have legally pre existingnon- conforming setbacks from the OHWM per
the SMP buffer, shall be allowed to expand the ground floor only along the
existing building line(s), so long as the existing distance from the nearest
point of the structure to the OHWM is not reduced, and the square footage of
CL 148 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W• \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
new intrusion into the buffer does not exceed 50% of the square footage of the
current intrusion. As a condition of approval a landscape plan showing
removal of invasive plant species within the entire shoreline buffer and
replanting with appropriate native species must be submitted to the City.
Maintenance of these plantings through the establishment period is required.
7. Within the shoreline jurisdiction, existing structures that do not meet the
requirements of the SMP may be remodeled, reconstructed or replaced,
provided that:
a. The new construction is within the original dimensions and location on
the lot;
b. The new construction does not further intrude into or adversely impact
the required buffer;
welfare; and
d. The structure otherwise meets the requirements of the SMn
c. The use or activity is enlarged. intensified. increased or altered only to
the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended fimctional
purpose:
d. The reconstruction will not create adverse impacts to shoreline
ecological functions and/or processes:
e. For properties in non leveed portions of the river. the applicant re-
slopes the bank to a 2.5:1 or 3:1 angle as appropriate for the shoreline
environment designation and restores and/or enhances the entire shoreline
buffer. including but not limited to paved areas no longer in use on the
property. For properties behind levees that do not meet the minimum,
profile, restore and /or enhance the remaining buffer area and remove,
invasive vegetation and plant with native vegetation on the levee prism as
permitted by the COE: and
f. The property owner applies for and is granted approval of a Shoreline
Conditional Use Permit.
8. A prc e->istinanon- conforming —use, within a pre existingnon- conforming
structure, shall not be allowed to expand into any other portion of the
structure.
C. Reauests for Time Extension Nonconforming Uses and Structures
A property owner may request, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, an
CL 149 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
291
292
extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months. Such a request (hall be
considered as a conditional use permit and may be approved only when:
1. For a nonconforming use. a finding is made that no reasonable alternative
conforming use is practical;
2. For a nonconforming structure. special economic circumstances prevent
the lease or sale of said structure within 24 months: and
3. The applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer on the property
to offset the impact of the continuation of the pre existing use. For
nonconforming uses, the amount of buffer to be restored and/or enhanced
will be determined based on the percentage of the existing building used
by the nonconforming use for which a time extension is being reauested.
Depending on the size of the area to be restored and /or enhanced. the
Director may require targeted plantings rather than a linear planting
arrangement. The vegetation management standards of this Program shall
be used for guidance on any restoration/enhancement. For nonconforming
structures, for each six month extension of time reauested, 15% of the
available buffer must be restored/enhanced..
Conditions may be attached to the permit that are deemed necessary to assure
compliance with the above findings, the reauirements of the master program and
the Shoreline Management Act and to assure that the use will not become a
nuisance or a hazard.
DE. Building Safety
Nothing in this SMP shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a
safe condition of any pre existingnon- conforming building or part thereof declared to
be unsafe by order of any City official charged with protecting the public safety.
12. Alterations or expansion of a pre -exi non- conforming use which are
required by law or a public agency in order to comply with public health or
safety regulations are the only alterations or expansions allowed.
23-. Alterations or expansions permitted under this section shall be the minimum
necessary to meet the public safety concerns.
1 ED. r-e cxistin °Non conforming Parking Lots
1. Nothing contained in this SMP shall be construed to require a change in any
aspect of a structure or facility covered thereunder including, without
limitation, parking lot layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, for
any structure or facility which existed on the date of adoption of this SMP.
2. If a change of use takes place, or an addition is proposed, which requires an
increase in the parking area by an increment less than 100 the requirements
of the SMP shall be complied with for the additional parking area.
CL 150 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
3. If a change of use takes place, or an addition is proposed, which requires an
increase in the parking area by an increment greater than 100 the
requirements of the SMP shall be complied with for the entire parking area.
1 FE. Pre existing Landscape Areas
1. Adoption of the vegetation protection and landscaping regulations contained
in this SMP shall not be construed to require a change in the landscape
improvements for any legal landscape area which existed on the date of
adoption of this SMP, unless and until the property is redeveloped or
alteration of the existing structure beyond the thresholds provided herein.
2. At such time as the property is redeveloped or the existing structure is altered
beyond the thresholds provided herein and the associated premises does not
comply with the vegetation protection and landscaping requirements of this
SMP, a landscape plan which conforms to the requirements of this SMP shall
be submitted to the Director for approval.
CL 151 11/19/2009 12.55.00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
293
294
CL 152 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document\Council SMP
15. APPEALS
Any appeal of a decision by the City on a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit,
Shoreline Conditional Use, Unclassified Use or Shoreline Variance must be appealed to
the Shoreline Hearing Board.
16. ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES
16.1 Violations
The following actions shall be considered violations of the Master Program:
A. To use, construct or demolish any structure, or to conduct clearing, earth moving,
construction or other development not authorized under a Substantial Development
Permit, Conditional Use Permit or Variance Permit, where such permit is required by the
Master Program.
B. Any work which is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other
requirements in a permit approved pursuant to the Master Program, provided that the
terms or conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans.
C. To remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in
accordance with the Master. Program.
D. To misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information
submitted to obtain any shoreline use or development authorization.
E. To fail to comply with the requirements of the Master Program.
16.2 Enforcement
It shall be the duty of the Director to enforce the Master Program subject to the terms and
conditions of TMC Chapter 8.45.
16.3 Inspection Access
A. For the purpose of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a permit or the
Master Program, authorized representatives of the Director may enter all sites for which a
Permit has been issued.
CL 153 11/19/2009 12.55 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
295
296
B. Upon completion of all requirements of a Permit, the applicant shall request a final
inspection by contacting the planner of record. The permit process is complete upon final
approval by the planner.
16.4 Penalties
A. Any violation of any provision of the SMP, or failure to comply with any of the
requirements of the SMP shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in Chapter 8.45 of
the Tukwila Municipal Code "Enforcement and shall be imposed pursuant to the
procedures and conditions set forth in that chapter.
B. Penalties assessed for violations of the SMP shall be determined by TMC Chapter
8.45.100, Penalties.
C. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a Permit required by
the Master Program, that a contractor, subcontractor, person with responsibility on the
site, or person authorizing or directing the work, erroneously believed a permit had been
issued to the property owner or any other person.
16.5 Remedial Measures Reauired
In addition to penalties provided in TMC Chapter 8.45, the Director may require any
person conducting work in violation of the Master Program to mitigate the impacts of
unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures.
A. Remedial measures must conform to the policies and guidelines of the Master
Program and the Shoreline Management Act.
B. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of the Master
Program shall be borne by the property owner and/or applicant.
16.6 Iniunctive Relief
A. Whenever the City has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or
threatening to violate the Master Program or any rule or other provisions adopted or
issued pursuant to the Master Program, it may either before or after the institution of any
other action or proceeding authorized by this Ordinance, institute a civil action in the
name of the City for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation.
Such action shall be brought in King County Superior Court.
B. The institution of an action for injunctive relief under this section shall not relieve any
party to such proceedings from any civil or criminal penalty prescribed for violations of
CL 154 11/19/2009 12:55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP
the Master Program.
16.7 Abatement
Any use, structure, development or work that occurs in violation of the Master Program,
or in violation of any lawful order or requirement of the Director pursuant to this Section,
shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner provided by the
Tukwila Municipal Code 8.45.105.
17. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS
17.1. This Master Program shall be periodically reviewed and adjustments shall be made
as are necessary to reflect changing local circumstances, new infoimation or
improved data, and changes in State statutes and regulations. This review process
shall be consistent with WAC 173 1926 and shall include a local citizen
involvement effort and public hearing to obtain the views and comments of the
public.
17.2 Any provision of this Master Program may be amended as provided for in RCW
90.58 and WAC 173 -19.26 Amendments or revisions to the Master Program, as
provided by law, do not become effective until approved by the Washington State
Department of Ecology.
17.3 Proposals for shoreline environment re- designations (i.e. amendments to the
shoreline maps and descriptions) must demonstrate consistency with the criteria set
forth in WAC 17346 26 -040 and this program.
18. LIABILITY
18.1. Liability for any adverse impacts or damages resulting from work performed in
accordance with a Permit issued on behalf of the City within the City limits, shall be
the sole responsibility of the owner of the site for which the Permit was issued.
18.2 No provision of or term used in the Master Program is intended to impose any duty
upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages
in a civil action.
CL 155 11/19/2009 12.55:00 PM
W \Shoreline \Council Review\ \Document \Council SMP
297
298
Map 1
Potential
Annexation
Areas
Legend
ED Tukwila City Limits
Potential Annexation Areas
Water Bodies
6107
Source:
City of Tukwila GIS,
tang County GIS
1' =.5 miles
Map 2
Duwamish River Transition Zone
C'-,'tinues to
Elliott Bay
r.
dos ow ow 1.•
River Ole 4
S86 pi
S PI
l.
s.
S.
S
280
t am *as eal**••••■••• Ion as
Ea S 112 St
Map 2
Pccess
Upriver edge of
transition zone
S 115t
River mile
599—
6107
Source:
City of Tukwila GIS,
King County GIS
Map 3
Annexation
History
Legend
L_ .1 Tukwila City Limits
Water Bodies
I Shoreline Annexed After 1974
1 =.5 miles
Reach G2
PAA
Reach 32
NJ
Turning Basin
Legend
Tukwila City Limits
PM Potential Annexation Areas
Urban Conservancy Shoreline Environment
High Intensity Shoreline Environment
Shoreline Residential Environment CIO
RIPUNNNGIShorNlna DATA& NaoaWao 491torslln.EnvWonm.nGmxd
r.. WLt
Reach G 1 PM
Map 4
Proposed
Shoreline
Environments
Reac_ l G1
I Turning Basin
North Wads:
Weir
I
Legend
Tukwila City Limits
Shoreline Annexed After 1974
IIIII Potential Annexation Area
Green Duwamish River
7A38
GIS
atorrukIlla GIS
Mop Gaudy GIS
Sii Sti
anverniehi
Riverhead
RAM&
.1110%
ara Park
Cgroh
odig
.4c
PE*
iy
17
57th Ave. S
*ire Pat*
0 1
a
S
E
15
Map 5
Shoreline
Armoring
Bkeatelif
Cs,
S 200th St
S 20445 St
.Coe
kleenderPerk
Peel) 14!
Legend
Slope Classifications
I Turning Basin
Type 2 Stream
Type 2 Stream in Pipe
Type 3 Stream
Type 3 Stream in Pipe
Type 4 Stream
Type 4 Stream in Pipe
Type 2 Watercourse Buffer (100')
Type 3 Watercourse Buffer (80')
Type 4 Watercourse Buffer (50')
200ft Shoreline Jurisdiction
Tukwila City Limits
Type 2 Shoreline Wetland
Type 2 Shoreline Wetland Buffer (80')
Fish Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area
Landslide potential is moderate; slope is between 15%
240% underlain by relatively permeable soils.
Landslide potential is high; dope is between 15% 40%
1 I underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock;
3 also indudesall areas sloping more than 40
Landslide potential is very high; includes sloping areas
with mappable zones of groundwater seepage and
4existing mappable landslide deposits regardless of slope.
sm
City of Tukwila GIS
King County GIS
7pe
a
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas shown are Salmon habitat enhancement
projects completed or underway. The river itself is also a Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Area.
S 1GSt
T
s204St
52000
1w..5 MILE
I
a.
r
Map 6
Sensitive
Areas In the
Shoreline
The mapping of areas of potential
geologic instability is approximate. On
site verification of topography and
geology is necessary. Wetland and
locations are approximate only and
watercourses shown on this map have
not been surveyed.
Legend
ED Tukwila City Limits
Potential Annexation Areas
City of Tukwila Property
Interurban Trail
Green River Trail
Potential New Trail
•-ek•-•-• Proposed Riverwalk
Street Ends Potential
Public Access
k: l
112
r '7' ....7,.....
‘.-.0katra-
1
)4 Greed River
Trail
jta..„
IF_ _1
g
Se
1 14;1
L :^1 40 St t 1— 1
1
V i t
1 k
1
I S S :78: 1i
i
.i_ S 152 St G t r3
I
I t, S 152 St
t 1
S 1S0 St
I
t
1
Api4 r 11 i
'''44 4
5
Tulatiterky avd
1 0# 1
i
is.... --1,
1 i
So........,...,s S
t Strandet Deli
1 t, ,i' i
kl
1 i I
x '6
t' lj 1
1 atokrand -V I i
1 "4•1,
Id 1k
1 I
I odland Dr! 1 i
r 1
sa,7 Inland Dri
also
I
le 3 4-et),
i?
ti
1.1
0
A
GIS
4
8 St 4 1
Map 7
Shoreline
Public Access
I.
m air NA Si
Trail
Potential
Trail
Proposed
Rivenvalk
Draft
CITY OF TUKWILA
SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE
Cumulative Impacts Analysis
Prepared for;
City of Tukwila
July 2008
313
314
Introduction
With the assistance of a grant from the Department of Ecology, the City of Tukwila is updating its Shoreline
Master Program (SMP) consistent with state guidelines (WAC Chapter 173 -26). Under the shoreline guidelines,
local jurisdictions are required to evaluate and consider cumulative impacts of reasonably foreseeable future
development in the shorelines of the state (WAC 173- 26- 186(8)(d)). This report assesses the cumulative impacts
of development and activities in the shoreline over time under the proposed amendments to the City of Tukwila
SMP and was prepared as a grant deliverable (SMA Grant No. G0600234, Task 9).
At this point in time, the proposed amendments to the SMP have been reviewed by Department of Ecology.
Tukwila staff has made revisions to the draft as a result of Ecology's initial review and the Planning Commission
and City Council will begin review of this revised draft soon. Accordingly, this analysis should be considered
preliminary and may be revised as revisions to the draft SMP update are incorporated during local adoption of the
SMP amendments or approval by Department of Ecology.
For the City of Tukwila, shorelines of the state in the city limits and Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) include
approximately 13.6 river miles of the Green/Duwamish River, between approximately river mile (RM) 17.3 and
RM 3.7. The Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila is designated as a "shoreline of statewide significance," having
a mean annual flow greater than 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs).
The purpose of evaluating cumulative impacts is to insure that, when implemented over time, the proposed SMP
goals, policies and regulations will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions from current "baseline"
conditions. Baseline conditions are identified and described in the Final Shoreline Inventory and Characterization
Report (May 2007); Appendix A to the draft SMP. The SMP provides standards and procedures to evaluate
individual uses or developments for their potential to impact shoreline resources on a case -by -case basis through
the permitting process. The purpose of this memorandum is to determine if impacts to shoreline ecological
functions are likely to result from the aggregate of activities and developments in the shoreline that take place
over time.
The state guidelines establish that, "to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and protection of other shoreline
functions and /or uses, master programs shall contain policies, programs, and regulations that address adverse
cumulative impacts and fairly allocate the burden of addressing cumulative impacts among development
opportunities. Evaluation of such cumulative impacts should consider:
Current circumstances affecting the shorelines and relevant natural processes;
Reasonably foreseeable future development and use of the shoreline; and
Beneficial effects of any established regulatory programs under other local, state, and federal laws.
This cumulative impacts assessment uses these three considerations as a framework for evaluating the potential
long -term impacts on shoreline ecological functions and processes that may result from development or activities
under the proposed SMP over time.
Current Circumstances
As part of the City's SMP update, an Inventory and Characterization Report and Map Folio was prepared in
December 2006, and was finalized in the spring of 2007 following technical review by Ecology and King County.
1 WAC 173- 26- 286(8)(d)
1
The final report and map folio is included as Appendix A to the SMP. The inventory and characterization report
identifies existing conditions and evaluates the ecological functions and processes in the City's shoreline
jurisdiction. The inventory included a characterization of ecosystem processes functioning at a watershed scale, as
well as an inventory and assessment of conditions in all shoreline areas within the City of Tukwila and its
Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) (shown below as the "shoreline planning area The term "shoreline
planning area" refers to the approximate area within the City's shoreline jurisdiction, or areas subject to SMP
regulations, as shown in Figure 1. The following sections summarize baseline conditions, or current
circumstances, with regard to Tukwila's shorelines.
Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications
The City of Tukwila is situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands at the transition from the fresh water Green River to
the tidally influenced Duwamish estuary ecosystem. Tukwila includes approximately 12.5 miles of the
Green/Duwamish River. The Green River basin is part of the Green/Duwamish Water Resource Inventory Area
(WRIA 9).
Historically, the Green/Duwamish River drained a significantly larger area than it does today. River course
changes and major engineering projects in the early part of the 20 century resulted in both the White and Cedar
Rivers being diverted to neighboring basins. As a result, the overall freshwater discharge in the Green/Duwamish
River has been reduced to around a third of the pre- diversion era. The Green/Duwamish has undergone extensive
modifications as part of past river management with the intent of reducing channel migration and limiting the
extent and duration of valley flooding.
Levees and/or revetments have been constructed along the majority of the Green/Duwamish River through the
City of Tukwila to increase bank strength and reduce flooding. In addition, flows within the Green/Duwamish
River have been significantly modified by the construction of the Howard A. Hanson Dam and installation of
water diversions. These modifications have significantly reduced the severity of floods that historically covered
much of the valley bottom. The condition of the current system of levees and revetments is a growing source of
concern for King County and the cities involved, as many of the levees are aging and would not meet current
standards for either flood conveyance or stability.
2
315
316
Figure 1. City of Tukwila Green Duwamish Shoreline Planning Area
3
Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions
The Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila provides important habitat for several fish and some
wildlife species, such as osprey. The entire length of the Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila has
been declared "critical habitat" for the Chinook salmon and bull trout and both species are listed as threatened
under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The aquatic environment within the channel is an important corridor
located at the transition from the freshwater riverine environment to tidal estuarine environment of Elliot Bay.
Almost every species of anadromous fish migrates through this transition zone.
One particularly important feature of Tukwila's shorelines is the habitat functions provided by the transition zone
between fresh and salt water associated with the Duwamish estuary. In Tukwila, this area generally extends from
the East Marginal Way bridge to the city's northern limits. This transition zone has effectively been pushed
upstream from its historic location due to: (1) a significant reduction (70 of fresh water flowing into the
Duwamish estuary (owing to the diversion of the White and Cedar/Black Rivers), (2) channel dredging, and (3)
reduction of flows as a result of the Howard A. Hanson dam. The establishment of heavy industrial uses in the
transition zone has replaced wetlands with impervious surfaces, and the river banks have been replaced by levees
and other armoring, eliminating edge habitat which slows flows and creating unrestrained rapid downstream
flows. Spatial structure, residence time, and the habitat available for fish refugia and rearing functions in the
Duwamish estuary have therefore been reduced and constrained. High densities of fish have been observed
utilizing what is left of this specific habitat. At the watershed scale, overall increases in salmonid survival rates
are dependent on the availability of sufficient transition zone habitat to accommodate fish while they adjust from
fresh to salt water (WRIA 9 Steering Committee, 2005).
Modifications to the river system have resulted in reduced levels of ecosystem functioning, including hydrology,
water quality, riparian habitat, and in- stream habitat. Changes to hydrology focus on modified flow regime due to
dam construction, diversion, and urban development. River management and levees have reduced the connection
between the rivers and their floodplains, changing the spatial extent of habitats, and increasing the potential for
negative water quality impacts. Disturbances to the channel banks have resulted in areas that are dominated by
non native invasive species. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in- channel wood, is generally lacking
throughout the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic habitats.
Land Use and Public Access
The majority of the upper Green/Duwamish watershed, beyond the city limits, is in managed forestland, parkland,
or designated wilderness areas. Agricultural land covers much of the upper watershed within the Green River
gorge. The Kent -Auburn Valley is a transitional area between the forest and agricultural activities upstream to the
highly developed residential, industrial and commercial development in the cities of Kent, Tukwila, and Seattle
downstream in the Lower Green Duwamish River Valley.
Within the valley, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses dominate the former Green River floodplain in
the vicinity of Tukwila. South of the city, commercial and warehouse /industrial Iand uses dominate on the right
bank in the City of Kent, with agricultural fields on the left bank within the Tukwila South potential annexation
area. Commercial development is prevalent between the southern city boundary and I -405. Residential
development dominates between I -405 and the I -5 Bridge. North of the I -5 Bridge to the Turning Basin,
residential uses give way to commercial uses. The Turning Basin, located at river mile 5.8, is the approximate
southern boundary of the predominantly industrial area that extends to the northern city limit.
4
317
318
There are significant public access opportunities for enjoyment and use of the Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila.
A series of parks and open space areas provide recreational opportunities and the Green River Trail provides
access along the river throughout much of the city, linking many shoreline parks. In addition, there are several
unofficial recreational fishing sites and fishing shelters at various locations along the shoreline.
Restoration Opportunities
The inventory and characterization provides an assessment of shoreline functions and identifies potential
conservation and restoration opportunities. As part of the SMP update process, the City also developed a Draft
Shoreline Restoration Plan in February 2007. The plan report was revised in May following technical review by
King County and Ecology and is included as Appendix B to the SMP.
The Restoration Plan builds on the Inventory and Characterization Report and provides a framework to:
Identify primary goals for ecological restoration of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem;
Identify how restoration of ecological function can be accomplished;
Suggest how the SMP update process may accomplish the restoration of impaired shoreline functions
associated with the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; and
Prioritize restoration projects so that the highest value restoration actions may be accomplished first.
Past work which focused on the Green \Duwamish River (in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9) has
resulted in good data collection and identification of potential restoration opportunities. Significant restoration
activities along the Green\Duwamish River are already underway in the form of the multi- agency Green River
Ecosystem Restoration Project. Several restoration opportunities have been identified as part of the WRIA 9
Final Salmon Habitat Plan and the recently adopted King County Flood Hazard Management Plan.
Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be two specific types of
restoration actions that will most benefit the Green/Duwamish ecosystem in Tukwila. While these projects are
intended to restore many ecosystem functions, the restoration activities will occur in the highly -urban valley
bottom, and as a result, cannot fully achieve pre- disturbance channel conditions. In addition, some restoration
actions must occur at the watershed scale, which will restore ecosystem functions that cannot be addressed solely
within Tukwila.
Enlarging channel cross sectional area. This action will increase flood storage, allow for more stable
levees, restore floodplain area, provide a larger intertidal zone in the important transitional area, and
provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. This action could include the use of
setback levees and revetments, and the excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to create back
channels.
Enhance existing habitats. This action will improve the functioning of the existing aquatic, riverine
wetland, and riparian habitats that currently exist along the Green/Duwamish River. These actions could
include the removal of non native invasive vegetation, installation of native riparian vegetation, and
installation of LWD below ordinary high water.
The Restoration Plan identifies over 20 site specific projects that are in various stages of development. The
projects generally address one or both of the types of actions described above. High priority projects will
typically address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions; have opportunity for multiple funding sources;
5
include freshwater tributary channels; and/or not require additional property acquisition. In the context of
designating shoreline environments and developing management policies and regulations, the City wants to
encourage and enable restoration projects throughout the city wherever possible.
Potential Use Conflicts
Two key issues illustrate potential use conflicts and constraints to implementing restoration in Tukwila: 1) levee
maintenance and management; and 2) existing development patterns and anticipated redevelopment.
Discussion of shoreline planning for the Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila must acknowledge the fact that, in
light of the existing system of levees and revetments, the City cannot act alone. There are a variety of regulatory
jurisdictions outside of the City with different responsibilities for maintenance and management of the levee
system, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), King County River and Floodplain Management Unit (acting as part of the Green River Flood Control
Zone District), and private property owners. The City of Tukwila Public Works Department has overall
responsibility for maintenance of all levees including the federally certified levee, which extends from about the I-
405 crossing to S. 180 The actual maintenance work on the levees is contracted by the City to King County.
The restoration of native tree and shrub species along the levees would increase riparian habitat and ecological
functioning of this reach of the Green/Duwamish River, benefiting salmonids as well as other species. However,
along the federally certified levee the Corps of Engineers (responsible for certifying the federal levee) recently
required removal of large trees to prevent what the Corps considers destabilization of the levee caused by the root
systems, potential water piping (e.g., water infiltrating into and through levees along root pathways at higher rates
than it could through root free soil) at high flows, and levee failure if trees fall. For the Vegetation Free Zone of
the levee, current Corps guidance only allows grass as vegetative cover on the levees (USACOE, Engineering
Manual 1110 -2 -301). Current guidance also specifies a root -free zone where plantings can occur, but roots will
generally not penetrate this structural zone. Therefore, under current regulations, to meet the requirements for
federal levee certification, some existing vegetation will continually have to be removed to maintain the levee
certification. Under the SMA, removing trees and vegetation from the riparian zone of shorelines of the state is in
conflict with policies for vegetation conservation and enhancement. A possible solution is to step back and re-
slope the levees to create benches where vegetation can be planted that will not interfere with the levee prism as
the levee system is reconstructed to improve its stability. This would require additional easement area beyond the
existing maintenance easements that have been acquired along the length of the system.
The existing development pattern also represents constraints to implementing restoration projects, including levee
setbacks, off channel habitat restoration, wetland and stream restoration, and riparian zone enhancements. Most
of Tukwila is fully developed with a dense, urbanized land use pattern along the river bank. The City's current
SMP, in place since 1974, establishes a 40 -foot setback from the mean high water line. In areas where King
County's SMP still applies, a 20 to 50 foot setback is established, depending on the type of use. In many places,
there is little more than this 20 to 40 -foot zone that is not intensely developed. Some places have more open
space and less development and thus have greater flexibility to accommodate potential habitat restoration actions.
The City's vision for future land use includes maintenance of existing urban development and further
development of its urban character, particularly its identity as a regionally significant center for manufacturing,
industrial, and commercial development, as well as treating the river as more of an amenity than in the past. One
challenge for the City is in determining how best to accommodate new development and redevelopment near the
shoreline in a manner consistent with the many competing goals of the GMA and SMA and their accompanying
Iocal documents, the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Master Program.
6
319
320
Reasonable Foreseeable Future Development and Use
For the purposes of the cumulative impacts analysis, this section focuses on the effects of anticipated development
and use of the shoreline as envisioned in the City's Comprehensive Plan and the draft SMP. Since the existing
development pattern in Tukwila is well established and highly urbanized, the focus of this discussion is on
potential redevelopment throughout much of the city. That is, there are few vacant parcels along Tukwila's
shorelines and virtually no potential for large areas of undeveloped land along the shoreline to be subdivided and
newly developed. One exception is the Tukwila South Potential Annexation Area, which is currently agricultural
and/or undeveloped land. While this section addresses anticipated future development and redevelopment, the
subsequent sections address how such development would occur under the proposed draft SMP.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element is divided into several elements, including three that specifically
address different geographic areas of the City: the Manufacturing/Industrial Center, Tukwila Urban Center, and
Tukwila South. Additional planning efforts for these areas include master plans, planned actions, and/or strategic
implementation plans.
From the upstream City boundary downstream to the Black River Green River confluence within the city limits
(S. 204 Street to the north boundary of Ft. Dent Park), the Comprehensive Plan designates areas along the
shoreline as Tukwila Urban Center and Commercial/Light Industrial (predominantly south of I -405). North of I-
405 in this reach, designations include a mix of Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Regional
Commercial Mixed Use, Commercial/Light Industrial, and Heavy Industrial. Significant portions of Low Density
Residential areas within the reach's shoreline area are designated with a Public Recreation Overlay and are
developed as Fort Dent Park, the Foster Golf Links and the Tukwila Community Center. Within the City's
southern PAA, along the western Green River shoreline, all areas are designated as Tukwila Valley South. The
Comprehensive Plan element generally envisions an extension of the commercial and industrial development on
the valley floor for this area.
From the Black River Green River confluence downstream to the northern city limits near the 16` Avenue S.
bridge, the Comprehensive Plan designates areas along the shoreline as a mix of Manufacturing Industrial
Center/Heavy and Low Density Residential. Other designations include Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light,
Commercia/Light Industrial, and Residential Commercial Center.
Tukwila Manufacturing /Industrial Center
The Tukwila Manufacturing/Industrial Center (MIC) is one of eight regionally significant industrial and
employment centers in the Central Puget Sound region. Designated as such by the Puget Sound Regional
Council, the City has developed a specific element in its Comprehensive Plan and an Implementation Plan to
guide redevelopment in the area. The Implementation Plan is structured as a Planned Action under SEPA and
was adopted in 1998. A significant element of the plan is an updated MIC Shoreline Master Plan. This element
was developed consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and has been integrated as a component of the City -wide
SMP Update. The element includes innovative approaches to combine shoreline redevelopment with
environmental conservation, restoration, or enhancement actions. The plan also provides guidelines for
integrating habitat enhancement with alternative bank stabilization designs, based in part on King County flood
reduction policies and guidelines for bank stabilization. The MIC Plan needs to be reviewed for any needed
amendments before completing the current SMP update.
7
Redevelopment in the MIC is also subject to design guidelines developed in 1992 by the Boeing Corporation, in
coordination with the City, and described in Duwamish Corridor Redevelopment Proposal /Design Guidelines
(Sugio Kobayashi Ullman Inc., 1992). The document, which became part of the MIC Planned Action, establishes
goals, objectives, and guidelines for redevelopment of Boeing properties in the Duwamish corridor. Objectives
include enhancement of the shoreline environment by replacing old riprap bulkheads with new, more
environmentally friendly retention structures and native riparian vegetation. The plan also promotes increased
public access as redevelopment occurs, primarily as public and employee -only (semi public) access features and
public shoreline access trails. Finally, the plan addresses remediation actions so that as redevelopment occurs,
sites with contaminated soil and groundwater are identified and clean up plans are developed, consistent with state
and federal laws. As this document is 14 years old, the City will be working with the Boeing Company to identify
any needed amendments or revisions to the Redevelopment Proposal as part of the SMP update.
Tukwila Urban Center Plan
The Comprehensive Plan includes an element addressing the Tukwila Urban Center. The City is currently
preparing a Tukwila Urban Center Plan. The Urban Center serves as a regionally significant shopping center
(including Westfield Shoppingtown) with light industrial, office park, and transportation oriented development.
The center is generally bounded by 1-405, 1-5, South 180 Street, and the Green River. Policies and
implementation strategies for the Urban Center promote mixed -use commercial and residential development near
the Green River, with an integrated network of park, trail, and recreational facilities.
Tukwila South
The Comprehensive Plan includes an element addressing Tukwila South, an area bounded generally by South
180 Street, I -5, the Green River, and South 204 Street. This area includes the southern designated potential
annexation area, which is currently in unincorporated King County. Currently the area is primarily a mix of
agricultural and vacant lands, with a small amount of residential and industrial uses. The Comprehensive Plan
element generally envisions an extension of the commercial and industrial development on the valley floor for
this area. As elsewhere in the City, the Comprehensive Plan promotes mixed -use densities for residential
development near the river, and maintenance and enhancement of the open space network along the Green River.
The Comprehensive Plan also directs that a master plan be developed for any significant development and
annexation of the Tukwila South Area.
A master plan for development has been proposed for this area. In July 2005, a Final EIS was issued for the 498
acre Tukwila South Project. The master plan proposes up to 14 million square feet of development in a large
scale, campus setting. The development is envisioned to create a major new employment hub with campus -style
office and research complexes with an array of commercial, retail, residential, hotel, and recreational uses
included. The master plan, described in the Final EIS as being in accordance with the vision and policies of the
Tukwila South component of the City's Comprehensive Plan, expects to develop over two phases: Infrastructure
Development Stage (3 years) and Full Buildout Stage (horizon of 2030). The Infrastructure Development Stage
would include the extension of major roadways (such as Southcenter Parkway) into the area, establishment of site
grades throughout the area, installation of utilities and stormwater control facilities, and construction of sensitive
areas mitigation as required for the master plan. The two action alternatives considered in the master plan
envision between 10 million and 14 million square feet of development to occur in the area during the Full
Buildout Stage. An easement for setting back the existing Federal 205 levee south of 190 Street has been
envisioned, as well as completion of two restoration projects along the River off channel fish habitat and
restoration of the Johnson Creek Channel.
8
321
322
Summary of Conditions and Findings
In summary, the City's shoreline planning areas are primarily designated for industrial /manufacturing and
commercial /retail land uses. Other areas are primarily designated for low- density single family uses. Public
access and recreational uses along the shoreline are located throughout the city. These uses are not expected to
change over time. Most of the City's shorelines are fully developed and future development activities on these
properties would largely occur as redevelopment.
The inventory and characterization and restoration planning elements of the SMP update should inform goals,
policies, regulations, and environment designations. In this context, the key findings can be summarized as
follows:
The Green/Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource, providing migratory habitat for
numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a variety of wildlife. The Green/Duwamish River
changes from fresh to salt water within Tukwila, making it a unique and important section of the overall
river system that deserves attention.
Existing shoreline habitat is largely homogenous and degraded throughout the city. The variation that
does exist is typically not significant enough to warrant different levels of protection or restoration focus
along the shoreline.
The flood protection system is made up of a mix of newer levees (e.g., the 205 levee), and older
portions of levee (e.g, the northern portion of the city). The older levees may not meet current
engineering standards in terms of slope angles and geotechnical stability, which may provide
opportunities for different approaches to redevelopment.
Restoration opportunities exist throughout Tukwila's shoreline environment. Activities that provide
restoration of both floodplain functions and habitat functions should be prioritized. Policies should
promote and regulations should enable the City to accomplish restoration goals and actions.
Given the relative homogeneity of the resource condition and needs throughout the city, environment
designations should reflect the distinction in current and planned land use and opportunities to expand or
enhance restoration. Primarily this is a distinction between existing residential development, where
banks may be armored with bulkheads or revetments, and commercial and industrial development
elsewhere in the city, where banks are altered by flood control structures.
It is important to acknowledge that future shoreline use patterns should not be driven solely by the
Comprehensive Plan and zoning. As a result of the SMP update process, changes may be warranted in the
Comprehensive Plan, zoning code, and floodplain management regulations to help facilitate long range planning
objectives for shoreline management (such as implementation of levee setbacks). That is, since the proposed
SMP amendments are informed by a body of technical and scientific shoreline analyses consistent with state
guidelines, future amendments to other regulations may be necessary to successfully implement the SMP's vision.
The following sections summarize the most significant proposed changes to the Tukwila's SMP and how these
changes reflect the findings of the inventory and characterization and restoration planning efforts.
9
Summary of Proposed SMP Amendments
Existing Regulatory Framework
The City's current SMP designates all shorelines as "Urban." At the time the 1974 SMP was developed, all of the
land in Tukwila's shoreline jurisdiction was either zoned industrial or was developed with urban uses. The SMP
defines the Urban Environment as "areas to be managed in high intensive land uses, including residential,
commercial, and industrial development and accessory uses, while providing for restoration and preservation to
ensure long -term protection of natural and cultural resources within the shoreline" (Tukwila, 1974). The SMP
further states that the management objectives for the shoreline "are directed at minimizing adverse impacts on the
river and shoreline ecology, maximizing the aesthetic quality and recreational opportunities of the river shore, and
recognizing the rights and privileges of property owners" (Tukwila, 1974). Within the Urban Environment,
Tukwila's SMP employs a three tiered system of regulations based on the distance from the Green River mean
high water mark (MHWM). These tiered management zones are generally described below and illustrated on
Figure 2:
River Environment/Zone: a 40 -foot wide zone extending landward from MHWM and having the most
environmentally protective regulations;
Low Impact Environment/Zone: the area between the River Environment and 100 feet from the
MHWM; and
High- Impact Environment/Zone: the area between 100 and 200 feet from the MHWM.
3 LOW
I IMPACT
ZONE
10
MEAN HIGH WATER LINE
Figure 2. Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44)
The City also administers the King County Shoreline Master Program for the areas which have been annexed
since the adoption of the City's SMP. These areas are designated Urban and the setbacks from Ordinary High
Water Mark vary from 20 feet to 50 feet depending on whether the use is water dependent, single family or
commercial/industrial.
323
324
Proposed Environment Designations
Tukwila's proposed shoreline designation system reflects the state's guidelines. The City's three proposed
environment designations are:
Shoreline Residential Environment;
Urban Conservancy Environment; and
High Intensity Environment.
The City proposes to designate river buffers to replace the current system of parallel shoreline management zones.
Instead of the current River Environment, a minimum river buffer would be established for each shoreline
environment. Allowed uses are proposed for the buffer area along the river and outside of the buffer in the
remaining shoreline jurisdiction. This system is intended to facilitate the City's long -range objectives for land
and shoreline management, including:
1. Ensuring no net loss of ecological shoreline functions;
2. Providing for habitat protection, enhancement, and restoration to improve degraded shoreline ecological
functions over time and protection of already restored areas;
3. Allowing continued and increased urban development in recognition of Tukwila's role as a regionally
significant industrial and commercial center; and
4. Providing for improved flood control in coordination with King County and the Army Corps of
Engineers.
The proposed shoreline environment designations and their associated buffers are illustrated in Figures 3 through
5 and described briefly below. Designation criteria, management policies, use regulations, and development
standards for each designation and management zone are in the draft SMP.
Shoreline Residential Environment
This environment would be designated in the area between the ordinary high water mark and 200 feet landward
for all properties zoned for single family use.
The purpose of the Shoreline Residential Environment is to accommodate urban density residential development,
appurtenant structures, public access and recreational activities. In addition to general shoreline management
objectives (above), the protective river buffer would limit development to accomplish the following objectives
(not listed in order of priority):
Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring;
Help protect water quality and habitat function by limiting allowed uses;
Protect existing and new development from high river flows;
Promote restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment; and
Allow room for reconstructing over steepened river banks to achieve a more stable slope and more
natural shoreline bank conditions.
The width of the buffer will be determined by identifying the location where the river bank would achieve an
angle of 2.5:1 and then setting back 20 feet from that location. However, in no case shall the buffer be less than
fifty (50) feet from the OHWM, measured on the horizontal. The river bank in the Shoreline Residential
Environment is typically in a somewhat modified and degraded state but generally not stabilized with revetments
or levees. This buffer width will protect shoreline functions, and allow for restoration by re- sloping and
11
stabilization using bioengineering methods where possible and through planting with native vegetation. The
buffer area and vegetation requirements established for the Shoreline Residential Environment will allow
removing invasive plants; planting native vegetation; include other features to improve shoreline habitat; and will
prevent the placement of any structures in an area that could potentially prove instable.
A cross section illustrating the proposed Residential Shoreline Environment and buffer is provided in Figure 3.
200'
SHORELINE RESIDENTIAL
ENVIRONMENT
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
50' (min)
BUFFER
RIVER
Figure 3. Schematic of Proposed Shoreline Residential Environment
Urban Conservancy Environment
This environment begins at the Ordinary High Water Mark and extends landward 200 feet along portions of the
river not navigable to large water craft and that are not located in low- density residential areas.
The Urban Conservancy Environment areas are currently developed with high intensity urban multifamily,
commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or are designated for such uses in the proposed annexation areas.
The Urban Conservancy Environment will also be established along Fort Dent Park as this site is bordered by a
County constructed levee. However, uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of
a minimum protective buffer intended to protect and restore ecological functions where they exist in urban and
developed settings while allowing a variety of compatible uses.
In addition to general shoreline management objectives, the river buffer would be established to accomplish the
following objectives (not listed in order of priority):
Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, flood plain and other
sensitive lands in the developed urban settings;
Provide opportunities for restoration and public access;
Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of property, while
accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting restoration of the natural character
of the shoreline environment, wherever possible;
Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and
Protect existing and new development from high river flows.
12
325
326
The width of the buffer in the Urban Conservancy Environment is proposed as 125 feet, if the shoreline has an
existing levee or is located south of I -405; or 100 feet, if there is no levee.
The establishment of the 125 foot buffer along the shorelines with levees and south of I -405 allows sufficient
room for eventually setting back the levees and other armored banks to a 2.5:1 slope, and including a mid -slope
bench that can be planted with native vegetation. This approach widens the channel somewhat to accommodate
high flows and improves shoreline function in providing vegetation for habitat enhancement. As the Corps of
Engineers does not permit planting on the levee prism, the only way to improve habitat along the 205 leveed
portion of the river is to create a bench that can be vegetated that will not create a hazard for the stability of the
levee.
As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, where applicable, if the property owner chooses to lay back the bank to
achieve a more stable slope of 2.5:1 (where feasible), and plant it with native vegetation plus include an additional
planted area 20ft wide at the top of the new bank, then this would become the buffer for that site.
A cross section illustrating the proposed Urban Conservancy Environment and buffer is provided in Figure 4.
High Intensity Environment
200'
URBAN CONSERVANCY
ENVIRONMENT
125"
ciwieme `w 1:d BUFFER
`repairor, f
repl
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
`100' north of 1 -405 for non -levee areas
13
RIVER
Figure 4. Schematic of Proposed Urban Conservancy Environment
This environment will be designated in the area between the Ordinary High Water Mark and 200 feet landward
for the area of the shoreline located from the southern end of the Turning Basin north to the City limit (including
the City's North PAA). The High Intensity Shoreline Environment area is currently developed with industrial
uses, a few of which are water dependent uses. Some areas of the shoreline in this environment are hardened with
riprap or bulkheads, while other areas are more natural banks, such as those in the three restoration sites around
the Turning Basin.
The purpose of the Urban High Intensity Environment is to provide for transportation and industrial uses while
encouraging water dependent uses, protecting existing shoreline ecological functions and restoring ecological
functions in areas that have been previously degraded. In addition to general shoreline management objectives
(above), the river buffer would be established to accomplish the following objectives (not listed in order of
priority):
Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, flood plain and other
sensitive lands in the developed urban settings;
Provide opportunities for restoration and public access;
Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of property, while
accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting restoration of the natural character
of the shoreline environment, wherever possible;
Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and
Protect existing and new development from high river flows.
The buffer will extend 100 feet landward from the ordinary high water mark. This buffer width is consistent with
the buffer width established by the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance for Type 2 streams that support salmonid
fish use, and allows room for setting back and vegetating the river bank to improve shoreline function over
existing conditions.
As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, if the property owner chooses to lay back the bank to achieve a more
stable slope of 2.5:1 (where feasible) and plant it with native vegetation plus include an additional planted area
20ft wide at the top of the new bank, then this would become the buffer for that site.
A cross section illustrating the proposed High Intensity Environment and buffer is provided in Figures.
200'
HIGH INTENSITY
ENVIRONMENT
1-
wry
i
BUFFER
t
1
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
RIVER
Figure S. Schematic of Proposed High Intensity Environment
Changes to Development Standards and Use Regulations
The preference for water dependent or water related uses established in the Shoreline Management Act requires a
body of water that is navigable and accessible both to businesses and the general public. The challenge for
Tukwila's SMP is that very little of the Green/Duwamish River is navigable. Of the 13.6 river miles in the City
and its PAA, only approximately 1.5 river miles are accessible to deep draft vessels, from the Duwamish River
Turning Basin north to the city limits. The vast majority of the river can only be accessed by kayaks, or small
motorized boats and definitely not larger ships or barges. In addition, the presence of recently re- certified U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (COE) levees along a major portion of the river prevents direct access to the river, other
14
327
328
than via visual access and pedestrian/bicycle trails, thus further limiting the possibility for establishment of water
dependent uses. Other portions of the shoreline are protected by King County constructed levees or armored with
revetments, which also limit the possibility of water dependent uses. Nonetheless, water dependent uses are
designated as priority uses north of the Turning Basin.
The proposed SMP offers several changes to the development regulations that encourage shoreline conservation,
facilitate shoreline restoration, and prohibit activities that would cause adverse impact to shoreline functions and
processes. The most significant change is related to provisions within the proposed river buffer. The restoration
plan identifies vegetation enhancement or restoration as one key priority for shoreline management in Tukwila.
As new development or redevelopment occurs, an assessment would be required to determine appropriate
vegetation restoration and management for particular development proposals. The restoration plan also prioritizes
actions that expand the active channel of the river and/or provide off channel habitat. The application of the river
buffer, would facilitate projects such as levee setbacks and vegetated benches, as well as removal of shoreline
armoring and setting back and re- sloping banks in non -levee areas to achieve a more natural, vegetated shoreline.
These actions would occur either as project specific implementation of the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan
(restoration plan) or the King County Flood Hazard Management Plan; or as part of redevelopment proposals in
coordination with the City, King County, and other stakeholders.
Consistent with state guideline requirements, the proposed draft SMP integrates environmentally sensitive areas
regulations (Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO), TMC 18.45). Under the proposed SMP, standards and regulations
for designated sensitive areas that are physically located in the shoreline jurisdiction would apply to all shoreline
uses and development. The SAO standards provide many provisions to protect the shoreline, tributaries to the
Green/Duwamish River, associated wetlands, and adjacent upland areas.
Another change is the requirement of environmental impact mitigation where unavoidable impacts to shoreline
ecological functions would occur as a result of allowed uses or development under the SMP. Consistent with
state guidelines (WAC 173- 26- 201(2)(c)), the proposed SMP requires mitigation measures where impacts are
unavoidable to achieve the "no net loss" of ecological functions standard. This requirement is applied to any
activity that would result in impacts to ecological functions, regardless if the action required a shoreline permit or
not.
Other changes include limiting new shoreline modifications such as bulkheads and riprap revetments along much
of the City's shoreline. New development would be required to be located and designed to avoid the need for
shoreline stabilization measures. The proposed shoreline stabilization standards will limit any new shoreline
stabilization, unless it can be shown through extensive studies to be necessary and will require the use of
bioengineering techniques wherever feasible. Further, the conservation of native shoreline vegetation and
removal of invasive vegetation has been emphasized in the new shoreline regulations for the City to further
stabilize shorelands and increase habitat functions. Other changes related to development of specific uses in the
shoreline are also designed to protect shoreline ecological functions and processes, while continuing to allow
legal uses and development and encouraging public access to the shoreline for water oriented uses such as fishing.
The proposed changes to development standards and use regulations are, in general, more protective than the
existing SMP. New development would be required to meet standards contained in the SAO regulations and meet
the policy intent and development standards of the SMP. Redevelopment would be allowed in all environments.
As redevelopment occurs, the policies and regulations in the SMP require that development be located and
designed in a manner that avoids impacts to ecological functions and /or enhances functions where they have been
degraded. For example, the vegetation conservation measures require that, as part of a redevelopment proposal,
15
non native or invasive species be replaced with native vegetation appropriate for riverine riparian environments.
Another example pertains to shoreline stabilization (for residential bulkheads or revetments). Policies and
development standards establish a preference for alternative "soft- shore" erosion control or stabilization designs.
Where shoreline stabilization is requested, project applicants would be required to demonstrate why a
bioengineered design would not provide adequate protection of existing development. Over time these changes
will likely have a net beneficial effect on shoreline ecological processes as properties are redeveloped.
Restoration Planning
As described previously, the SMP Restoration Plan (Appendix B to the draft SMP) represents the shoreline
restoration element of the SMP. The plan includes goals and policies addressing restoration. The policies
establish the City's intent is to meet the "no net loss" standard, and result in an overall improvement to the
condition of the habitat and resources within the shoreline jurisdiction of the City over time. The plan identifies
opportunities for restoration activities or efforts that include programmatic opportunities (e.g. surface water
management; water quality improvement; public education), 26 site specific opportunities (some of which are
already underway), regional plans and policies for Puget Sound restoration, and potential funding and partnership
opportunities. The SMP's restoration planning is focused on areas where shoreline functions have been degraded
by past development activities. The areas with impaired functions were identified in the City's Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization. Recognizing that much impairment to shoreline processes and functions are the
result of watershed scale activities beyond the City's control, the implementation of the Restoration Plan will
improve shoreline ecological functions in the City over time.
Beneficial Effects of Any Established Regulatory Programs Under Other Local,
State, and Federal Laws
A variety of other regulatory programs, plans, and policies work in concert with the City's SMP to manage
shoreline resources and regulate development near the shoreline. The City's Comprehensive Plan establishes the
general land use pattern and vision of growth and development the City has adopted for areas both inside and
outside the shoreline jurisdiction. Various sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) are relevant to
shoreline management, such as zoning (TMC Title 18), stormwater management (TMC 14.30), and floodplain
management (TMC 16.52). The City's development standards and use regulations for environmentally sensitive
areas (TMC 18.45) are particularly relevant to the City's SMP. Designated sensitive areas located in the shoreline
may include areas of potential geologic instability, wetlands, watercourses, and fish and wildlife conservation
areas. As noted above, standards and regulations in the critical areas regulations are now integrated in the
proposed SMP.
A number of state and federal agencies may have jurisdiction over land or natural elements in the City's shoreline
jurisdiction. Local development proposals most commonly trigger requirements for state or federal permits when
they impact wetlands or streams; potentially affect fish and wildlife listed under the federal Endangered Species
Act (ESA); result in over one acre of clearing and grading; or affect the floodplain or floodway. As with local
requirements, state and federal regulations may apply throughout the city, but regulated resources are common
within the City's shoreline jurisdiction. The state and federal regulations affecting shoreline related resources
include, but are not limited to:
Endangered Species Act: The federal ESA addresses the protection and recovery of federally listed species. The
ESA is jointly administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries
16
329
330
(formerly referred to as the National Marine Fisheries Service), and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS).
Clean Water Act (CWA): The federal CWA requires states to set standards for the protection of water quality for
various parameters, and it regulates excavation and dredging in waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Certain
activities affecting wetlands in the City's shoreline jurisdiction or work in the adjacent rivers may require a permit
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or Washington State Department of Ecology under Section 404 and
Section 401 of the CWA, respectively.
Hydraulic ProiectAvvroval (HPA): The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) regulates
activities that use, divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow of the beds or banks of waters of the state and may
affect fish habitat. Projects in the shoreline jurisdiction requiring construction below the ordinary high water
mark of Puget Sound or streams in the city could require an HPA from WDFW. Projects creating new
impervious surface that could substantially increase stormwater runoff to waters of the state may also require
approval.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPDES): Ecology regulates activities that result in wastewater
discharges to surface water from industrial facilities or municipal wastewater treatment plants. NPDES permits
are also required for stormwater discharges from industrial facilities, construction sites of one or more acres, and
municipal stormwater systems that serve populations of 100,000 or more.
State -owned Aauatic Lands: The Washington State Department of Natural Resources is the steward for the State
owned bed of the Green/Duwamish River and would regulate any structures constructed in the bed of the river,
such as piers.
Conclusion
In large measure, the development and use patterns along Tukwila's shorelines are well established and there is
little undeveloped land along the shoreline. Tukwila's identity as a regionally significant industrial,
manufacturing, and commercial center will be maintained. Therefore, change within the shoreline will primarily
be the result of redevelopment activities. The proposed SMP provides a new system of shoreline environment
designations and river buffers that would protect shoreline resources and enable enhancement and restoration
actions. The updated development standards and regulation of shoreline modifications provides more protection
for shoreline processes. The updated standards and regulations are more restrictive of activities that would result
in adverse impacts to the shoreline environment. The restoration planning effort outlined in the proposed SMP
provides the City with opportunities to improve or restore ecological functions that have been impaired as a result
of past development activities. In addition, the proposed SMP is meant to compliment several city, county, state
and federal efforts to protect shoreline functions and values.
Based on the assessment of these factors, the cumulative actions conducted over time in accordance with the
proposed draft SMP are not likely to result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions from existing baseline
conditions. In concert with implementation of restoration actions in the city, the regulatory provisions of the
proposed SMP would serve to improve the overall condition of shoreline resources in the city as redevelopment
occurs.
17
0
CO
C
0
ca
1
0)
CD 0)
C
CD
0
332
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction 114
1.1 Regulatory Background 11.1 1
1.2 Defining Restoration 31.2 I
2.0 Restoration Planning 424
2.1 Restoration Framework 42.1 1
2.2 Assessment of Functions 62.2 1
2.2.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications 62.2.1 1
2.2.2 Habitat and Species 6
2.23 Land Use 7 1 1
2.2.4 Altered Ecosystem Processes 72.2.1 1
2.3 Existing Plans and Programs 9
2.3.1 Regional 92.3.1 1
2.3.2 City 102.2.2
2.4 Completed Projects 103.1 1
3.0 Restoration Opportunities 1434
3.1 Potential Projects and Restoration Priorities 113.1 1
4.0 Policy Development 2144
5.0 Implementation 2354
5.1 Funding and Partnership Opportunities 235.1 1
5.1.1 Puget Sound Action Team 235.1.1 1
5.1.2 Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) 245.1.2 1
5.1.3 King Conservation District 245.1.3 1
5.1.4 Natural Resource Damage Assessment Funds 245.1.'1 1
5.1.5 King County Flood Control District 245.1.5 1
5.2 Timelines and Benchmarks 255.2 1
5.3 Mechanisms and Strategies for Effectiveness 25`•3
6.0 Conclusions 2664
7.0 References 2874
8.0 Attachments 308-4
List of Tables
Table 1. Restoration Planning Structure 4
Table 2. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila. 8
Table 3. Completed Restoration Proiects in Tukwila 12
Table 4. Potential Restoration Projects and Initial Proiect Ranking 16
1.2 1
2.2.1 1
r
Table 3. Completed Restoration Projects- in Tukwila.
Table 1. Potential Restoration Projects and Initial Project Ranking
May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
333
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
List of Figures
Figure 1. Mitigation Versus Restoration in Shoreline Master Programs (Source: Department of
Ecology) 21.1 1
Figure 2. Schematic View of Overall Restoration Framework (based on Palmer et al. 2005) 52,1
4
334 May 2007 ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Regulatory Background
May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
The Green/Duwamish River is a central feature in the City of Tukwila. The Green/Duwamish
River has long been an important nexus between upland freshwater and marine saltwater
environments, as well as a focus area for historical land use and urban development. The
Shoreline Management Act (SMA or the Act) (RCW 90.58) is charged with balancing how
shorelines should be developed, protected, and restored. The Act has three broad policies or
mandates; it strives to: 1) encourage water dependent uses, 2) protect and restore shoreline
natural resources, and 3) promote public access. Restoration planning is an important
component of the environmental protection policy of the Act.
This report supports the development of a restoration element to the City of Tukwila's Shoreline
Master Program (SMP), originally adopted in 1974. The SMP is being updated to comply with
the SMA requirements (RCW 90.58), and the state's SMP guidelines (Washington
Administrative Code [WAC] 173 -26, Part III), which went into effect in 2003.
The SMP guidelines require that local governments develop SMP policies that promote
"restoration" of impaired shoreline ecological functions and a "real and meaningful" strategy to
implement restoration objectives. The City's shoreline inventory and characterization report
(ESA Adolfson, 2006) identifies which shoreline ecological functions and ecosystem processes
have been impaired. Local governments are further encouraged to contribute to restoration by
planning for and supporting restoration through the SMP and other regulatory and non regulatory
programs.
This report provides a framework to:
1. Identify primary goals for ecological restoration of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem;
2. Identify how restoration of ecological function can be accomplished;
3. Suggest how the SMP update process may accomplish the restoration of impaired
shoreline functions associated with the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; and
4. Prioritize restoration projects so that the highest value restoration actions may be
accomplished first.
The state has directed local governments to develop SMP provisions "...to achieve overall
improvements in shoreline ecological functions over time when compared to the status upon
adoption of the master program." This overarching goal is accomplished primarily through two
distinct objectives:
1. Protection of existing shoreline functions through regulations and mitigation
requirements to ensure "no net loss" of ecological functions from baseline environmental
conditions; and
2. Restoration of shoreline ecological functions that have been impaired from past
development practices or alterations.
335
This distinction is illustrated in Figure 1. below.
336 May 2007
A
er
CURRENT CONDITION
(BASELINE)
"No Net Loss"
achieved by
shoreline regulations
that require
avoidance and
mitigation of
impacts
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Two Distinct Objectives:
No -Net Loss of Shoreline Ecological Functions
and Restoration Over Time
"Restoration"
achieved by
improving functions
over time
Where new development
introduces new impacts,
mitigation is required.
Figure 1. Mitigation Versus Restoration in Shoreline Master Programs (Source:
Department of Ecology)
The concept of no net loss of shoreline ecological function is embedded in the Act and in the
goals, policies and governing principles of shoreline guidelines and other federal and state
environmental protections (e.g., the Clean Water Act). Washington's general policy goals for
shorelines of the state include the "protection and restoration of ecological functions of shoreline
natural resources." This goal derives from the Act, which states, "permitted uses in the shoreline
shall be designed and conducted in a manner that minimizes insofar as practical, any resultant
damage to the ecology and environment of the shoreline area." Furthermore, the governing
principles of the guidelines clarify that protection of shoreline ecological functions is
accomplished through the following (WAC 173 -26 -186):
Meaningful understanding of the current shoreline ecological conditions,
Regulations and mitigation standards that ensure that permitted developments do not
cause a net loss of ecological functions,
Regulations that ensure exempt developments in the aggregate do not result in net loss of
ecological functions,
Goals and policies for restoring ecologically impaired shorelines,
2
Regulations and programs that fairly allocate the burden of mitigating cumulative
impacts among development opportunities, and
Incentives or voluntary measures designed to restore and protect ecological functions.
It is important to note that the restoration planning component of the SMP is focused on
voluntary mechanisms (actions over and above any mitigation required for shoreline impacts due
to development), not regulatory provisions (required mitigation or re- vegetation). Restoration
planning is focused on economic incentives, available funding sources (including City general
funds in the Capital Improvement Program and grant funding). volunteer programs, and other
programs that can contribute to restoration of shoreline functionsa no net loss strategy.
However, the restoration proiects framework developed for this compensatory
restoration plan can also be achieved applied othrough compensatory
mitigation projects (i.e. carrying out mitigation at identified restoration sites in lieu of on -site
mitigation). In this way, all efforts to improve ecosystem functioning can be ae coordinated,
and will be designed to work together.
1.2 Defining Restoration
There are numerous definitions for "restoration" in scientific and regulatory publications.
Specific elements of these definitions often differ, but the core element of repairing damage to an
existing, degraded ecosystem remains consistent. In the SMP context, the WAC defines
"restoration" or "ecological restoration" as:
"...the reestablishment or upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes or
functions. This may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to,
revegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic
materials. Restoration does not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline area to
aboriginal or pre European settlement conditions" (WAC 173 -26- 020(27)).
Using the WAC definition of restoration in regards to state shorelines, it is clear the effort should
be focused on specific shoreline areas where natural ecological functions have been impaired or
degraded. The emphasis in the WAC is to achieve overall improvement in existing shoreline
processes or functions, where functions are impaired. Therefore, the goal is not to restore the
shoreline to historically natural conditions, but rather to improve on existing, degraded
conditions. In this context, restoration can be broadly implemented through a combination of
programmatic measures (such as surface water management; water quality improvement; public
education) and site specific projects (such as setback levees or riparian plantings).
May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
337
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Table 1 below summarizes the key elements included in restoration planning within the context
of an SMP update under the state's current guidelines (WAC 173- 26- 201(2)(f)). These key
elements provide the organization and content for this report.
Table 11. Restoration Planning Structure
ey'elements for. the sihoreliine restoration ;planning
ocess.WAC 173 26.201(2)(
Identify degraded areas, impaired ecological functions, and sites
with potential for ecological restoration.
Establish overall goals and priorities for restoration of degraded
areas and impaired ecological functions.
Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs that are
currently being implemented which are designed to contribute to
local restoration goals (such as capital improvement programs
(CIPs) and watershed planning efforts (WRIA habitat/recovery
plans).
Identify timelines and benchmarks for implementing restoration
projects and programs and achieving local restoration goals.
Provide for mechanisms or strategies to ensure that restoration
projects and programs will be implemented according to plans and
to appropriately review the effectiveness of the projects and
programs in meeting the overall restoration goals (e.g., monitoring
of restoration project sites).
Identify additional projects and programs needed to achieve local
restoration goals, and implementation strategies including
identifying prospective funding sources for those projects and
programs.
2.0 RESTORATION PLANNING
2.1 Restoration Framework
Assessment of Functions (Section 2.2);
Restoration Opportunities (Section 3)
Restoration Priorities (Section 3.2);
Policy Development (Section 4)
Existing Plans and Programs (Section 2.3);
Potential Projects (Section 3.1)
Implementation (Section 5)
Implementation (Section 5)
Restoration Opportunities (Section 3);
Funding and Partnership Opportunities
(Section 5.1)
The guidelines for the SMP process direct that local shoreline master programs shall include
"goals, policies and actions for restoration of impaired shoreline ecological functions." Under
the guidelines, restoration planning has a purpose distinct from development regulations and
mitigation standards. "The guidelines expressly focus restoration requirements on the use of
master program policies, as opposed to development regulations" (Ecology, 2004). Therefore, to
develop specific restoration goals and policies for Tukwila's SMP, an overall restoration
framework was considered to maintain consistency with an approach to restoration currently
recommended at the national level. This restoration framework includes elements that go beyond
the traditional no net loss philosophy to target a long -term improvement in a broad base of
ecosystem functions where feasible in the City of Tukwila.
Significant national attention has been applied recently to the development of an approach to
restoring riverine ecosystems that will more consistently result in long -term improvement in
338 May 2007 4
ecosystem functioning (Brinson, 1993, Kondolf, 1995, Palmer et al, 2005, Bernhardt et al, 2005).
The National River Restoration Science Synthesis project recently focused efforts on developing
both: 1) a database of existing and proposed river restoration projects; and 2) criteria to
consistently determine if a restoration is successful (Palmer and Allan, 2006). This work is
intended to provide a consistent restoration approach across jurisdictions and to improve the
probability of future success by learning from existing river restoration projects.
These national efforts have resulted in recent publications of a recommended approach to river
restoration. This approach is synthesized in Figure 1, below, modified for use within this
restoration framework. The approach has three phases: (1) Decision, (2) Design and
Implementation, and (3) Monitoring and Assessment. This framework is offered here to provide
the following:
Background and insight into how current approaches to ecosystem restoration have been
developed;
A way to consider how to integrate new information as it comes available; and
A basis for integrating the City's efforts into regional efforts.
P HASE
Preserve existing locations that perform ecosystem
functions at medium or high levels.
Monitor baseline conditions.
Coordinate with watershed and regional efforts to
ensure consistency throughout the basin.
P HASE 2
Develop a guiding image for restoration based on regional
reference, appropriately modified by existing conditions.
Target a broad base of ecosystem functions.
Target self sustaining ecosystems.
Do no lasting harm.
P HASE 3
Monitor post restoration conditions.
Adaptively manage restorations.
Use monitoring and maintenance results to
inform future restoration activities.
Summary of Phases of Restoration Objectives
Based on Palmer et al 2005
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
DECISION
DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION
MONITORING
AND ASSESSMENT
Figure 2. Schematic View of Overall Restoration Framework (based on Palmer et al. 2005)
May 2007 5
339
2.2 Assessment of Functions
2.2.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Shoreline restoration planning begins with the identification of "degraded areas" or areas with
"impaired ecological functions." The assessment of existing degraded areas and/or functions
relies heavily on the City of Tukwila Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report
(ESA Adolfson, 2006). The City's inventory and characterization examined riverine and
estuarine ecosystem processes that maintain shoreline ecological functions; and identified
impaired ecological functions. Key fmdings of the inventory and characterization are
summarized below.
The City of Tukwila is situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands at the transition from the fresh
water Green River to the tidally influenced Duwamish estuary ecosystem. Tukwila includes
approximately 12.5 miles of the Green/Duwamish River. The Green River basin is part of the
Green/Duwamish Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9).
Historically, the Green/Duwamish River drained a significantly larger area than it does today.
River course changes and major engineering projects in the early part of the 20 century resulted
in both the White and Cedar Rivers being diverted to neighboring basins. As a result, the overall
freshwater discharge in the Green/Duwamish River has been reduced to around a third of the
pre diversion era. The Green/Duwamish has undergone extensive modifications as part of past
river management with the intent of reducing channel migration and limiting the extent and
duration of valley flooding.
Levees and/or revetments have been constructed along the majority of the Green/Duwamish
River through the City of Tukwila to increase bank strength and reduce flooding. In addition,
flows within the Green/Duwamish River have been significantly modified by the construction of
the Howard A. Hansen Dam and installation of water diversions. These modifications have
significantly reduced the severity of floods that historically covered much of the valley bottom.
The condition of the current system of levees and revetments is a growing source of concern for
King County and the cities involved, as many of the levees are aging and would not meet current
standards for either flood conveyance or stability.
2.2.2 Habitat and Species
The Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila provides important habitat for several
fish and some wildlife species, such as osprey. The aquatic environment within the channel is an
important corridor located at the transition from the freshwater riverine environment to tidal
estuarine environment of Elliot Bay. Almost every species of anadromous fish migrates through
this transition zone. The entire length of the Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila
has been declared "critical habitat" for the Chinook salmon and bull trout. Both species are
listed as threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act.
340 May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
The transition zone between fresh and salt water has effectively been pushed upstream from its
historic location due to: (1) a significant reduction (70 of fresh water flowing into the
Duwamish estuary (owing to the diversion of the White and Cedar/Black Rivers), (2) channel
dredging, and (3) reduction of flows as a result of the Howard A Hanson dam. The
establishment of heavy industrial uses in the transition zone has replaced wetlands with
impervious surfaces, and the stream banks have been replaced by levees and other armoring,
eliminating slow- moving flows through edge habitat and creating unrestrained downstream
flows. Spatial structure, residence time, and the habitat available for refugia and rearing
functions in the Duwamish estuary have therefore been reduced and constrained. High densities
of fish have been observed utilizing what is left of this specific habitat (the transition zone). At
the watershed scale, overall increases in salmonid survival rates are dependent on the availability
of sufficient transition zone habitat to accommodate fish while they adjust from fresh to salt
water (WRIA 9 Steering Committee, 2005).
Modifications to the river system have resulted in reduced levels of ecosystem functioning,
including hydrology, water quality, riparian habitat, and in- stream habitat. Changes to hydrology
focus on modified flow regime due to dam construction, diversion, and urban development.
River management and levees have reduced the connection between the rivers and their
floodplains, changing the spatial extent of habitats, and increasing the potential for negative
water quality impacts. Disturbances to the channel banks have resulted in areas that are
dominated by non native invasive species. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in- channel
wood, is generally lacking through the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic
habitats.
2.2.3 Land Use
The majority of the upper Green/Duwamish watershed, outside of the city limits, is in managed
forestland, parkland, or designated wilderness areas. Agricultural land covers much of the higher
river within the Green River gorge. The Kent -Auburn Valley is a transitional area between the
forest and agricultural activities upstream to the highly developed residential, industrial and
commercial development in the cities of Kent, Tukwila, and Seattle downstream in the Lower
Green Duwamish River Valley.
Within the valley, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses dominate the former Green
River floodplain in the vicinity of Tukwila. South of the city, commercial and
warehouse /industrial land uses dominate on the right bank in the City of Kent, with agricultural
fields on the left bank within the Tukwila South annexation area. Commercial development is
prevalent between the southern city boundary and I -405. Residential development dominates
between I -405 and the I -5 Bridge. North of the I -5 Bridge to the turning basin, residential uses
give way to commercial uses. The upper turning basin, located at river mile 5.8, is the southern
boundary of the predominantly industrial area that extends to the northern city limit.
2.2.4 Altered Ecosystem Processes
Key findings regarding current levels of ecosystem functioning within the lower
Green/Duwamish ecosystem are reported in Chapter 5 of the City of Tukwila Draft Shoreline
May 2007 7
341
342 May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Inventory and Characterization Report (ESA Adolfson, 2006). The inventory report identified
key ecosystem processes, and provided a qualitative assessment of their levels of functioning at
both a watershed and city reach scale. Key ecosystem functions identified in the Inventory, their
level of alteration, and potential restoration actions are summarized below.
Table 22. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila.
Function
Catego
Channel
Hydrologic Floodplain
Interaction
Hydrologic
Water
Quality
Upland sediment
Retention of
particulates and
contaminants
iterations'to natura
functonin
Presence of flood protection
structures (e.g., levees, river bank
revetments, flood gates) and
significant fill and development
along the shoreline limit channel
floodplain interactions in Tukwila.
Fine sediment contribution to the
river is increased due to build -up
generation and wash -off from surrounding
urban land uses.
Levees and revetments are virtually
continuous along the riverbanks,
limiting the potential to retain
particulates in the fluvially
dominated reaches. Particulates
and contaminants_ including
sediment, are retained in the tidally
dominated reaches, as evidenced by
the need to dredge the estuary
turning basin.
Potential Restoration
within 'the, CI
1. Modify current levees and revetments
to increase channel and floodplain
interaction;
2. Excavate back or side channels;
1. Implement enhanced stormwater
BMPs for fine sediment removal in
stormwater runoff.
1. Modify current levees and revetments
to increase channel and floodplain area;
2. Install native riparian species to
increase bank roughness.
Function
Category
Water
Quality
LWD and
Organics
LWD and
Organics:
Fu nction
Maintain
Characteristic
Plant Community
Source of LWD
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Alterations to natural
functioning
As channel floodplain interaction
was reduced, the channel became a
Nutrient Cycling conduit for nutrients, offering little
opportunity for contact time with
soils.
The majority of the shoreline within
the City of Tukwila is currently
dominated by non native invasive
weed species (Himalayan
blackberry, reed canary grass, and
Japanese knotweed). Some higher
quality areas of cottonwood, alder,
and willow exist in riparian areas
bordering open space, parkland,
and residential zones.
for LWD, tThere are some large
cottonwoods and big leaf maples
that occur along the Ievees (many
of which are being removed to meet
Corps of Engineers standards for
levee maintenance). Other areas
and of the shoreline also have large
trees that provide a limited source
of LWD. revetment system.
2.3 Existing Plans and Programs
Potential Restoration Action
within the City
1. Increase riverine wetland area;
2. Install native riparian plant species.
3. Set back banks (revetments and
levees).
1. Remove invasive plants and install
native riparian species;
2. Incorporate LWD into bank
stabilization and restoration projects;
3. Institute programmatic weed control
activities along shoreline.
4. Promote bioengineering techniques
for shoreline stabilization projects.
1. Install native riparian species;
2. Incorporate LWD into bank
stabilization and restoration projects.
As noted in the inventory and characterization report and summarized above, many of the
alterations to shoreline functions and ecosystem processes in the Green/Duwamish River are due
to watershed scale issues within the upper watershed which cannot be fully restored or addressed
in the lower river section through Tukwila. However, hydrologic, water quality, and habitat
restoration measures in the City do have the potential to improve the overall functioning of this
important section of Green/Duwamish River ecosystem at the transition from fresh to salt water.
2.3.1 Regional
The importance of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem within the Puget Sound has resulted in
significant focus on this area in terms of restoration potential. With the federal listing of
Chinook and bull trout as endangered species, watershed planning in the region (e.g., WRIA 9)
has focused on developing a Salmon Habitat Plan (WRIA 9, 2005), to which the City of Tukwila
is a party. The plan establishes goals, objectives, and programmatic and site specific actions to
address restoration of habitat critical to salmon species in the Green/Duwamish watershed. In
general, the approach used by the regional entities around Tukwila (e.g. WRIA 9, King County)
May 2007 9
343
appears to be consistent with the overall national restoration framework in the sense that the
proposed projects address a broad base of ecosystem functions.
The Lower Duwamish Damage Assessment. Remediation and Restoration Program is a federal
program (Natural Resource Damage Assessment NRDA) that is addressing habitat restoration,
as part of remediation of contaminated sites (including sediments) in the lower Part of the river. I
The goal of the program is to "restore. replace. or acauire the equivalent of those natural
resources injured as the result of hazardous substance releases" over decades. The program has
developed a set of strategies that will include rehabilitation. creation. and enhancement
proiects.at various locations (not vet identified specifically) in the Lower Duwamish.once
remediation of contaminated sites has occurred. Marshes and mudflats are a to priority.
Riparian buffers. especially those adjoining marsh habitats. are also targeted because they
support wildlife. filter runoff and provide material inputs. The strategy, which is currently under
evaluation through a programmatic EIS, has identified several Habitat Focus Areas (HFAs),
where restoration funding would be directed. The highest priority location for restoration
protects is in HFA 1. which extends from the north tip of Harbor Island in Seattle. to the North,
Winds Weir site in Tukwila (most of the transition zone). Upriver from there. (HFA -3) to the
confluence of the Green and Black Rivers (RMI l) is the third priority area and further un- river,
to River Mile 32 (the Lower Green River) is fourth. Any projects located in HFA 3 or 4 will be
subject to minimum size standards and will be considered only if they are components of
projects located in HFA -1.
To allow for the implementation of the restoration goals within a watershed context, it is
imperative that the City of Tukwila continue to coordinate its actions with other regional entities,
especially the WRIA 9 and NRDA programs. These entities often focus specifically on
restoration (e.g., Puget Sound Action Team), or have a broad mandate to address the
Green/Duwamish system (e.g., King County, Green River Flood Control Zone District).
2.3.2 City
Tukwila has already engaged in the greater regional restoration effort for the Green/Duwamish
River. The City Council has ratified the WRIA 9 Plan and contributes resources to maintain
operating staff. Tukwila has worked within the larger Green/Duwamish River Ecosystem
restoration project to acquire properties that are either currently functioning as restoration sites
(Cecil B. Moses park, Codiga Park), or have the potential for restoration (North Winds Weirl
restoration under construction) and Duwamish Gardens). WRIA 9 and other regional partners
are currently working together to monitor baseline conditions (e.g., Anchor, 2004; Pentec, 2004;
Terralogic and Landau, 2004).
2.4 Completed Projects
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
I Administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish
and Wildlife Service (DOI, FWS)
344 May 2007 10
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Several projects have already been completed in the Green/Duwamish River. These projects
provide an excellent opportunity to learn about what river restoration measures are the most
effective. For example, it appears that the back channel that was excavated at Codiga Farm Park
provides important habitat for migrating juvenile fish (Corps Seattle District, 2004). These
projects and their current status are shown below in Table 3, listed by river mile (RM). The
general location of these projects in Tukwila is shown on Map 1.
May 2007 11
345
Map
identifier
C -0
C -1
Project
of s Seattle Fleets and.
Facilities intertidal habitat
restoration
Kenco Marine intertidal
habitat restoration site
(also referred to as the
T i n g Basin #3 Project)
C -2 Coastal America Turning
Basin restoration
enhancement site
Cecil B. Moses Park at
C 3 North Winds Weir. left
bank) off-site channel
estuary wetland, intertidal
habitat restoration site.
Codiga Parkes o
C -4 channel, estuary wetland
site
February 2007
ed Restoration Projects in Tukwila
Table 3. Completed lead
Current Agent encIe
StatuslStag
City of Seattle
Compensate f l new
d
i b ye,
intertidal habitat. installing. native instaltive
riparian vegetation. n
habitat features..
To restore the resources affected
by releases of hazardous
substances from CSOs and storm
drains with restoration of
salmonid habitat being a priority.
Clean up area that was developed
and plant with native d
brackish marsh vegetation
Create off-channel, shallow water
habitat in the transition zone to
restore intertidal marsh.
Create off channel juvenile fish
refuge and wetland habitat ater
including deep-
eas
ne Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 06002
Tukwila Shorelt
Completed,
monitoring and,
maintenance
underway by City of
Seattle.
Completed project
but maintenance and
monitoring unknown
underway
Muckleshoot staff at
tie.
Completed project.
Maintenance is
ongoing as volunteer
effort.
Completed project,
maintenance schedule
unknown.
Monitoring progr
is in effect.
Completed project,
C ee i ty and.
People for Puget,
Sound volunteers are
working to restore
riparian area
waterward of off
Gurrerktly--0Qwned by
Muckleshoot Indian
Tribe. NOAA Fisheries
did the contracting
work for the projec
Seattle, King County,
and Ecology also
involved.
Corps of Engineers
Elliot Bay /Dt am
Restoration Panel
(2000)
Corps of Engineers
unding
City of Seattle
(mitigation
1991 settlement
meneysfunds from
suit filed -ham
13niteat
City -for "alleged
injuries to natural
resources
1991 settlement for
"alleged injuries to
na tural resources
River
Mite
FM 5 2
RM 5.3
RM 5.4
RM 6.2
Left bank
f
Long -term
funding. RIv 8.
Tukwila will be Right
responsible for bank
maintenance
monitoring
12
Map P roles arne
Identif
C -5a
w
one L (por
D as been repa
Site 3. Lil point Levee
ck(Re air
.Set_ba
Z40'1
5 La pianta Levee
Site
S c
etet -b�
l
The
ch nati
monitoring programs'
strength; me habitat
bank
a� comple in I
Comple phases
crease 1999 and 2002
existing levee, at toe
Set back Ju L
to -provide instream a
that e
resulted ,Levee re air f mid
1stalla with
ba lasted
set
o e bench to be
native. yezetation.
resulted in vee
Levee re air that r o
set h-c� k and= tallation ��,rfh
to be last
she bench �e.tatton
sat_=
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration r 'a=
Lea,d "Agen °r
rer►t''" ;,xA9enoi5
Cur e.,;,
tatustSta9 e
action
C0 din 2
corn
bench no
plantin m fete
�etco
Constr
C �letedin
on end
pl�tin b
fete
et cons
King County
funding
1IVI 15.1
Agency f V
bank
1, 300 feet_i
F enter etas eft galalc
Kin Coun
re air fundin
R_'
Left 13a
Federal erneraenc
Kih� Count re air fundan
3.0 RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
It is important to note that the monitoring and maintenance aspects of several of these completed
projects are not being fully executed. Implementation of effective monitoring and maintenance
of these projects is needed to match current national guidance for restoration and to maximize
the potential for restoration success.
Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be two specific
types of restoration actions that will most benefit the Green/Duwamish ecosystem in Tukwila.
These actions are intended to boost the levels of ecosystem functioning as part of a self
sustaining ecosystem that will limit the need for future manipulation. While these projects are
intended to restore many ecosystem functions, the restoration activities will occur in the highly
urban valley bottom, and as a result, cannot fully achieve pre disturbance channel conditions. In
addition, some restoration actions must occur at the watershed scale, which will restore
ecosystem functions that cannot be addressed solely within Tukwila.
1. Enlarging channel cross sectional area. This action will increase flood storage, allow
for more stable levees, restore floodplain area, provide a larger intertidal zone in this
important transitional area, and provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland
habitats. This action could include the use of setting back levees and re- sloping banks to
reduce steepnessrevetments, and the excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to
cr tc back channels.
2. Creating off channel areas. This action would create off channel areas through the
excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to create back channels.
3. Reconnecting wetland habitat to the river. This action would reconnect an old oxbow
wetland to the river. allowing for off channel habitat (Nelson Side Channel).
4. Removing fish barriers where tributary streams discharge to the river. This action
would remove flap gates and install fish friendly flap gates at the mouths of Tukwila's
three major. streams (Gilliam. Southaa.te and Riverton) and possibly restore habitat area at
these locations in the shoreline jurisdiction.
5. Enhancin a existing habitats. This action will improve the functioning of the existing
aquatic, riverine wetland, and riparian habitats that currently exist along the
Green/Duwamish River. These actions could include the removal of non native invasive
vegetation, installation of native riparian vegetation, and installation of LWD below
ordinary high water.
3.1 Potential Projects and Restoration Priorities
Significant past work has occurred to identify specific restoration projects within the shorelines
of Tukwila (Pentec, 2004, Anchor 2003, WRIA 9, 2005 etc.). Many of these projects were
identified in the Inventory and Characterization Report, and are described below. Most of the
restoration projects are part of ongoing restoration planning through the WRIA. 9 watershed
planning process. Table 4 includes a project description and notes the current status of each
348 May 2007 14
project. The project number correlates to those locations shown on Maps 1 through 4 in Section
8., Attachments.
Opportunities exist to enhance riparian vegetation along the majority of the Green/Duwamish
River, as mentioned above and in previous reports (e.g., Anchor 2003). Since these
opportunities are so ubiquitous, they are not specifically addressed in Table 4.
To aid the City in developing an internal ranking system, a preliminary qualitative (high,
medium, low) project ranking system is employed. This system has been modified to place the
highest priority on those projects located within the transition zone (from the East Marginal Way
S bridge, northward),
High priority projects will typically:
Address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions;
Have opportunity for multiple funding sources;
Include freshwater tributary channels; and/or
Not require additional property acquisition.
Be located in the transition zone
Medium priority projects will typically:
Address limited ecosystem functions; and
Be eligible for multiple funding sources, and/or require property acquisition.
Low priority projects will typically:
Only focus on habitat enhancement;
Will be used as mitigation to offset impacts elsewhere; or
Not be eligible for multiple funding sources.
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
This ranking system is applied to the projects that have been proposed to -date, as described in
Table 4.
May 2007 15
349
Project Name 1 Locatio
1
Shallow water habitat creation Hamm Creek
stream and estuary restoration site
RM 4.7 -5.5 a ba
2
Area to soup oration/enhancement site
Basin
RM 5.4
3
Duwamish Riverbank Stabilization at S. lob'
St.
RM 5.$ Right bank
4
North Wind Weir off-site channelestuary
wetland (Also known as 3ite l,,
habitat restoration site.
RM 6.3
Right bank
5
Bank restoration revetment setback
RM 5.5 6.6
Left bank
6
Riverton Creek channel a d tidal wetland
enhancements
RM 6.6
May 2007
Project Description Goals
Restore intertidal mudflats and channel edge habitats
to create low velocity and/or shallow water habitat.
Rehabilitate riparian areas.
Combined area totaling 10 acres.
Add to restoration that occurred under this project
south side of inlet, clear invasive vegetation, etc.
Stabilize eroding bank, regrade• 7e store 400 If of
riparian vegetation
Create two acres of off- channel, shallow water
habitat in the transition zone to restore intertidal
marsh area.
Protect improve riparian vegetation. Remove
armor and fill and increase area within
existing bank the estuarine transition zone.
Table 44. Potential R estoration Projects and Initial Project Ranking
L ead Agttt Y °C
Agencies
Ecosystem Processes t Shoreline Current Status I Funding d
Restore tributary access by removing fish passage
b and modifying stream mouth area.
Rehabilitate riparian and wetland slough areas in
their current locations.
Functions Addressed
Channel Floodplaininteracnon
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Fluvial Sediment Transport
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant ConununttY
Source of LWD
Targeted land area is not
yet available for
completion of project
Funding not yet identified
Exploratory; Property
acquisition needed
Funding not yet identified
CIP Project #94 -DR05
Funding notes identified
yes
ml
remediati
Conshnction for fish and
wildlife habitat is pendlNg
but scheddUled n. in n
F
Ki CouoPr IWRlA9
ject DUW-
(2005 11)
To Be Determined
teitr;t anarntetieri
County/WR 9
Schedule not yet King 005, Project DUW
established 9)
Fun di n g not yet identified
Coordination with City and
WSDOT in progress
ea ptnilw Stud° and 70°';
O,i..n u nderwa•'
Grant funding will bg
soueht for final
aec n n n
c_O
King County/WRIA 9
(2005, Project DUW-
CIP# 9g -DR
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 060023
Potential for
Success
Good
MAMA
Good
ie
eeateta
Good
To Be Determined 134'01064s
Good
Rung 5,t5W� 9
(2005,Fr Pr0j ;tDUW
eenteut
Good
_:.r
Ranking
Notes
High ecological priority; in
#4ediu uan one- would
tH need to be acquired
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions; would expand
f.4ediu existing restoration, jsin
m transition rons_,__L'land would
need to be acquired
Addresses limited ecosystem
functions, does not increase
channel are„;? to transition
Irene land would need to be
acquired
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions, land already
acquired; is in transition zone,
High some construction funds
secured
H -i
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions; in t t iii n
&and would need to be
acquired
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions, in a! "iron zn'lf
land already in public
High ownership; opportunity to
team with WSDOT
project Name Location
7
Shallow water habitat creation
RM 5.5
7.0
8
Duwatnish Gardens, off channel habitat area
(formerly called the Carasino property)
RM7
Right bank
9
S. 115 St. Bank setback
restoration and revetment
RM 6.9
7.2 Right bank
10
Duwarntsh Riverhend l4ill Park %riverbank
setback, off- channel area, heath
re storalionStabilisarns t-n
ear S. I l5 St
RM6.9-
7.2 Right bank
12
Potential estuary restoration enhancement at
mouth of Southgate Creek
May 2007
I t
4 2 "d Ave. S. Bank restoration
RM71
7.9
RMS
Project Description Goals
Restore intertidal mudfiats and channel
a ridgy ch
to create low velocity areas adjacent
Create 2.1 acres of off channel fish refuge habitat
Remove existing armor, reshape and revegetate the
river bank
Same location as 10, below, but different strategy
Relocate S. 1 15 to allow for bank setback and
sgtabilization. provide off- channel area with beach,
and riparian vegetation as Hart of nark develonmen'e
Improve riparian habitat throughout this segment, east
Relocate a water main pipe to reconfigure
bank and allow for a low vegetated b oo be to
constructed. Add large woody debris comp
the channel.
Provide fish refuge area
Ecosystem Processes Shoreline
Functions Addressed
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Fluvial Sediment Transport
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Fluvial Sediment Transport
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Transition from fresh to salt water
Current Status Funding
No specific project is King County/WRIA 9
planned (2005, Project DUW-
Phased project, funding not 7)
yet identified
Land isacouired available
�Ba-bas- Stalled
gfFunding yet identifier.
to design and cunstu_et
beiot'
City owns eastern portion
Funding unknown
City owns laadeastetat
petition
Conceptual design.
comoleted_.Funding for
detailed design &s
construction not_yet
identified5et
Schedule not yet
established
Funding not yet identified
(Note: a bank stabilization,
protect was emmleted in
200 ns a s emeronic
renair to nrnteet the
existing water line LA/D
was and riparian vegetation
were installed as .sart of the,
project
Lead Agency or
Agencies
King County/WRIA 91
City of Tukwila
(2005, Part of Project
area DUW-7
CIP Project #06•DR02
King County /WRIA 9
City of Tukwila
(2005, Project DU W-
6)
Schedule not yet
established
Funding not yet identified
King County/WR 9
City of Tukwila
(2005, Project DUW-
5)
City of Tukwila, land
acquisition needed.
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant 540.0600
Potential for
Success
Good
;sonmephie
wanted
Good
hre
aeolettt
Good
SinallaElo
d
Tukwila aFte-previons
Cl? Project 994 -DRO9
Desmoine-levee)
Fair
Water -line
eesstta+tts
options
Ranking
135
fp transition,
z t_o_LtIrn
Nigh
ffighli,sw
Medium
Fair
besated-at-dyilamie Medium
area atend et
Southgate Greet"
Notes
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions; land would need to
be acquired
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions, $726,000 in grant
funds acqu to -date, land
owned by Cih -he
aesittiredi-jp,aled in transition
zo—. ne. eligible for grant
funding.
14 i ghMedis Addresses limited ecosystem
ua functions' is in transition zone.
Addresses multiple ecosystem.
functions, land in Subl; 5�
ewnershin, nay
would need to be relocated
landward. 90ee-aet3°
Addresses limited but
important ecosystem
functions; water line
constrains design options
Addresses limited ecosystem
functions: located at dynamic
area at end of Southgate Cree,:
project Name i Locatiir
13
Ban restoration 8 revetment setback
8.2 -8.9
L
14
Shallow water habitat creation
'AM
11.0 1341150 10
15
wetland on rig
Create off channel, batik ht
RM 99
16a
Foster Golf Course Riverbank improvements
App r App roximat el y RMto
'Naha, Retorati n
Foster olt aurae
ro'c RM
Replace t ebris b of thew ea ana itnptovE
conflnce ai B v a r a cGte ntB d 5 u fah reins an rring
1mPro tiPar
Rivet by r eatOt ettrBueirhetgent marsh and
R M 11
M a y 2001
NufrientGychng water
t fresh to salt
drelocateGreenRiver Transitionfrom
tic Plant Community
e rte slowEnoent a eas add native riparia Characteris woody debris Maintain
Reshape create slow wear areas, Source of OD
Retention of Par
plan
Particula
E
Proj
large wo
is and 1 Channel Floodpl �n� n
e
rive vegetation lack ti Create on
dy
Processes t Shoreline
Ecosyste
el Floodplainlnteraction
C Fun Address
Function
Channel
of Partic
Nutrient Cycling
w o ff-chan nel itjoo from fresh to salt water
ity
te
of ne rated Trans Characteristic Plant Cotton
Create a mtOmnt of 15 acres t riparian vegetation with associated Maintain
s hallow water f m vegetation Source of L`ND
ttQarr
ante of Particul
Retentio
1 of
Interaction
Ch
Nutrient CY
l
Nu cing
Transtnon from fresh to saltwat
to
Deseription i Goals
of el. c aner c hallow Ma m m ion tore Rlant salt water
Commun
areas create onEl construction is
h WD
an
eta refuge past
lnu c n
h F
g to
l Fl o odplam hrteraction
Chant o {Particulates
Retention
Current Status !Funding
,h bra
e
Sch
e stablish ed
et
'Funding not yet identified
Schedule o r project plan �A 9
Sch t blished. I g Coontypoi t1'r"
n 00 (2005, Project a
ProPe b necessary
Phased p ro j ect, 6
Schedule or projec
establis not
Y opeRy acquisition
requi
Funding n yet identifed
Scheduled for 20
Source
Project #03 .0 City ofT in
cc
...ode, k i• ad' we`
rood a n c
articula
\i
r
afire t
Conce ptual plan
Funding not yet identified
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
2da Source
1)
Ring Ca fWR1A4
tm ectDl
(2005, Prot)
1
hy =a Shoreline Restoration Planning
Sl4 CrantNn•0600234
Notes
O
eente"`
Ring County 8),
(2005,ProjectL
ERP Pe
G
G
d
Good
Addresse multiple requ ires ecosystem
pro perty V
o rtant
Addresses multiple tnd nB
ecosystem ot started
functions; itiou
Medium
a cquisitio n
Low
EUded for use as
Site on, therefor sho tton
mitigate us for resmra
notbe a focus
ul' I T F
e
Medium
Addresses multiple uons� system
May 2007
Project Name Location
18
Ft. Dent Park riparian area enhancement on east
bank and levee setback
RM 11.4-
11.7
Right bank
19
Gilliam Creek fish passage improvements and
riparian rehabilitation
RM 12.5
Left bank
20
Nelson Side Channel Off channel habitat
rehabilitation
RM 12.5
12.65
21
Side channel project on riverward side of levee
Rlvl 12.8
22
Off channel and wetland habitat creation
Rh-I 12.5
13.5
23
Acquisition, levee setback and habitat
rehabilitation
Rot 14.7
15.3
Right bank
Project Description Goals
Setback the existing levee to create a low vegetated
bench for low velocity and /or shallow water habitat.
Plant native vegetation and add large woody debris.
Remove existing flood control flap gate from mouth
of Gilliam Creek and add fish ladder to restore fish
passage but retain flood control. Approximately
2,000 feet of the Creek would be improved by
widening the channel, adding spawning gravel, large
woody debris, and riparian vegetation.
Connect remnant river channel (Nelson wetland)
with river to create off channel refugia for juvenile
fish. Restore river bank by re- sloping river side
channel adjacent levee and planting riparian
vegetation.
Potential side channel creation in disconnected
floodplain at Riverview Plaza. Create freshwater
wetland habitat, flood storage, low velocity shallow
water areas for food production and fish refuge.
Create an engineered side channel to connect and
enhance approximately 10 acres of wetland. Project
would provide floodplain re- connection and juvenile
Chinook habitat during peak time rearing and
migration. Improve the river banks, enhance wetland
areas, and create tributary channels.
Setback existing levee to widen the river channel,
provide a low vegetated bench, install woody
debris, and plant native riparian vegetation.
Ecosystem Processes Shoreline
Functions Addressed
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Upland sediment generation
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition front fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transition from fresh to salt water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Current Status Funding
No schedule or project pla
established
Funding not yet identified
Needs multiple agency
coordination. Schedule or
project plan not yet
established.
Funding not yet identified
Conceptual planning stage
Funding not yet identified
City-owned land,
preliminary conceptual
plan
Funding not yet identified;
coordination with WR1A 9
has begun
Schedule or project plan
not yet established.
Requires participation of
public and private
landowners
Funding not yet identified
Conceptual planning stage.
Requires acquisition of
river right -of -way just
north of Desimone levee
setback project.
Funding not yet identified
Lead Agency or
Agencies
King County/WRIA 9
(2005, Project LG -17)
King County/WRIA 9
(2005, Project LG -16),
Ecosystem
Restoration Project
City CIP Project #98-
011.05
King County/WRIA 9
(2005, Project LG -15)
City CIP Project #03-
PK04
City of Tukwila.
Potential location for
restoration and/or off
site wetland mitigation
King County/WRIA 9
(2005, Project LG -14)
King County /WR1A 9
(2005, Project LG-13)
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning— SMA Grant No. 0600234
Potential for
Success
Good Medium
Fair
to restore
eonaeetwicy
Good
S+arilaete- 6ediga
eeatem
Good Medium
Good Medium
Ranking Notes
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions over a limited area
Addresses important
freshwater tributary and
High multiple ecosystem functions;
requires fish ladder ro e to
connectivity
High
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions; conceptual design
completed, property in public
ownership.
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions; does not require
property acquisition;
coordination with WRIA 9 has
begun to pursue eligibility for
matching funds,
Addresses multiple ecosystem
functions; requires property
acquisition; could provide
significant area
Good Addresses limited ecosystem
Medium functions, requires property
acquisition
19
Project Name I Location
24
Desimone Levee Projects 1 -3
RM —14 -15
25
Segale Levee Projects 44
FM 13¢.
26
Aeeteisitierriited-eQff-channel habitat Johnson
River and stream. rehabilitation-at— e
Creek
RM 4412-17.3
May 2007
La Pinirte Levee Setback
V 16-4
Ecosystem processes I Shoreline
Functions Addressed
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Tnesition-fvere-f b sale -water
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source afLWD
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Nutrient Cycling
Transitiaa free
Maintain Characteristic Plant Community
Source of LWD
Channel Floodplain Interaction
Retention of Particulates
Upland sediment generation
a j dacent to the rive. Remove fish passage Nutrient Cycling
Project Description Goals
Levee set back projects to repair/replace existing
oversteepened levees
Levee set back projects to repair/replace existing
oversteepened levees
juvenile i t a sa lmonid flood refuge and rearing
habitat Johnson Creek?4��
barriers and re-align s
I t eanderin^ chap th hahrtat f_ot� spaiiew Maintain Characteristic Plant Community irnmscts to fish ha Community
a
aenaeerlt�
mts itlK: d enhance Source of LWD
degraded riparian areal Channel Flora
Setback levee to allow for channel exonnsioa mid
slope bench for denting
net w
4e.sa rater
with native vegetation• l br Interaction
Retention of Particulates
UDlan__ d_'d! veneration
Nutrient Cvclins
aintain Characteristic Plant Community.
Source of LW2
Current Status 1 Funding
CIP -level plans
Funding unknown
CEP-level plans
Funding unlmown
Conceptual planning stage.
Annexation proposal to
Tukwila is under review.
Fundingnefye
itlentlt tv e
developer as mitiWk
wcp al nlanninv. stave,
even rvrnnstmctrion trolls
146 S to S 200 to by
done in con5unction with
went of site
private dew
Lead Agency or
Agencies
King County Flood
Hazard Management
Plan 2006
King County Flood
Hazard Management
plaa200
King CountyIWRIA 9
(2005, Project LG -11),
detenvtined
City of Tukwila. King
Count
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No 060023
potential for
Success
Fair
Fair
oodFa+r
Creek
Ranking
Medium
Medium
Notes
Levee setback is less complex
in this location since the
is undeveloped at this
time: river system has
potential to be more dynamic
in this are?
Levee setback is less complex
in this location since the
property is undeveloped at this
time; river system has
RQ l g n rial to be more dynamic
"nl ttu e?
Addresses multiple ecosystem
Medium functions;
a erluiettiea
Addresses multiale v
Medimn functions.
May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
4.0 POLICY DEVELOPMENT
The City of Tukwila has been a partner in several projects within the greater Green/Duwamish
River Ecosystem Restoration Project (e.g., North Winds Weir and Codiga Farm property
acquisitions). Both projects are excellent examples of focusing restoration resources and efforts
on projects that address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions.
The initial success of these efforts underscores the importance of the City of Tukwila working
with other national or regional entities to pursue significant restoration opportunities. While the
City may be able to pursue some restoration or enhancement opportunities without regional
partners, these types of projects will typically be smaller scale, lower priority actions (e.g., weed
control, native plantings).
The Draft SMP has policies related to shoreline restoration that will be incorporated into the
City's Comprehensive Plan. Specific policies include:
Policy 5.2.1: Coordinate shoreline planning and management activities with other,
local jurisdictions and their plans such as the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan and the,
King County Flood Hazard Management Plan to establish region -wide consistency in
addressing river issues with regional implications, such as economic development,
public access, wildlife habitat, water quality control and flood control.
Policy 5.2.2: Promote river stewardship and increase river awareness through actions,
which further shoreline goals, such as educational programs, community activities.
and partnerships with Tukwila residents. businesses, schools. government, and
community organizations.
New Policy 5.2.3: Promote and participate in the implementation of the Watershed
Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan, including supporting the recommended
Projects located in Tukwila to improve the habitat functions of the Green /Duwamish
River. as well as the Plan policies and goals.
21
355
356
support another lead agency.
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Policy 1 is intended to allow Tukwila to As
noted in the Inventory and Characters. ation Report, there are some issues, including water
river water reaches Tukwila, it is not possible to cool the water sufficiently to have a m aningful
effect on local habitat conditions.
Policy 2. Identify specific restoration opportunities within Tukwila where the City can take the
1 d with support from other regional entities.
identify high priority restoration projects. This method is intended to help the city focus its
efforts in an organized way.
Policy Provide incentives to new projects and proposed re development to preserve additional
ar behind existing levees to allow for levee setback and back channel projects.
Policy 3 is intended to provide the city a way to preserve area along the river corridor, and to
provide additional ar for future restoration activities. This policy is an incentive based
approach to preserving the same level of economic development allowed under current zoning
Policy 1. Provide stormwater utility rate incentives and /or new stormwatcr regulations to
promote enhanced water quality tr atmcnt measures.
Policy 1 is intended to improve water quality within the Green/Duwamish River. This is another
incentive based approach to balance the impacts of new development. If successful, this policy
could be expanded to address retro fitting expanded treatment into existing systems. This policy
will also help to acknowledge the connection of ar as outside of shoreline jurisdiction to the
S will require changes in the City's c
regulations to meet the new requirements and promote improvements in water quality.
Policy 5. Provide monitoring and adaptive management of restoration projects implemented
within the city.
Policy 5 is untended to move the city into a leading
day to day maintenance (e.g., maintenance of irrigation systems) and adaptive management of
these restoration sites to ensure that they have the highest potential for success. Monitoring and
maintenance are key elements of the restoration framework, and will be essential to the
exist to support thccc activities.
May 2007 22
PEE; 3.
Policy 8
Encourage public involvement in the restoration of the shoreline.
projects-that would not :;cc
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
s. This- poky also supports types of
The implementation portion of restoration planning typically requires more detailed site specific
information than is available at this time. This section provides an implementation approach
consistent with the restoration framework and guidance for SMP development (WAC 173-26
201(2)(f)(vi)).
5.1 Funding and Partnership Opportunities
Funding opportunities for restoration projects include both federal and state grants and legislative
funds administered by state agencies. for which the City would typically urovide a match from
its Qeneral fimd. For potential projects in Tukwila, the greatest likelihood to obtain funding
would result from continued participation in the WRIA 9 forum and /or strategic partnering with
King County and state and federal agencies. Targeting funding requests to address levee setback
projects would fit well into the scientific and restoration plans /goals of the organizations listed
below. A few of these programs and organizations most relevant to Tukwila are described
below.
5.1.1 Puget Sound Action Team
The state legislature has appropriated a total of $182 million for state agencies and university
education programs for implementing the 2005 -2007 Puget Sound Conservation and Recovery
Plan (PSAT, 2005). Funding is allocated by both priority area (e.g., habitat restoration (13
May 2007
23
357
358
percent), stormwater (29 percent)) and state agency (e.g., Ecology, WDFW, WSU Extension,
etc.). The habitat restoration funds would be the best fit for opportunities in Tukwila.
5.1.2 Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB)
With the listing of salmonid species under the Endangered Species Act in 1999, the Legislature
created the Salmon Recovery Funding Board. Composed of citizens appointed by the Governor
and five state agency directors, the Board provides grant funds to protect or restore salmon
habitat and assist related activities. It works closely with local watershed groups and has helped
finance over 500 projects. The Salmon Recovery Funding Board awarded $7.1 million during the
first five funding cycles for salmon habitat protection, restoration, and assessment projects in the
Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed (WRIA 9). These grants build on other
funding sources such as the King County Conservation District and Waterways 2000. The site
specific opportunities in Tukwila (levee setbacks and off channel habitat restoration on the
Green River) that have been identified in the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan are good candidates
and have the greatest likelihood of receiving SRFB funding.
5.1.3 King Conservation District
The King Conservation District (KCD) is a non regulatory natural resources assistance agency
founded in 1949. The District promotes conservation through demonstration projects,
educational events, providing technical assistance, and, in some cases, providing or pointing the
way to funds that may be available for projects. The WRIA 9 Forum allocates approximately
$634,000 in King Conservation District funds annually to support habitat protection and
restoration projects, stewardship projects and programs, and essential technical assessments. As
of 2005, the highest priority for WRIA 9 KCD funding became projects and programs that are
informed by the strategies identified by the watershed Habitat Plan and the Strategic Assessment.
5.1.4 Natural Resource Damage Assessment Funds
The history of industrial land use within the Green/Duwamish River valley has resulted in
discharge of pollutants to water and soils in the area. To remediate and mitigate for these
impacts, the United States brought litigation against the City of Seattle and King County. The
result of the settlement agreement resulted in the availability of National Resource Damage
Assessment (NRDA) funds for ecological restoration in the Duwamish. Several projects (e.g.,
Turning Basin 3, Herring's House Habitat Restoration) have already been completed in this
vicinity. These funds are managed by NOAA, another partner in the Green/Duwamish River
Ecosystem Restoration Project.
5.1.5 King County Flood Control District
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
May 2007 24
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
King County is in the process of developing a new Flood Control District to address flooding
issues throughout the county. Current plans call for spending $335 million to implement the
recommendations included in the recently adopted Flood Hazard Management Plan (King
County, 2006). These plans and projects include the installation of setback levees and inclusion
of habitat features as part of the overall flood control project. The plan was adopted by the King
County Council January 16, 2007 and on April 16, 2007 the Council adopted one flood control
district for the entire county.
5.2 Timelines and Benchmarks
In the context of the SMP update, restoration planning is a long -term effort. As stated earlier, the
SMP guidelines include the general goal that local master programs "include planning elements
that, when implemented, serve to improve the overall condition of habitat and resources within
the shoreline area" (WAC 173- 26- 201(c)). As a long -range policy plan, it is difficult to
establish meaningful timelines and measurable benchmarks in the SMP by which to evaluate the
effectiveness of restoration planning or actions. Nonetheless, the legislature has provided an
overall timeframe for future amendments to the SMP. In 2003, Substitute Senate Bill 6012
amended the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58.080) to establish an amendment schedule
for all jurisdictions in the state. Once the City of Tukwila amends its SMP (on or before
December 1, 2009), the City is required to review, and amend if necessary, it's SMP once every
seven years (RCW 90.58.080(4)). During this review period, the City could document progress
toward achieving shoreline restoration goals. The review could include:
Re- evaluating adopted restoration goals, objectives, and policies;
Summarizing both planning efforts (including application for and securing grant funds)
and on- the ground actions undertaken in the interim to meet those goals; and
Revising the SMP restoration planning element to reflect changes in priorities or
objectives.
Another mechanism that may serves to establish timelines and benchmarks would be
is the incorporation of projects in the -a shoreline restoration program organized
the City's capital improvement program (CIP). Similar to an
infrastructure CIP, a shoreline restoration CIP would be evaluated and updated regularly. The
CIP would be focused on site specific projects and would be funded through grants. Further,
other CIP projects, such as stormwater facility improvements, will could be evaluated to
determine if their design could advance shoreline restoration goals.
5.3 Mechanisms and Strategies for Effectiveness
The SMP guidelines for restoration planning state that local programs should "...appropriately
review the effectiveness of the projects and programs in meeting the overall restoration goals"
(WAC 173- 26- 201(2)(f)). Phase 3 of the restoration framework described previously (based on
Palmer et al, 2005) provides a general roadmap for assessing restoration actions and revising the
approach to meeting restoration goals. It includes the following objectives:
Monitor post- restoration conditions;
May 2007
25
359
360
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Adaptively manage restoration projects; and
Use monitoring and maintenance results to inform future restoration activities.
These core objectives have been expanded upon by regional entities focused on restoration such
as the WRIA 9 Forum and the Puget Sound Nearshore Project (PNSP). Strategic principles and
concepts intended to guide ecosystem recovery are expressed in guidance publications (PSNP,
2004) and the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan (WRIA 9, 2006). The strategic principles and
concepts are very briefly summarized below:
Purpose and Need. Potential restoration projects should be consistent with overarching
goals and objectives. For example, the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan establishes near
term (the next 10 years) and long -term (50- to 100 -year) goals to improve viable
salmonid population parameters, such as increased productivity (population
growth/abundance), improved genetic diversity, and improved distribution of habitat
throughout the watershed (spatial structure).
Restoration Principles. Restoration planning should be strategic and restoration design
should be based on carefully developed goals and objectives. Follow -through, or
monitoring, should be employed, including development of performance criteria and use
of adaptive management in project development.
Monitoring Principles. Three types of monitoring are defined: 1) implementation
monitoring to track which potential programs and projects are carried out; 2)
effectiveness monitoring to determine if habitat objectives of the program or project have
been achieved; and validation monitoring to confirm whether proposed restoration
actions are achieving the overall objectives for restoration. Monitoring should be driven
by specific questions, goals, and objectives and should be used as the basis for
determining if restoration goals are being met. Monitoring should be long -term and
interdisciplinary. Another component of monitoring is information management; data
should be well documented and available to others.
Adaptive Management Principles. Adaptive management is a process that uses
research and monitoring to allow projects to proceed, despite inherent uncertainty and
risk regarding its consequences. Adaptive management is best accomplished at a
regional or watershed scale, but can be used at a project level to increase knowledge
about ecosystems and how they respond to restoration actions.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
State guidelines require all jurisdictions to address shoreline restoration planning as part of the
Shoreline Master Program update process (WAC 173- 26- 201(2)(f)). This restoration plan
presents an overall framework to allow the City of Tukwila to pursue the restoration of
ecosystem functioning within the Green/Duwamish River ecosystem. Key alterations to
ecosystem functioning were identified in previous inventory and characterization work:
May 2007 26
Based on these alterations, we identified fivetwe key restoration actions for the aquatic
ecosystems within Tukwila, as explained in Section 3:
1. Enlarging channel cross sectional area. This action will increase flood storage, allow
May 2007
1. The overall area over which key ecosystem functions occur is significantly reduced
from historic conditions. This area includes the important zone between fresh and salt
water that provides a transition for migrating fish.
2. Aquatic and wetland habitats are largely homogeneous in terms of both hydrology and
vegetative structure, and these habitats are typically restricted to the area within levees
and revetments within the City of Tukwila.
3. Degradation of water quality, especially water temperature, in the watershed above
Tukwila has effects that cannot be fully mitigated within the City.
4. Current levees would likely not meet current engineering standards.
gr-eater-4ntertidal zone, and provide a smoother transition from aquatic to upland
habitats. This action could include the use
excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to create back channels.
Creating of off channel areas.
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
2,
3. Reconnecting wetland habitat to the river.
4. Remove fish barriers where tributary streams discharge to the river.
5. Enhance existing habitats.
existing aquatic, riverine wetland, and riparian habitats that currently exist along the
Grcen/Duwamish River.
Based on the review of existing listed projects in Table 4, it appears that these goals are at the
core of most of the projects being implemented via regional restoration efforts. The City of
Tukwila is the lead on several at least one of these projects, and is pursuing additional projects.
The City will maintain its active role in regional restoration efforts, and continue to focus on
improvement of functions in the Green/Duwamish River ecosystem, with proiects in the
Transition Zone being the highest priority.
27
361
362
7.0 REFERENCES
Anchor Environmental, LLC. 2004. Lower Green River Baseline Habitat Report. Prepared for
WRIA 9.
Brinson, M.M., 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Technical Report WRP-
DE-4, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. NTIS No. AD
A270053.
City of Tukwila. Capital Improvements Proaram, 2009 -2010.
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
E. S. Bernhardt, M. A. Palmer, J. D. Allan, G. Alexander, K. Barnas, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S.
Clayton, C. Dahm, J. Follstad -Shah, D. Galat, S. Gloss, P. Goodwin, D. Hart, B. Hassett,
R. Jenkinson, S. Katz, G. M. Kondolf, P. S. Lake, R. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O'Donnell,
L. Pagano, B. Powell, and E. Sudduth. 2005. Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration
Efforts. Science. 308(5722) 636 -637.
ESA Adolfson. 2006. City of Tukwila Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report.
Prepared for the City of Tukwila. Seattle, Washington.
Green Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed Water Resource Inventory Area 9
Steering Committee (WRIA 9). August 2005. Salmon Habitat Plan Making Our
Watershed Fit for a King. Prepared for the WRIA 9 Forum. Seattle, Washington.
King County. 2003. Lower Green River Corridor Assessment. Dated November 2003, King
County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. 24 pp.
King County. 2006. Draft Flood Hazard Management Plan: King County, Washington. King
County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Water and Land Resources
Division, Seattle, Washington.
Kondolf, G.M. 1995. Five elements for effective evaluation of stream restoration. Restoration
Ecology 3(2):133 -136.
Palmer, M.A., and J.D. Allan. 2006. Restoring Rivers; Policy Recommendations to Enhance
Effectiveness of River Restoration. Issues in Science and Technology, Winter 2006.
Accessable online at restoringrivers.org
Palmer, M.A., E.S. Bernhardt, J.D. Allan, P.S. Lake, G. Alexander, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S,
Clayton, C.N. Dahm, J. Follstad Shah, D.L. Galat, S.G. Loss, P. Goodwin, D.D. Hart, B.
Hassett, R. Jenkinson, G.M. Kondolf, R. Lave, J.L. Meyer, T.K. O'Donnell, L. Pagano,
and E. Sudduth. Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of
Applied Ecology. 42, 208 -217.
Pentec Environmental. 2003. DRAFT Inventory of Shoreline Habitat and Riparian Conditions of
the Green/Duwamish River Within the City of Tukwila. Prepared for City of Tukwila.
January 7, 2003, Report: 12578 -02.
May 2007 28
May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Puget Sound Action Team (PSAT). 2005. 2005 -2007 Puget Sound Conservation and Recovery
Plan. Olympia, Washington.
Puget Sound Nearshore Project (PNSP). 2004. Guiding Restoration Principles. Technical
Report 2004 -03 available online: www.puaetsoundnearshore.or�
Shared Strategy for Puget Sound (Shared Strategy). 2005. Draft Puget Sound Salmon Recovery
Plan. Submitted by Shared Strategy Development Committee. Seattle, Washington.
TerraLogic GIS, Inc and Landau Associates. 2004. Final Lower Duwamish Inventory Report.
Technical report prepared for WRIA 9 Steering Committee. Seattle, WA.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps Seattle District). 2004. Memorandum for
Record, Subject: Codiga Farms Baseline Monitoring Report. Reference: CENWS -PM-
PL-ER. July 23, 2004.
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2004. Restoration Planning and the 2003
Shoreline Management Guidelines. Ecology Publication No. 04 -06 -022. Olympia,
Washington.
29
363
364
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
May 2007
Tukwila Shoreline Restoration Planning SMA Grant No. 0600234
Map 1. City of Tukwila Restoration Opportunity Sites: River Miles 4 -7
Map 2. City of Tukwila Restoration Opportunity Sites: River Miles 7 -11
Map 3. City of Tukwila Restoration Opportunity Sites: River Miles 11 -15
Map 4. City of Tukwila Restoration Opportunity Sites: River Miles 15 -17
Example Project Sheets
30
Project Purpose
Acquire available undeveloped
property along the Duwamish Estuary
Increase channel area
Enhance habitat characteristics in the important transition zone between fresh and
salt water
High Priority Restoration Action.
North Wind Weir
Site 1
Salmon Plan Site DUW 10
Part of Ecosystem Restoration
Project
Potential for —2 acres of
back/side intertidal channel
habitat
Completed project on the left bank
Current Status
Property acquired in 2001
Joint project between Tukwila, USACOE, and King County (lead)
Funding provided by SRFB, Elliot Bay/Duwamish Restoration program, Washington
State, King County, Seattle, and Tukwila.
Remediation completed 2009, construction of habitat improvements to begin 2009
365
366
Riverton Creek
Site
Salmon Plan Site DUW 8
Part of Ecosystem
Restoration Project
Potential for -3.4 acres
intertidal channel habitat
on freshwater input point.
Project Purpose
Replace flap gate with self regulating tide gate
Increase intertidal area area
Enhance habitat characteristics in the important transition zone between fresh and
salt water
Current Status
Site is in public ownership
Feasibility study and 70% design underway (2009) by City
Funding for final design and construction not identified City will apply for grant
funding
Duwamish
Gardens Site
Salmon Plan Site DUW 7
Part of Ecosystem
Restoration Project
Potential for —2.1 acres
of intertidal channel
habitat.
Project Purpose
Increase intertidal area area
Enhance habitat characteristics in the important transition zone between fresh and
salt water
Current Status
SRFB funding obtained for property acquisition, property acquired by City
City in process of securing site (demolition of house and other structures, fencing)
City will seek grant funding for construction
367
368
Gilliam Creek Site
Salmon Plan Site LG -16
Part of Ecosystem Restoration Project
(Corps of Engineers lead)
City CIP 98 -DR05
Potential for 2,000 linear feet of channel
restoration.
Project Purpose
Remove existing fish passage barrier
Install fish ladder
Enhance in- stream habitat characteristics with large wood and riparian vegetation.
Current Status
Funding not yet identified
Future coordination with WSDOT project to construct new highway interchange.
Nelson Side Channel Site
Salmon Plan Project LG -15
City CIP 03 -PK04
Potential for -2 acres of channel
rehabilitation.
Project Purpose
Connect remnant river channel to the river to create off channel refugia for
juvenile fish.
Restore river bank by sloping river side channel and adjacent levee.
Install riparian vegetation.
Current Status
Conceptual planning stage.
Funding not yet identified.
369
370
D u FT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, UPDATING THE SHORELINE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN, TO INCORPORATE POLICIES THAT
REFLECT NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR AREAS SUBJECT TO SHORELINE
JURISDICTION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals
and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County Countywide
Planning Policies; and
WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State, regulated under RCW
90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila, and
WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive
Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and
WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the State Legislature has found that shorelines of
the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and unrestricted
construction on privately -and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not in the best public
interest; and
WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020, the Legislature directed local governments developing
Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to uses
in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect State -wide interests over local interests;
2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit;
4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly
owned areas of the shoreline; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the
shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100, deemed
appropriate or necessary; and
WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), adopted new
rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act;
and
WHEREAS, DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide
direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and
WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline
master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by DOE, in
accordance with a schedule established in that section; and
WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila
to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program is implemented by regulations
codified at TMC 18.44, which are in turn guided by the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's
Shoreline Goals and Policies; and
WHEREAS, the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Shoreline Goals and Policies were adopted
in Ordinance No. 1757, specifically, Goals and Policies 5.1 -5.10; and
WHEREAS, in order to amend the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program, it is necessary to
update the Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Goals and Policies, which have not been updated
since 1995, to reflect the updated WAC 173 -26 regulations for shoreline master programs; and
WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established a
Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background
studies; and
1N \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:Fsn 11/19/2009
Page 1 of 11
371
372
WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program
in 2008; and
WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master
Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an "Inventory and
Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non
Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program,
held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow
additional public input, and recommended adoption of the Planning Commission's revised
Shoreline Master Program to the City Council in February 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing
to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009 and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the
Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved
revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to
address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers and the Department of
Ecology; and
WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of
methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the
proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including: mailings to property owners and
tenants; notice boards along the Green River Trail; postings on the City's web site; creation of a
broadcast email group who received updates of the shoreline review process; and articles in the
City's newsletter; and
WHEREAS, one of the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan is to protect the natural
environment, including shoreline areas, because they are an essential contributor to the overall
welfare of the City's residents and businesses; and
WHEREAS, the revisions to the Comprehensive Plan Policies for the shoreline address
changes in shoreline character and the need to further protect the shoreline resources for public
safety, flood control and habitat improvement; and
WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce,
pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Goals and Policies 5.1 -5.11 of the Shoreline Element of the City of Tukwila's
Comprehensive Land Use Plan, are hereby amended to read as shown in "Attachment A" to
this ordinance.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of
this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage
and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009.
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachment "Attachment A" City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Policies
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number.
Page 2 of 11
5.1 Shoreline Environment Designations
ATTACHMENT A
Ordinance No.
Goal: Shoreline Environment designations that meet Washington State Shoreline
Management Act requirements, and reflect local conditions and Tukwila's long -term
vision for its shoreline. The shoreline jurisdiction generally extends for 200 feet on
either side of the Ordinary High Water mark, consistent with the Washington State
Shoreline Management Act. In order to implement this goal, the SMP proposes three
Environment Designations: Shoreline Residential, Urban Conservancy, and High
Intensity (as detailed in the Shoreline Environment Section) that comply with the
Washington State Shoreline Management Act and function well for the City.
Policies:
New Policy 5.1.1: Shoreline Residential Environment. In the Shoreline
Residential Environment, priority shall be given to the following:
o Uses that preserve or restore the natural character of the shoreline or
promote preservation of vegetation, open space, flood plain or
sensitive area lands; and
o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological
limitations of the land and water and that will not require extensive
alteration of the shoreline or new "hard" structural shoreline
stabilization. Where possible the removal of bulkheads, revetments,
levees or other "hard" structural shoreline stabilization is required.
Hard structural shoreline stabilization may be replaced with
alternative bioengineered bank stabilization, and
o On publicly owned property, water- dependent or water related
recreational activities that are compatible with the character of the
shoreline residential areas.
o Maintenance of existing single family residential development
patterns and public open space and recreation uses;
o Residential and recreational development that promotes vegetation
conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and
maintenance of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions;
o Residential and recreational development that contributes to the
restoration of ecological functions over time in areas where ecological
degradation has occurred.
Policy 5.1.2, Urban Conservancy Environment: In the Urban Conservancy
Environment priority shall be given to the following:
o Development that promotes vegetation conservation and
enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water
quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
o Water enjoyment uses
o Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline
dependent use;
o Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided
by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands;
o Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control,
consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed
passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on
migration;
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated,
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 3 of 11
373
374
o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological
limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive
alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for
restoration projects.
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated;
o Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and
o Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of
commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are
minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions.
New Policy 5.1.3, High Intensity Shoreline Environment: In the High
Intensity Environment, priority shall be given to the following:
o Water dependent commercial and industrial uses;
o Development that promotes vegetation conservation and
enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water
quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
o Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline
dependent use;
o Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided
by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands;
o Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control,
consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed
passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on
migration;
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated;
o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological
limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive
alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for
restoration projects.
o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever
feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated;
o Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and
o Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of intensive
commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are
minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions.
5.2 Shoreline Planning and Management
Goal: Expanded value of the river as a community and regional resource through
regional coordination of shoreline management programs and through programs that
foster river appreciation and awareness, involving partnerships among businesses,
schools, government and community organizations.
Policies:
Policy 5.2.1: Coordinate shoreline planning and management activities with
other local jurisdictions and their plans such as the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat
Plan and the King County Flood Hazard Management Plan to establish
region -wide consistency in addressing river issues with regional implications,
such as economic development, public access, wildlife habitat, water quality
control and flood control.
Policy 5.2.2: Promote river stewardship and increase river awareness through
actions which further shoreline goals, such as educational programs,
community activities, and partnerships with Tukwila residents, businesses,
schools, government, and community organizations.
W.\ Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 4 of 11
New Policy 5.2.3: Promote and participate in the implementation of the
Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan, including supporting the
recommended projects located in Tukwila to improve the habitat functions of
the Green/ Duwamish River, as well as the Plan policies and goals.
C. Implementation Strategies:
WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan
Tukwila SMP Restoration Plan
5.3 Land Development Use and Economic Vitality
Goal: Development along the shoreline that fosters the economic vitality of Tukwila
while preserving the long -term benefits of the river.
Policies:
Policy 5.3.1: Implement Shoreline Design Guidelines to:
o Encourage design that views the river as an amenity;
o Guide the design of multiple shoreline uses;
o Establish techniques for increasing multiple shoreline use;
o Prioritize locations for use;
o Encourage removal of invasive species with nonchemical methods and
maintenance of native planted vegetation to minimize the presence of
invasive species.
Policy 5.3.2: Design and locate all shoreline development to minimize impacts
on areas identified as important for other river uses, such as wildlife and
aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, historical
resource and flood control.
Policy 5.3.3: When no other feasible alternative exists. aAllow structures to be
placed in the water, or structural reinforcement of the riverbank, only when
this provides a significant, long -term public benefit, does not interfere with
navigation or flood management, does not cause a loss of shoreline function
or is essential to a water- dependent use.
Policy 5.3.4: Prohibit the construction of new flood control facilities unless
constructed to incorporate habitat restoration features and work to remove
existing shoreline armoring where possible- to restore habitat functions.
Policy 5.3.5: Recognize and promote the river's contribution to the economic
vitality of Tukwila, as a valuable amenity for existing and future businesses
which depend on or benefit from a shoreline location.
Policy 5.3 6: Ensure that shoreline development does not diminish the
commercial navigability of the River
Policy 5.3.7: Tukwila Urban Center Development Policy Design and locate
shoreline development in the Tukwila Urban Center to encourage water
enjoyment uses that:
o Provide for shoreline multiple uses that are consistent with the
underlying zoning;
o Provide additional benefits, such as riverbank restoration, fishing
piers, non motorized boat launches, river views, or interpretive signs;
o Support public access to and along the shoreline;
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 5 of 11
375
376
Policies
o Provide water- enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and
non -water dependent uses;
o Encourage efficient use of land, through such techniques as clustering,
mixed use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under
principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors.
o Ensure that new development and re- development in the Urban
Center acknowledges the goal of a continuous street facade along
Christensen Road and the riverfront and locates parking facilities to
the interior of the lot.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.3.7:
o Shoreline Design Guidelines
o Development Standards
o Tukwila Urban Center Plan
MIC Development Policy 5.3.8: Ensure that non -water dependent shoreline
development in the MIC. provides for shoreline multiple uses to the extent
that site security and the success of industrial operations are not jeopardized;
ensures no net loss of shoreline function and provides adequate mitigation
for the loss of shoreline multiple use opportunities.
MIC Development Policy 5.3 10: Allow opportunities for commercial and
recreational marinas to locate in Tukwila downstream of the turning basin,
where compatible with existing and future navigability and existing and
future ecological restoration projects.
Policy 5.3.11. Development outside the Tukwila Urban Center or MIC:
Design and locate shoreline development outside of the Tukwila Urban
Center and the MIC to:
o Provide for multiple shoreline uses;
o Provide water enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and
non -water dependent uses;
o Encourage efficient use of land through such techniques as clustering,
mixed -use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under
principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors;
o Treat the river as an amenity in the design and location of the project.
5.4 Private Property Rights
Goal: Protect rights of property owners to reasonable use and enjoyment of private
property, through appropriate location, access to, and design of shoreline uses.
Policy 5.4.1: Design, locate and manage shoreline uses in a manner which
maintains reasonable use and enjoyment of private property.
Policy 5 4.2: Design and locate public access in a way that is appropriate for
the site, depending on site conditions and private property concerns.
Policy 5.4.3: Special sensitivity is required for residential property; therefore,
all single family residential development of four or fewer single family
residential lots is excluded from requirements to provide private or public
access. Single family property owners are not exempt from the responsibility
to improve the habitat value of the shoreline environment.
Policy 5.4.4. Maintain flexibility in methods of obtaining public access, to
allow for different site conditions and private property concerns that might
conflict with public access, such as privacy, safety, and security.
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 6 of 11
Ncv Policy 5.4.5: Obtain additional easement area to permit the
improvement of river habitat by setting back levees or removing revetments
and other hard shoreline armoring and replacing with more habitat- friendly
shoreline treatment.
5.5 Shoreline Design Quality
Goal: Enhanced identity of the river as a unique community asset through high quality
development and public activities that reflect Tukwila's history and sense of
community pride.
Policies:
Policy 5.5.1: Require that shoreline development outside of the MIC.
o Ensures no net loss of shoreline function,
o Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design Guidelines;
o Reflects principles of high quality design, in such areas as site
planning, architecture and landscaping;
o Includes setbacks, bulk, height, density, landscape buffers and
provisions for open space that enhance the shoreline environment.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.1:
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline development standards
o Tukwila Urban Center Plan
Policy 5.5.2: Require that shoreline development in the MIC:
o Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design Guidelines;
o Maintains or enhances the existing visual quality along the river;
o Provides trees and other landscaping to buffer industrial uses that are
incompatible with other river uses;
o Provides amenities that enhance enjoyment of the river by employees.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.2:
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline development standards
5.6 Access and Recreational Use
Goal: Increase the amount and diversity of opportunities for public recreation and
access to and along the river, including visual and cultural access, access to the water's
edge, opportunities for small boat navigation and access, and connections to other
neighborhoods, consistent with the shoreline character.
Policies:
Policy 5.6.1: Retain and improve areas identified as important in the network
of public access to the river, including cross -town connections, former
railroad right -of -ways and unimproved street -end right -of -ways, historic
sites, unique natural features or other areas valuable for their interpretive
potential.
New- Policy 5.6.2: Maintain existing parks along the shoreline and acquire
additional park land to increase access and recreation opportunities.
Policy 5.6.3: Incorporate river access requirements to guide the design,
location and management of shoreline public access in short plats over 4 lots
and all subdivisions as well as multi family, commercial and industrial
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 7 of 11
377
378
development; to identify types of access appropriate and feasible for various
site conditions and locations; and to establish strategies, funding sources and
priorities for acquisition and enhancement of shoreline public access.
Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.1- 5.6.3.
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline access guidelines
o Shoreline development standards
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space Plan
Policy 5.6.4: Design, locate and manage public access for diverse types and
variable levels of intensity in order to minimize impacts on vulnerable
features of the natural environment and to minimize conflicts with private
property uses.
Policy 5.6.5: Where shoreline development provides public access areas,
reserve such areas for use by the public through the means most appropriate
for the type, scale and impacts of the development, such as dedication,
donation or sale of an easement or right -of -way to the City.
Policy 5.6.6: Support the implementation of the King County Green River
Trail, per the existing King County Green River Trail Master Plan as well as
pedestrian/bicycle connections with the Trail from properties on the opposite
bank and the expansion of this trail where appropriate.
Policies for Development outside MIC:
Policy 5.6.7: Require subdivisions, multi- family residential uses and
commercial and industrial uses along the shoreline to provide a trail for
public access along the river in areas identified for trail connections,
consistent with the King County Green River Trail Master Plan, Shoreline
Master Program or any other approved access plan.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.7
o King County Green River Trail Master Plan
o Shoreline public access standards
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space Plan
Policy 5.6.8: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is
designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as
benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access, and
appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines.
Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.8
o King County Green River Trail Master Plan
o Shoreline public access standards
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space Plan
Policy 5.6.9: Except for single family residential development of four or fewer
single family residential lots, shoreline development shall maintain and
encourage views of the water from the shoreline and from upland area,
through design of building height, bulk and modulation, and windows,
breezeways and outdoor spaces.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 8 of 11
Implementation Strategies
o Shoreline design guidelines
New Policy 5.6.10: Public access improvements should be designed and
constructed to:
o Look and "feel" welcoming to the public;
o Connect to public areas, street ends, and other pedestrian or public
throughfares;
o Enhance the character of Tukwila;
o Avoid conflicts with water dependent uses;
o Provide for public safety and minimize impacts to private property
and individual privacy and security;
o Require a low level of operation and maintenance;
o Ensure that construction (i.e. structures and access pathways)
incorporates environmentally sensitive design and materials (e.g.,
non toxic, natural materials)
Policy 5.6.11: Improve pedestrian connections between the river, Green River
Trail and the planned Rivcrwalk and the Urban Center's commercial, office
and residential uses.
Policies for Development in MIC
Policy 5.6.12: For MIC properties included in the King County Green River
Trail Master Plan or other approved access plan, require shoreline
development to provide a trail for public access along the river.
Policy 5.6.13: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is
designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as
benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access and
appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines.
Policy 5.6.14: For MIC properties not included in the King County Green
River Trail Plan, require shoreline development to provide public access or a
private natural area in lieu of public access, or otherwise mitigate the loss of
public access.
Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.12 -14
o Shoreline design guidelines
o Shoreline access guidelines
o Walk and Roll Plan
o Parks and Open Space
5.7 Transportation within the Shoreline Turisdiction
Goal: Safe corridors and amenities for pedestrians, cyclists and users of public
transportation, allowing more citizens to access and enjoy the river.
Policies:
Policy 5.7.1. Design and locate transportation uses within the shoreline
jurisdiction to be compatible with shoreline vegetation or other habitat
features, turn -outs or parking areas for public access, biofiltration swales to
protect water quality, public art or interpretive signs.
Policy 5.7.2: Ensure the transportation uses within the shoreline jurisdiction
and within those corridors identified as river cross connections provide safe,
convenient and attractive pedestrian, bicycle and boater access and facilities
for public transportation.
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 9 of 11
379
380
Policy 5.7.3: Minimize transportation impacts to the natural environment
(such as air, noise, odor or water pollution) and enhance the natural
environment wherever possible through planting trees and other habitat
features.
Policy 5.7 4: Encourage maintenance of the river's navigability up to the
Turning Basin, where this achieves a greater public interest and a balance
between costs and benefits to the broader community and impacts to the
habitat functions of the river, in recognition of the historical significance of
navigation and its importance to the economic vitality of water dependent
uses and the MIC
5.8 Historical Resource Use and Archaeological Protection
Goal: Recognition of the river's contribution to Tukwila history and community
identity through identification, enhancement, restoration, and protection of sites with
historic and cultural value and through development of interpretive and educational
programs.
Policies
Policy 5.8.1: Ensure that shoreline development reflects the river's important
role in Tukwila's history and that long -term public use of the river as an
historical resource is protected by providing for the identification, protection
and interpretation of unique historic and archaeological features.
Policies
Policy 5.8.2: Ensure that public shoreline development reflects the river's
natural features and community traditions.
Ncw Policy 5.8.3: Ensure that archaeological artifacts and sites are protected
when development takes place in the shoreline jurisdiction.
5.9 Natural Environment and Habitat Use
Goal: Restored, enhanced, and protected natural environment resources along the river,
including trees, wildlife habitat and features with value for long -term public, scientific
and educational uses.
Policy 5.9.1: Ensure that shoreline development results in no net loss of
shoreline ecological function, minimizes impacts on wildlife and that
significant vegetation, sandbars, wetlands, watercourses, and other critical
areas identified as important for habitat are maintained through the proper
location, design, construction, and management of all shoreline uses and
activities.
Policy 5.9.2: Ensure that shoreline development and activities protect
riverbank vegetation and, where feasible, restore degraded riverbanks in
accordance with the vegetation management provisions of the Shoreline
Master Program, in order to minimize and compensate for impacts to fish and
wildlife habitat.
Policy 5.9.3: Mitigate unavoidable disturbances of significant vegetation or
habitat through replacement of habitat and provision of interpretive features
consistent with the shoreline access guidelines.
Ncw Policy 5.9.4: Support relief from certain shoreline master program
requirements for properties affected by habitat restoration projects that result
in the movement of the ordinary high water mark.
New Policy 5.9.5: Support establishing the Transition Zone as the priority
area for habitat restoration projects given its importance for subtidal and
intertidal habitats to allow salmonids to gradually adjust to the change
W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 10 of 11
between fresh and saltwater conditions.
5.10 Water Quality, Surface Water and Flood Control Use
Goal: Improved water quality and quantity control programs affecting the
Green /Duwamish River that improve the river's water quality, provide habitat for fish
and wildlife, protect public health and safety, and enhance public enjoyment of the
river.
Policies:
Policy 5.10.1: Design, locate, and manage shoreline development including
streets, flood control projects, surface water drainage and sewer systems,
clearing and grading activities, and landscaping in a manner which
minimizes opportunities for pollutants to enter the river, provides erosion
control and otherwise protects water quality.
Policy 5.10.2: Design, manage, and mitigate flood control uses to minimize
impacts to other shoreline uses such as trees and riverbank vegetation, public
access and recreation, and fish habitat; and set them back from the river,
where feasible for the project, with land areas between the water and the
levee set aside as open space for public recreation or wildlife habitat.
Policy 5.10.3: Consistent with project feasibility, mitigate unavoidable
negative impacts on other shoreline uses owing to flood control uses through
such measures as restoration of trees and native riverbank vegetation,
provision of public access to the water's edge, interpretive features, or other
mitigation of loss of opportunities for shoreline multiple uses.
New Policy 5.10.4: Obtain additional easements, where needed, from
property owners to set back levees to improve shoreline habitat functions. As
redevelopment occurs, replace bulkheads, revetments or other hard bank
stabilization with more natural riverbanks to improve ecological functions
and habitat where possible.
C. Implementation Strategies
Policies:
Increase levee setback to incorporate vegetated mid -slope benches
Shoreline access guidelines
Surface Water Management Plan
WRIA 9 Plan water quality policies
Shoreline Restoration Plan
5.11 Public Health, Safety and Welfare. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.11
Goal. Shoreline uses that do not endanger public health, safety and welfare, or the
capacity of the river to provide long -term benefits and resources to the community.
Policy 5 11.1: Design, locate, and manage shoreline uses, such as capital
improvement projects and private development, in a manner that does not
endanger public health, safety and welfare, and enhances the capacity of the
river to provide long -term benefits and resources to the community and the
environment.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc
CL:ksn 11/19/2009
Page 11 of 11
381
382
W- \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, UPDATING REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORELINE
REGULATIONS TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS;
REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 1796 §3 (PART), 1775 §2, AND 1758 §1 (PART), AS
CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.44, "SHORELINE
OVERLAY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILTTY; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals
and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County County-wide
Planning Policies; and
WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State, regulated under RCW
90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and
WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive
Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and
WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the State Legislature has found that shorelines of
the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and unrestricted
construction on privately -owned and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not in the best
public interest; and
WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020, the Legislature directed local governments developing
Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to uses
in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect State -wide interests over local interests;
2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit;
4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly
owned areas of the shoreline; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the
shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100, deemed
appropriate or necessary; and
WHEREAS, Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout have been listed as "threatened"
under the Federal Endangered Species Act, and the Green /Duwamish River throughout
Tukwila is a critical resource for these species, making shoreline habitat protection and
restoration crucial, particularly in the Transition Zone portion of the river that extends from the
East Marginal Way South bridge through the north City limits; and
WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), adopted new
rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act;
and
WHEREAS, DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide
direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and
WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline
master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by DOE, in
accordance with a schedule established in that section; and
WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila
to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established
a Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background
studies and used consultant services to prepare technical documents; and
WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program
in 2008; and
Page 1 of 47
383
384
WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master
Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an "Inventory and
Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non
Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program,
held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow
additional public input, and recommended adoption of the Planning Commission's revised
Shoreline Master Program to the City Council in February 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing
to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009 and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the
Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved
revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to
address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers and the Department of
Ecology; and
WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of
methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the
proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including: mailings to property owners and
tenants; notice boards along the Green River Trail; postings on the City's web site; creation of a
broadcast email group who received updates of the shoreline review process; and articles in the
City's newsletter; and
WHEREAS, revisions to the City's shoreline regulations, codified in Tukwila municipal
Code Chapter 18.44, are required to implement the updated Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, new and revised Zoning Code definitions, codifed in Chapter 18.06 of the
Tukwila Municipal Code, are required to implement the changes to TMC Chapter 18.4 TMC
and the updated Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce
pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Purpose and Definition Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
18.44.010 Purpose and Definition
The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971,
as amended (referred to in the chapter as "Shoreline Act" (SMA)) and the rules and regulations
hereunder (referred to in this chapter as "shoreline regulations as codified in the Washington
Administrative Code; and to provide for the regulation of development that affects those areas
of the City under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Act.
Section 2. Shoreline Environment Designations Adopted. Updated requirements for
shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
18.44.020 Shoreline Environment Designations
All shoreline within the City is designated "urban" and further identified as follows:
1. Shoreline Residential Environment. All lands zoned for residential use as measured
200 feet landward from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM);
2. Urban Conservancy Environment. All lands not zoned for residential use upstream
from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM; and
3. High Intensity Environment. All lands downstream from the Turning Basin as
measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM.
Section 3. Principally Permitted Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
18.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses
A. This section specifies the uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional
Use or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment. Also included are special
conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended
to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation.
W. \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 2 of 47
B. General Use Regulations. All shoreline uses shall meet the requirements listed below
1. The first priority for City-owned property within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be
reserved for water- dependent uses including, but not limited to, habitat restoration, followed
by water enjoyment uses, public access, passive recreation, passive open space uses, or public
educational purposes.
2. No hazardous waste handling, processing or storage is allowed within the SMA
shoreline jurisdiction, unless incidental to a use allowed in the designated shoreline
environment and adequate controls are in place to prevent any releases to the shoreline /river
3. Overwater structures shall not cause a net loss of ecological function, interfere with
navigation or flood management, or present potential hazards to downstream properties or
facilities. They shall comply with the standards in the Overwater Structures Section of the
Shoreline Management Program (SMP).
4. Parking as a primary use is not permitted, except for existing Park and -Ride lots,
where adequate stormwater collection and treatment is in place to protect water quality.
Parking is permitted only as an accessory to a permitted or conditional use in the Shoreline
Jurisdiction.
5. All development, activities or uses unless an approved over water, flood
management structure, or shoreline restoration project shall be prohibited waterward of the
OHWM.
Section 4. Shoreline Residential Environment Uses Adopted. Updated requirements
for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.040 Shoreline Residential Environment Uses
A. Shoreline Residential Buffer Delineated Uses. The Shoreline Residential River
Buffer shall consist of the area needed to achieve a 2.5:1 slope of the river bank, measured from
the toe of the bank to the top of the bank, plus 20 linear feet measured from the top of the bank
landward; provided, that in no case shall the Shoreline Residential Buffer be less than 50 feet
landward of the OHWM.
1. Permitted Uses. No uses or structures are permitted in the Shoreline Residential
Buffer except for the following:
a. Shoreline restoration projects;
b. Over -water structures subject to the standards in the Over -water Structures
Section associated with water- dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control or
channel management. Private, single residence piers for the sole use of the property owner
shall not be considered an outright use on the shoreline. A dock may be allowed when the
applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the following alternatives have been
investigated and are not available or feasible:
1) commercial or marina moorage;
2) floating moorage buoys;
3) joint use moorage pier /dock.
c. Public parks, recreation and open space;
d. Public pedestrian bridges;
e. Public and /or private promenades, footpaths or trails;
f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters,
provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height or 25 square feet in area or block views
to the shoreline from adjacent properties;
g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code;
h. Construction, maintenance or re- development of levees for flood control
purposes, provided that any new or redeveloped levee shall meet the applicable levee
requirements of this chapter;
i. Vehicle bridges, only if connecting public rights -of -way;
j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection,
transmission or disposal of refuse;
k. Fire lanes when co- located with levee maintenance roads;
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 3 of 47
385
386
1. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline
Stabilization section of this SMP.
m. Water dependent uses and their structures, as long as there is no net loss of
shoreline ecological function;
n. Fences, provided the maximum height of a fence along the shoreline is four feet
and the fence does not extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain -link fences must
be vinyl coated.
o. Existing essential streets, roads and rights -of -way may be maintained or
improved;
P.
Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use;
q. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground;
r. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping
contaminated sediments; and
s. Patios or decks not exceeding 18 inches in height, limited to a maximum 200
square feet and 50% of the width of the river frontage. Decks or patios must be located
landward of the top of the bank and be constructed to be pervious and of environmentally
friendly materials.
t. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as
runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at
or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible.
2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the
shoreline residential river buffer subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions
established by TMC Chapter 18.64 and shall be reviewed through a Shoreline Conditional Use
Permit:
a. Dredging activities when in compliance with all federal and state regulations,
when necessary for navigation or remediation of contaminated sediments.
b. Dredging for navigational purposes is permitted where necessary for assuring
safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant
ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is provided. Maintenance dredging of
established navigation channels and basins is restricted to maintaining previously dredged
and /or existing authorized location, depth and width. Dredging of bottom materials for the
purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited.
c. New private vehicle bridges.
B. Shoreline Residential Environment Outside of Buffer Permitted Uses. The following
uses are permitted within the Shoreline Residential Environment outside of the Shoreline
Residential River Buffer. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Shoreline Residential
Development Zone as established in the Shoreline Environment Designation section.
1. Permitted Uses. The Shoreline Residential Environment shall contain residential,
recreational and limited commercial uses and accessory uses as allowed in the underlying
zoning district. In addition, the Shoreline Residential Environment shall allow the following
uses:
a. All uses permitted in the Shoreline Residential River Buffer;
b. For non residential uses, parking /loading and storage facilities located to the
most upland portion of the property and adequately screened and /or landscaped in accordance
with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping section;
c. Railroad tracks; and
d. Public or private roads.
2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be
allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter
18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is required.
Section 5. Urban Conservancy Environment Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for
shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.050 Urban Conservancy Environment Uses
A. Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer Delineated.
W.\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 4 of 47
The Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer shall consist of that area measured 100 feet
landward of the OHWM for non leveed portions of the river, and that area measured 125 feet
landward from the OHWM for leveed portions of the river.
B. Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer Uses.
1. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the Urban Conservancy River
Buffer:
a. Shoreline restoration projects;
b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over -water
Structures Section that are associated with water dependent uses, public access, recreation,
flood control, channel management or ecological restoration,
c. Public parks, recreation and open space;
d. Public and /or private promenades, footpaths or trails;
e. Public pedestrian bridges;
f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters,
provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and 25 square feet in area and views of
the shoreline are not blocked from adjacent properties;
g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code;
h. Construction, maintenance or re- development of levees for flood control
purposes, provided that any new or re- developed levee shall meet the applicable levee
requirements of this chapter;
i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way; existing
public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or replaced.
j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection,
transmission or disposal of refuse;
k. Levee maintenance roads;
1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the
Levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the
river and for landscaping purposes;
m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline
Stabilization Section;
n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights -of -way may be maintained or
improved;
o. Water- dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the
underlying zoning district;
p. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as
runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at
or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible;
q. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water- dependent use;
r. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground,
s. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping
contaminated sediments.
t. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Insfrastructure Design and
Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter
systems and outfalls. Any regional detention facility located in the buffer shall be designed
such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the
surrounding environment, and provide design features that serve both public and private use,
such as an access road that can also serve as a trail. The facility shall be designed to locate
access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical.
2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the
Shoreline Urban Conservancy Environment buffer, subject to the requirements, procedures and
conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64 and shall be reviewed through a Shoreline
Conditional Use Permit:
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 5 of 47
387
388
a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient
accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts
are minimized and when mitigation is provided.
b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation is
provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited.
Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations.
c. New private vehicle bridges.
C. Urban Conservancy Environment Outside of Buffer Uses.
The following uses are permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment, outside of
the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the
Urban Conservancy Environment as established in the Shoreline Environment Designation
section.
1. Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer
and /or the underlying zoning district may be allowed.
2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be
allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter
18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required.
D. Urban Conservancy Buffer Width Reduction
The Director may reduce the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer as follows:
1. For property located within the 100 -foot buffer in non -levee portions of the river, the
Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer may be reduced to that area occupied by the river
bank plus 20 feet measured landward from the top of the bank; provided however, that the
applicant must first re -slope the river bank to 2.5:1, provide a 20 -foot setback from the top of the
new slope and vegetate both the river bank and the 20 -foot setback area in accordance with the
standards in TMC 18.44.080, and provided that the Director determines that any buffer
reduction will not result in direct, indirect or long -term adverse impacts to shoreline ecosystem
functions. Further, a buffer enhancement plan, including removal of invasive plants and
plantings using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the
buffer and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions, must be approved by
the Director and implemented by the applicant as a condition of the reduction.
2. For property located within the 125 -foot buffer along leveed portions of the river,
the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer may be reduced to that area occupied by levee or
river bank improvements meeting the minimum levee profile or other levee standards
provided in this chapter, plus 10 feet measured landward from the landward toe of the levee or
(if permitted by this chapter) floodwall. In the event that the owner provides the City with a
10 -foot levee maintenance easement, measured landward from the landward toe of the levee or
levee wall and prohibiting the construction of any structures and allows the City to access the
area to inspect the levee, then the buffer shall be reduced to the landward toe of the levee, or
landward edge of the levee floodwall, as the case may be.
3. If fill is placed along the back slope of a new levee, the Urban Conservancy
Environment Buffer may be reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back
slope of the levee; provided, that the property owner must grant the City a levee maintenance
easement measured 10 feet landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall, and
which easement prohibits the construction of any structures and allows the City to access the
area to inspect the levee and /or wall and make any necessary repairs.
Section 6. High Intensity Environment Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for
shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.060 High Intensity Environment Uses
A. High Intensity Environment Buffer Delineated
The High Intensity Environment Buffer shall consist of an area measured 100 feet
landward from the OHWM. The remaining area of shoreline jurisdiction is non buffer area.
B. High Intensity Environment Buffer Uses.
1. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the High Intensity River Buffer:
a. Shoreline restoration projects;
W Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 6 of 47
b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over -water
Structures Section that are associated with water- dependent uses, public access, recreation,
flood control, channel management or ecological restoration;
c. Public parks, recreation and open space;
d. Public and /or private promenades, footpaths or trails;
e. Public pedestrian bridges;
f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters,
provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and 25 square feet in area and no
views of the shoreline are blocked from adjacent properties;
g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code;
h. Construction, maintenance or re- development of levees for flood control
purposes, provided that any new or re- developed levee shall meet the applicable levee
requirements of this chapter;
i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way; existing
public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or replaced,
j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection,
transmission or disposal of refuse;
k. Levee maintenance roads;
1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the
Levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the
river and for landscaping purposes;
m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline
Stabilization Section of this SMP;
n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights -of -way may be maintained or
improved,
o. Water- dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the
underlying zoning district;
p. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as
runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at
or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible;
q. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use;
r. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground, and
s. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping
contaminated sediments.
t. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and
Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter
systems and outfalls. Any regional detention facility located in the buffer shall be designed
such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the
surrounding environment, and provide design features that serve both public and private use,
such as an access road that can also serve as a trail. The facility shall be designed to locate
access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical.
2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the
Shoreline High Intensity Environment Buffer subject to the requirements, procedures and
conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be
required.
a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient
accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts
are minimized and when mitigation is provided.
b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation is
provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited.
Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations.
c. New private vehicle bridges.
C. Shoreline Urban High Intensity Environment Uses. The Shoreline High Intensity
Environment shall consist of the remaining area within the 200 foot Shoreline Jurisdiction that
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 7 of 47
389
390
is not within the Shoreline High Intensity Environment Buffer area. Uses shall meet the
purposes and criteria of the Shoreline Environment Designations section.
1. Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the High Intensity Environment Buffer and or
the underlying zoning district may be allowed.
2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be
allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter
18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required.
D. Shoreline High Intensity Environment Buffer Reduction.
The Director may reduce the High Intensity Environment Buffer where the applicant re-
slopes the river bank to be no steeper than 3:1 above the OHWM, provides a 20 -foot setback
from the top of the new slope vegetates both the river bank and the 20 -foot setback area in
accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, and the
Director determines that there will be no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. On
properties where the bank slope currently is no steeper than 3:1 or where the property owner
has already re- sloped the river bank, provided a 20 -foot setback and vegetated the bank and
setback as provided in this section, the buffer width will be the distance measured from the
OHWM to the top of the bank, plus 20 feet.
Section 7. Development Standards Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.070 Development Standards
A. Applicability. The development standards of this chapter apply to work that meets the
definition of substantial development except for vegetation removal per TMC Section 18.44.080,
which applies to all shoreline development. The term "substantial development" applies to
non conforming, new or re- development. Non conforming uses, structures, parking lots and
landscape areas will be governed by the standards in TMC Section 18.44.130E, "Non-
conforming Development."
B. Shoreline Residential Development Standards. A shoreline substantial development
permit is not required for construction within the Shoreline Residential Environment by an
owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his /her own use or for the
use of a family member. Such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must
otherwise conform to this Chapter. Short subdivisions and subdivisions are not exempt from
obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit.
1. Shoreline Residential Environment Standards. The following standards apply to the
Shoreline Residential Environment
a. The development standards of the applicable underlying zoning district (Title
18, Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply.
b. New development and uses must be sited so as to allow natural bank inclination
of 2.5:1 slope with a 20 -foot setback from the top of the bank. The Director may require a
riverbank analysis as part of any development proposal.
c. Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc., shall be suitably screened with native
vegetation per the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section.
d. New shoreline stabilization, repair of existing stabilization or modifications to
the river bank must comply with the standards in the Shoreline Stabilization Section.
e. Short plats of five to nine lots or formal subdivisions must be designed to
provide public access to the river in accordance with the Public Access Section. Signage is
required to identify the public access point(s).
f. Parking facilities associated with single family residential development or public
recreational facilities are subject to the specific performance standards set forth in the Off -Street
Parking Section.
g. Fences, freestanding walls or other structures normally accessory to residences
must not block views of the river from adjacent residences or extend waterward beyond the top
of the bank. Chain link fencing must be vinyl coated.
h. Recreational structures permitted in the buffer must provide buffer mitigation.
i. The outside edge of surface transportation facilities, such as railroad tracks,
streets, or public transit shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the OHWM, except where
the surface transportation facility is bridging the river.
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 8 of 47
j. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water
dependent uses and their structures, the maximum height for structures shall be as established
by the underlying zone.
2. Design Review. Design review is required for non residential development in the
Shoreline Residential Environment.
C. High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development Standards.
1. Standards. The following standards apply in the High Intensity and Urban
Conservancy Environment.
a. The development standards for the applicable underlying zoning district (Title
18, Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply
b. All new development performed by public agencies, or new multi- family,
commercial, or industrial development shall provide public access in accordance with the
standards in the Public Access Section.
c. Development or re- development of properties in areas of the shoreline armored
with revetments or other hard armoring other than levees, or with non armored river banks,
must comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, TMC Section 18.44.080.
d. Any new shoreline stabilization or repairs to existing stabilization must comply
with Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(F).
e. Over -water structures shall be allowed only for water- dependent uses and the
size limited to the minimum necessary to support the structure's intended use and shall result
in no net loss to shoreline ecological function. Over -water structures must comply with the
standards in the Over -water Structures Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(K).
2. Setbacks and Site Configuration.
a. The yard setback adjacent to the river is the buffer width established for the
applicable shoreline environment.
b. A fishing pier, viewing platform or other outdoor feature that provides access to
the shoreline is not required to meet a setback from the OHWM.
3. Height Restrictions. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures,
and water- dependent uses and their structures, to preserve visual access to the shoreline and
avoid massing of tall buildings within the shoreline jurisdiction, the maximum height for
structures shall be as follows:
a. 15 feet where located within the River Buffer;
b. 45 feet between the outside landward edge of the River Buffer and 200 feet of the
OHWM.
Provided, no permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or
structure of more than 35 feet above average grade level on shorelines of the State that will
obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines. The
Director may approve a 15% increase in height if the project proponent provides additional
restoration and /or enhancement of the shoreline buffer, beyond what may otherwise be
required in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.080, Vegetation Protection and
Landscaping. If the required buffer has already been restored, the project proponent may
provide a 20% wider buffer, and /or enhanced in order to obtain the 15% increase in height in
accordance with TMC Section 18.44.080, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping.
4. Lighting. In addition to the lighting standards in TMC Chapter 18.60, "Board of
Architectural Review," lighting for the site or development shall be designed and located so
that:
a. The minimum light levels in parking areas and paths between the building and
street shall be one -foot candle;
b. Lighting shall be designed to prevent light spillover and glare on adjacent
properties and on the river channel, be directed downward so as to illuminate only the
immediate area, and be shielded to eliminate direct off -site illumination,
c. The general grounds need not be lighted,
d. The lighting is incorporated into a unified landscape and /or site plan.
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 9 of 47
391
392
D. Surface Water and Water Quality. The following standards apply to all shoreline
development.
1. New surface water systems may not discharge directly into the river or streams
tributary to the river without pre treatment to reduce pollutants and meet State water quality
standards.
2. Such pre treatment may consist of biofiltration, oil /water separators, or other
methods approved by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department.
3. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface
runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for stormwater detention infiltration.
4. Stormwater outfalls must be designed so as to cause no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions or adverse impacts where functions are impaired. New stormwater
outfalls or maintenance of existing outfalls must include shoreline restoration as part of the
project.
sewer.
5. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary
6. Solid and liquid wastes and untreated effluents shall not be allowed to enter any
bodies of water or to be discharged onto shorelands.
7. The use of low impact development techniques is required, unless such techniques
conflict with other provisions of the SMP or are shown to not be feasible due to site conditions.
E. Flood Hazard Reduction. The following standards apply to all shoreline development.
1. New flood hazard structures must incorporate appropriate vegetation restoration
and conservation actions consistent with the standards of the Vegetation Protection and
Landscaping Section.
2. New structural flood hazard reduction structures shall be allowed only when it can
be demonstrated by a riverbank analysis that
a. They are necessary to protect existing development;
b. Non structural measures are not feasible; and
c. Impacts to ecological functions and priority species and habitats can be
successfully mitigated so as to assure no net loss.
3. Levees, berms and similar flood control structures, whether new or redeveloped,
shall be designed to meet the minimum levee profile, except as provided in Section
18.44.070(E)10 below.
4. Publicly- funded structural measures to reduce flood hazards shall improve public
access or dedicate and provide public access unless public access improvements would cause
unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security
problems, or significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated.
5. Rehabilitation or replacement of existing flood control structures such as levees,
with a primary purpose of containing the 1% annual chance flood event, shall be allowed
where it can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis that the existing structure:
a. Does not provide an appropriate level of protection for surrounding lands; or
b. Does not meet the minimum levee profile or other appropriate engineering
design standards for stability (e.g., over steepened side slopes for existing soil and /or flow
conditions); and
c. Repair of the existing structure will not cause or increase significant adverse
ecological impacts to the shoreline.
6. Rehabilitated or replaced flood hazard reduction structures shall not extend the toe
of slope any further waterward of the OHWM than the existing structure.
7. New structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as levees, berms and similar
flood control structures shall be placed landward of the floodway as determined by the best
available information.
8. New, redeveloped or replaced structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be
placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated fish and wildlife habitat conservation
areas.
W.\ Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18 44.doc
CL.ksn 11/20/2009
Page 10 of 47
9. No commercial, industrial, office or residential development shall be located within
a floodplain without a Flood Control Zone Permit issued by the City. No development shall be
located within a floodway, except as otherwise permitted.
10. New, redeveloped or replaced flood hazard reduction structures may deviate from
the minimum levee profile only as follows. A floodwall may be substituted for all or a portion
of a levee back slope only where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure
legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this subsection, and which structure has not
lost its nonconforming status. The floodwall shall be designed to be the minimum necessary to
provide 10 feet of clearance between the levee and the building, or the minimum necessary to
preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety
standards. A floodwall may also be used where necessary to prevent the levee from
encroaching upon a railroad easement recorded prior to the date of adoption of this subsection.
If a floodwall is permitted under this subsection the levee slope must be 2.5H:1 V unless it is not
physically possible to achieve such a slope; in that instance, the levee slope must be as close to
2.5H:1V as physically possible.
F. Shoreline Stabilization. The provisions of this section apply to those structures or
actions intended to minimize or prevent erosion of adjacent uplands and /or failure of
riverbanks resulting from waves, tidal fluctuations or river currents. Shoreline stabilization or
armoring involves the placement of erosion resistant materials (e.g., large rocks and boulders,
cement, pilings and /or LWD (LWD)) or the use of bioengineering techniques to reduce or
eliminate erosion of shorelines and risk to human infrastructure. This form of shoreline
stabilization is distinct from flood control structures and flood hazard reduction measures
(such as levees). The terms "shoreline stabilization," "shoreline protection" and "shoreline
armoring" are used interchangeably.
1. Shoreline protection shall not be considered an outright permitted use and shall be
permitted only when it has been demonstrated through a riverbank analysis and report that
shoreline protection is necessary for the protection of existing legally established structures and
public improvements.
2. New development and re- development shall be designed and configured on the lot
to avoid the need for new shoreline stabilization. Removal of failing shoreline stabilization
shall be incorporated into re- development design proposals wherever feasible.
3. Replacement of lawfully established, existing bulkheads or revetments are subject to
the following priority system:
a. The first priority for replacement of bulkheads or revetments shall be landward
of the existing bulkhead.
b. The second priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments shall be
to replace in place (at the bulkhead's existing location).
4. When evaluating a proposal against the above priority system, at a minimum the
following criteria shall be considered:
a. Existing topography;
b. Existing development;
c. Location of abutting bulkheads;
d. Impact to shoreline ecological functions; and
e. Impact to river hydraulics, potential changes in geomorphology, and to other
areas of the shoreline.
5. Proponents of new or replacement hard shoreline stabilization (e.g. bulkheads or
revetments) must demonstrate through a documented riverbank analysis that bioengineered
shoreline protection measures or bioengineering erosion control designs will not provide
adequate upland protection of existing structures or would pose a threat or risk to adjacent
property. The study must also demonstrate that the proposed hard shoreline stabilization will
not adversely affect other infrastructure or adjacent shorelines.
6. Where allowed, shoreline armoring shall be designed, constructed and maintained
in a manner that does not result in a net loss of ecological function, including fish habitat, and
shall conform to the requirements of the 2004 Washington State Department of Fish and
Wildlife (or as amended) criteria and guidelines for integrated stream bank protection
(Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology and
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 11 of 47
393
394
regulatory requirements. The hard shoreline stabilization must be designed and approved by
an engineer licensed in the State of Washington and qualified to design shoreline stabilization
structures.
7. Shoreline armoring shall be designed to the minimum size, height, bulk and extent
necessary to remedy the identified hazard.
8. An applicant must demonstrate the following in order to qualify for the RCW
Section 90.58.030.30(e)(iii)(ii) exemption from the requirement to obtain a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit for a proposed single family bulkhead and to insure that the bulkhead
will be consistent with the SMP:
a. Erosion from currents or waves is imminently threatening a legally established
single family detached dwelling unit or one or more appurtenant structures; and
b. The proposed bulkhead is more consistent with the City's Master Program in
protecting the site and adjoining shorelines and non structural alternatives such as slope
drainage systems, bioengineering or vegetative growth stabilization are not feasible or will not
adequately protect a legally established residence or appurtenant structure; and
c. The proposed bulkhead is located landward of the OHWM or it connects to
adjacent, legally established bulkheads; and
d. The maximum height of the proposed bulkhead is no more than one foot above
the elevation of extreme high water on tidal waters as determined by the National Ocean
Survey published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
9. Bulkheads or revetments shall be constructed of suitable materials that will serve to
accomplish the desired end with maximum preservation of natural characteristics. Materials
with the potential for water quality degradation shall not be used. Design and construction
methods shall consider aesthetics and habitat protection. Automobile bodies, tires or other
junk or waste material that may release undesirable chemicals or other material shall not be
used for shoreline protection.
10. The builder of any bulkhead or revetment shall be financially responsible for
determining the nature and the extent of probable adverse effects on fish and wildlife or on the
property of others caused by his /her construction and shall propose and implement solutions
approved by the City to minimize such effects.
11. When shoreline stabilization is required at a public access site, provision for safe
access to the water shall be incorporated in the design whenever possible.
12. Placement of bank protection material shall occur from the top of the bank and shall
be supervised by the property owner or contractor to ensure material is not dumped directly
onto the bank face.
13. Bank protection material shall be clean and shall be of a sufficient size to prevent its
being washed away by high water flows.
14. When riprap is washed out and presents a hazard to the safety of recreational users
of the river, it shall be removed by the owner of such material.
15. Bank protection associated with bridge construction and maintenance may be
permitted subject to the provisions of the SMP and shall conform to provisions of the State
Hydraulics Code (RCW 77.55) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineer regulations.
G. Archaeological, Cultural and Historical Resources. In addition to the requirements of
TMC Section 18.50.110, Archaeological /Paleontological Information Preservation
Requirements, the following regulations apply:
1. All land use permits for projects within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be
coordinated with affected tribes.
2. If the City determines that a site has significant archaeological, natural scientific or
historical value, a substantial development that would pose a threat to the resources of the site,
shall not be approved.
3. Permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological resources require a
site inspection or evaluation by a professional archaeologist in coordination with affected
Indian tribes. The City may require that development be postponed in such areas to allow
investigation of public acquisition potential, retrieval and preservation of significant artifacts
and /or development of a mitigation plan. Areas of known or suspected archaeological
W\ Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 12 of 47
middens shall not be disturbed and shall be fenced and identified during construction projects
on the site.
4. Developers and property owners shall immediately stop work and notify the City of
Tukwila, the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and affected
Indian tribes if archaeological resources are uncovered during excavation.
5. In the event unforeseen factors constituting an emergency, as defined in RCW
90.58.030, necessitate rapid action to retrieve or preserve artifacts or data identified above, the
project may be exempted from any shoreline permit requirements. The City shall notify the
Washington State Department of Ecology, the State Attorney General's Office and the State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Office of such an exemption in a timely
manner.
6. Archaeological excavations may be permitted subject to the provision of the Master
Program.
7. On sites where historical or archaeological resources have been identified and will
be preserved in situ, public access to such areas shall be designed and managed so as to give
maximum protection to the resource and surrounding environment.
8. Interpretive signs of historical and archaeological features shall be provided subject
to the requirements of the Public Access Section when such signage does not compromise the
protection of these features from tampering, damage and /or destruction.
H. Environmental Impact Mitigation.
1. All shoreline development and uses shall occur in a manner that results in no net
loss of shoreline ecological functions through the careful location and design of all allowed
development and uses. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from allowed
development and uses are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the
provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met.
2. To the extent Washington's State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA), chapter
43.21C RCW, is applicable, the analysis of environmental impacts from proposed shoreline uses
or developments shall be conducted consistent with the rules implementing SEPA (TMC
Chapter 21.04 and WAC 197 -11).
3. Where required, mitigation measures shall be applied in the following sequence of
steps listed in order of priority:
a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action;
b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or
reduce impacts;
c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment;
d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations;
e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments; and
f. Monitoring the impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate
corrective measures.
4. In determining appropriate mitigation measures applicable to shoreline
development, lower priority measures shall be applied only where higher priority measures are
determined by the City to be infeasible or inapplicable.
5. When mitigation measures are appropriate pursuant to the priority of mitigation
sequencing above, preferential consideration shall be given to measures that replace the
impacted functions directly and in the immediate vicinity of the impact. However, if mitigation
in the immediate vicinity is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils,
waves or other factors, then off -site mitigation within the Shoreline Jurisdiction may be allowed
if consistent with the Shoreline Restoration Plan. Mitigation for projects in the Transition Zone
must take place in the Transition Zone. In the event a site is not available in the Transition Zone
to carry out required mitigation, the project proponent may contribute funds equivalent to the
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 13 of 47
395
396
value of the required mitigation to an existing or future restoration project identified in the CIP
to be carried out by a public agency in the Transition Zone.
I. Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements. In addition to the parking
requirements in TMC Chapter 18.56, the following requirements apply to all development in
the Shoreline Jurisdiction.
1. Any parking, loading, or storage facilities located between the river and any
building must incorporate additional landscaping in accordance with the Vegetation Protection
and Landscaping Section, or berming or other site planning or design techniques to reduce
visual and /or environmental impacts from the parking areas utilizing the following screening
techniques:
a. A solid evergreen screen of trees and shrubs a minimum of six feet high; or
b. Decorative fence a maximum of six feet high with landscaping. Chain link fence,
where allowed, shall be vinyl coated and landscaped with native trailing vine or an approved
non -native vine other than ivy, except where a security or safety hazard may exist; or
c. Earth berms at a minimum of four feet high, planted with native plants in
accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section.
2. Where a parking area is located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction and adjacent to a public
access feature, the parking area shall be screened by a vegetative screen or a built structure that
runs the entire length of the parking area adjacent to the amenity. The landscape screening
shall comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section.
3. Where public access to or along the shoreline exists or is proposed, parking areas
shall provide pedestrian access from the parking area to the shoreline.
4. Parking facilities, loading areas and paved areas shall incorporate low impact
development techniques wherever feasible, adequate stormwater retention areas, oil /water
separators and biofiltration swales or other treatment techniques and shall comply with the
standards and practices formally adopted by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department.
J. Land Altering Activities. All land altering activities in the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall
be in conjunction with an underlying land development permit, except for shoreline restoration
projects. All activities shall meet the following standards:
1. Clearing, Grading and Landfill.
a. Land altering shall be permitted only where it meets the following criteria:
1) The work is the minimum necessary to accomplish an allowed shoreline use;
2) Impacts to the natural environment are minimized and mitigated;
3) Water quality, river flows and /or fish habitat are not adversely affected,
4) Public access and river navigation are not diminished;
5) The project complies with all federal and state requirements;
6) The project complies with the vegetation protection criteria of the Vegetation
Protection and Landscaping Section; and
7) The project will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or
processes. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from an otherwise allowed
land altering project are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the
provisions of this section. In that event, the "no net loss" standard is met; and
8) Documentation is provided to demonstrate the fill comes from a clean
source.
b. Clearing, grading and landfill activities, where allowed, shall include erosion
control mechanisms, and any reasonable restriction on equipment, methods or timing
necessary to minimize the introduction of suspended solids or leaching of contaminants into
the river, or the disturbance of wildlife or fish habitats in accordance with the standards in
TMC Chapter 16.54, "Grading."
2. Dredging.
a. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations.
Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins must be restricted to
maintaining previously dredged and /or existing authorized location, depth, and width.
W. \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 14 of 47
b. Where allowed, dredging operations must be designed and scheduled so as to
ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes. In cases where impacts to
shoreline ecological functions from allowed dredging are unavoidable, those impacts shall be
mitigated according to the provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is
met.
K. Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks and Other Over -water
Structures.
1. General Requirements.
a. Prior to issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for construction
of piers, docks, wharves or other over -water structures, the applicant shall present approvals
from State or Federal agencies, as applicable.
b. Structures must be designed by a qualified engineer and must demonstrate the
project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological function and will be stable against the
forces of flowing water, wave action and the wakes of passing vessels.
c. In -water structures shall be designed and located to minimize shading of native
aquatic vegetation and fish passage areas. Removal of shoreline, riparian and aquatic
vegetation shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary to construct the project. All areas
disturbed by construction shall be replanted with native vegetation as part of the project.
d. New or replacement in -water structures shall be designed and located such that
natural hydraulic and geologic processes, such as erosion, wave action or floods will not
necessitate the following:
1) reinforcement of the shoreline or stream bank with new bulkheads or similar
artificial structures to protect the in -water structure; or
2) dredging.
e. No structures are allowed on top of over -water structures except for properties
located north of the Turning Basin.
f. Pilings or other associated structures in direct contact with water shall not be
treated with preservatives unless the applicant can demonstrate that no feasible alternative to
protect the materials exists and that non -wood alternatives are not economically feasible. In
that case, only compounds approved for marine use may be used and must be applied by the
manufacturer per current best management practices of the Western Wood Preservers Institute.
The applicant must present verification that the best management practices were followed. The
preservatives must also be approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
g. All over -water structures shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and
sound condition. Abandoned or unsafe over -water structures shall be removed or repaired
promptly by the owner. Accumulated debris shall be regularly removed and disposed of
properly so as not to jeopardize the integrity of the structure. Replacement of in -water
structures shall include proper removal of abandoned or other man-made structures and
debris.
h. Boat owners who store motorized boats on -site are encouraged to use best
management practices to avoid fuel and other fluid spills.
2. Marinas, Boat Yards and Dry Docks.
a. All uses under this category shall be designed to achieve no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from uses allowed
under this category are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the
provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met.
b. Commercial /industrial marinas and dry docks shall be located no further
upriver than Turning Basin #3.
c. Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed and operated to avoid or
minimize adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, water quality, native shoreline vegetation,
navigation, public access, existing in -water recreational activities and adjacent water uses.
d. Marinas shall submit a fuel spill prevention and contingency plan to the City for
approval. Haul -out and boat maintenance facilities must meet the City's stormwater
management requirements and not allow the release of chemicals, petroleum or suspended
solids to the river.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 15 of 47
397
398
e. Marinas, boat yards and dry docks must be located a minimum of 100 feet from
fish and wildlife habitat areas (see "Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline" Map 5).
f. New marinas, launch ramps and accessory uses must be located where water
depths are adequate to avoid the need for dredging.
3. Boat Launches and Boat Lifts.
a. Boat launch ramps and vehicle access to the ramps shall be designed to not cause
erosion; the use of pervious paving materials, such as grasscrete, are encouraged.
b. Boat launch ramps shall be designed to minimize areas of landfill or the need for
shoreline protective structures.
c. Access to the boat ramp and parking for the ramp shall be located a sufficient
distance from any frontage road to provide safe maneuvering of boats and trailers.
d. Launching rails shall be adequately anchored to the ground.
e. Launch ramps and boat lifts shall extend waterward past the OHWM only as far
as necessary to achieve their purpose.
f. Boat lifts and canopies must meet the standards of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Regional General Permit Number 1 for Watercraft Lifts in Fresh and
Marine /Estuarine Waters within the State of Washington.
4. Over -water Structures. Where allowed, over -water structures such as piers, wharves
and docks shall meet the following standards:
a. The size of new over -water structures shall be limited to the minimum necessary
to support the structure's intended use and to provide stability in the case of floating docks.
Structures must be compatible with any existing channel control or flood management
structures.
b. Over -water structures shall not extend waterward of the OHWM any more than
necessary to permit launching of watercraft, while also ensuring that watercraft do not rest on
tidal substrate at any time.
c. Adverse impacts of over -water structures on water quality, river flows, fish
habitat, shoreline vegetation, and public access shall be minimized and mitigated. Mitigation
measures may include joint use of existing structures, open decking or piers, replacement of
non -native vegetation, installation of in -water habitat features or restoration of shallow water
habitat.
d. Any proposals for in -water or over -water structures shall provide a pre
construction habitat evaluation, including an evaluation of salmonid and bull trout habitat and
shoreline ecological functions, and demonstrate how the project achieves no net loss of
shoreline ecological functions.
e. Over -water structures shall obtain all necessary state and federal permits prior to
construction or repair.
f. All over -water structures must be designed by a qualified engineer to ensure
they are adequately anchored to the bank in a manner so as not to cause future downstream
hazards or significant modifications to the river geomorphology and are able to withstand high
flows.
g. Over -water structures shall not obstruct normal public use of the river for
navigation or recreational purposes.
h. Shading impacts to fish shall be minimized by using grating on at least 30% of
the surface area of the over -water structure on residential areas and at least 50% of the over
water structure on all other properties. The use of skirting is not permitted.
i. If floats are used, the flotation shall be fully enclosed and contained in a shell
(such as polystyrene) that prevents breakup or loss of the flotation material into the water,
damage from ultraviolet radiation, and damage from rubbing against pilings or waterborne
debris.
j. Floats may not rest on the tidal substrate at any time and stoppers on the piling
anchoring the floats must be installed to ensure at least 1 foot of clearance above the substrate.
Anchor lines may not rest on the substrate at any time.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 16 of 47
k. The number of pilings to support over -water structures, including floats, shall be
limited to the minimum necessary. Pilings shall conform to the pilings standards contained in
the US Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit No. 6.
1. No over -water structure shall be located closer than five feet from the side
property line extended, except that such structures may abut property lines for the common use
of adjacent property owners when mutually agreed upon by the property owners in an
easement recorded with King County. A copy of this agreement shall be submitted to the
Department of Community Development and accompany an application for a development
permit and/or Shoreline Permit.
Section 8. Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Adopted. Updated requirements for
shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.080 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping
A. Purpose, Objectives and Applicability.
1. The purpose of this section is to:
a. Regulate the protection of existing trees and native vegetation in the Shoreline
Jurisdiction;
b. Establish requirements for removal of invasive plants at the time of development
or re- development of sites;
c. Establish requirements for landscaping for new development or re- development;
and
d. Establish requirements for the long -term maintenance of native vegetation to
prevent establishment of invasive species and promote shoreline ecosystem processes.
2. The City's goal is to:
a. Preserve as many existing trees as possible and increase the number of native
trees, shrubs and other vegetation in the shoreline because of their importance to shoreline
ecosystem functions as listed below.
1) Overhead tree canopy to provide shade for water temperature control;
2) Habitat for birds, insects and small mammals;
3) Vegetation that overhangs the river to provide places for fish to shelter;
4) Source of insects for fish;
5) Filtering of pollutants and slowing of stormwater prior to its entering the
river; and
6) A long -term source of woody debris for the river
b. In addition, trees and other native vegetation are important for aesthetics. It is
the City's goal that unsightly invasive vegetation, such as blackberries, be removed from the
shoreline and be replaced with native vegetation to promote greater enjoyment of and access to
the river.
c. The City will provide information and technical assistance to property owners
for improving vegetation in the Shoreline Jurisdiction and will work collaboratively with local
citizen groups to assist property owners in the removal of invasive vegetation and planting of
native vegetation, particularly for residential areas.
3. With the exception of residential development /re- development of four or fewer
residential units, all activities and developments within the Shoreline Environment must
comply with the landscaping and maintenance requirements of this section, whether or not a
shoreline substantial development permit is required. Single- family residential projects are not
exempt if implementing a shoreline stabilization project on the shoreline.
4. The tree protection and retention requirements apply to existing uses as well as new
or re- development.
B. Tree Protection, Retention and Replacement.
1. As many significant trees and as much native vegetation as possible are to be
retained on a site proposed for development or re- development, taking into account the
condition and age of the trees. As part of design review, the Director of Community
Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require alterations in the arrangement
of buildings, parking or other elements of proposed development in order to retain significant
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 17 of 47
399
400
non invasive trees, particularly those that provide shading to the river Trees located on
properties not undergoing development or re- development may not be removed except those
that interfere with access and passage on public trails or that present an imminent hazard to
existing structures or the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City may require an
evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA)- certified arborist.
2. To protect the ecological functions that trees and native vegetation provide to the
shoreline, removal of any significant tree or native vegetation in the Shoreline Jurisdiction
requires a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and is generally only
allowed on sites undergoing development or re- development. Only trees that interfere with
access and passage on public trails or trees that present an imminent hazard to existing
structures or the public may be removed from sites without an issued building permit or
Federal approval. Factors that will be considered in approving tree removal include, but are not
limited to: tree condition and health, age, risks to structures, and potential for root or canopy
interference with utilities.
3. Prior to any tree removal or site clearing, a Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and
Vegetation Clearing Permit application must be submitted to the Department of Community
Development (DCD) containing the following information:
a. A vegetation survey on a site plan that shows the diameter, species and location
of all significant trees and all existing native vegetation;
b. A site plan that shows trees and native vegetation to be retained and trees to be
removed and provides a table showing the number of significant trees to be removed and the
number of replacement trees required;
c. Tree protection zones and other measures to protect any trees or native
vegetation that are to be retained for sites undergoing development or re- development;
d. Location of the OHWM, river buffer, Shoreline Jurisdiction boundary and any
sensitive areas with their buffers;
e. A landscape plan that shows diameter, species name, spacing and planting
location for any required replacement trees and other proposed vegetation;
f. An arborist evaluation justifying the removal of hazardous trees if required by
DCD; and
g. An application fee per the current Land Use Permit Fee resolution.
4. Where permitted, significant trees that are removed from the shoreline shall be
replaced pursuant to the tree replacement requirements shown below, up to a density of 100
trees per acre (including existing trees). The Director or Planning Commission may require
additional trees or shrubs to be installed to mitigate any potential impact from the loss of this
vegetation as a result of new development.
Tree Replacement Requirements
Diameter* of Tree Removed *measured at
height of 4 feet from the ground)
4 -6 inches (single trunk);
2 inches (any trunk of a multi-trunk tree)
Over 6 -8 inches
Over 8 -20 inches
Over 20 inches
5. The property owner is required to ensure the viability and long -term health of trees
planted for replacement through proper care and maintenance for the life of the project.
Replaced trees that do not survive must be replanted in the next appropriate season for
planting.
6. If all required replacement trees cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site,
off -site tree replacement within the shoreline jurisdiction may be allowed at a site approved by
the City. Priority for off -site tree planting will be at locations within the Transition Zone. If no
suitable off -site location is available, the applicant shall pay into a tree replacement fund. The
fee shall be based on the value of the replacement trees and their delivery, labor for site
preparation and plant installation, soil amendments, mulch, and staking supplies.
7. When a tree suitable for use as LWD is permitted to be removed from the shoreline
buffer, the tree trunk and root ball (where possible) will be saved for use in a restoration project
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Number of Replacement
Trees Required
3
4
6
8
Page 18 of 47
elsewhere in the shoreline jurisdiction. The applicant will be responsible for the cost of moving
the removed tree(s) to a location designated by the City. If no restoration project or storage
location is available at the time, the Director may waive this requirement. Trees removed in the
shoreline jurisdiction outside the buffer shall be placed as LWD in the buffer (not on the bank),
if feasible. Priority for LWD placement projects will be in the Transition Zone.
8. Dead or dying trees located within the buffer or undeveloped upland portion of the
Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be left in place as wildlife snags, unless they present a hazard to
structures, facilities or the public.
9. Topping of trees is prohibited unless absolutely necessary to protect overhead utility
lines. Topping of trees will be regulated as removal and tree replacement will be required.
10. For new development or re- development where trees are proposed for retention,
tree protection zones shall be indicated on site plans and shall be established in the field prior
to commencement of any construction or site clearing activity. A minimum 4 feet high
construction barrier shall be installed around significant trees and stands of native trees or
vegetation to be retained. Minimum distances from the trunk for the construction barriers shall
be based on the approximate age of the tree (height and canopy) as follows:
a. Young trees (have reached less than 20% of life expectancy): 0.75 feet per inch of
trunk diameter
diameter.
b. Mature trees (have reached 20 -80% of life expectancy): 1 foot per inch of trunk
c. Over mature trees (have reached greater than 80% of life expectancy): 1.5 feet
per inch of trunk diameter.
C. Landscaping. This section presents landscaping standards for the Shoreline Jurisdiction
and is divided into a general section and separate sections for the River Buffer and for the
remaining part of the Shoreline Jurisdiction for each environment designation.
1. General Requirements. For any new development or re- development in the
Shoreline Jurisdiction, except single- family residential development of four or fewer Lots,
invasive vegetation must be removed and native vegetation planted and maintained in the
River Buffer, including the riverbank.
a. The landscaping requirements of this subsection apply for any new development
or redevelopment in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except: single family residential development of
4 or fewer lots. The extent of landscaping required will depend on the size of the proposed
project. New development or full redevelopment of a site will require landscaping of the entire
site. For smaller projects, the Director will review the intent of this section and the scope of the
project to determine a reasonable amount of landscaping to be carried out. Trees and other
vegetation shading the river shall be retained or replanted when riprap is placed per the
approved tree permit, if required.
b. Invasive vegetation must be removed as part of site preparation and native
vegetation planted, including the river bank.
c. On properties located behind publicly maintained levees, an applicant is not
required to remove invasive vegetation, or plant native vegetation within the buffer.
d. Removal of invasive species shall be done by hand or with hand -held power
tools. Where not feasible and mechanized equipment is needed, the applicant must obtain a
Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and show how the slope stability of
the bank will be maintained and a plan must be submitted indicating how the work will be
done and what erosion control and tree protection features will be utilized. Federal and State
permits may be required for vegetation removal with mechanized equipment.
e. Trees and other vegetation shading the river shall be retained or replanted when
riprap is placed as specified in the approved tree permit, if a permit is required.
f. Removal of invasive vegetation may be phased over several years prior to
planting if such phasing is provided for by a plan approved by the Director to allow for
alternative approaches, such as sheet mulching and goat grazing. The method selected shall
not destabilize the bank or cause erosion.
g. A combination of native trees, shrubs and groundcovers (including grasses,
sedges, rushes and vines) shall be planted. The plants listed in the Riparian Restoration and
Management Table of the 2004 Washington Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines
(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and U.S.
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 19 of 47
401
402
Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington, as amended) shall provide the basis for plant
selection. Site conditions, such as topography, exposure, and hydrology shall be taken into
account for plant selection. Other species may be approved if there is adequate justification.
h. Non -native trees may be used as street trees in cases where conditions are not
appropriate for native trees (for example where there are space or height limitations or conflicts
with utilities).
i. Plants shall meet the current American Standard for Nursery Stock (American
Nursery and Landscape Association ANLA).
j. Plant sizes in the non buffer areas of all Shoreline Environments shall meet the
following minimum size standards:
Deciduous trees: 2 inch caliper
Conifers: 6 -8 foot height
Shrubs: 24 inch height
Groundcover /grasses: 4 inch or one gallon container
k. Smaller plant sizes (generally one gallon, bareroot, plugs, or stakes, depending
on plant species) are preferred for buffer plantings. Willow stakes must be at least 1/2 -inch in
diameter.
1. Site preparation and planting of vegetation shall be in accordance with best
management practices for ensuring the vegetation's long -term health and survival.
m. Plants may be selected and placed to allow for public and private view corridors
and /or access to the water's edge.
n. Native vegetation in the shoreline installed in accordance with the preceding
standards shall be maintained by the property owner to promote healthy growth and prevent
establishment of invasive species. Invasive plants (such as blackberry, ivy, knotweed,
bindweed) shall be removed on a regular basis, according to the approved maintenance plan.
o. Areas disturbed by removal of invasive plants shall be replanted with native
vegetation where necessary to maintain the density shown in TMC Section 18.44.080B4, and
must be replanted in a timely manner, except where a long -term removal and re- vegetation
plan, as approved by the City, is being implemented.
p. The following standards apply to utilities and loading docks located in the
Shoreline Jurisdiction:
1) Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc. shall be suitably screened with native
vegetation;
2) Utility easements shall be landscaped with native groundcover, grasses or
other low- growing plants as appropriate to the shoreline environment and site conditions;
3) Allowed loading docks and service areas located waterward of the
development shall have landscaping that provides extensive visual separation from the river.
2. River Buffer Landscaping Requirements in all Shoreline Environments. The River
Buffer in all shoreline environments shall function, in part, as a vegetation management area to
filter sediment, capture contaminants in surface water run -off, reduce the velocity of water run-
off, and provide fish and wildlife habitat.
a. A planting plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect or an approved
biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval showing plant species, size, number and
spacing. The requirement for a landscape architect or biologist may be waived by the Director
for single family property owners (when planting is being required as mitigation for
construction of overwater structures or shoreline stabilization), if the property owner accepts
technical assistance from City staff.
b. Plants shall be installed from the OHWM to the upland edge of the River Buffer
unless site conditions would make planting unsafe.
c. Plantings close to and on the bank shall include native willows, red osier
dogwood and other native vegetation that will extend out over the water, to provide shade and
habitat functions when mature. Species selected must be able to withstand seasonal water level
fluctuations.
d. Minimum plant spacing in the buffer shall follow the River Buffer Vegetation
Planting Densities Table, shown in TMC Section 18.44.080(C)(2). Existing non invasive plants
may be included in the density calculations.
W.\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 20 of 47
e. Irrigation for buffer plantings is required for at least two dry seasons or until
plants are established. An irrigation plan is to be included as part of the planting plan.
f. In the event a development project allows for setback and benching of the
shoreline along an existing levee or revetment, the newly created mid -slope bench area shall be
planted and maintained with a variety of native vegetation appropriate for site conditions.
River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities
Plant Material Type
Stakes /cuttings along riverbank
(willows, red osier dogwood)
1 Shrubs
Trees
Groundcovers, grasses, sedges,
rushes, other herbaceous plants
Native seed mixes
Planting Density
1 -2 feet on center or per bioengineering method
3 -5 feet on center, depending on species 1
15 -20 feet on center, depending on species 1
1 -1.5 feet on center, depending on species
5 -25 pounds per acre, depending on species
3. Landscaping Requirements for the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity
Environments Outside of the River Buffer. For the portions of property within the Shoreline
Jurisdiction landward of the River Buffer, the landscape requirements in the "General" section
of this SMP and the requirements for the underlying zoning as established in TMC Chapter
18.52 shall apply except as indicated below.
a. Parking Lot Landscape Perimeters. One native tree for each 20 lineal feet of
required perimeter landscaping, one shrub for each four lineal feet of required perimeter
landscaping, and native groundcovers to cover 90% of the landscape area within three years,
planted at a minimum spacing of 12 inches on- center
b. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping. Every 300 square feet of paved surface
requires ten square feet of interior landscaping within landscape islands separated by no more
than 150 feet between islands.
c. Landscaping shall be provided at yards not adjacent to the river, with the same
width as required in the underlying zoning district. This standard may be reduced as follows:
1) Where development provides public access corridor between off -site public
area(s) and public shoreline areas, side yard landscaping may be reduced by 25% to no less
than 3 feet; or
2) Where development provides additional public access area(s) (as allowed by
the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development Standards) equal in
area to at least 2.5% of total building area, front yard landscaping may be reduced by 25
D. Vegetation Management in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The requirements of this
section apply to all existing and new development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction.
1. Trees and shrubs may only be pruned for safety, to maintain view or access
corridors and trails by pruning up or on the sides of trees, to maintain clearance for utility lines,
and /or for improving shoreline ecological function. This type of pruning is exempt from any
permit requirements. Topping of trees is prohibited except where absolutely necessary to avoid
interference with existing utilities.
2. Plant debris from removal of invasive plants or pruning shall be removed from the
site and disposed of properly.
3. Use of pesticides:
a. Pesticides (including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides) shall not be used in
the Shoreline Jurisdiction except where:
1) Alternatives such as manual removal, biological control, and cultural control
are not feasible given the size of the infestation, site characteristics, or the characteristics of the
invasive plant species;
2) The use of pesticides has been approved through a comprehensive
vegetation or pest management and monitoring plan;
3) The pesticide is applied in accordance with State regulations;
4) The proposed herbicide is approved for aquatic use by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; and
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 21 of 47
403
404
5) The use of pesticides in the Shoreline Jurisdiction is approved in writing by
the City and the applicant presents a copy of the Aquatic Pesticide Permit issued by the
Department of Ecology or Washington Department of Agriculture.
b. Self contained rodent bait boxes designed to prevent access by other animals are
allowed.
c. Sports fields, parks, golf courses and other outdoor recreational uses that involve
maintenance of extensive areas of turf shall provide and implement an integrated turf
management program or integrated pest management plan designed to ensure that water
quality in the river is not adversely impacted.
Section 9. Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction Adopted.
Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.090 Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction.
A. Purpose.
1. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) requires protection of critical areas
(sensitive areas), defined as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded areas, geologically
hazardous areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife conservation areas, and
abandoned mine areas.
2. The purpose of protecting environmentally sensitive areas within the Shoreline
Jurisdiction is to:
a. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural functions and values of these
areas.
b. Protect quantity and quality of water resources.
c. Minimize turbidity and pollution of wetlands and fish bearing waters and
maintain wildlife habitat.
d. Prevent erosion and the loss of slope and soil stability caused by the removal of
trees, shrubs, and the root systems of vegetative cover.
e. Protect the public against avoidable losses, public emergency rescue and relief
operations cost, and subsidy cost of public mitigation from landslide, subsidence, erosion and
flooding.
f. Protect the community's aesthetic resources and distinctive features of natural
lands and wooded hillsides.
g. Balance the private rights of individual property owners with the preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas.
h. Prevent the loss of wetland and watercourse function and acreage, and strive for
a gain over present conditions.
i. Give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to
protect or enhance anadromous fisheries.
j. Incorporate the use of best available science in the regulation and protection of
sensitive areas as required by the State Growth Management Act, according to WAC 365 -195-
900 through 365 195 -925 and WAC 365 190 -080.
3. The goal of these sensitive area regulations is to achieve no net loss of wetland,
watercourse, or fish and wildlife conservation area or their functions.
B. Applicability, Maps and Inventories.
1. Sensitive areas located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction are regulated by the SMP and
this chapter. However, the level of protection for the sensitive areas located in the shoreline
jurisdiction shall be at least equal to that provided in the Sensitive Areas section of the Zoning
Code (TMC Chapter 18.45).
2. Sensitive areas currently identified in the Shoreline Jurisdiction are discussed in the
Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of the City's SMP. The
locations are mapped on the "Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction," Map 5. This map is
based on assessment of current conditions and review of the best available information.
However, additional sensitive areas may exist within the Shoreline Jurisdiction and the
boundaries of the sensitive areas shown are not exact. It is the responsibility of the property
owner to determine the presence of sensitive areas on the property and to verify the boundaries
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 22 of 47
in the field. Sensitive area provisions for abandoned mine areas do not apply as none of these
areas is located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction.
3. Sensitive areas comprised of frequently flooded areas and areas of seismic instability
are regulated by the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52) and the Washington
State Building Code, rather than by Section 18.44.090 of this chapter.
C. Best Available Science. Policies, regulations and decisions concerning sensitive areas
shall rely on Best Available Science to protect the sensitive areas functions and values. Special
consideration must be given to the conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve
or enhance anadromous fish and their habitats. Nonscientific information may supplement
scientific information, but is not an adequate substitution for valid and available scientific
information.
D. Sensitive Area Studies. An applicant for a development proposal that may include a
sensitive area and /or its buffer shall submit those studies as required by the City and specified
below to adequately identify and evaluate the sensitive area and its buffers.
1. General Requirements
a. A required sensitive areas study shall be prepared by a person with experience
and training in the scientific discipline appropriate for the relevant sensitive area. A qualified
professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in ecology or related
science, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries, geotechnical or related field, and at least
two years of related work experience.
b. The sensitive areas study shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the
analysis of sensitive area data and shall use field reconnaissance and reference the source of
science used. The sensitive areas study shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to
sensitive areas.
c. It is intended that sensitive areas studies and information be utilized by
applicants in preparation of their proposals and therefore shall be undertaken early in the
design stages of a project.
2. Wetland, Watercourse and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area Sensitive Area
Studies. At a minimum, the sensitive areas study shall contain the following information, as
applicable:
a. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal,
and identification of the permit requested;
b. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal showing: sensitive areas
and buffers and the development proposal with dimensions, clearing limits, proposed
stormwater management plan, and mitigation plan for impacts due to drainage alterations;
c. The dates, names and qualifications of the persons preparing the study and
documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site;
d. Identification and characterization of all sensitive areas, water bodies, and
buffers adjacent to the proposed project area or potentially impacted by the proposed project;
e. A statement specifying the accuracy of the study and assumptions used in the
study;
f. Determination of the degree of impact and risk from the proposal both on the
site and on adjacent properties;
g. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to sensitive areas, their
buffers and other properties resulting from the proposal;
h. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing in order
to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to sensitive areas;
i. Plans for adequate mitigation to offset any impacts;
j. Recommendations for maintenance, short -term and long -term monitoring,
contingency plans and bonding measures; and
k. Any technical information required by the director to assist in determining
compliance.
3. Geotechnical Studies.
W. \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 23 of 47
405
406
a. A geotechnical study appropriate both to the site conditions and the proposed
development shall be required for development in Class 2, Class 3, and Class 4 Areas.
b. All studies shall include at a minimum a site evaluation, review of available
information regarding the site and a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas. For
Class 2 areas, subsurface exploration of site conditions is at the discretion of the geotechnical
consultant. In addition, for Class 3 and Class 4 Areas, the study shall include a feasibility
analysis for the use of infiltration on -site and a subsurface exploration of soils and hydrology
conditions. Detailed slope stability analysis shall be done if the geotechnical engineer
recommends it in Class 3 areas, and must be done in Class 4 areas.
c. Applicants shall retain a geotechnical engineer to prepare the reports and
evaluations required in this subsection. The geotechnical report and completed site evaluation
checklist shall be prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practices, under
the supervision of and signed and stamped by the geotechnical engineer. The report shall be
prepared in consultation with the appropriate City department. Where appropriate, a geologist
must be included as part of the geotechnical consulting team. The report shall make specific
recommendations concerning development of the site.
d. The opinions and recommendations contained in the report shall be supported
by field observations and, where appropriate or applicable, by literature review conducted by
the geotechnical engineer, which shall include appropriate explorations such as borings or test
pits, and an analysis of soil characteristics conducted by or under the supervision of the
engineer in accordance with standards of the American Society of Testing and Materials or
other applicable standards. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations or interpretations,
the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geotechnical engineer.
4. Modifications or Waivers to Sensitive Area Study Requirements.
a. The Director may limit the required geographic area of the sensitive area study
as appropriate if:
1) The applicant, with assistance from the City, cannot obtain permission to
access properties adjacent to the project area; or
2) The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the site.
b. The Director may allow modifications to the required contents of the study
where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is required to
adequately address the potential sensitive area impacts and required mitigation.
c. If there is written agreement between the Director and the applicant concerning
the sensitive area classification and type, the Director may waive the requirement for sensitive
area studies provided that no adverse impacts to sensitive areas or buffers will result. There
must be substantial evidence that the sensitive areas delineation and classification are correct,
that there will be no detrimental impact to the sensitive areas or buffers, and that the goals,
purposes, objectives and requirements of the SMP will be followed.
E. Procedures. When an applicant submits an application for any building permit,
subdivision, short subdivision or any other land use review that approves a use, development
or future construction, the location and dimensions of all sensitive areas and buffers on the site
shall be indicated on the plans submitted. When a sensitive area is identified, the following
procedures apply.
1. The applicant shall submit the relevant sensitive area study as required by this
chapter
2. The Department of Community Development will review the information submitted
in the sensitive area studies to verify the information, confirm the nature and type of the
sensitive area, and ensure the study is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). At
the discretion of the Director, sensitive area studies may undergo peer review, at the expense of
the applicant.
3. Denial of use or development: A use or development will be denied if the Director
determines the applicant cannot ensure that potential dangers and costs to future inhabitants of
the development, adjacent properties, and Tukwila are minimized and mitigated to an
acceptable level.
4. Preconstruction meeting: The applicant, specialist(s) of record, contractor, and
department representatives will be required to attend pre construction meetings prior to any
work on the site.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 24 of 47
5. Construction monitoring: The specialist(s) of record shall be retained to monitor the
site during construction.
6. On -site Identification: The Director may require the boundary between a sensitive
area and its buffer or between the buffer and any development or use to be permanently
identified with fencing, or with a wood or metal sign with treated wood, concrete or metal
posts. Size will be determined at the time of permitting, and wording shall be as follows:
"Protection of this natural area is in your care. Do not alter or disturb. Please call the City of
Tukwila (206 -431 -3670) for more information."
F. Wetland Determinations and Classifications.
1. Wetlands and their boundaries are established by using the Washington State
Wetland and Delineation Manual, as required by RCW 36.70A.175 (Ecology Publication #96 -94)
and consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
2. Wetland determinations shall be made by a qualified professional (certified Wetland
Scientist or non certified with at least two years of full -time work experience as a wetland
professional).
3. Wetland areas within the City of Tukwila have certain characteristics, functions and
values and have been influenced by urbanization and related disturbances. Wetland functions
include, but are not limited to the following: improving water quality; maintaining hydrologic
functions (reducing peak flows, decreasing erosion, groundwater); and providing habitat for
plants, mammals, fish, birds, and amphibians. Wetland functions shall be evaluated using the
Washington State Functional Assessment Method.
4. Wetlands shall be designated in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands
Rating system (Washington Department of Ecology, August 2004, Publication #93 -74) as
Category I, II, III or IV as listed below:
a. Category I wetlands are those that
1) represent a unique or rare wetland type; or
2) are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; or
3) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are
impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or
4) provide a high level of functions. The following types of wetlands listed by
Washington Department of Ecology and potentially found in Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction
are Category I
a) Estuarine wetlands (deepwater tidal habitats with a range of fresh
brackish- marine water chemistry and daily tidal cycles, salt and brackish marshes, intertidal
mudflats, mangrove swamps, bays, sounds, and coastal rivers).
b) Wetlands that perform many functions well and score at least 70 points in
the Western Washington Wetlands Rating System.
c) Waterfowl or shorebird areas designated by the State Department of Fish
and Wildlife.
b. Category II wetlands are difficult, though not impossible to replace and provide
high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I
wetlands, but still need a relatively high level of protection. Category II wetlands potentially in
Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction include:
1) Estuarine Wetlands Any estuarine wetland smaller than an acre, or those
that are disturbed and larger than 1 acre are category II wetlands.
2) Wetlands that Perform Functions Well Wetlands scoring between 51 -69
points (out of 100) on the questions related to the functions present are Category II wetlands.
c. Category III wetlands have a moderate level of functions (scores between 30 -50
points). Wetlands scoring between 30 -50 points generally have been disturbed in some ways
and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than
Category II wetlands.
d. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scores less than 30
points) and are often heavily disturbed. While these are wetlands that should be able to be
replaced or improved, they still need protection because they may provide some important
functions. Any disturbance of these wetlands must be considered on a case by case basis.
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 25 of 47
407
408
G. Watercourse Designation and Ratings.
1. Watercourse ratings are based on the existing habitat functions and are rated as
follows:
a. Type 1 Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State under
RCW 90.58 (Green Duwamish River).
b. Type 2 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have either perennial (year round)
or intermittent flows and support salmonid fish use.
c. Type 3 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial flows and are not
used by salmonid fish.
d. Type 4 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have intermittent flows and are
not used by salmonid fish.
2. Watercourse sensitive area studies shall be performed by a qualified professional
(hydrologist, geologist, engineer or other scientist with experience in preparing watercourse
assessments).
H. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas.
1. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction include
the habitats listed below
a. Areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary
association;
b. Habitats and species of local importance, including but not limited to bald eagle
habitat, heron rookeries, and osprey nesting areas;
c. Waters of the State (i.e., the Green /Duwamish River itself);
d. State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas; and
e. Areas critical for habitat connectivity.
2. The approximate location and extent of known fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas are identified in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report and
are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction map. Only the salmon habitat
enhancement project sites completed or underway are shown as Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Areas on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Map. Streams are
shown as watercourses. The river is not shown as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation
Area for the sake of simplicity Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas correlate closely
with the areas identified as regulated watercourses and wetlands and their buffers, as well as
off channel habitat areas created to improve salmon habitat (shown on the Sensitive Areas
Map) in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The Green Duwamish River is recognized as the most
significant fish and wildlife habitat corridor. In addition, Gilliam Creek, Riverton Creek,
Southgate Creek, Hamm Creek (in the North Potential Annexation Area (PAA)), and Johnson
Creek (South PAA) all provide salmonid habitat.
I. Wetland Watercourse and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Buffers.
1. Purpose and Intent of Buffer Establishment.
a. A buffer area shall be established adjacent to designated sensitive areas. The
purpose of the buffer area shall be to protect the integrity, functions and values of the sensitive
areas. Any land alteration must be located out of the buffer areas as required by this section.
b. Buffers are intended in general to:
1) Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing
sensitive areas;
2) Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development;
3) Preserve the edges of wetlands and the banks of watercourses and fish and
wildlife habitat conservation areas for their critical habitat value;
4) Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high water
events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to
hydrologic or climatic effects;
5) Provide shading to watercourses and fish and wildlife habitat conservation
areas to maintain stable water temperatures and provide vegetative cover for additional
wildlife habitat;
W.\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CLksn 11/20/2009
Page 26 of 47
6) Provide input of organic debris and nutrient transport in watercourses;
7) Reduce erosion and increased surface water run -off;
8) Reduce loss of or damage to property;
9) Intercept fine sediments from surface water run -off and serve to minimize
water quality impacts; and
10) Protect the sensitive area from human and domestic animal disturbances.
2. Establishment of Buffer Widths. The following standard buffers shall be established:
a. Wetland buffers (measured from the wetland edge):
1) Category I and II Wetland: 100 -foot buffer.
2) Category III Wetland. 80 -foot buffer.
3) Category IV Wetland: 50 -foot buffer.
b. Watercourse buffers (measured from the OHWM):
1) Type 1 Watercourse: The buffer width for the Green Duwamish River is
established in the Shoreline Environment Designations of this SMP for the three designated
shoreline environments.
2) Type 2 Watercourse: 100 foot -wide buffer.
3) Type 3 Watercourse: 80- foot -wide buffer.
4) Type 4 Watercourse: 50- foot -wide buffer
c. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas: The buffer will be the same as the
river buffer established for each Shoreline Environment measured from the OHWM, unless an
alternate buffer is established and approved at the time a fish and wildlife habitat restoration
project is undertaken.
3. Sensitive Area Buffer Setbacks. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set
back 15 feet and all other development shall be set back ten feet from the sensitive area buffer's
edge. The building setbacks shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge.
Building plans shall also identify a 20 -foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the
impacts of development will be reviewed. The Director may waive setback requirements when
a site plan demonstrates there will be no adverse impacts to the buffer from construction or
occasional maintenance activities.
4. Reduction of Standard Buffer Width. Except for the Green /Duwamish River (Type 1
watercourse for which any variation in the buffer shall be regulated under the shoreline
provisions of this program), the buffer width may be reduced on a case -by -case basis, provided
the reduced buffer area does not contain slopes 15% or greater In no case shall the approved
buffer width result in greater than a 50% reduction in width. Buffer reduction with
enhancement may be allowed as part of a Substantial Development Permit if:
a. Additional protection to wetlands or watercourses will be provided through the
implementation of a buffer enhancement plan;
b. The existing condition of the buffer is degraded;
c. Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to, the following:
1) Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife habitat or
improve water quality;
2) Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are likely to
be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes, snags, root wads /stumps,
birdhouses and heron nesting areas; or
3) Removing non -native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer area
and replanting the area.
5. Increase in Standard Buffer Width. Buffers for sensitive areas will be increased when
they are determined to be particularly sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development
will create unusually adverse impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required
only after completion of a sensitive areas study by a qualified biologist that documents the
basis for such increased width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when:
a. The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant
adverse impacts upon the sensitive area that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width, or
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 27 of 47
409
410
b. The area serves as habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive or monitor
species listed by the federal government or the State.
6. Maintenance of Vegetation in Buffers. Every reasonable effort shall be made to
maintain any existing viable native plant life in the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from
the buffer as part of an enhancement plan approved by the Director. Enhancements will ensure
that slope stability and wetland or watercourse quality will be maintained or improved. Any
disturbance of the buffers shall be replanted with a diverse plant community of native
northwest species that are appropriate for the specific site as determined by the Director. If the
vegetation must be removed, or the vegetation becomes damaged or dies because of the
alterations of the landscape, then the applicant for a permit must replace existing vegetation
with comparable specimens, approved by the Director, which will restore buffer functions
within five years.
J. Areas of Potential Geologic Instability.
1. Classification. Areas of potential geologic instability are classified as follows:
a. Class 1 areas, where landslide potential is low, and which slope is less than 15
b. Class 2 areas, where landslide potential is moderate, which slope is between 15%
and 40 and which are underlain by relatively permeable soils;
c. Class 3 areas, where landslide potential is high, which include areas sloping
between 15% and 40 and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock,
and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than 40
d. Class 4 areas, where landslide potential is very high, which include sloping areas
with mappable zones of groundwater seepage, and which also include existing mappable
landslide deposits regardless of slope.
2. Exemptions. The following areas are exempt from regulation as geologically
hazardous areas:
a. Temporary stockpiles of topsoil, gravel, beauty bark or other similar landscaping
or construction materials.
b. Slopes related to materials used as an engineered pre -load for a building pad.
c. Any temporary slope that has been created through legal grading activities
under an approved permit may be re- graded.
d. Roadway embankments within right -of -way or road easements.
e. Slopes retained by approved engineered structures, except riverbank structures
and armoring.
3. Geotechnical Study Required.
a. Development or alterations to areas of potential geologic instability that form the
riverbanks shall be governed by the policies and requirements of the Shoreline Stabilization
Section of this SMP. Development proposals on all other lands containing or threatened by an
area of potential geologic instability Class 2 or higher shall be subject to a geotechnical study.
The geotechnical report shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for and width of
any setbacks or buffers necessary to insure slope stability. Development proposals shall then
include the buffer distances as defined within the geotechnical report. The geotechnical study
shall be performed by a qualified professional geotechnical engineer, licensed in the State of
Washington.
b. Prior to permitting alteration of an area of potential geologic instability, the
applicant must demonstrate one of the following:
1) There is no evidence of past instability or earth movement in the vicinity of
the proposed development and, where appropriate, quantitative analysis of slope stability
indicates no significant risk to the proposed development or surrounding properties; or
2) The area of potential geologic instability can be modified or the project can
be designed so any potential impact to the project and surrounding properties is eliminated,
slope stability is not decreased, and the increase in surface water discharge or sedimentation
shall not decrease slope stability.
4. Buffers for Areas of Potential Geologic Instability
a. Buffers are intended to:
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 28 of 47
1) Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing
sensitive areas;
2) Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development;
3) Prevent loading of potentially unstable slope formations;
4) Protect slope stability;
5) Provide erosion control and attenuation of precipitation, surface water and
stormwater runoff;
6) Reduce loss of or damage to property; and
7) Prevent the need for future shoreline armoring.
b. Buffers may be increased by the Director when an area is determined to be
particularly sensitive to the disturbance created by a development. Such a decision will be
based on a City review of the report as prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer and by a
site visit.
5. Additional Requirements.
a. Where any portion of an area of potential geologic instability is cleared for
development, a landscaping plan for the site shall include tree replanting in accordance with
the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section of this SMP Vegetation shall be sufficient
to provide erosion and stabilization protection.
b. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to submit, consistent with the
findings of the geotechnical report, structural plans that were prepared and stamped by a
structural engineer. The plans and specifications shall be accompanied by a letter from the
geotechnical engineer who prepared the geotechnical report stating that in his /her judgment,
the plans and specifications conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report, the
risk of damage to the proposed development site from soil instability will be minimal subject to
the conditions set forth in the report, and the proposed development will not increase the
potential for soil movement.
c. Further recommendations signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer shall
be provided should there be additions or exceptions to the original recommendations based on
the plans, site conditions or other supporting data. If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the
plans and specifications is not the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the
new engineer shall, in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express
his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and
state that the plans and specifications conform to his or her recommendations.
d. The architect or structural engineer shall submit to the City, with the plans and
specifications, a letter or notation on the design drawings at the time of permit application
stating that he or she has reviewed the geotechnical report, understands its recommendations,
has explained or has had explained to the owner the risks of loss due to slides on the site, and
has incorporated into the design the recommendations of the report and established measures
to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by any earth movement
predicted in the report.
e. The owner shall execute a Sensitive Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless
Agreement running with the land, on a form provided by the City The City will file the
completed covenant with the King County Department of Records and Elections at the expense
of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded covenant will be forwarded to the owner.
f. Whenever the City determines that the public interest would not be served by
the issuance of a permit in an area of potential geologic instability without assurance of a
means of providing for restoration of areas disturbed by, and repair of property damage caused
by, slides arising out of or occurring during construction, the Director may require assurance
devices.
g. Where recommended by the geotechnical report, the applicant shall retain a
geotechnical engineer (preferably retain the geotechnical engineer who prepared the final
geotechnical recommendations and reviewed the plans and specifications) to monitor the site
during construction. If a different geotechnical engineer is retained, the new geotechnical
engineer shall submit a letter to the City stating whether or not he /she agrees with the opinions
and recommendations of the original study Further recommendations, signed and sealed by
the geotechnical engineer, and supporting data shall be provided should there be exceptions to
the original recommendations.
W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 29 of 47
411
412
h. During construction the geotechnical engineer shall monitor compliance with
the recommendations in the geotechnical report, particularly site excavation, shoring, soil
support for foundations including piles, subdrainage installations, soil compaction and any
other geotechnical aspects of the construction. Unless otherwise approved by the City, the
specific recommendations contained in the soils report must be implemented. The geotechnical
engineer shall provide to the City written, dated monitoring reports on the progress of the
construction at such timely intervals as shall be specified. Omissions or deviations from the
approved plans and specifications shall be immediately reported to the City. The final
construction monitoring report shall contain a statement from the geotechnical engineer that,
based upon his or her professional opinion, site observations and testing during the monitoring
of the construction, the completed development substantially complies with the
recommendations in the geotechnical report and with all geotechnical- related permit
requirements. Occupancy of the project will not be approved until the report has been reviewed
and accepted by the Director.
i. Substantial weight shall be given to ensuring continued slope stability and the
resulting public health, safety and welfare in determining whether a development should be
allowed.
j. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could
include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dry
season, or sequencing activities such as installing erosion control and drainage systems well in
advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined by the Director that the
development will increase the potential of soil movement that results in an unacceptable risk of
damage to the proposed development, its site or adjacent properties.
K. Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses and Alterations.
1. General Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the Shoreline
Jurisdiction buffers are allowed in sensitive areas within the jurisdiction except:
a. Promenades
b. Recreational structures
c. Public pedestrian bridges
d. Vehicle bridges
e. New utilities
f. Plaza connectors
g. Water- dependent uses and their structures
h. Essential streets, roads and rights -of -way
i. Essential public facilities
j. Outdoor storage
2. In addition, the following uses are allowed:
a. Maintenance activities of existing landscaping and gardens in a sensitive area
buffer including, but not limited to, mowing lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of
garden crops and pruning and planting of vegetation. The removal of established native trees
and shrubs is not permitted. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their buffers is not allowed
without written permission of the City.
b. Vegetation maintenance as part of sensitive area enhancement, creation or
restoration. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their buffers is not allowed without written
permission of the City.
3. Uses Requiring a Type II permit.
a. Maintenance and repair of existing uses and facilities where alteration or
additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used.
b. Construction of new essential streets and roads, rights -of -way and utilities.
c. New surface water discharges to sensitive areas or their buffers from detention
facilities, presettlement ponds or other surface water management structures may be allowed
provided the discharge meets the clean water standards of RCW 90.48 and WAC 173.200 and
173.201 as amended, and does not adversely affect water level fluctuations in the wetland or
adversely affect watercourse habitat and watercourse flow conditions relative to the existing
rate.
d. Plaza connectors.
e. Essential public facilities.
f. Overwater structures.
W\ Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 30 of 47
g. Recreation structures.
4. Conditional Uses. Dredging, where necessary to remediate contaminated sediments,
if adverse impacts are mitigated, may be permitted.
5. Wetland Alterations. Alterations to wetlands are discouraged, are limited to the
minimum necessary for project feasibility, and must have an approved mitigation plan
developed in accordance with the standards in this chapter.
a. Mitigation for wetlands shall follow the mitigation sequencing steps in this
chapter and may include the following types of actions:
1) Creation the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological
characteristics to develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site, where a biological wetland
did not previously exist;
2) Re- establishment the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological
characteristics of a site with the goal of restoring wetland functions to a former wetland,
resulting in a net increase in wetland acres and functions;
3) Rehabilitation the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological
characteristics with the goal of repairing historic functions and processes of a degraded
wetland, resulting in a gain in wetland function but not acreage;
4) Enhancement the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological
characteristics to heighten, intensify, or improve specific functions (such as vegetation) or to
change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present, resulting in a change in
wetland functions but not in a gain in wetland acreage; or
5) A combination of the three types.
b. Allowed alterations per wetland type and mitigation ratios are as follows:
1) Alterations are not permitted to Category I or II wetlands unless specifically
exempted under the provisions of this Program. Mitigation will still be required at a rate of 3:1
for creation or re- establishment, 4;1 for rehabilitation, and 6:1 for enhancement.
2) Alterations to Category III wetlands are prohibited except where the location
or configuration of the wetland provides practical difficulties that can be resolved by modifying
up to .10 (one tenth) of an acre of wetland. Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III
wetland must be located contiguous to the altered wetland. Mitigation for any alteration to a
Category III wetland must be provided at a ratio of 2:1 for creation or re- establishment, 4:1 for
rehabilitation and 8.1 for enhancement alone.
3) Alterations to Category IV wetlands are allowed, where unavoidable and
adequate mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards of this section. Mitigation
for alteration to a Category IV wetland will be 1.5:1 for creation or re- establishment and 3:1 for
rehabilitation or enhancement.
4) Isolated wetlands formed on fill material in highly disturbed environmental
conditions and assessed as having low overall wetland functions (scoring below 20 points) may
be altered and /or relocated with the permission of the Director. These wetlands may include
artificial hydrology or wetlands unintentionally created as the result of construction activities.
The determination that a wetland is isolated is made by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
6. Watercourse Alterations. All impacts to a watercourse that degrade the functions
and values of the watercourse shall be avoided. If alteration to the watercourse is unavoidable,
all adverse impacts shall be mitigated in accordance with the approved mitigation plan as
described in this chapter. Mitigation shall take place on -site or as close as possible to the
impact location, and compensation shall be at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Any mitigation shall result
in improved watercourse functions over existing conditions.
a. Diverting or rerouting may only occur with the permission of the Director and
an approved mitigation plan. Any watercourse that has critical wildlife habitat or is necessary
for the life cycle or spawning of salmonids shall not be rerouted, unless it can be shown that the
habitat will be improved for the benefit of the species. A watercourse may be rerouted or day
lighted as a mitigation measure to improve watercourse function.
b. Piping of any watercourse should be avoided. Relocation of a watercourse is
preferred to piping; if piping occurs in a watercourse sensitive area, it shall be limited and shall
require approval of the Director Piping of Type 1 watercourses shall not be permitted. Piping
may be allowed in Type 2, 3 or 4 watercourses if it is necessary for access purposes. Piping may
be allowed in Type 4 watercourses if the watercourse has a degraded buffer, is located in a
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 31 of 47
413
414
highly- developed area and does not provide shade, temperature control, etc. for habitat. The
applicant must comply with the conditions of this section, including: providing excess capacity
to meet needs of the system during a 100 -year flood event, and providing flow restrictors and
complying with water quality and existing habitat enhancement procedures.
c. No process that requires maintenance on a regular basis will be acceptable
unless this maintenance process is part of the regular and normal facilities maintenance process
or unless the applicant can show funding for this maintenance is ensured for as long as the use
remains.
standards:
d. Piping projects shall be performed pursuant to the following applicable
1) The conveyance system shall be designed to comply with the standards in
current use and recommended by the Department of Public Works.
2) Where allowed, piping shall be limited to the shortest length possible as
determined by the Director to allow access onto a property.
3) Where water is piped for an access point, those driveways or entrances shall
be consolidated to serve multiple properties where possible, and to minimize the length of
Piping.
4) When required by the Director, watercourses under drivable surfaces shall
be contained in an arch culvert using oversize or super span culverts for rebuilding of a
streambed. These shall be provided with check dams to reduce flows, and shall be replanted
and enhanced according to a plan approved by the Director.
5) All watercourse crossing shall be designed to accommodate fish passage.
Watercourse crossings shall not block fish passage where the streams are fish bearing.
6) Stormwater run -off shall be detained and infiltrated to preserve the
watercourse channel's dominant discharge.
7) All construction shall be designed to have the least adverse impact on the
watercourse, buffer and surrounding environment.
8) Piping shall be constructed during periods of low flow, or as allowed by the
State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
9) Water quality must be as good or better for any water exiting the pipe as for
the water entering the pipe, and flow must be comparable.
7. Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area Alterations. Alterations to the
Green /Duwamish River are regulated by the shoreline provisions of this SMP. Alterations to
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas that have been created as restoration or habitat
enhancement sites and are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Map are
prohibited and may only be authorized through a shoreline variance procedure.
L. Sensitive Areas Mitigation. Mitigation shall be required for any proposals for
dredging, filling, piping, diverting, relocation or other alterations of sensitive areas as allowed
in this chapter and in accordance with mitigation sequencing and the established mitigation
ratios. The mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a sensitive area study by a qualified
specialist.
1. Mitigation Sequencing. Applicants shall demonstrate that reasonable efforts have
been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to sensitive areas and buffers.
When an alteration to a sensitive area or its required buffer is proposed, such alteration shall be
avoided, minimized or compensated for in the following order of preference:
a. Avoidance of sensitive area and buffer impacts, whether by finding another site
or changing the location of the proposed activity on -site;
b. Minimizing sensitive area and buffer impacts by limiting the degree of impact
on site;
c. Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or
substitution.
2. Criteria for Approval of Alterations and Mitigation. Alterations and mitigation plans
are subject to Director approval and may be approved only if the following findings are made:
a. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality;
b. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat;
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL.ksn 11/20/2009
Page 32 of 47
c. The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and /or stormwater
detention capabilities;
d. The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion
hazard or contribute to scouring actions;
e. The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property;
f. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas or the
shoreline; and
g. The mitigation will result in improved functions such as water quality, erosion
control, and wildlife and fish habitat.
3. Mitigation Location.
a. On -site mitigation shall be provided, except where it can be demonstrated that:
1) On -site mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with
hydrology, soils, or other factors; or
2) Mitigation is not practical due to potentially adverse impacts from
surrounding land uses; or
3) Existing functional values created at the site of the proposed restoration are
significantly greater than lost sensitive area functions; or
4) Established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or
other sensitive area functions have been established and strongly justify location of mitigation
at another site.
b. Off -site mitigation shall occur within the Shoreline Jurisdiction in a location
where the sensitive area functions can be restored. Buffer impacts must be mitigated at or as
close as possible to the location of the impact.
c. Wetland creation, relocation of a watercourse, or creation of a new fish and
wildlife habitat shall not result in the new sensitive area or buffer extending beyond the
development site and onto adjacent property without the agreement of the affected property
owners, unless otherwise exempted by this SMP
4. Mitigation Plan Content and Standards. The scope and content of a mitigation plan
shall be decided on a case -by -case basis. As the impacts to the sensitive area increase, the
mitigation measures to offset these impacts will increase in number and complexity The
minimum components of a complete mitigation plan are listed below. For wetland mitigation
plans, the format should follow that established in "Wetland Mitigation in Washington State,
Part 2 Develooine Mitigation Plans (Washington Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers,
EPA, March 2006, as amended)."
a. Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of
existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site.
b. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation
measures. This should include a description of site selection criteria, identification of target
evaluation species, and resource functions.
c. Performance standards for the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals
and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. They may include water quality
standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological,
geological or hydrological criteria. The following shall be considered the minimum
performance standards for approved sensitive area alterations:
1) Sensitive area functions and improved habitat for fish and wildlife are
improved over those of the original conditions.
2) Hydrologic conditions, hydroperiods and watercourse channels are
improved over existing conditions and the specific performance standards specified in the
approved mitigation plan are achieved.
3) Acreage requirements for enhancement or creation are met.
4) Vegetation native to the Pacific Northwest is installed and vegetation
survival and coverage standards over time are met and maintained.
5) Buffer and bank conditions and functions exceed the original state.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 33 of 47
415
416
6) Stream channel habitat and dimensions are maintained or improved such
that the fisheries habitat functions of the compensatory stream reach, meet or exceed that of the
original stream.
d. A detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of
mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction sequence and
construction management, and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that
are an integral requirement of any development proposal.
e. Monitoring and /or evaluation program that outlines the approach and
frequency for assessing progress of the completed project. An outline shall be included that
spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated and reported.
f. Maintenance plan that outlines the activities and frequency of maintenance to
ensure compliance with performance standards.
g. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action and any corrective
measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards
have not been met.
h. Performance security or other assurance devices.
5. Mitigation Timing.
a. Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently
disturb sensitive areas or their buffers and either prior to or immediately after activities that
will temporarily disturb sensitive areas.
b. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing
wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use or occupancy of the
activity or development. The Director may allow activities that permanently disturb wetlands
or watercourses prior to implementation of the mitigation plan under the following
circumstances:
conditions;
phasing.
1) To allow planting or re- vegetation to occur during optimal weather
2) To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or
3) To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing or
c. Monitoring of buffer alterations shall be required for three to five years. All other
alterations shall be monitored for a minimum of five years.
6. Corrective Actions and Monitoring. The Director shall require subsequent corrective
actions and long -term monitoring of the project if adverse impacts to regulated sensitive areas
or their buffers are identified.
7. Recording. The property owner receiving approval of a use or development
pursuant to the SMP shall record the City- approved site plan clearly delineating the sensitive
area and its buffer with the King County Division of Records and Elections. The face of the site
plan must include a statement that the provisions of this chapter, as of the effective date of the
ordinance from which the SMP derives or is thereafter amended, control use and development
of the subject property and provide for any responsibility of the latent defects or deficiencies.
8. Assurance Device.
a. The Director may require a letter of credit or other security device acceptable to
the City to guarantee performance and maintenance requirements. All assurances shall be on a
form approved by the City Attorney.
b. When alteration of a sensitive area is approved, the Director may require an
assurance device, on a form approved by the City Attorney, to cover the monitoring costs and
correction of possible deficiencies for the term of the approved monitoring and maintenance
program.
c. The assurance device shall be released by the Director upon receipt of written
confirmation submitted to the Department from the applicant's qualified professional that the
mitigation or restoration has met its performance standards and is successfully established.
Should the mitigation or restoration meet performance standards and be successfully
established in the third or fourth year of monitoring, the City may release the assurance device
early. The assurance device may be held for a longer period, if at the end of the monitoring
W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 34 of 47
period if, the performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been
successfully established.
d. Release of the security does not absolve the property owner of responsibility for
maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies or other duties under law
Section 10. Public Access to the Shoreline Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.100 Public Access to the Shoreline
A. Applicability.
1. Public access shall be provided on all property that abuts the Green /Duwamish
River shoreline in accordance with this section as further discussed below where any of the
following conditions are present:
a. Where a development or use will create increased demand for public access to
the shoreline, the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. For
the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is determined by
evaluating whether the development reflects an increase in the land use intensity (for example
converting a warehouse to office or retail use), or a significant increase in the square footage of
an existing building. A significant increase is defined as an increase of 3,000 square feet.
b. Where a development or use will interfere with an existing public access way,
the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. Impacts to public
access may include blocking access or discouraging use of existing on -site or nearby accesses.
c. Where a use or development will interfere with a public use of lands or waters
subject to the public trust doctrine, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this
impact.
d. Where the development is proposed by a public entity or on public lands.
e. Where identified on the Shoreline Public Access Map.
For the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is
determined by evaluating whether the development reflects an increase in the land use
intensity, for example converting a warehouse to office or retail use, or a significant increase in
the square footage of an existing building. A significant increase is defined as an increase of
3,000 square feet. The extent of public access required will be proportional to the amount of
increase in the demand for public access. For smaller projects, the Director will review the
intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable amount of public
access to be carried out. Depending on the amount of increase, the project may utilize the
alternative provisions for meeting public access in 18.44.100(F). The terms and conditions of
18.44.100(A) and (B) shall be deemed satisfied if the applicant and the City agree upon a master
trail plan providing for public paths and trails within a parcel or group of parcels.
2. The provisions of this section do not apply to the following:
a. Short plats of four or fewer lots;
b. Where providing such access would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards;
c. Where providing such access would create inherent and unavoidable security
problems; or
d. Where providing such access would cause significant ecological impacts that
cannot be mitigated.
An applicant claiming an exemption under items 26 -d above must comply with the
procedures in TMC Section 18.44.100(F).
B. General Standards.
1. To improve public access to the Green /Duwamish River, sites shall be designed to
provide:
a. Safe, visible and accessible pedestrian and non motorized vehicle connections
between proposed development and the river's edge, particularly when the site is adjacent to
the Green River Trail or other approved trail system; and
b. Public pathway entrances that are clearly visible from the street edge; and
W. \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44 doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 35 of 47
417
418
c. Clearly identified pathways that are separate from vehicular circulation areas.
This may be accomplished through the use of special paving materials such as precast pavers,
bomonite, changes in color or distinct and detailed scoring patterns and textures.
d. Site elements that are organized to clearly distinguish between public and
private access and circulation systems.
2. Required public access shall be fully developed and available for public use at the
time of occupancy in accordance with development permit conditions except where the
decision maker determines an appropriate mechanism for delayed public access
implementation is necessary for practical reasons. Where appropriate, a bond or cash
assignment may be approved, on review and approval by the Director of Community
Development, to extend this requirement for 90 days from the date the Certificate of Occupancy
is issued.
3. Public access easements and related permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed
of title or the face of the plat, short plat or approved site plan as a condition tied to the use of
the land. Recording with the County shall occur prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit
or final plat approval. Upon re- development of such a site, the easement may be relocated to
facilitate the continued public access to the shoreline.
4. Approved signs indicating the public's right of access and hours of access, if
restricted, shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the applicant in conspicuous
locations at public access sites. Signs should be designed to distinguish between public and
private areas. Signs controlling or restricting public access may be approved as a condition of
permit approval.
5. Required access must be maintained throughout the life of the project.
6. Public access features shall be separated from residential uses through the use of
setbacks, low walls, berms, landscaping, or other device of a scale and materials appropriate to
the site.
7. Shared public access between developments is encouraged. Where access is to be
shared between adjacent developments, the minimum width for the individual access easement
may be reduced, provided the total width of easements contributed by each adjacent
development equals a width that complies with Fire Department requirements and /or exceeds
the minimum for an individual access.
8. Public access sites shall be connected directly to the nearest public area (e.g., street,
public park, or adjoining public access easement). Where connections are not currently
possible, the site shall be designed to accommodate logical future connections.
C. Requirements for Shoreline Trails.
Where public access is required under TMC Section 18.44.100(A)1 above, the
requirement will be met by provision of a shoreline trail as follows:
1. Development on Properties Abutting Existing Green River Trail. An applicant
seeking to develop property abutting the existing trail may meet public access requirements by
upgrading the trail along the property frontage to meet the standards of a 14- foot -wide trail
with 2 -foot shoulders on each side.
2. Development on Properties Where New Trails are Planned. An applicant seeking to
develop property abutting the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments may
meet public access requirements by dedicating an 18- foot -wide trail easement to the City for
public access along the river
D. Publicly -Owned Shorelines.
1. Shoreline development by any public entities, including but not limited to the City
of Tukwila, King County, port districts, state agencies, or public utility districts, shall include
public access measures as part of each development project, unless such access is shown to be
incompatible due to reasons of safety, security, impact to the shoreline environment or other
provisions listed in this section.
2. The following requirements apply to street ends and City-owned property adjacent
to the river.
a. Public right -of -way and "road- ends," or portions thereof, shall not be vacated
and shall be maintained for future public access.
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 36 of 47
b. Unimproved right -of -ways and portions of right -of -ways, such as street ends
and turn -outs, shall be dedicated to public access uses until such time as the portion becomes
improved right -of -way. Uses shall be limited to passive outdoor recreation, car top boat
launching, fishing, interpretive /educational uses, and /or parking, which accommodates these
uses, and shall be designed so as to not interfere with the privacy of adjacent residential uses.
c. City -owned facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall provide new trails
and trail connections to the Green River Trail in accordance with approved plans and this SMP.
d. All City -owned recreational facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, unless
qualifying for an exemption as specified in this chapter, shall make adequate provisions for:
1) Non motorized and pedestrian access;
2) The prevention of trespass onto adjacent properties through landscaping,
fencing or other appropriate measures;
3) Signage indicating the public right -of -way to shoreline areas; and
4) Mechanisms to prevent environmental degradation of the shoreline from
public use.
E. Public Access Incentives.
1. The minimum yard setback for buildings, uses, utilities or development from non-
riverfront lot lines may be reduced as follows:
a. Where a development provides a public access corridor between off -site areas, or
public shoreline areas to public shoreline areas, one side yard may be reduced to a zero lot line
placement; or
b. Where a development provides additional public access area(s) equal in area to
at least 2.5% of total building area, the front yard (the landward side of the development) may
be reduced by 50
2. The maximum height for structures may be increased by 15% when:
a. Development devotes at least 5% of its building or land area to public shoreline
access; or
b. Development devotes at least 10% of its land area to employee shoreline access.
3. The maximum height for structures under 18.44.070(C)3 and this section may be
increased by a maximum of 25% when:
a. One of the criteria in 18.44.100(E)2 is met; and
b. The applicant restores or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including, but not
limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property to offset the impact of the increase in
height. Buffer restoration /enhancement projects undertaken to meet the requirements of
18.44.100(F) to meet the requirements of TMC Section 18.44.100(F) do not qualify as restoration
or enhancement for purposes of the height incentive provided in this subsection.
c. No combination of incentives may be used to gain more than a 25% total height
increase for a structure.
4. The maximum height for structures may be increased to the height permitted in
the underlying zoning district for properties that construct a 14- foot -wide paved trail with a 2-
foot -wide shoulder on each side for public access along the river in areas identified for new
shoreline trail segments, or where, in the case of properties containing or abutting existing
public access trails, the existing trail either meets the standard of a 14- foot -wide trail with 2-
foot -wide shoulders on either side or the property owner provides any necessary easements
and improvements to upgrade the existing trail to that standard along the property frontage.
F. Exemptions from Provision of On -Site Public Access.
1. Requirements for providing on -site general public access, as distinguished from
employee access, will not apply if the applicant can demonstrate one or more of the following:
a. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist related to the primary
use that cannot be prevented by any practical means.
b. Inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the
application of alternative design features or other solutions.
W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 37 of 47
419
420
c. The cost of providing the access, easement or other public amenity on or off the
development site is unreasonably disproportionate to the total long -term cost of the proposed
development.
d. Unavoidable environmental harm or net loss of shoreline ecological functions
that cannot be adequately mitigated will result from the public access.
e. Access is not feasible due to the configuration of existing parcels and structures,
such that access areas are blocked in a way that cannot be remedied reasonably by the
proposed development.
f. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between the proposed access and
adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated.
g. Space is needed for water dependent uses or navigation.
2. In order to meet any of the above referenced conditions, the applicant must first
demonstrate, and the City determine in its findings through a Type II decision, that all
reasonable alternatives have been exhausted including, but not limited to:
a. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and /or limiting hours of
use;
b. Designing separation of uses and activities through fencing, terracing, hedges or
other design features; or
c. Providing access on a site geographically separate from the proposal such as a
street end cannot be accomplished.
3. If the above conditions are demonstrated, and the proposed development is not
subject to the Parks Impact Fee, alternative provisions for meeting public access are required
and include:
a. Development of public access at an adjacent street end, or
b. Protection through easement or setbacks of landmarks, unique natural features
or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential, or
c. Contribution of materials and /or labor toward projects identified in the Parks
and Recreation Master Plan, the Shoreline Restoration Plan, or other City adopted plan; or
d. In lieu of providing public access under this section, at the Director's discretion,
the applicant may provide restoration /enhancement of the shoreline jurisdiction to a scale
commensurate with the foregone public access.
Section 11. Shoreline Design Guidelines Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.110 Shoreline Design Guidelines
The Green /Duwamish River is an amenity that should be valued and celebrated when
designing projects that will be located along its length. If any portion of a project falls within
the Shoreline Jurisdiction, the entire project will be reviewed under these guidelines as well as
the relevant sections of the Design Review Chapter of the Zoning Code (TMC Chapter 18.60).
The standards of TMC Chapter 18.60 shall guide the type of review, whether administrative or
by the Board of Architectural Review.
A. The following standards apply to development, uses and activities in the Urban
Conservancy and High Intensity Environments and non residential development in the
Shoreline Residential Environment:
1. Relationship of Structure to Site. Development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction
shall demonstrate compliance with the following:
a. Respect and reflect the shape of the shoreline.
b. Orient building elements to site such that public river access, both visual and
physical, is enhanced.
c. Orient buildings to allow for casual observation of pedestrian and trail activity
from interior spaces.
d. Site and orient buildings to provide maximum views from building interiors
toward the river and the shoreline.
e. Orient public use areas and private amenities to the river
W: \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 38 of 47
f. Clearly allocate spaces, accommodating parking, vehicular circulation and
buildings, to preserve existing stands of vegetation or trees so that natural areas can be set
aside, improved, or integrated into site organization and planning.
g. Clearly define and separate public from non -public spaces with the use of
paving, signage, and landscaping.
2. Building Design. Development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall demonstrate
compliance with the following:
a. To prevent building mass and shape from overwhelming the desired human
scale along the river, development shall avoid blank walls on the public and river sides of
buildings.
b. Buildings should be designed to follow the curve of the river and respond to
changes in topography; buildings must not "turn their back" to the river
c. Design common areas in buildings to take advantage of shoreline views and
access; incorporate outdoor seating areas that are compatible with shoreline access.
d. Consider the height and scale of each building in relation to the site.
e. Extend site features such as plazas that allow pedestrian access and enjoyment of
the river to the landward side of the buffer's edge.
f. Locate lunchrooms and other common areas to open out onto the water -ward
side of the site to maximize enjoyment of the river.
g. Design structures to take advantage of the river frontage location by
incorporating features such as:
1) plazas and landscaped open space that connect with a shoreline trail system,
2) windows that offer views of the river; or
3) pedestrian entrances that face the river
h. View obscuring fencing is permitted only when necessary for documentable use
requirements and must be designed with landscaping per the Vegetation Protection and
Landscaping Section. Other fencing, when allowed, must be designed to complement the
proposed and /or existing development materials and design.
i. Where there are public trails, locate any fencing between the site and the
landward side of the shoreline trail.
3. Design of Public Access. Development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall
demonstrate compliance with the following:
a. Public access shall be barrier free, where feasible, and designed consistent with
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
b. Public access landscape design shall use native vegetation, in accordance with
the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Additional landscape
features may be required where desirable to provide public /private space separation and
screening of utility, service and parking areas.
c. Furniture used in public access areas shall be appropriate for the proposed level
of development and the character of the surrounding area. For example, large urban projects
should provide formal benches; for smaller projects in less developed areas, simpler, less
formal benches or suitable alternatives are appropriate.
d. Materials used in public access furniture, structures or sites shall be:
1) Durable and capable of withstanding exposure to the elements;
2) Environmentally friendly and take advantage of technology in building
materials, lighting, paved surfaces, porous pavement, etc, wherever practical, and
3) Consistent with the character of the shoreline and the anticipated use.
e. Public- Private Separation:
1) Public access facilities shall look and feel welcoming to the public, and not
appear as an intrusion into private property.
2) Natural elements such as logs, grass, shrubs, and elevation separations are
encouraged as means to define the separation between public and private space.
W. \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 39 of 47
421
422
Section 12. Shoreline Restoration Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.120 Shoreline Restoration
A. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Not Required. Shoreline restoration
projects shall be allowed without a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit when these
projects meet the criteria established by WAC 173- 27- 040(o) and (p) and HB 2199.
B. Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction Due to Restoration.
1. In cases where shoreline restoration projects result in a change in the location of the
OHWM and associated Shoreline Jurisdiction on the subject property and /or adjacent
properties, and where application of Shoreline Master Program regulations would preclude or
interfere with the uses permitted by the underlying zoning thus presenting a hardship to the
project proponent.
a. Applications for relief, as specified below, must meet the following criteria:
1) The proposed relief is the minimum necessary to relieve the hardship;
2) After granting the proposed relief, there is net environmental benefit from
the restoration project; and
3) Granting the proposed relief is consistent with the objectives of the shoreline
restoration project and with the Shoreline Master Program.
4) Where a shoreline restoration project is created as mitigation to obtain a
development permit, the project proponent required to perform the mitigation is not eligible for
relief under the provisions of this section.
b. The portion of property that moves from outside Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside
Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project:
1) may be developed for the full range of uses of the underlying zoning
consistent with the Zoning Code, including uses that are not water- oriented;
2) is not required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit;
3) is not subject to the SMP provisions for public access;
4) is not subject to shoreline design review; and
5) is not subject to the development standards set forth in this program.
c. The intent of the exemptions identified above in a(1) to a(4) is to implement the
restoration projects of the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan, which reflects the
projects identified in the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan pursuant to Policy 5.2
of this Master Program.
2. Consistent with the provisions of (1)(a) and (1)(b) above, the Shoreline Residential
Environment Buffer, High Intensity or Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer width may be
reduced to no less than 25 feet measured from the new location of the OHWM for the portion of
the property that moves from outside the Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction
as a result of the shoreline restoration project, subject to the following standards:
a. The 25 -foot buffer area must be vegetated according to the requirements of the
Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section or as otherwise approved by the City; and
b. The proponents of the restoration project are responsible for the installation and
maintenance of the vegetation.
3. The habitat restoration project proponents must record with King County a survey
that identifies the location of the OHWM location prior to implementation of the shoreline
restoration project, any structures that fall within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, and the new
location of the OHWM once construction of the shoreline restoration project is completed.
4. Shoreline restoration projects must obtain all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife approvals as well as written approval from
the City.
Section 13. Administration Requirements Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.130 Administration
A. Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit.
W. Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 40 of 47
1. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Based on guidelines in the SMA for a
Minimum Shoreline Jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The
Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green /Duwamish River, its banks,
the upland area which extends from the OHWM landward for 200 feet on each side of the river,
floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. The floodway shall not include
those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore have
not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity
2. Applicability. The Tukwila SMP applies to uses, change of uses, activities or
development that occurs within the above defined Shoreline Jurisdiction. All proposed uses
and development occurring within the Shoreline Jurisdiction must conform to Chapter 90.58
RCW, the SMA, and this master program whether or not a permit is required.
B. Substantial Development Permit Requirements.
1. Permit Application Procedures. Applicants for a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit shall comply with permit application procedures in TMC Chapter 18.104.
2. Exemptions.
a. To qualify for an exemption, the proposed use, activity or development must
meet the requirements for an exemption as described in WAC 173 -27 -040, except for properties
that meet the requirements of the Shoreline Restoration Section. The purpose of a shoreline
exemption is to provide a process for uses and activities which do not trigger the need for a
Substantial Development Permit, but require compliance with all provisions of the City's SMP.
b. The Director may impose conditions to the approval of exempted developments
and /or uses as necessary to assure compliance of the project with the SMA and the Tukwila
SMP, per WAC 173- 27- 040(e). For example, in the case of development subject to a building
permit but exempt from the shoreline permit process, the Building Official or other permit
authorizing official, through consultation with the Director, may attach shoreline management
terms and conditions to building permits and other permit approvals pursuant to RCW
90.58.140.
C. Shoreline Conditional Use Permit.
1. Purpose. As stated in WAC 173 -27 -160, the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) is to allow greater flexibility in the application of use regulations of the SMP in a manner
consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special
conditions may be attached to the permit by the City or the Department of Ecology to prevent
undesirable effects of the proposed use and /or assure consistency of the project with the SMA
and the City's SMP. Uses which are specifically prohibited by the SMP may not be authorized
with approval of a CUP
2. Application. Shoreline Conditional Use Permits are a Type 4 permit processed
under TMC Chapter 18.104.
3. Application Requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for permit
application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104 and the SMP.
4. Approval Criteria.
a. Uses classified as shoreline conditional uses may be authorized, provided that
the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1) The proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and
the policies of the Tukwila SMP;
2) The proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public
shorelines;
3) The proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible
with other permitted uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the
Comprehensive Plan and SMP;
4) The proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline
environment in which it is to be located, and
5) The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
b. In the granting of all Conditional Use Permits, consideration shall be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if
Conditional Use Permits were granted to other developments in the area where similar
circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 41 of 47
423
424
policies of RCW 90.58 and all local ordinances and shall not produce substantial adverse effects
to the shoreline environment.
E. Shoreline Variance Permits.
1. Purpose. The purpose of a Shoreline Variance Permit is strictly limited to granting
relief from specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this Master
Program where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the physical
character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of the Master
Program will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the SMA policies as
stated in RCW 90.58.020. Reasonable use requests that are located in the shoreline must be
processed as a variance until such time as the SMA is amended to establish a process for
reasonable uses.
2. Application Requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for a Type 3
permit application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104.
3. Shoreline Variance Permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the
permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances
the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and the public interest
will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
4. Approval Criteria. A Shoreline Variance Permit for a use, activity or development
that will be located landward of the OHWM and /or landward of any wetland may be
authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
a. The strict application of the bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set
forth in the Master Program preclude or significantly interfere with a reasonable use of the
property not otherwise prohibited by the Master Program.
b. The hardship described in TMC Section 18.44.130.E(4)a is specifically related to
the property and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural
features and the application of the Master Program, and not from the owner's own actions or
deed restrictions; and the variance is necessary because of these conditions in order to provide
the owner with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone
in which the property is situated.
c. The design of the project will be compatible with other authorized uses within
the area and with uses planned for the area under the Comprehensive Plan and SMP and will
not cause adverse impacts to adjacent properties or the shoreline environment.
d. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other
properties in the area.
e. The variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief.
f. The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
5. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM.
a. Shoreline Variance Permits for development and /or uses that will be located
either waterward of the OHWM or within any sensitive area may be authorized only if the
applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1) The strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set
forth in this Master Program preclude all reasonable permitted use of the property.
2) The proposal is consistent with the criteria established under TMC Section
18.44.130.E(4), "Approval Criteria."
3) The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be
adversely affected by the granting of the variance.
b. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area such that the total of the
variances would remain consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and not cause substantial adverse
effects to the shoreline environment.
c. Variances from the use regulations of the Master Program are prohibited.
F. Non Conforming Development.
1. Non Conforming Uses. Any non conforming lawful use of land that would not be
allowed under the terms of this SMP may be continued as an allowed, legal, non conforming
W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 42 of 47
use, defined in TMC Chapter 18.06 or as hereafter amended, so long as that use remains lawful,
subject to the following:
a. No such non conforming use shall be enlarged, intensified, increased or
extended to occupy a greater use of the land, structure or combination of the two, than was
occupied at the effective date of adoption of this SMP unless TMC Section 18.66.120 applies.
b. No non conforming use shall be moved or extended in whole or in part to any
other portion of the lot or parcel occupied by such use on the effective date of adoption of this
chapter
c. If any such non conforming use ceases for any reason for a period of more than
24 consecutive months, any subsequent use shall conform to the regulations specified by in this
chapter for the shoreline environment in which such use is located. Upon request of the owner,
prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City
Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set
forth in TMC Section 18.44.130(F)3.
d. If a change of use is proposed to a use determined to be non conforming by
application of provisions in this chapter, the proposed new use must be a permitted use in this
chapter or a use approved under a Conditional Use Permit process. For purposes of
implementing this section, a change of use constitutes a change from one permitted or
conditional use category to another such use category as listed within the Zoning Code.
e. A structure that is being or has been used for a non conforming use may be used
for a different non conforming use only upon the approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use
permit. In addition to the conditional use criteria in TMC 18.44.130(c), before approving a
conditional use for a change in non conforming use, the following findings must be made:
1) No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical,
2) The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and
provisions of the SMP and as compatible with the uses in the area as the pre existing use;
3) the use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the
minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose;
4) The structure(s) associated with the non conforming use shall not be
expanded in a manner that increases the extent of the non conformity;
5) The change in use will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological
functions and /or processes;
6) The applicant restores and/or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including
but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property, to offset the impact of the
change of use per the vegetation management standards of this program. This may include the
restoration of paved areas to vegetated area if no longer in use;
7) The use complies with the conditional use permit criteria of this Program;
and
8) The preference is to reduce exterior uses in the buffer to the maximum extent
possible.
2. Non Conforming Structures. Where a lawful structure exists on the effective date of
adoption of this chapter that could not be built under the terms of this chapter by reason of
restrictions on height, buffers or other characteristics of the structure, it may be continued as an
allowed, legal structure so long as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the
following provisions:
a. No such structure may be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its
degree of nonconformity or increases its impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline
environment. Ordinary maintenance and repair of and upgrades to a non conforming structure
are permitted, including but not limited to, painting, roof repair and replacement, plumbing,
wiring, mechanical equipment repair /replacement, repaving and weatherization. These and
other alterations, additions or enlargements may be allowed as long as the work done does not
extend further into any required buffer, increase the amount of impervious surface, or increase
the impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment. Complete plans shall be
required of all work contemplated under this section.
b. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means, the structure may
be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided application is made
for permits within 12 months of the date the damage occurred and all reconstruction is
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 43 of 47
425
426
completed within two years of permit issuance. In the event the property is redeveloped, such
re- development must be in conformity with the provisions of this chapter
c. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance whatsoever, it
shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this chapter after it is moved.
d. When a non conforming structure, or structure and premises in combination, is
vacated or abandoned for 24 consecutive months, the structure, or structure and premises in
combination, shall thereafter be required to be in conformance with the regulations of this
chapter. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon
reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24
consecutive months using the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.130(F)3.
e. Residential structures and uses located in any single family or multiple family
residential zoning district and in existence at the time of adoption of this chapter shall not be
deemed nonconforming in terms of height, use, or location provisions of this title. Such
buildings may be rebuilt after a fire or other natural disaster to their original dimensions,
location and height, but may not be changed except as provided in the non conforming uses
section of this chapter.
f. Single family structures in single- or multiple family residential zoning districts,
which have legally non conforming setbacks from the OHWM per the SMP buffer, shall be
allowed to expand the ground floor only along the existing building line(s) as long as the
existing distance from the nearest point of the structure to the OHWM is not reduced and the
square footage of new intrusion into the buffer does not exceed 50% of the square footage of the
current intrusion. As a condition of building permit approval, a landscape plan showing
removal of invasive plant species within the entire shoreline buffer and replanting with
appropriate native species must be submitted to the City. Plantings should be maintained
through the establishment period.
g. Within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, existing structures that do not meet the
requirements of the SMP may be remodeled, reconstructed or replaced, provided that:
1) The new construction is within the original dimensions and location on the
lot;
2) The new construction does not further intrude into or adversely impact the
required buffer;
3) The use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the
minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose;
4) The reconstruction will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological
functions and /or processes;
5) For properties in non leveed portions of the river, the applicant re- slopes the
bank to a 2.5:1 or 3:1 angle as applicable depending on the property's shoreline environment
designation and restores and /or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but not limited
to, paved areas no longer in use on the property. For properties behind levees that do not meet
the minimum profile, restore and /or enhance the remaining buffer area and remove invasive
vegetation and plant with native vegetation on the levee prism as permitted by the COE; and
6) The property owner applies for and is granted approval of a Shoreline
Conditional Use permit.
h. A non conforming use, within a non conforming structure, shall not be allowed
to expand into any other portion of the structure.
3. Requests for Time Extension Non conforming Uses and Structures
a. A property owner may request, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, an
extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months. Such a request shall be considered as a
Conditional Use permit under TMC Chapter 18.64 and may be approved only when:
1) For a non conforming use, a finding is made that no reasonable alternative
conforming use is practical;
2) For a non conforming structure, special economic circumstances prevent the
lease or sale of said structure within 24 months; and
3) The applicant restores and /or enhances the shoreline buffer on the property
to offset the impact of the continuation of the pre existing use. For non conforming uses, the
amount of buffer to be restored and /or enhanced will be determined based on the percentage
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 44 of 47
of the existing building used by the non conforming use for which a time extension is being
requested. Depending on the size of the area to be restored and /or enhanced, the Director may
require targeted plantings rather than a linear planting arrangement. The vegetation
management standards of this program shall be used for guidance on any
restoration /enhancement. For non conforming structures, for each six-month extension of time
requested, 15% of the available buffer must be restored /enhanced.
b. Conditions may be attached to the permit that are deemed necessary to assure
compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the Master Program and the Shoreline
Management Act and to assure that the use will not become a nuisance or a hazard.
4. Building Safety. Nothing in this SMP shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening
or restoring to a safe condition of any non conforming building or part thereof declared to be
unsafe by order of any City official charged with protecting the public safety.
a. Alterations or expansion of a non conforming use that are required by law or a
public agency in order to comply with public health or safety regulations are the only
alterations or expansions allowed.
b. Alterations or expansions permitted under this section shall be the minimum
necessary to meet the public safety concerns.
5. Non Conforming Parking Lots.
a. Nothing contained in this SMP shall be construed to require a change in any
aspect of a structure or facility covered thereunder including, without limitation, parking lot
layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, for any structure or facility which existed on
the date of adoption of this SMP.
b. If a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed, that requires an
increase in the parking area by an increment less than 100 the requirements of the SMP shall
be complied with for the additional parking area.
c. If a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed, that requires an
increase in the parking area by an increment greater than 100 the requirements of the SMP
shall be complied with for the entire parking area.
6. Non Conforming Landscape Areas.
a. Adoption of the vegetation protection and landscaping regulations contained in
this SMP shall not be construed to require a change in the landscape improvements for any
legal landscape area that existed on the date of adoption of this SMP, unless and until the
property is redeveloped or alteration of the existing structure is made beyond the thresholds
provided herein.
b. At such time as the property is redeveloped or the existing structure is altered
beyond the thresholds provided herein and the associated premises does not comply with the
vegetation protection and landscaping requirements of this SMP, a landscape plan that
conforms to the requirements of this SMP shall be submitted to the Director for approval.
Section 14. Appeals Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby
adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.140 Appeals
Any appeal of a decision by the City on a
Shoreline Conditional Use or Shoreline Variance
Shorelines Hearing Board.
Section 15. Enforcement and Penalties Ado
regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.150 Enforcement and Penalties
A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered violations of the Master Program:
1. To use, construct or demolish any structure, or to conduct clearing, earth moving,
construction or other development not authorized under a Substantial Development Permit,
Conditional Use Permit or Variance Permit, where such permit is required by the Master
Program.
2. Any work that is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other
requirements in a permit approved pursuant to the Master Program, provided the terms or
conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans.
W: \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit,
must be appealed to the Washington State
pted. Updated requirements for shoreline
Page 45 of 47
427
428
3. To remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in
accordance with the Master Program.
4. To misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information
submitted to obtain any shoreline use or development authorization.
5. To fail to comply with the requirements of the Master Program.
B. Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Director to enforce the Master Program subject
to the terms and conditions of TMC Chapter 8.45.
C. Inspection Access.
1. For the purpose of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a permit or
the Master Program, authorized representatives of the Director may enter all sites for which a
permit has been issued.
2. Upon completion of all requirements of a permit, the applicant shall request a final
inspection by contacting the planner of record. The permit process is complete upon final
approval by the planner.
D. Penalties.
1. Any violation of any provision of the SMP, or failure to comply with any of the
requirements of the SMP, shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in TMC Chapter 8.45,
"Enforcement" and shall be imposed pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in
that chapter
2. Penalties assessed for violations of the SMP shall be determined by TMC Section
8.45.100, "Penalties."
3. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a permit required by
the Master Program that a contractor, subcontractor, person with responsibility on the site, or
person authorizing or directing the work erroneously believed a permit had been issued to the
property owner or any other person.
E. Remedial Measures Required. In addition to penalties provided in TMC Chapter 8.45,
the Director may require any person conducting work in violation of the Master Program to
mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures.
1. Remedial measures must conform to the policies and guidelines of the Master
Program and the SMA.
2. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of the Master
Program shall be borne by the property owner and /or applicant.
F Injunctive Relief.
1. Whenever the City has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or
threatening to violate the Master Program or any rule or other provisions adopted or issued
pursuant to the Master Program, it may, either before or after the institution of any other action
or proceeding authorized by this ordinance, institute a civil action in the name of the City for
injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation. Such action shall be brought in
King County Superior Court.
2. The institution of an action for injunctive relief under this section shall not relieve
any party to such proceedings from any civil or criminal penalty prescribed for violations of the
Master Program.
G. Abatement. Any use, structure, development or work that occurs in violation of the
Master Program or in violation of any lawful order or requirement of the Director pursuant to
this section, shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner
provided by TMC Section 8.45.105.
Section 16. Shoreline Master Program Review and Amendments Adopted. Updated
requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows:
TMC 18.44.160 Shoreline Master Program Review and Amendments
A. The SMP shall be periodically reviewed and adjustments shall be made as are necessary
to reflect changing local circumstances, new information or improved data, and changes in
State statutes and regulations. This review process shall be consistent with WAC 173 -26 and
shall include a local citizen involvement effort and public hearing to obtain the views and
comments of the public.
W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Page 46 of 47
B. Any provision of this Master Program may be amended as provided for in RCW 90.58
and WAC 173 -26. Amendments or revisions to the Master Program, as provided by law, do not
become effective until approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology.
C. Proposals for shoreline environment re- designations (i.e. amendments to the shoreline
maps and descriptions) must demonstrate consistency with the criteria set forth in WAC 173-
26 -040 and this program.
Section 17. Liability Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby
adopted to read as follows:
18.44.170 Liability
A. Liability for any adverse impacts or damages resulting from work performed in
accordance with a permit issued on behalf of the City within the City limits shall be the sole
responsibility of the owner of the site for which the permit was issued.
B. No provision of or term used in the Master Program is intended to impose any duty
upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages in a civil
action.
Section 18. Applicability of Amended Zoning Code. After the effective date of this
ordinance, Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Code, as hereby amended shall apply to all properties
subject to the shoreline overlay, provided that nothing contained herein shall be deemed to
override any vested rights or require any alteration of a non conforming use or non conforming
structure, except as specifically provided in Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Code, as amended.
Section 19. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 1796 §3 (part), 1775 §2 (part), and 1758 §1 (part), as
codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.44, are hereby repealed.
Section 20. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of
this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 21. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the
Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as
provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2009
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc
CL:ksn 11/20/2009
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Page 47 of 47
429
430
W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, UPDATING DEFINITIONS FOR SHORELINE REGULATIONS
TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 1758 §1 (PART); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals
and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County County-wide
Planning Policies; and
WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State, regulated pursuant to
RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and
WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive
Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and
WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the Washington State Legislature has found that
shorelines of the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and
unrestricted construction on privately -owned and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not
in the best public interest; and
WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020 the Legislature directed local governments developing
Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to the
following uses, in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect the State -wide interest
over local interest; 2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over
short -term benefit; 4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public
access to publicly -owned areas of the shorelines; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the
public in the shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100,
deemed appropriate or necessary; and
WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) adopted new
rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act;
and
WHEREAS, the DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide
direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and
WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline
master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by the DOE,
in accordance with a schedule established in that section; and
WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila
to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established a
Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background
studies and used consultant services to prepare technical documents; and
WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program
in 2008; and
WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master
Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an "Inventory and
Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non
Significance was issued August 13, 2008, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program,
held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow
Page 1 of 9
431
432
additional public input, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to
the City Council in February 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing
to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009, and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the
Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved
revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to
address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers, staff and the
Department of Ecology; and
WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of
methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the
proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including: mailings to property owners and
tenants; notice boards along the Green River Trail; postings on the City's web site; the creation
of a broadcast e-mail group that received updates of the shoreline review process; and articles
in the City's newsletter; and
WHEREAS, the updated Shoreline Master Program will be implemented by revised
shoreline regulations, codified in Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.44, and
WHEREAS, new and revised Zoning Code definitions, codified in Chapter 18.06 of the
Tukwila Municipal Code, are required to implement the changes to TMC Chapter 18.44 and the
updated Shoreline Master Program; and
WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce,
pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Appurtenance" means a structure that is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment
of a single family residence, including a garage, deck, driveway, utilities, fences, installation of
a septic tank and drain field, and grading, that does not exceed 250 cubic yards and that does
not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark
(WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(g)).
Section 2. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Armoring" means the control of shoreline erosion with hardened structures, such as
bulkheads, sea walls and riprap.
Section 3. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Bank" means the rising ground bordering a water body and forming an edge or slope.
Section 4. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Bioengineering" means integrating living woody and herbaceous materials with organic
(plants, wood, jute mats, coir logs, etc.) and inorganic materials (rocks, soils) to increase the
strength and structure of the soil along a riverbank, accomplished by a dense matrix of roots
that hold the soil together. The above ground vegetation increases the resistance to flow and
reduces flow velocities by dissipating energy.
Section 5. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Bulkhead" means vertical structures erected parallel to and near the ordinary high water
mark for the purpose of protecting adjacent uplands from erosion from the action of waves or
currents.
Section 6. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Channel migration zone" means the area along a river within which the chanlel(s) can be
reasonably predicted to migrate over time as a result of natural and normally occurring
W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 2 of 9
hydrological and related processes when considered with the characteristics of the river and its
surroundings.
Section 7. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Dike" means an embankment or structure built in the river channel to contain or redirect
flow within the channel and prevent shoreline destabilization.
Section 8. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Development, shoreline" means, when conducted within the Shoreline Jurisdiction on
shorelands or shoreland areas as defined herein, a use consisting of the construction or exterior
alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or
minerals; construction of bulkheads; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any project of
a permanent or temporary nature that interferes with the normal public use of the waters
overlying lands subject to the Shoreline Management Act at any stage of water level.
Section 9. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Ecological/ecosystem functions (or shoreline functions)" means the work performed or
role played by the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the
maintenance of the aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's natural
ecosystem. See WAC 173- 26- 200(2)(c).
Section 10. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Ecosystem -wide processes" means the suite of naturally occurring physical and geologic
processes of erosion, transport, and deposition; and specific chemical processes that shape
landforms within a specific shoreline ecosystem and determine both the types of habitat and
the associated ecological functions.
Section 11. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Environment designation" means the term used to describe the character of the shoreline
in Tukwila based upon the recommended classification system established by WAC 173 -26 -211
and as further refined by Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP).
Section 12. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Feasible" means, for the purpose of the Shoreline Master Program, that an action such as a
development project, mitigation, or preservation requirement meets all of the following
conditions:
1. The action can be accomplished with technologies and methods that have been used in
the past in similar circumstances, or studies or tests have demonstrated in similar
circumstances that such approaches are currently available and likely to achieve the intended
results;
2. The action provides a reasonable likelihood of achieving its intended purpose; and
3. The action does not physically preclude achieving the project's primary intended legal
use.
In cases where these guidelines require certain actions unless they are infeasible, the burden
of proving infeasibility is on the applicant. In determining an action's infeasibility, the
reviewing agency may weigh the action's relative public costs and public benefits, considered
in the short- and long -term time frames.
Section 13. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Flood plain" means that land area susceptible to inundation with a one percent chance of
being equaled or exceeded in any given year (synonymous with 100 -year flood plain). The limit
of this area shall be based upon flood ordinance regulation maps or a reasonable method which
meets the objectives of the Shoreline Management Act.
Section 14. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 3 of 9
433
434
"Flood hazard reduction" means actions taken to reduce flood damage or hazards. Flood
hazard reduction measures may consist of nonstructural or indirect measures such as setbacks,
land use controls, wetland restoration, dike removal, use relocation, bioengineering measures,
and storm water management programs and of structural measures such as dikes and levees
intended to contain flow within the channel, channel realignment, and elevation of structures
consistent with the National Flood Insurance Program.
Section 15. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas
that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the
water surface elevation more than one foot.
Section 16. Definition Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section
18.06.370, "Definitions," is amended to read as follows:
18.06.370 Grading
"Grading" means activity that results in change of the cover or topography of the earth or
any activity that may cause erosion, including clearing, excavation, filling and stockpiling.
Section 17. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Large Woody Debris (LWD)" means whole trees with root wads and limbs attached, cut
logs at least 4 inches in diameter along most of their length, and root wads at least 6.5 feet long
and 8 inches in diameter. Large woody debris is installed to address a deficiency of habitat and
natural channel forming processes.
Section 18. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Levee" means a broad embankment of earth built parallel with the river channel to contain
flow within the channel and prevent flooding from a designated design storm.
Section 19. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Levee, minimum profile" means, the minimum levee profile for any new or reconstructed
levees is the King County 'Briscoe Levee" profile 2.5:1 overall slope with a 15 -foot mid -slope
bench for maintenance access and native vegetation plantings.
Section 20. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Mean Higher High Water (MHHW)" means the average of the higher high water height
of each tidal day, and is used in determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for the tidally
influenced portions of the river.
Section 21. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Native vegetation" means vegetation with a genetic origin of Western Washington,
Northern Oregon and Southern British Columbia, not including cultivars.
Section 22. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"No Net Loss" means a standard intended to ensure that shoreline development or uses,
whether permitted or exempt, are located and designed to avoid loss or degradation of
shoreline ecological functions that are necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources.
Section 23. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Nonconforming use, shoreline" means a use or development that was lawfully
constructed or established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or the
Shoreline Master Program or amendments thereto, but does not conform to present regulations
or standards of the program.
Section 24. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 4 of 9
"Non- water- oriented uses" means those uses that are not water- dependent, water related,
or water enjoyment.
Section 25. Definition Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section
18.06.605, "Definitions," is amended to read as follows:
18.06.605 Ordinary high water mark
"Ordinary high water mark" means the mark that will be found by examining the bed and
banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters (all lakes, streams, and tidal
water) are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon
the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland in respect to vegetation as that
condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change
thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or the Department of
Ecology. In any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high
water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary
high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water
Section 26. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Overwater structure" means any device or structure projecting over the Ordinary High
Water Mark, including, but not limited to, bridges, boat lifts, wharves, piers, docks, ramps,
floats or buoys.
Section 27. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Public access" means the ability of the general public to reach, touch or enjoy the water's
edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent
locations. Public access may be provided by an owner by easement, covenant, or similar legal
agreement of substantial walkways, corridors, parks, or other areas serving as a means of view
and /or physical approach to public waters. The Director may approve limiting public access as
to hours of availability, types of activity permitted, location and area.
Section 28. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Regional detention facility" means a stormwater detention and /or retention facility that
accepts flow from multiple parcels and /or public right -of -way. The facility may be public or
private.
Section 29. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Revetment" means a sloping structure built to increase bank strength and protect an
embankment, or shore against erosion by waves or river currents. A revetment is usually built
of rock riprap, wood, or poured concrete. One or more filter layers of smaller rock or filter cloth
and "toe" protection are included. A revetment typically slopes and has a rough or jagged face.
The slope differentiates it from a bulkhead, which is a vertical structure.
Section 30. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Riparian" means the land along the margins of rivers and streams.
Section 31. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Riverbank analysis and report" means a scientific study or evaluation conducted by
qualified experts and the resulting report to evaluate the ground and /or surface hydrology and
geology, the geomorphology and hydraulic characteristics of the river, the affected land form
and its susceptibility to mass wasting, erosion, scouring and other geologic hazards or fluvial
processes. The report shall include conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of
the proposed development on geologic and /or hydraulic conditions, the adequacy of the site to
be developed, the impacts of the proposed development, alternative approaches to the
proposed development, and measures to mitigate potential site specific and cumulative
geological, hydrological and hydraulic impacts of the proposed development, including the
potential adverse impacts to adjacent and down current properties. Geotechnical/
hydrological /hydraulic reports shall conform to accepted technical standards and must be
prepared by qualified professional engineers or geologists who have professional expertise
about the regional and local shoreline geology and processes.
W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Defindions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 5 of 9
435
436
Section 32. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Shorelands or shoreland areas" means those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all
directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the Ordinary High Water Mark; floodways
and contiguous flood plain areas landward 200 feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and
river deltas associated with the streams, lakes and tidal waters that are subject to the provisions
of the Shoreline Management Act.
Section 33. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Shoreline areas" means all "shorelines of the State" and shorelands" as defined in RCW
90.58.030.
Section 34. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Shoreline jurisdiction" means the channel of the Green /Duwamish River, its banks, the
upland area which extends from the Ordinary High Water Mark landward for 200 horizontal
feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its 100 -year flood
plain. For the purpose of determining shoreline jurisdiction only, the floodway shall not
include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore
have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity.
Section 35. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Shoreline modifications" means those actions that modify the physical configuration or
qualities of the shoreline area through the construction or alteration of a physical element such
as a dike, breakwater, pier, weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline structure.
"Shoreline modifications" may also include other actions, such as clearing, grading or
application of chemicals.
Section 36. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Shoreline restoration or ecological restoration" means the re- establishment or upgrading
of impaired ecological shoreline processes, functions or habitats, including any project that is
approved by the Federal, State, King County, or City government or the WRIA 9 Steering
Committee, is intended to provide habitat restoration and where the future use of the site is
restricted through a deed restriction to prohibit non- habitat uses. This may be accomplished
through measures including, but not limited to, re- vegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline
structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not imply a
requirement for returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre European settlement
conditions.
Section 37. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Shoreline stabilization" means actions taken to protect riverbanks or adjacent uplands
from erosion resulting from the action of waves or river currents. "Hard" structural
stabilization includes levees, bulkheads and revetments. "Soft" shoreline stabilization includes
use of bioengineering measures where vegetation, logs, and /or certain types of rock are used to
address erosion control and /or slope stability.
Section 38. Definition Deleted. Ordinance 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section
18.06.765, "Shoreline Zone," is deleted.
Section 39. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Significant tree, shoreline" means a single trunked tree that is 4 inches or more in
diameter at a height of 4 feet above the ground or a multi- trunked tree with a diameter of 2
inches or more (such as willows or vine maple).
Section 40. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Significant vegetation removal" means the removal or alteration of trees, shrubs, and /or
ground cover by clearing, grading, cutting, burning, chemical means, or other activity that
causes significant ecological impacts to functions provided by such vegetation. The removal of
invasive or noxious weeds does not constitute significant vegetation removal. Tree pruning, not
W Word Processing\ Ordinances Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 6 of 9
including tree topping, where it does not affect ecological functions, does not constitute
significant vegetation removal.
Section 41. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market
value exceeds $5,000 or as adjusted by the State to account for inflation, or any development
that materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The
following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of the Shoreline
Management Act, but are not exempt from complying with the substantive requirements of this
Shoreline Master Program.
1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including repair
of damage caused by accident, fire, or elements.
2. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements.
3. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching
activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction
and maintenance of irrigation structures including, but not limited to, head gates, pumping
facilities, and irrigation channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of
a commercial nature, and alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other
than that which results from normal cultivation shall not be considered normal or necessary
farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of
being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include
land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and /or grazing, nor shall it include
normal livestock wintering operations.
4. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor
buoys.
5. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single family
residence for his own use or for the use of his or her family, which residence does not exceed a
height of 35 feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state
agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed
pursuant to this chapter.
6. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only,
for the private non commercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and
multiple family residences. This exception applies if either:
(a) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed $2,500; or
(b) in fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed $10,000, but if
subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding $2,500 occurs within five years of
completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a
substantial development for the purpose of this chapter
7. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or
other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation
system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and
artificially stored ground water for the irrigation of lands.
8. The marking of property lines or corners on state owned lands, when such marking
does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water.
9 Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities
existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of
an agricultural drainage or diking system.
10. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an
application for development authorization under this chapter, if:
a. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters;
b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including,
but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values;
c. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of
the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing
before the activity;
W.\ Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 7 of 9
437
438
d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a
performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction
to ensure the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and
e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550, "Oil or
natural gas exploration in marine waters."
11. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW
17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed
control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the
Department of Agriculture or the department jointly with other state agencies under chapter
43.21C RCW.
12. Watershed restoration projects, which means a public or private project authorized by
the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and
consists of one or more of the following activities:
a. A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which less than 25
cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which
no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional
plantings.
b. A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the
principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of
the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of
flowing water.
c. A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce
impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the
citizens of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream
habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than 200 square feet in floor
area and is located above the Ordinary High Water Mark of the stream.
13. Watershed restoration plan, which means a plan developed or sponsored by the
Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Department of Ecology, the Department of Natural
Resources, the Department of Transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within
and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county or a conservation district that provides a general
program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re- creation,
or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment,
drainage area or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant
to the State Environmental Policy Act.
14. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish
passage, when all of the following apply:
a. The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife;
b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and
Wildlife pursuant to Chapter 77.55 RCW; and
c. The local government has determined the project is substantially consistent with the
local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a
timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent.
Additional criteria for determining eligibility of fish habitat projects are found in WAC
173 -27 -040 2 (p) and apply to this exemption.
Section 42. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Water dependent" means a use or portion of a use that cannot exist in a location that is not
adjacent to the water and which is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of
its operations. Examples of water dependent uses include ship cargo terminal loading areas,
marinas, ship building and dry docking, float plane facilities, sewer outfalls, and shoreline
ecological restoration projects.
Section 43. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Water enjoyment" means a recreational use or other use that facilitates public access to the
shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use. The use must be open to the general public and
the shoreline- oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the
W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Page 8 of 9
use that fosters shoreline enjoyment. Examples of water enjoyment uses include parks, piers,
museums, restaurants, educational /scientific reserves, resorts and mixed -use projects.
Section 44. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Water oriented" means a use that is water dependent, water related or water enjoyment or
a combination of such uses.
Section 45. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"Water related" means a use or portion of a use that is not intrinsically dependent on a
waterfront location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location
because:
a. The use has a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival or
shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or
b. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water dependent uses and the
proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive and /or more convenient.
Examples of water related uses are warehousing of goods transported by water, seafood
processing plants, hydroelectric generating plants, gravel storage when transported by barge,
and log storage or oil refineries where transport is by tanker.
Section 46. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as
follows:
"WRIA" means Water Resource Inventory Area river basin planning and management
areas formalized under Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173 500 -04 and authorized
under the Water Resources Act of 1971, RCW 90.54. WRIA 9 refers to the Green /Duwamish
River Basin within which Tukwila is located.
Section 47. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of
this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 48. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage
and publication as provided by law
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc
11/20/2009
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number.
Page 9 of 9
439
440
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
1 0 LA Inztials ITEM NO.
V. Meeting Date 1 Prepared by 1 Mayor review 1 Council review, 1
O 11/23/09 I SH 1` I n/ki 1
12/07/09 1 SH 1 I v
`;'P 4 T.
29.1
ITEM INFORMATION
CAS NUMBER: 09-171 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
AGENDA ITEM TITLE An ordinance and policy regarding City cash reserves.
CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolutton Ordinance Bid Award Public Heating Other
Mtg Date 11/23/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/07/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PIV
SPONSOR'S The ordinance adds new regulations, TMC 3.34, providing for adoption by reference
SUMMARY proposed Administrative Policy No. 300 -15, Reserve Policy. The policy would provide for
cash reserves to address revenue shortfalls, unplanned expenses and mitigate the risk of
loss of uninsured claims against the City.
The Council is being asked to approve the ordinance adopting Policy 300 -15.
REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. n Planning Comm.
DATE:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Finance Department
COMMITTEE Committee Chair consent to take this item directly to COW
COST IMPACT, FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
Fund Source:
Comments:
MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
11/23/09
12/07/09
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/19/09
Ordinance in Draft Form
Administrative Policy No. 300 -15, Reserve Policy
12/07/09
AAI
442
TO:
ISSUE
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
City of Tukwila
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Rhonda Berry
Finance and Safety Committee
FROM: Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director
DATE: November 19, 2009
SUBJECT: City Reserve Policy
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
The City's Financial Policies, contained within the CIP document, specify that the City's
accumulated reserves shall not fall below $3,000,000. This amount is inadequate as a
reserve for all of the City's possible financial contingencies. This specific amount does
not provide for enough funds to address significant declines in budgeted revenue, nor is
it enough to address unexpected expenses such as flood prevention and mitigation. The
policy is not a formal legal requirement placed upon the use or preservation of ending
fund balances. Also, the policy has historically not been included in the City's biennial
budget development process.
The Financial Policies contained within the CIP document are not a legal requirement
for Council and the Mayor as the biennial budget is developed and adopted. The City
currently has no formal reserve or contingency policy. This lack of formal policy was
noted during two recent bond rating reviews. The SCORE jail facility issued bonds in
October 2009, and the Cascade Water Alliance issued bonds in August 2009. Both
bond issues included a review of Tukwila's finances and reserve policies. While the
City's existing bond rating was re- affirmed, one of the reasons why Tukwila did not
receive an upgrade in our rating was the lack of a formal reserve policy.
The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recently issued a
Recommended Practice for cities to follow titled Appropriate Level of Unrestricted Fund
Balance in the General Fund. The recommendations contained within the
Recommended Practice are incorporated into the attached draft reserve policy.
The draft reserve policy represents a comprehensive reserve policy for the major funds
of the City of Tukwila and recommends a phased approach in setting reserve levels.
One of the key components of a financially stable organization is the establishment and
maintenance of appropriate reserves and the adoption of a prudent reserve policy.
While Tukwila has a reserve objective in our Financial Policies, contained within the
443
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
CIP, it does not have a clearly delineated policy to govern decision making and fiscal
actions by Council and administration. This is essential, especially as the City works to
maintain and improve its financial standing overall, and within the bond community.
The following are objectives of the draft reserve policy:
A. Establish sound formal fiscal reserve policies. These policies will be the
foundation for ensuring that strong fiscal management and policies guide
future City decisions.
B. Build adequate reserves. This action will provide the City with resources to
help stabilize the City's finances and will position it better to address
economic downturns or large -scale emergencies. In addition, it is critical to
minimize the potential for reactive decision making which could lead to poor
choices and unpleasant consequences.
C. Guide the City toward meeting its short-term and long -term obligations and to
ensure that the City maintains the highest credit rating possible.
The draft reserve policy recommends that the City establish and maintain appropriate
reserves for the City's major funds. Adequate reserve levels would allow the City to
withstand short-term revenue and expenditure swings which can result in short-term
decisions with negative Tong -term implications, mitigate the impact of economic
downturns that result in reduced revenues from the City's major revenue sources,
respond to the budgetary affects of natural disasters or other catastrophic events,
address excessive legal exposure of the City, and demonstrate the desire to maintain
and improve its financial standing and creditworthiness to bond rating agencies and the
financial community.
The GFOA recommends that "governments establish a formal policy on the level of
unreserved fund balance that should be maintained in the general fund. GFOA also
encourages the adoption of similar policies for other types of governmental funds. Such
a guideline should be set by the appropriate policy body and should provide both a
temporal framework and specific plans for increasing or decreasing the level of
unreserved fund balance, if it is inconsistent with that policy GFOA recommends, at a
minimum, that general purpose governments, regardless of size, maintain unreserved
fund balance in their general fund of no less than five to 15 percent of regular general
fund operating revenues..." In establishing a policy governing the level of reserves in
the General Fund, a government should consider a variety of factors, including:
The predictability of its revenues and the volatility of its expenditures (i.e., a
higher level of unreserved fund balance may be needed if significant revenue
sources are subject to unpredictable fluctuations or if operating expenditures are
highly volatile).
The availability of resources in other funds as well as the potential drain upon
general fund resources from other funds (i.e., the availability of resources in other
funds may reduce the amount of unreserved fund balance needed in the general
444 W12009 InfoMemos\ReservePolicy.doc
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
fund, just as deficits in other funds may require that a higher level of unreserved
fund balance be maintained in the general fund).
Liquidity (i.e., a disparity between when financial resources actually become
available to make payments and the average maturity of related liabilities may
require that a higher level of resources be maintained).
Designations (i.e., governments may wish to maintain higher levels of unreserved
fund balance to compensate for any portion of unreserved fund balance already
designated for a specific purpose).
The goal of the draft reserve policy is to maintain a reserve between 75% and 100% of
the minimum of the targeted balances. If reserve levels fall below 75% of the minimum,
action will be required to increase the reserve over a number of years back to 100% of
the minimum targets. The policy provides for a plan to be developed that will return the
reserve to an appropriate level over a period of three to seven years, depending upon
the severity of the draw down of the reserve.
This policy also requires an annual reporting mechanism, and the review of this Policy
on a periodic basis. The annual report compares the reserves of each fund at the end of
each fiscal year to the budgeted expenditures of the current fiscal year.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to approve the attached Reserve Policy, and Ordinance
adopting the Policy.
This item is scheduled to be discussed at the November 23, 2009 Committee of the
Whole meeting and the December 7, 2009 Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENT
Draft Ordinance
Reserve Policy 300 -15
W12009 InfoMemoslReservePolicy.doc
445
446
DR 'T
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING NEW REGULATIONS REGARDING CITY
CASH RESERVES, TO BE CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 3.34, "RESERVE POLICY"; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILTTY;
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that the City of Tukwila is in need of a reserve
policy that provides resources for unplanned expenses, to offset unexpected revenue
declines and to improve the long -term financial condition of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes establishing such a reserve policy has a direct
effect upon the bond rating of the City, which could result in future decreased borrowing
costs; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined it is in the best interest of its citizens and
businesses to provide long -term financial stability, reduce reliance upon one -time cost
savings, to address unplanned economic challenges that might face the City in the future;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Regulations Established. Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 3.34, "Reserve
Policy," is hereby created to read as follows:
3.34 Reserve Policy
City Administrative Policy No. 300 -15, "Reserve Policy," attached to this ordinance as
"Exhibit A," is hereby adopted and incorporated into this chapter by reference as if fully set
forth herein. The Finance Director is required to maintain the administrative reserve policy
Changes to the policy require approval by the City Council Finance and Safety Committee.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in
the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force and effect five
days after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2009.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachment Exhibit A Reserve Policy 300
W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Cash Reserve Policy.doc
SH:ksn 11/19/2009
-15
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number
Page 1 of 1
447
448
1.0 PURPOSE:
CITY OF TUKWILA
ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL
TITLE: RESERVE POLICY
To establish a Reserve Policy for the City which is capable of addressing the
various types (categories) of the City's operating and reStritted use funds. The
objectives of this Policy are to (i) provide a clear uraderstaridjgg the goals and
objectives of reserve establishment, (ii) offer uidante and Iirr itations regarding the
establishment, use and replenishment of City reserves, and (iii)-establish a process
for periodic reporting and review of City
2.0 ORGANIZATION AFFECTED:
All City funds.
3.0 REFERENCES:
4.0 GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY:
The General Fund to accoun for all general revenues of the City not
specifically levied or colt„ acted for other City funds, and for expenditures related to
providing general services by the City. 'For.the purpose of this policy and as it
applies to the uen ral Find-only, the Cit `will establish a Contingency Reserve
Fund with, a minimumEalancetf�8%M.of annual General Fund revenues. At no time,
hoWe'VeKEShaltthe bata .ce in the Contingency Reserve Fund fall below 4% unless
,�sbecifically'waived by t1 City Council because of an unforeseen emergency.
Tie Contingencyeserve Fund shall initially be set at a minimum of 4% of annual
General Fund revenues. The City shall reach the targeted minimum of 8% no later
than-fig-cal year 2014 according to the following schedule:
29/0 by December 31, 2011
'4%o December 31, 2012
-:6% by December 31, 2013
8% by December 31, 2014
Index: 300 -15
Page 1 of 5
4.1 If actual expenditures in the General Fund are less than budgeted
expenditures, and the General Fund does not end the year at a deficit, at least
25% of the difference between budgeted and actual expenditures will revert to
the Contingency Reserve Fund and may then be re- appropriated in a
subsequent year at the discretion of the City Council.
4.2 The City will annually direct a minimum of 25% of sales tax receipts from new
construction (NAICS Industry Classification Code 23) to the Contingency
449
450
TITLE: RESERVE POLICY
Reserve Fund.
4.3 Use of Contingency Reserve Fund To the extent that there is an imbalance
in the General Fund between revenues and budgeted expenditures, City
Council and administration will strive to address the imbalance first with
revenue increases, expenditure reductions, or a combination of the two.
Use of the Contingency Reserve Fund is a one -time, non recurring funding
source. If an imbalance in the General Fund occurs that can not be addressed
with additional revenues or expenditure reductions, a 1piti -year plan shall be
developed to address the imbalance concurrently` ith the" planned reserve
draw down of the Contingency Fund. The impleltation of the replenishment
plan will be done in accordance with the gui,diiine 1 w (see
"Replenishment of Reserves A planne&dr yy dowribfabe fund's reserves
should: a) not exceed 50% of the balar a 11 -tlie ContingWey, Reserve Fund,
and b) not reduce the reserve below1070 of annual General .d revenues.
4.4 Replenishment of Reserves The Qbwing criteria will be usedla :r• store the
Contingency Reserve Fund based upcir1the remaining fund balaaice compared
to the minimum reserve guideline:
1 If the reserves aredrawn down by 25.Q% of reserve fund balance,
then a budgetary pff..all be implemi'ted to return the reserve level
to between 75% an -'100 of the minimanarance over a 5 to 7 year
period.
2. If the reserves are drain d,QWn 5:% of reserve fund balance,
theadWzbudgetary plaa th r=eserve shall be structured over
a "to 5 year period.
3. 4flibe reser a are drawn drown by 0 -10% of reserve fund balance, then
a-sojution tareplenish to at `eVit the minimum shall be structured over
a 1 tcs' ye ripe. od...
4.5. ;T A'r ta`r l.,Status'1RWpprting ani'= Periodic Review Annually, after presentation of
the Cify mprel1 sive Annual Financial Report, the Finance Director will
prepare an resent' =eta i} dated Reserve Level Status report by July 1 of the
following yeah
5.0 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE POLICY:
Index: 300 -15
Page 2 of 5
=AC least everyyfie years, the Mayor, based on advice from the Finance
Drier -,tor, will ask the City Council to reaffirm or revise this policy, including the
perceri;tagesM-established herein.
5.1. The City shall maintain a Risk Management Reserve Fund dedicated to
mitigation of the risk of loss arising from potential claims against the City for
general liability purposes as well as claims resulting from natural disasters
such as flooding and earthquakes.
5.2. The Risk Management Reserve Fund shall be set initially at a minimum of 4%
TITLE: RESERVE POLICY
of annual General Fund revenues. The City shall reach the targeted minimum
of 8% no later than fiscal year 2014 according to the following schedule:
2% by December 31, 2011
4% by December 31, 2012
6% by December 31, 2013
8% by December 31, 2014
5.3. Legal claims expenses incurred below the City's insurance deductable
amounts will be paid for out of the Risk Management Fund.
Uninsured legal claim expenses will also be deddced from the Risk
Management Reserve Fund.
5.4. Use of the Risk Management Reserve Fuiad A draw doWjLof the fund's
reserves should: a) not exceed 50% ofthe balance in thel isk Management
Reserve Fund, and b) not reduce the reserve below 4% of annual General
Fund revenues.
5.5. Replenishment of Reserves The followin wcriteria will be used to restore the
Risk Management Reserve Fund based upon =the remaining fund balance
compared to the minimur= reserve guideline
1. If the reserves are dreawn down bar 25- 50 %rofreserve fund balance,
then a budgetary planwshall,be implemented to return the reserve level
to between 75% and 100%Tof the mamum balance over a 5 to 7 year
period_
2. reservers are drawn down by 10 -25% of reserve fund balance,
ifieb,the buegetary plan toTestore the reserve shall be structured over
a 31o:a.yeaiperi.od.
If the rrserves°are40y,vra,down by 0 -10% of reserve fund balance, then
solution- `faseplenisffto at least the minimum shall be structured over
a° to 3 year: period.
The City Council may their discretion and as necessary, transfer funds
;between the Contingency Reserve Fund and the Risk Management Reserve
'F4nd. Once the:two reserve funds are fully funded up to the minimum levels
aszekablisheelwithin this policy, at no time will the combined balances of both
funds -tlr eclirie below 8% of annual General Fund revenues.
6.0 REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND POLICY:
Index: 300 -15
Page 3 of 5
6.1. The City shall maintain a Revenue Stabilization Fund dedicated to mitigating
the impact of unanticipated revenue declines.
6.2. The City shall appropriate, on an annual basis, a transfer of 1% of General
Fund revenue to the Revenue Stabilization Fund beginning with the 2011-
2012 biennial budget. The Revenue Stabilization Fund will not be utilized by
451
452
TITLE: RESERVE POLICY
6.3. In addition to the annual 1% appropriation, the City will transfer a minimum of
25% of the excess of any actual property tax or sales tax collections above the
respective budgeted amounts. Such transfer shall take place by March 31 of
the following fiscal year.
6.4. Replenishment of Reserves The following critQz be used to restore the
Revenue Stabilization Fund based upon the rernal fl g fund balance
compared to the minimum reserve guideline
1. If the reserves are drawn dowkt -by 25=50% of reseMe and balance,
then a budgetary plan shallIITimplemented to return ir eserve level
to between 75% and 100f ,1e minimum balance ove aZ`to 7 year
period.
2. If the reserves are drawn down 6",_M5% of reserve fund balance,
then the budgetary plan to restore tfi reserve shall be structured over
a 3 to 5 year perio""
3. If the reserves are d"aWii!down by 0 -10 °Io fund balance, then
a solution to replenigh to alsrdathe minirrt' rim shall be structured over
a 1 to 3 year period.
6.5. If the accarmlat di,balance in thr Revenue Stabilization Fund exceeds 10% of
annua1-neral Halt revenues, such excess shall be transferred to the
Contilipty Resei to Fund.
the City unless actual General Fund revenue is 5% or more below budgeted
revenue after six months through any given calendar year. At no point will the
balance in the Revenue Stabilization Fund decline by more than 50 unless
actual General Fund revenue is more than 20% below budgeted revenue.
7.0 ENTERPRISE FUN D :RESERVE POE10Y:
Index: 300 -15
Page 4 of 5
The Cityi l!aII mai j an adequate fund balance in each of the City's
enterprise to pt de funding for capital expenses, unanticipated
revenue dedl %rtes, and =any other unbudgeted expense. The policy applies to
The following nds:
1. WateriFund
2. Fund
3. `Siirface Water Fund
4. Foster Golf Course Fund
7.2. The City shall incorporate into its customer rate structure funding for the
establishment and maintenance of a Working Capital Reserve Fund. The
reserve balance shall be no less than 20% of the previous year operating and
capital expenses. The City shall reach the targeted minimum of 20% no later
than fiscal year 2014 according to the following schedule:
TITLE: RESERVE POLICY
5% by December 31, 2011
10% by December 31, 2012
15% by December 31, 2013
20% by December 31, 2014
7.3. Use of the Working Capital Reserve Fund A draw down of the fund's
reserves should: a) not exceed 50% of the balance in the Working Capital
Reserve Fund, and b) not reduce the reserve below 10% of annual operating
and capital expenditures within each fund.
7.4. Replenishment of Reserves The following criteriawill be used to restore the
Working Capital Reserve Fund based upon theµreh:aining fund balance
compared to the minimum reserve guidelind:
Title:
RESERVE POLICY
Effective Date:
12/11/09 N/A
Index: 300 -15
Page 5 of 5
1. If the reserves are drawn down by 25-50% of reserve and balance,
then a budgetary plan shall, be implemented to return=tfaa.reserve level
to between 75% and 1 00% of "fhe minimum balance overa=5 to 7 year
period.
2. If the reserves are drawn down byy3=Y25% of reserve fund balance,
then the budgetary plan to restore tF reserve shall be structured over
a 3 to 5 year period:
3. If the reserves are dIaaivfi own by 0 -10(E reaerve fund balance, then
a solution to replenish to ate: east the minimum shall be structured over
a 1 to 3 year period.
7.5. The Workiit'eapjtal Reserve fund shall beThaintained within each of the
Enterprige Funds =.but shall be separate from the accumulated fund balance
within eac1 Jund.
Initiating Department:
Finance Department
Supercedes: Mayor's Office Approval Signature:
453
454
30th (Monday) 1st (Tuesday)
Chamber of
Commerce
Gov't.
Community
Affairs Cmte.,
12:00 NOON
Chamber
Office)
23rd (Monday) 24th (Tuesday) 25th (Wednesday)
Community Utilities Cmte, COPCAR
Affairs Parks 5:00 PM RESCHEDULED
Cmte, (CR #1) TO DEC. 9TH
5 00 PM
(CR #3)
City Council
Committee of
the Whole Mtg.,
7:00 PM
(Council
Chambers)
C.O.W TO BE
IMMEDIATELY
FOLLOWED BY
A SPECIAL
MEETING
Upcoming Meetings Events
NOVEMBER DECEMBER 2009
Arts
Commission,
5.30 PM
(Community
Center)
Court
2nd (Wednesday)
Sister City
Cmte,
5.30 PM
(CR #3)
26th (Thursday)
Thanksgiving
Day
City offices closed
;tea.
3rd (Thursday)
Equity
Diversity
Commission,
515 PM
(CR #3)
Court
27th (Friday)
City offices closed
4th (Friday)
Human Services
Providers,
11.30 AM
(Community
Center)
28th (Saturday)
Tukwila Int'l. Blvd.
Action Cmtc's
Try Day
[TRASH PICKUP DAY
WAS HELD
NOVEMBER 14TH)
5th (Saturday)
Winterfest
2:00 to 5:00 PM
Community Center
Enjoy live holiday
entertainment from
our local schools,
winter arts and crafts,
refreshments, lighting
of the tree (5:00 PM)
and the arrival of
Santa Claus.
Children can sit on
Santa's lap (photo
available for a fee).
Guests are
encouraged to
bring a can offood
to help support the
Tukwila Pantry.
Arts Commission: 1st Tues., 5.30 PM, Tukwila Community Center Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2341.
Chamber of Commerce's Tukwila Government and Community Affairs Committee: 1st Tues., 12:00 Noon, Chamber Offices.
Contact Nancy Damon at 206 -575 -1633.
City Council Committee of Whole (C.O.W.) Meeting: 2nd 4th Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall.
A City Council Regular Meeting: 1st 3rd Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall.
Community Affairs Parks Committee: 2nd 4th Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3. Agenda items for 11/23/09 meeting: (A)
Interlocal agreement for the Minor Home Repair Program. (B) Parks and Recreation 2010 fee increase. (C) 2009 3rd quarter report.
COPCAB (Community Oriented Policing Citizens Adv. Board): 4th Wed., 6:30 PM, Conf. Rm #5. Phi Huynh (206 -433- 7175).
Equity Diversity Commission: 1st Thurs., 5 15 PM, Conf. Room #3. Contact Kimberly Matej at 206 433 -1834.
Finance Safety Committee: 1st 3rd Tues., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3
>Human Services Advisory Brd: 2nd Fri. of even months, 10:00 AM, Human Services Office. Contact Evie Boykan at 206 -433 -7180.
Human Services Providers: Quarterly, 11.30 AM, TCC (2009 3/20, 6/19, 9/18, and 1214). Contact Stacy Hansen at 206 433 -7181
Library Advisory Board: 3rd Wed., 7:00 PM, Foster Library Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342.
Parks Commission: 3rd Wed., 5.30 PM, Senior Game Room at Community Center Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206 767 -2342.
Planning Commission/Board of Architectural Review: 4th Thurs., except 2nd Thursday in Nov Dec., 7:00 PM,
Council Chambers at City Hall. Contact Wynetta Bivens at 206 -431 -3670.
Sister City Committee: 1st Wed., 5.30 PM, Conf. Room #3. Contact Bev Will/son at 206 -433 -1844.
Transportation Committee: 1st 3rd Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #1
Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 PM (meeting location varies). Contact Pat Brodin at 206 -433 -1860.
➢Tukwila Int'I. Blvd. Action Cmte: 2nd Tues., 7:00 PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Chief Dave Haynes at 206 -433 -1812.
Utilities Committee: 2nd 4th Tues., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #1 Agenda items for 11/24/09 meeting: (A) Interurban Ave. S. Water-
line Project project completion and acceptance. (B) Standby Power Upgrades Year 1 project completion and acceptance.
(C) Records Center Shelving Contract project completion and acceptance. (D) Sewer excise tax refund front the State Department of
Revenue. (E) 2009 3rd quarter report.
Court Busy Court and /or Jury Calendar (noted to alert employees and citizens of potential parking difficulty).
455
456
Tentative Agenda Schedule
MONTH
November 2
11th Veterans Day
(City offices closed)
26t Thanksgiving
(City offices closed)
27th —Day after
Thanksgiving
(City offices closed)
30th
Fifth Monday of the
month —no Council
meeting scheduled
December
25th Christmas
(City offices closed)
7
MEETING 1-
REGULAR
Special Presentation:
Recycler of the Year
Unfinished Business:
Ordinance amending
Ordinance No. 2221,
which adopted the 2009-
2010 biennial budget
Resolution adopting the
2010 -2015 Financial
Planning Model and CIP
Authorize Mayor to sign
contracts for Seattle
Southside Visitors Center
website redesign
Authorize Mayor to sign
a contract for Seattle
Southside Visitors Center
vacation planner
redesign
Authorize Mayor to sign
an interlocal agreement
with King County for
provision of services
provided by the Road
Services Division
Ordinance adopting all
King County zoning,
land use, shoreline and
other development
regulations for any work
related to the South Park
Bridge
Authorize Mayor to sign
an amendment to
contract #06 -059 with
Commercial Develop-
ment Solutions for 2010
project management
services
Shoreline Master
Program ordinances
(discussion only)
MEETING 2 MEETING 3 MEETING 4
C.O.W. REGULAR C.O.W.
9 16
14 21
Special Presentation:
Presentation of
official Honorary
DARE Officer
proclamation to
Jamie Kurfman
Special Issues:
Resolution to
finalize Tukwila
South annexation
Shoreline Master
Program
ordinances
COMMITTEE OF THE
WHOLE MEETING TO
BE FOLLOWED BY A
SPECIAL MEETING
SPECIAL MEETING
Unfinished Business:
Resolution to
finalize Tukwila
South annexation
Shoreline Master
Program
ordinances
23
See agenda packet
cover sheet for this
week's agenda
(November 23, 2009
Committee of the Whole
Meeting)
28