Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREG 2019-09-03 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETTukwila City Council Agenda •.�i .�i REGULAR MEETING . �J,-� 11-A w, ti o �z 4� o ''',r _ Allan Ekberg, Mayor Counci/members: ❖ Dennis Robertson + Verna Seal David Cline, CityAdministrator + De'Sean Quinn + Kate Kruller Kathy Hougardy, Council President ❖ Thomas McLeod ❖ Zak Idan 19oa Tuesday, September 3, 2019; 7:00 PM • Ord #2613 • Res #1965 1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / ROLL CALL 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda (please limit your comments to five minutes per person). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. (Refer to back of agenda page for additional information.) 3. CONSENT AGENDA a. Approval of Minutes: 8/5/19 (Regular Mtg.); 8/19/19 (Regular Mtg.) b. Approval of Vouchers c. Applications for lodging tax funds: (1) Approve an application for lodging tax funds from the City of Tukwila for the Seattle Sports Commission (SSC) 2020 Region Ready Conference, in the amount of $5,000.00 (2) Approve an application for lodging tax funds from the City of Tukwila for an International Food Truck Rally 2.0, in the amount of $10,000.00. [Reviewed and forwarded to Consent by the Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee on 8/27/19.1 d. A resolution adopting the 2019 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for the King County Solid Waste System. [Reviewed and forwarded to Consent by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on 8/20/191 e. Authorize the purchase of golf carts for the Cart Replacement Program, in an amount not to exceed $50,000. [Reviewed and forwarded to Consent by the Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee on 8/27/191 Pg.1 Pg.19 Pg.61 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Discussion on ordinances updating the Shoreline Master Program: ). Please bring your binder (distributed separately). Q (1) (Discussion only) on an ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 2344; repealing the 2011 Shoreline Master Program; and approving and adopting a new Shoreline Master Program update for the City of Tukwila to incorporate new state requirements. (2) (Discussion only) on an ordinance repealing various definitions as codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, "Definitions"; repealing Ordinance Nos. 2346 and 2549 §23; reenacting TMC Chapter 18.44, "Shoreline Overlay," to establish new regulations related to shoreline uses; amending various ordinances as codified in TMC Sections 18.52.030, 18.60.050 and 18.104.010 to update zoning regulations related to shoreline uses. b. Authorize the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Agreement with the City of SeaTac for Justice Center frontage. Pg.73 pg.87 pg.159 Pg.223 (continued...) REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, September 3, 2019 Page 2 5. NEW BUSINESS A resolution restating the City's commitment to being diverse, tolerant and inclusive. Pg.229 6. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff - City Administrator Report and Monthly Public Safety Plan update d. City Attorney e. Council Analyst Pg.235 7. MISCELLANEOUS 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION — Collective Bargaining — Pursuant to RCW 42.30.140(4)(a) — 30 minutes 9. ADJOURNMENT Reasonable City Clerk's Office www.tukwilawa.gov, Tukwila City Hall is ADA accessible. accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the (206-433-1800 or TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaWA.gov). This agenda is available at and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio/video taped (available at www.tukwilawa.gov) HOW TO TESTIFY When recognized by the Presiding Officer to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic rules of courtesy when speaking and limit your comments to 5 minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens and members of the public, and may not be able to answer questions or respond during the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS Members of the public are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are NOT included on the agenda during PUBLIC COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. If you have a comment on an Agenda item, please wait until that item comes up for discussion to speak on that topic. SPECIAL MEETINGS/EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters as prescribed by law. Executive Sessions are not open to the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2.04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: 1. The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Members of the public who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at that time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings - The Mayor, elected by the people to a four-year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. and Special Meetings. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular or Special Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings - Councilmembers are elected for a four-year term. The Council President is elected by the Councilmembers to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one-year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed there are forwarded to Regular or Special Council meetings for official action. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Ixilialr ;llcctinr Date Preparrd b N irlor'o reP/SIP Council mien 09/03/19 BJM ., r._c/.., Ki iL ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. S•r \ITT Si )NS{ IN: B. MILES i ORIGIN 1I, AGI•:\Ii\ DATE: 9/3/19 •\(1l:\I) 1 I I i:N: Tl rl,L Review of Lodging Tax Funding Requests. Alolion Date 2/4/19 ❑ l:esolklioi lltg Dale ❑ Bi I l iirri Allg Dais ❑ Ptib/c I lean. 17, All, Dale ❑ O16er ,l fig Date C:vi i.t;ORY II Discussion Or Ordinance dltg Dale MI:g Altg Date Sht)Nst)lt ❑Collniil ❑lIR ❑DCI7 ❑hiltcrti e ❑Fire ❑TV ❑P&R ❑Police ❑Pir ❑Colrit Alrpor Si'ONst)tz's Review of two lodging tax funding requests from the City of Tukwila. Application #1 for, SuMMM-\lv $5,000, is to sponsor the "Region Ready Conference" hosted by the Seattle Sports Commission in 2020. Application #2, for $10,000, is to sponsor and support another "Food Truck Rally" with Westfield Southcenter before the end of 2019. The City's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee considered both request and recommends approval. Ri;viiA i n BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. ❑ Trans &Infrast.ructure DATE: 8/27/19 ' CDN Comm ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Public Safety Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COMMT•C[E CHAIR: QUINN ❑ Arts Comm. RECOMMENDATIONS: Si (.)NS()lt/.-ADMIN. COMNII•ITICI: Mayor's Office/Economic Development Unanimous Approval; Forward to Consent Agenda COST IMPACT/ FUND SOURCE F\I'I:Nori liRI? RI;vikim AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $15,000 $840,000 $N/A Fund Source: 101 FUND, LODGING TAX Comments: State Law limits the use of these funds for tourism promotion. MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 09/03/19 MTG. DATE i ATTACHMENTS 09/03/19 Informational Memorandum dated August 20, 2019 Lodging Tax Application, SSC Region Ready Conference Lodging Tax Application, International Food Truck Rally 2.0 Minutes from the 8/27 CDN Committee Meeting 1 2 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development and Neighborhoods FROM: Brandon Miles, Business Relations Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 20, 2019 SUBJECT: 2019 Lodging Tax Funding Request SSC Region Ready Conference and International Food Truck Rally 2.0 ISSUE Review of a lodging tax funding request from the City of Tukwila (the "City") to sponsor the 2020 Seattle Sports Commission Region Ready Conference and a request by the City to sponsor a Food Truck Rally in September. BACKGROUND The City collects a 1% lodging tax on certain qualifying overnight stays in paid accommodations (hotels/motels/Airbnb) in the City. State law limits the use of these funds to tourism promotion'. There is currently just over $1 million in lodging tax funds available for use. The City's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) reviews all requests, even by the City, for use of lodging tax funds. LTAC then forwards a list of recommended applications to the City Council for its review and consideration. If LTAC does not recommend an application be funded, that application is not forwarded to the City Council. The City Council may approve or deny any of the applications recommended by the LTAC. The City Council may also approve an application and increase or decrease the dollar amount awarded2. The City accepts applications on a rolling basis, with the LTAC reviewing requests monthly. 1 RCW 67.28.080 (6) defines "tourism promotion" as "...activities, operations, and expenditures designed to increase tourism, including but not limited to advertising, publicizing, or otherwise distributing information for the purpose of attracting and welcoming tourists; developing strategies to expand tourism; operating tourism promotion agencies; and funding the marketing of or the operation of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists." 2 On August 17, 2016, the Washington State Attorney General's Office issued an informal opinion regarding whether a municipality could change the dollar amounts recommended by the local lodging tax advisory committee. Specifically, the informal opinion states: "When awarding lodging tax revenues pursuant to RCW 67.28.1816(2)(b)(ii), a municipality may award amounts different from the local lodging tax advisory committee's recommended amounts, but only after satisfying the procedural requirements of RCW 67.28.1817(2), according to which the municipality must submit its proposed change to the advisory committee for review and comment at least forty-five days before final action on the proposal." 3 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Pending Applications Following its July 23 and August 27 meetings, LTAC has forward the following two applications from the City of Tukwila to the City Council. LTAC recommends the applications be funded. 1. City of Tukwila, Seattle Sports Commission (SSC) 2020 Regional Ready Conference ($5,000) In January 2020 the Seattle Sports Commission, which is part of Visit Seattle, is hoping to bring the annual "Region Ready" Conference to the Hyatt in Renton. The Conference brings together leaders in the sports, hospitality, and government leaders to discuss issues with bringing in large events, such as a Super Bowl, World Cup, and/or Major League All -Star Game to the Puget Sound region. This is the 2nd year the event has been held. The 2019, event was held at the Hyatt Regency in Downtown Seattle. The conference brings in civic and business leaders to discuss how the region could host large sporting events, such as a Super Bowl, World Cup, or MLB All -Star Game. While this conference is not in Tukwila, it provides the City with a great branding and business development opportunity. The City is seen as a jurisdiction welcoming large events. 2. City of Tukwila, International Food Truck Rally 2.0 ($10,000) Note, LTAC is considering the funding request in the afternoon on August 27, prior to the CDN meeting. Should LTAC not recommend approval this application will be pulled from the evenings CDN agenda. In July, with LTAC funds, the City sponsored its first food truck rally in partnership with Westfield Southcenter and Culinex. Westfield Southcenter has expressed a desire to do one more event before Fall. There were many positive remarks from the July event and the July event was great proof of concept for the City, Westfield and Culinex. Lessons were learned from the event and the City and Westfield have ideas on how to make the next event even better. The date is tentatively scheduled for September 22 (subject to change), which would be the same day as the Rave Green Run. These two events occurring at the same time would provide great visitor experience for people in the Southcenter District. The funds will be allocated to a sponsorship agreement ($7,500) with Westfield Southcenter to support the operations and marketing of the event and additional funds for the City ($2,500) for marketing and the creation of banners for the event. The banners would not be date specific so that they could be used at future events. FINANCIAL IMPACT The total amount of funding requested from the lodging tax fund is $15,000. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the funding request, as recommended by LTAC. Staff suggests that the application be placed on September 3 consent agenda. ATTACHMENTS A. City of Tukwila LTAC Application, SSC Region Ready Conference 4 B. City of Tukwila LTAC Application, Food Truck Rally 2.0 Application to the City of Tukwila for Use of 2019 Lodging Tax Funds Updated after LTAC meeting to correct some incorrect information. The updated information was verbally communicated to LTAC at the July 23 meeting. Event or Activity Name (if applicable): City of Tukwila, 2020 Region Ready Conference Amount of Lodging Tax Requested: $5,000 Applicant Organization: City of Tukwila, Mayor's Office Federal Tax ID Number: 91-6001519 Mailing Address: 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Primary Contact Name: Brandon J. Miles Primary Contact Phone: (206) 431-3684 Primary Contact Email Address: Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov Check all the service categories that apply to this application: ✓ Tourism promotion or marketing. ✓ Operation of a special event or festival designed to attract tourists. ✓ Operation of a tourism -related facility owned or operated by a non-profit organization. Operation and/or capital costs of a tourism -related facility owned by a municipality or a public facilities district. Check which one of the following applies to your agency: Non -Profit (Note: Attach a copy of your current non-profit corporate registration from the Washington Secretary of State Office) ✓ Municipality I am an authorized agent of the organization/agency applying for funding. I understand that: • I am proposing a tourism -related service for 2019. If awarded, my organization intends to enter into a services contract with the City; provide liability insurance for the duration of the contract naming the City as additional insured and in an amount determined by the City; and file for a permit for use of City property, if applicable. • My agency will be required to submit a report documenting economic impact results in a format determined by the City. Signature: Printed Name Date: 5 1) Describe your tourism -related activity or event. In January 2020 the Seattle Sports Commission (SSC), which is part of Visit Seattle, is hoping to bring the annual "Region Ready" Conference to the Hyatt in Renton. The Conference brings together leaders in the sports, hospitality, and government leaders to discuss issues with bringing in large events, such as a Super Bowl, World Cup, and/or Major League All -Star Game to the Puget Sound region. This is the 2nd year the event has been held. The 2019, event was held at the Hyatt Regency in Downtown Seattle. 2) If an event, list the event name, date(s), and projected overall attendance. January 2020, with an estimated attendance of 200 2,000. 3) Is your event/activity/facility focusing on attracting overnight tourists, day tourists, or both? Both. 4) Describe why visitors will travel to Tukwila to attend your event/activity/facility. This particular event is about helping Visit Seattle host a regional event in the south end. It's unlikely that this particular event will draw a considerable number of visitors to Tukwila. However, the overall goal of this conference is to build regional capacity for hosting large events, such as a Super Bowl or World Cup games. These events would have a considerable impact on Tukwila should the eventually be held in Seattle. 5) Describe the geographic target of the visitors you hope to attract (locally, regionally, nationally, and/or internationally). Regional conference. 6) Describe the prior success of your event/activity/facility in attracting tourists 2020 will be the 2nd holding of the event. The first year was 2019, with about 1,500 people attending the event in Seattle. The 2019 event includes executive suite representatives from each of the major sports franchisees in Seattle and a keynote speech from Bob Stanton, majority owners of the Mariners. Visit Seattle has extensive experience hosting events. This will event will be a draw for people within Seattle and Bellevue. 7) If this your first time holding the event/activity/facility provide background on why you think it will be successful. No, SSC hosted the event last year and it was well received. 6 8) Describe the media strategy you employ to promote your event/activity/facility to attract overnight and/or day tourists? Please list any digital or print media (newsletters, e-blasts, social media, etc.) your agency uses or intends to use to promote your event/activity/facility. Visit Seattle and SSC has an extensive background in hosting events. Visit Seattle and SSC uses social media and direct emails to promote the 2019 event. 9) Describe how you will promote lodging establishments, restaurants, retailers, and entertainment establishments in the City of Tukwila. N/A 10) Is the City able to use your digital and print media for collaborative marketing? The City will be considered as sponsor for the 2020 event and will be promoted on such by SSC for the event. 11) Describe how you will use the name, "Tukwila" in publications, promotions, and for your event? Tukwila will be considered a sponsor of the event. Again, this will event will be held in Renton, but Tukwila will be a main sponsor. 12) Measurements and Metrics (Note: You will be required to report these metrics as part of the close out of the agreement between your organization and the City.) As a direct result of your proposed tourism -related service, provide an estimate of: a. Overall attendance at your proposed event/activity/facility. 2000 b. Number of people who will travel fewer than 50 miles for your event/activity. 1800 c. Number of people who will travel more than 50 miles for your event/activity. 209 d. Of the people who travel more than 50 miles, the number of people who will travel from another country or state. 0 e. Of the people who travel more than 50 miles, the number of people who will stay overnight in Tukwila. 0 f. Of the people staying overnight, the number of people who will stay in PAID accommodations (hotel/motel/bed-breakfast) in Tukwila. 0 7 g. Number of paid lodging room nights resulting from your proposed event/ activity/facility (for example: 25 paid rooms on Friday and 50 paid rooms on Saturday = 75 paid lodging room nights) 0 13) What methodologies did you use to calculate the estimates and what methodologies will you use to track outcomes, such as total participants, estimated visitor spending, etc? These are estimates based on similar type events in the area. This event is not likely to generate hotel stays. This event is about supporting create the framework for the area to be able to host large sporting events. This large sporting events would have a considerable impact on generating heads in beds and feet on the streets. 14) Are you applying for lodging tax funds from another community? If so, which communities and in what amounts? Tukwila is not. SSC and Visit Seattle may apply for funds from the City of Renton. 15) Are you applying funding from Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority (SSRTA)? If so, in what amount? This would be up to Visit Seattle. 16) What is the overall budget for your event/activity/facility? What percent of the budget are you requesting from the City of Tukwila? N/A. Tukwila is only being asked to be a sponsor for the event. 17) What will you cut from your proposal or do differently if full funding for your request is not available or recommended? The event will not likely be moved elsewhere of Tukwila does not host. This event is a great opportunity for the Tukwila to promote itself to industry leaders in the sporting field. Applications are considered on a rolling basis. Please contact staff to discuss the process for having the application reviewed by the City's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Completed applications should be submitted to: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee c/o Brandon Miles City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 8 Or, Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov Questions? LTAC Contact: Brandon J. Miles (206) 431-3684 Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov. Updated: March 21, 2017 9 10 Application to the City of Tukwila for Use of 2019 Lodging Tax Funds Event or Activity Name (if applicable): City of Tukwila„ International Food Truck Rally 2.0 Amount of Lodging Tax Requested: $10,000 Applicant Organization: City of Tukwila, Mayor's Office Federal Tax ID Number: 91-6001519 Mailing Address: 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Primary Contact Name: Brandon J. Miles Primary Contact Phone: (206) 431-3684 Primary Contact Email Address: Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov Check all the service categories that apply to this application: ✓ Tourism promotion or marketing. ✓ Operation of a special event or festival designed to attract tourists. ✓ Operation of a tourism -related facility owned or operated by a non-profit organization. Operation and/or capital costs of a tourism -related facility owned by a municipality or a public facilities district. Check which one of the following applies to your agency: Non -Profit (Note: Attach a copy of your current non-profit corporate registration from the Washington Secretary of State Office) ✓ Municipality I am an authorized agent of the organization/agency applying for funding. I understand that: • I am proposing a tourism -related service for 2019. If awarded, my organization intends to enter into a services contract with the City; provide liability insurance for the duration of the contract naming the City as additional insured and in an amount determined by the City; and file for a permit for use of City property, if applicable. • My agency will be required to submit a report documenting economic impact results in a format determined by the City. Signature: Printed Name Date: 11 1) Describe your tourism -related activity or event. International Food Truck Rally 2.0, tentatively scheduled for September of 2019. This event will celebrate the City's diversity and cultural with food trucks with foods and goodies from around the world. In July, in partnership with Westfield Southcenter and Culinex, the City sponsored its first food truck rally. Everyone agrees the initial food truck rally in July was a huge success. The City and Westfield Southcenter would like to do one more event in 2019 to build off the momentum. The City and Westfield are working to have Food Truck Rally 2.0 on the same day as the Sounder 5K race. This would provide a great day of events and activities focused in the Southcenter District. 2) If an event, list the event name, date(s), and projected overall attendance. Several hundred people attended the first event, with total food truck sales of about $30,000. Unfortunately, there was no counter at the gate to be able to track attendance. Weather permitting, we are hoping for 1,500 attendees and $50,000 in food truck sales. Combining the event with the Rave Green Run should help drive attendance. 3) Is your event/activity/facility focusing on attracting overnight tourists, day tourists, or both? The event is about building the overall tourism destination of Tukwila. The event will be marketed at people within 20 miles of the City and existing hotel guest in the City. The event is consistent with the adopted brand guidelines and recommendations prepared by Bill Baker. One of the recommendations was for the City to create events and activities that promote the City's multi -ethnic and diverse population. 4) Describe why visitors will travel to Tukwila to attend your event/activity/facility. Tukwila is conveniently located at the intersections of 1-405 and I-5. Over 150,000 people come to the City every day to work, play, and stay. This event will cater to the people in South King County. At the July event the City did hear from several people who traveled more than 50 miles just to attend the event. Additionally, the event will be at Westfield Southcenter, the largest mall in the Pacific NW. Having the event at the mall will help draw more people to the activities. 5) Describe the geographic target of the visitors you hope to attract (locally, regionally, nationally, and/or internationally). Within 20 miles of the City and people staying at area hotels. Additionally, the event may occur on the same day as the Rave Green run, which will help draw more people to the event. 6) Describe the prior success of your event/activity/facility in attracting tourists 12 The City sponsored this same event in July, and it was well received by all involved. The City and Westfield learned from the event and will take the lessons learned to put on an improved event. Some things we are looking at for the September event: 1. Music. 2. Beer Garden (City funds will not be used for a beer garden). 3. Tents 4. Expanded games and activities. 7) If this your first time holding the event/activity/facility provide background on why you think it will be successful. No, this will the 2nd time the City has sponsored the food truck rally. The first event, held in July, was successful, despite limited promotion of the event. 8) Describe the media strategy you employ to promote your event/activity/facility to attract overnight and/or day tourists? Please list any digital or print media (newsletters, e-blasts, social media, etc.) your agency uses or intends to use to promote your event/activity/facility. • Digital promotion by the City's partners. • Cross promotion by the Sounders and Westfield Southcenter • Digital Displays in the Mall. • Paid Social Media Posts 9) Describe how you will promote lodging establishments, restaurants, retailers, and entertainment establishments in the City of Tukwila. This event will cater to food trucks that work within and near Tukwila. 10) Is the City able to use your digital and print media for collaborative marketing? N/A 11) Describe how you will use the name, "Tukwila" in publications, promotions, and for your event? Tukwila will be in the name of the event and the location will be marked as being in Tukwila. 12) Measurements and Metrics (Note: You will be required to report these metrics as part of the close out of the agreement between your organization and the City.) As a direct result of your proposed tourism -related service, provide an estimate of: a. Overall attendance at your proposed event/activity/facility. 1,500 13 b. Number of people who will travel fewer than 50 miles for your event/activity. 1,400 (does not include people staying at area hotels that might attend). c. Number of people who will travel more than 50 miles for your event/activity. 100 d. Of the people who travel more than 50 miles, the number of people who will travel from another country or state. 0 e. Of the people who travel more than 50 miles, the number of people who will stay overnight in Tukwila. 0 f. Of the people staying overnight, the number of people who will stay in PAID accommodations (hotel/motel/bed-breakfast) in Tukwila. 0 g. Number of paid lodging room nights resulting from your proposed event/ activity/facility (for example: 25 paid rooms on Friday and 50 paid rooms on Saturday = 75 paid lodging room nights) 0 13) What methodologies did you use to calculate the estimates and what methodologies will you use to track outcomes, such as total participants, estimated visitor spending, etc? Based upon the estimated attendances at the July Food Truck Rally 14) Are you applying for lodging tax funds from another community? If so, which communities and in what amounts? No. No. 15) Are you applying funding from Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority (SSRTA)? If so, in what amount? 16) What is the overall budget for your event/activity/facility? What percent of the budget are you requesting from the City of Tukwila? 14 Total request is $10,000. Budget is $7,500 to sponsor the event and would be paid to Westfield. This would cover actual marketing and operational costs for the event. The City would retain $2,500 to help promote the event and to purchase banners for the event. The banners would not be date a specific and could be used for other food truck events. 17) What will you cut from your proposal or do differently if full funding for your request is not available or recommended? The event will not occur if the City does not sponsor the event. Applications are considered on a rolling basis. Please contact staff to discuss the process for having the application reviewed by the City's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Completed applications should be submitted to: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee c/o Brandon Miles City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Or, Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov Questions? LTAC Contact: Brandon J. Miles (206) 431-3684 Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov. Updated: March 21, 2017 15 DRAFT City of Tukwila International Food Truck Roundup 2.0 2019 Scope of Services As outlined the budget above, funds will be used for an International Food Truck Roundup. Funds will be used as followed: 1. Support marketing and advertising for the event; 2. Support for event's operation; and 3. Other costs needed for the event to occur. 4. Design and production of banners for the event. Note, the expectation is that other third parties will provide in -kind and/or cash support for the event and the event's marketing. 16 City of Tukwila City Council Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes August 27, 2019 - 5:30 p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers: De'Sean Quinn, Chair; Kathy Hougardy, Verna Seal Staff: David Cline, Minnie Dhaliwal, Jack Pace, Derek Speck, Craig Zellerhoff, Rick Still, Warren Orr, Laurel Humphrey, Meredith Sampson Guest: Patience Malaba, Housing Development Consortium CALL TO ORDER: Chair Quinn called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS II. BUSINESS AGENDA Consensus existed to postpone item C, Board and Commission Appointment Process, until the next meeting. A. Lodging Tax Applications Staff is seeking Council approval of two applications from the City of Tukwila for lodging tax funds: $5,000 for the Seattle Sports Commission's 2020 Region Ready Conference and $10,000 for an International Food Truck Rally 2.0. Funds will be sued for sponsorship of these events and received approval of the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO SEPTEMBER 3, 2019 REGULAR CONSENT AGENDA. B. Ordinance & Resolution: House Bill 1406 Staff is seeking Council approval of legislation that will authorize retention of a portion of sales tax revenue to be used toward local investments in affordable housing, pursuant to House Bill 1406 approved in the 2019 legislative session. HB 1406 provides local governments a mechanism to address affordable housing serving those at or below 60% of area median income, with revenue available for: acquiring, rehabilitating or constructing affordable housing, operations and maintenance of new or supportive housing, or rental assistance for tenants. To begin collecting the revenue, the City Council must pass a resolution of intent, adopt an ordinance, and notify the Department of Revenue. Tukwila's expected revenue without a qualifying tax is $162,046, and approximately $324,093 with a qualifying tax (i.e. affordable housing levy, sales and use tax for housing and related services, sales tax for chemical dependency and mental health). The legislation prepared by staff will allow the City to move forward with the process and does not presume any decisions about the use of the funds. Councilmember Seal noted that she serves on the South King Housing & Homelessness Partners Executive Board, and discussions there are focused on the member cities pooling their HB 1406 revenues toward collective solutions. 17 18 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeteic Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council r Jim 09/03/19 HK AlWiC i q( ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. STAFF SPONSOR: HENRY HASH ORIGIN.\I, AGENDA D;\ l r:: 09/03/19 AGr:ND,\ I i i•: i Trri.I; Resolution to Adopt King County's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan CA` t (;(.)RY ❑ Discussion .Dtg Date ❑ Motion AN Date ® Resolution MtgDate 09/03/19 ❑ Ordinance Altg Date ❑ Bid_ ward A1tg Date ❑ Public Ffearitzg dltg Date ❑ Other _ .kg Date Si)()NSOR ['Council ❑Mayor ❑tIR ❑DCD ['Finance Fire ❑7S .P&R. ❑Police Al PIE Court SP()Ns()R's King County is required to periodically update their Comprehensive Solid Waste Sl'M1I:\RY Management Plan. The 2019 Plan presents strategies for managing King County's solid waste and this update includes; increasing recycling, modernizing facilities, and maximizing the capacity within our existing landfill footprint. Staff recommends Option 2 and Council is being asked to approve the Resolution adopting the King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. REVIEWED 1iY • C.O.1X'. Mtg. ❑ CDN Comm ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Public Safety Comm. ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COMMITTEE. CI -LAIR: ZAK IDAN El 'Trans &Infrastructure DATE: 08/20/19 RECOMMENDATIONS: Sr()NsoR/ADMIN. CUM:\I1I Public Works I 1 E Unanimous Approval of Option 2; Forward to Regular Consent COST IMPACT 1 FUND SOURCE r \PI:NDII I'RI? REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: N/A Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 09/03/19 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 09/03/19 Informational Memorandum dated 08/16/19 Resolution King County Solid Waste Division Comp Plan PowerPoint Presentation Minutes from the Transportation and Infrastructure meeting 08/20/19 19 20 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Public Works Department - Henry Hash, Director INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee FROM: Henry Hash, Public Works Director ',y- BY: Hari Ponnekanti, City Engineer CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 16, 2019 SUBJECT: King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan Resolution ISSUE Resolution adopting King County's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. BACKGROUND King County is required to update their Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan periodically. The Plan presents strategies for managing King County's solid waste and recycling over the next six years, with consideration for the next 20 years. King County staff provided a PowerPoint presentation to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on June 18, 2019. The Plan is approved if it is approved by cities representing greater than 75% of the population of cities that act within 120 days. DISCUSSION County staff has engaged in a collaborative process and involved the City during the development of the plan. There are no outstanding issues or concerns with this plan from the City staff. Attachment 2 provides a summary of the final Comprehensive Solid Waste Management plan. Key elements include: • The plan presents goals to increase recycling in our area. • The Plan also identifies modernizing facilities to benefit customers' experience and increase equitable service levels. • The updated Plan also provides details to maximize capacity within our existing landfill footprint to better manage waste locally. City has a choice of three options: • Option 1 is to non -concur with the Plan and submit a "no" vote to King County. • Option 2 is to adopt the Plan which requires City Council to pass a Resolution. • Option 3 is to take no action. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to choose from the above three option regarding King County's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and consider this item on the Consent Agenda at the September 3, 2019 Regular Meeting. Attachments: Resolution King County Solid Waste Division Comp Plan PowerPoint Presentation W:\PW Eng\OTHER\Cyndy Knighton\TIC Agenda Items\8-20-19\KC Solid Waste\INFO MEMO KC Solid Waste.docx 21 22 Ci of Tul ila Washington Resolution No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2019 COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the purpose of the 2019 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (the "2019 Plan") is to plan for solid waste and materials reduction, collection, handling, and management services and programs in the geographic area for which King County has comprehensive planning authority for solid waste management by law or by interlocal agreement, or both; and WHEREAS, the 2019 Plan was prepared in accordance with RCW 70.95.080, which requires that each county within the state, in cooperation with the various cities located within such county, prepare and periodically update a coordinated, comprehensive solid waste management plan; and WHEREAS, King County and all cities in King County except Seattle and Milton have executed the 2013 Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement ("the Interlocal Agreement"); and under the Interlocal Agreement, King County serves as the planning authority for solid waste; and WHEREAS, King County worked with city representatives serving on the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee to develop the 2019 Plan; and WHEREAS, the 2019 Plan updates and replaces the 2001 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 2019, the King County Regional Policy Committee, acting as the Metropolitan King County Council Solid Waste Interlocal Forum, recommended adoption of King County Ordinance 18893 for approval of the 2019 Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2019, the Metropolitan King County Council adopted Ordinance 18893, which approved the 2019 Plan; and W:\Legislative Development\Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan adopted 8-13-19 HP:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 2 23 WHEREAS, the Interlocal Agreement sets a 120-day period for cities to take action on the 2019 Plan; and the 2019 Plan cannot receive final approval unless cities representing at least 75 percent of the incorporated population of the cities that take action in the 120-day period approve the Plan; and the 120-day period runs from receipt by a city of the Plan recommended by the Regional Policy Committee and approved by the Metropolitan King County Council; and WHEREAS, after City approval the 2019 Plan is further subject to final approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila desires to approve the 2019 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for the King County Solid Waste System; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City Council approves adoption of the document entitled "2019 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan," dated April 17, 2019, and hereby incorporated by reference as "Attachment A." PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Kathy Hougardy, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Attachment A: 2019 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan updated April 17, 2019 24 W:\Legislative Development\Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan adopted 8-13-19 HP:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 2 LAI King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Waste Resoufce Waste Prevention Recovery Disposal L N a) A Plan for King County's Regional System • 2,132 square miles • King County and 37 cities • 1.5 million residents* • 931,000 tons of garbage* fEDFRALWAY *2017 La King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division E " DAVALL RIRAIAND REDMOND .. ISSAQUAH SNOWALNIE Q NORTH BEND 1_1 N co • King County • Transfer stations • Landfill • Cities • Provide/contract for curbside collection • Private Companies • Curbside collection • Materials recovery facilities (MRFs) • County/Cities/Private • Promote recycling and sustainability U1 King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division W O Steps in Plan Approval Develop plan and EIS Oct 2016 - Dec 2017 Public comment Jan 8 - Mar 8 2018 2016 2017 2018 Discuss with Advisory Committees Oct 2016 - Nov 2017 King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Regional Policy Committee and County Council review Jul 2018 - Apr 2019 Preliminary state review Jan - May 2018 2019 We are here City approval May - Sep 2019 Final state approval Oct 2019 4 W N Six Major Planning Elements King COWIN Existing Solid Forecasting & Sustainable Transfer & Disposal & Finance Waste System Data Materials Processing Landfill Management Management (Recycling) King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division W Key Policy Recommendations Disposal Services Recycling Transfer La King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division W a) IMO CARDBOARD ONLY f � • King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Waste Resource Waste Prevention Recovery Disposal W CO Aspirational goal of moving recycling from 54% to 70% Menu of actions lets cities tailor approaches to their needs while working toward more unified regional approaches King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division O vims VI King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division r Waste Resource Waste Prevention Recovery Disposal N King County Waste Transfer System • 8 urban stations • Modernization complete or underway for all except NE service area • 2 rural drop boxes King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Connso Wecolools Ner,moe Shoreline 2008 Seattle firma/ aee fyRuughtor -1965 _ Bunn eunt Medina ` Beason B.n lava' 2017 New.. Duvall Skykanlsh 1980's \nenh. Renton 9unen ru 1985 '` Sears ' N` Coder Rine Regional Landfill Ly- Nn.mar�EyParh �-i \ Cedar Falls gow La2072ke \_. �' 1980'a Doe Mew (Reieild In up/04(.7,9.7r progress) 1985 P.wc Type of facility 1111 Retained or Rebuilt Transfer Station ' Transfer Station To Be Closed When Replacement Capacity is Available 1.,P4 ".:J► King County Regional Landfill S King County Drop Box Locations of Closed Landfills Enumclaw 1993 Jam`--•. 0 1 2 4 6 8 124es 10 Plan: Continue Modernizing Facilities Finish station modernization including a new NE facility Improved customer convenience Faster unloading Expanded recycling services Garbage compaction Sustainable building design and operation Equitable service levels King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division a) OW Waste Prevention EN - W King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Resource Recovery Waste Disposal co Plan: Further Develop Cedar Hills Landfill Maximize capacity within existing landfill footprint Benefits • Lowest cost per ton • Lowest greenhouse gases • Manages waste locally • Provides time to plan for next disposal option after Cedar Hills is full Work must begin this year to have new capacity ready in time King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Protecting Employees, Public, and Environment is a Top Priority • SWD is accountable for the quality of air, groundwater, leachate, and sto r m wa to r — Over 600 gas and 70 water wells are regularly monitored for compliance • Cedar Hills accounts for less than 10% of reported odor complaints to the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency — Cedar Hills is staffed 24/7 with highly skilled and trained professionals who do around -the -clock odor checks six times a day. • Active landfill areas are covered daily to control odors and reduce potential for wildlife to carry away garbage King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division 14 U1 N Next Plan Update Will Identify Post -Cedar Hills Disposal Method • Start discussion well before the 5-year update cycle • Options • Waste -to -Energy (mass burn) • Waste Export by Rail • Other emerging technologies King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division C31 City Approval of the Plan • Governed by interlocal agreements • City legislation in a 120 day period • Plan is approved if approved by cities representing >75% of the population of cities that act within 120 days • After city approval, Department of Ecology gives final approval within 45 days King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Sort It Out Separar Su Reciciaje Metal Metal Cardboard Crrtc- ""+ Clean Wood Madera limpia 16 C;1 a) IN King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division Waste Prevention Resource Recovery Waste Disposal King Street Center 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 701 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 206-477-4466 711 TTY Relay your. ki ngcou nty.gov/so l idwaste ►g King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Solid Waste Division 17 58 City of Tukwila City Council Transportation & Infrastructure Committee TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 - 5:30 p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers: Zak Idan, Chair; Thomas McLeod, Kathy Hougardy Staff: David Cline, Scott Bates, Hari Ponnekanti, Han Kirkland, Gail Labanara, Cyndy Knighton, Laurel Humphrey CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Idan called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Resolution: King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan *Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution that would adopt King County's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, which is pending approval of cities representing at least 75% of the population during the 120-day approval period. The Plan outlines programs to prevent, recycle, and dispose of waste, and includes six major planning elements: existing solid waste system, forecasting & data, recycling, transfer& processing, disposal & landfill management, and finance. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO SEPTEMBER 3, 2019 REGULAR CONSENT AGENDA. B. Interlocal Purchasing Agreement: Job Order Contracting Staff is seeking Council approval of an Interlocal Joint Purchasing Agreement with the City of Bellevue which would provide access to the use of their Job Order Contract (JOC) for a maximum amount of $1,000,000. A JOC is a State -approved procurement method in which a contractor agrees to provide an indefinite quantity delivery of negotiated and definitive work orders from a pre -established catalog on contracts over a fixed period. The City of Bellevue's JOC has a $4 million capacity per year over three years, and this Agreement would allow Tukwila to use up to $1 million of this capacity over the same period. The maximum dollar amount for any one work order is $500,000. Committee members discussed the proposal and requested that staff present this to the Committee of the Whole since it is a new method of procurement for the City. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. C. Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Staff provided a summary of progress and efforts to date for the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program, which was adopted in 2018 by Resolution 1955 to address residents' concerns about traffic safety. The program is taking off and staff has been installing Level 1 treatments that include new permanent speed feedback signs, LED enhanced signs, and parking restriction signs. Requests for new crosswalks have come in, but these require engineering study and are classified as a Level 2 treatment under the Program. Staff has contracted KPG, Inc. for assistance with engineering and may require use of other consultants in the future. Committee members and staff reviewed a matrix of requests that indicates rank, location, assessment information, status and more. Councilmembers asked clarifying questions. Chair Idan suggested adding requests and their status to the City's website. FORWARD BRIEFING TO AUGUST 26, 2019 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. 59 60 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS 1nitialr Medif ` Date Prepared by Alelm :+ reteew Coiunil review 1l'll 09/03/19 CZ E- ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. S'I'Al.:I, SPONSOR: RICK STILL ORR;INAI.AGENDA DX1'I;: 09/03/19 AGENDA ITIN Tl I IE Golf Cart Purchase at Foster Golf Links C AT I,:GORY ❑ Discussion 1111,g Dade Motion Date 09/03/19 ❑ Ordinance A1tg Dole ❑ Bid _Award Al/g Daly ❑ Public Healing A111g Dade ❑ Othec A'flg Date I U Redo%///ion Adtg A-10, Dale SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Alayor ❑ I IR ❑ DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT P&R ❑ Police U PIV SPONSOR'S Approve the purchase of Golf Carts at Foster Golf Links SUMMARY RI;1'I1:wl:D BY ❑ COWS' Mtg. ® CA&P Cmtc ❑ 17&S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte [1 Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parrs Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: 08/27/19 COMMI'Fi'FE CHAIR: QUINN RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. COMMA Parks and Recreation Department I I l: CDN- Forward to Consent Agenda COST IMPACT 1 FUND SOURCE E\I'I;NDF!uRI1RI:QUIRI?D AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $49,980 $50,000 $ Fund Source: 411.00.576.681.35.00 Comments: Expenditure has been built in to the 2019-2020 budget MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 9/3/19 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 9/3/19 Info Memorandum dated 8/20/19 w/ attachment Minutes from the 8/27 CDN Committee meeting 61 62 44rLA4,4. City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee FROM: Rick Still, Parks and Recreation Director BY: Craig Zellerhoff, Parks and Recreation Business Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 20, 2019 SUBJECT: Foster Golf Links — Golf Cart Update and Purchase ISSUE Provide an update to the Committee on the Foster Golf Cart replacement program. BACKGROUND The 2019-2020 budget includes $25,000 for each year to continue the Golf Cart replacement program. Foster Golf Links (FGL) currently has 64 carts. Due to age and usage, the current fleet is requiring repairs on a regular basis leaving 50-54 carts available to customers on any given day. FGL is in the process of replacing most of the older golf carts to reduce annual maintenance costs, to provide a better golf experience and to reduce the number of golf carts FGL rents annually to meet the golfer needs. The carts have been purchased under the National Intergovernmental Purchasing Alliance (NIPA), which is similar to a state -bid purchasing process. The golf cart replacement plan was initially started in 2011 and was placed on hold due to budget reductions in 2016. Through the 2019-20 budget process, City Council approved leaving the Admission Tax in the FGL budget to enable the reinstatement of the cart replacement program. Foster Golf Links (FGL) averages nearly 15,000 power cart rentals per year. Cart rentals are the 2nd largest revenue producer at FGL. DISCUSSION The replacement program for 2019-2020 budget, is to purchase 12 new EZ-GO TXT EFI carts, and trading in 15 of our oldest carts. By doing so, we will reduce the "down time" with carts taken out of service due to mechanical problems. It will also provide consistency within our fleet for ease of maintenance and transferability of parts. The new carts are equipped with a new engine which achieves 20 mpg more than the previous carts. The carts will be outfitted with hour meters, Club Pro bag covers, canopy top, USB ports and Foster Golf Links logo in accordance with the specs attached. The carts will be purchased under the National Intergovernmental Purchasing Alliance (NIPA). EZ-GO and the City are members of NIPA which is similar to a state bid purchasing process. Additionally, since the carts will be rented back to the public, our resale certificate waives the sales tax charge on the purchase. FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost for the cart replacement plan has been included in the 2019-2020 operational budget for Foster Golf Links. We are utilizing the biennial of $50,000 for a one-time purchase to for better pricing. The cost for 2019 will be $49,980. 63 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to forward this item to the Consent Agenda at the September 3, 2019 Regular Meeting ATTACHMENTS A. EZ-GO Cart Information and Pricing 64 Z:\Council Agenda Items\Parks and Recreation\FGL Golf CartsIMEMO - FGL Golf Carts.docx EXHIBIT A FLEET GOLF CAR PROPOSAL PRESENTED TO Foster Golf Links WWW.PACIFICGOLFTURF.COM PORTLAND, OREGON SNOHOMISH WASHINGTON SPOKANE WASHINGTON 14625 SE STARK ST 1818 BICKFORD, AVE 6206 E TRENT AVE BLSG 2 SUITE A PORTLAND, OR 97233 SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99212 (S03) 282-6022 (800) 368-9158 (360) 568-7798 (800) 368-9158 (509) 879-5117 (800) 368-9158 Wiedenmann 2F IVe CUSHMAN BUFF 1Q TURI OHN DEERE GOLF A Textron Company 65 EXHIBIT A I22 GOLF Presented To: &TURF Ave South A Textron Company JOHN DEERE GOLF Prepared By Warren Orr Foster Golf Links 13500 Interurban Tukwila, WA 98168 Peter Trudeau Sales Manager (503) 313-3793 ptrucleau@tpacificpolfturf.com QTY, MODEL VEHICLE COLOR SEAT TYPE /COLOR 12 TXT GAS EFI Ivory Standard Factory Seat Tan INCLUDED ACCESSORIES QTY , ACCESSORY ACCESSORY DETAILS / COLOR 12 Top Assembly Tan 12 Wheel Covers Gold 12 Standard Tire and Wheel 8" Standard Factory 4 Ply Tire and Wheel 12 Windshield E-Z-GO Factory Split Windshield 12 Message Holder 12 Club Pro Bag Covers Tan 12 Hour Meter Standard Factory Install 12 Premium Steering Wheel Standard Factory Install 12 USB Ports Standard Factory Install 2 Casual Tow Bar 1 Manual Kit 12 Factory Freight 12 Fleet Instalation / Local Delivery Any change to the accessory list must be obtained in writing at least 45 days prior to production date. Location of Logo 11 Course Logo Center Front Cowl Location of Numbers Number Sequence Die Cut Numbers One Per Side to be determined .Club is Responsible for logo artwork 45 days prior to fleet delivery SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 't Acceptance of the above listed accessories and vehicle information Accepted By: I tie: Pacific Golf & Turf Accepted By: Title: Date: Date: 66 ... .GOLF Presented To: EXHIBIT A �-.. &TUR= r Ave South A T¢sbOn Company JOHN DEERE GOLF Prepared BY Warren Orr Foster Golf Links 13500 Interurban Tukwila, WA 98168 Peter Trudeau Sales Manager (503) 313-3793 ptrudeau(<ilpacificpolfturf.com FINANCIAL DETAILS QTY MODEL Terms UNIT PRICE TOTAL MONTHLY PRICE 12 TXT GAS EFI Cash Purchase $ 5,990.00 $ 71,880.00 $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ - $ - $ NET TOTAL $ 49,980.00 TRADE / LEASE TERMINATION QTY YEAR MODEL CONDITION VALUE PER CAR TOTAL 15 2011 TXT Gas Good $1,460.00 $21,900.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 FLEET INSPECTION REPORT detailing the current conditon of the trade in / tease return Vehicles will be added to the cast of the replacement fleet as specified in this agreement. vehicles on the date of the fleet inspection. vehicles at the time of inspection. Any damages or loss of vehicle accessories/chargers that occur between of the customer, 1- Customer acknowledges they hove received a full inspection report (attached) 2- Customer understands that excess damages to Lease Termination vehicles 3- Customer understands that trade in values or based on the condition of the 4- Customer understands that this agreement is based on the condition of the inspection and accepstance of new vehicles by Pacific Golf & Turf is the repsonsibility Payment Schedule: Expected Delivery: Additional Information: Cash Purchase Payment Months: First Pay: Due Upon Delivery September 2019 Sep-2019 PROPOSAL EXPIRATION TIMELINE REQUIREMENTS Proposal Acceptance Updated Credit information Signed Lease Documents Final Review Order Specifications, Order New Vehicles Accepted 8y: 1 itIe: Pacific Golf & Turf Accepted By: Title: DATE: This Proposal is valid through (POT or Lease Co.) / Credit Approval Delivery Timing 5/31/2019 delivery date is subject to change based on Date: Date: product availability. 67 A Textron Company MODEL: TXT FLEET GOLF CAR TYPE: GASOLINE POWERED FLEET GOLF CAR MODEL YEAR: 2019 Part No: 657061 PRODUCT SPECIFICATION Engine: 13,5 hp (10.1 kW) per SAE J1940 standard, 4 cycle, 24.5 ci (401 cc) single cylinder, air-cooled • Fuel System: • Ignition: • Air Cleaner: • Valve Train: • Lubrication: • Balancer: Electrical: Drive Train: Brakes: Transaxle: Capacity: Overhead valve Pressurized oil system, spin -on oil filter Internal counter rotating balance shaft Closed -loop electronic fuel injection Electronic inductive spark Replaceable dry cartridge Starter/Generator, solid-state regulator, 12 Volt maintenance free battery (525 CCA, 85 minute reserve) Automatic, continuously variable transmission (CVT) Dual rear wheel mechanical self-adjusting drum brakes. Single point park brake release with self -compensating system. Differential with helical gears, ground speed governor, forward/reverse Seating for 2 persons PRODUCT OVERVIEW Dimensions Overall Length Overall Width Overall Height (No Canopy) Overall Height (With Canopy) Wheel Base Front Wheel Track Rear Wheel Track Gnd Clearance @ Differential Vehicle Power Power Source Valve Train Horsepower (kW) Electrical System Battery (Qty, Type) Key or Pedal Start Air Cleaner Lubrication Oil Filter Cooling System Fuel Capacity Drive Train Transaxle Gear Selection Rear Axle Ratio 93.0 in (236 cm) 47.0 in (119 cm) 46.5 in (118 cm) (Top of Steering Wheel) 67.5 in (171 cm) (Top of Sun Canopy) 66 in (168 cm) 34 in (86 cm) 38.5 in (98 cm) 4.3 in (11 cm) 4 Cycle 24.5 cu in (401 cc). Single Cylinder OHV 13.5 hp (10.1 kW) Exceeds SAE J1940 Std. Starter/Generator. Solid State Regulator One, 12 Volt Maintenance Free Pedal Industrial Rated Dry Filter Pressurized Oil System Spin On Air Cooled 5.96 Gallon (22.6L) Tank Continuously variable transmission (CVT) Differential with helical gears Forward -Reverse 11.47:1 (Forward) 14.35:1 (Reverse) Some items listed may be optional equipment Performance Seating Capacity Dry Weight Curb Weight Vehicle Load Capacity Outside Clearance Circle Speed (Level Ground) Towing Capacity Steering &Suspension Steering Front Suspension Rear Suspension Service Brake Parking Brake Front Tires Rear Tires Body & Chassis Frame Front Body & Finish Standard Color 2 Persons 760 lb (344 kg) 780 lb (354 kg) 800 lb (363 kg) 19.0 ft (5.8 m) 12 mph ± 0.5 mph (19 kph ± 0.8 kph) 3 Golf Cars with Approved Permanent Tow Bar Self -compensating rack and pinion Leaf springs with hydraulic shock absorbers Leaf springs with hydraulic shock absorbers Rear wheel mechanical self-adjusting drum Self -compensating, single point engagement 18 x 8.50 - 8 (4 Ply Rated) Tires 18 x 8.50 - 8 (4 Ply Rated) Tires Welded Steel. DuraShieldTM powder coat Injection molded TPO Ivory or Forest Green 6 2019 Gas TXT Fleet EFI GC eleased: 09/27/2018 evised: 10/15/2018 * Specifications are subject to change without notice Field installed accessories may require installation charges 1 of 2 A Textron Company OPTIONS & FIELD INSTALLED ACCESSORIES (Installation not included)* Item TIRES & WHEELS: Front: Std Opt FId Hole -in -One 18 x 8.50 - 8 (4 Ply Rated) X Tour Max 18 x 8.50 -10" Alloy Wheels X USA Trail 18 x 8.50 - 8 (Load Range C) X Rear: Hole -in -One 18 x 8.50 - 8 (4 Ply Rated) X Tour Max 18 x 8.50 -10" Alloy Wheels X X USA Trail 18 x 8.50 - 8 (Load Range C) Wheel Covers: Spoke, Silver Spoke, Gold COLORS: Ivory or Forest Green X Almond X Black X Flame Red X Inferno Red X Patriot Blue X Metallic Charcoal X Oasis Green X Platinum X Burgundy X Electric Blue X Sunburst Orange X Bright White X SEATING: Seat Color (Oyster) X Seat Color (Tan) Seat Color (Grey) Premium Seat(Mushroom) Premium Seat(Lt Beige) X X PIN STRIPES: Pewter Black Gold X X X Item ELECTRICAL OPTIONS: Std Opt Fld' Fuel/Oil Gauge X Unique Group Key Switch X Unique Individual Key Switch X USB Port X Heavy Duty Battery X OTHER OPTIONS: Sweater Basket X Fender Scuff Guard X Heavy Duty Rear Suspension X Front Bumper X Cooler & Bracket X Sand Bottle X Sand Bucket X Side Basket (Single or Double) X Tow Bar (Permanent) X CE Kit, Gas X Tow Bar (Casual Use) X Sand Rake X Sand Rake Holder X Club and Ball Washer X 4 Bag Attachment X Premium Steering Wheel X WEATHER PROTECTION: Bag Cover Kit (Oyster) X Bag Cover Kit (Tan) X Bag Cover Kit (Green) X Bag Cover Kit (Black) X Sun Canopy (Top) Oyster X Sun Canopy (Top) Tan X Sun Canopy (Top) Black X Weather Enclosure (3 Side, Sun Canopy & Wdshld Req'd) X Windshield Flat (Clear) (Requires Sun Canopy) X Windshield Fold Down (Clear) (Requires Sun Canopy) X Message Holder (1 Piece, Requires Sun Canopy) X Double Message Holder (Requires Sun Canopy) X Rear View Mirror (Requires Sun Canopy) X 2019 Gas TXT Fleet EFI GC Released: 09/27/2018 Revised: 10/15/2018 Specifications are subject to change without notice " Field installed accessories may require installation charges 2 of 2 69 70 Community Development & Neighborhoods Minutes August28, 2019 Committee members asked clarifying questions. Chair Quinn spoke in support of moving forward with the legislation and of considering the pooling of funds to maximize the impact. Committee members discussed that they are not interested in moving forward with an additional qualifying tax but would like to learn more about the impacts and opportunities of HB 1406. Staff will return to the Committee of the Whole discussion with additional information about available tools. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. C. Foster Golf Links Golf Cart Purchase Staff is seeking Council approval of a one-time purchase in the amount of $49,980 for the golf cart replacement program. Funds will be used to purchase 12 new EZ-GO TXT EFI carts, trading in 15 of the oldest carts. This will reduce downtime associated with service and repairs. Funds are included in the 2019-2020 budget at $25,000 per year. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO SEPTEMBER 3, 2019 REGULAR CONSENT AGENDA. Marketing Staff provided an overview of the marketing plan for Foster Golf Links, which has been in effect for around four years and has recently evolved to include the principle of focusing on the "why." Recent efforts include revising the Foster Golf Links website with better graphics and improved usability, development of a tournament brochure, and increased social media engagement. Rounds are up 60% compared to last year, and staff believes these marketing enhancements are primarily responsible. DISCUSSION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Committee members and staff discussed the 2019 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, which is an effort in King County to identify barriers to fair housing as identified by community and stakeholder input, data, and policy analysis. The City's Human Services Department has experienced a notable improvement in relations between tenants and property management. Adjourned 6:22 p.m. Committee Chair Approval 71 72 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Imtiul� _IIeeting Date Prepared by a14or.e review Council review 06/24/19 MD ,I Q8/26/19 MD 09/03/19 MD,/l Q- /.1..--ft/4. ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. STAFF SPONSOR: JACK PACE ORIGINAL AGI NDA D;1TL: 6/24/19 AGENDA I'l I:: Trrl.L Periodic Update of the Shoreline Master Program and Regulations C vn (a)xY ®Discussion Mtg Date 6/24/19 ❑ Mohan ,lltg Tate ❑ Resoluiion :11tg Date ❑ 0111inc7nce altg Date ❑ Bid Award Mix Dale ❑ Other big Date 11 Public TIearil AllyDate 6/24/19 SI'ONS()R ❑Council ❑Mayor ❑HR ®DC'D ❑Finance ❑Fire ❑T,S ❑P rT ❑Police PIT" a Coro/ SIk)\SOR'S The City and Washington Department of Ecology are conducting a joint review process for So111r1Ry, the mandated periodic update of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program and implementing regulations. The PC has forwarded a recommended draft of the changes to Council. The Council is being asked to hold a public hearing on the recommendations, review any additional public comments, give staff direction on further changes and adopt new ordinances. RINI] 1X 1.1) BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. ❑ Trans &Infrastructure DATE: 2/12/19, /1 CDN Comm ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Public Safety Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COM11I'TTF.E CHAIR; QUINN ❑ Arts Comm. 6/11/19, 8/13/19 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPoNS()R/ADMIN. COMMITI Department of Community Development NN Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT I FUND SOURCE EXPI:NI)1"1'UR1. RI (luIRI:u AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $24,750 $4,750 $ Fund Source: DOE GRANT $20,000, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUDGET Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 6/24/19 Public Hearing held 8/26/19 Forward to next Regular Meeting w/ amendments 9/3/19 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 6/24/19 Informational Memorandum dated 6/11/19 Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 6/11/19 *Please Bring Binder Distributed Separately* 8/26/19 Informational Memorandum dated R/71/1Q w/ attachments Minutes from the 8/13 CDN Committee meeting 9/3/19 Updated informational memorandum w/ attachment draft ordinances 73 74 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director BY: Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 27, 2019 SUBJECT: Shoreline Master Program Update ISSUE The City of Tukwila is required to periodically update its Shoreline Master Program and associated regulations for compliance with changes to the Shoreline Management Act, Department of Ecology guidelines, and legislative rules. BACKGROUND On August 26, 2019, the City Council reviewed the two draft ordinances: one amending the Shoreline Master Plan and the second one amending the Zoning Code. These ordinances included recommendations made by the Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee after the Committee reviewed the Planning Commission recommended draft on August 13th, 2019. DISCUSSION The Committee of the Whole asked staff for the additional information on the following two items: 1. Limit on the cost of alterations of non -conforming structures Council wanted additional information for option 3. Option 3 was to revise the code to have no limit on the cost of alterations if there is no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer and the proposal includes buffer restoration. The additional information requested was: a) sample language regarding "buffer restoration" b) City Attorney's opinion c) estimate of how much of the river would be affected by this The revised language regarding buffer restoration has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is shown as shaded below: 18.44.110. G. 2. a. (2) If the structure is located on a property that has no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, there shall be no limit on the cost of alterations, provided the applicant restores and/or enhances the entire shoreline buffer along the subject property to meet the vegetation management standards of this chapter. If the structure is located on a property that has reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, the cost of the alterations may not exceed an aggregate cost of 50% of the value of the building or structure in 75 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 any 3-year period based upon its most recent assessment, unless the amount over 50% is used to make the building or structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a building or structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. There are approximately ten small lots along the river in Tukwila that have no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer. City Attorney also pointed out that these lots could apply for a Shoreline Variance for relief from standards where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances related to the physical character or configuration of property. Typically, shoreline restoration is not required as part of a variance application. Additionally, staff considered the cost of shoreline restoration/enhancement. A draft restoration plan is attached for reference. A mid -range habitat restoration of 275 linear feet could cost about $80,000. 2. Docks -Criteria to be used for demonstrating a need for moorage Council requested that staff propose some criteria that the Director shall use to determine if the requirements listed in TMC 18.44.050.K.1.a. have been satisfied before approving a new dock. Staff recommendations are shown as shaded area below. Also, note that approval process for a dock requires a shoreline substantial development permit that includes a public notice to properties within 500 feet. Additionally, state permits are likely required from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Natural Resources. 18.44.050.K.1.a. A dock may be allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, 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. The Director shall use the following criteria to determine if the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage: (1) Applicant has provided adequate documentation from a commercial marina within 5 river miles that moorage is not available (2) Floating moorage buoy is technically infeasible as determined by a professional hydrologist (3) Applicant has provided adequate documentation from any existing moorage pier/dock owner within 5 river miles that joint use is not possible. FINANCIAL IMPACT No direct impacts are expected due to these changes. The Department of Ecology has provided Tukwila with a $20,000 grant to offset the cost of hiring a consultant to assist with the update. RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to review the two ordinances and finalize their edits. Staff will bring back the ordinances for adoption after the City Council review of the critical areas code update. ATTACHMENT 1. Sample shoreline buffer restoration plan and cost estimate 76 Desimone Trust Property Habitat Restoration Plan- REVISED 2 LOCAL RESTQRAT$ON EARTH CORPS ULQ8AL LEADERSHIP Prepared for: Jamie Rooney Columbia Trust Company 1301 A Street, Suite 800 Tacoma, WA 98401 Tel: 253-305-1577 REVISED August 27, 2018 6310 NE 74th St, Suite 201E Seattle, WA 98115 www.earthcorps.org EarthCorps © 2018 All rights reserved. 77 Scope of Work: Desimone Trust Property Habitat Restoration Project- REVISED 2 /page 2 NARRATIVE This Plan is a provided as a supplement to the February 9, 2018 report written by EarthCorps for the same property. Desimone Trust is now interested in increasing the restoration site from 81% to 96% in order to apply for a permit with the City of Tukwila to extend a deadline for a non -conforming use and structure at 16401 West Valley Highway, Tukwila WA 98168 (parcel #252304-9007). To obtain the stated permit, 96% of the shoreline (Attachment A) will need to be restored/enhanced. The total length of the shoreline on the property is approximately 286 linear feet, with 96% representing 275 linear feet or approximately 14,399 square feet. EarthCorps' recommendation is to start the project at the SE property line and travel 275 linear feet downstream. In addition, a budget for the implementation of the plan by EarthCorps is provided in Attachment B, though note that this does not ensure the availability of EarthCorps to conduct the work as described. Project Highlights: • 14,399 square feet with 275 linear feet of habitat restoration • 100 native trees and 3500 shrubs installed, in addition to 600 live -stakes along the immediate shoreline • 5 years of vegetation maintenance (2020-2024) • 3 years of watering (2020-22) Project Details: Task 1- English ivy control: Initial English ivy control will be conducted manually in late Fall 2018 on the upland/ flatter sections of the site (MU# 1- approximately 6,625 square feet) and include survival rings on existing trees. Note that the English ivy on the steeper slopes (MU# 3) will remain and be controlled with herbicide in task 3 in order to maintain the integrity of the slope and minimize erosion. All initial removal of plant material will be hauled off site via a dumpster to a composting facility. Bare ground will be covered with wood straw (http://www.woodstraw.com) at 50% coverage. Task 2- Himalayan blackberry control and erosion control: Himalayan blackberry will be brush cut and cut to less than 2-foot-long sections and left onsite to minimize erosion in MU# 2 and parts of MU# 3. In addition, straw wattles will be installed along the river and at intervals throughout the site based on the steepness of the slope. Task 3- Himalayan blackberry and English ivy control: Aquatic approved herbicide will be used on Himalayan blackberry) and English ivy2 re -growth. English ivy remaining on the steep slopes 1 Aquatic approved glyphosate 5%, surfactant 1% 2 Aquatic formulation of triclopyr 2%, glyphosate 4%, surfactant 1% 78 Scope of Work: Desimone Trust Property Habitat Restoration Project- REVISED 2 /page 3 will also be controlled with herbicide (MU#'s 1, 2, and 3). This task is recommended at two intervals in spring and late summer 2019. NOTE: City of Tukwila will receive pre -notification of herbicide application perTMC 18.44.D.3. Task 4- Native tree, shrub and live stake installation: Native trees at 9-10 feet on -center and native shrubs at 5 feet on -center will be planted throughout the site along with mulch rings to retain moisture. Live stakes will be installed along the bank at 1.5 feet on center (Nov -Dec 2019). Task 5- Site maintenance - watering: This task includes watering of the installed native plants every two weeks from mid -June to early September for three years (2020-22). Task 6- Site maintenance — weed maintenance: This task includes vegetation maintenance of the site two times per year (spring and late summer) for five years (2020-24). Task 7- Monitoring: Annual monitoring reports will be submitted to the City of Tukwila by November 30th for five years (2020-24) and include plant survival, native plant species richness, native woody cover, and invasive plant species percent cover. Monitoring plots will be established and baseline data collected following the plant installation in 2019. Photo monitoring will be established prior to invasive species control and will be monitored on a yearly basis through 2024. Performance Standards shall be followed as described in Attachment C. Based on monitoring, additional maintenance and/or installation of native plants may occur in order to meet performance standards. Planting notes: All tree and shrub species (both potted and live stakes) will be native to the Pacific Northwest and demonstrated to provide erosion control and slope stabilization such as those found in Table 3 of the WA DOE Plant Selection Guide (https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/9330.pdf). Installed potted plants will be monitored and replaced as necessary to maintain a greater than 80% survival rate. SCHEDULE # Task Timeline 1 English ivy control Late fall 2018/ winter 2018-19 2 Himalayan blackberry brush cutting and erosion control installation Late fall 2018/ winter 2018-19 3 Himalayan blackberry and English ivy control Spring and late summer 2019 4 Native tree and live stake installation Late fall 2019 5 Site maintenance- watering Spring and summer 2020-22 6 Site maintenance- maintenance Spring and summer 2020-24 7 Monitoring Fall 2019-24 79 Scope of Work: Desimone Trust Property Habitat Restoration Project- REVISED 2 / page 4 EARTHCORPS BACKGROUND EarthCorps is a non-profit organization founded in 1993 with a mission to build a global community of leaders through local environmental service. EarthCorps provides a year- long intensive program for young adults from the US and 80 other countries to learn best practices in community -based environmental restoration and develop their leadership skills as they supervise more than 10,000 volunteers each year. Location Restoration EarthCorps' core expertise is community -based environmental restoration. We regard restoration as a process of reestablishing healthy habitat: returning a polluted or degraded environment as closely as possible to a thriving, self-sustaining ecosystem. As restoration practitioners, our goal is to expedite natural processes in rebuilding a functioning natural ecosystem. Environmental service is a uniquely effective way to build community. When people put their hands into the dirt together and see their efforts transform a threatened area into a more vibrant landscape, they forge a special bond, empowering themselves and their community. Global Leadership Based in Seattle, Washington, EarthCorps brings together emerging environmental leaders from more than 60 countries to work on projects in the Puget Sound region and Cascade Mountains. As part of EarthCorps' intensive hands-on curriculum, they learn multiple restoration techniques, try out project design and management, develop leadership and team -building skills, and help manage thousands of local volunteers on projects. EARTHCORPS PROJECT LEAD: Bill Brosseau, Operations Director Tel: (206) 322-9296 ext. 207 Cell: (206) 255-4158 Email: bill@earthcorps.org Nelson Salisbury, Senior Ecologist & GIS Specialist Tel: (206) 322-9296 ext. 214 Email: nelson@earthcorps.org 80 Desimone Trust - Tukwila, WA Shoreline Habitat Improvement Plan Attachment A MU 1 Hand Pull 6,625 Sq Ft We sniv ld iaoulhconWr MU 2 Brush/Spray 3,560 Sq Ft PIN: 2523049007 Legend MGMT Units Parcels Contour 5ft Shoreline Restoration Total linear feet of shoreline: 286 ft Riparian Enhancement (96%): 275 ft W E S Feet 0 15 30 60 1:516 loCx, ps SruNAr.nM EARTH CORPS G.ONA% l6A044,4in EarthCorps © 2018 82 Attachment B Budget The following budget is for the implementation of the Desimone Trust Habitat Restoration Plan. Crew Labor $ 47,700.00 Project Management $ 17,710.00 Materials* $ 10,600.75 Subtotal $ 76,010.75 Materials & Handling Fee (10% of Total Materials) $ 1,060.08 TOTAL FEE $ 77,070.83 SalesTax: 10% $ 7,707.08 TOTAL PAYABLE $ 84,777.91 * Dumpster fee is based on 20 cubic yards of plant material. Any additional plant material will be billed separately. ** Bond requirement per August 16, 2018 letter from the City of Tukwila is not included in the budget and will be an additional cost. EarthCorps will provide the following: • An assigned project manager to coordinate with the landowner to schedule statedtasks, purchase materials and maintain communication throughout the project. • A 20 cubic yard dumpster for initial invasive plant control • A porta toilet during multiday tasks • All materials • Basic hand tools along with access to power tools (brush cutter and chainsaws) and specialized equipment including herbicide application equipment. • Training and education in ecological restoration best management practices, ecology, leadership and community outreach. • Washington State Licensed Herbicide Applicator onsite as needed. • Workers' compensation, health insurance, and related taxes. • Washington Labor & Industries documentation • Administrative/ payroll and human resource services. Landowner will provide the following: • Access to the site including ability to stage a dumpster, port -a -toilet and materials • City of Tukwila permits related to the project 83 84 Attachment C Performance Standards These performance standards will be used to evaluate the success of all restoration activities during the course of the monitoring period. If, during any monitoring year, it is shown that these standards are not met or are not likely to be met, adaptive management actions will occur. These actions could include, but are not limited to: invasive species removal or treatment, additional plant installation, or other actions as deemed necessary to meet the goals and objectives of the shoreline restoration. Objective 1: Plant Establishment 1A Plant Survival: Plant survival will be greater than 80% at the completion of the monitoring period (Year 5). • Monitoring Methodology: Plots shall be established in order to sub -sample tree, live stake, and shrub installations. The shape, size, and number of plots will be determined and established by the contractor following initial planting, and revisited on a yearly basis through Year 5. Plots will be permanently marked in the field for relocation. 1B Species Richness: By Year 5, at least four (4) native shrub species and three (3) native tree species will be established on site. No single species will represent more than 50% of each functional group (shrubs and trees). Existing vegetation as well as appropriate native volunteer species can be counted towards this standard. • Monitoring Methodology: Visual assessment of entire site. 1C Woody Cover: Native woody cover will exceed 50% across the site. Existing vegetation as well as appropriate native volunteer species can be counted towards this standard. • Monitoring Methodology: Woody cover will be estimated in plots established in Performance Standard 1A. Adaptive management shall be implemented if cover is expected not to meet the 50% standard following monitoring in Year 2. Objective 2: Invasive Species Control 2A Invasive Species: In any year during the monitoring period, invasive species cover will be less than 10% total cover across the entire restoration area. Invasive species are defined here as any species that has been given a legal designation by the King County Noxious Weed Control Program, and shall include those species indicated as "Non - regulated Noxious Weeds" and "King County Weeds of Concern". • Monitoring Methodology: Visual assessment of entire site by Management Unit. In addition, invasive cover will be estimated in plots established in Performance Standard 1A. Adaptive management shall be implemented if overall invasive 85 Attachment C species cover is determined to be greater than 10% (on average) using either method described above. For example, if the average of invasive species cover is estimated to be more than 10% across each of the three Management Units OR the average of invasive species cover is estimated to be more than 10% across each of the established monitoring plots, then this Performance Standard will not be met for that year and adaptive management will be necessary. Objective 3: Photo Monitoring • Monitoring Methodology: Photo monitoring points shall be established and baseline photographs taken prior to any management activities. Photo points shall be permanently marked in the field and indicated on a map in order to facilitate relocation. Repeat photography shall occur each year beginning in 2018 and should be completed during the growing season (June -August) and taken at relatively the same time each year. 86 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2344; REPEALING THE 2011 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM; APPROVING AND ADOPTING A NEW SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 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, RCW 90.58 finds that shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and that unrestricted construction on privately and publicly owned shorelines of the state is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 establishes a hierarchy of preference for uses in shorelines of state-wide significance: recognizing and protecting the state-wide interest over local interest; preserving the natural character of the shoreline; resulting in long term over short term benefit; protecting the resources and ecology of the shoreline; increasing public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines; increasing recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and providing for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop and administer local shoreline master programs for regulation of uses on shorelines of the state; and WHEREAS, Tukwila's current Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 2009 and revised per Department of Ecology comments in 2011; and WHEREAS, the City is conducting a required periodic update of its Shoreline Master Program per RCW 90.58.080 (4)(a)(i) using the joint review process with the Department of Ecology; and W: Legislative Development\SMP-Adopting update -repeal Ord 2344 8-28-19 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 3 87 WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Public Outreach Plan that incorporated a variety of methods to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update including an open house, mailings to property owners and tenants, notice in a stormwater bill, postings on the City's website, creation of a broadcast e-mail group who received updates of the shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter "The Hazelnut;" and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a public review draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on March 28, 2019, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council on April 25, 2019; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Planning Commission recommended draft Shoreline Master Program update and a Determination of Non - Significance was issued May 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 24, 2019 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, 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, as set forth in "Attachment A," is hereby adopted and shall become binding as of the effective date of this ordinance on all properties within the shoreline jurisdiction. Section 2. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2344, including the Shoreline Master Program adopted by reference in Section 1 thereof, is hereby repealed. Section 3. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/ subsection numbering. Section 4. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Adopting update -repeal Ord 2344 8-28-19 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 3 88 Section 5. 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 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Ordinance Number: Attachment A — Shoreline Master Program W: Legislative Development\SMP-Adopting update -repeal Ord 2344 8-28-19 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 3 89 90 TUKWILA SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM December 14, 2009 Revised Per Ecology Letter March 24, 2011 PC Recommended Draft 4-25-2019 Prepared by Tukwila Department of Community Development with the assistance of ESA Adolfson and The Watershed Company rlsrl�[ •r 1 t 1 1 1 4 1 i Y 1 1" [ i ECOLOGY This report was funded in part through a grant, G0600234, from the Washington State Department of Ecology. 91 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose and Background 1 1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction 1 2. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 5 2.1 SMP Components 5 2.2 SMP Elements 6 2.3 History of SMP Planning in Tukwila 6 2.4 Current SMP Update Process 7 3. DEFINITIONS 8 4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION —SUMMARY .8 4.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications 9 4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions 10 4.3 Land Use 11 4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts 13 4.5 Conclusions 15 5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN - SUMMARY 17 5.1 Background 17 5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions 17 5.3 Plans, Programs, and Completed Projects 19 5.4 Restoration Opportunities 19 5.5 Potential Projects and Priorities 20 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES 21 7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS 21 7.1 Pre 2009 Regulatory Framework 21 7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory / 22 Characterization Report and Restoration Plan i 92 7.3 State Environment Designation System 23 7.4 Environment Designations 26 7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers 31 7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment 36 7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment 38 7.8 High Intensity Environment 42 7.9 Aquatic Environment 44 8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS AND 44 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE JURISDICTION. 45 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations 45 9.2 Purpose 46 10. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE 49 11. SHORELINE DESIGN GUIDELINES 51 12. SHORELINE RESTORATION 51 13. ADMINISTRATION 52 13.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit 52 13.2 Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations 53 14. APPEALS 53 15. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS 54 16. LIABILITY 54 SMP Public Review Draft Clean ii 8/28/2019 93 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Pre 2009 Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44) 22 Figure 2. Briscoe Levee Profile 35 Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer 38 Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees 40 Figure 5. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees 41 Figure 6. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placement of Fill on Levee Back Slope 42 Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment 43 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila 18 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System — WAC 173-26-211 (5) 25 Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline 27 Ecological Conditions LIST OF MAPS Map 1. Annexation History and Potential Annexation Areas .4 Map 2. Duwamish River Transition Zone 16 Map 3. Shoreline Environments 30 Map 4. Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline 48 Map 5. Shoreline Public Access .. 50 APPENDICES A. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report B. Shoreline Restoration Plan 94 SMP Public Review Draft Clean iii 8/28/2019 1. INTRODUCTION 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 reflects changes in local conditions and priorities and the evolving State regulatory environment. 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 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. SMP Public Review Draft - Strikeout 1 8/28/2019 95 Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) 1111 1111- �r IIII-1111- ��� -w IIII=1111=III— writ I=1111 1111E1111E1111E1111EIIIIE1111EII—11111111- III-1111-1-1111E1111E1111- —1111E1111-111E1111—I11i-1111—III v 1111E1111-1111 III —1111E1111E1111E1111-1111 Wetland in 100 year Flood plain IIII IIII IIII IIII Ill! IIII - IIII 200' C IIII - IIII - IIII K 200' Flood way III - IIII - IIII - liII - IIII - IIII - 100 Year Flood Plain 200' from OHWM or flood way and all marshes, bogs, and swamps in 100 year flood plain 200' from OHWM and 100 year flood plain Figure 1.1 Lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act B. Shoreline Jurisdiction in Tukwila The Green/Duwamish River is the only "shoreline of statewide significance" in the city (RCW 98.58.030). A small portion of the Black River, a shoreline of the state, is also located in Tukwila. 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 and the Black 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 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. 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 96 2 8/28/2019 All proposed uses and activities under its jurisdiction must be reviewed for compliance with the goals, policies and regulations referenced 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 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. 180th 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 Green River and are identified on Map 1. 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 20 years. Where changed circumstances dictate, the SMP will provide updated guidance and regulations for the MIC area. The MIC area has significant potential for redevelopment. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 3 8/28/2019 97 98 C a"5En _ L Legend Tukwila City Limits Tukwila Urban Center Manufacting /Industrial Center Potential Annexation Areas Green / Duwamish River Shoreline Annexed After 1974 i 204. r Map 1 Manufacturingllndustrial Center Boundary Annexation History and Potential Annexation Areas i ■ ■ 1 Tukwila Urban Center 1"=,5 MILE SMP Public Review Draft Clean 4 8/28/2019 99 100 2. TUKWILA'S SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 2.1 SMP Components This SMP document contains the SMA overview and background related to the development of the SMP Comprehensive Update in 2011 as updated through the 2019 Periodic Review process. To comply with the SMA, Tukwila has included the following components in this Shoreline Master Program (SMP): • Outreach including a citizen participation process, and coordination with state agencies, Indian tribes, and other local governments (see Section 2.4) • Inventory, analysis and characterization of shoreline conditions, environmental functions and ecosystem -wide processes • Analysis of potential shoreline restoration opportunities • Establishment of shoreline environments • Shoreline Design Guidelines that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 • Evaluation and consideration of cumulative impacts The Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan: • Contains the SMP goals and policies that have been adopted in the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance #, date) The Shoreline Regulations: • Development regulations that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 (Ordinance #, date) • Development regulations that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.45 (Ordinance # to be inserted after City Council adoption in 2019) • Shoreline Design Guidelines that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 (Ordinance #, date) • Board of Architectural Review Shoreline Design Criteria found in TMC Section 18.60.050 (Ordinance #, date) • Shoreline Landscape Requirements that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.52 (Ordinance #, date) • Definitions provided in TMC Chapter 18.06 (Ordinance #, date) • Portions of the Critical Areas Protection Provisions that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.45 (Ordinance #, date) with exclusions identified in Subsection 9 of this document and within TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 5 8/28/2019 101 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 Element of the Comprehensive Plan and the regulations in Chapters 18.44 and 18.45 of the City's 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 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. 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 1992-1993, 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 adopted in 1995. Staff began the process to prepare a new SMP in 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 of all parcels within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction and a Shoreline Design Manual. New shoreline regulations approved by Ecology in 2000 were immediately appealed and ultimately invalidated by the Shoreline Hearings Board in 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 6 8/28/2019 102 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. In order to capitalize on previous citizens' involvement in the planning process, the City decided to start the SMP update with 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 2009 SMP update process, the City: • 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 2.4 Current SMP Update Process The City of Tukwila completed a comprehensive update to its Shoreline Master Program in 2009, with additional revisions made in 2011. Washington State law requires jurisdictions to periodically review and update their SMPs every eight years in accordance with the SMA and its current guidelines and legislative rules to attain state approval. The City of Tukwila's update started with an open house in the fall of 2018 and will be complete in 2019. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 7 8/28/2019 103 This periodic update is focused on: • Reviewing relevant legislative updates since 2009 and incorporating any applicable amendments. • Ensuring consistency with recently adopted regulations for critical areas and flood hazard areas. • Streamlining and eliminating duplication in the documents. • Addressing a limited number of policy questions such as a required levee profile, use of flood walls and incentives for public access. This periodic update will not: • Re-evaluate the ecological baseline which was established as part of the 2009 comprehensive update. • Extensively assess no net loss criteria other than to ensure that proposed amendments do not result in degradation of the baseline condition. • Change shoreline jurisdiction or environment designations. 3. DEFINITIONS Definitions used in the administration of the Shoreline Master Program are incorporated into the Definitions Chapter of the Zoning Code, TMC Chapter 18.06. In addition to the definitions provided in TMC Chapter 18.06, Chapter 90.58 RCW, Chapter 173-26 WAC, and Chapter 173-27 WAC apply within the shoreline jurisdiction. Where definitions in the Tukwila Municipal Code conflict with state definitions, the definitions provided in RCW or WAC shall control. 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 prior 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. While the report has been finalized, the City continues to utilize the most recent information available, such as the recently updated FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) Revised Preliminary Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM), which were issued after the completion of the Inventory and Characterization report. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 8 8/28/2019 104 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 G1-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 20th Century that diverted the White, Black and Cedar Rivers 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. 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 9 8/28/2019 105 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. Hanson 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 do not meet current standards for either flood conveyance or stability. The Tukwila 205 levee on the left bank of the river in the Urban Center is not certified and areas protected by this levee have been designated as "secluded" and regulated as outside of the 100-year Special Flood Hazard on the proposed 9/15/2017 FEMA Revised Preliminary Digital Flood Hazard Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM). Other levees in the City also do not meet Corps of Engineers standards and are mapped as floodplain. These include portions of the Tukwila South area and levees along the right bank of the river. 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, Steelhead trout and bull trout. These 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 saltwater 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 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 10 8/28/2019 106 Transition Zone habitat to accommodate fish while they adjust from fresh to saltwater (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, piping of streams including the use of tide -gates, pumped storm discharges, 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 and generally devoid of sufficient riparian vegetation. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in -channel wood, is generally lacking throughout the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic habitats as well as river temperatures that periodically exceed state standards and create lethal and sublethal conditions for adult salmon. 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 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 11 8/28/2019 107 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 approximately one third of historic conditions and have impacted fish habitat. 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 Green/Duwamish 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 Green/Duwamish 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 the Howard A. 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 Basin, where it can be accessed primarily by small watercraft, 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 12 8/28/2019 108 B. Riverbank Vegetation The natural environment along the river has been significantly altered from its original riparian corridor by intense urban development and riverbank 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 upstream, redevelopment of the shoreline has the potential to provide appropriate landscaping and restoration of habitat that are more attractive to wildlife and 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. 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 13 8/28/2019 109 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 authorized "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, management, and regulating of the levee system, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), King County Flood Control District (KCFCD), and private property owners. The City of Tukwila Public Works Depai linent has overall responsibility for maintenance of all levees, including the federally authorized Tukwila 205 levee, which extends from about the I-405 crossing to approximately S. 196th Street. The actual maintenance work on public levees is performed by KCFCD. 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 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 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 first SMP, in place since 1974, established a 40-foot setback from the mean high water line. In places that have not been redeveloped under current regulations 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, 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 14 8/28/2019 110 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 have 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 reconstructing existing levees and revetments to protect existing development from flood hazards and restore habitat, an effort that will take place over a number of years in coordination with the King County Flood Control Zone District, King County and state and federal agencies. There are many opportunities for conservation and restoration actions in the City to restore or replace habitat while managing natural hazard areas. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 15 8/28/2019 111 112 Elliott Bay Harbor 4 Island SEATTL 1st Ave S Bridge South Park Bridge SEATTLE E Marginal Wy S Bridge Puget Sound BURIEN 11oy!dune. xrimu on Pm map has ngn cumLddY Nn2 funk sW Pre o2012 50..4113 bMe GgM10 umre]e Mte:emr f tygfpp(r NMf5 a1 rr{rcwnLVms a swoops. mama a nmfed. m 10 mammy. enwr.ss n POLs W me she d moil depnphon Ong Cwermsna pp 110k LY]iy general 505211YdfOL1. IKb1Ptl 010012,201.0102MWS inkenp. ten rol kninedlu km rmnre a eeeaee,e9sbp Prom ve MO Oa MOW d .damaloo rndarnd m I* em Jkry ado ca Mombasa sn Ms map e arrwlxo ero22:112,, wmen pgmewnnd 2.4 Carl' 1110 12662/ eutrsr>abr2oreLlooa; iMrd romper 2012 Revised Map 2 — Duwamish River Transition Zone n Duwamish Transition Zone River mile and number IM Incorporated area 02,000 4,000 Feet October 2014 Tukwila Intl Blvd Bridge TUKWILA Lake Washington 1-5 Bridge SMP Public Review Draft Clean 16 8/28/2019 113 114 5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN -SUMMARY 5.1 Background 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 comments and refocus priorities to projects within the Transition Zone. The Shoreline Restoration Plan 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 shoreline 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 Shoreline 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 scale issues within the upper watershed that 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 17 8/28/2019 115 Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila Function Category Function Alterations to natural functioning Potential Restoration Action within the City Hydrologic Channel-Floodplain Interaction Presence of flood protection structures (e.g., levees, riverbank revetments, flood gates) and significant fill and development along the shoreline limit channel-floodplain interactions in Tukwila. 1. Modify current levees and revetments to increase channel and floodplain interaction; 2. Excavate back or side channels. Hydrologic Upland sediment generation Fine sediment contribution to the river is increased due to build-up and wash -off from surrounding urban land uses. Implement enhanced stormwater Best Management Practices for fine sediment removal in stormwater runoff. Water Quality Retention of particulates and contaminants 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. 1. Modify current levees and revetments to increase channel and floodplain area; 2. Install native riparian species to increase bank roughness. Water Quality Nutrient cycling As channel-floodplain interaction was reduced, the channel became a conduit for nutrients, offering little opportunity for contact time with soils. 1. Increase riverine wetland area; 2.Install native riparian plant species; 3. Set back banks (revetments and levees). Large Woody Debris (LWD) and Organics Maintain characteristic plant community 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. 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. LWD and Organics: Source of LWD Despite the lack of many sources for LWD, there are some large cottonwoods and big leaf maples that occur along the levees and revetment system. 1. Install native riparian species; 2 Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization • and restoration projects. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 18 8/28/2019 116 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 for restoration (Cecil B. Moses Park, Codiga Farm, 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 (CIP) 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. 5.4 Restoration Opportunities Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be 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 steepness. These 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 Map 2. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 19 8/28/2019 117 • Enhancing 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 -friendly flap gates at the mouths of Tukwila's three major streams (Gilliam, Southgate and Riverton) and possibly restore habitat area at these locations in the shoreline jurisdiction. 5.5 Potential Projects 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 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 projects is within the Transition Zone. The Transition Zone is identified 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 20 8/28/2019 118 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES The goals and policies that lead and inspire Tukwila's shoreline actions are found in the Shoreline Element of the City's 2015 Comprehensive Plan. These, along with the narrative in that Chapter, were updated based on the 2009 SMP and 2011 revisions approved by the Department of Ecology. 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 Pre 2009 Regulatory Framework Tukwila's first SMP, adopted in 1974, designated 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 defined 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 stated 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 employed 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 21 8/28/2019 119 The City also administered the King County Shoreline Master Program for the areas which had been annexed since the adoption of the City's SMP in 1974. These areas were designated Urban and the setbacks from Ordinary High Water Mark varied from 20 feet to 50 feet depending on whether the use was water dependent, single family or commercial/industrial. See Annexation History (Map 1) for an identification of the areas where the City administered the County's SMP. 200 URBAN ENVIRONMENT 100' 60' 40 HIGH IMPACT ZONE LOW IMPACT ZONE RIVER ZONE RIVER 2�n URBAN ENVIRONMENT 40' 60' 100' RIVER ZONE LOW IMPACT ZONE HIGH IMPACT ZONE E-MEAN HIGH WATER LINE Figure 1. Pre 2009 Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC Chapter 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 for salmonids and other species. Adult salmon heading upstream to spawn require cool water; and juveniles heading downstream require food and refuge from high flows. The Transition Zone, which extends from river mile 10 downstream through the northern City limits (see Map 2), where juvenile salmon adjust from fresh to saltwater habitat (osmoregulate), is of critical importance because of significant habitat losses over the years. Additionally, the river provides migratory habitat for numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a variety of wildlife. • The entire Green/Duwamish River and its tributaries are a critical resource for federally protected 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 watercraft and Green River Trail users. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 22 8/28/2019 120 • 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 A. Hanson Dam and are little affected by actions in the City, except for such functions as water quality (especially fine sediment capture and filtering of contaminants in stormwater), local surface hydrology (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. The Transition Zone needs greater protection and restoration focus than other sections of the shoreline in the city. • 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 projects 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. The County's 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 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)). SMP Public Review Draft Clean 23 8/28/2019 121 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 24 8/28/2019 122 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System - WAC 173-26-211 (5) Environment Designation Purpose Applicability to Tukwila Aquatic 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. This designation will be used for the area waterward of the ordinary high water mark which includes the water surface along with the underlying lands and the water column. Natural 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. 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. Rural Conservancy 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 floodplain processes, and provide recreational opportunities. Not applicable to Tukwila. All of the City's shorelines are urbanized. Potential annexation areas are either urbanized or proposed for intensive development. Urban Conservancy The purpose of the "urban conservancy" environment is to protect and restore ecological functions of open space, floodplain and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses. 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 floodplains are largely disconnected by a series of levees, revetments, and other infrastructure. Shoreline Residential 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. 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. High -Intensity 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. 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 25 8/28/2019 123 7.4 Environment Designations The 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 Shoreline Environments, which are identified on Map 3, are: • Shoreline Residential Environment • Urban Conservancy Environment • High -Intensity Environment • Aquatic Environment The City designated a buffer to replace the prior system of parallel shoreline management zones. Instead of the prior River Environment, a minimum buffer was established for each shoreline environment and allowed uses were 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 26 8/28/2019 124 Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification MIC/H & Fresh/Salt Water High Intensity 100' The Director may reduce the MIC/L zoned Transition Zone, Lower flooding standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon property risk, Less than 20' construction of the following cross from North difference from section: City Limits OHWM to top of - 1. Reslope bank from OHWM to EMWS bank, tidal (not toe) to be no steeper than Bridge, and North influence 3:1, using bioengineering techniques Potential Annexation - 2. Minimum 20' buffer landward from top of bank Area - 3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Comment: Maximum slope is reduced due to measurement from OHWM and to recognize location in the Transition Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below OHWM difficult. 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 the river. 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 functions. LDR zoned Moderate flooding Shoreline Distance Removal of invasive species and property risk, Less than 25' Residential required replanting with native species of w/o levees difference from to set high habitat value voluntary unless from OHWM to top of back triggered by requirement for a EMWS to bank, tidal slope Shoreline Substantial Development I-405 influence on northern section from toe at 2.5:1 plus 20' setback, Min. 50' width permit. SMP Public Review Draft - Strikeout 27 8/28/2019 125 Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification LDR zoned property with levees from EMWS to I-405 Moderate flooding risk, Less than 25' difference from OHWM to top of bank, tidal Shoreline Residential 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in accordance with City levee standards, the Director may reduce the buffer to actual width required. Comment: This applies to City - owned property at Fort Dent. influence on northern section Commercially zoned property from 42nd Ave S. Bridge to I-405 Moderate flooding risk, Less than 25' difference from OHWM to top of bank Urban Conservancy 100' The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the following cross section: - 1. Reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than 3:1, 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 functions. 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 functions. West River bank from I-405 to South City Limit, Tukwila 205 Levee and South Annexation Area High flooding risk, Federally certified and County levee, large water level fluctuations Urban Conservancy 125' Upon construction or reconstruction of levee in accordance with City levee standards the Director may reduce the buffer to the actual width required. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 28 8/28/2019 126 Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification East River bank without levee from I-405 south to City Limits Moderate flooding risk, 20 to 25' difference from OHWM to top of bank, Moderate slumping risk, large water level fluctuations Urban Conservancy 100' The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the following cross section: - 1. Reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than 3:1, 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 functions. 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 functions. East River bank with levee from I-405 to South City Limit Moderate flooding risk, 20 to 25' difference from OHWM to top of bank, Moderate slumping risk, large water level fluctuations Urban Conservancy 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in accordance with City levee standards the Director may reduce the buffer to the actual width required for the levee. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. Any shoreline environment where street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer End buffer on river side of existing improved street or roadway. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 29 8/28/2019 127 128 Legend f _,J Tukwila City Limits PAA Potential Annexation Areas Urban Conservancy Shoreline Environment • High Intensity Shoreline Environment sue - - Shoreline Residential Environment Mg ,,Cau,de1s t I"=.5 MILE Map 3 Reach G 1 PAA SMP Public Review Draft Clean 30 8/28/2019 129 130 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 years due to the increase in stormwater entering the river from increasing impervious surfaces throughout the watershed and increasing frequency and intensity of flows during high rain events. These higher and more frequent 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, ensuring that new structures are not built too close to the river's edge is crucial to avoid loss of human life. Staff also reviewed the rationale for the buffer widths established for watercourses under TMC Chapter 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 repair/reconstruction), existing land use patterns, and state and federal agency policies. The following information summarizes 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 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 31 8/28/2019 131 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 steep and more stable (requiring less armoring) slopes, so that they can be planted, which 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 250 feet in mapped floodplain areas to allow for protection of shoreline functions that support salmonids.l Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC Chapter 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 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 ' Endangered Species Act — Section 7 Consultation, Final Biological 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 32 8/28/2019 132 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 streams provide food and 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 and 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 riverbanks 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 33 8/28/2019 133 The damage to the levee system in storm events led to discussions among the City, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the King County Flood Control District to determine the best levee design to prevent the recurring problem of continued levee repairs. The criteria used to design a levee profile are: • 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. This profile was used to repair two areas of the federally -certified levee in Tukwila —the Lily 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 any costs of land acquisition for laying back the levees. It is expected that the use of this levee design or an environmentally superior solution will reduce the need to continually repair the levee in those areas, thus avoiding such high expenditures in the future and saving money in the long run. The profile discussed above is illustrated in Figure 2 below: SMP Public Review Draft Clean 34 8/28/2019 134 Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas -Width Will Vary Reconfigured Levee 18' 2 1�11-1ilg l lilLliljlil—L• �1 JIL= - - - JIJJ = n—sc n n n n n n n n n n n_i _• II II II II I-11 -I-11 111-111-11 —ID-ID i IIl ID—m a—iii—i i u � Maintenance Easement 15' * Reconfigured Slope averages 2.5:1 with bench Vegetated Bench Willows 1.5 1Existing Levee Minimum Levee Profile Not To Scale Figure 2. Briscoe Levee Profile Ordinary High Water Mark OHWM 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.2 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 Puget Sound. For areas without levees, north of I-405 and those areas south of I-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 angle of repose for a more stable slope. Even though the above explanation for determining appropriate buffer distance used 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 2 The 125 foot distance includes a slope no steeper than 2.5:1 with a mid -slope bench incorporated, 18 feet at the top of the levee and 10 feet on the back side of the levee for access and inspection. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 35 8/28/2019 135 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. C. Conclusions The determination of buffer widths was based on two important criteria: (1) the need to achieve bank stability and protect structures along the shoreline from damage due to erosion and bank failures; and (2) 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 Sensitive Areas Ordinance 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 protection of human life and property. 7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment A. Designation Criteria All properties zoned for single-family use from the ordinary high water mark landward 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, 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 36 8/28/2019 136 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 riverbanks 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: ZONE Number of parcels within 50 feet of OHWM Number of vacant parcels within 50 feet Number of parcels with structures within 50 feet / % Number of parcels within 100 feet of OHWM Number of vacant parcels within 100 feet Number of parcels with structures within 100 feet / % LDR 135 12 67 / 49% 201 25 165 / 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 nonconforming structures in the proposed SMP buffer would be governed by Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.44.110, 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. 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 37 8/28/2019 137 20 feet from top of - -_-- reconfigured river bank The riverbank 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 50' min Buffer 20' — Ordinary High Water Mark N 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 natural bank failures that result in the natural angle of repose (2.5:1 or greater). 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 watercraft. Uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 38 8/28/2019 138 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 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, floodplain 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 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 riverbank to achieve a slope of 3:1, 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 3:1 slope may be less than 100 feet, depending on the character of the riverbank 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 riverbank to be no steeper than 3:1, provide a 20-foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the riverbank 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 39 8/28/2019 139 long-term adverse impacts to shoreline ecosystem functions. 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 no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. 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' rl Urban Conservancy Environment k 100' Buffer Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees Buffer in Levee Areas: 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 riverbank to the minimum levee profile and to achieve an overall slope of 3:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope. The establishment of the 3:1 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. An easement to allow access for levee inspection is required on the landward side of the levee at the toe. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 40 8/28/2019 140 200' Urban Conservancy Environment k 125' 4 I Allow room it for Levee I repair or I replacement I I Buffer Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 5. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees As an alternative to the 125 foot buffer for leveed areas, a property owner may construct levee or riverbank improvements that meet the Army Corps of Engineers, King County Flood Control District, and City of Tukwila minimum levee standards. These standards at a minimum shall include an overall slope no steeper than 3:1 from the toe of the levee to the riverward edge of the crown, 16-foot access across the top of the levee, a 2:1 back slope, and an additional 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 achieving an overall slope of 3:1 the slope should be as close to 3:1 as possible. A floodwall is not the preferred back slope profile for a levee but may be substituted for all or a portion of the back slope where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this Master Program which has not lost its nonconforming status and to preserve access needed for building functionality. The floodwall shall be designed to provide 15-foot clearance between the levee and the building or to preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety standards. A floodwall may also be used where necessary to avoid encroachment on a railroad easement or to provide area for waterward habitat restoration. In areas of the river where the property owner or a government agency has constructed a levee with an overall waterward slope of 3:1 or flatter, the buffer 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 floodwall, plus 15 feet. In the event that the owner provides the City and/or applicable agency with a 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 41 8/28/2019 141 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 15 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 6 below. Buffer that could Be Replaced by Easements Buffer Reduction Proposed Levee 18' Top Width New Ground / 10' > Access/ 2 Plane Inspection 11— n 2* Fill )/I —�/��I Imill ==(=11=11E=�= 11 1=1— = I III1T11I 1II1I1 111 111 11— f1I—=1 —11 I--=11 11 IIIIII1 III 111 1T=IIIIII I IEIII1 1 —T=r1-11—a—i—i I— 1E11 E111E 101 E11 h_ 1-I I 1-1 I I—III—III—. --111E111E111E11 111E111=11 L Landward Levee Toe Buffer Reduction with Backfill Option Not To Scale Figure 6. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placement of Fill on Levee Back Slope 7.8 High Intensity Environment 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 critically important for juvenile Chinook and chum smolts making the transition to saltwater. 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 24-hour period SMP Public Review Draft Clean 42 8/28/2019 142 and seasonally. The Transition Zone is a crucial habitat for salmonids. 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. The purposes of the High Intensity River Buffer are to: • Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, floodplain 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 riverbank 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 riverbank, and can only be determined on a site -by -site basis. Allow room to reconfigure river bank to 3:1 slope I 200' AI High Intensity Environment k 100' 4 Buffer Ordinary High Water Marker " Rive Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment SMP Public Review Draft Clean 43 8/28/2019 143 As an alternative to the 100-foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the riverbank to a maximum 3:1, provide a 20-foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the riverbank 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 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 no case shall the buffer be less than 50 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. 7.9 Aquatic Environment A. Designation Criteria All water bodies within the City limits and its potential annexation area under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act waterward of the ordinary high water mark. The aquatic environment includes the water surface together with the underlying lands and the water column. B. Purpose The purpose of this designation is to protect the unique characteristics and resources of the aquatic environment by managing use activities to prioritize preservation and restoration of natural resources, navigation, recreation and commerce, and by assuring compatibility between shoreland and aquatic uses. 8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use, or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment are provided in TMC Section 18.44.030 along with 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. Development standards such as setbacks, height limitations, water quality regulations, flood hazard reduction, shoreline stabilization, protection of archaeological resources, environmental impact mitigation, parking and over water structures requirements are codified in TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 44 8/28/2019 144 The Administrative procedures codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 are designed to: • Assign responsibilities for implementation of the Master Program and Shoreline Permits. • 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 These procedures include permit application requirements, conditional use approval criteria, variance approval criteria, and regulations for non -conforming development. 9. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE JURISDICTION 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations A. The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance (TMC Chapter 18.45), (Ordinance #, date), which is herein incorporated by reference into this SMP, except for the provisions excluded in subsection B of this section: 1. Wetlands 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) 3. Areas of potential geologic instability 4. Abandoned mine areas 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas Such critical area provisions shall apply to any use, alteration, or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. Unless otherwise stated, no development shall be constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, or altered, or land divided without full compliance with the provision adopted by reference and the Shoreline Master Program. Within shoreline jurisdiction, the regulations of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be liberally construed together with the Shoreline Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between any of the adopted provisions below and the Shoreline Master Program, the most restrictive provisions shall prevail. B. The following provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply within the Shoreline jurisdiction: 1. Critical Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 18.45.160) 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180). 3. Permitting, Appeals, and Enforcement Procedures (TMC Section 18.45.195) SMP Public Review Draft Clean 45 8/28/2019 145 C. Critical 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 TMC Chapter 18.44. 9.2 Purpose A. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) and Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) require protection of critical areas, defined as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, and fish and wildlife conservation areas. B. The purpose of protecting environmentally critical 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 the most current, accurate, and complete scientific and technical information available in the regulation and protection of critical areas as required by the state Shoreline Management Act, according to WAC 173-26- 201 and WAC 173-26-221. C. The goal of these critical area regulations is to provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. Critical areas currently identified in the shoreline jurisdiction are discussed in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of this Shoreline Master Program. The locations are mapped on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Map (Map 4). 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 46 8/28/2019 146 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 47 8/28/2019 147 148 • Legend �■ r ■ r� Tukwila City Limits Type 2 Shoreline Wetland {. ■ r ■ r� Type 2 Shoreline Wetland Buffer (PO') Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area ■r� Fish & Wildlife Habitat Buffer(100') .... Type 2 Stream Q Type 2 Stream in Pipe Type 3 Stream Type 3 Stream in Pipe Type 4 Stream Type 4 Stream in Pipe n Type 2 Watercourse Buffer (100') Type 3 Watercourse Buffer (BO') 1 Type 4 Watercourse Buffer (50') 200ft River Buffer Slope Classifications Isreraaoarnra§rn ter sort Isrenerrn 154 and 90% 2 3na ana..a�n r, mlarv�Hr pe„�.mle:.a,. .or10%am 3 zlikrNin by rota, Yimlperme,i'le ssils cr'b'ed «M, also nudes -roux slopirg glom Ilan PR.1108 ish and Wildlife Habitat Canservatmn Areas shown are Salmon habitat enhancement projects completed or underway. The river Itself is also a fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area. Map 4 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 IoceliOns e approximate only and watermursesshrw • this map have not been surveyed. .11 a a a ^...c.r■r �1 r"_.5 MILE SMP Public Review Draft Clean 48 8/28/2019 149 150 10. 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. 180th Street. A habitat restoration project is underway at Duwamish Riverbend Hill on South 115th Street, which also includes public access to the river. The Shoreline Public Access Map (Map 5) 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. 180th on the left bank to the end of the south annexation area. A pedestrian bridge to link the area south of S. 180th 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 Depaitiiient Capital Improvement Program to address this need at City -owned sites. A comprehensive regional inventory of public access points to the River should be completed to identify gaps and opportunities. Requirements for public access to shorelines have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 49 8/28/2019 151 152 Turning Basin F Legend ! Tukwila City Limits Potential Annexation Areas - City of Tukwila Property +s . Interurban Trail Green River Trail ��••. Potential New Trail Street Ends Potential Public Access i OS Potential - Trail • Map 5 Shoreline Public Access Green River Trail Interurban Trail P'= 5 MILE SMP Public Review Draft Clean 50 8/28/2019 153 154 11. 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. The river and its tributaries support salmon runs and resident trout, including the ESA -listed Chinook salmon, Bull Trout and Steelhead. If any portion of a project falls within the shoreline jurisdiction, then the entire project will be reviewed under the shoreline specific guidelines codified in TMC Chapter 18.44, 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. The 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. 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/Duwamish River. The City will continue to add sites to the Restoration Plan as they are identified and will include them in the City's Capital Improvement Program for acquisition and improvement. Project sites in the Transition Zone have the highest priority for acquisition. Amendments or revisions to the Shoreline Restoration Plan do not require an amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 51 8/28/2019 155 13. 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. 13.1 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: 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 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. B. Applicability 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. Except that requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the following described in WAC 173-27-044 and WAC 173-27-045: 1. Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to Chapter 70.105D RCW, or to the Department of Ecology when it conducts a remedial action under Chapter 70.105D RCW. 2. Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a national pollutant discharge elimination system storm water general permit. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 52 8/28/2019 156 3. WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Washington State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW 90.58.356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other local review. 4. Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045. 5. Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to Chapter 80.50 RCW. 13.2 Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations 1. Compliance with this Master Program does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may apply. The applicant is responsible for complying with all other applicable requirements. 2. Where this Master Program makes reference to any RCW, WAC, or other state or federal law or regulation, the most recent amendment or current edition shall apply. 3. When any provision of this Master Program or any other federal, state, or local provision conflicts with this Master Program, the provision that is most protective of shoreline resources shall prevail, except when constrained by federal or state law, or where specifically provided otherwise in this Master Program. 4. Relationship to Critical Areas Regulations. (a) For protection of critical areas where they occur in shoreline jurisdiction, this Master Program adopts by reference the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, which is incorporated into this Master Program with specific exclusions and modifications in Section 9 of this SMP. (b) All references to the Critical Areas Ordinance are for the version adopted [SAO adoption date]. Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191(2)(b), amending the referenced regulations in the Master Program for those critical areas under shoreline jurisdiction will require an amendment to the Master Program and approval by the Department of Ecology. (c) Within shoreline jurisdiction, the Critical Areas Ordinance shall be liberally construed together with this Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of this Master Program and Chapter 90.58 RCW. 14. 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 53 8/28/2019 157 15. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS 15.1. This Master Program 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. 15.2 Any provision of this Master Program may be amended as provided for in RCW 90.58.080 and WAC 173-26-090 and 173-26-100. Amendments or revisions to the Master Program, as provided by law, do not become effective until 14 days following written approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology. 15.3 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 173- 26 and this program. 16. LIABILITY 16.1. 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. 16.2 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. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 54 8/28/2019 158 NOTE: Shaded text denotes changes made after the August 26, 2019 Committee of the Whole meeting. See pages 12, 26 and 56. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON; REPEALING VARIOUS DEFINITIONS AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) CHAPTER 18.06, "DEFINITIONS"; REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 2346 AND 2549 §23; REENACTING TMC CHAPTER 18.44, "SHORELINE OVERLAY," TO ESTABLISH NEW REGULATIONS RELATED TO SHORELINE USES; AMENDING VARIOUS ORDINANCES AS CODIFIED IN TMC SECTIONS 18.52.030, 18.60.050 AND 18.104.010 TO UPDATE ZONING REGULATIONS RELATED TO SHORELINE USES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 finds that shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and that unrestricted construction on privately and publicly owned shorelines of the state is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 establishes a hierarchy of preference for uses in shorelines of state-wide significance: recognizing and protecting the state-wide interest over local interest; preserving the natural character of the shoreline; resulting in long term over short term benefit; protecting the resources and ecology of the shoreline; increasing public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines; increasing recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and providing for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop and administer local shoreline master programs for regulation of uses on shorelines of the state; 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, 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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 64 159 WHEREAS, Tukwila's current Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 2009 and revised per Department of Ecology comments in 2011; and WHEREAS, the City is conducting a required periodic update of its Shoreline Master Program per RCW 90.58.080 (4)(b)(i) using the joint review process with the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Public Outreach Plan that incorporated a variety of methods to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update including an open house, mailings to property owners and tenants, notice in a stormwater bill, postings on the City's web site, creation of a broadcast e-mail group who received updates of the shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter "The Hazelnut;" and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a public review draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on March 28, 2019, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council on April 25, 2019; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the draft Shoreline Master Program update as recommended by the Planning Commission and a Determination of Non -Significance was issued May 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 24, 2019, 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, 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. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §8, as codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Development, Shoreline," is hereby amended to read as follows: Development, Shoreline "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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 64 160 water level. "Development, Shoreline" does not include dismantling or removing structures if there is no other associated development or re -development. Section 2. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §15, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Floodway," is hereby amended to read as follows: Floodway "Floodway" means the area that has been established in effective federal emergency management agency flood insurance rate maps or floodway maps. The floodway does not include lands that can reasonably be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or maintained under license from the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state. Section 3. TMC Section Adopted. A new section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," as follows: Nonconforming Structure, Shoreline "Nonconforming Structure, Shoreline" 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. Section 4. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "River Channel," is hereby amended to read as follows: River Channel "River Channel" means that area of the river lying riverward of the mean high water mark. Section 5. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §33, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Shoreline Areas," is hereby amended to read as follows: Shorelines or Shoreline Areas "Shorelines" or "Shoreline areas" means all "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. Section 6. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §41, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Substantial Development," is hereby amended to read as follows: Substantial Development "Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds $7,047.00 or any development that materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this definition must be adjusted for inflation by the Office of Financial Management every five years, beginning July 1, 2007, based upon changes in the Consumer Price W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 64 161 Index during that time period. "Consumer Price Index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average Consumer Price Index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, United States Department of Labor. In accordance with WAC 173-27-040, as it now reads and as hereafter amended, the following shall not be considered developments which require a shoreline substantial development permit, although shall still comply with the substantive requirements of the 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: i) $20,000 for docks that are constructed to replace existing docks, and are of equal or lesser square footage than the existing dock being replaced; or ii) $10,000 for all other docks constructed on fresh waters. iii) However, if subsequent construction occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, and the combined fair market value of the subsequent and prior construction exceeds the amount specified above, the subsequent W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 4 of 64 162 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 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 43.21 C 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 10 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 5 of 64 163 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. 15. The external or internal retrofitting of an existing structure for the exclusive purpose of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.) or to otherwise provide physical access to the structure by individuals with disabilities. Section 7. Section Numbers within TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. As a result of amendments contained herein, the section number for some definitions in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," may be changed as part of codification of this ordinance including, but not limited to, the following: Current Section Number Definition 18.06.330 Floodplain 18.06.472 Large Woody Debris (LWD) 18.06.590 Nonconforming Use W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 6 of 64 164 18.06.591 Non -Water -Oriented Uses 18.06.592 Office 18.06.593 Open Record Appeal 18.06.594 Open Record Hearing 18.06.595 Open Space Section 8. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "High -Impact Environment," is hereby repealed. Section 9. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2347 §19, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Levee, Minimum Profile," is hereby repealed. Section 10. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Low -Impact Environment," is hereby repealed. Section 11. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "River Environment," is hereby repealed. Section 12. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Shoreline," is hereby repealed. Section 13. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2346 as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.44 is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 14. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2549 §23, as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.44.150, "Enforcement and Penalties," is hereby repealed. Section 15. TMC Chapter 18.44 Reenacted. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.44, "Shoreline Overlay," is hereby reenacted to read as follows: Sections: 18.44.010 18.44.020 18.44.030 18.44.040 18.44.050 18.44.060 18.44.070 CHAPTER 18.44 SHORELINE OVERLAY Purpose and Applicability Shoreline Environment Designations Principally Permitted Uses and Shoreline Use and Modification Matrix Shoreline Buffers Development Standards Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Environmentally Critical Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 7 of 64 165 18.44.080 Public Access to the Shoreline 18.44.090 Shoreline Design Guidelines 18.44.100 Shoreline Restoration 18.44.110 Administration 18.44.120 Appeals 18.44.130 Enforcement and Penalties 18.44.140 Liability Section 16. TMC Section 18.44.010 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.44.010 Purpose and Applicability A. The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, as amended, and the rules and regulations thereunder 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 Management Act. In particular, the purpose of this chapter is to: 1. Recognize and protect shorelines of State-wide significance; 2. Preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3. Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 4. Increase public access to publicly -owned areas of the shoreline; 5. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline: 6. Protect and create critical Chinook salmon habitat in the Transition Zone of the Green River. B. 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. C. Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191 (2)(c), this chapter, together with the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan, constitutes the City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program. Any modifications to these documents will be processed as a Shoreline Master Program Amendment and require approval by the Department of Ecology. Section 17. TMC Section 18.44.020 is hereby reenacted 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). W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 8 of 64 166 2. Urban Conservancy Environment. All lands not zoned for residential use upstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM. 3. High Intensity Environment. All lands downstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM. 4. Aquatic Environment. All water bodies within the City limits and its potential annexation areas under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark. The Aquatic Environment includes the water surface together with the underlying lands and the water column. Section 18. TMC Section 18.44.030 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses and Shoreline Use and Modification Matrix A. TMC Section 18.44.030(A), including the Use Matrix (Figure 18-1), 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. B. In the matrix, shoreline environments are listed at the top of each column and the specific uses are listed along the left-hand side of each horizontal row. The cell at the intersection of a column and a row indicates whether a use may be allowed in a specific shoreline environment and whether additional use criteria apply. The matrix shall be interpreted as follows: 1. If the letter "P" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use may be allowed within the shoreline environment if the underlying zoning also allows the use. Shoreline (SDP, CUP and Variance) permits may be required. 2. If the letter "C" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use may be allowed within the shoreline environment subject to the shoreline conditional use review and approval procedures specified in TMC Section 18.44.110(E). 3. If the letter "X" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use is prohibited in that shoreline environment. C. In addition to the matrix, the following general use requirements also apply to all development within the shoreline jurisdiction. Additional requirements controlling specific uses are set forth for each Shoreline Environment designation, to implement the purpose of the respective Shoreline Environment designations. 1. The first priority for City -owned property, other than right-of-way, 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 9 of 64 167 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 TMC Section 18.44.050(K). 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 it is an approved overwater, flood management structure or shoreline restoration project, shall be prohibited waterward of the OHWM. SHORELINE USE MATRIX* P = May be permitted subject to development standards. C = May be permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use. X = Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction. Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environment Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer Non - Buffer AGRICULTURE Farming and farm -related activities X X X P X X X Aquaculture X X X X X X X COMMERCIAL (1) General X X X P X P (2) P (3) Automotive services, gas (outside pumps allowed), washing, body and engine repair shops (enclosed within a building) X X X C X C (2) X Contractors storage yards X C X C (2) X Water -oriented uses C P C P C P C Water -dependent uses P (4) P(5) P(4) P P(4) P P Storage P (6) P (5) P (6) P P (6) P X CIVIC/INSTITUTIONAL General X P X P X P X DREDGING Dredging for remediation of contaminated substances C (7) NA C (7) NA C (7) NA C (7) Dredging for maintenance of established navigational channel NA NA NA NA NA NA P (8) Other dredging for navigation NA NA NA NA NA NA C (9) Dredge material disposal X X X X X X X Dredging for fill NA NA NA NA NA NA X W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 168 Page 10 of 64 P = May be permitted subject to development standards. C = May be permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use. X = Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction. Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environment Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer Non - Buffer ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY (Water Dependent) P P P P P P P ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY (Nonwater Dependent) (10) C C C C C C C FENCES P (11) P C (11) P C (11) P X FILL General C (12) P C (12) P C (12) P C (12) Fill for remediation, flood hazard reduction or ecological restoration P (13) P P (13) P P (13) P P (13) FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT Flood hazard reduction (14) P P P P P P P Shoreline stabilization (15) P P P P P P P INDUSTRIAL (16) General X X P (3) P P (3) P (2) P (3) Animal rendering X X X C X X X Cement manufacturing X X X C X C (2) X Hazardous substance processing and handling & hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities (on or off -site) (17) X X X X X X X Rock crushing, asphalt or concrete batching or mixing, stone cutting, brick manufacture, marble works, and the assembly of products from the above materials X X X C X C (2) X Salvage and wrecking operations X X X C X C (2) X Tow -truck operations, subject to all additional State and local regulations X X X C X P (2) X Truck terminals X X X P X P (2) X Water -oriented uses X X C P C P C Water -dependent uses (17) X X P (4) P P (4) P P MINING General X X X X X X X OVERWATER STRUCTURES (18) Piers, docks, and other overwater structures P(19) NA P (20) NA P (20) NA P (20,21) Vehicle bridges (public) P (31, 4) P (31) P (31, 4) P (31) P (31, 4) P (31) P (31) Vehicle bridges (private) C C C C C C C W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 11 of 64 169 P = May be permitted subject to development standards. C = May be permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use. X = Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction. Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environment Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer Non - Buffer Public pedestrian bridges P P P P P P P PARKING — ACCESSORY Parking areas limited to the minimum necessary to support permitted or conditional uses X P (5) X P X P X RECREATION Recreation facilities (commercial — indoor) X X X P X P (22) X Recreation facilities (commercial — outdoor) X X C(23,24) C (24) C(23, 24) C(24) X Recreation facilities, including boat launching (public) P(23) P P(23,24, 25) C P(23,5) P P (3) Public and private promenades, footpaths, of trails or other uncovered recreation space P P P (26) P P (26) P X provided it meets vegetation and landscaping requirements of TMC Section 18.44.060 RESIDENTIAL — SINGLE FAMILY/MULTI-FAMILY Dwelling X(27) P X P X X X Houseboats X X X X X X X Live-aboards X X X X X X P (21,28) Patios and decks P(29) P P P X Signs (30) P P P P P P X Shoreline Restoration P P P P P P P TRANSPORTATION General C C C C C C C (3) Park & ride lots X X X C (9) X C (9) X Levee maintenance roads P (32) P (32) P (32) P (32) P (32) P (32) NA Railroad X P X X X X X UTILITIES General (10) P(4) P P(4) P P(4) P C Provision, distribution, collection, transmission, or disposal of refuse X X X X X X X Hydroelectric and private utility power generating plants X X X X X X X Wireless towers X X X X X X X Support facilities, such as outfalls P (33) P P (33) P P (33) P C (33) Regional detention facilities X USES NOT SPECIFIED C C C C C C C *This matrix is a summary. Individual notes modify standards in this matrix. Permitted or conditional uses listed herein may also require a shoreline substantial development permit and other permits. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 170 Page 12 of 64 (1) Commercial uses mean those uses that are involved in wholesale, retail, service and business trade. Examples include office, restaurants, brew pubs, medical, dental and veterinary clinics, hotels, retail sales, hotel/motels, and warehousing. (2) Nonwater-oriented uses may be allowed as a permitted use where the City determines that water -dependent or water -enjoyment use of the shoreline is not feasible due to the configuration of the shoreline and water body. (3) Permitted only if water dependent. (4) Structures greater than 35 feet tall require a conditional use permit. (5) Permitted if located to the most upland portion of the property and adequately screened and/or landscaped in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping section. (6) Outdoor storage within the shoreline buffer is only permitted in conjunction with a water - dependent use. (7) Conditionally allowed when in compliance with all federal and state regulations. (8) Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins is restricted to maintaining previously dredged and/or existing authorized location, depth and width. Conditionally allowed when significant ecological impacts are minimized and mitigation is provided. (10) Allowed in shoreline jurisdiction when it is demonstrated that there is no feasible alternative to locating the use within shoreline jurisdiction. (11) The maximum height of the fence along the shoreline shall not exceed four feet in residential areas or six feet in commercial areas where there is a demonstrated need to ensure public safety and security of property. The fence shall not extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain -link fences must be vinyl coated. (12) Fill minimally necessary to support water -dependent uses, public access, or for the alteration or expansion of a transportation facility of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline when it is demonstrated that alternatives to fill are not feasible is conditionally allowed. (13) Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments is permitted. (14) Any new or redeveloped levee shall meet the applicable levee requirements of this chapter. (15) Permitted when consistent with TMC Section 18.44.050(F). (16) Industrial uses mean those uses that are facilities for manufacturing, processing, assembling and/or storing of finished or semi -finished goods with supportive office and commercial uses. Examples include manufacturing processing and/or assembling such items as electrical or mechanical equipment, previously manufactured metals, chemicals, light metals, plastics, solvents, soaps, wood, machines, food, pharmaceuticals, previously prepared materials; warehousing and wholesale distribution; sales and rental of heavy machinery and equipment; and internet data centers. (17) Subject to compliance with state siting criteria RCW Chapter 70.105 (See also Environmental Regulations, Section 9, SMP). (18) Permitted when associated with water -dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control or channel management. (19) Permitted when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: (a) commercial or marina moorage; (b) floating moorage buoys; (9) W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 13 of 64 171 (c) joint use moorage pier/dock. (20) Permitted if associated with water -dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or ecological restoration. (21) Boats may only be moored at a dock or marina. No boats may be moored on tidelands or in the river channel. (22) Limited to athletic or health clubs. (23) Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters are permitted in the buffer provided no such structure shall block views to the shoreline from adjacent properties. (24) Permitted only if water oriented. (25) Parks, recreation and open space facilities operated by public agencies and non-profit organizations are permitted. (26) 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. (27) Additional development may be allowed consistent with TMC Section 18.44.130G.2.f. A shoreline conditional use permit is required for water oriented accessory structures that exceed the height limits of the Shoreline Residential Environment. (28) Permitted in only in the Aquatic Environment and subject to the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.050(K). (29) Patios and decks are permitted within the shoreline buffer so long as they do not exceed 18 inches in height and are limited to a maximum of 200 square feet and 50% of the width of the river frontage, whichever is smaller. Decks or patios must be located landward of the top of the bank and be constructed to be pervious and of environmentally -friendly materials. If a deck or patio will have an environmental impact in the shoreline buffer, then commensurate mitigation shall be required. (30) Permitted when consistent with TMC Section 18.44.050(L). (31) Permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way. (32) May be co -located with fire lanes. (33) Allowed if they require a physical connection to the shoreline to provide their support function, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible. (34) 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 vested as of the effective date of this program or if no feasible alternative location exists. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 14 of 64 172 Section 19. TMC 18.44.040 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.040 Shoreline Buffers Buffer widths. The following shoreline buffer widths apply in shoreline jurisdiction. Environment Buffer width (1)(2) Modification Shoreline Residential 50 feet OR the area needed to achieve a slope no steeper than 2.5:1, 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, whichever is greater (3) Urban Areas without 100 feet (4) Conservancy levees Areas with levees 125 feet (5) High Intensity 100 feet (4) Aquatic Not Applicable (1) Unless otherwise noted, all buffers are measured landward from the OHWM. (2) In any shoreline environment where an existing improved street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer, the buffer ends on the river side of the edge of the improved right- of-way. (3) Removal of invasive species and replanting with native species of high habitat value voluntary unless triggered by requirement for a Shoreline Substantial Development permit. (4) The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the following cross section: (a) Reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than 3:1 in the Urban Conservancy Environment or reslope bank from OHWM (not toe) to be no steeper than 3:1 in the High Intensity Environment, using bioengineering techniques (b) Minimum 20-foot buffer landward from top of bank. (c) Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value. Maximum slope is reduced due to measurement from OHWM and to recognize location in the Transition Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below OHWM difficult. 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 the river. 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 functions. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 15 of 64 173 (5) Upon reconstruction of levee to the levee standards of this chapter, the Director may reduce the buffer to actual width required for the levee. If fill is placed along the back slope of a new levee, the buffer may be reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope of the levee. If the property owner provides a levee maintenance easement landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall which: 1) meets the width required by the agency providing maintenance; 2) prohibits the construction of any structures; and 3) allows the City to access the area to inspect the levee and make any necessary repairs, then that area may be outside of the shoreline buffer and allow incidental uses such as parking. Section 20. TMC 18.44.050 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.050 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 18.44.060, 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 18.44.110(G), "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 3:1 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, TMC Section 18.44.050(F). 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, TMC Section 18.44.080. 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, TMC Section 18.44.050(1). W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 16 of 64 174 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. j. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water - dependent uses and their structures, the maximum height for structures shall be 30 feet. For bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water -dependent uses and their structures, the height limit shall be as demonstrated necessary to accomplish the structure's primary purpose. Bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water -dependent uses and their structures greater than 35 feet in height require approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. 2. Design Review. Design review is required for non-residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment. C. High Intensity, Urban Conservancy and Aquatic Environment Development Standards. 1. Standards. The following standards apply in the High Intensity, Urban Conservancy and Aquatic Environments. 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 18.44.060. d. Any new shoreline stabilization or repairs to existing stabilization must comply with Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.050(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 18.44.050(K). 2. Setbacks and Site Configuration. a. The yard setback adjacent to the river is the buffer width established for the applicable shoreline environment. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 17 of 64 175 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. 65 feet between the outside landward edge of the River Buffer and 200 feet of the OHWM. c. 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. For any building that is proposed to be greater than 35 feet in height in the shoreline jurisdiction, the development proponent must demonstrate the proposed building will not block the views of a substantial number of residences. The Director may approve a 15 foot increase in height for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction if the project proponent provides restoration and/or enhancement of the entire shoreline buffer beyond what may otherwise be required including, but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." If the required buffer has already been restored, the project proponent may provide a 20% wider buffer, planted in accordance with TMC Section 18.44.060 ,"Vegetation Protection and Landscaping," in order to obtain the 15-foot increase in height. 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 to the maximum extent feasible, 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. D. Surface Water and Water Quality. The following standards apply to all shoreline development. 1. New surface water systems shall 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 18 of 64 176 3. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for storm water 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. 5. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary sewer. 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 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. 2. Flood hazard structures must incorporate appropriate vegetation restoration and conservation actions consistent with the standards of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 3. 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. 4. Rehabilitation or replacement of existing flood control structures, such as levees, with a primary purpose of containing the 1% to 0.02% 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 a 3:1 riverside slope 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 19 of 64 177 5. Rehabilitated or replaced flood hazard reduction structures shall not extend the toe of slope any further waterward of the OHWM than the existing structure. 6. 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 information available. 7. New, redeveloped or replaced structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. 8. 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. New, redeveloped or replaced flood hazard reduction structures must have an overall waterward slope no steeper than 3:1 unless it is not physically possible to achieve such as slope. A floodwall may be substituted for all or a portion of a levee back slope where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this subsection, if structure has not lost its nonconforming status, or to allow area for waterward habitat restoration development. The floodwall shall be designed to provide 15 feet of clearance between the levee and the building, or 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. 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 large woody debris (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: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 20 of 64 178 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 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. 6. Shoreline armoring such as riprap rock revetments and other hard shoreline stabilization techniques are detrimental to river processes and habitat creation. Where allowed, shoreline armoring shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that does not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, 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 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 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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 21 of 64 179 b. 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 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 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 22 of 64 180 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 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 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 Archaeology and Historic Preservation Office of such an exemption in a timely manner. 6. Archaeological excavations may be permitted subject to the provision of this chapter. 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 at a minimum 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 43.21 C 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. For all development, mitigation sequencing shall be applied in the following order of priority: a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 23 of 64 181 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. 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 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 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 24 of 64 182 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 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. 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; (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 that 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." W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 25 of 64 183 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. 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. A dock may be allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, 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. The Director shall use the following criteria to determine if the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage: (a) Applicant has provided adequate documentation from commercial marina within 5 river miles that moorage is not available. (b) Floating moorage buoy is technically infeasible as determined by a professional hydrologist. (c) Applicant has provided adequate documentation from any existing moorage pier/dock owner within 5 river miles that joint use is not possible. b. Prior to issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for construction of piers, docks, wharves or other over -water structures, the applicant shall present proof of application submittal to State or Federal agencies, as applicable. c. 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. d. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 26 of 64 184 e. 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. f. No structures are allowed on top of over -water structures except for properties located north of the Turning Basin. g. 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. h. 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. i. 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 chapter; 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. e. Marinas, boat yards and dry docks must be located a minimum of 100 feet from fish and wildlife habitat areas. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 27 of 64 185 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, bridges, 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 28 of 64 186 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. This standard may be modified for bridges if necessary to accommodate the proposed use. 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. 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. I. 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. 5. Live-Aboards. New over -water residences are prohibited. Live-aboards may be allowed provided that: a. They are for single-family use only. b. They are located in a marina that provides shower and toilet facilities on land and there are no sewage discharges to the water. c. Live-aboards do not exceed 10 percent of the total slips in the marina. d. They are owner -occupied vessels. e. There are on -shore support services in proximity to the live-aboards. L. Signs in Shoreline Jurisdiction. 1. Signage within the shoreline buffer is limited to the following: a. Interpretative signs and restoration signage, including restoration sponsor acknowledgment. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 29 of 64 187 b. Signs for water -related uses. c. Signs installed by a government agency for public safety along any public trail or at any public park. d. Signs installed within the rights of way of any public right-of-way or bridge within the shoreline buffer. e. Signs installed on utilities and wireless communication facilities denoting danger or other safety information, including emergency contact information. 2. Billboards and other off -premise signs are strictly forbidden in the shoreline buffer. Section 21. TMC 18.44.060 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.060 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping A. Purpose 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: 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; shelter; the river; and (2) Habitat for birds, insects and small mammals; (3) Vegetation that overhangs the river to provide places for fish to (4) Source of insects for fish; (5) Filtering of pollutants and slowing of stormwater prior to its entering (6) A long-term source of woody debris for the river. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 30 of 64 188 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 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. B. Applicability. 1. This chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control maintenance and clearing of trees within the City of Tukwila for properties located within the shoreline jurisdiction. For properties located within a critical area or its associated buffer, the maintenance and removal of trees shall be governed by TMC Chapter 18.45. TMC Chapter 18.54, "Urban Forestry and Tree Regulations" chapter shall govern tree removal on any undeveloped land and any land zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) that is developed with a single family residence. TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," shall govern the maintenance and removal of trees on developed properties that are zoned commercial, industrial, or multifamily, and on properties located in the LDR zone that are developed with a non -single family residential use. The most stringent regulations shall apply in case of a conflict. 2. 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 project or overwater structure. 3. The tree protection and retention requirements and the vegetation management requirements apply to existing uses as well as new or re -development. C. Minor Activities Allowed without a Permit or Exemption. a. The following activities are allowed without a permit or exemption: (1) Maintenance of existing, lawfully established areas of crop vegetation, landscaping (including paths and trails) or gardens within shoreline jurisdiction. Examples include, mowing lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops, pruning, and planting of non-invasive ornamental vegetation or indigenous native species to maintain the general condition and extent of such areas. Cutting down trees and shrubs within the shoreline jurisdiction is not covered under this provision. Excavation, filling, and construction of new landscaping features, such as concrete work, berms and walls, are not covered in this provision and are subject to review; (2) Noxious weed control within shoreline jurisdiction, if work is selective only for noxious species; is done by hand removal/spraying of individual plants; spraying is conducted by a licensed applicator (with the required aquatic endorsements from WADOE if work is in an aquatic site); and no area -wide vegetation removal or W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 31 of 64 189 grubbing is conducted. Control methods not meeting these criteria may still be approved under other provisions of this chapter. D. Tree Retention and Replacement. 1. Retention. a. 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 a land use application such as but not limited to subdivision or short plat, design review, or development permit 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. b. Topping of trees is prohibited and will be regulated, as removal with tree replacement required. c. Trees may only be pruned to prevent interference with an overhead utility line with prior approval by the Director. The pruning must be carried out under the direction of a Qualified Tree Professional or performed by the utility provider under the direction of a Qualified Tree Professional. The crown shall be maintained to at least 2/3 the height of the tree prior to pruning. Pruning more than 25% of the canopy in a 36 month period shall be regulated as removal with tree replacement required. 2. Permit Requirements. 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 critical 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. g. An application fee per the current Land Use Permit Fee resolution. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 32 of 64 190 3. Criteria for Shoreline Tree Removal. A Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit shall only be approved by the Director of Community Development if the proposal complies with the following criteria as applicable: a. The site is undergoing development or redevelopment; b. Tree poses a risk to structures; c. There is imminent potential for root or canopy interference with utilities; d. Trees interfere with the access and passage on public trails; e. Tree condition and health is poor, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist; f. Trees present an imminent hazard to the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist; and g. The proposal complies with tree retention, replacement, maintenance and monitoring requirements of this Chapter. 4. Tree Replacement Requirements. a. Significant trees that are removed, illegally topped, or pruned by more than 25 percent in 36 month period within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be replaced pursuant to the tree replacement requirements shown below, up to a density of 100 trees per acre (including existing trees). b. Significant trees that are part of an approved landscape plan on a developed site are subject to replacement per TMC Chapter 18.52. Dead or dying trees removed from developed or landscaped areas shall be replaced 1:1 in the next appropriate season for planting. c. 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. Removal of non -hazardous trees as defined by TMC Chapter 18.06 in non -developed areas are subject to the tree replacement requirements listed in the table below. d. 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 4.5 feet from the ground) Number of Replacement Trees Required 4 - 6 inches (single trunk); 2 inches (any trunk of a multi -trunk tree) 3 Over 6 - 8 inches 4 Over 8 - 20 inches 6 Over 20 inches 8 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 33 of 64 191 e. 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. f. 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 a fee into a tree replacement fund per the adopted fee resolution. 5. Large Woody Debris (LWD). 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 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. E. Tree Protection During Development and Redevelopment. All trees not proposed for removal as part of a project or development shall be protected using Best Management Practices and the standards below. 1. The Critical Root Zones (CRZ) for all trees designated for retention, on site or on adjacent property as applicable, shall be identified on all construction plans, including demolition, grading, civil and landscape site plans. 2. Any roots within the CRZ exposed during construction shall be covered immediately and kept moist with appropriate materials. The City may require a third -party Qualified Tree Professional to review longterm viability of the tree. 3. Physical barriers, such as 6-foot chain link fence or plywood or other approved equivalent, shall be placed around each individual tree or grouping at the CRZ. 4. Minimum distances from the trunk for the physical barriers shall be based on the approximate age of the tree (height and canopy) as follows: a. Young trees (trees which have reached less than 20% of life expectancy): 0.75 per inch of trunk diameter. b. Mature trees (trees which have reached 20-80% of life expectancy): 1 foot per inch of trunk diameter. c. Over mature trees (trees which have reached greater than 80% of life expectancy): 1.5 feet per inch of trunk diameter. 5. Alternative protection methods may be used that provide equal or greater tree protection if approved by the Director. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 34 of 64 192 6. A weatherproof sign shall be installed on the fence or barrier that reads: "TREE PROTECTION ZONE — THIS FENCE SHALL NOT BE REMOVED OR ENCROACHED UPON. No soil disturbance, parking, storage, dumping or burning of materials is allowed within the Critical Root Zone. The value of this tree is $ [insert value of tree as determined by a Qualified Tree Professional here]. Damage to this tree due to construction activity that results in the death or necessary removal of the tree is subject to the Violations section of TMC Chapter 18.44." 7. All tree protection measures installed shall be inspected by the City and, if deemed necessary a Qualified Tree Professional, prior to beginning construction or earth moving. 8. Any branches or limbs that are outside of the CRZ and might be damaged by machinery shall be pruned prior to construction by a Qualified Tree Professional. No construction personnel shall prune affected limbs except under the direct supervision of a Qualified Tree Professional. 9. The CRZ shall be covered with 4 to 6 inches of wood chip mulch. Mulch shall not be placed directly against the trunk. A 6-inch area around the trunk shall be free of mulch. Additional measures, such as fertilization or supplemental water, shall be carried out prior to the start of construction if deemed necessary by the Qualified Tree Professional's report to prepare the trees for the stress of construction activities. 10. No storage of equipment or refuse, parking of vehicles, dumping of materials or chemicals, or placement of permanent heavy structures or items shall occur within the CRZ. 11. No grade changes or soil disturbance, including trenching, shall be allowed within the CRZ. Grade changes within 10 feet of the CRZ shall be approved by the City prior to implementation. 12. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that the CRZ of trees on adjacent properties are not impacted by the proposed development. 13. A pre -construction inspection shall be conducted by the City to finalize tree protection actions. 14. Post -construction inspection of protected trees shall be conducted by the City and, if deemed necessary by the City, a Qualified Tree Professional. All corrective or reparative pruning will be conducted by a Qualified Tree Professional. F. Landscaping. 1. General Requirements. For any new development or redevelopment in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except single family residential development of 4 or fewer lots, invasive vegetation must be removed and native vegetation planted and maintained in the River Buffer, including the river bank. 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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 35 of 64 193 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. b. Invasive vegetation must be removed as part of site preparation and native vegetation planted, including the river bank to OHWM. c. On properties located landward of publicly maintained levees, an applicant is not required to remove invasive vegetation or plant native vegetation on the levees, however the remaining buffer landward of the levee shall be improved and invasive vegetation planted. 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. 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. 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 or in approved developed landscape areas 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 1 gallon container W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 36 of 64 194 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. I. 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 18.44.060.B.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. p. Landscape plans shall include a detail on invasive plant removal and soil preparation. q. 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 an approved biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval that shows plant species, size, number and spacing. The requirement for a 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). b. Plants shall be installed from the OHWM to the upland edge of the River Buffer unless the Director determines that site conditions would make planting unsafe. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 37 of 64 195 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 18.44.060.C.2. 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. g. The Director, in consultation with the City's environmentalist, may approve the use of shrub planting and installation of willow stakes to be counted toward the tree replacement standard in the buffer if proposed as a measure to control invasive plants and increase buffer function. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table Plant Material Type Planting Density Stakes/cuttings along river bank (willows, red osier dogwood) 1 - 2 feet on center or per bioengineering method Shrubs 3 - 5 feet on center, depending on species Trees 15 — 20 feet on center, depending on species Groundcovers, grasses, sedges, rushes, other herbaceous plants 1 — 1.5 feet on center, depending on species Native seed mixes 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 chapter 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 12 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 38 of 64 196 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 a 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. G. 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 views 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. No more than 25% may be pruned from a tree within a 36 month period without prior City review and is subject to replacement ratios of this chapter. This type of pruning is exempt from any permit requirements. Topping of trees is prohibited and shall be regulated as removal with tree replacemet required 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 Department of Ecology or Washington Department of Agriculture. b. Self-contained rodent bait boxes designed to prevent access by other animals are allowed. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 39 of 64 197 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. 4. Restoration Project Plantings: Restoration projects may overplant the site as a way to discourage the re-establishment of invasive species. Thinning of vegetation to improve plant survival and health without a separate shoreline vegetation removal permit may be permitted five to ten years after planting if this approach is approved as part of the restoration project's maintenance and monitoring plan. H. Maintenance and Monitoring. The property owner is required to ensure the viability and long term health of vegetation planted for replacement or mitigation through proper care and maintenance for the life of the project subject to the permit requirements as follows: 1. Tree Replacement and Vegetation Clearing Permit Requirements: a. Schedule an inspection with the Urban Environmentalist to document planting of the correct number and type of plants. b. Submit annual documentation of tree and vegetation health for three years. 2. Restoration and Mitigation Project Requirements: a. A five-year maintenance and monitoring plan must be approved by the City prior to permit issuance. The monitoring period will begin when the restoration is accepted by the City and as -built plans have been submitted. b. Monitoring reports shall be submitted annually for City review up until the end of the monitoring period. Reports shall measure survival rates against project goals and present contingency plans to meet project goals. c. Mitigation will be complete after project goals have been met and accepted by City environmentalist. d. A performance bond or financial security equal to 150% of the cost of labor and materials required for implementation of the planting, maintenance and monitoring shall be submitted prior to City acceptance of project. Section 22. TMC 18.44.070 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.070 Environmentally Critical Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction A. Applicable Critical Areas Regulations. The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC Chapter 18.45, (Ordinance #, date), which is herein incorporated by reference into this SMP, except as provided in TMC Section 18.44.070(B). Said provisions shall apply to any use, alteration, or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. Unless otherwise stated, no development shall be constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, or altered, or land divided without full compliance with the provisions adopted by reference and the Shoreline Master W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 40 of 64 198 Program. Within shoreline jurisdiction, the regulations of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be liberally construed together with the Shoreline Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between any of the adopted provisions below and the Shoreline Master Program, the most restrictive provisions shall prevail. 1. Wetlands 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) 3. Areas of potential geologic instability 4. Abandoned mine areas 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas B. The following provisions in TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply: 1. Critical Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 8.45.160) 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180). Exceptions within shoreline jurisdiction shall require a shoreline variance based on the variance criteria listed in TMC Section 18.44.110(F) and WAC 173-27-170. 3. Permitting, Appeals, and Enforcement Procedures (TMC 18.45.195) 4. Activities and alterations to shorelines of the state and their buffers shall be subject to the provisions of this Master Program. 5. Shoreline buffer widths are defined in TMC Section 18.44.040 . 6. Future amendments to the Critical Areas Ordinance require Department of Ecology approval of an amendment to this Master Program to incorporate updated language. 7. If provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance conflict with provisions of this Master Program, the provisions that are the most protective of the ecological resource shall apply, as determined by the Director. 8. If there are provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance that are not consistent with the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW, and supporting Washington Administrative Code chapters, those provisions shall not apply. C. Areas of seismic instability are also defined as critical areas. These areas are regulated by the Washington State Building Code, rather than by Section 18.44.070 of this chapter. Additional building standards applicable to frequently flooded areas are included in the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52). W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 41 of 64 199 Section 23. TMC 18.44.080 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.080 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 in the Shoreline Master Program. f. Where a land division of five or greater lots, or a residential project of five or greater residential units, is proposed. 2. 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 TMC Section 18.44.080(F). The terms and conditions of TMC Sections 18.44.080(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. 3. 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 an area is limited to authorized personnel and providing such access would create inherent and unavoidable security problems that cannot be mitigated through site design or fencing; or W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 42 of 64 200 d. Where providing such access would cause significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated. An applicant claiming an exemption under items 3(b) - (d) above must comply with the procedures in TMC Section 18.44.080(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 identified with signage; and c. Clearly identified pathways that are separate from vehicular circulation areas. This may be accomplished through the use of distinct paving materials, 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 in perpetuity. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 43 of 64 201 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 18.44.080(A)1, 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 shall meet public access requirements by upgrading the trail along the property frontage to meet the standards of a 12-foot-wide trail with 2-foot shoulders on each side. If a 12-foot-wide trail exists on the property it shall mean public access requirements have been met if access to the trail exists within 1,000 feet of the property. 2. Development on Properties Where New Regional Trails are Planned. An applicant seeking to develop property abutting the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments shall meet public access requirements by dedicating a 16-foot- wide trail easement to the City for public access along the river. 3. On -site Trail Standards. Trails providing access within a property, park or restoration site shall be developed at a width appropriate to the expected usage and environmental sensitivity of the site. 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. 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, hand carry boat launching, fishing, interpretive/educational uses, and/or parking that accommodates these uses, and shall be designed so as to not interfere with the privacy of adjacent residential uses. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 44 of 64 202 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 that connects 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 within the shoreline jurisdiction may be increased by 15 feet 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 within the shoreline jurisdiction may be increased by 15 feet for properties that construct a 12-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 12-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. 4. During the project review, the project proponent shall affirmatively demonstrate that the increased height will: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 45 of 64 203 a. Not block the views of a substantial number of residences; b. Not cause environmental impacts such as light impacts adversely affecting the river corridor; c. Achieve no net loss of ecological function; and d. Not combine incentives to increase the allowed building height above the maximum height in the parcel's zoning district. 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 such as active railroad tracks or hazardous chemicals related to the primary use that cannot be prevented by any practical means. b. The area is limited to authorized personnel and inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of alternative design features or other solutions. 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: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 46 of 64 204 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, a private applicant may provide restoration/enhancement of the shoreline jurisdiction to a scale commensurate with the foregone public access. Section 24. TMC 18.44.090 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.090 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 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. 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 towards 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. 2. Building Design. Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 47 of 64 205 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. 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 such as boulders are appropriate. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 48 of 64 206 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. 4. Design of Flood Walls. The exposed new floodwalls should be designed to incorporate brick or stone facing, textured concrete block, design elements formed into the concrete or vegetation to cover the wall within 3 years of planting. Section 25. TMC 18.44.100 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.100 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 RCW 90.58.580. B. Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction Due to Restoration. 1. Relief may be granted from Shoreline Master Program standards and use regulations 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 this chapter's 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 (1) The proposed relief is the minimum necessary to relieve the (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. criteria: hardship; W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 49 of 64 207 (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 Department of Ecology must review and approve applications for relief. c. For the portion of property that moves from outside Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project, the City may consider the following, consistent with the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.100.B.1.a. (1) permitting development for the full range of uses of the underlying zoning consistent with the Zoning Code, including uses that are not water oriented; (2) waiving the requirement to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit if it is otherwise exempt from the requirement for a substantial development permit; (3) waiving the provisions for public access; (4) waiving the requirement for shoreline design review; and (5) waiving the development standards set forth in this chapter. d. The intent of the exemptions identified in TMC Section 18.44.100.B.1.c.(1) to B.1.c.(5) 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 Goals and Policies 5.2 of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. 2. Consistent with the provisions of TMC Section 18.44.100.B.1.a, 1.b and 1.c, the Shoreline Residential Environment, High Intensity, Urban Conservancy Environment Shoreline 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 50 of 64 208 C. Shoreline Restoration Building Height Incentive. 1. Consistent with provisions in TMC Section 18.44.050.C, building heights within shoreline jurisdiction may be increased 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 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." Additional Restoration and/or enhancement shall include: a. creation of shallow -water (maximum slope 5H:1V) off channel rearing habitat and/or b. removal of fish passage barriers to known or potential fish habitat, and restoration of the barrier site. Section 26. TMC 18.44.110 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.110 Administration A. Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit. 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 chapter whether or not a permit is required. B. Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations. 1. Compliance with this Master Program does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may apply. The applicant is responsible for complying with all other applicable requirements. 2. Where this Master Program makes reference to any RCW, WAC, or other state or federal law or regulation, the most recent amendment or current edition shall apply. 3. In the case of any conflict between any other federal, state, or local law and this Master Program, the provision that is most protective of shoreline resources shall prevail, except when constrained by federal or state law, or where specifically provided in this Master Program. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 51 of 64 209 4. Relationship to Critical Areas Regulations. (a) For protection of critical areas where they occur in shoreline jurisdiction, this Master Program adopts by reference the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, which is incorporated into this Master Program with specific exclusions and modifications in TMC Section 18.44.070. (b) All references to the Critical Areas Ordinance are for the version adopted . Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191(2)(b), amending the referenced regulations in the Master Program for those critical areas under shoreline jurisdiction will require an amendment to the Master Program and approval by the Department of Ecology. [CAO adoption date] (c) Within shoreline jurisdiction, the Critical Areas Ordinance shall be liberally construed together with this Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of this Master Program and Chapter 90.58 RCW. C. Developments not required to obtain shoreline permits or local reviews. Requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the following as described in WAC 173-27-044 and WAC 173-27-045: 1. Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to Chapter 70.105D RCW, or to the Department of Ecology when it conducts a remedial action under Chapter 70.105D RCW. 2. Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a national pollutant discharge elimination system storm water general permit. 3. WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.356, Washington State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW 90.58.356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other local review. 4. Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045. 5. Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW. D. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 52 of 64 210 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, TMC Section 18.44.100. 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 and overlay district. 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. 3. A substantial development permit shall be granted only when the development proposed is consistent with: a. The policies and procedures of the Shoreline Management Act; b. The provisions of Chapter 173-27 WAC; and c. This Shoreline Master Program. E. 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 this chapter 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 shall 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 this chapter. 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 Shoreline Master Program; (2) The proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines; W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 53 of 64 211 (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 this chapter; (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 policies of Chapter 90.58 RCW and all local ordinances and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. F. 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 chapter where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of this chapter 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. Variances from the use regulations of this chapter are prohibited. 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 a permit would result in inconsistencies with the policies of the Shoreline Management Act (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 ordinary high water mark 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 this chapter preclude or significantly interfere with a reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by this chapter. b. The hardship for which the applicant is seeking the variance 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 this chapter, 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 54 of 64 212 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. g. 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. 5. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM. a. Shoreline variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located either waterward of the ordinary high water mark or within any critical 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 18.44.1110F.4., "Approval Criteria;" and (3) The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected by the granting of the variance. G. Non -Conforming Development. 1. Non -Conforming Uses. Any non -conforming lawful use of land that would not be allowed under the terms of this chapter may be continued as an allowed, legal, non -conforming 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, moved 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 chapter except as authorized in TMC Section 18.66.120 or upon approval of a conditional use permit. b. If any such non -conforming use ceases for any reason for a period of more than 24 consecutive months, the non -conforming rights shall expire and any subsequent use shall conform to the regulations specified in this chapter for the shoreline environment in which such use is located, unless re-establishment of the use is authorized through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, which must be applied for within the two-year period when the non -conforming use ceases to exist. Water -dependent uses should not be considered discontinued when they are inactive due to dormancy, or where the use is typically seasonal. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City may grant an extension W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 55 of 64 213 of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set forth in TMC Section 18.44.110.G.4. c. 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 Type 2 permit with public notice 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 Shoreline Use Matrix. d. 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 Type 2 permit subject to public notice. Before approving 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 non -conforming 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 chapter. This may include the restoration of paved areas to vegetated area if no longer in use. (7) 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. Such structures may be repaired, maintained, upgraded and altered provided that: (1) The structure may not 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 except as authorized in TMC Section 18.66.120; and (2) If the structure is located on a property that has no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, there shall be no limit on the cost of alterations, provided the applicant restores and/or enhances the entire shoreline buffer W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 56 of 64 214 along the subject property to meet the vegetation management standards of this chapter. If the structure is located on a property that has reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, the cost of the alterations may not exceed an aggregate cost of 50% of the value of the building or structure in any 3-year period based upon its most recent assessment, unless the amount over 50% is used to make the building or structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a building or structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. (3) Maintenance or repair of an existing private bridge is allowed without a conditional use permit when it does not involve the use of hazardous substances, sealants or other liquid oily substances. 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 two years of the date the damage occurred and all reconstruction is completed within two years of permit issuance. In the event the property is redeveloped, such redevelopment must be in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. c. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance, it must be brought as closely as practicable into conformance with the applicable master program and the act. 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 an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months may be granted using the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.110.G.4. e. Residential structures located in any Shoreline Residential Environment and in existence at the time of adoption of this chapter shall not be deemed nonconforming in terms of height, residential 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 the Shoreline Residential Environment that 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. 3. For the purposes of this section, altered or partially reconstructed is defined as work that does not exceed 50% of the assessed valuation of the building over a three- year period. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 57 of 64 215 4. Requests for Time Extension —Non -conforming Uses and Structures. a. A property owner may request, prior to the end of the two—year period, an extension of time beyond the two-year period. Such a request shall be considered as a Type 2 permit under TMC Chapter 18.104 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. (3) The applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer on the property to offset the impact of the continuation of the non -conforming use. For non- conforming 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 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. 5. 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 structure 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. 6. Non -Conforming Parking Lots. a. Nothing contained in this chapter 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 chapter. 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 this chapter shall be complied with for the additional parking area. c. If a property is redeveloped, a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed that requires an increase in the parking area by an increment greater than W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 58 of 64 216 100%, the requirements of this chapter shall be complied with for the entire parking area. An existing non -conforming parking lot, which is not otherwise subject to the requirements of this chapter, may be upgraded to improve water quality or meet local, state, and federal regulations. d. The area beneath a non -conforming structure may be converted to a contiguous parking lot area if the non -conforming structure is demolished and only when the contiguous parking is accessory to a legally established use. The converted parking area must be located landward of existing parking areas. 7. Non -Conforming Landscape Areas. a. Adoption of the vegetation protection and landscaping regulations contained in this chapter 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 chapter, 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 chapter, a landscape plan that conforms to the requirements of this chapter shall be submitted to the Director for approval. H. Revisions to Shoreline Permits. Revisions to previously issued shoreline permits shall be reviewed under the SMP in effect at the time of submittal of the revision, and not the SMP under which the original shoreline permit was approved and processed in accordance with WAC 173-27-100. I. Time Limits on Shoreline Permits. 1. Consistent with WAC 173-27-090, shoreline permits are valid for two years, and the work authorized under the shoreline permit must be completed in five years. Construction activity must begin within this two-year period. If construction has not begun within two years, a one-time extension of one year may be approved by the Director based on reasonable factors. The permit time period does not include the time during which administrative appeals or legal actions are pending or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the project. 2. Upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of a proposed project, and consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, the City may adopt a different time limit for a shoreline substantial development permit as part of an action on a shoreline substantial development permit. Section 27. TMC 18.44.120 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.120 Appeals Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying, or rescinding of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, or Shoreline W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 59 of 64 217 Variance may seek review from the Shorelines Hearings Board by filing a petition for review within 21 days of the date of filing of the decision as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). Section 28. TMC 18.44.130 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.130 Enforcement and Penalties A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered violations of this chapter: 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 this chapter. 2. Any work which is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other requirements in a permit approved pursuant to this chapter, provided that the terms or conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans. 3. To remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in accordance with this chapter. 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 this chapter. B. Enforcement. This chapter shall be enforced 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 this chapter, 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 this chapter shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in TMC Chapter 8.45 of the Tukwila Municipal Code ("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 Chapter 8.45.120, Penalties. 3. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a permit required by this chapter, 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 60 of 64 218 4. Penalties for Tree Removal: a. Each unlawfully removed or damaged tree shall constitute a separate violation. b. The amount of the penalty shall be $1,000 per tree or up to the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by an ISA certified arborist. The Director may elect not to seek penalties or may reduce the penalties if he/she determines the circumstances do not warrant imposition of any or all of the civil penalties. c. Any illegal removal of required trees shall be subject to obtaining a tree permit and replacement with trees that meet or exceed the functional value of the removed trees. In addition, any shrubs and groundcover removed without City approval shall be replaced. d. To replace the tree canopy lost due to the tree removal, additional trees must be planted on -site. Payment may be made into the City's Tree Fund if the number of replacement trees cannot be accommodated on -site. The number of replacement trees required will be based on the size of the tree(s) removed as stated in TMC Section 18.44.060 B 4. 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 this chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 1. Remedial measures must conform to the policies and guidelines of this chapter and the Shoreline Management Act. 2. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of this chapter 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 this chapter or any rule or other provisions adopted or issued pursuant to this chapter, 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 this chapter, 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 TMC Section 8.45.100. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 61 of 64 219 Section 29. TMC 18.44.140 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.140 Liability No provision of or term used in this chapter 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 30. TMC 18.52.030 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2580 §6, 2523 §8, 2442 §1, 2251 §61, 2235 §13, and 1872 §14 (part), as codified in the first paragraph at TMC Section 18.52.030 (above TABLE A — Perimeter and Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements by Zone District), are hereby amended for the first paragraph to read as follows: 18.52.030 Perimeter and Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements by Zone District In the various zone districts of the City, landscaping in the front, rear and side yards and parking lots shall be provided as established by the various zone district chapters of this title. These requirements are summarized in the following table (Table A), except for Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) requirements, which are listed in TMC Chapter 18.28. Additional landscape requirements apply in the Shoreline Overlay District, as directed by TMC Section 18.44.060, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping. Section 31. TMC 18.60.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2580 §7 and §8, 2442 §5, 2368 §62, 2235 §16 and §17, 2199 §20, 1986 §16, 1865 §51, and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.60.050, are hereby amended to add Section H to read as follows: 18.60.050 Board of Architectural Review H. Shoreline Design Criteria. The criteria contained in the Shoreline Design Guidelines (TMC Section 18.44.090) shall be used whenever the provisions of this title require a design review decision on a proposed or modified development in the Shoreline Overlay District. Section 32. TMC 18.104.010 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2442 §6, 2368 §70, 2294 §1, 2251 §75, 2235 §19, 2135 §19, and 2119 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.104.010, "Classification of Project Permit Applications," subparagraph 3, "Type 3 Decisions," are hereby amended to read as follows: 3. TYPE 3 DECISIONS are quasi-judicial decisions made by the Hearing Examiner following an open record hearing. Type 3 decisions may be appealed only to Superior Court, except for shoreline variances and shoreline conditional uses that may be appealed to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 62 of 64 220 TYPE 3 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY (closed record appeal) Resolve uncertain zone district boundary Hearing Examiner Superior Court Variance (zoning, shoreline, sidewalk, land alteration, sign) Hearing Examiner Superior Court TSO Special Permission Use (TMC Section 18.41.060) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Conditional Use Permit Hearing Examiner Superior Court Modifications to Certain Parking Standards (TMC Chapter 18.56) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Reasonable Use Exceptions under Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC Section 18.45.180) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Variance for Noise in excess of 60 days (TMC Section 8.22.120) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Variance from Parking Standards over 10% (TMC Section 18.56.140) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Subdivision - Preliminary Plat with no associated Design Review application (TMC Section 17.14.020) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Wireless Communication Facility, Major or Waiver Request (TMC Chapter 18.58) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Hearing Examiner State Shorelines Hearings Board Section 33. Codification Clarification. Due to amendments to TMC Chapter 18.44 as stated in this ordinance, TMC sections formerly numbered 18.44.065, 18.44.150 and 18.44.160 no longer exist. Section 34. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 63 of 64 221 Section 35. 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 36. 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 , 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes strike-thru 8-28-19 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 64 of 64 222 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initial. Meetiq Date Prepared by Mayor- review Co dnczl review 08/26/19 RB lic, 09/03/19 RB W. ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. STA I, SPONSOR: RACHEL BIANCHI ORIGINAL AGENDA DA1'I?: 08/26/19 AGI?ND,\ I'rr,M Ti l l,1? Interlocal agreement with City of SeaTac for Justice Center frontage improvements Cx1'1?GORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date Motion Date 9/3/19 ❑ Resolution Mty Date ❑ Ordinance Ally Date ❑ Bid Award Ally Date ❑ Public Hearing Ally Date 11 11 Other Ally Ally Date 08/26/19 SPONSOR ❑Council HR ❑DCD Finance ❑Fire ❑TS ❑Pe'AZ ❑Police ❑PIV ❑Court ►1Mayor SPONSOR'S The City of Tukwila is building the Justice Center abutting Military Road, which is the City SUNL'\lARY of SeaTac's right of way. In order to address the frontage improvements needed on the Military Road side of the Justice Center, the cities need to enter into an interlocal agreement. RI,A'11,WI?D BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. ❑ CDN Comm ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Trans &Infrastructure ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. DATE: 8/19/19 COMMIT TEE CI -LAIR: ROBERTSON 1 Public Safety Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONsoR/ADMIN. Commn'rrEk Administrative Services Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPINDITURI: RI?QUIRI:D AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 8/26/19 Forward to next Regular Meeting 09/03/19 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 8/26/19 Informational memo dated August 13, 2019. SeaTac Interlocal Agreement for Frontage Improvements Minutes from the 8/19 Public Safety Committee Meeting 09/03/19 Interlocal Agreement 223 224 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEATAC AND THE CITY OF TUKWILA FOR FEE IN LIEU OF MITIGATION RELATED TO CONSTRUCTING FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN MILITARY ROAD SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TUKWILA JUSTICE CENTER This Agreement is between the City of SeaTac ("SEATAC") in King County, a municipal corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Washington, and the City of Tukwila ("TUKWILA") in King County, a municipal corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Washington, for fee in lieu of mitigation of constructing frontage improvements in Military Road South right-of-way for the development of the Tukwila Justice Center project. RECITALS WHEREAS, TUKWILA owns or is in the process of acquiring the 15000 block of Tukwila International Boulevard, located in the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington, for the purposed of constructing the Tukwila Justice Center; and WHEREAS, four of these parcels owned by TUKWILA, identified as King County Parcel Numbers 004100-0514, 004100-0516, 004100-0480, and 004100-0494 abut Military Road South, which is in the public right-of-way located in the SEATAC ("Abutting Property"); and WHEREAS, TUKWILA is making certain improvements in association with the development of the Tukwila Justice Center on the above -referenced property ("Proposed Development"); and WHEREAS, in connection with the Proposed Development and as a condition, TUKWILA is constructing certain frontage improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, street lighting, and surface water management infrastructure along Military Road South ("Frontage Improvements") at TUKWILA's cost; and WHEREAS, the construction of the Frontage Improvements is required to mitigate a direct impact that has been identified as a consequence of the Proposed Development; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 82.02.020, TUKWILA desires to enter into a voluntary agreement with SEATAC, in which TUKWILA will make a one-time payment to SEATAC in lieu of constructing improvements needed to mitigate the direct impact of the Proposed Development ("Mitigation Payment"); and WHEREAS, SEATAC and TUKWILA agree that a one-time payment made by TUKWILA to SEATAC will be used to mitigate the Proposed Development's direct impacts on Military Road South; and WHEREAS, SEATAC agrees that once payment has been made to SEATAC, and the payment has been utilized to mitigate impacts on Military Road South, TUKWILA will not be responsible for constructing Frontage Improvements along Military Road South adjacent to the Abutting Property; and 1 225 WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this fee in lieu agreement so that SEATAC may apply the Mitigation Payment to SEATAC's Military Road South and South 152nd Street Capital Improvement Project that meets or exceeds the mitigation goals required of the Proposed Development, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the parties contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. PAYMENT IN LIEU OF MITIGATION 1.2. Pursuant to RCW 82.02.020 as a voluntary agreement, TUKWILA hereby agrees and covenants to make a one-time Mitigation Payment to SEATAC, in the sum of Two Hundred Thirty -Eight Thousand Five Hundred Fifty -Three and zero cents ($238,553.00), in consideration of SEATAC agreeing that acceptance of the above - referenced Mitigation Payment is in lieu of TUKWILA constructing frontage improvements along Military Road South, adjacent to TUKWILA's Abutting Property, as a condition of the Proposed Development. The Mitigation Payment shall be remitted no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the date of execution of this Agreement. 2. FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG MILITARY ROAD SOUTH 2.1. SEATAC agrees that the Mitigation Payment identified in this Agreement mitigates direct impacts of the Proposed Development, and that any frontage improvements later constructed in Military Road South, adjacent to TUKWILA's property, will not be borne by TUKWILA. 3. USE OF MITIGATION PAYMENT BY THE CITY TUKWILA and SEATAC agree that the payment identified in Paragraph I above may be used by SEATAC for improvements on SEATAC's Military Road South and South 152nd Street Capital Improvement Project, and that such improvements will mitigate direct impacts that have been identified as a consequence of the Proposed Development. 4. AGREEMENT APPURTENANT AND BINDING ON SUCCESSORS 4.1. This Agreement and the covenants, conditions, and terms hereof shall be appurtenant to, and shall run with, the real property described in this Agreement, and shall be binding on the heirs, assigns, and successors in interest of TUKWILA. 5. CHOICE OF LAW 5.1. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event of any litigation regarding construction or effect of this Agreement, or the rights of the parties to this Agreement, it is agreed that venue shall be King County, Washington. 2 226 6. COSTS TO PREVAILING PARTY 6.1. In the event that either party initiates any action to enforce the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable costs and attorney's fees. 7. ENTIRE INSTRUMENT 7.1. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the matter set forth and herein and any prior or contemporaneous understandings are merged herein. This Agreement shall not be modified except by written Agreement executed by the parties hereto. 8. ENFORCEMENT 8.1. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and gives no third - party right to any other entity or person. No joint venture is formed as a result of this Agreement. 9. AMENDMENT 9.1. This Agreement may not be amended except by a written instrument signed by both parties. 10. COUNTERPARTS 10.1. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original agreement, and all of which shall constitute one agreement. The execution of one counterpart by a party shall have the same force and effect as if that party had signed all other counterparts. 11. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS 11.1. The Recitals contained in this Agreement, and the Preamble paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. 12. NO THIRD -PARTY BENEFICIARIES 12.1. This Agreement is for the benefit of the Parties hereto only and is not intended to benefit any other person or entity, and no person or entity not a signatory to this Agreement shall have any third -party beneficiary or other right whatsoever under this Agreement. No other person or entity not a party to this Agreement may enforce the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 3 227 13. SEVERABILITY 13.1. The provisions of this Agreement are separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion or the invalidity of the remainder of this Agreement, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. 14. HEADINGS 14.1. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for reference only and shall not be construed to expand, limit, or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby enter into this Agreement as of the latest date written below. CITY OF SEATAC CITY OF TUKWILA Name: Carl C. Cole Title: City Manager Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Name: David Cline Title: City Administrator Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Name: Mark S. Johnsen Name: Rachel Turpin Title: Senior Assistant City Attorney 4 Title: City Attorney 228 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 09/03/19 LH ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. STAFF SPONSOR: LAUREL HUMPHREY ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 9/03/19 AGENDA ITIM TITLE A resolution restating and repealing Resolution the city's 1900. commitment to being diverse, tolerant and inclusive, CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance MtgDate ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date /1 Resolution Mtg Date 9/3/19 ❑Mayor- HR DCD ❑.Finance .Fire TS P&R Police ❑PTV Court SPONSOR 11 Council SPONSOR'S The City Council requested additional language in its policy statement on being an inclusive SUMMARY city. The best way to achieve this is by repealing Resolution 1900 and restating its content with the additions. REVIEWED BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. ❑ CDN Comm ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Public Safety Comm. ❑ Trans &Infrastructure ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: COMMI FI EE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. COIVII1n rEE COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 9/3/19 Resolution 229 230 City of Tu ila Washington Resolution No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, RESTATING THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO BEING DIVERSE, TOLERANT AND INCLUSIVE, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1900. WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is a beautifully diverse community of neighborhoods, residents, businesses and visitors; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila considers this diversity to be one of its greatest assets and prioritizes the value of inclusiveness; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1614 in 2006 reaffirming its commitment to being an inclusive community as a fundamental value; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1900 in 2016 reaffirming its commitment to being a diverse, tolerant and inclusive community; and WHEREAS, we, as elected representatives of the people, have a responsibility to not stay silent in the face of violence and discrimination against any person; and WHEREAS, the people of Tukwila recognize that people of all cultures, ethnicities, abilities, and backgrounds all do better when we work together; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila promotes civilityand strives for a culture where tolerance and solidarity overcome fear and division; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila does not tolerate bias, harassment, or discrimination based on race, religion, ancestry, national origin, immigration status, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, housing status or status with regard to public assistance; and W:\Legislative Development\Recommitment to being diverse -tolerant -inclusive 8-23-19 LH:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 3 231 WHEREAS, we advance the principles of non -violence, tolerance, religious freedom, trust and safety, and recognize that these principles are valued by all communities in our City; and WHEREAS, all of Tukwila's residents deserve to live in a safe environment free of hate, discrimination and fear; and WHEREAS, we believe in the public sector for the public good, and advancing equity and inclusion is critical to the success of our communities and our nation; and WHEREAS, because hate crimes and incidences of intimidation are on the rise locally, regionally, and nationally, the City Council desires to reiterate their position that all elected officials, whether local, state, or federal, should be leaders in opposing hate speech and especially careful to never use such language in spoken, written, or social media; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council reaffirms its commitment to equality and inclusiveness for all residents and visitors to our City. We reject the politics and language of division, bigotry, violence, hate and discrimination. We will fight for the rights, freedoms and interests of all the members of our community no matter what the color of our skin, our gender, the way we worship, where we were born, our sexual orientation, our abilities, or any other identity. Furthermore, we resolve to: 1. Prioritize and promote a welcoming environment for all in our community and recognize the rights of individuals to live their lives with dignity and free of discrimination. 2. Commit to pursuing a policy agenda that affirms civil and human rights and ensures that those targeted on the basis of culture, religion or immigration status can turn to government without fear of recrimination. 3. Engage with individuals and community groups to promote education and dialogue among all community members. 4. Denounce the use of language expressing hate with the intent to strike fear in the hearts of people because of their racial, cultural, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or national origin differences. Section 2. Resolution No. 1900 is hereby repealed in its entirety. 232 W:\Legislative Development\Recommitment to being diverse -tolerant -inclusive 8-23-19 LH:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 3 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Kathy Hougardy, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Dennis Robertson, Tukwila City Council Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Verna Seal, Tukwila City Council Filed with the City Clerk: De'Sean Quinn, Tukwila City Council Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Kate Kruller, Tukwila City Council Thomas McLeod, Tukwila City Council Zak Idan, Tukwila City Council W:\Legislative Development\Recommitment to being diverse -tolerant -inclusive 8-23-19 LH:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 3 233 234 TO: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Mayor's Office - David Cline, City Administrator The City of opportunity, the community of choice Mayor Ekberg Councilmembers FROM: David Cline, City Administrator DATE: August 28, 2019 SUBJECT: City Administrator's Report The City Administrator Report is meant to provide the Council, staff and community an update on the activities of the City and on issues that concern Tukwila. Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information about any of the following items. I. Intergovernmental Update • Washington City/County Management Association (WCMA) Annual Conference: City Administrator David Cline attended the WCMA Annual Conference held in Kennewick August 13 -16. At the conference Tukwila was presented with the Innovations in Local Government Award for the free wi-fi project and the Outstanding Assistant award was given to Rachel Bianchi for going above and beyond in her duties as Deputy City Administrator. • King County Flood Control District Advisory Meeting: Mayor Ekberg and Councilmember Robertson attended a King County Flood Control District Advisory meeting on August 15. • Meeting with Senator Murray's Office: Mayor Ekberg, City Administrator David Cline and Community Engagement Manager Niesha Fort -Brooks met with Stasha Espinosa, Director of King County Affairs for Senator Patty Murray on August 21 to discuss barriers for the underserved and best practices for voter education to improve voter turnout. • Meeting with Councilmember Upthegrove: City Administrator David Cline and Business Relations Manager Brandon Miles met with Councilmember Upthegrove on August 23 and provided a tour of the areas by the Sound Transit commuter rail station and the Tukwila International Boulevard light rail station where we have applied for grant funds that would be allocated for pedestrian improvements. II. Community Events • Tukwila Community Center Mural: The new mural at the Tukwila Community Center is complete. The mural was created by Hoa Hong, a local Tukwila resident and artist and depicts the four seasons and keeping a watchful eye on the river. • See You in the Park The Sullivan Center Shindig: The Sullivan Center Shindig was the final See You in the Park event of the summer, held on August 21 at the Sullivan Center. While the weather may have impacted attendance, there was an overall turnout of about 125 Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 235 City Administrator's Report August 28, 2019 Page 2 attendees. The event was held in conjunction with the Tukwila Farmers Market. Several vendors from local organizations shared resources on transit, care programs and more. Global to Local was onsite providing free health screenings. The City was presented with the Governor's Smart Communities Partnership Award for Tukwila Village at the event. • Welcome the Water Event: Welcome the Water will be held September 8 at the Tukwila Community Center. An afternoon gathering by the river to honor the water, the Duwamish River, the salmon, and the change of the seasons. III. Staff Updates Public Safety • Secure Mailbox Program: The City has purchased another 100 mailboxes to offer to the residents of Tukwila. The high security mailboxes were purchased at a discount of $108, to sell to Tukwila residents at cost and at a reduced rate for lower income residents. The application can be found online at http://TukwilaWA.gov/mailbox. There are also applications available at City Hall. Once the application is approved, staff will contact the applicant for payment and pickup arrangements. • Community Meeting: The Community Police Team had a fruitful community meeting regarding activity occurring along 164th Street. The area is actively being patrolled and issues are being addressed. • Interurban Trail Clean -Up: The major clean up on the Interurban Trail was completed earlier than anticipated and the trail has been reopened. The contractor for Puget Sound Energy cutback overgrown non-native vegetation and blackberries along the public trail from Strander Boulevard south to 180th St. In the process, crews removed hundreds of junked automotive and truck tires, and more than 25 tons of trash, which included more than 40 shopping carts, wooden pallets, broken furniture, automotive parts, medical waste and a pickup load of various electronics for recycling. Project Updates • 53rd Ave S: Estimated Completion: November 2019 The contractor is currently with Seattle City Light (SCL) in order to secure operation acceptance for the project. The contractor is also restoring the irrigation systems for the adjacent school district properties. • 42nd Ave Phase III: Estimated Completion: November 2019 The contractor is coordinating with the electrical sub -constructor to finish installing the remaining streetlights. • S 196th/200th Street Bridge Repair: Six bids were received on August 20 and are currently being reviewed. • 2019 Overlay and Repair: Estimated Completion: August 2019 All contracted work has been completed, except for pedestrian signal modifications at 52nd Ave S and Interurban Ave S. Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 236 City Administrator's Report August 28, 2019 Page 3 • Economic Development Plan Outreach: Economic Development staff attended the recent Human Services Advisory Board meeting to explain how Board members can be involved in the City's Economic Development Plan. • Potential Land Sale Coordination: Economic Development staff met with two of the property owners adjacent to the City's vacant lot at 14840 Tukwila International Boulevard (former Newporter motel) to discuss a coordinated sale in 2020. • HealthPoint Health and Wellness Center: HeathPoint has hired Adam Taylor, formerly with Global to Local, to coordinate community input on needs for the future development. • Tukwila Village Land Sale: The City and developer reached agreement on the final land price for the remaining parcels and the land sale has closed escrow. • Tukwila Village Transportation Management Plan: On August 13 the property owner for the first phase of Tukwila Village submitted a proposed Transportation Management Plan, including a Parking Management Plan, to the City and King County Library System. Both agencies are reviewing the plan. Staff anticipates their will need to be some further work on the plan before it is approved. Boards and Commissions • Arts Commission: Vacant Position: Position #7 Resident. • Civil Service Commission: No vacancies. • COPCAB: Vacant Position: Student Representative. • Equity & Social Justice Commission: Vacant Position: Student Representative. • Human Services Advisory Board: No vacancies • Landmark Commission: No vacancies. • Library Advisory Board: Vacant Positions: Position #7 Resident & Student Representative. One application received. • Lodging Tax Advisory Committee: No vacancies. • Park Commission: Vacant Positions: Position #4 Resident & Student Representative. One application received. • Planning Commission: No vacancies. to Council/Citizen Inquiries Date of Inquiry Inquiry Response July 15, 2019 Councilmember Kruller indicated People are trespassing at cemetery late at night. Chief Linton has requested additional patrols. August 5, 2019 Councilmembers requested clarification about whether emergency vehicles manage speed humps or not? Fire vehicles can manage all current "speed cushions" being used in the city, although they may reduce response by approximately 30-45 seconds Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 237 238 TUKWILA PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN Monthly Update August 31, 2019 Overall Plan Outreach • Team anticipates another event for the public in late 2019. Ground breaking ceremony for all Public Safety Plan Projects at the future FS51 site was held on Saturday, March 30, 2019. Financial Oversight Committee • The Committee reported to Council on September 4, 2018. The Chair of the Committee presented to the Finance Committee on June 24, 2019. • Next Committee Report to Council scheduled for end of 2019. Siting Advisory Committee • The Siting Advisory Committee voted to defer regular meetings as the major decisions have been made. They will meet on an as -needed basis. Acquisition Lease Updates • Process is complete. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Outreach • See attached status report from outreach consultant Darling Nava. Near -term Council Decisions and Key Dates • Contract amendments to Public Safety Committee and Council • Easement authority • Fire Station 52 mini-MACC • Fire Station 54 immediate needs report to Public Safety • PW Masterplan update to Full Council 9/3 Fire Stations Siting • Complete. Architecture and Programming • Architectural program has been reviewed and approved by the team. 239 Design and Permitting • Building permit for Station 51 was submitted in October. Building permit was received in all areas except wetlands report. Permit revisions for accepted alternates for Station 51 have been submitted and are under review. • Station 52 Public Works and initial building permits submitted and under review. • Station 52 traffic determination was submitted in Februrary, 2019 with approval received in April, 2019. • Station 52 Conditional Use Application and Design Review Application have been submitted. Hearings Thursday, June 26, 2019. • Fire Station 51 meetings scheduled with neighbors to negotiate temporary construction easements. • Station 52 Phase 1 Public Works Permit Issued 7/9/19. • Station 52 Phase 2 Building Permit application submitted 8/9/19. Bidding and Construction • Construction for 51 began in May 2019. • Bidding and construction schedule for 52 are on track, early work bidding to start in June with construction to begin in July. • Fire Station 51 first concrete pour done on 6/13. • See monthly Construction Report for FS 51 construction progress and photos. • Fire Station 52 bidding to continue in Sept. • Station 52 NTP executed for Lydig 7/16. • Station 52 site mobilized and fenced 7/22. • Station 52 Phase 1 work continued. • See monthly Construction Report for FS 51 and FS 52 construction progress and photos. • Station 51 first slab on grade pour 8/12. • Station 52 site grading and stabilization occurred through August. Justice Center Siting • Complete. Architecture and Programming • Complete. Design and Permitting 240 • Complete. Bidding and Construction • Construction began in early April, 2019 with mobilization of construction trailers and fencing, utility disconnect work, excavation in the north lot for stormwater utilities, contaminated soil removal, hazardous materials abatement and demolition of remaining buildings on the site. • Sitework, excavation, contaminated soil removal, underground utilities and foundation construction continued. • See monthly Construction Report for construction progress and photos. Public Works Facility • Project is transferred to Public Works Department in August / 2019. Budget • See attached Budget Report Schedule August 2019 • Fire Station 52 phase 2 (building) permit submitted • Public Works Masterplan with phasing presented to Commiitee and September 2019 • Fire Station 52 phase 2 (building) permit issued • Fire Station 52 phase 2 bidding begins October 2019 • Fire Station 52 phase 2 bidding completed • Fire Station 52 Lydig contract amendment to Public Safety Committee November 2019 • Fire Station 52 Lydig contract amendment to Council • Fire Station 52 phase 2 construction begins 241 December 2019 through May 2020 • All projects construction continues May 2020 • Fire Station 51 Substantial Completion • Public Works Move In June 2020 • Fire Station 51 Final completion July 2020 • Fire Station 51 move-in/occupancy September 2020 • Justice Center Substantial Completion October 2020 • Justice Center furniture installation and move-in/occupancy January 2021 • Fire Station 52 Substantial Completion February/March 2021 • Fire Station 52 move-in/occupancy 242 TUKWILA PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECTS Justice Center SOJ Construction Management Monthly Report August 2019 Report Prepared by: Ethan Bernau Report Reviewed by: Justine Kim Owner's Representative: Shiels Obletz Johnsen (SOJ) Architect: DLR Group GCCM: BNBuilders Construction Progress: • Completed first lift of asphalt paving at North Lot. • Completed underslab utilities installation. • Completed slab on grade pours. • Completed removal of underground storage tanks (USTs) and associated contaminated soils. • Started structural steel erection. Upcoming Activities: • Continue structural steel erection, complete in September. • Install decking for 2nd floor and roof. • Install primary power ductbank from Military Rd to electrical vault location. Budget Status: • See overall TPSP budget summary updated monthly and included in monthly report package. Change Order Status: • Change Order #1 was executed. • Change Order #2 will be prepared due to unforeseen conditions associated with additional contaminated soils, underground storage tanks and other miscellaneous issues. Schedule Status: • See TPSP master project schedule updated monthly and included in monthly report package. Critical Issues: • None. Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report 1 243 244 Asphalt Paving and Curbs at North Lot Rebar Placement, Area C Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report Steel Erection, Area A Steel Erection, Area A Tukwila Public Safety Plan — Justice Center- Monthly Report 3 246 TUKWILA PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECTS Fire Station 51 SOJ Construction Management Monthly Report August 2019 Report Reviewed by: Justine Kim Owner's Representative: Shiefs Obletz Johnsen (SOJ) Architect: Weinstein A+ U GCCM: Lydig Construction Progress: • Stem wall form installation complete. • First slab on grade pour August 12tn • Second slab on grade pour August 19th • Site grading continues. • First structural steel delivery August 19tn • Structural steel erection to start August 29th Upcoming Activities: • Pond tie-in connection and dewatering to complete in September. • Place and finish slab on metal decking late September. • Frame exterior walls late September. Budget Status: • See overall TPSP budget summary updated monthly and included in monthly report package. Change Order Status: • No change orders issued in August. Schedule Status: • See TPSP master project schedule updated monthly and included in monthly report package. Critical Issues: • None. Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report 1 247 248 Vapor barrier prep for slab on grade pour First slab on grade pour Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report 2 249 Slab on grade pour Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report 3 250 TUKWILA PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECTS Fire Station 52 SOJ Construction Management Monthly Report July 2019 Report Reviewed by: Justine Kim Owner's Representative: Shiels Obletz Johnsen (SOJ) Architect: Weinstein A+ U GCCM: Lydig Construction Progress: • Site demo has been completed. • Shoring contractor onsite preparing for shoring wall 1 installation. • First shoring pile installed August 20th • PSE electrical design coordination continues. • Excavation for concrete walls continues through August. • Zayo began conduit and meet -me vault installation August 19th Upcoming Activities: • Footings to start mid -September. • Retaining wall construction to start September 25th • Hollow core planks to be set for detention vault September 30th Budget Status: • See overall TPSP budget summary updated monthly and included in monthly report package. Change Order Status: • No change orders issued in August. Schedule Status: • See TPSP master project schedule updated monthly and included in monthly report package. Critical Issues: • None. Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report 1 251 252 Site Clearing and Demo Site Clearing and Demo Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report First solider pile installation Tukwila Public Safety Plan - Justice Center - Monthly Report 3 254 UKWILA PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN 2016 FIRE STATION 51 A/E PROCUREMENT PROGRAMMING DESIGN/PERMITTING BIDDING/CONSTRUCTION MOVE-IN/OCCUPANCY FIRE STATION 52 A/E PROCUREMENT PROGRAMMING DESIGN/PERMITTING BIDDING/CONSTRUCTION MOVE-IN/OCCUPANCY JUSTICE CENTER A/E PROCUREMENT PROGRAMMING DESIGN/PERMITTING BIDDING/CONSTRUCTION MOVE-IN/OCCUPANCY PUBLIC WORKS A/E PROCUREMENT MASTER SITE PLAN DESIGN PHASE 1 BIDDING/CONSTRUCTION PHASE 1 MOVE-IN/OCCUPANCY PHASE 1 2017 2018 2019 2020 AIME IMOD 111111111111 IMO i ME '1llllllllllllllllllll1111 1�I I))III) 2021 PROJECT In A/E PROCUREMENT = PROGRAMMING SE DESIGN/PERMITTING WI BIDDING/CONSTRUCTION MOVE-IN/OCCUPANCY GNI City of Tukwila - Facilities Plan TOTAL PROJECT MONTHLY Budget Report (REVISED Budgets; D-20 Plan Adopted by Council) Life to Date Costs as of kips) 23, 2019 (reconciled m.ncclg ihru Aug 13, 2019 GL) VUNCII. REPORTING SGJIJI: I R S- USTICE CENTER A/E Services (both Design & CA) Permits/Fees Construction (Pre -Con, Const & Tax) Construction Related Costs (incl Bond) PM Services (Mel Other Professional Svcs) Contingency (mutt Construction & Project) Contingency for Site Contamination (soils,hazmat) Land Acquisition Contingency for Land Acquisition Original Budget $ 3,278,125 $ 700,000 $ 38,738,678 $ 2,112,639 $ 1,815,875 $ 6,507,731 $ - $ 14,133,295 $ 1,250,000 Budget Transfers $ 221,875 $ 50,000 $ (376,684) $ (25,275) $ 266,721 $ (2,061,555) $ 550,000 S (416,714) $ 250,000 Current Budget $ 3,500,000 $ 750,000 $ 38,361,994 $ 2,087,364 $ 2,082,596 $ 4,446,176 $ 550,000 $ 13,716,581 $ 1,500,000 Committed Budget $ 3,195,000 $ 443,049 $ 38,361,993 $ 586,628 $ 1,988,766 $ - $ - $ 13,716,007 $ 1,491,500 I Life to Date Coo, S 2,462,797 $ 443,049 $ 8,973,292 $ 385,800 $ 1,147,654 $ - $ - $ 13,692,053 $ 1,491,500 Remaink Committed $ 732,203 $ - $ 29,388,701 $ 200,828 $ 841,112 $ - $ - $ 23,954 $ - Remaining Midget $ 305,000 $ 306,951 $ t $ 1,500,736 $ 93,830 $ 4,446,176 $ 550,000 $ 574 $ 8,500 Cost at Campkuiou $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - TOTAL $ 68,536,343 $ (1,541,632) S 66,994,711 $ 59,782,942 $ 28,596,145 S 31,186,798 S 7,211,769 $ - 'OUA'C!!. REPORTING SUMMARY - IRE .57:1770;\'51 A/E Services (both Design & CA) Land Acquisition Permits/Fees Construction (Pre -Con, Const & Tax) Construction Related Costs (mutt Bond) PM Services End Other Professional Svcs) Contingency (mutt Construction & Project) Drig,,,,t ludgee $ 1,070,000 $ - $ 234,000 S 9,396,000 S 931,000 S 526,000 S 1,116,000 Burka Trur,/er, $ 322,781 $ - $ 100,000 $ 1,315,046 $ (300,000) $ (50,000) $ 153,806 Current Budget $ 1,392,781 $ - $ 334,000 $ 10,711,045 $ 631,000 S 476,000 $ 1,269,806 ('o,,,,,,, fed /tarlget Li/e In Date Costs Reamia'g ('onaniaed Remaining Itadget Cost at Completion $ 1,287,071 $ - $ 151,939 $ 10,711,045 S 167,917 $ 363,412 $ - $ 936,550 $ - $ 136,151 $ 1,481,838 $ 95,150 $ 178,113 $ - $ 350,521 $ - $ 15,788 $ 9,229,208 $ 72,767 $ 185,299 $ - $ 105,710 $ - $ 182,061 $ - $ 463,083 $ 112,588 $ 1,269,806 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - TOTAL S 13,273,000 S 1,541,633 $ 14,814,632 S 12,681,384 S 2,827,802 $ 9,853,582 $ 2,133,249 S - IRE STATION ,S? Original Budget Itutc•erIran,/' ('urnlaItrotkt ComatirtedBudget Life Dale ('a,l, Rearain'gCouurated Remaining DmIL:et ('o,rwConfiderou A/E Services (both Design & CA) $ 1,415,000 $ 355,172 $ 1,770,172 $ 1,622,653 $ 1,005,736 $ 616,917 $ 147,519 $ - Land Acquisition $ 16,000 $ 9,160 $ 25,160 $ 17,157 $ 17,157 $ - $ 8,003 $ - Permits/Fees S 353,000 $ 50,000 $ 403,000 $ 182,835 $ 122,658 $ 60,177 $ 220,165 $ - Construction (Pre -Con, Const & Tax) S 13,298,000 $ 4,409,676 $ 17,707,676 $ 7,619,567 $ 187,223 $ 7,432,344 $ 10,088,109 $ - Construction Related Costs (mutt Bond) PM Services (incl Other Professional Svcs) S 1,398,000 $ 787,000 $ (307, I60) $ (50,000) $ 1,090,840 $ 737,000 $ 400,853 $ 547,375 $ 27,985 $ 268,829 $ 372,868 $ 278,546 $ 689,987 $ 189,625 S $ - Contingency (mutt Construction & Project) $ 1,343,000 $ 413,152 $ 1,756,152 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,756,152 $ - TOTAL $ 18,610,000 S 4,880,000 $ 23,490,000 S 10,390,439 $ 1,629,587 $ 8,760,852 $ 13,099,561 S - OUA'LH. REPORT/A'G.tiUA73I1RY "IRE STATION 54 Original Budget S 150,000 S 902,668 S 20,000 S 230,000 $ 50,000 $ 107,500 $ 41,832 Ilmlgr11ram,/,'r, $ (17,005) $ 31,206 $ (12,827) $ (123,300) $ (2,698) $ (835) $ 125,459 Current Budget $ 132,995 $ 933,874 $ 7,173 $ 106,700 $ 47,302 $ 106,665 $ 167,291 CtenRidge! Life toOak 0,,n Remain'C ' a Remaining Budget Cast at Completion $ S - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - A/E Services (both Design & CA) Land Acquisition Permits/Fees Construction (Pre -Con, Const & Tax) Construction Related Costs (mutt Bond) PM Services (incf Other Professional Svcs) Contingency (incf Construction & Project) $ 134,495 $ 933,875 $ 4,100 $ 106,700 $ 42,302 $ 106,665 $ - $ 132,995 $ 933,775 $ 4,100 $ 67,856 $ 28,825 $ 86,066 $ - $ 1,500 $ 100 $ - $ 38,844 $ 13,477 $ 20,599 $ - $ (1,500) $ (I) $ 3,073 $ - $ 5,000 $ - $ 167,291 TOTAL $ 1,502,000 S - $ 1,502,000 $ 1,328,137 $ 1,253,617 $ 74,520 $ 173,863 $ - 1 'i\ )' 'UBLIC WORKS Original /t„dget $ 767,385 $ 22,000,046 S 110,000 S 4,950,000 S 529,036 S 668,426 $ 975,107 Badger Ira fer, $ 15,000 $ 3,374,913 $ (20,000) $ (1,895,000) $ (404,793) $ (348,426) $ (721,694) ( omen( Budget $ 782,385 $ 25,374,959 $ 90,000 $ 3,055,000 S 124,243 $ 320,000 $ 253,413 Committed ltudget Life to Date C'asrs Remain) ['emanated Remaining Budget COW at ('onplelion $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - A/E Services (both Design & CA) Land Acquisition Permits/Fees Construction (Pre -Con, Const & Tax) Construction Related Costs (ind Bond) PM Services (incf Other Professional Svcs) Contingency (Mel Construction & Project) $ 335,382 $ 25,372,307 $ - $ - $ 77,643 $ 279,832 $ - $ 264,039 $ 25,370,107 $ - $ - $ 61,111 $ 169,763 $ - $ 71,343 S 2,200 $ - $ - $ 16,532 $ 110,069 $ - $ 447,003 $ 2,652 $ 90,000 $ 3,055,000 $ 46,600 $ 40,168 $ 253,413 TOTAL S 30,000,000 5 - 5 30,000,000 $ 26,065,163 $ 25,865,019 S 200,144 S 3,934,837 S - TUKWILA PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN Monthly DBE OUTREACH EFFORTS 8.19.19 Outreach Consultant updates for July 2019 General Updates for the Last Month • Lydig's last report of July 2019 DBE participation is about 23% • BNB last report of July 2019 DBE participation is about 7% Lydig Update • GC's last report of July 2019 DBE participation is about 23% • I have met w/Lydig atjobsite Thursday, 8.15.19 and discussed the Outreach Effort for Fire Station #52 • I have reached out to ANEW/PACE Megan Clark to meet with Lydig's Team FS#52 to discuss pre - apprentice opportunities • Lydig, Project Manager Kiel Lunsford will be present at NAMC (National Association of Minority Contractors) General Monthly Meeting on 9.15.19 @ 6pm BNB Update • BNB had completed the outreach effort w/Darling Nava Consulting Upcoming Events • Attaching Outreach Plan for Fire Station #52 Darling Nava Consulting Outreach@DarlingNava.com 257 258 Outreach Plan August 19, 2019 City of Tukwila, Fire Station #52 The plan for the Outreach on City of Tukwila Fire Station #52 are the following: • Reaching out to my External Partners o Building Trades visitation every Tuesday and promoting the COT FS#52 to subcontractors attending PLA/CWA Compliance o National Association of Minority Contractors — General Monthly Meeting (September 5, 2019 & email o Tabor 100 - General Monthly Meeting (last Saturday of each month) & email ■ Working with Anthony Burnett (Business Development) o Construction Designers & Entrepreneurs — via email (since they are not having meetings til October 2019 o Northwest Mountain Minority Supplier Development Council ■ Meeting w/Fernando Martinez (President & Chief Executive Officer— awaiting for response for me to stop by and engage with him to provide the flyer from Lydig's Bid Opportunities o Economic Alliance — Everett ■ I have spoke with Lisa Lagerstrom and engaging with their pool of subcontractors listed within in their database o Seattle Southside Chamber of Commerce — I am member and will be their Chamber Mixer on August 28,2019 to be held at Hotel Interurban, where you engage with small business from the area and outside city limits of Tukwila o OMWBE (Office of Minority Women Business Enterprise) — I will be sending out the flyers that Lydig had prepared to create buzz in their community o AGC (Association of General Contractors) I am member, again I will be sending out the flyers that Lydig had prepared to create buzz in their community I will have a day to day interaction with all this external partners and keep everyone posted of the results and who we are capturing in the community for subcontractors and suppliers. 259 260 City of Tukwila BNB - Justice Center 8/20/2019 WMBE Participation GC Contract Value $ 29,098,053.00 Award Amount: $ 4,645,946 Scopes of Work that you Intend to Award to WMBEs Sub/Supplier Name Certification Approximate Subcontract $ Amount City y of Seattle Self- Certification OMWBE State Certification OMWBE Federal Certification SCS Supplier of Hardware, Doors and Frames Contract Hardware Inc. SBE $ 310,362 Site Concrete Caliber Concrete WBE $ 520,550 Signage Sign Wizards SDBE/WSB E $ 36,236 Supplier SnapTex SBENVBE/ MBE $ 33,875 Shelving Workpointe SBE $ 454,003 Plumbing Redline Mechanical X $ 809,002 Controls C&C Solutions VOSBE $ 235,700 Marble Supply Skyline Marble WBE $ 88,000 Rubber Base Install Zombie Base WSBE $ 4,758 Roofing Systems Axiom #1027 $ 583,020 Painting and Coatings Halili WBE $ 219,450 Fire Protection Columbia Fire #1599 $ 287,890 Irigation and Landscaping RE Sides Landscaping #1054 $ 1,020,000 Temp Sanitation (NSS) Construction Site Services $ 22,000 Waterproofing Inland Waterproofing WBE $ 21,100 Outreach Coordinator Darling Nava Consulting M4F0026198 In Progress Participation: $ 4,645,946 Percentage of Award Amount: 16% Scopes where the sub/supplier is not yet determined or committed When do you anticipate making a selection? Do you anticipate using a SCS Is this a Spread the Work SCS Can only a Sole Source do the work? Approximate Subcontract $ Amount $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ - Total Amount Not Yet Committed to a Sub/Supplier: $ - 261 Pano 7/R City of Tukwila Lydig Construction, Inc Fire Station #51 Updated 8.26.19 WMBE Participation GC Contract Value Award Amount: $ 9,587,314.00 $ 2,219,102.00 Scopes of Work that you Intend to Award to WMBEs Sub/Supplier Name Certification City of Seattle Self- Certification OMWBE State Certification OMWBE Federal Certification SCS Approximate Subcontract $ Amount Roofing Axiom Division 7 SCS $ 217,945 Site Concrete Caliber Concrete Const WBE $ 394,500 Masoonry Cascade Construction SCS $ 310,097 Fencing Secure -A -Site WBE $ 299,000 Steel Erection CHG Building Systems SCS $ 168,922 Overhead Doors Crawford Door Company SB, VOSB $ 102,261 Fire Protection Emerald Fire LLC WBE $ 49,750 Bituminous Waterproofing Inland Waterproofing WBE $ 10,850 Striping Stanley Patrick Striping SCS $ 4,834 Plumbing Adept Mechanical MBE MBE / DBE SCS $ 659,596 Concrete Sawing Salinas Sawing & Sealing MBE $ 1,347 Trucking SilverStreak Inc WBE T/M Site Services Construction Site Services MBE WBE T/M Office Supplies Keeney Office Supply WBE T/M Total Amount Intended to be Performed by DBE to Date: $ 2,219,102 Percentage of Contract Amount: 23% 262 Done 1/Q Scopes where the sub/supplier is not yet determined or committed When do you anticipate making a selection? Do you anticipate using a SCS Is this a Spread the Work SCS Can only a Sole Source do the work? Approximate Subcontract $ Amount $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total Amount Not Yet Committed to a Sub/Supplier: $ - 263 o�Ro '/,q Apprentice Utilization Plan List the prime and all subcontractors scheduled to work on this project, and indicate the estimated number of hours to be performed by journey level and apprentice workers for each. Apprentice utilization must equal or exceed 15% of the total labor hours. Estimated information Prime Contractor and all Subcontractors Journey Labor Hours Apprentice Labor Hours Total Labor Hours for Project Apprentice Percentage Number of Apprentices BNBuilders 763 56 819 6.84% 1 Ascendent, LLC 566 55 621 8.86% 3 Iliad, Inc 2,848 0 2,848 0.00% 0 Rhine 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Valley Electric 214 0 214 0.00% 0 TOTALS: 4,391 111 4,502 Apprenticeship Utilization Requirement: 2.47% 15% 4 Page 3/3 Apprentice Utilization Plan List the prime and all subcontractors scheduled to work on this project, and indicate the estimated number of hours to be performed by journey level and apprentice workers for each. Apprentice utilization must equal or exceed 15% of the total labor hours. Estimated information Prime Contractor and all Subcontractors Journey Labor Hours Apprentice Labor Hours Total Labor Hours for Project Apprentice Percentage Number of Apprentices Lydig Construction 910 62 972 6.38% 3 ESM Consulting Engineers 70 0 70 0.00% 0 SCI Infrastructure 1,668 0 1,668 0.00% 0 West Wind Reinforcing 37 0 37 0.00% 0 TOTALS: 2,684 62 2,746 Apprenticeship Utilization Requirement: 2.26% 15% 3 Page 3/3 266 Upcoming Meetings and Events September 2019 SEP2 MONDAY SEP3 TUESDAY SEP4 WEDNESDAY SEP5 THURSDAY SEP6 FRIDAY SEPT SATURDAY .' irCI R L. ig 0 /MAY City offices and Community Center closed. . int Coo{ downnin the summertime at the Community Center Spray Park through September 2. Free lunch and afternoon snacks provided for ages 1 to 18 years of age. Opens daily from 10:00 AM - 8:00 PM weather permitting. . Library Advisory Board 5:30 PM Community Center Public Safe ty Committee 5:30 PM Hazelnut Conference Room . City Council Regutar Meeting 7:00 PM Council ChambersCommunity . Transportation & Infrastructure Committee 5:30 PM Hazelnut Conference Room Ian CIrS' IT1ar {Ct Hosted by Food innovation Network. Wednesdays (July 17 — Oct 16) 4:00PM-7:00PM Tukwila Village Plaza 14350 Tukwila International Blvd . Equity & Social Justice Commission 5:15 PM Hazelnut Conference Room SEP 8 SUNDAY ,,.. wr IE7L! e Mat y i R '.!r.- A cultural event in honor of the water, the Duwamish River, the salmon, and the change of the seasons. 2:00 PM —6:00 PM Center For more information, please contact Sarah at sarah.kavage@tukwiia wa.gov or visit www.TukwilaWA.govr welcome-the-water- event. SEP 9 MONDAY SEP 19 TUESDAY SEP 11 WEDNESDAY SEP 12 THURSDAY SEP 13 FRIDAY SEP 14 SATURDAY . Civil Service Commission 5:00 PM Resources Conference Room Finance Committee 5:30 PM Hazelnut Conference Room . City Council Committee of the Whole Meeting 7:00 PM Council Chambers . Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee 5:30 PM Hazelnut Conference Room . Tukwila International Boulevard Action Committee 7:00 PM Valley View Sewer District 3460 5 148th - Park Commission 5:30 PM Community Center .iX71 ]�I rnarKet Hosted by Food Innovation Network. Wednesdays (July 17 — Oct 16) 4:00 PM-7:00 PM Tukwila Village Plaza 14350 Tukwila International Blvd . Community Oriented Policing Citizens Advisory Board 6:30 PM Duwamish Conference Room GREEN i . TUKWILA 1,14i1,1µHuman Tukwila Park Work Party for Day of Caring Event Volunteer sign- up is full. 15832 51" Ave S . - Tukwila Community Center is hosting a "Back to School" supply drivel Donations can be dropped off to $iACK';Oi�Qv the community center until September 11. Donated items will be given to local organizations that support Tukwila students in need. For a list of most needed items, call the front desk at 206-768-2822. Arts Commission: 4th Wed., 6:00 PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Tracy Gallaway at 206-767-2305. Civil Service Commission: 2nd Mon., 5:00 PM, Human Resources Conference Room. Contact Michelle Godyn at 206-431-2187. Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee: 2nd & 4th Tues., 5:30 PM, Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. COPCAB (Community Oriented Policing Citizens Advisory Board): 2nd Thurs., 6:30 PM, Duwamish Conference Room. Contact Chris Portman at 206-431-2197. Equity & Social Justice Commission: 1st Thurs., 5:15 PM, Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Niesha Fort -Brooks at 206-454-7564_ Finance Committee: 2nd & 4th Mon., 5:30 PM, Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206.433-8993. Library Advisory Board: 1st Tues., 5:30 PM, Community Center. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206-767-2342. Park Commission: 2nd Wed., 5:30 PM, Community Center. Contact Robert Eaton at 206-767-2332. . Planning CommissionlBoard of Architectural Review: 4th Thurs., 6:30 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Contact Wynetta Bivens at 206-431-3670. Public Safety Committee: 1st & 3rd Mon., 5:30 PM, Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. (2A) Regional Automatic Aid Interfocal Agreement for Fire Department. (2B) Purchase of Fire Marshal replacement vehicle. (2C) An ordinance to establish penalties for the crime of exposing minor children to domestic violence. Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: 1st & 3rd Tues., 5:30 PM, Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. (2A) WA Recreation and Conservative Office grant acceptance for Chinook Wind. (2B) Project completion and acceptance of South 141" Street Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Pedestrian Crossings. (2C) Bid award for the South 198h/200" Street Bridge Repair. {2D) 2019 Presentation on the State of the City's bridges. (3) SCATBd / RTC (4E) Public Safety Plan — Public Works Shops. (4F) Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program. . Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 PM, Tukwila Heritage & Cultural Center, 14475 591h Avenue S. Contact Louise Jones -Brown at 206-244-4478. Tukwila International Boulevard Action Committee: 2nd Tues., 7:00 PM, Valley View Sewer District. Contact Chief Bruce Linton at 206-433-1815 267 Tentative Agenda Schedule MONTH MEETING 1 — REGULAR MEETING 2 — C.Q.W. MEETING 3 - REGULAR MEETING 4 — C.O.W. September 3 (TUESDAY) See agenda packet cover sheet for this week's agenda: September 3, 2019 Regular Meeting 9 Special Issues 16 Unfinished Business 23 - An ordinance and resolution related to House Bill 1406 "Encouraging investments in affordable and supportive housing". - Discussion on Fire Department budget. - A resolution updating the Fire Department fee schedule. - Public Works Interlocal Joint Purchasing Agreement with City of Bellevue for job order contracting. - An update on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). - An ordinance and resolution related to House Bill 1406 "Encouraging investments in affordable and supportive housing". - A resolution updating the Fire Department fee schedule. - Public Works Interlocal Joint Purchasing Agreement with the City of Bellevue for job order contracting. October 7 Appointments 14 21 28 Appointments to Arts Commission, Library Advisory Board and Park Commission. 268