Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2007-05-14 Item 4D - Code Amendment - Raise SEPA Review Thresholds and Streamline Review Process COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS ITEM NO. i 1, 1 A Mayor's I 1 0/ i t 0 05/14/07 7 Me etin Date Pr ar k Ma ar's review rncil review 1 P\ 1 1 t 1 (1, ITEM- =INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 5/14/07 AGENDA ITEM TITLE SEPA Code Amendment CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 5 -14 -07 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date ilrtg Date Mbrtg Date Mtg Date 1SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs EXI DCD Finance Fire El Legal P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S The proposal is to raise certain SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) review thresholds SU1LVARY and streamline the review process by combining comment periods. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte El Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 4 -10 -07 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Forward Council decision to the Planning Commission CON MITTEE Approve proposal except for the threshold for single family construction COST IMPACT I =FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0 Fund Source: N/A Comments: L MTG DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION I 5 -14 -07 1 1 �UITG. DATE ATTACHMENTS- 5 -14 -07 Information Memo dated 5/9/07 Community Affairs and Parks Committee minutes of 4/10/07 I INFORMATION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Mullet Committee of the Whole FROM: Jack Pace, Acting DCD Direct DATE: May 9, 2007 SUBJECT: Code Amendment SEPA ISSUE Should the SEPA process and thresholds be streamlined to eliminate review or shorten timelines for smaller projects when environmental impacts are unlikely? BACKGROUND The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires that a standard checklist be filled out by a project proponent to identify the environmental impacts of certain actions. Actions include grading, dredging, paving, construction or demolition of buildings, and adoption or revision of most plans, policies or regulations by a government agency. The intent is to identify environmental impacts that would otherwise "fall through the cracks" and provide a mechanism for public review and mitigation. Jurisdictions have flexibility in setting the thresholds that trigger SEPA review up to the maximum level allowed by the State. Type of Action Tukwila's Maximum Proposed Threshold Threshold Thresholds Residential 4 dwelling units 20 dwelling units 9 dwelling units Construction Commercial/Industrial 4,000 sf and 20 12,000 sf and 40 12,000 sf and 40 Construction parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces 1 Parking Lots 40 parking spaces 1 40 parking spaces 1 No Change Landfills or 500 cubic yards 500 cubic yards No Change Excavations Jurisdictions can also take advantage of an optional SEPA process that allows them to identify projects where significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely and combine the comment period on that determination with the notice of application comment period for the underlying permit. NG Page 1 05/09/2007 9:54:00 AM Q: \CODEAMND\5 -14CO W_SEPA. D OC The CAP reviewed this proposal on April 10, 2007 and unanimously recommended approval of all changes except there was no consensus on raising the threshold for single family construction. AN ALYSIS Tukwila and other agencies with permitting authority have a comprehensive set of regulations to control negative impacts in the following areas that are subject to SEPA review: 1. Grading, filling, unstable soil and erosion 2. Air emissions (Puget Sound Clean Air Agency) 3. Surface water (wetlands and watercourses), groundwater, and storm water 4. Vegetation and landscaping 5. Animals, endangered species, wildlife habitat 6. Energy and natural resources 7. Environmental health, hazardous waste and noise, 8. Land and shoreline use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics, design review 11. Light and glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic and cultural preservation 14. Transportation, traffic and parking 15. Public services 16. Utilities, sewer and water concurrency Because these standards are already in place we do not often have to rely on SEPA to impose mitigation conditions. Raising the threshold for number of new dwelling units to 9 would match the threshold for subdivision review. Raising the threshold for new buildings in commercial/industrial zones to 12,000 sf and 40 parking spaces would streamline review of smaller projects. As an example the Claim Jumper restaurant is approximately 12,000 sf. Because SEPA triggers notice requirements some smaller projects that do not require other approvals such as design review would no longer require public notice if the threshold were changed. Short plats for 5 or more lots are required to provide public notice and raising the SEPA threshold would not change that. 18.104.090 Notice of Application Procedure Notice of Application shall be provided as follows: 1. For all Type 2, 3, 4 and 5 decisions, and Type 1 decisions which require SEPA review, the Notice of Application shall be mailed by first class mail to the applicant and to departments and agencies with jurisdiction, except that a Notice of Application is not required in the case of a Code Interpretation pursuant to TMC 18.96.010 or a Sign Permit Denial pursuant to TMC Chapter 19.12. NG Page 2 05/09/2007 9:54:00 AM Q:\CODEAMND\5-14COW_SEPA.DOC 2. For Type 1 decisions and Type 2 decisions which require SEPA review, the Notice of Application shall be provided by posting pursuant to TMC 18.104.110, provided that the Notice of Application for a Type 1 decision involving a single- family residence need not be posted but shall be published one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. 3. For short plats of 5 through 91ots and Type 3, 4 and 5 applications, the Notice of Application shall be posted pursuant to TMC 18.104.110 and mailed pursuant to TMC 18.104.120. Notice requirements for secure community transition facilities shall be in accordance with RCW 71.09.315 as amended. Very few development proposals require a full environmental impact statement (EIS) to analyze impacts and develop mitigation measures. For the vast majority of development in Tukwila the City issues either a determination of non significance (DNS) or a mitigated determination of non significance (MDNS) after review of the SEPA checklist. The City is authorized under WAC 197 -11 -355 to make this determination early in the review process and combine the SEPA comment period with that of the underlying permit, saving about two weeks of processing time. PROPOSAL Raise the flexible thresholds for residential, commercial and industrial new construction as shown on the table above. Take advantage of the optional DNS process that allows for concurrent SEPA and project comment periods. RECOMMENDATION Both staff and the CAP recommend adopting the above changes though there was not consensus on the threshold for single family development. If the City Council chooses to amend the SEPA regulations the next step would be to send this change to the Planning Commission for its review and a recommendation. The City Council will then hold its own public hearing prior to adoption of any changes. NG Page 3 05/09/2007 9:54:00 AM Q:\CODEAMND\5-14COW_SEPA.DOC Community Affairs and Parks Committee Meeting Minutes April 10. 2007 Page 2 should not limit itself only to low -cost or "in- pond "solutions. He asked if we have looked at other potential problems besides phosphorous. Ms. Whiting said she has examined bacteria loads but has not found a problem. Also, she believes that the consultant will be looking at the best technical options for improving the pond water quality. Councilmember Carter expressed support for the study and the concept of the pond being a habitat rather than a place for people to swim. Mr. Pace offered to share the preliminary analysis in September before all of the analysis is completed. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO COW. As a related issue, the committee discussed the consultant selection for the Tukwila Pond Park design Phase I that was discussed at the April 9, 2007 Council meeting. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. c) Code Amendments SEPA Nora Gierloff introduced this item. It would streamline the SEPA process and thresholds to eliminate review or shorten timelines for smaller projects when environmental impacts are unlikely. Ms. Gierloff referred to the table in the agenda report that compared Tukwila's thresholds to the State maximum and the proposed. Mr. Pace noted that most buildings would go through a design review process. Mr. Lancaster mentioned that with traffic concurrency and impact fee systems, we no longer rely on SEPA for mitigating traffic impacts like we once did. Councilmember Robertson asked if these changes would reduce our ability to control small infill developments on hillsides. Mr. Pace indicated that our sensitive areas ordinance addresses steep slope sites and tree permits and other regulations still apply. Councilmember Carter asked what would catch environmental issues like underground storage tanks? Mr. Pace and Ms. Whiting explained that owners have a responsibility to disclose and often the lenders require the analysis. Mr. Lancaster said that if an owner didn't disclose it, SEPA wouldn't have caught it anyway. Councilmember Robertson asked how these changes would have affected the City's process on a previous Fosterview development. Mr. Lancaster indicated that it would have had no effect on Fosterview, since that development included more than 9 dwelling units. He acknowledged it might eliminate a source of information that citizens are used to receiving on smaller residential developments (those between 4 and 9 units). He also noted that if any of the thresholds in the table are exceeded, SEPA is triggered, even if the proposed development is below any of the other thresholds.. Councilmember Robertson expressed support for the changes but also a desire to keep tools for the City to ensure the right kind of development. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL ON ALL CHANGES BUT KEEPING THE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION THRESHOLD AT FOUR DWELLING UNITS INSTEAD OF THE PROPOSED NINE. FORWARD TO COW. TOWNHOUSES Nora Gierloff introduced this item. It would change the Zoning Code to allow for development of fee simple townhomes. Some changes, such as minimum lot area, average lot width, setbacks and landscaping, would be necessary to allow fee simple townhouses since our development standards are based on a multi- family garden apartment style. Other changes would be necessary to enable a development pattern and density closer to the style of townhouses being built in other cities. One question is how prescriptive does Tukwila want to be on open space, such as requiring decks or onsite playgrounds, etc. Another issue is how to treat setbacks. The City's current tiered set -back standards may make development of fee simple economically infeasible. Councilmember Robertson expressed concern about the effects of eliminating the tiered set -back standards. Councilmember Carter emphasized that the design review process must address all sides of a building, not just the front. Ms. Gierloff discussed the current 50% development coverage limitation. Councilmember Robertson mentioned that using pervious surfaces (such as grasscrete) may be needed to ensure the development's environmental impact is not greater than development under today's standards. Councilmember Carter indicated this issue can be dealt with as the townhouse proposal goes through the approval process. She also expressed an interest in fence height being included in the design review process to minimize the amount of blank, high and solid walls facing the streets. FORWARD TO COW FOR DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION. HOUSEKEEPING Nora Gierloff introduced this item on four amendments to the Zoning Code related to: permit processing, limitation on additions to homes that do not meet setbacks, retaining wall setbacks, and administrative variance for lot size. FORWARD TO PLANNING COMMISSION.