Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2010-07-26 Item 4A.2 - Ordinance - Annotated Proposed Sensitive Areas (SAO) RevisionsEXPENDITURE REQUIRED $NA Fund Source: NA Comments: MTG. DATE 7/26/10 MTG. DATE 7/26/10 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayiew 1 ,oundl review 07/26/10 1 JP y9 l /v,. 08/02/10 1 JP I AMOUNT BUDGETED $NA !TEN INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 10-084 'ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: JULY 26, 2010 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Revisions to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO), TMC 18.45 CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance 13zd Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 7/26/10 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 8/2/10 Mtg Date Mtg Date 7/26/10 Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S The ordinance revises the wetland classification system, adds references to the State's SUMMARY watercourse rating system, clarifies information to be included in sensitive area special studies and mitigation plans; clarifies where buffer mitigation must be carried out; removes seven areas from the SAO maps that do not meet the criteria for sensitive areas. After the close of the public hearing, staff would like direction on the process and level of review by Council of the SAO revisions. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 7 -12 -10 CAP; Planning Commission approved revisions on 6 -24 -10 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development COMMIT I"LE Unanimous approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST 'IMPACT` FUND SOURCE RECORD;:OECOUNCIL ACTION ITEMNO. 3 c 4,11. APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $NA ATTACHMENTS Informational Memorandum dated 7/21/10 Draft Ordinance Annotated proposed SAO revisions Proposed SAO Map Removals (7) Addendum to SAO departures Memo for Wetland and Watercourse Buffer Widths Minutes from Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 7/12/10 Attachment E Legislative History Folder (red) *Community Affairs Parks members Please bring red folder from 7/12 1 PROPOSED REVISION EXPLANATION FOR MODIFICATION Chapter 18.45 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS Sections: 18.45.010 Purpose 18.45.020 Best Available Science 18.45.030 Sensitive Area Applicability, Maps and Inventories 18.45.040 Sensitive Area Special Studies 18.45.050 Interpretation 18.45.060 Procedures 18.45.070 Sensitive Area Permitted Uses 18.45.080 Wetland Designations, Ratings and Buffers 1 18.45.090 Wetland Uses, Alterations and Mitigation 18.45.100 Watercourse Designations, Ratings and Buffers 1 18.45.110 Watercourse Uzc3, Alterations and Mitigation 18.45.120 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Designations, Ratings and Buffers 18.45.130 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Uses Exemptions, Alterations, and Mitigation 18.45.140 Abandoned Mine Areas 18.45.150 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Designation, Mapping, Uses and Standards 18.45.160 Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay 18.45.170 Sensitive Areas Tracts and Easements 18.45.180 Exceptions 18.45.190 Appeals 18.45.xxx Enforcement and Penalties 18.45.200 Recording Required 18.45.210 Assurance Device 18.45.220 Assessment Relief CL Page 1 of 44 07/0j/201 (1.1 :5 PM07/0.1,r2 -0ld)- 12:08:00- PIv406/30/201-0- 3:07 00 PM \temp \XP rnwisc \Annotated Proposed SAO Chant_>es -Final PC Rec NO SI- 1ADINC.docW: \Lori er Foiccts \24- IA- S4A-t1mdtslRtrnuirr EL 1 fission \PC R i mended -Bees to Council \Annotated -I oyesed SAG- htun -es- 4ual PC Ree-- A1A- S14AD1NC.docW: \Long Range Projects\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Conlin issionl Antietated- Proposed SAO Changes Fin PC no :,ltading.dee ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 18.45.010 Purpose A. The purpose of TMC Chapter 18.45 is to protect the environment, human life and property, designate and classify ecologically sensitive areas such as regulated wetlands and watercourses and geologically hazardous areas and to protect these areas and their functions values while also allowing for reasonable use of public and private property. These regulations are prepared to comply with the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, to apply best available science according to WAC 365- 195 -900 to 925 and to protect critical areas as defined by WAC 365- 190 -080. B. Standards are hereby established to meet the following goals of protecting environmentally sensitive areas: 1. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural functions and-wilties-of these areas. 2. Protect quantity and quality of water resources. 3. Minimize turbidity and pollution of wetlands and fish- bearing waters and maintain wildlife habitat. 4. Prevent erosion and the loss of slope and soil stability caused by the removal of trees, shrubs, and root systems of vegetative cover. 5. Protect the public against avoidable losses, public emergency rescue and relief operations cost, and subsidy cost of public mitigation from landslide, subsidence, erosion and flooding. 6. Protect the community's aesthetic resources and distinctive features of natural lands and wooded hillsides. 7. Balance the private rights of individual property owners with the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. 8. Prevent the loss of wetland and watercourse function and acreage, and strive for a gain over present conditions. 9. Give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to protect or enhance anadromous fisheries. 10. Incorporate the use of best available science in the regulation and protection of sensitive areas as required by the state Growth Management Act, according to WAC 365- 195 -900 through 365- 195 -925 and WAC 365- 190 -080. CL Page 2 of 44 C: \temn \XParnw'ise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Lon_ Renee Proiects\2010 SAO Amdts \PInnom Co Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Long Range Projects\2010 SAO Amdts \Plan+ri The term "values" (such as value for public education, recreation, natural beau)), and preservation of open space), is difficult to quanta and measure and, therefore, is not generally used any longer, since tools (i. e. wetland functional assessment) have been developed for evaluating wetlands based on their functions (habitat, water quality improvement, flood storage, etc.) 18.45.020 Best Available Science A. Policies, regulations and decisions concerning sensitive areas shall rely on Best Available See explanation above regarding "values". 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM07/0142010 12:08440- PM0613012010- 3:07:10 ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS Science to protect the functions and values of these areas and must give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish and their habitats. B. Nonscientific information may supplement scientific information, but is not an adequate substitution for valid and available scientific information. C. Incomplete or unavailable scientific information leading to uncertainty for permitting sensitive area impacts may require application of effective adaptive management on a case by case basis. Adaptive management relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory or non regulatory actions protect sensitive areas or replace their functions. 18.45.030 Sensitive Area Applicability, Maps, and Inventories A. Applicability The provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall apply to all land uses and all development activities in a sensitive area or a sensitive area buffer as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title. The provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 apply whether or not a permit or authorization is required within the City of Tukwila. No person, company, agency or applicant shall alter a sensitive area or buffer except as consistent with the purposes and requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. The following are sensitive areas regulated by TMC Chapter 18.45: 1. Abandoned coal mines; 2. Areas of potential geologic instability: Class 2, 3, 4 areas (as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title and TMC 18.45.120.A); 3. Wetlands; 4. Watercourses; 5. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. The Growth Management Act also identifies frequently flooded areas and areas of seismic instability as critical areas. Regulations governing frequently flooded areas are found in TMC 16.52, Flood Zone Management. Areas of seismic instability are defined and regulated through the Washington State Building Code. B. The City shall not approve any permit or otherwise issue any authorization to alter the condition of sensitive area land, water or vegetation or to construct or alter any structure or improvement in, over, or on a sensitive area or its buffer, without first ensuring compliance with the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. C. Approval of a permit or development proposal pursuant to the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 does not release the applicant from any obligation to comply with the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. D. When TMC Chapter 18.45 imposes greater restrictions or higher standards upon the CL Page 3 of 44 0.7/01/2010 1_56QO F M07/01./201.0- .1208 00- PM06/30 {2.04.0 3.:07 PM nC \temp \XPernwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanpes -Pinal PC Ree NO SI- IADING.docW: \Lee —1 e- Pfeiecls \2010 SAO .Amdts \Plannipe- C-o' Recommended -Rocs to Council \Annet ted- hreBeeed SAO Cl itt as- LtL+nal -P6 -Rec NO SIIADING.doc \V: \Long Range Projects \201 0 SAO Amdts \Planning, CommissienNAnnotated- Rfepeaed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS development or use of land than other laws, ordinances or restrictive covenants, the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall prevail. E. It is the obligation of the property owner to comply with all relevant provisions of this Code. F. Sensitive Areas Maps and Inventories 1. The distribution of many sensitive areas in Tukwila is displayed on the Sensitive Areas Maps, on file with the Department of Community Development (DCD). These maps are based on site assessment of current conditions and review of the best available scientific data and are hereby adopted by reference. 2. Studies, preliminary inventories and ratings of potential sensitive areas are on file with DCD. 3. As new environmental information related to sensitive areas becomes available, the Director is hereby designated to periodically add new information to the Sensitive Areas Map. Removal of any information from the sensitive area maps must be approved by the City Council as a Type 1 decision. 4. Regardless of whether a sensitive area is shown on the sensitive areas map, the actual presence or absence of the features defined in the code as sensitive areas shall govern. The Director may require the applicant to submit technical information to indicate whether sensitive areas actually exist on or adjacent to the applicant's site, based on the definitions of sensitive areas in this code. 5. All revisions, updates and reprinting of sensitive areas maps, inventories, ratings and buffers shall conform to TMC Chapter 18.45. 18.45.040 Sensitive Areas Special Studies A. Required An applicant for a development proposal that may include a sensitive area and /or its buffer shall submit those studies as required by the City and specified below to adequately identify and evaluate the sensitive area and its buffers. 1. A required sensitive areas study shall be prepared by a person with experience and training in the scientific discipline appropriate for the relevant sensitive area in accordance with WAC 365 -195- 905(4). A qualified professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in ecology or related science, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries, geotechnical or related field, and two years of related work experience. a. A qualified professional for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas must have a degree in ecology or related sciences and professional experience related to the subject species. b. A qualified professional for wetland sensitive area studies must be a certified Professional Wetland Scientist or a non certified Professional Wetland Scientist with at least two CL Page 4 of 44 PM C: \temn \XPernwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanecs -Final PC Rec NO SHADFNG- docW: \Lo Final PC Rec NO SI {ADINC do ._.e. osed SAO Chan,cs Final PC no shading.doc Staff proposes this change to facilitate removal of sensitive areas from the map when they have been altered or filled under an approved mitigation plan, or when field investigation by the staff wetland biologist confirms that the sensitive area does not meet the definition of a wetland or watercourse, and should not have been shown on the map. (Note: when the SAO map was first prepared, staff did not have access to private property to directly observe suspected sensitive areas. However, as development permits are submitted with sensitive areas studies, additional information is made available that allows staff to confirm when mapped sensitive areas do not meet the definitions in the SAO). 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7/0142010 -1- OS440-PM06/40/2.0103-07 -(d0 d-- Rieies€d SAO Cl ices ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS years of full -tune work experience as a wetlands professional, including delineating wetlands using the state or federal manuals, preparing wetland reports, conducting function assessments, and developing and implementing mitigation plans. c. A qualified professional for a geological hazard study must be a professional geotechnical engineer as defined in the Definitions chapter of this Title, licensed in the state of Washington. d. A qualified professional for watercourses means a hydrologist, geologist, engineer or other scientist with experience in preparing watercourse assessments. 2. The sensitive areas study shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of sensitive area data and shall use field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. The sensitive area study shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to sensitive areas in accordance with the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. B. Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Area Studies The sensitive area study shall contain the following information, as applicable: 1. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal, and identification of the permit requested; 2. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal showing: sensitive areas and buffers and the development proposal with dimensions; clearing limits; proposed storm water management plan; and mitigation plan for impacts due to drainage alterations; 3. The dates, names and qualifications of the persons preparing the study and documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site; 4. Identification and characterization of all sensitive areas, water bodies, and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area or potentially impacted by the proposed project as described in the following sections: a. Characterization of wetlands must include: (1) A wetland delineation report that includes methods used. field indicators evaluated and the results. Wetland delineation must be performed in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington 'Department of Ecology. March 1997 (or as revised). Field data forms are to be included in the report. Data collection points are to be shown on the site plan with their corresponding numbers indicated. After the City of Tukwila confirms the boundaries. they are to be professionally surveyed to the nearest square foot and the site plan modified as necessary to incorporate the survey data. Exact wetland acreage will be calculated after the boundaries have been surveyed. (2) Coward in (Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the U.S. U.S. Department of the Interior) classification of the wetland(s). (3) Hvdrogeomornhic classification of the wetland(s). (4) Hvdrooeriod Clarification of the type and extent of information that needs to be included in sensitive areas studies in order to improve the quality of the studies for adequate decision making. This information is consistent with what state and federal agencies require and complies with best available science. The wetland requirements were already being provided to applicants through a guidance handout (available in the DCD lobby). Because applicants often failed to obtain the guidance or ignored it, requiring staff to provide extensive comments on sensitive areas reports stafffelt it was better to codes the requirements to try and improve the quality of studies and to improve efficiency in the permit process. CL Page 5 of 44 071.01/2010 I;.$6:_00_PMOF /01J2OrO -1 :0&:00- PIvh06/30 %0}0 -3 07 (10 P.M r.C: \temp \XPermvise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanecs -Final PC Itee NO SI-HADING.doc" ko e 14-a i iccts \20' AQ- +dts \Pla mine Commission \PC Recommended Decs to Cexmeil\An k+ted- Pfoonscd- fiAO-Cl i 3��e 644 -n41 PC fec NO Sl -1 �tNC 1-oe-W \Long Range Projccts\2010 SAO Ardts \Planning Comm issio+i \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS (5) Brief landscape assessment of the wetland (identify hydrologic basin /sub- basin; inlets. outlets; surrounding land use: habitat aualitv and connectivity: ultimate point of discharge: presence of culverts or other constraints to flow: relationship to other wetlands /watercourses adiacent to or potentially impacted by the proposed project). (6) Description of buffer size per this Chapter. conditions (topographic considerations. existing vegetation types and density. habitat features, watercourse edges. presence of invasive species. etc.) and functions: (7) Functional assessment. For proposed wetland filling the Washington Functional Assessment Method (WAFAM) must be used. For or proposed projects that will impact buffers. the Washing ton Wetland Classification System may-shall be used as a functional assessment. (8) Classification of the wetland under Tukwila's rating system b. Characterization of the watercourses on site or adiacent to the site must include: (11 Description of: flow regime. physical characteristics of streambed. banks. dimensions and bank -full width. stream gradient, stream and buffer vegetation conditions, habitat conditions. and existing modifications. (2) Brief landscape assessment of the watercourse (identify hydrologic basin /subbasin. and contributing basin area acreage. outlets. surrounding land use. habitat auality and connectivity, ultimate point of discharge, presence of culverts or other constraints to flow. presence of man -made or natural barriers to fish passage, relationship to wetlands or other watercourses adjacent to or potentially impacted by the proposed project. flow regime). (3) Classification of the watercourse under Tukwila's rating system: (4) Description of buffer size per this Chanter. conditions (topographic considerations. existing vegetation types and density. habitat features. watercourse edges. presence of invasive species. etc.) and functions; (5) Description of habitat conditions. wildlife /fish use of the watercourse. including sensitive. threatened or endangered species; (6). Citation of any literature or other resources utilized in preparation of the report. 5. A statement specifying the accuracy of the study and assumptions used in the study; 6. Determination of the degree of hazard and risk from the proposal both on the site and on adjacent properties; 7. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to sensitive areas, their buffers and other properties resulting from the proposal; 8. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to sensitive areas; 9. Plans for adequate mitigation to offset any impacts; 10. Recommendations for maintenance, short-term and long -term monitoring, CL Page 6 of 44 1zM. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7/9.42010 -Q4800 RIv1U6/30/20 E(?-3 -07 :00 C:\temn \XPernwise \Annotated Prnnosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Lon° Rance Proiects\2010 SAO Amdts \P!annir.: C: rs,i:.:,,.PC Re,.,.......e..,ded Docs to Council \Annotated Proi esed SAO Ch es- Final contingency plans and bonding measures; and 11. Any technical information required by the director to assist in determining compliance with TMC Chapter 18.45. C. Geotechnical Report 1. A geotechnical report appropriate both to the site conditions and the proposed development shall be required for development in Class 2, Class 3, Class 4 areas, and any areas identified as Coal Mine Hazard Areas unless waived pursuant to TMC 18.45.040.E. 2. Geotechnical reports for Class 2 areas shall include at a minimum a site evaluation review of available information regarding the site and a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas. Subsurface exploration of site conditions is at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. 3. Geotechnical reports for Class 3, Class 4 and Coal Mine Hazard Areas shall include a site evaluation review of available information about the site, a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas, a feasibility analysis for the use of infiltration on -site and a subsurface exploration of soils and hydrology conditions. Detailed slope stability analysis shall be done if the geotechnical engineer recommends it in Class 3 or Coal Mine Hazard Areas, and must be done in Class 4 areas. 4. Applicants shall retain a geotechnical engineer to prepare the reports and evaluations required in this subsection. The geotechnical report and completed site evaluation checklist shall be prepared in accordance with the generally accepted geotechnical practices, under the supervision of and signed and stamped by the geotechnical engineer. The report shall be prepared in consultation with DCD. in consultation with and the Public Works the appropriate City Change suggested by Public Works to reflect how the process departments. actually works._Last sentence deleted at direction of Planning Commission (5/20/10) site, ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 5. The opinions and recommendations contained in the report shall be supported by field observations and, where appropriate or applicable, by literature review conducted by the geotechnical engineer which shall include appropriate explorations, such as borings or test pits, and an analysis of soil characteristics conducted by or under the supervision of the engineer in accordance with standards of the American Society of Testing and Materials or other applicable standards. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations or interpretations, the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geotechnical engineer. D. Sensitive Area Study Modifications to Requirements 1. The Director may limit the required geographic area of the sensitive area study as appropriate if: CL PM C'\ temp \XPerpwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chan <aes -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW:\Lope-Rance Proiects \2010 SAO Amdts \I4tnnine Collmissi -n\ C Recommended Dos to Co neilltAi atat< -Pfogosed- Q- Ntange C Gitial -PC Rec NA- 1- ADbNC-; -docW: \Long Ra c {s\Planning Commission \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doe Page 7 of 44 07/01 /2U 1_11_ .5.6...:00 PM07J01 /20.10- 12408:1)0 -P! 406/3 0 /2 0 1 0 3:07 )0 ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS a. The applicant, with assistance from the city, cannot obtain permission to access properties adjacent to the project area; or b. The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the site. 2. The Director may allow modifications to the required contents of the study where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential sensitive area impacts and required mitigation. E. Waiver A waiver to the sensitive areas study may be granted by the Director if the Clarification of under what conditions a waiver may be granted. following conditions have been met: 1. A wetland has been classified and delineated or the Ordinary High Water mark has been determined in watercourses (OHWM) and confirmed by the City within the last two years, in accordance with the requirements of this chapter: 2. The classification and location of wetland boundaries or OHWM have been confirmed by the City: and the proposed development or action will avoid all imp_ acts to the sensitive area(s). 3. There is substantial evidence that If a wetland or watercourse has been previously classified and delineated. the dclin ation has been development proposal or action will avoid all impacts to thc sensitive area( th i agreement between the Director and the applicant concerning the sensitive area classification and adverse impacts to sensitive areas or buffers will result. Thcrc must be substantial evidence that thc sensitive areas classification is correct, that there will be no detrimental impact to the sensitive areas or buffers, and that the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45 will be followed. F. Review of Studies The Department of Community Development will review the information submitted in the sensitive area studies to verify the information, confirm the nature and type of the sensitive area, and ensure the study is consistent with TMC Chapter 18.45. At the discretion of the Director, sensitive area studies may undergo peer review, at the expense of the applicant. 18.45.050 Interpretation The provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be held to be minimum requirements in their interpretation and application and shall be liberally construed to serve the purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45. 18.45.060 Procedures When an applicant submits an application for any building permit, subdivision, short CL Page 8 of 44 PM Cr \temn \XPernwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW :Lone Ranee Proiects■2010 SAO Antdts&P-la c \V:\Lomb Rance Proji- cts\20 ie Eke .lmdls \Plannin, Commission\Annotated Propos..d SAO Chan es Final PC no shading.doc No changes proposed to this section. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0 0i420-ie- i�-es:00 Pa to V2010 -3 -07:00 tated -1 renesed SAO Chances- ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS subdivision or any other land use review which approves a use, development or future construction, the location and dimensions of all sensitive areas and buffers on the site shall be indicated on the plans submitted. When a sensitive area is identified, the following procedures apply. The Director may waive item numbers 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the following if the size and complexity of the project does not warrant that step in the procedures and the Director grants a DCD has had difficulty monitoring mitigation due to inability to waiver pursuant to TMC 18.45.040 E. Approval bv the Department of a sensitive area alteration is access private property. contingent upon the applicant granting the City the right of continuous entry upon proper notice to observe sensitive area conditions. 1. Sensitive areas study and geotechnical report. a. The applicant shall submit the relevant study as required in TMC 21.04.140 and TMC Chapter 18.45. b. It is intended that sensitive areas studies and information be utilized by applicants in preparation of their proposals and therefore shall be undertaken early in the design stages of a project. 2. Planned residential development permit Any new residential subdivision or multiple family residential proposal that includes a wetland or watercourse or its buffer on the site may apply for a planned residential development permit and meet the requirements of the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. 3. Denial of use or development A use or development will be denied if the Director determines that the applicant cannot ensure that potential dangers and costs to future inhabitants of the development, adjacent properties, and Tukwila are minimized and mitigated to an acceptable level. 4. Preconstruction meeting The applicant, specialist(s) of record, contractor, and department representatives will be required to attend pre construction meetings prior to any work on the site. 5. Construction monitoring The specialist(s) of record shall be retained to monitor the site during construction. 6. On -site Identification The Director may require the boundary between a sensitive area and its buffer and any development or use to be permanently identified with fencing, and /or with a wood. plastic or metal sign mounted on a with treated wood, concrete or metal posts. Sign size will be determined at the time of permitting, however. the minimum size shall be 10 x 12 inches. It shall be permanently affixed to the post bv bolts and the wording shall be as follows: "Protection of this natural area is in your care. Alteration. dumping or disturbance is prohibited pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.45. Please call the City of Tukwila at 206 431 -3670 for more information." CL Page 9 of 44 F�P,d r: \tenth \XPctrnwise \Annotated Pronnseci SAO C'hanctes -Final PC Rec NO S1- TADING.doc. .l41m14 1 b t ing Commission \Anno a These changes are intended to improve the quality, readability and longevity of signage. There have been problems with signs being too small and falling off when not mounted appropriately. Addition of the word "dumping" is intended to discourage placement of garbage and yard maintenance debris in sensitive area buffers (an all too common problem). Staff also feels it is important to provide a telephone number to make it easier for a property owner or the public to obtain more information. 07/01 /2010 1:56100 PM07/0r120r0.d..2-:08:00-PM0C /30/20.1.0.3 07.:00 Ir i-m C err xazr;s+en \PC Recommended Docs to Cotrncil\Amnet- aced- Pronese Flio-iw_et;- 18.45.070 Sensitive Area Permitted Uses A. General Uses The uses set forth in this entire section, including subsections A. through D, and the following general uses, may be located within a sensitive area or buffer, subject to the provisions of TMC 21.04 and of the mitigation requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45: 1. Maintenance and repair of existing uses and facilities provided no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used in the sensitive area or buffer. 2. Nondestructive education and research. 3. Passive recreation and open space. 4. Maintenance and repair of essential streets, roads, rights -of -way, or utilities. 5. Actions to remedy the effects of emergencies that threaten the public health, safety or welfare. 6. Maintenance activities of existing landscaping and gardens in a sensitive area buffer including but not limited to mowing lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops and pruning and planting of vegetation. The removal of established native trees and shrubs is not permitted. B. Permitted Uses Subject To Administrative Review The following uses may be permitted only after administrative review and approval by the Director: 1. Maintenance and repair of existing uses and facilities where alteration or additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used. 2. Construction of new essential streets and roads, rights of way and utilities. 23. New surface water discharges to sensitive areas or their buffers from detention facilities, pre- settlement ponds or other surface water management structures may be allowed provided that the discharge meets the clean water standards of RCW 90.48 and WAC 173.200 and 173.201 as amended, and does not adversely affect water level fluctuations in the wetland or adversely affect watercourse habitat and watercourse flow conditions relative to the existing rate. Water quality monitoring may be required as a condition of use. 34. Bioswales and dispersion outfalls are the only Regional storm water facilities allowed in wetland or watercourse buffers. 18.45.110. Dcsign shall be subject to the standards of this section and other applicable City standards, including mitigation. Type 1Category I wetlands and Typc 1 and 2 watercourses shall not be used for regional storm water detention. Water quality monitorina may be reauired as a CL Page 10 of 44 P-M C: \temn \XPcrnwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \L gag o ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS Repetitive. Now incorporated into re- numbered paragraphs 5 and 7. The City currently has no mechanism for evaluating whether the installed stormwater treatment system is functioning adequately to treat runoff before it is discharged to a sensitive area. Therefore, in certain situations, staff would like the flexibility to require periodic monitoring and reporting. Allowing regional detention facilities in sensitive areas causes permanent adverse impacts. Wetland categories are proposed to be changed to be consistent with Department of Ecology classification, which is based on r. o shading.doc 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7/0 -1/20 -1.0 -1 0$-00- 14406/30/20}03: -0700 uncil\An^ „otated1ed Ptee• -esed -SAO Chang-es- ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS condition of use. best available science (see revised Section 18.45.080 for more 45. Enhancement or other mitigation including landscaping with native plants. detail). 56. Essential Utilities a. Essential utilities must be constructed to minimize, or where possible avoid, disturbance of the sensitive area and its buffer. b. All construction must be designed to protect the sensitive area and its buffer against erosion, uncontrolled storm water, restriction of groundwater movement, slides, pollution, habitat disturbance, any loss of flood carrying capacity and storage capacity, and excavation or fill detrimental to the environment. c. Upon completion of installation of essential utilities, sensitive areas and their buffers must be restored to pre project configuration, replanted as required and provided with maintenance care until newly planted vegetation is established. In addition. mitigation to offset impacts to sensitive areas or their buffers must be carried out in accordance with the standards and Clarification that mitigation is required in addition to site mitigation ratios of this chapter. restoration after work is completed d. All crossings must be designed for shared facilities in order to minimize adverse impacts and reduce the number of crossings. 6�. Essential Public Streets, Roads and Rights Way The intent of the original SAO was that only essential public a. Construction of new essential public streets. roads and rights-of-way. where streets, roads and Rights of Way would be allowed. This change avoidance of sensitive areas is not possible. Impacts to the sensitive area and its buffer must be clarifies that intent. kept to the absolute minimum. be. Essential public streets, roads and rights -of -way must be designed and maintained to prevent erosion and avoid restricting the natural movement of groundwater. eb. Essential public streets, roads and rights -of -way must be located to conform to the topography so that minimum alteration of natural conditions is necessary. The number of crossings shall be limited to those necessary to provide essential access. de. Essential public streets, roads and rights -of -way must be constructed in a way that does not adversely affect the hydrologic quality of the wetland, or watercourse and /or its buffer. Where feasible, crossings must allow for combination with other essential utilities. eel. Upon completion of construction, the area affected must be restored to an appropriate grade, replanted according to a plan approved by the Director, and provided with care until newly planted vegetation is established. In addition. mitigation to offset impacts to sensitive Clarification that mitigation is required in addition to site areas or their buffers must be carried out in accordance with the standards and mitigation ratios of restoration this chanter. CL Page 11 of 44 07/01/2010 1.56_ PMQ741, 42:01. :00.. M0(!3Q/201.Q307 PM CAtemn \KParnwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chang.es -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc`x+,-� ^m =Ran ^e Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Plannine Commission \PC Recommended Does to Cottrei1` ^n,a,.^t;}te4 Rreeesed SAE Ghanues- r� -r+ahI PC R& c NO SI- TADING.docW: \Long Range Projects \2010 £AC Amdts \Planning Commission\AnnoLa hinges Final F.;, s mding.doo Page 12 of 44 Final PC I ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 7g. Public /Private Use and Access a. Public and private access shall be limited to trails, boardwalks, covered or uncovered viewing and seating areas. footbridges only if necessary for access to other areas of the property, and displays such as interpretive signage or kiosks), and must be located in areas that have the lowest sensitivity to human disturbance or alteration. Access features shall be the minimum dimensions necessary to avoid adverse impacts to the sensitive area. Trails shall be no wider than 5 feet and are only allowed in the outer half of the buffer. except for allowed wetland or stream crossings. For proposed wetland or watercourse crossings or trails, an assessment of impacts to wetland /watercourse and buffer function (especially where the sensitive area provides habitat function for wildlife) will be reauired and must be prepared by a aualified biologist. Crossings (except for minor crossings for access to contiguous property) and trails must be designed to avoid adverse impacts to sensitive area functions. The Director may reauire mechanisms to limit or control public access when environmental conditions warrant (such as temporary trail closures during wildlife breeding season or migration season.) b. Public access must be specifically developed for interpretive, educational or research purposes by, or in cooperation with, the City or as part of the adopted Tukwila Parks and Open Space Plan. Private footbridges are allowed only for access across a sensitive area that bisects the property. c. No motorized vehicle is allowed within a sensitive area or its buffer except as required for necessary maintenance, agricultural management or security. d. Any public access or interpretive displays developed along a sensitive area and its buffer must, to the extent possible, be connected with a park, recreation or open -space area. e. Vegetative edges, structural barriers, signs or other measures must be provided wherever necessary to protect sensitive areas and their buffers by limiting access to designated public use or interpretive areas. f. Access trails and footbridges must incorporate design features and materials that protect water quality and allow adequate surface water and groundwater movement. Trails must be built of permeable materials. g. Access trails must be located where they do not disturb nesting, breeding and rearing areas and must be designed so that sensitive plant and critical wildlife species are protected. Trails and footbridges must be placed so as to not cause erosion or sedimentation. destabilization of watercourse banks. interference with fish passage or significant removal of native vegetation. Footbridges must be anchored to prevent their movement due to water level or flow fluctuations. Any work in the wetland or stream below the OHWM will reouire additional federal and state permits. 89. Dredging, Digging or Filling a. Dredging, digging or filling within a sensitive area or its buffer may occur only These changes are proposed to clarify allowed uses and establish standards for property owners to access areas of their property when it contains sensitive areas. DCD has received numerous requests for installation offootbridges and trails through/across sensitive areas, and there have been numerous instances where footbridges were installed without authorization and without necessary precautions to prevent streambank collapse or prevent movement of the footbridge in high water situations. Criteria have been added to minimize the potential adverse impacts of these features in sensitive areas. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7 11 1 01.04 -24! 4I0- 1zM0 613 0 /20 10 -3:)7 )0 CL P#1 C: \temp \XPernwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NC) SHADING -doc nce Pro'ects\2010 SAO Amdts\Planninc Commission \PC Recommended Does to Conncil\Annetated Pronosed-SAA -Chop es- ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS with the permission of the Director and only for the following purposes: (1) Uses permitted by TMC 18.45.080, 18.45.090, 18.45.110, 18.45.130; (2) Maintenance of an existing watercourse; (3) Enhancement or restoration of habitat in conformance with an approved mitigation plan identified in a sensitive area study; (4) Natural system interpretation, education or research when undertaken by, or in cooperation with, the City; (5) Flood control or water quality enhancement by the City; (6) Maintenance of existing water quality controls, for normal maintenance needs and for any diversion, rerouting, piping or other alteration permitted by TMC Chapter 18.45; (7) Filling of abandoned mines. b. Any dredging, digging or filling shall be performed in a manner that will minimize sedimentation in the water. Every effort will be made to perform such work at the time of year when the impact can be lessened. c. Upon completion of construction, the area affected must be restored to an appropriate grade, replanted according to a plan approved by the Director, and provided with care until newly planted vegetation is established. C. Permitted Uses Subject to Exception Approval Other uses may be permitted upon receiving a reasonable use exception pursuant to TMC 18.45.180. A use permitted through a reasonable use exception shall conform to the procedures of TMC Chapter 18.45 and be consistent with the underlying zoning. D. Uses allowed under a Sensitive Area Master Plan prepared and approved under the provisions of TMC 18.45.160. 18.45.080 Wetlands Designations, Ratings and Buffers A. Wetland Designations. 1. For the purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45, "wetlands" and "regulated wetlands" are defined in the Definitions chapter of this title. A wetland boundary is the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland established by using the Washington State Wetland and Delineation Manual, as required by RCW 36.70A.175 (Ecology Publication #96 -94) and consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. 2. Wetland determinations and delineation of wetland boundaries shall be made by a Change proposed for clarification and to avoid duplication. aualified Professional. as described in 18.45.040. T.S. Fish and Wildlife Scrvic:.':: "Classification of Wetlands and Dcepwater Habitats of the United States FWS /OBS 79/31" (Cowardin et al., 1979), contains the descriptions of wetland classes and CL Page 13 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56:00 i 1€7/0.1,L20.1.0..- 12.:08:00 PIv406/- 301r0}0 3:071)0 PM c C: \temp \XPErowise \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc \V: ,.a Range Projects \2010 SAO-A+n n \PC Reeefmcnded Does to Council SAO Chajtee s- -4 i+i +il PC Rec NO SI f-A-1} -N{-i- deer "J: \Lang Range Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Cornmissien\Aneeteted Propesed SAO Changes Gina' P ,e- &ha4i,rg,dee ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS subclasses: 3. Wetland areas within the City of Tukwila have certain characteristics. and functions and values and have been influenced by urbanization and related disturbances. Wetland functions include, but are not limited to the following: a. Improving water quality; b. Maintaining hydrologic functions (reducing peak flows, decreasing erosion, groundwater recharge. flood storage): and c. Providing habitat for plants, mammals, fish, birds, and amphibians B. Wetland Ratings. Wetlands shall be designated Type 1, Typc 2 or Type 3 in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands Rating system for Western Washington. (Washington State Department of Ecology. August 2004. Publication #04 -06 -025) as Category L II, III. or IV as listed below: 1. Typc 1 Category I wetlands are those wetlands that mcct any of thc following criteria_ it represent a unique or rare wetland type: or ii) are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands: or iii) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are imnossible to replace within a human lifetime: or iv) provide a high level of functions. The following tunes of wetlands listed by Washington Department of Ecology and notentially found in Tukwila are Category I: a. Estuarine wetlands (deepwater tidal habitats with a range of fresh brackish- marine water chemistry and daily tidal cycles. salt and brackish marshes. intertidal mudflats, bays, sounds, and coastal rivers) The wetland is characterized by thc presence of species listed by thc federal government or State as endangered or threatened, or the presence of critical or outstanding habitat for thosc species; b. Wetlands that perform many functions well and score at least 70 points in the Western Washington Wetlands Rating System :The wetland has 10 60% permanent open water in dispersed patches with two or more classes of vegetation; The wetland is equal to or greater than five acr wetland classes, one of which may be substituted by permanent or open water; or by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2. Category II Typc 2 wetlands are difficult. though not impossible to replace and provide high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I wetlands. but still need a relatively high level of protection. The following types of wetlands listed by Washington Department of Ecology and notentially found in Tukwila are Category II wetlands See previous explanation pg. 2 above (18.45.010) for elimination of the term "values Adding additional hydrologic functions to obtain improved information about wetland function. Changes proposed to meet best available science for classing wetlands and for evaluating wetland functions. Use of these methods are required by the Department of Ecology and the Corps of Engineers for any applicant proposing to alter wetlands and as such, do not add any additional requirements to applicants. This change will also help to avoid confusion and inconsistencies for applicants between state and city requirements. CL Page 14 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7/0142010- 1-2 e8 0- PM068-e/201-0 -:0740 PM C: \temp \XParmrase \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHAD[NG.docW: \Lone Rance Proiccts '2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission\PC Recommended Does to Council\Annotated Pronosed SAO Cl�enees- P4a S11AD1NG.docW: \Long Range Projccts\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission\Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC :-e s'.tading,.doc a. Estuarine wetlands smaller than an acre. or those that are disturbed and larger than one acreThe wetland is equal to or greater than one acre in size; b. Wetlands that perform functions well Wetlands scoring between 51 -69 points (out of 100) on the auestions related to the functions present.The wetland has three or more c 'The wetland is characterized by the presence of nesting sites for priority species ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS watercourse. 3. Category III wetlands have a moderate level of functions (scores between 30 and 50 points). Wetlands scoring between 30 -50 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. Type22 wetlands arc those wetlands that are greater than 1,000 sq. ft. and than one acre in size with two or fewer wetland classes. 4. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scores less than 30 points) and are often heavily disturbed. While these are wetlands that should be able to be replaced or improved, they still need protection because they may provide some important functions. Any disturbance of these wetlands will be considered on a case by case basis. C. Wetland Buffers A buffer area shall be established adjacent to designated wetland areas. The purpose of the buffer area shall be to protect the integrity and functions and values of the See explanation pg. 2 above regarding "values wetland area. Any land alteration must be located out of the buffer areas as required by this section. Wetland buffers are intended in general to: 1. Minimize long -terra impacts of development on properties containing wetlands; 2. Protect wetlands from adverse impacts during development; 3. Preserve the edge of the wetland and its buffer for its critical habitat value; 4. Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high water events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects; 5. Reduce erosion and increased surface water runoff; 6. Reduce loss of or damage to property; 7. Intercept fine sediments from surface water runoff and serve to minimize water quality impacts; and CL Page 15 of 44 07/01/2010 1.56 ;00 PM0 -0 -12 08 ng06 /30/2010 3:07 (}0 PM Atom) \XPerowise \Annotated Proposed SAO CIanzes -Final PC Rec NO SHAD ING.docW \I.on3. Ramie Proiccts12010 SAO Amdts \Pl; nnin_ Comrnissioi PC Recommended Does to Comcil \And- Pronesed SAO Ntaneres- rA;-iiial PC Re ecW: \Long Range- Projects\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 8. Protect the sensitive area from human and domestic animal disturbances. An undisturbed sensitive area or buffer may substitute for the yard setback and landscape requirements of the TMC 18.50 and 18.52. D. Special Buffer Studias DE. Wetland Buffer Widths The following standard buffers shall be established from the wetland edge: 1. Type 1Cate>?ory I and II Wetland; 100 foot buffer. 2. Category III Type 2 Wetland; 80 -foot buffer. 3. Category IVTypc 3 Wetland; 50 -foot buffer. EP. Buffer Setbacks 1. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set back 15 feet and all other development shall be set back ten feet from the buffer's edge. The building setbacks shall be measured, from the foundation to the buffer's edge. Building plans shall also identify a 20 -foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of development will be reviewed. 2. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site plan demonstrates there will be no impacts to the buffer from construction or occasional maintenance activities (see TMC Figure 18 -2). FG. Variation of Standard Wetland Buffer Width 1. The Director may reduce the standard wetland buffers only where buffer conditions are degraded (due to existing development within the prescribed buffer width. the presence of significant amount of invasive vegetation that impairs buffer function. and /or lack of native vegetation). on a case -by -case basis, provided the remaining buffer is enhanced and the reduced buffer area does not contain slopes 15% or greater. Where a buffer has a variable tonographv that includes Class I slopes on the landward half of the buffer. a buffer reduction mate be allowed if the proposed reduction is in the area with the Class I slopes. and a 10 foot planted setback from the ton of the slope is maintained. Further. a geotechnical review of the proposed buffer enhancement plan must determine that the buffer enhancement can be implemented without destabilizing the slope. The approved buffer width shall not result in greater than a 50% reduction in width. 2. Buffer reduction with enhancement may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 permit with an approved buffer enhancement plan prepared by a Qualified wetland biologist if: a. Additional protection to wetlands will be provided through the implementation of a buffer enhancement plan; b. The existing condition of the buffer is degraded; and c. Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to the following: CL Page 16 of 44 PM C: \ternn \XPerowise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc Fine ed Proposed SAO Chances Final PC no shading.doc Requirement for sensitive area study is already included in Section 18.45.040. See previous explanation (revised Section 18.45.080) for changes to wetland classification. Buffer widths have not changed. See Addendum to Departures Memo for an explanation of why buffers based on BAS are not recommended. Clarification that buffer enhancement is required for all buffer reductions. Clarification of under what situations buffer reduction is allowed when there are steep slopes on the property. Clarification that buffer reduction is not allowed when the buffer is in good condition (very rare in Tukwila). This better meets BAS. Clarification that enhancement plan is always required for buffer reduction. Clarification that both criteria must be met. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM07691,1BtA- t-2-©S 00- PM06/3F1/201 -9 3:0 00 s to Council\Annotateel--D~ onesed fiA0 C}jttrw s ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS (1) Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife habitat or improve water quality or hydrology; (2) Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are likely to be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes, snags, root wads /stumps, birdhouses and heron nesting areas; or (3) Removing non native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer area and replanting the area subject to 2.c.(1) above. 3. Buffers for all types of wetlands will be increased when they are determined to be particularly sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development will create unusually adverse impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required only after completion of a wetland study by a qualified wetlands specialist or expert that documents the basis for such increased width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when: a. The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant adverse impacts upon the wetland that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width; or b. The area serves as habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive or monitor species listed by the federal government or the State. 4. Every reasonable effort shall be made to maintain the existing viable native plant life in the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an enhancement plan approved by the Director. Enhancements will ensure that slope stability and wetland quality will be maintained or improved. Any disturbance of the buffers for wetlands shall be replanted with a diverse plant community of native northwest species that are appropriate for the specific site as determined by the Director. If the vegetation must be removed, or because of the alterations of the landscape the vegetation becomes damaged or dies, then the applicant for a permit must replace existing vegetation along wetlands with comparable specimens, approved by the Director, which will restore buffer functions within five years. 5. The Director shall require subsequent corrective actions and long -term monitoring of the project if adverse impacts to regulated wetlands or their buffers are identified. 18.45.090 Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation A. No use or development may occur in a Category I. Category II. Category III or Category IV Type 1, Type 2 or Type 3 wetland or its buffer except as specifically allowed by TMC Chapter 18.45. Any use or development allowed is subject to review and approval by the Director. Where required, a mitigation or enhancement plan must be developed and must comply with the standards of mitigation required in TMC Chapter 18.45. In addition. federal and /or state authorization is reauired for direct impacts to waters of the United States or the State of Washington. B. Alterations Correction of a typographical error. "Uses" eliminated because uses are covered in the allowed uses Section (18 45.070). See explanation above (modified 18.45.080) for changes in wetland categories. Mitigation plan is the correct term enhancement is one of several types of mitigation. Reference to federal and state authorizations is to give applicants notice of the potential need for other permits. CL Page 17 of 44 PM \temp \\Perowise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Lana R ance Preiects\2010 SAO Amdts \Plmmin nioai °f e,,Tnericlecl Dees lc mciI \Anr -kited Proposed SAO Chap-aes- ctinal PC Rec NO SHADING.decW: \Lon Range Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commissiotr\Artnatated Proposed SAO Changes 1� 07/01/2010 1 /01/2010 12:08:00- PM06/30 /2.0.10 3:07 10 01 ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 1. Alterations to wetlands are discouraged and are limited to the minimum necessary for project feasibility. Requests for alterations must be accompanied by a mitigation plan, are subject to Director approval, and may be approved only if the following findings are made: a. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality; b. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat; c. The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and/or storm detention capabilities; d. The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion hazard or contribute to scouring actions; e. The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property; and f. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas. 2. Alterations are not permitted to Category I and D Type 1 wetlands unless specifically exempted under the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. 3. Alterations to Category III Typc 2 wetlands are allowed only where unavoidable and adeauate mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards of this section.arc prohibited except where the location or configuration of the wetland provides practic: water ads 2 v. for creation or restoration and 3:1 for hlenhancement and must be located contiguous to the altcrcd wetland. 4. Isolated Typc 3 Alterations to Category IV wetlands may be altcrcd or relocated only with the permission of the Director. are allowed only where unavoidable and adeauate mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards of this section. A mitigation or enhancement plan must be developed and must comply wi 18A5. Mitigation for alterations to a Category IV wetland will b establishment and 3:1 for rehabilitation or enhancement. 5. Wetlands that are less than 1.000 sauare feet may be exempted where it has been shown by the applicant that they are not associated with a riparian corridor• they are not part of a wetland mosaic. do not contain habitat identified as essential for local populations of priority species identified by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and do not score 20 points or greater for habitat in the Western Washington Wetland Rating System. S.6. Mitigation plans shall be completed for any proposals for dredging, filling, alterations and relocation of wetland habitat allowed in TMC Chapter 18.45. Changes proposed to be consistent with Department of and assessed as having low overall wetland functions may be altcrcd and/or relocated under TMC Ecology/Corps of Engineers /EPA policies based on best Chapter 18.15. T available science. created as the result of construction activities The determination that a wetland is isolated is made CL Page 18 of 44 PM C \tcmn \XPgrnwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanecs -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Lone Rance Proiects\2010 SAO Amdts\Planninc -Co Fival P cW:\Long Ikuige Projects\2010 SAO Amdts \P:a:3r.ir'.e ^e See explanation above (modified 18.45.080) for changes in wetland categories. Based on experience in comparing Department of Ecology ratings with City of Tukwila ratings Staff has assumed that wetlands previously classified as Type 1 are equivalent to Ecology Category II,' Type 2 wetlands are equivalent to Category III, and Type 3 wetlands are equivalent to Category IV. Where wetlands have already classified under the Ecology system, wetlands will be designated accordingly on the draft revised SAO map. The 1000 square foot exemption is maintained but new criteria must be met better meets BAS and is approved by Ecology. 07/01 /2010 1:56:00 PMO-710442. 010 -12- 0800- PN406/-30/2A10- 3:0 ?:04 cs to Council\Aniletated Prooesed SAO Chang eft- ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS through the Typc 2 permit prco3c A mitigation or enhancement plan must be developed and must ee rply with the standards of mitigation required in TMC Chapter 18.15. C. Mitigation Sequencing. Applicants shall demonstrate that reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers. When an alteration to a wetland or its required buffer is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized or compensated for in the following order of preference: 1. Avoidin arzee the impact altoaether by not takina a certain action or parts of an action: These revisions included to be consistent with Best Available hether by finding another site or changing the location of Science and Ecology guidance. the proposed activity on site; 2. Minimizing wetland and wetland buffer impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. by using appropriate technoloay. or by takina affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; of impact on site; 3. Rectifvina the impact by repairing or rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment; 4. Reducing or eliminating the imp act over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 53. Compensatiana for the impact b: replacing, enhancing, or providing substituteiefr resources or environments; and /orshall occur in the following order of preference: 6. Monitoring the impact and takina appropriate corrective measures. 1 by enhancing significantly degraded wetlands; creating wetlands in—an al' oec- tart— i- f-deetrate hydrol; i, primarily of exotic introduced species or noxious weeds. enhancina functions at an existing. degraded wetlan,a D. Wetland Mitigation Plans Content. 1. The mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a sensitive area study by a specialist approved by the Director. Wetland and /or buffer alteration or relocation may be allowed only when a mitigation plan clearly demonstrates that the changes would be an improvement of wetland and buffer quantitative and qualitative functions. The plan shall follow the performance standards of TMC Chapter 18.45 and show how water quality, wildlife and fish habitat, and general wetland quality would be improved. 2. The scope and content of a mitiaation plan shall be decided on a case -bv -case basis taking into account the degree of impact and the extent of the mitiaation measures. As the impacts to the sensitive area increase. the mitiaation measures to offset these impacts will increase in For clarification purposes, staff proposes to reorganize this section to separate the content of mitigation plans (Section D) from the standards for mitigation (new Paragraph E below). The mitigation standards found in Section F have been moved to the new Section E. No change from existing code -moved from Section F. CL Page 19 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56: pM07d0 112010 -12: 08.00- 1 00 C: \temp \XPero��'ise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc L :ii :a Rance Proiects \2010 SAO Ai lP anninc Commission \PC Recommended Does to" cnnsil \An^^' d' fonesed SAO Charues- tat PC 1246440 S1-64DING.docw: \Long Range Projccts\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commissie Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc 01 number and complexity. ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 3. For wetlands. the format of the mitigation plan should follow that established in "Wetland Mitigation in Washington State. Part 2 Developing Mitigation Plans" (Washington Department of Ecology. Corps of Engineers, EPA. March, 2006 or as amended). 4. The components of a complete mitigation plan are as follows: a. Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site: b. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation measures. This should include a description of site selection criteria. identification of target evaluation species and resource functions: c. Performance standards of the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals, and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. They may include water Quality standards. species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices. or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. d. A detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of mitigation techniaues. This plan should include the proposed construction seauence and construction management. and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development proposal: e. Monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the approach for assessing a completed proiect for the specified monitoring period. An outline shall be included that shells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the mitigation proiect's progress: f. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action. and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates proiect performance standards have not been met: and g. Performance security or other assurance devices as described in TMC 18.45.210. E. Mitigation Standards 1. Types of Wetland Mitigation Actiona. a. Mitigation for wetlands shall follow the mitigation seauencine steps in this chapter and may include the following types of actions: (11 Restoration: al Re- establishment the manipulation of the physical. chemical or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of restoring wetland functions to a former wetland. resulting in a net increase in wetland acres and functions: CL Page 20 of 44 PM C: \tcnm \XPcrowise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADING -doc F-itea1 PC n,�.e ru ADING -a c e e !ar.r.ir.g- ^;,,,.a3:siete\Annetn ees Final PC no shad:.•, deg Changed to meet best available science. Format required by Department of Ecology /Corps of Engineers /EPA). No change -moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. No change from existing code moved from Section F. Standards in Section E separated out from previous mitigation plan content in Section D. These are the types of Ecology approved mitigation options /actions which may be utilized in mitigation plans. 07/01/2010 1 :56:00 PMO .71e1 010 --1 -2 08410- PM0613e al -0 07 cs to Council \Annotated Proposed SAO Chin ees- ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS bl Rehabilitation the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing historic functions and processes of a degraded wetland. resulting in a gain in wetland functions but not acreage: (21. Creation (establishmentl- the manipulation of the physical. chemical or biological characteristics to develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site, where a biological wetland did not previously exist: (31 Enhancement the manipulation of the physical. chemical or biological characteristics to heighten. intensify, or improve specific functions (such as vegetation) or to change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present. resulting in a change in wetland functions but not in a gain in wetland acreage: or (4) A combination of the -three types. b. Required mitigation ratios are listed below. Alternate mitigation ratios may be accepied.. theDirector__upon__preseitatioil of jpstifcation based on best available science that shows that the proposed compensation represents a roughly proportional exchange for the Proposed impacts. (11 Alterations are not permitted to Category I or II wetlands unless specifically exempted under the provisions of this Program. When alterations are allowed. mitigation ratios for Category I wetlands shall be 4:1 for creation or re- establishment- 8:1 for rehabilitation. and 16 :1 for enhancement. Mitigation ratios for Category II wetlands shall be at 3:1 for creation or re- establishment. 6:1 for rehabilitation and 12:1 for enhancement. Creation or re- establishment shall be contiguous to the wetland. unless an exception is authorized by the Director. For Category II estuarine wetlands. re- establishment. creation and enhancement ratios will be decided on a case by case basis. (21 tion or configuration of thc wetland provides practical difficulties that can be- resolved by modifying up to .10 (one tenth) of an acre of wetland. Alterations to Category III wetlands are prohibited except where unavoidable and mitigation seauencing in accordance with this Chapter has been utilized and where mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards in the section. Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III Type 2 wetland must be located contiguous to thc altered wetland Mitigation for any alteration to a Typz 2 •.7 :tland must be provided at a ratio of 2:1 1.5:1 for creation or restoration re establishment. 4:1 for rehabilitation and 3:1 8:1 for enhancement alone and must be located contiguous to the altered wetland_ (31 Mitigation for alteration to a Category IV wetland will be 1.5:1 for creation or re- establishment. 3:1 for rehabilitation or 6:1 for enhancement. Where only a portion of the wetland is filled. the potential functionality of the remaining reduced wetland must be considered in mitigation planning. 2. The following shall be considered the minimum performance standards for approved CL Page 21 of 44 PNI cr c: \ten) \XPgrp\;iise \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC Rec NO SHADINCi.docW: \Long Ranee Pro' .�J =final PC Rec. NO S''4A -1 14(i.do \V: \Lone R nge Pfe I e s \Planning Commission \Annotated Proposed SAO CI .i-;;cs Final PC no shading.doo Allowed alterations have not changed fi -om existing SAO only wetland categories have been modified. Increases in mitigation ratios are proposed to be consistent with best available science (Department of Ecology guidance), which is already applied by Ecology and the Corps of Engineers when reviewing wetland fill applications, thus the impact to applicants will not change by changing mitigation ratios in the SAO. Alternative ratios may be allowed if applicant can demonstrate that they meet BAS and fairly compensate for the wetland being lost. The mitigation ratios are suggested by Ecology guidance and are based on BAS.. Flexibility in varying the ratios is provided for in b. above. Removal of requirement for mitigation contiguous to this type of wetland and limiting it to 0.10 acre of modification recognizes that this is not always the best location for mitigation .and allows for consideration of each proposed alteration on a case by case basis. .a (170 /2010 /2010 1 5i :QO_ PM07/0....2Q 1O....12 08:00- PMO6/-30 Q,U }.(t4:07700} ocs to Council Annotated-1 SAO Cha+ e5- wetland alterations: a. Wetland functions improved over those of the original conditions. b. Hvdroloaic conditions and hvdroperiods are improved over existing conditions and the specific hydrologic performance standards specified in the approved mitigation plan are achieved. c. Acreage reauirements for creation, re- establishment, rehabilitation or enhancement and for proposed wetland classes are met. d. Vegetation native to the Pacific Northwest is installed and vegetation survival and coverage standards over time are met and maintained. e. Habitat features are installed, if habitat is one of the functions to be improved. f. Buffer and bank conditions and functions exceed the original state. 2. In order to achieve thc City's goal of no net loss of wetland functions and acreage, alteration of wetlands w: compensate for the impacts to thc wetland and will compensate at a ratio of 1.5 to 1. 3. Impacts tc -:fetlands may c mitigated b significantly degraded wetlands, however, in order to achieve thc City's goal of no net loss of wetland functions proposing to enharc� iialands must product a sensitive arca study that identifies how adequately mitigate for the loss of proposal must also show whether existing wetland functions will be reduced by the enhancement actions. 3. Maintenance and monitoring of mitigation shall be done by the property owner for a period of no less than five years and for ten years when the mitigation plan includes establishing forested wetlands and /or buffers. Maintenance shall be carried out in accordance with the approved mitigation elan. Monitoring reports must be submitted to the City for review with the freauencv specified in the approved lnitiaation plan. 34. The DCD Director may approve, through a Type 2 decision, the transfer of mitigation to a wetland mitigation bank using the criteria in 4.a. through 4.f below. The Director must determine the number of wetland mitigation bank credits required to meet the mitigation ratios established in TMC Chapter 18.45. a. Off -site mitigation is proposed in a wetland mitigation bank that has been approved by all appropriate agencies, including the Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, EPA or other regulatory agencies; and certified under state rules: and b. The proposed wetland alteration is within the designated service area of the wetland bank: and ch. The applicant provides a justification for the number of credits proposed; and CL Page 22 of 44 07/01/2010 1.56:00 PM07 /01 201-0-1- 2:08400- PM06/30/2-010-3 07 00 PM C: \tcmn \XPtirnw'ise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADLNG.docW: \Lon° Ran2c Pro'ects\2010 SAO Amdts \Plannine Commission \PC recommended #acs -!2 C snc z ,,c a ^tcd Proposed SAO C114111eei ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS cts\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission\Annolated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc Claming what minimum performance standards are required for approval of wetland alterations. Now using Ecology wetland rating system and mitigation ratios which represent Best Available Science. Ten year monitoring is required by Ecology and the Corps of Engineers for wetland mitigation involving establishment of forested conditions, which is consistent with BAS (it takes at least 10 years for tree canopy coverage to be achieved). These agencies do not typically regulate impacts to buffers unless they are part of a wetland mitigation plan. Additional clarification for allowing use of wetland banks. ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS de. The mitigation achieved through the number of credits required meets the intent of TMC Chapter 18.45; and ed. The Director bases the decision on a written staff report, evaluating the equivalence of the lost wetland functions with the number of wetland credits required:: and e. The applicant provides a cony of the wetland bank ledger demonstrating that the approved number of credits has been removed from the bank. New language proposed as a means of tracking mitigation when FE. Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Location. mitigation bank is used. 1. In instances where portions of a wetland or wetland buffer impacted by development. remain. On site mitigation for buffer impacts shall be provided on -site. Where an essential public road. street or right of way or essential public utility cannot avoid reducing a buffer by more than Claming that buffer impacts must be mitigated at the impacted 50 additional buffer enhancement must be carried out at other locations around the impacted wetland and not off wetland. 2. On -site mitigation for wetland impacts shall be provided, except where the applicant can demonstrate that: (a) On -site wetland mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, waves or other factors; or Clarification (b) Mitigation is not practical due to potentially adverse impact from surrounding land uses; or (c) Existing functionsa1 values created at the site of the proposed restoration are significantly greater than lost wetland functione-ls values; or Explanation for deletion of "values found above on page 2. (d) That established Rregional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions have been established and strongly justify location of mitigation at another Consistency with wording in other requirements in this section. site. 32. Off -site mitigation shall occur within the same watershed where the wetland loss occurred. 43. Mitigation sites located within the Tukwila city limits are preferred. However, the Director may approve mitigation sites outside the city upon finding that: (a) Adequate measures have been taken to ensure the non development and long -term viability of the mitigation site; and (b) Adequate coordination with the other affected local jurisdiction has occurred. 54. In selecting mitigation sites, applicants shall pursue select a siteit}g in a location where the targeted functions can reasonably be performed and sustained and shall pursue sites in the Consistency with best available science and Ecology guidelines. following order of preference: (a) Upland sites that were formerly wetlandaSites within the immediate drainage sub- basin; (b) cd species, weeds or emergent vegetation Sites within the next higher CL Page 23 of 44 PM a .C: \temo \XPernwisc \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanecs -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Lome -P a ccts \2010 SAO An iiral PC Rec NO SHAD1NG4acW: \Long Range I ets\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission\Annotnte4- 1>-feposetI SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc 07/01/2010 I_56. 00 PMO7 /0-1, -l- 2.08:00- Rh40(/30/201.0.3:U7 ed Decs to Conneil \Annotated- Pienesed 4O Cheneei- 01 -r drainage sub- basin: (c) Other disturbcd uplandSites within Green /Duwamish River basin: (d) Existing degraded wetland. existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation sitc; ineasurcc. This should include a description of site selection c evaluation spccics and resource functions; ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS b case by case basis. As tho impacts to the sensitive area increase, the mitigation measures to offset these impacts will increase in number and complexity. The components of mitigation plan arc as follows: fo beginning remedial action o s. They may include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat divcrsi geological or hydrological criteria; 1. detailed construction plan of the. written specifications and descriptions of mitigation techniques. T the proposed construction sequence and construction management, and be accompanied by detailed sitc diagrams and blueprints that are an Monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the approach for assessing a cvalua g the mitigation project's progress; 5. Contingency plan identifying potential cou: ties of action, and any corrective m nsurci to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards have not been met; and 7. Performance security or other assurance devices as described in TMC 18.45.210. G. Mitigation Timing. Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently disturb wetlands and either prior to or immediately after activities that will temporarily disturb wetlands. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. The Director may allow activities that permanently disturb wetlands prior to implementation of the mitigation plan under the following circumstances: 1. To allow planting or re- vegetation to occur during optimal weather conditions; 2. To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or 3. To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing or phasing H. Permitted Uses CL Page 24 of 44 PM C: \temn \XPtirnwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc c \V: \Long Range Projects\2010 SAO Arndts\Planning COMM ission \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC ::c s'hading.doc Mitigation plan content has been separated from mitigation standards for clarity. See revised Section 18.45.090.D. and new section 18.45.090. E. 07/01/2010 1.56:00 PMA7/A1 -/2 111}-1- 08- 09- PTv10Fi130/2.- 01.0 3:07 00 d- Rrenesed SAES- chances ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS r ble use execpti. t Duplication deleted because this is covered in permitted uses reasonable use exception shall conform to the procedures of TMC Chapter 18.45 and be consistent Section 18.45.070 C. 18.45.100 Watercourse Designations, Ratings and Buffers A. Watercourse Ratings: Watercourse ratings are consistent with the Washington .Department of Natural Resources_ Water Typing categories (noted in parentheses .after each category). which are based on the existing habitat functions and are rated as follows: 1. Type 1 (S) Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State, under RCW 90.58. These watercourses shall be regulated under TMC 18.44, Shoreline Overlay. 2. Type 2 (F) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have arc known to.._�eused. by fish or meet the physical criteria to be potentially used by fish and that have perennial (year- round) or seasonal +ntcrmittent flows and support salmonid fish use. 3. Type 3 (Np) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial flows and do not meet the criteria of a Type F stream or have been proven not to contain fish using methods described in the Forest Practices Board Manual Section 13arc not used by salmonid fish. 4. Type 4 (Ns) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have intermittent flows (do not have surface flow during at least some nortio.n of the year) and do not meet the physical criteria. of a Type r- _wa_tercoursearc not used by cc!monid fish. B. Watercourse Buffers. Any land alteration must be located out of the buffer areas as required by this section. Watercourse buffers are intended in general to: 1. Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing watercourses; 2. Protect the watercourse from adverse impacts during development; 3. Preserve the edge of the watercourse and its buffer for its critical habitat value; 4. Provide shading to maintain stable water temperatures and vegetative cover for additional wildlife habitat; 5. Provide input of organic debris and uptake of nutrients; 6. Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high water events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects; 7. Reduce erosion and increased surface water runoff; 8. Reduce loss of, or damage to, property; 9. Intercept fine sediments from surface water runoff and serve to minimize water quality impacts; and 10. Protect the sensitive area from human and domestic animal disturbance. WA Department of Natural Resources (WA DNR) classifications have been added in parentheses to assist reviewers who are familiar with that rating system. The WA DNR classifications are recognized by other state and federal agencies. Practically speaking only the names of the classifications change Tukwila's watercourse rating system was already generally consistent with the technical aspects of the DNR rating, but additional language has been added to make the definitions consistent with the DNR classification system. CL Page 25 of 44 07/011201.0 1 ,56_ 0 PM0- 7 /0 1- 120 l 0 ..2:O84?0. -PMO6 /30/2010 -3:07 00 PM cr c: \temp \XParowise \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes -Final PC Rec NC) ST- IADING.docW: \Lon- R-ann..e Pfeiects\2010 S, AA nom. n\ PC Recommended Does to Connell Annotated-Proposed st. -e c'Iremwes- G ,icinal PC `acs 1`!Q- S- 1- IAD1NG. doe` "'T "hen g Race Prrijects \2010 SAO Amdts \Plana ommission\Annetated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading dee ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS An undisturbed sensitive area or buffer may substitute for the yard setback and landscape requirements of TMC 18.50 and 18.52. C. Special Buffer Studie.; ^.pplicants for a use or development within a watercourse or its Removed to avoid duplication with Section 18.45.040 for Sensitive Areas Studies CD. Watercourse Buffer Widths The following buffer widths. measured from the Ordinary Hieh Water Mark (OHWM), apply to each side of a watercourse. If the OHWM cannot be determined then the buffer will be measured from the ton of bank: 1. Type 1 (S) Watercourse: Regulated under TMC 18.44, Shoreline Overlay. 2. Type 2 (F) Watercourse: 100 foot -wide buffer. 3. Type 3 (Np) Watercourse: 80- foot -wide buffer. 4. Type 4 (Ns) Watercourse: 50- foot -wide buffer. DE.Buffer Setbacks 1. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be setback 15 feet and all other development shall be setback 10 feet. Building setbacks shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge. Building plans shall also identify a 20 -foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of development will be reviewed. 2. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site plan demonstrates there will be no impacts to the buffer from construction or occasional maintenance activities (see TMC Figure 18 -2). EF. Variation of Standard Watercourse Buffer Width. 1. The Director may reduce the standard watercourse buffers on a case -by -case basis only where the buffer is significantly degraded (due to existing development within the prescribed buffer width, the presence of significant amount of invasive vegetation that impairs buffer function. and/or lack of native vegetation), provided the remaining buffer is enhanced in accordance with an approved buffer enhancement plan. prepared by a aualified professional, and does not contain slopes 15% or greater. Where a buffer has a variable topography that includes Class 1 slopes on the landward portion of the buffer. a buffer reduction may be allowed if the proposed reduction is in the area with the Class I slopes. a 10 foot planted setback from the ton of the slope is maintained. Further. a eeotechnical review of the proposed buffer enhancement plan must determine that the buffer enhancement can be implemented without destabilizing the slope. The approved buffer width shall not result in greater than a 50% reduction in width. 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 watercourses, and that: (a) The buffer is vegetated and includes an on -site buffer enhancement plan, .prepared by a aualified professional. as may be required to retain existing native vegetation and install Page 26 of 44 CL PM C: \tenor \XP rnwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc Find Adding clarification current version of SAO does not spec from where to measure "edge of watercourse". OHWM is consistent with federal and state regulatory agencies. Modification to watercourse designations explained above. Limiting buffer reduction to those buffers that are already disturbed more closely meets best available science. Clarification that buffer enhancement is required for buffer reduction. Clarification of under what circumstances buffer reduction when there are steep slopes might be allowed. Adds requirement that a geotechnical professional review the enhancement plan to ensure it will not create slope instability. Clarification that a professional must prepare buffer enhancement plan and that native vegetation must be retained (better meets best available science). Deletion of "values" 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0-7/ 03;2010- 1 ©&0©- PM06/3©F2 -1 -d 3:0:04} e :macs ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS additional native vegetation in order to improve the buffer function -arid value; or explained pg. 2 above (18.45.0100). (b) If there is no significant vegetation in the buffer, a buffer may be reduced only if an on -site buffer enhancement plan is provided. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions and. 2. Buffers for all types of watercourses will be increased when they are determined to be particularly sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development will create unusually adverse impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required only after completion of a watercourse study by a qualified specialist or expert that documents the basis for such increased width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when: (a) The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant adverse impacts upon the watercourse that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width; or (b) The area serves as habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive or monitor species listed by the federal government or the State. 3. Every reasonable effort shall be made to maintain the existing viable native plant life and non invasive significant trees in the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an enhancement plan approved by the Director. Enhancements will ensure that slope stability and watercourse quality will be maintained or improved. Any disturbance of the buffers for watercourses shall be replanted with a diverse plant community of native northwest species that are appropriate for the specific site as determined by the Director. If the vegetation must be removed, or because of the alterations of the landscape the vegetation becomes damaged or dies, then the applicant for a permit must replace existing vegetation along watercourses with comparable specimens, approved by the Director that will restore buffer functions within five years. 4. The Director shall require subsequent corrective actions and long -term monitoring of the project if adverse impacts to regulated watercourses or their buffers are identified. 18.45.110 Watercourse Uses Alterations and Mitigation A. gal Permitted Uses I. The uses set forth in this entire section, including subsections A through G. and TMC 18.45.070, may be located within a watercourse or its buffer, subject to the provisions of TMC 21.04 and of TMC Chapter 18.15. —A. 2. No use or development may occur in a watercourse or its buffer except as specifically allowed by TMC Chapter 18.45. Any use or development allowed is subject to the standards of TMC Chapter 18.45. B. Alterations. 1. Diverting or rerouting may only occur with the permission of the Director and an CL Page 27 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM07/0i• /2010- 12.•:0 &Q0- Pb406130 /2010 3:0700 PM C:Vann \XParnwise \Annotated Proposed S.AC) Ch annes -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docw: \L*xs -I tnne Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planninf Commission \PC Recommended Does to Coeaieil \Annotated Prenosce P O—Gl a iwes- icrl PC Rec NO Sl1AD1NG.doc11': \Long Range Projects\2010 SAO Amdls \Planning Commission \Anno 'tames Final PC no altading.doc Requiring that buffer enhancement be done on -site. This is in response to several requests from applicants for off -site buffer enhancement (which negates the whole purpose of having a buffer). Retaining native vegetation meets best available science. Staff believes that retaining non invasive non- native established trees is preferable to tree removal in order to replace with native species (for habitat value, shading, etc.). This is what is being done in practice. "Uses" deleted from heading because allowed uses are already defined in Section 18.45.070 and are not actually addressed in this section. ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS approved mitigation plan. 2. Any watercourse that has critical wildlife habitat, or is necessary for the life cycle or spawning of salmonids, shall not be rerouted unless it can be shown that the habitat will be improved for the benefit of the species. 3. A watercourse may be rerouted or day lighted as a mitigation measure to improve watercourse function. 4. As a condition of approval. the Director may require water quality monitoring for stormwater discharges to streams. and additional treatment of stormwater if water aualitv standards are not being met. 5E. Piping. Piping of any watercourse should be avoided. Relocation of a watercourse or installation of a bridge is preferred to piping; if piping occurs in a watercourse sensitive area, it shall be limited to requirements for stream crossings for access and shall require approval of the Director. al. Piping of Type 1 watercourses shall not be permitted. 131 Piping may be allowed in Type 3 or 4 other watercourses if it is necessary for access purposes. In Tvoc 2 all watercourses it must be demonstrated that the piping will not cause adverse impacts to fish. confine the channel or floodnlain. create an entry point for road run -off. create downstream scouring. cause erosion or sedimentation. or adversely impact riparian habitat (including downstream habitat). 1 event; and buffcr, is located in a highly developed at a and docs not provide shade, temperature control etc. watercourse has a degraded Providing e:,seas s enhancement proccdurcs. 1. No process that requires maintenance on a regular basis will be acceptable unless this maintenance process is part of the regular and normal facilities maintenance process or unless the applicant can show funding for this maintenance is ensured for as long as the use remains. c... Piping projects shall be performed pursuant to the following applicable standards: (1)a. The conveyance system shall be designed to comply with the standards in current use and recommended by the Department of Public Works and the standards of the Washington Demitinent of Fish and Wildlife in the "Design of Road Culverts for Fish Passage" Manual (2003 or as amended). c2)h. Where allowed, piping shall be limited to the shortest length possible as determined by the Director to allow access onto a property. (3)e. Where water is piped for an access point, those driveways or entrances shall CL Page 28 of 44 PM C: \terno \XPernw'ise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanees -Final PC Rec NO SHAD1NG.docW: \Long Rance Proiects\2010 SAO Amdts \Plannin° Commission \PC Reco Rin• :cW: \Lonb'_?acana °rojects\2010 SAO Amdts \P!nr:-v posed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc The City currently has no mechanism for evaluating whether the installed stormwater treatment system is functioning adequately to treat runoff before it is discharged to a watercourse. Therefore, in certain situations, staff would like the flexibility to require periodic monitoring and reporting, with the ability to require corrective action if needed Additional clarifications and criteria added to ensure that piping projects ensure that adverse impacts to fish or watercourse functions are limited. Format changes to 5. to better organize this section. Adding standards for fish passage in accordance with BAS and at Muckleshoot Tribe, recommendations. Public Works projects already utilize this manual. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM(1 0.1a2-0 -1-0 -1 :08 -00- PAh06/30/2-0 -0 3:F? OU eteted- Pfeooscd SAO Chen-acs ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS be consolidated to serve multiple properties where possible, and to minimize the length of piping. (4)d. When required by the Director, watercourses under drivable surfaces shall be contained in an arch culvert using oversize or super span culverts for rebuilding of a streambed. These shall be provided with check dams to reduce flows, and shall be replanted and enhanced according to a plan approved by the Director. (5)e. All watercourse crossing shall be designed to accommodate fish passage unless technically__..not feasible. '-gs shall not block fish passage Duplicative language. fish bearing. (61 Water quality must be as good or better for anv water exiting the pipe as for the Not new language, moved from "i. below. water entering the pipe. and flow must be comparable. 6. Maintenance dredging of watercourses shall be allowed only when necessary to protect public safety. structures and fish passage and shall be done as infrequently as possible. Lona -term solutions. such as stormwater retrofits are preferred over onaolna maintenance dredging. No ur occs ular basis will be acceptable unless it is part of the rcaular and normal facilities maintcnan 7 Storm water runoff shall be detained and infiltrated to preserve the watercourse channel's, dominant discharge. 8g. All construction shall be designed to have the least adverse impact on the watercourse, buffer and surrounding environment. 9h. All pPiping or other alterations shall be carried out or constructed during periods of low flow, or as specified by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife in accordance with an approved Hydraulics Permit. Wa 10. On properties being developed or re- developed. or when stream crossings in public or private rights- of -wav are being replaced. existing culverts that carry fish- bearing watercourses or those that could bear fish (based on the criteria in WAC 222 -16 -031 Washington Forest Practices Rules and Regulations), culverts shall be upgraded to meet the standards in the WDFW manual "Design of Road Culverts for Fish Passage" (2003 or as updated) if technically feasible. D. Permitted Uses Subject to Exception Approval Clarification related to maintenance to better meet BAS. Clarifications Not a new clause was moved from this location to c. (6) above. Language in #10 added by the Planning Commission 6- 24 -10. Already addressed in Sensitive Area Permitted Uses Section 18.45.070 above. with the underlying zoning. CE. Mitigation Plan Contents All impacts to a watercourse that degrade the functions and Section C reorganized (and re- numbered) to separate required CL Page 29of44 07 /01/20101.56:00PM0W0•142010 -14:•08:00 -PM06 /30/20.10.3'07-00 PM 0-C: \temp \XPernwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHAD1NG.docW: \Lowe Proiects \2010 SAO Amdts \Plannine- C-&mmission \PC Recommended -1 ees-ta Lei: \Annotated Proposed SAO- Glinn -ees- -J4nal PC RLc NO S11AD1NG.docW: \Lon„ Range P- r-a}ects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO RE values of the watercourse or its buffer shall be avoided. If alteration to the watercourse or buffer is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to the watercourse and its buffer resulting from a development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated in accordance with an approved mitigation plan as described below. 1. Plans. Mitigation plans shall be completed for any proposals of dredging, filling, diverting, piping and rerouting of watercourses or buffer impacts: and 2. Plan Contents The mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a sensitive area study by a specialist approved by the Director. The plan must show how water quality, treatment, erosion control, pollution reduction, wildlife and fish habitat, and general watercourse quality would be maintained or improved. All such plans must be approved by the Director. 23. Mitigation Standards The scope and content of a mitigation plan shall be decided on a case -by -case basis taking into account the degree of impact and extent of mitigation measures needed. As the impacts to the watercourse or its buffer sensitive arca increase, the mitigation plan measures to offset these impacts will increase in extent number and complexity. 3. The components of a complete mitigation plan are as follows: a. Baseline information including existing watercourse conditions such as hvdroloaic patterns /flow rates. stream gradient. bank full width. stream bed conditions. bank conditions. fish and other wildlife use. in- stream structures. riparian conditions. buffer characteristics. water Quality. fish barriers and other relevant information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site. b. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation measures. This should include a description of site selection criteria, identification of target evaluation species and resource functions. c. Performance standards of the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals and obiectives. and for trigaering_bcginning remedial action or contingency measures. Performance standards They may include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, creation of fish habitat or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. The following shall be considered the minimum performance standards for approved stream alterations: that the fisheries habitat functions of the compensatory stream reach meet or exceed that of the i; guration should be restored to an equal or enhanced state of the original stream; (3) The channel, bank and buffer areas shall be replanted with native vegetation, which restores or improves the original in specie CL Page 30 of 44 PM C: \temp \XParnwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADiNO.doc Final PC Rec NO SI- 14B1N44ec \Long Ran Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning ^err.«.- issienN,4nnotaied -PFetr VISIONS contents of mitigation plan from mitigation standards to eliminate confusion. Explanation for deleting "values" explained pg. 2 above. Clarifying that impacts to buffer must also be avoided and if not avoidable must be addressed in mitigation plans. Clarification for what factors are considered for deciding scope of mitigation plan. Clarification of information to be included in mitigation plan to improve the quality of watercourse studies, enable better decisions and meet best available science. List of performance standards have been moved to a new standards section D below. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM07/04 -/201A 14:0 8- 00-4M06 30x010 3:420() awed SAO Chan es and ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS or better than in the original stream; (5) The original fish and wildlife habitat shall be maintained or enhanced; and the affected property owners. d. Detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction sequence and construction management, and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development proposal. e. Monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the approach for assessing a completed project. An outline shall be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the mitigation project's process. For nroiects that discharge storm water to a stream. the Director may reauire water quality monitoring. f. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action, and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards have not been met g. Performance security or other assurance devices as described in TMC 18.45.210. D. Mitigation Standards 1. The Washington "Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines" "Washington State Aauatic Habitat Guidelines Program Washington Department of Ecology. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2004 or as amended) shall be used as Best Available Science for the development of watercourse and buffer mitigation techniaues. 2. The following shall be considered the minimum standards for approved stream alterations: (1) Maintenance or improvement of stream channel habitat and dimensions such that the fisheries habitat functions of the compensatory stream reach exceed that of the original stream: (2) Bank and buffer configuration restored to an enhanced state: (31 Channel. bank and buffer areas replanted with native vegetation. which improves the original in species diversity and density: (4) Stream channel bed and biofiltration systems eauivalent to (in the case of public drainage maintenance proiects) and better than in the original stream (in the case of other kinds of proiects): (5) Original fish and wildlife habitat enhanced unless technically not feasible: The City currently has no way to confirm that stormwater discharges meet water quality standards. The ability to require monitoring by the applicant /owner in certain situations would provide that mechanism. New section made up of performance standards that were previously listed in Mitigation Plan section. No changes in standards unless noted below. Reference to Aquatic Habitat Guideline, encourages applicants to use best available science when developing mitigation plans. Standards modified to require improvement (as opposed to matching existing conditions) in watercourse conditions (except for public drainage maintenance projects), as most reaches of Tukwila streams are degraded and merit improvements. Exception made where not technically feasible (such as streams in roadside ditches where there is no room for improvements or it is not feasible to place in- stream features). CL Page 31 of 44 07/01/2010 1,56_00 ['M07/01/24I10 -1- 2:05 -00- F1\406/30/201-0- 3 {I7:00 IPM C: \temp \XPgrnwisc \Annotated Prnnnsed SAO Changes -Final PC Rec NC) SHADING. docW6en -P m€ roiects \201,0 SAO ij zha nnin_ Commission \PC Recommended Does to Council \Annotated- IR4Has i S O-Ch iiv2es- 14Lina1- P-C=R- eo- NO-Sk' 141N. e- W.`1_ -ong Range- Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning CommissiookAnnotated Proposed SAO Chances Final PC no shading.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 3. Relocation of a watercourse shall not result in the new sensitive area or buffer extending beyond the development site and onto adiacent property without the written agreement of the affected property owners. F. Mitigation Timing Department of Community Development approved plans must have the mitigation construction completed before the existing watercourse can be modified. The Director may allow activities that permanently disturb a watercourse prior to implementation of the mitigation plan under the following circumstances: 1. To allow planting or re- vegetation to occur during optimal weather conditions; or 2. To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or 3. To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing or phasing. G. Permitted Uscs Subject to Exception Approval e :.ccption pursuant to TMC 18.45.180. A use permitted through a reasonable use exception shall conform to thc procedures of TMC Chapter 18.15 and be consistent with thc underlying zoning. 18.45.120 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Designation, Rating and Buffers A. Designation. Areas of potential geologic instability are classified as follows: 1. Class 1 area, where landslide potential is low, and which slope is less than 15 2. Class 2 areas, where landslide potential is moderate, which slope is between 15% and 40 and 'which are underlain by relatively permeable soils; 3. Class 3 areas, where landslide potential is high, which include areas sloping between 15% and 40 and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock, and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than 40 4. Class 4 areas, where landslide potential is very high, which include sloping areas with mappable zones of groundwater seepage, and which also include existing mappable landslide deposits regardless of slope; B. Buffers Buffers for areas of potential geologic instability are intended to: 1. Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing sensitive areas; 2. Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development; 3. Prevent loading of potentially unstable slope formations; 4. Protect slope stability; 5. Provide erosion control and attenuation of precipitation surface water and storm water runoff; and 6. Reduce loss of or damage to property. CL Page 32 of 44 P-M C: \tcmn \XPernwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHAD ENG.docW: -Lon °antic Proiccts`2010 SAO Amdts \Plannine Commission \PC Recommended Demo Rigel PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Long Par ?rojects\2010 SAO Amdls\Planning Cont-:'.ss'.s,.4. Already addressed in Section 18.45.070 No changes proposed to this section. 07/01 /2010 1:56:00 PM0 03 20 0-1-'', ,-:8&:00- 1z1v10H/30/203-0 -3:0 00 escd SAO Chen es- ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS An undisturbed sensitive area or buffer may substitute for the yard setback and landscape requirements of TMC 18.50 and 18.52. C. Each development proposal containing or threatened by an area of potential geologic instability Class 2 or higher shall be subject to a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.040 B and 18.45.060. The geotechnical report shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to achieve the goals and requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. Development proposals shall then include the buffer distances as defined within the geotechnical report. D. Buffers may be increased by the Director when an area is determined to be particularly sensitive to the disturbance created by a development. Such a decision will be based on a City review of the report as prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer and by a site visit. 18.45.130 Areas Of Potential Geologic Instability Uses, Exemptions, Alterations and No changes proposed to this section. Mitigation. A. General The uses permitted in the underlying zoning district may be undertaken on sites that contain areas of potential geologic instability subject to the standards of this section and the recommendations of a geotechnical study. B. Exemptions The following areas are exempt from regulation as geologically hazardous areas: 1. Temporary stockpiles of topsoil, gravel, beauty bark or other similar landscaping or construction materials; 2. Slopes related to materials used as an engineered pre -load for a building pad; 3. Any temporary slope that has been created through legal grading activities under an approved permit may be regraded without application of TMC Chapter 18.45 under an approved permit; 4. Roadway embankments within right -of -way or road easements; and 5. Slopes retained by approved engineered structures. C. Alterations 1. Prior to permitting alteration of an area of potential geologic instability, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. There is no evidence of past instability or earth movement in the vicinity of the proposed development, and where appropriate, quantitative analysis of slope stability indicates no significant risk to the proposed development or surrounding properties; or b. The area of potential geologic instability can be modified or the project can be CL Page 33 of 44 07/01/2010 1.56:00 PMO- 7/01/2010 -4- 2:08:00- PTv40(r/30/20103:{ }7•00 PM C: \tenor \XPermwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanecs -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc -W \1.nta -e-1 tnce Proiee i\2 0-g n mtlts \Planninc Commissie14PC Re_ r_marded -De to Council\Ann- otated 1piHOSrc14A0- Glrtutees- ial PC Rec NO SI 14144NGAocW: \Long Range- Projects\2010 SAO Amdts \PIfflmint. COmmissien \Annotated Proposed SAO Clte::g s f -i-nal PC no shadind.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS designed so that any potential impact to the project and surrounding properties is eliminated, slope stability is not decreased, and the increase in surface water discharge or sedimentation shall not decrease slope stability. 2. Where any portion of an area of potential geologic instability is cleared for development, a landscaping plan for the site shall include tree replanting with an equal mix of evergreen and deciduous trees, preferably native, and approved by the Director. Replacement vegetation shall be sufficient to provide erosion and stabilization protection. D. Disclosures, Declarations and Covenants 1. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to submit, consistent with the findings of the geotechnical report, structural plans which were prepared and stamped by a structural engineer. The plans and specifications shall be accompanied by a letter from the geotechnical engineer who prepared the geotechnical report stating that in his/her judgment, the plans and specifications conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report; the risk of damage to the proposed development site from soil instability will be minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the report; and the proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. 2. Further recommendations signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer shall be provided should there be additions or exceptions to the original recommendations based on the plans, site conditions or other supporting data. If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the plans and specifications is not the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer shall, in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and state that the plans and specifications conform to his or her recommendations. 3. The architect or structural engineer shall submit to the City, with the plans and specifications, a letter or notation on the design drawings at the time of permit application stating that he or she has reviewed the geotechnical report, understands its recommendations, has explained or has had explained to the owner the risks of loss due to slides on the site, and has incorporated into the design the recommendations of the report and established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by any earth movement predicted in the report. 4. The owner shall execute a Sensitive Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless Agreement running with the land, on a form provided by the City. The City will file the completed covenant with the King County Department of Records and Elections at the expense of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded covenant will be forwarded to the owner. E. Assurance Devices. Whenever the City determines that the public interest would not be served by the issuance of a permit in an area of potential geologic instability without assurance of a means of providing for restoration of areas disturbed by, and repair of property damage caused Page 34 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 710 4201 }0 -1 OS -0O- PM06/30/ 103:07 -.40 CL PM C: \temp \XParnwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docw:\Lone Ranee Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Commission \PC Recommended Does to Council \Anne 4ed PFeo sed SAO Chan s Final PC Rec NO SHADING.d2a1'.': \L ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS by, slides arising out of or occurring during construction, the Director may require assurance devices pursuant to TMC 18.45.210. F. Construction Monitoring. 1. Where recommended by the geotechnical report, the applicant shall retain a geotechni- cal engineer to monitor the site during construction. The applicant shall preferably retain the geotechnical engineer who prepared the final geotechnical recommendations and reviewed the plans and specifications. If a different geotechnical engineer is retained by the owner, the new geotechnical engineer shall submit a letter to the City stating whether or not he /she agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the original geotechnical engineer. Further recommendations, signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer, and supporting data shall be provided should there be exceptions to the original recommendations. 2. The geotechnical engineer shall monitor, during construction, compliance with the recommendations in the geotechnical report, particularly site excavation, shoring, soil support for foundations including piles, subdrainage installations, soil compaction and any other geotechnical aspects of the construction. Unless otherwise approved by the City, the specific recommendations contained in the soils report must be implemented by the owner. The geotechnical engineer shall make written, dated monitoring reports on the progress of the construction to the City at such timely intervals as shall be specified. Omissions or deviations from the approved plans and specifications shall be immediately reported to the City. The final construction monitoring report shall contain a statement from the geotechnical engineer that, based upon his or her professional opinion, site observations and testing during the monitoring of the construction, the completed development substantially complies with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and with all geotechnical- related permit requirements. Occupancy of the project will not be approved until the report has been reviewed and accepted by the Director. G. Conditioning and Denial of Use or Developments. 1. Substantial weight shall be given to ensuring continued slope stability and the resulting public health, safety and welfare in determining whether a development should be allowed. 2. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dryer season, or sequencing activities such as installing erosion control and drainage systems well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined by the Director that the development will increase the potential of soil movement that results in an unacceptable risk of damage to the proposed development, its site or adjacent properties. CL Page 35 of 44 07/01./2Q10 1 9C,Q0_I?MO7/E)1, -010 -{-3 08.:00- PM06 /30/ 0}0 -3 07 PM C: \XPP:rowisc \Annotated Prnnosed SAO Changes -Final PC' ROC NO SHADING docW: \Lon^. Ran ^e Projects \2010 SAO An mnission\PC Recommended Doc; to Co nei-kA �notetcd Ifi�3e end SAE)- Chanues- lal- P-C-Rec NO SIIADING.docw: \Long Range P e ts\2O1 49 -Amdls \Planning Co+nmissi Reposed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.dee ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS 18.45.140 Abandoned Mine Areas A. Development of a site containing an abandoned mine area may be permitted when a geotechnical report shows that significant risks associated with the abandoned mine workings can be eliminated or mitigated so that the site is safe. Approval shall be obtained from the Director before any building or land- altering permit processes begin. B. Any building setback or land alteration shall be based on the geotechnical report. C. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dryer season, or sequencing activities such as installing drainage systems or erosion controls well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined that the development will increase the potential of soil movement or result in an unacceptable risk of damage to the proposed develop- ment or adjacent properties. D. The owner shall execute a Sensitive Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless Agreement running with the land, on a form provided by the City. The City will file the completed covenant with the King County Division of Records and Elections at the expense of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded covenant will be forwarded to the owner. 18.45.150 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Designation, Mapping, Uses and Standards A. Designation. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas include the habitats listed below: 1. Areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association; 2. Habitats and species of local importance, including but not limited to bald eagle habitat, heron rookeries; 3. Commercial and recreational shellfish areas; 4. Kelp and eelgrass beds; 5. Mudflats and marshes; 6. Naturally occurring ponds under 20 acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat; 7. Waters of the State; 8. State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas; and 9. Areas critical for habitat connectivity. B. Mapping. 1. The approximate location and extent of known fish and wildlife habitat conservation CL Page 36 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7-/0142.01-0-1-2 08 004 PM C: \term \XPernwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes -Final PC Rec NO S1- IADING.docW: \Lone Rance Proiects\2010 SAO Amdts \Plannine Commission\PC Recommended Door. to Cad Proposed SAO Chaii °es Final PC Rec NO SI IAD1NC.docW: \Long Range Projccts\2010 SAD F_::: osed SAO C:._...__ Filial PC. :nn s:iading.doc No changes proposed to this section. ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS areas are identified by the City's Sensitive Areas Maps, inventories, open space zones, and Natural Environment Background Report. The City designates 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 9 above as known fish and wildlife habitats within its current limits. 2. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas correlate closely with the areas identified as regulated watercourses and wetlands and their buffers in Tukwila. The Green/Duwamish River is recognized as the most significant fish and wildlife habitat corridor as well as off channel habitat areas created in the river to improve salmon habitat (shown on the Sensitive Areas Map) in the Shoreline iurisdiction. Gilliam Creek. Riverton Creek. Southgate Creek. Johnson Creek. and Hamm Creek (in the north PAM all provide salmonid habitat. In addition. the Native Growth Protection Area in the Tukwila South proiect area provides an important upland wildlife habitat corridor. Tukwila Pond and its associated wetlands also meets the definition of a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area. as it provides significant habitat for waterfowl and other birds during all seasons of the year. In addition to the Sensitive Areas Maps, the following maps are to be used as a guide for the City, but do not provide a final habitat area designation: a. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat Species Maps; b. Anadromous and resident salmonid distribution maps contained in the Habitat Limiting Factors reports published by the Washington Conservation Commission; and c. Washington State Digital Coastal and Coastal Zone Management Program. C. Buffers. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas shall have buffers no less than 100 feet in width. Buffer reductions approved for an underlying wetland or watercourse shall also apply to the related Conservation Area. D. Uses and Standards. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas will be regulated through TMC 18.44, Shoreline Overlay District and the regulations in TMC Chapter 18.45 related to wetlands and watercourses. No additional use regulations apply specifically to Conservation Areas. 18.45.160 Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay A. The purpose of this Section is to provide an alternative to preservation of existing individual wetlands, watercourses and their buffers in situations where an area -wide plan for alteration and mitigation will result in improvements to water quality, fish and wildlife habitat and hydrology beyond those that would occur through the strict application of the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. B. The City Council may designate certain areas as Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay districts for the purpose of allowing and encouraging a comprehensive approach to sensitive area protection, restoration, enhancement and creation in appropriate circumstances utilizing best available science. Designation of Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay districts shall occur through This language added to provide consistency with newly adopted SMP, and to provide examples for clarification purposes. Designation of Native Growth Protection Area for Tukwila South is part of Development Agreement. Tukwila Pond was not previously designated as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat, but it meets the definition. Buffers are consistent with adopted SMP Clarification CL Page 37 of 44 07/01/2010 1: 56:00 PM07IC i'.20.10- 12:0 &.:00- TTM06130i2•0t0 -3 07 00 PM C: \temp \XParpwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Changes -Final PC R.ec NC) SHADING.docW: \'..r:ra 3n. e Pro n A Q i*dts \PlannilL C: 1'r. "rr.:F.:::3n \PC Ree-ennilendoci Does to Cl uneiI \Anttet- ated- 14eoesed SAO- CITt linal PC Rec. NA- 14- A- B41NL-i-clecW: \Long Rango Projccts\201 0 SAO Amd1 P1tinning Commission \Annota t3esed SAO Changes Final PC no shading.dee ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS the Type 5 decision process established by TMC 18.104. C. Criteria for designating a Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay district shall be as follows: 1. The overlay area shall be at least 10 acres. 2. The City Council shall find that preparation and implementation of a Sensitive Area Master Plan is likely to result in net improvements in sensitive area functions and values when compared to development under the general provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. D. Within a Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay district, only those uses permitted under TMC 18.45.070, 18.45.090 and 18.45.110 shall be allowed within a Type —1-Category I or II wetland, a Type 1 (S) watercourse, or their buffers. E. Within a Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay district, the uses permitted under TMC 18.45.070, 18.45.090 and 18.45.110 and other uses as identified by an approved Sensitive Area Master Plan shall be permitted within Type 2 Category III and Type 3 Category IV wetlands and their buffers; and within Type 2, (F) 3, (Np) and 4 (Ns) watercourses and their buffers, provided that such uses are allowed by the underlying zoning designation. F. A Sensitive Area Master Plan shall be prepared under the direction of the Director of Community Development. Consistent with subsection A, the Director may approve development activity within a Sensitive Area Overlay District for the purpose of allowing and encouraging a comprehensive approach to sensitive areas protection, creation, and enhancement that results in environmental benefits that may not be otherwise achieved through the application of the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. G. The Director shall consider the following factors when determining whether a proposed Sensitive Areas Overlay and Master Plan results in an overall net benefit to the environment and is consistent with best available science: 1. Whether the Master Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Natural Environment Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. 2. Whether the Master Plan is consistent with the purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45 as stated in TMC 18.45.010. 3. Whether the Master Plan includes a Mitigation Plan that incorporates stream or wetland restoration, enhancement or creation meeting or exceeding the requirements of TMC 18.45.09013: and/or TMC 18.45.110-D., as appropriate. 4. Whether proposed alterations or modifications to sensitive areas and their buffers and /or alternative mitigation results in an overall net benefit to the natural environment and improves sensitive area functions and values. 5. Whether the Mitigation Plan gives special consideration to conservation and protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. 6. Mitigation shall occur on -site unless otherwise approved by the Director. The Director may approve off -site mitigation only upon determining that greater protection, restoration CL Page 38 of 44 PM• C: \temp \XParnwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.docW: \Long Rance Proiccts\2010 SAO Amdts \Pla n.,:., n e ^m ission \PC Recommended Does to Council' ^notated o. e d S A O t a `e Final PC Rec NO SHAD1NC.docW: \Long Range Projects\2010 SAO Amdts \Planning Conunissi Deletion of "values” explained previously pg. 2 above (Section 18.45.010). Modification of wetland categories explained previously. The reference to subsection D is incorrect the Mitigation Plan and Standards have been separated into two sections now. Deletion of "values" explained previously pg. 2 above (Section 18.45.010). 07/01/2010 1.56:00 PM0-7/01 -/20I0-1 0&00 -P 4oe 0a01e 3.c>7 0 ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS or enhancement of sensitive areas could be achieved at an alternative location within the same watershed. 7. Where feasible, mitigation shall occur prior to grading, filling or relocation of wetlands or watercourses. 8. At the discretion of the Director, a proposed Master Plan may undergo peer review, at the expense of the applicant. Peer review, if utilized, shall serve as one source of input to be utilized by the Director in making a final decision on the proposed action. H. A Sensitive Area Master Plan shall be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development. Such approval shall not be granted until the Master Plan has been evaluated through preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the requirements of TMC 21.04. The EIS shall compare the environmental impacts of development under the proposed Master Plan relative to the impacts of development under the standard requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. The Director shall approve the Sensitive Area Master Plan only if the evaluation clearly demonstrates overall environmental benefits, giving special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. 18.45.170 Sensitive Areas Tracts and Easements A. In development proposals for planned residential or mixed use developments, short subdivisions or subdivisions, and boundary line adjustments and binding site plans, applicants shall create sensitive areas tracts or easements, in lieu of an open space tract, per the standards of the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. B. Applicants proposing development involving uses other than those listed in TMC 18.45.170A, on parcels containing sensitive areas or their buffers, may elect to establish a sensitive areas tract or easement which shall be: 1. If under one ownership, owned and maintained by the ownership; 2. If held in common ownership by multiple owners, maintained collectively; or 3. Dedicated for public use if acceptable to the City or other appropriate public agency. C. A notice shall be placed on the title or plat that sensitive area tracts or easements shall remain undeveloped in perpetuity. 18.45.180 Exceptions A. Wetlands 1,000 sq. ft. and less that do not meet any of the criteria of TMC 18.45.080.B are exempt from the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. AB. Reasonable Use Exceptions. CL Page 39 of 44 PM C: \ten) \XPErnwisc \Annotated Pronoscd SAO Chan acs-Fin al PC Rec NO Sl- IADING.doc`x':`T.–' –R Pfeiecls\2010 SAO Amdts \Planninc Commission \PC Recomme riled De^ to r_ n„ i-i etz4ed- 1kenased SAO Cltaaae i 1 PC—R 1-I A I_ S -14C -5 1-es -W \Long Ran Projects\2010 SAO AmdtskPlanning ComiirissiellAnno No changes proposed to this section. See new exception for wetlands less than 1,000 square feet in new section 18.45.090 B. 5. 07/01/2010 1.56:00 PM07 01 /20.1.0.1 .08. :00- P•MO6/30 /2.01.0- 3.:x}7,00 ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS -e3 1. If application of TMC Chapter 18.45 would deny all reasonable use of the property containing wetlands, watercourses or their buffers, the property owner or the proponent of a development proposal may apply for a reasonable use exception. 2. Applications for a reasonable use exception shall be a Type 4 decision and shall be processed pursuant to TMC 18.104. 3. If the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission that application of the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 would deny all reasonable use of the property, development may be allowed which is consistent with the general purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45 and the public interest. 4. The Commission, in granting approval of the reasonable use exception, must determine that: a. There is no feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, modifications of setbacks, buffers or other land use restrictions or requirements, phasing of project implementation, change in timing of activities, revision of road and lot layout, and /or related site planning that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts to the sensitive area. b. As a result of the proposed development there will be no unreasonable threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site. c. Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property. d. The proposed development is compatible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property if such similar sites exist. e. Disturbance of sensitive areas has been minimized by locating any necessary alterations in the buffers to the greatest extent possible. f. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of: (1) a segregation or division of a larger parcel on which a reasonable use was permittable after the effective date of the sensitive areas ordinance number 1599, June 10, 1991; (2) actions by the owner of the property (or the owner's agents, contractors or others under the owner's control) that occurred after the effective date of the sensitive areas ordinance provisions that prevents or interferes with the reasonable use of the property; or (3) a violation of the sensitive areas ordinance; g. The Commission, when approving a reasonable use exception, may impose conditions, including but not limited to a requirement for submission and implementation of an CL Page 40 of 44 PM Correct spelling error 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM0- 7/01 20.1 -0 240R=00P1 106/30/20 -0 x:07:00 C: \temp \XParnwise \Annotated Proposed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING.doc n`PC Rccom ended D osed SAO- Ctranaes- P-inal PC 12t NO SI IADING.docW: \Lase Rance Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \P'•a• m -ssiea`f_.::: e "r Changes Final PC is s'hading.doc ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS approved mitigation plan designed to assure that the development: (1) complies with the standards and policies of the sensitive areas ordinance to the extent feasible; and (2) does not create a risk of damage to other property or to the public health, safety and welfare. h. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. B. Emergencies Alterations in response to an emergency that poses an immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare, or that poses an immediate risk of damage to private property. Any alteration undertaken as an emergency shall be reported within one business day to the Department of Community Development. The Director shall confirm that an emergency exists and determine what, if any, mitigation and conditions shall be required to protect the health, safety, welfare and environment and to repair any damage to the sensitive area and its required buffers. Emergency work must be approved by the City. If the Director determines that the action taken, or any part thereof, was beyond the scope of an allowed emergency action, then the enforcement provisions of TMC 18.45.XX shall apply. Adds reference to new Enforcement and Penalties Section. 18.45.XX Enforcement and Penalties Clarification of penalties taken directly from the enforcement A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered a violation of this chapter: section of TMC. Similar language was included in the recently 1. To use. construct or demolish a structure or to conduct clearing. earth moving. adopted Shoreline Master Program. construction or other development not authorized under a Special Permission. Reasonable Use or other permit where such permit is reauired by this chapter. 2. Anv work that is not conducted in accordance with the plans. conditions. or other requirements in a nernit approved pursuant to this chapter. provided the terins or conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans. 3. To remove or deface anv notice. comp laint or order reauired bv posted in accordance with this chapter. 4. To misrepresent anv material fact in anv application. plans or other information submitted to obtain anv sensitive area use. buffer reduction or development authorization. 5. To fail to comply with the requirements of this chapter. B. Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Director to enforce this chapter pursuant to the terms and conditions of TMC Chanter 8.45. C. Inspection Access. 1. For the purposes of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a Hermit or this CL Page 41 of 44 02/(11/2 010 1 _5 _Q0 PM07i01•i2•0•1•0 -1 -2:08:40- PN406/30/20•1•0- 307:00 PM C: \temp \XPernwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO Si- IADING.docW: \Long-Ranee Proiccts \2010 SAO Amdts\Plannin,e-Gommis-sionl,PC Recommended Does to Council \Annoteted -I Hnsed -SAO CI a es- r i+i+i -PC Ree -Alp c i s _�_�n r)iN_ eW: \Long Range Projects \2010 SAO Amdts \Planning CORM issien \Annotated Propesc.d SAO Changes Final PC no shading.dec 00 ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS chapter. authorized representatives of the Director may enter all sites for which a permit has been issued. 2. Upon completion of all reauirements of a permit. the applicant shall reauest 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 anv provision of this chanter. or failure to comply with any of the reauirements of this chanter. shall be subiect to the penalties prescribed in TMC 8.45. "Enforcement" and shall be imposed pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in that chapter. 2. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a Permit reauired 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. E. Remedial Measures Reauired. 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 chanter. 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. Iniunctive Relief. 1. Whenever the City has reasonable cause to*believe that any person is violating or threatening to violate these regulations or any rule or other provisions adopted or issued pursuant to these regulations. it may either before or after the institution of anv other action or proceeding authorized by this Ordinance. institute a civil action in the name of the City for iniunctive 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 iniunctive relief under this section shall not relieve any party to such proceedings from any civil or criminal penalty prescribed for violations of these regulations. G. Abatement. Any use. structure, development or work that occurs in violation of these regulations. or in violation of any lawful order or reauirement of the Director pursuant to this Section. shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner provided by the Tukwila Municipal Code 8.45.105. 18.45.190 Appeals CL Page 42 of 44 PM C: \temp \XPtirnwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chanties -Final PC Rec NO SHADING-doc 'ects\2010 SAO Amdts \Planninc Co Pi-nol PC Rec NO SHADING.do No changes proposed to this section. 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PMO-7/01 411 -0- 1248- :00- 1zA406f30/2-01- 03:-07:00 0 eesed SAO Changes ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS A. Any appeal of a final decision of DCD made pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be an appeal of the underlying permit or approval and shall be taken to the Planning Commission. Any such appeal shall be processed pursuant to TMC 18.108.020 and TMC 18.116. B. In considering appeals of decisions or conditions, the following shall be considered: 1. The intent and purposes of the sensitive areas ordinance; 2. Technical information and reports considered by the DCD; and 3. Findings of the Director, which shall be given substantial weight. 18.45.200 Recording Required The property owner receiving approval of a use or development pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.45 shall record the City approved site plan clearly delineating the wetland, watercourse, areas of potential geologic instability or abandoned mine and their buffers designated by TMC 18.45.080, 18.45.090, 18.45.100, 18.45.120 18.45.140 and 18.45.150 with the King County Division of Records and Elections. The face of the site plan must include a statement that the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45, as of the effective date of the ordinance from which TMC Chapter 18.45 derives or thereafter amended, control use and development of the subject property, and provide for any responsibility of the property owner for the maintenance or correction of any latent defects or deficiencies. 18.45.210 Assurance Device A. In appropriate circumstances, such as when mitigation is not completed in advance of the project. the Director may require a letter of credit or other security device acceptable to the city, to guarantee performance and maintenance requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. All assurances shall be on a form approved by the City Attorney and be eaual to 1 50% of the cost of the labor and materials for implementation of the approved mitigation plan. B. When alteration of a sensitive area is approved, the Director may require an assurance device, on a form approved by the City Attorney, to cover the monitoring and maintenance costs and correction of possible deficiencies for five years. Monitoring of buffer sensitive area years. In the event that more than five years monitoring and maintenance is required. the amount of security reauired will be for the first five years and years 7 and 10. If at the end of five years. performance standards are not being achieved. an increase in the security device may be reauired by the Director. When another agency requires monitoring beyond the Citv's time Period. copies of those monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. C. The assurance device shall be released by the Director upon receipt of written No changes proposed to this section. Clarification of when a financial assurance device would be needed. Following changes are to ensure that policies are applied consistently within DCD. Clarification of how assurance device for implementation of mitigation plan is calculated, when required. Separation of assurance device needed for mitigation implementation from that needed for monitoring and maintenance both or only one might be necessary. Staff is suggesting relocating where the length of time for the monitoring period is specified to the first sentence. Corps of Engineers and Department of Ecology often require monitoring and maintenance for longer periods than Tukwila. CL Page 43 of 44 07/01/2010 1:56:00 PM07/( I. I. J2. F?.1. 0- I- 2t08:0(1..I.>.h404/30/?01.0 3 07:00 PM C: \temp \XPcrnwisc \Annotated Pronosed SAO C'han "cs -Final PC 'Pee NO SI-IATNNO.docW: \L+t+it-Rance Proiects \2010 SAO Amdts\1 C R+ta+ission \PC Recommended-Pecs to Coeneil \Am otated Pronesed-4tkA-A O'inal PC Rec NO SI IADING.docW: \6eng Range Projects \20 I 0 SAO Am4Fs\Planning COMM ission \Annotated Proposed EN,: Chances Final P ae- sltad+r g4ee c° ANNOTATED PROPOSED SAO REVISIONS confirmation submitted to the Department from the applicant's qualified professional that the mitigation or restoration has met its performance standards and is successfully established. Should the mitigation or restoration meet performance standards and be successfully established in the third or fourth year of monitoring, the City may release the assurance device early. The assurance device may be held for a longer period, if at the end of the monitoring period, the performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been successfully established. In such cases. Recommended change, due to problems encountered with failure the monitoring period will be extended and the bond held until the standards have been met. to meet performance standards. D. Release of the security does not absolve the property owner of responsibility for maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies or other duties under law. 18.45.220 Assessment Relief No changes proposed to this section. A. Fair Market Value The King County Assessor considers sensitive area regulations in determining the fair market value of land under RCW 84.34. B. Current Use Assessment. Established sensitive area tracts or easements, as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title and provided for in TMC 18.45.170, may be classified as open space and owners thereof may qualify for current use taxation under RCW 18.34; provided, such landowners have not received density credits, or setback or lot size adjustments as provided in the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. C. Special Assessments. Landowners who qualify under TMC 18.45.220B shall also be exempted from special assessments on the sensitive area tract or easement to defray the cost of municipal improvements such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers and water mains. CL Page 44 of 44 PM C: \temp \XPcrnwise \Annotated Pronosed SAO Chances -Final PC Rec NO S1- IADTNG.doc Final PC Rec1•40 SHADING.docW: \Long Rance Projects\2010 SAO Anidts\Plannin Commission \Annotated Proposed SAO Chan cs Final PC no shading.doc 07/01/2010 1.56:00 PM0-a/al- 121341- 1248449- P11©6/a0 0-1.0- u7:i/0 tatcd Proposed SAO Chances