Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PLANNING 2019-03-28 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET
Department o Co unity Developn nt hack Pace, Director Allan Ekberg, Mayor CHAIR, DENNIS MARTINEZ; VICE -CHAIR, HEIDI WATTERS; COMMISSIONERS, SHARON MANN, MIKE HANSEN, LOUISE STRANDER, KAREN SIMMONS AND DIXIE STARK PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 28, 2019 - 6:30 PM TUKWILA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER ATTENDANCE ADOPT MINUTES IV. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: PURPOSE: L 18-0075 Shoreline Master Program Update The City of Tukwila and Department of Ecology Periodic review of the Shoreline Master Program. The City has prepared draft SMP amendments to keep the SMP current with changes in state law, changes in other Tukwila plans and regulations, and other changed local circumstances. V. DIRECTOR'S REPORT VI. ADJOURN Tukwila City Hall • 6200 South center Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov City of Tukwila PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES Date: February 28, 2019 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Council Chambers Present: Chair Dennis Martinez, Vice -Chair Heidi Watters, Commissioners Louise Strander, Karen Simmons and Dixie Stark Excused Absence: Commissioners Sharon Mann and Mike Hansen Staff: Planning Supervisor Minnie Dhaliwal, Urban Environmentalist Andrea Cummins and Planning Commission Secretary Wynetta Bivens Adopt Minutes: Commissioner Strander made a motion to adopt the January 24, 2019 minutes. Commissioner Watters seconded the motion. Motion passed. Chair Martinez opened the work session on critical areas regulations. Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor and Andrea Cummins, Urban Environmentalist, provided some background information on the critical areas. The state law regulates what is allowed in the critical areas and mandates cities to comply with the Growth Management Act (GMA). Cities must update and adopt critical area regulations every eight years, based on best available science. Staff has reviewed and identified gaps in the City's existing code for the Planning Commissioners / (PC) to vet and determine what to change. At the November 8, 2018 work session, the PC requested staff return with additional information on four topics. There was discussion and clarification on each of the topics, which are listed in the information memorandum dated February 19, 2019. Following are some of the issues discussed, as well as the policy decisions made by the PC. 1. Mitigation plans and monitoring costs Staff provided some information on the benefits of monitoring and the chances of mitigation success. The City has established a five-year monitoring period. The Depai tment of Ecology and US Army Corps of Engineers also have monitoring requirements for some wetland impacts, which could be up to 10 years. There was a lengthy discussion on this topic. One of the issues raised pertained to a property owner developing their property that is adjacent to property that has a wetland. Staff clarified that if buffers extend on their property, they will need to address potential impacts to the buffers from the proposed development; further, they may need to get access rights to delineate the wetland. It was noted that the buffers are not in 1 Page 2 of 3 February 28, 2019 PC Minutes good condition. There was discussion on the mitigation plans, performance standards, monitoring requirements and what happens once the monitoring period ends. There was also discussion regarding the types of projects that require a Federal permit in Tukwila. Decision: Option 3 - Adopt the standard buffer widths recommended by the Department of Ecology but allow alternative buffer if impact minimization measures are taken AND buffer is replanted. 2. Exempt wetland Commissioner Stark made inquiry regarding why there is not a buffer mitigation with option 1. Commissioner Strander said in the discussion at the November 8, 2018 work session that option 3 seemed to have more options for the property owner, „"There was also discussion on wetland mosaic. Decision: Option 1 - Keep the existing code and exempt mitigation for wetland impacts. etlands up to 1,000 sq. ft. with Note: Four of the five Commissioners were in consensus with sta recommendation. Commissioner Strander was opposed and in favor of option 3. 3. Non-confoiiiiing provisions Part 1 - Vertical Expansion Decision: Option 1 - Allow existing buildings to expand :vertically to add upper stories in exchange for buffer enhancement. Part 2 - Lateral Expansion Commissioners Strander and Wafters were opposed to limiting it to a one-time expansion allowance and were in consensus with establishing a cap on the overall expansion. Commissioner Stark said option 1 needed some additional language and wanted to know if staff would draft the "language, = Staff said that they would draft and return with language. The PC were in consensus. Staff noted the following suggestions made by the consultant: - Add a provision stating that expansion is only allowed on legally permitted property. - Expansions" should be excluded for detached accessory structures. To qualify for expansion along the sides there is a threshold of 50% of the existing intrusion but no more than 500 sq. ft. with the assumption that 75% of the buffer is in place. - To qualify for expansion along the side opposite to the critical area, the maximum threshold of 500 sq. ft. could be raised to 1,000 sq. ft. Decision: Option 1 - Allow expansion along the existing building lines in exchange for buffer enhancement but limit it to a one-time expansion and limit the square footage of a new intrusion into the buffer to less than 50%of the current intrusion. Further, this 2 option could be limited to situations where the buffer width is at least 75% of the Page 3 of 3 February 28, 2019 PC Minutes required buffer. Note: the PC were in consensus to also add the following language, "500 sq. ft. on either side and 1,000 sq. ft. away from the buffer zone." Part 3 — Enclosing within existing footprint (e.g., enclosing a carport or adding a roof over decks) Decision: Option 1 - Allow enclosing within existing footprint. 4. Geologically Hazardous Areas This section of the code is administered by the Public Works Department and their opinion is not to establish one standard setback for all slopes. Instead the setback should be established by the geotechnical engineer after site conditions are determined for each site. Decision: To be administered case -by -case. Staff will complete a final strikethrough/underline docum schedule a PC public hearing on this item in April. Director's Report: Staff reminded the PC to respond to staffs inqu regarding their availability for a second meeting on April 1lth. The Shoreline Master Program will bon the March PC agenda. Staff informed the PC about Sound Transit'Bus Rapid Transit project that was approved as part of ST3 by the voters and includes frequent bus service from Burien to Lynnwood with a stop along SR518 to connect Tukwila International Boulevard station. release it for publicreview and then Adjourned: 8:15 PM Submitted: By Wypctta Givens Planning Commission 3 4 Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department o Co unity Developn nt hack Pace, ,Director STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE MARCH 28, 2019 HEARING FILE NUMBERS: L18-0075 SMP Update REQUEST: Review and revise Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program and Zoning Code Shoreline Overlay, hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. LOCATION: 200 feet landward of the OHWM of the Green River through Tukwila PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice was published in the Seattle Times and a postcard was mailed to the owners and tenants of all Tukwila parcels within Shoreline jurisdiction on 3/14/19. Information about the update was included in the citywide Stormwater mailer and the September eHazelnut newsletter. An open house was held on 10/9/18. Periodic emails have been sent to the interested parties list. STAFF: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director ATTACHMENTS: A. Edits to TMC 18.44 Shoreline Overlay District B. Updated Shoreline Master Program C. Gap Analysis Report BACKGROUND The Green/Duwamish River flows over 93 miles from the Cascade Mountains to Elliott Bay. Approximately 13 miles of the river meanders through Tukwila's industrial district, urban center and residential neighborhoods. The river system has undergone extensive changes over the years as the population has increased dramatically, forests have been logged, levees have been built, streams and rivers rerouted, and freeways, homes, shopping and manufacturing centers constructed. As the impacts of human development have been recognized, State and Federal agencies have developed regulations that require local jurisdictions to provide better protection for remaining habitat, to control the collected storm water flowing directly into the river, and to identify and restore areas where habitat restoration can succeed. This took on new urgency when salmon were listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act in 1999. Tukwila City Hall + 6200 South center Boulevard • Tukwila, A 98188 • 206- 33 , 800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 5 L18-0075 SMP Update PC Staff Report Page 2 The Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila is categorized as a Shoreline of the State. In response to the State Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and Federal requirements, Tukwila has adopted three documents related to the river — the Shoreline Master Program (S P), Shoreline Element in the City's Comprehensive Plan, and zoning regulations in TMC Chapter 18.44 Shoreline Overlay. Most construction, grading or clearing within 200 feet landward of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) requires a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit which is reviewed by the Washington State Department of Ecology after issuance by the City. The City's shoreline development regulations balance economic interests, flood control, and residential development with enhancement and stewardship of the ecological functions of the river. The City of Tukwila completed a comprehensive update to its Shoreline Master Program in 2009, with additional revisions made in 2011. Washington state law requires jurisdictions to periodically review and update their SMPs every eight years for compliance with changes to the SMA and Department of Ecology guidelines and legislative rules. The current update is due on June 30, 2019. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM PERIODIC UPDATE This update process is being undertaken jointly with the Department of Ecology using the joint review process. By coordinating closely with DOE from the start we will streamline the review timeline and ensure that we are addressing all required topics. The current update will focus on: • Reviewing relevant legislative updates since 2009 and incorporating any applicable amendments per the Gap Analysis Report (Attachment C, also available on the Shoreline Management page of the City website). • Ensuring consistency with recently adopted regulations for critical areas and flood hazard areas. • Streamlining and eliminating duplication in the documents. • Addressing a limited number of policy questions. This periodic update will not: • Re-evaluate the ecological baseline which was established as part of the 2009 comprehensive update. • Extensively assess no net loss criteria other than to ensure that proposed amendments do not result in degradation of the baseline condition. • Change shoreline jurisdiction or environment designations. DISCUSSION Staff began public outreach and education about the update process with an all -city mailing advertising an open house in October in addition to mentions in other City publications and on the City's web site. This hearing was advertised through an additional postcard to property owners and tenants within the shoreline jurisdiction and email notices to interested parties. 6 L18-0075 SMP Update PC Staff Report Page 3 Staff has developed public review drafts of the documents that comprise the SMP and made them available on the City's web site. Attachment A to this report is an annotated, strikeout/underline version of TMC Chapter 18.44 showing the bulk of the proposed changes. Attachment B is a clean version of the SMP (strikeout/underline is available on the City's Shoreline website) containing the history of Tukwila's SMP, a summary of the shoreline inventory and characterization study, a summary of the shoreline restoration plan, background on how the shoreline buffers were determined, and an explanation of where the goals, policies and regulations for the shoreline are located. The language in the public review drafts represents the mandatory consistency updates, housekeeping changes to streamline the document, and staff's recommended policy changes. For the policy questions alternatives are listed below the discussion of the staff recommendation. Consistency with State Regulations As documented in the Gap Analysis report there are areas where the City's regulations do not reflect recent changes to State law. These include updates to definitions, new shoreline exemptions, and updated references to RCW and WAC sections. These changes are mandatory for consistency across jurisdictions. The proposal also includes language for revisions and time extensions for issued shoreline permits in accordance with State requirements. Streamlining/Eliminating Duplication The current SMP includes policies and regulations that were subsequently also adopted into the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. This duplication has given rise to inconsistencies and requires duplicate amendments whenever changes are made. The proposal is to create a multi -part SMP that spans these documents and includes the Shoreline Element and Chapter 18.44 by reference without repeating policy or regulation language. The current Chapter 18.44 Shoreline Overlay duplicates the environmental regulations found in Chapter 18.45 Sensitive Area Ordinance for sensitive areas within the shoreline jurisdiction. After discussion with our DOE reviewer the proposal is to eliminate this duplication, reference the regulations in 18.45 that are currently being updated, and add additional language about applicability and limitations of that chapter. This does mean that adoption of the environmental regulation update will need to occur concurrently with the adoption of the shoreline update. Another proposal is to combine the shoreline use matrix and narrative list of uses into a single table for clarity. Similarly, the narrative discussion of shoreline buffers has been put into a table. Tree protection standards and penalties for tree unauthorized removal are proposed to be updated to match the standards required outside of the shoreline under the new Tree Ordinance. Policy Questions 1) Additional Flexibility for Levee Profile The current SMP contains a minimum levee profile with a mid -slope bench that is required throughout the City. In practice this has not always been the chosen solution for a given location and has required 7 Vegetated Bench Willows ExiatinS Levee Online ry High Water dark OHWM L18-0075 SMP Update PC Staff Report Page 4 a shoreline variance even for designs with better environmental performance. The proposal is to retain the minimum levee profile as an example but allow flexibility to address site conditions and environmental opportunities without the variance process as long as criteria such as an overall 2.5:1 river bank slope (red line below) and native plantings are met. Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas VVidth will Vary Reconfigured Levee it Maintenance Easement * Reconfigured Slope averages .5.t with bench Minimum Levee Profile Not To Scale Alternatives: A. Accept the proposal in the public review draft to allow more flexibility in levee design, or B. Retain the current minimum levee profile and continue to require variances for designs that deviate from that cross section, or C. Select different levee design standards. 2) Additional Flexibility for Floodwalls This update is happening alongside a discussion about flood protection measures in the Lower Green River Corridor Flood Hazard Management Plan. There are multiple alternatives under consideration including the question of whether future levees should be built to protect against 500 year rather than 100 year flood events. This could require levees to be between 3.5 and 5.5 feet higher, which requires between 20 and 30 additional feet of width with a front and back slope of at least 2.5:1 or adding 3.5 to 5.5 feet of height to a flood wall configuration without the need for an additional 20 to 30 feet of width. The current Flood Control District access road standard is 15', not the 10' built into our current buffer calculation so the total width of the levee footprint could increase by up to 35 feet. Allowing an alternative flood wall configuration to substitute for the back slope, especially where site constraints exist, would reduce the width needed and lessen the impact on adjacent property owners. Levees are so expensive to build and the consequences of a levee failure are so significant that the need to allow site specific design solutions may be desirable to reach life safety and economic goals. 8 L18-0075 SMP Update PC Staff Report Page 5 Alternatives: A. Accept the proposal in the public review draft to allow greater use of floodwalls, or B. Retain the current restrictions on use of floodwalls and widen the shoreline buffer to cover a wider levee footprint, or C. Select different flood wall standards. 3) Increased Height Incentives The proposal is to provide increased building height incentives for property owners who provide shoreline restoration or shoreline public access above that required by code. Currently the shoreline 45 foot height limit may be increased by 15% on properties that restore shoreline buffers or build shoreline public access amenities. However, this only results in a 6.75 foot building height increase, not enough for an additional story, so developers have not used the provision. Changing to a 30% or 13.5 foot increase may be a more appealing incentive to encourage buffer restoration or public access. Alternatives: A. Accept the incentive increase proposal in the public review draft, or B. Retain the current 15% height incentive, or C. Select different height incentive such as increasing the building height to that allowed in the underlying zone. 4) Resloping Standard for Buffer Reduction in Urban Conservancy As an alternative to the standard buffer in non -leveed areas of a shoreline environment a property owner may opt to voluntarily reslope (lay back) the bank to a more stable angle and replant it with native plant species to a specific standard. The buffer would then be reduced to the width needed to accommodate the enhanced cross section. Currently the standard for this reduction in the Urban Conservancy environment is a river bank slope of 2.5:1 and the proposal is to change it to 3:1 to match the standard in the High Intensity environment. This means that if the top of the bank is 10 feet higher in elevation than the ordinary high water mark the river bank would be flattened to create a 30 foot wide slope. This more gentle slope would improve habitat value, reduce erosion, and provide greater flood capacity. Alternatives: A. Accept the proposal in the public review draft to require flatter river banks for properties seeking buffer reductions, or B. Retain the current 2.5:1 standard for buffer reductions in Urban Conservancy, or C. Select different criteria for buffer enhancement and reduction. RECOMMENDATION Hold the public hearing on the proposed changes, review each proposed change and policy alternative, and determine whether any additional changes should be added based on public testimony. Staff will return with a comment matrix and revised drafts for the PC to review and forward to the City Council. 9 10 ZONING CODE CHAPTER 18.06 DEFINITIONS 18.06.210 Development "Development" means the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, Of enlargement of any structure that requires a building permit. "Development" does not include dismantling or removing structures if there is no other associated development or re -development, 18.06.330 Floodp-Plain "Flood -plain" means that land area susceptible to inundation with a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (synonymous with 100-year flood -plain). The limit of this area shall be based upon flood ordinance regulation maps or a reasonable method that meets the objectives of the Shoreline Management Act. 18.06.338 Floodway LFIeechvaeansAllevateFeetwse-eindadOeentlaReaFeas-tilate 4eKteg-ci4chafga4he4Dase-ffecafivesiRg-tiatee fe "Floodwa " eans the area that has been established in effective federal emer enc mana ement a enc flood insurance rate maps or floodway maps. The floodway does not include lands that can reasonably be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or maintained under a license from the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state. "High -impact environment" means the area between the lowimpact 18.06.550 L Env4gnmen.t-ancl-a-pai-n4-1-89-feet-lani-fr-gm-thrix-Ing-enyi-ranmen-taiateetive il-8,46,494-- Levee, "Levee, minimum profile" m ns the minimum levee profile for any new or reconstructed levees is the King 18.06.691 River Channel "River channel" means that area of the rive high water mark. (Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) lying riverward of the mean 18.06.695 River -Environment 'River environment" pete4-40-feet-landy.,ard-fateF-marlaavjag-the-meet-envirenfneatalaKi-uee reguabons as-establtshed-in-the Shoretine-Oveclay-District- . .181167--55-ShoFeliner-e4neLmeans-the-tine-at-Rler141-hiNater-suFr-eunding-an0Ge}Lef-wateF-ef-2-0-ac-r-es or larger or where t reater. (Ord. 1758 §1 (par 18.06.757 Shorelines or Shoreline Areas "Shorelines" or "Shoreline areas" means all "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. Commented N : This is a term from the prior SMP and is no longer used. Commented [NG2]: no longer used. Commented [NG3]: specific levee design and 2.5:1 or flatter slope from This is a term from the prior SMP and is The proposal is to move away from a instead give parameters such as overall the toe, Commented [NG4]: This is a term from the prior SMP and is no longer used, Commented [NG5]: We now regulate at Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) 1 1 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 18.06.817 Substantial Developmen "Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds $570007,047.00 or any development that materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this definition must be adjusted for inflation by the Office of Financial Management every five years, beginning July 1, 2007, based upon changes in the Consumer Price Index during that time period. "Consumer Price Index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average Consumer Price Index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, United States Department of Labor. The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of the Shoreline Management Act, but are not exempt from complying with the substantive requirements of this Shoreline Master Program: 1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including repair of damage caused by accident, fire, or elements. 2. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. 3. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, and alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations. 4. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. 5. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his own use or for the use of his or her family, which residence does not exceed a height of 35 feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter. 6. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private non- commercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multiple family residences. This exception applies if either: -(a) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed $2,500; or b) in fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed i1$242,500 for docks that are constructed to replace existing docks, and are of equal or lesser square footage than the existing dock being replaced: or ii) $11,200 for all other docks constructed on freshwaters. -but iii) However if subsequent construction d+ng$2 99-occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, and the combined fair market value of the subsequent and prior construction exceeds the amount specified above, the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the purpose of this chapter. 7. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater for the irrigation of lands. 8. The marking of property lines or corners on state owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water. 9. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system. 10. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under this chapter, if: a. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters; Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 2 of 59 Commented f NG6]: These changes are due to updates in State law. 12 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values; c. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550 (Oil and Natural Gas exploration in marine waters). 11. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the Department of Agriculture or the department jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21C RCW. 12. Watershed restoration projects, which means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: a. A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which less than twenty-five cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged. and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings; b. A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizen of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project is less than two hundred square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary high water mark of the stream. 13. Watershed restoration plan, which means a plan, developed or sponsored by the department of fish and wildlife, the department of ecology, the department of natural resources, the department of transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act. 14. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: a. The project has been approved in writing by the department of fish and wildlife; b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the department of fish and wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW; and c. The local government has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. Additional criteria for determining eligibility of fish habitat projects are found in WAC 173-27-040 2 (p) and apply to this exemption. 15. The external or internal retrofitting of an existing structure wittafor the exclusive purpose of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.) or to otherwise provide physical access to the structure by individuals with disabilities. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 3 of 59 13 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update ZONING CODE CHAPTER 18.44 SHORELINE OVERLAY DISTRICT Sections: 18.44.010 Purpose and Applicability 1844.020 Shoreline Environment Designations 10.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses and Shoreline Use and Modification Matrix 18�4.040 Shoreline Residential Environment U-,ux3xnmnne8uffers 18x4850 Urban C'm:c,vancvsnvi,onmom Uso, 18�1,06Aquatic Environment U:on 18.4487-0050 Development Standards 10/48:100 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping 18�.DK070 Environmentally Sensitive Critical Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction 1844.4-0080 Public Access mthe Shoreline 10.44.11A090 Shoreline Design Guidelines 18�4.1-20100 Shoreline Restoration 10.4*11-30 Administration 18�4.44A120 Appeals 10.4*.450130 Enforcement and Penalties 18.44.460140 Liability l844.0l0Purpose and App|iobi|itV� x�The purpose of this chapter ismimplement the Shoreline Management Act of19r1.asamended and the rules and regulations thereunder as codified in the Washington Administrative Code; and to provide for the regulation of development which affect those areas of the City under No jurisdiction of the Shnmii"o Management Act. |nparticular, the purpose of this chapter ixto: 1, Recognize and protect shorelines of State-wide significance; z. Preserve the natural character ofthe shn,elino' 3. Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 4, Increase public access mpublicly -owned areas ofthe shoreline; n. Increase recreational opportunities for the public inthe shoreline: D, Protect and create critical Chinook salmon habitat in the Transition Zone of the Green River B. Applicability vfAmended Zoning Code. After the effective date of this ordinance, Chapter 10.44 of the Zoning Code, as hereby amended, shall apply to all properties subject to the shoreline overlay, provided that nothing contained herein shall be deemed to override any vested rights or require any alteration of non -conforming use or non -conforming mmctum, except *nspecifically provided in Chapter 18.44of the Zoning Code, asamended. C. Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191—(2)(—c), this Chapter, together with the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan constitutes the City ofrvmwi|o'sShoreline Master Program. Any modifications to these documents will be processed an a Shoreline moote, Program Amendment and require approval bvthe Department of Ecology, l8.44.02OShoreline Environment All shoreline within the City is designate "urban"and further identified as I . Shoreline Residential Environment. All lands zoned for residential use oomeasured D0feet landward from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OVWM). 2. Urban Conservancy Environment. All lands not zoned for residential use upstream from the Turning Basin asmeasured 2O0feet landward from the 0HWM. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 4 of 59 ~~ Commented [NG7]: This section explains that Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program is comprised of policy and regulations in separate documents, Commented [NIG8]: No changes are proposed to the shoreline environment designations. 14 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 3. High Intensity Environment. All lands downstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM. 4. Aquatic Environment. All water bodies within the City limits and its potential annexation areas under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark. The Aquatic Environment includes the water surface together with the underlying lands and the water column. (Ord. 2346 §1, 2011) 18.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses and Shoreline Use and Modification Matrix A. TMC Section 18.44.030(A), including the Use Matrix (Figure 18-1), specifies the uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment. Also included are special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation. B. In the matrix, shoreline environments are listed at the top of each column and the specific uses are listed along the left-hand side of each horizontal row. The cell at the intersection of a column and a row indicates whether a use may be allowed in a specific shoreline environment and whether additional use criteria apply. The matrix shall be interpreted as follows: 1. If the letter "P" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use may be allowed within the shoreline environment if the underlying zoning also allows the use. Shoreline (SDP, CUP and Variance) permits may be required. 2. If the letter "C" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use may be allowed within the shoreline environment subject to the shoreline conditional use review and approval procedures specified in TMC- Section 18.44.110-.C. 3. If the letter "X" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use is prohibited in that shoreline environment. C. In addition to the matrix the following general use requirements also apply to all development within the shoreline jurisdiction. Additional requirements controlling specific uses are set forth for each Shoreline Environment designation, to implement the purpose of the respective Shoreline Environment designations. 1. The first priority for City -owned property other than right-of-way within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be reserved for water -dependent uses including but not limited to habitat restoration, followed by water - enjoyment uses, public access, passive recreation, passive open space uses, or public educational purposes. 2. No hazardous waste handling, processing or storage is allowed within the SMA shoreline jurisdiction, unless incidental to a use allowed in the designated shoreline environment and adequate controls are in place to prevent any releases to the shoreline/river. 3. Overwater structures, shall not cause a net loss of ecological function, interfere with navigation or flood management, or present potential hazards to downstream properties or facilities. They shall comply with the standards in the Overwater Structures Section of TMC Section 18.44.07-0050(K). 4. Parking as a primary use is not permitted, except for existing Park and Ride lots, where adequate stormwater collection and treatment is in place to protect water quality. Parking is permitted only as an accessory to a permitted or conditional use in the shoreline jurisdiction. 5. All development, activities or uses, unless it is an approved overwater, flood management structure or shoreline restoration project, shall be prohibited waterward of the OHWM. (Ord. 2346 §2, 2011) Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 5 of 59 Commented [NG91: The proposal is to combine the Use Matrix and the narrative list of uses into one table for clarity, Shoreline use categories are broader than Zoning District uses and both sets of requirements must be met when establishing a new use, 15 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update P = May be Permitted Subject to development standards C = May be Permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use X = Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environm ent Buffer-4) Non- Buffer Buffer (-2) Non- Buffer Buffer (4-) Non - Buffer AGRICULTURE Farming and farm -related activities X X X P X X X Aquaculture X X X X X X X COMMERCIAL (41.) General X X X P X P (82) P (S3) Automotive services, gas (outside pumps allowed), washing, body and engine repair shops (enclosed within a building) X X X C X (82) C X Contractors storage yards X X X C X (82) C X Water -oriented uses PC P CP P PC P XC Water -dependent uses P (4) P(5) P(4) P P(4) P P Storage P (6) P (5) P (6) P P (6) P X CIVIC/INSTITUTIONAL General X P X P X P X DREDGING Dredging for remediation of contaminated substances C 7 NA C (7) NA C (7) NA C (7) Dred i or main nance of established NA NA NA NA NA NA P (8) navigational channe Other dredging for navigation NA NA NA NA NA NA C (9) Dredge material disposal X X X X X X X Dredging for fill NA NA NA NA NA NA X ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY (Water Dependent) — EP- P-E CP- PE CP Pe P 5-) ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY (Nonwater Dependent) (910) c C C C C C C FENCES P (ijf C (11) C (11) P X FILL General C (12) P C (12) P C (12) P C (12) Fill for remediation or ecol a res oration P (13) P P (13) P P (13) P P (13) FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 6 of 59 16 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update P = May be Permitted Subject to development standards C = May be Permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use X = Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environm ent Buffer{l- Non- Buffer Buffer (-2) Non- Buffer Buffer (-3) Non - Buffer Flood hazard reduction (14) p p P P p p P Shoreline stabilization (15) p p P P p p P INDUSTRIAL (16) General X X P (63) P P (53) P (82) P (53) Animal rendering X X X C X X X Cement manufacturing X X X C X C (82) X Hazardous substance processing and handling & hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities (on or off -site) (817) X X X X X X X Rock crushing, asphalt or concrete batching or mixing, stone cutting, brick manufacture, marble works, and the assembly of products from the above materials X X X C X C (82) X Salvage and wrecking operations X X X C X C (82) X Tow -truck operations, subject to all additional State and local regulations X X X C X P (82) X Truck terminals X X X P X P (82) X Water -oriented uses X X PC P PC P PC Water -dependent uses (17) X X P (4) P P (4) P P MINING General X X X X X X X Dredging X X X X —X X C OVERWATER STRUCTURES (18) Piers Docks and other overwater structures P(19) NA P (20) NA P (2) NA P 20 21 Vehicle bridges (public) P (31, 4) P (31) P (31, 4) P (31) P (31, 4) P (31) P (31 Vehicle bridges (private) C C C C C C C Public pedestrian bridges P P P P P P P PARKING — ACCESSORY Parking areas limited to the minimum necessary to support permitted or conditional uses X P (5) X P X P X RECREATION Recreation facilities (commercial — indoor) X X X P X p (2244) X Recreation facilities (commercial — outdoor) X X C(23,2444) C (24) XC(23,24) C (24)X X Recreation facilities, including boat launching (public) P(123) P P(23,24)C(12) C P(23) P P (53) Public and private promenades footpaths or P P P (26) P P (26) P X trails RESIDENTIAL — SINGLE FAMILY/MULTI-FAMILY Dwelling X(2749) p X P X X X Houseboats X X X X X X X Live-aboards X X X X X X P(21,284-3 Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 7 of 59 17 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update P = May be Permitted Subject to development standards C = May be Permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use X = Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environm ent Buffer-4) Non- Buffer Buffer (-2-) Non- Buffer Buffer (-3-) Non - Buffer Patios and Decks P(29) P P (29) P p p X. SIGNS (30) p P P P p p X SHORELINE RESTORATION p P P P p P P TRANSPORTATION General C C C C C C C (3S) Park & ride lots X X X C (9) X C (9) X Levee maintenance roads P (32) P (32) P (32) P (32) P (32) P (32) NA Railroad X P X X X X X UTILITIES General (910) CP(4) P P(4) P P(-4) P C Provision, distribution, collection, transmission, or disposal of refuse X X X X X X Hydroelectric and private utility power generating plants x X X X X X X Wireless towers X X X X X X X Support facilities, such as outfalls P P (33) P P (33) P C (33) Regional detention facilities X X P (34) P (34) P (34) P (34) X USES NOT SPECIFIED C C C C C C C *This matrix is a summary. Individual notes modify standards in this matrix. Detailed use .standards ore found in the text of this chapter. Permitted or conditional uses listed herein may also require a shoreline substantial development permit and other permits. (2) Additional permitted uses found at TMC 18/11.050 are atlowed (3)-Additio44-per-milted-ttses-found-at-TMG-1-S,444460-are-allowed-tn-tlie-b-tiffer, 1. Commercial uses mean those uses that are involved in wholesale retail service and business trade. Examples include office, restaurants, brew pubs, medical, dental and veterinary clinics, hotels, retail sales, hotel/motels, and warehousing. 2. Nonwater-oriented uses may be allowed as a permitted use where the City determines that water - dependent or water -enjoyment use of the shoreline is not feasible due to the configuration of the shoreline and water body. 3. Permitted only if water dependent. 4. Structures greater than 35 feet tall require a conditional use permit. 5. Permitted if located to the most upland portion of the property and adequately screened and/or landscaped in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping section. 6. Outdoor storage within the shoreline buffer is only permitted in conjunction with a water -dependent use. 7. Conditionally allowed when in compliance with all federal and state regulations. 8. Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins is restricted to maintaining previously dredged and/or existing authorized location, depth and width, 9. Conditionally allowed when significant ecological impacts are minimized and mitigation is provided. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 8 of 59 18 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 10. Allowed in shoreline jurisdiction when it is demonstrated that there is no feasible alternative to locating the use within shoreline jurisdiction. 11. The maximum height of the fence along the shoreline shall not exceed four feet and the fence shall not extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain -link fences must be vinyl coated. 12. Fill minimally necessary to support water -dependent uses, public access, or for the alteration or expansion of a transportation facility of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline when it is demonstrated that alternatives to fill are not feasible is conditionally allowed. 13. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments is permitted. 14. Any new or redeveloped levee shall meet the applicable levee requirements of this chapter. 15. Permitted when consistent with TMC Section 18.44.050 F. 16. Industrial uses mean those uses for manufacturing, processing, assembling and/or storing of finished or semi -finished goods with supportive office and commercial uses. Examples include, but are not limited to, manufacturing processing and/or assembling such items as electrical or mechanical equipment, previously manufactured metals, chemicals, light metals, plastics, solvents, soaps, wood, machines food pharmaceuticals previously prepared materials' warehousing and wholesale distribution; sales and rental of heavy machinery and equipment; and internet data centers. 17. Subject to compliance with state siting criteria found in Chapter 70.105d RCW (See also Environmental Regulations, TMC Section 18.44.070). 18. Permitted when associated with water -dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control or channel management. 19. Permitted when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: a, commercial or marina moorage; b. floating moorage buoys, c. joint use moorage pier/dock. 20. Permitted if associated with water -dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or ecological restoration. 21. Boats may only be moored at a dock or marina. No boats may be moored on tidelands or in the river channel. 22. Limited to athletic or health clubs. 23. Recreation furniture and structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters are permitted in the buffer provided no such structure shall block views to the shoreline from adjacent properties. 24. Permitted only if water —oriented. 25. Parks, recreation and open space facilities open to the public and operated by public agencies and non-profit organizations are permitted. 26. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping purposes. 27. Additional development may be allowed consistent with TMC Section 18.44.110.-G.-2.-f. A shoreline conditional use permit is required for water --oriented accessory structures that exceed the height limits of the Shoreline Residential environment. 28. Permitted in only in the Aquatic Environment and subject to the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.050.-K. 5, 29. Patios and decks are permitted within the shoreline buffer so long as they do not exceed 18 inches in height, are limited eto a maximum of 200 square feet and 50Q/0 of the width of the river frontage. Decks or patios must be located landward of the top of the bank and be constructed to be pervious and of environmentally -friendly materials. 30. Permitted when consistent with TMC Section 18.44.050 L. 31. Permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 9 of 59 19 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 32. May be co -located with fire lanes or parking areas. 33. Allowed if they require a physical connection to the shoreline to provide theft support function, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible. 34. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls vested as of the effective date of this program or if no feasible alternative location exists. Any regional detention facility located in the buffer shall be designed such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the surrounding environment, and provide design features that serve both public and private use, such as an access road that can also serve as a trail. The facility shall be designed to locate access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical. (4)-Goinfnef6al-uses-meari-thos-e-uses-that-aFe-i-ovolved in wholesaletail,-servic-e-and-bti&iness-tr-adex-anaplas i-ndude-offie rits1)-reu-bsrfedic-alTdefilal-a44d-veterinary-c4-i ' retail-salesho[eWmotelsTand -c-o ne-e-Nith-state-siting-eFi 18.14.090) 7 Industrial uses rrean those uses that are facilities for manufacturing, processing emi finished goods with supportEve-effiee-a d commercial andlor assembling such items as electrical or mechani metals, plastics, solvents, soaps, wood, machines, food, pharmaceuti and wholesale distribution; ca es and rental of h (8)-Nen-watef-oriented-uses-may-he-al watef-enjoyment-usc of the-shorel)ne-is-not-f (9) Allowed in shoreline juriscfctio shoreline jurisdiction. developm repuiwateronentedaeeesser (11) Limited to athletic or health clubs. (1-2)-13-erm)tted onl0f-water-oriented.- 118.44.040 Shoreline Buffers tal-Regulation-s-, T-MC , assembling andlor storing of chem cols, ligh- y prepared materials; warehousing ntors. dy se to locating the use within 841430-E. 2. f. A shosetneeend4en e-Residential A. Buffer widths. The following river buffer widths apply in shoreline jurisdiction. Environment Buffer width (1)(2) Modification Shoreline Residential Urban Areas without Conservancy levees 50 feet OR the area needed to achieve a slope no steeper than 2.5:1, measured from the toe of the bank to thetoofthebonktus20 linear feet measured from the top of the bank landward, whichever is greater 100 feet 0_1 Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 10 of 59 Commented [NG10]: The buffer distances and modifications that were previously included in the use section have been consolidated into a table. 20 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Areas with levees 125 feet High Intensity 100 feet Aquatic Not Applicable 1. Unless otherwise noted, all uffers buffersare measured landward from the OHWM 2. In any shoreline environment where an existing improved street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer, the buffer ends on the river side of the edge of the improved right-of-way 3. Removal of invasive species and replanting with native species of high habitat value is voluntary unless triggered by requirement for a Shoreline Substantial Development permit. 4. The Director a educe the standard buffer on a case-b -ca e basis b u o 50% u on con uction o he followin cross section: a. Reslope bank from OHWM (not toe) to be no steeper than [31, using bioengineering techniques b. Minimum 20buffer landward from top of bank Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Maximum slope is reduced due to measurement from OHWM and to recognize location in the Transition Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below OHWM difficult. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to the river. In all cases, a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include the use of a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. 5. Upon reconstruction of a levee to the levee standards of this chapter, the Director may reduce the buffer to actual width required for the levee. If fill is placed along the back slope of a new levee, the buffer may be reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope of the levee. If the property owner provides a 15-foot levee maintenance easement landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall which prohibits the construction of any structures and allows the City to access the area to inspect the levee and make any necessary repairs that area may be outside of the shoreline buffer and allow incidental uses such as parking. 18.14.040 Shoreline Residential Environment Uses consist of the .rea needed to achieve a 2.5:1 slope of the river bank, m asured from the toc of the bank to tho top-of-the-bank,plos-2-04inear-feet- a4-t ank-iancase shall the-Sborettne Resideintial-Buffefbeilesslham50-feet-landward of -the 01=PAIR 1—Permitted-Uses—Nb-uses-or-structures-are-per-mitted-in-the-Shoreline-Residential Buffer except foFthe a. Shoreline restoration proj-cts. b—Over-water-structufee-subjed-toithe-standards-inAhe- residence pior he sole use of the property owner shall not consideredconsidored an outright use on thc shar 2 floating moorage buoys; Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 n Page 11 of 59 Commented [NG11]: The current code calls for 2.5:1 slopes.in the Urban Conservancy environment, al in High Intensity. The proposal is to require buffer reductions in both areas reslope to 3:1. Commented [SS12]: These sections are shown as deleted because the uses have been moved to use and modifications matrix in 18.44.030 21 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update (-joint use moorage pier/dock. c. Public parks, recreation and open space. d. Public pedestrian-bd4ge& e. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails. such structure shall of refuse. ecologica sediments. exceed 15 feet in height or 25 square feet in area or block vie•,Is Signs conforming Construction, maintenance or re developmen i. Vehicle bridges, only if connecting public rights of -way. ood con to the shoreline from Commented [CL13]: The height and size requirement has been an issue for some of the recreation uses in the shoreline \ buffer — informational kiosk at Duwamish Hill. In hindsight, I think 1 purposes, provided \ ft. and 25 sq. ft. are too stringent k. Fire lanes when co located with levee maintenance roads. 1. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in TMC Section 18.14.070(F). t. Patios or decks eline-is-four-feet-an be vinyl coated. constructed to be pervious and of environmentally friendly materials. If a deck or patio will hay environmental impact in the shorelin ,uuffer, then commensurate mitigation shall be required. or other facilities that must have a physical connection to the shoreline to provide their support function, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible. 2:—Ger3ditional-Uses:-Only-the oNowing-maybe-allowed-as-a-ond+tional-Use Residential River Buffcr subject to the requirem e b. Dredging for navigational purposes is permitted where ommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts are minimized bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fit material is prohibited. c. New private vehicle bridges. d. Fill minimally necessary to support water dependent uses, public access, or for the alteration or Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 12 of 59 Commented [NG14R13]: Note 23 in the use matrix removes these size restrictions. 22 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update shall meet the 1. Permitte ancl-ftmited-commeroial-uses-a-14€1-accesses-as-attoweri-in-the-undertytrig-zoning-distnot—In-additionr the Shoreline Residential Environment shall allow the following uses: b. For non residential uses, parking/loading and storage facilities la,ated to the most upland e property and adequately screened a dlor landscaped in accordance with the Vegetation c. Railroad tracks. subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18,61. A Shoreline 18.11.050 Urban C n5crvancy Envir nmcnt Uscs Buffer shall consist of that Section, -WC Section 1-8.A-4178( flood coi4rol, channel c -u.lic parks ecreation-and-open-spac-e d. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails. Ord. 2316 §3,',011) portions of ncy River Buffer: shelters, provided no . ocked from adjacent properties. h. Construction, maintenance or re development of lovees for flood control purposes, provided that any new or re -developed levee shall meet the applicable Iev•e requirements of this chapter. private vehicle .ridges may be maintained or replaced. j. Utility towers and utilities, except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse. k. -Levee-maintenance roads: !. Plaza corn° purposes-. m, New shoreline stabilization utilizing the deve Section, TMC Secton 18.11.070(F). n E-x sting-essentia1-streets, roads -and -rights -of zoning di he Shoreline Stabilization ct Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 13 of 59 Commented [CL151: Same explanation as under residential buffer. 23 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update p. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as outfall facilities q. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use. sediments. tion facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction located in the buffer shall be designed such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed .,+��mrperv, .j—vcn"fi-cxv-c"" ;rua-rc�f.,r £ray+h��G�ir 2. Conditional Uses, Only the following may be allo.ded as a Conditional UrbanGonservanc € tvirenment f#er—subject-to-the-requirements procedores- ndsenditions-established by TMC Chapter 18.61 and shall be reviewed through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit: a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existi g provided.. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation is provided. Dredging of federal and state regulations. d. Fill minimally necessary to support water dependent uses, public access, or for the alteration or expansion of a transportation facility of statewi.e significance currently located on the shoreline when it is the Urban Conservancy Environment, outside of the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer. Uses shall meet # e purposes and criteria of the Urban Conservancy Environment as established in the Shoreline Environ ent Designation section. 1. Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer and/or the Conditional Use Permit shall be required. Environment Buffer as follows: 4. Foy pro erty Iosated withn the 100 foot bufferin--non-levees re slope the river bank to setback ar a in accordance with the standards in TMC Section 18.14.080, and provided that the Director determines that a as a ondition of the reduction. In no case shall the reduced buffer be less than 50 feet. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 14 of 59 Commented [RL16]: The KCFCD is implementing 500-year level of flood protection. This may require that future levees are constructed within areas that are not currently protected by a levee. Commented [MP17]: The WRIA 9 Re -green the Green - Riparian Revegetation strategy states that tall trees along a 165- foot wide swath next to the river will have the most habitat/shade benefit. 24 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Conservancy Environment Buffer may be reduced to that area occupied by levee or river bank improvements in this chapter, plus 10 feet measured toe of the levee or levee wall and prohibiting the construction of any structures and allows the City to access cdgc of the levee floodwall, as the case may be, may be reduced to the point where the ground plane int•rsects the back slope of t e levee; provided, that th landward toe of the levee or levee wall, and which easement prohibits the construction of any structur s and allows the City to acce,s t 18.41.060 High Intensity Environment Uccs A—High-Intensity-Environment-BBuffer-Delneaied-. -- The -High-ntensity— nvironment-Buffer-shall re p-rmitted in the High Intensity River Buffer: a. S Section that are associated with water dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channet management or ecological restorat'on. c. Public parks, recreation and open space. Commented [CL18]: I think we should reconsider the hard and fast levee profile that was adopted in the SMP — the profile we approved for the Kent repair was actually better in some ways than our adopted profile. However it required a shoreline variance because it did not meet the exact design of the minimum levee profile. f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no Commented [CL19]: See explanation above g. Signs conforming to the development standards of this chapter. h. Construction, maintenance or re development of levees for flood control purposes, provided i. New vehicle bridges; permitted only if connecting public rights of way; existing public or private -vehicle-bridges-may-be-mair+tained-or--replaced- ofof r„fuse. ction, transmission or disposal Commented [CL20]: See explanation under residential buffer Plaza purposes,. m. New shor•linc s Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(F). a. 'oning district. p dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the underlying upport facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as outfall facilities q. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent us Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 15 of 59 25 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Water oriented essential public facilities, both above and below ground. b-en documented that no feasible location is available outside of the buffer. t. Landfill as part of an approved remediation ptan for tke u. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls vested as of the effective date of this program or if no feasible alternative location exists. Any regional detention facility to blend with t e surrounding environment, and provide resign features that serve both public and private use, 2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the Shoreline High Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required. ecessary for assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existing provided bottom materials for the purpose of s staining fill material is prohibited. Dredgin c. New private vehicle bridges. d. Fill minimally necessary to support water dependent uses, public access, or for the alteration C. Shoreline Urban High Intensity Environment Uses. The Shoreline High Intensity Environment h Designations section. 1. Permitt•d Uccs. All uses'ermitted in the High Intensity Environment Buffer and/or t e S or lino Use Matrix may be allowed. 2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be allowed subject to thc requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Cenditional-UseRermit-s toefegeired.. �Errvirnme+�t Bu€t2r Redttctaon, The Drector n reduce the High intensity Environment Buffer where the applicant re slopes the river bank to be no steeper than 3:1 above the ovides a-2&feet setback-from-the-top-ofthemew-slope egetates both1he-river-bank-and4he-20-foot cordance-with-the-standard n-theVegetatiea-Rroteetmon an8 Landscaping Sectiwee,-and-the rently is no steeper than 3:1 or where the setback as provided in this chapter, the buffer width will be the distance measured from the OHWM to the top (Ord.-2346SSS 244-1) 18.11.065 Aquatic Environment Uses A. Aquatic Environment Delineated. The Aquatic Environment onskts of all water bodies within waterward of thc Ordinary High Water Mark. The Aquatic Environment includes the water surface together with the underlying lands and thc water column. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 16 of 59 26 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update B. Permitted Uses, The following uses arc permittcd in the Aquatic Environment. Uses and ithin the Aquatic Environment must le compatible with the adjoining shoreline environment: 1. Shoreline restoration projects. 2. Over water structures subject to the standards established in the Over water Structures Section gement or ecological restoration. redevelopment of a levee shall meet Section, 5. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the underlying zoning district. 6. Boats moored at a dock or marina. No boats may be moored on tidelands or in the river channel. ommodation of existing 2. Dredging for rem diation of contaminated s diments when mitigation is provided. Dredging of federal and state regulations 3. Fill minima expansion of a transportation facility of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline when it is demonstrated that alternatives to fill are not feasible. (Ord. 2346 §6, 2011) 18.44.07-0050 Development Standards A. Applicability. The development standards of this chapter apply to work that meets the definition of substantial development except for vegetation removal per TMC Section 18.44.080060, which applies to all shoreline development. The term "substantial development" applies to non -conforming, new or re -development. Non -conforming uses, structures, parking lots and landscape areas, will be governed by the standards in TMC Section 18.44.1-30110(E), "Non -Conforming Development." B. Shoreline Residential Development Standards. A shoreline substantial development permit is not required for construction within the Shoreline Residential Environment by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his/her own use or for the use of a family member. Such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to this chapter. Short subdivisions and subdivisions are not exempt from obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 1. Shoreline Residential Environment Standards. The following standards apply to the Shoreline Residential Environment: a. The development standards of the applicable underlying zoning district (Title 18, Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply. b. New development and uses must be sited so as to allow natural bank inclination of 2.5:1 slope with a 20-foot setback from the top of the bank. The Director may require a riverbank analysis as part of any development proposal. c. Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc., shall be suitably screened with native vegetation per the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. d. New shoreline stabilization, repair of existing stabilization or modifications to the river bank must comply with the standards in the Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.147-0050(F). Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 17 of 59 27 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update e. Short plats of five to nine lots or formal subdivisions must be designed to provide public access to the river in accordance with the Public Access Section, TMC Section 18.44.08100. Signage is required to identify the public access point(s). f. Parking facilities associated with single family residential development or public recreational facilities are subject to the specific performance standards set forth in the Off -Street Parking Section, TMC Section 18.44.070050(1). g. Fences, freestanding walls or other structures normally accessory to residences must not block views of the river from adjacent residences or extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain link fencing must be vinyl coated. h. Recreational structures permitted in the buffer must provide buffer mitigation. i. The outside edge of surface transportation facilities, such as railroad tracks, streets, or public transit shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the OHWM, except where the surface transportation facility is bridging the river. j. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water -dependent uses and their structures, the maximum height for structures shall be 30 feet. For bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water -dependent uses and their structures, the height limit shall be as demonstrated necessary to accomplish the structure's primary purpose. Bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water - dependent uses and their structures greater than 35 feet in height require approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. 2. Design Review. Design review is required for non-residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment. C. High Intensity, Urban Conservancy and Aquatic Environment Development Standards. 1. Standards. The following standards apply in the High Intensity, Urban Conservancy and Aquatic Environments. a. The development standards for the applicable underlying zoning district (Title 18, Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply. b. All new development performed by public agencies, or new multi -family, commercial, or industrial development shall provide public access in accordance with the standards in the Public Access Section. c. Development or re -development of properties in areas of the shoreline armored with revetments or other hard armoring other than levees, or with non -armored river banks, must comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, TMC Section 18.44.080060. d. Any new shoreline stabilization or repairs to existing stabilization must comply with Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.O74050(F). e. Over -water structures shall be allowed only for water -dependent uses and the size limited to the minimum necessary to support the structure's intended use and shall result in no net loss to shoreline ecological function. Over -water structures must comply with the standards in the Over -water Structures Section, TMC Section 18.44.09050(K). 2. Setbacks and Site Configuration. a. The yard setback adjacent to the river is the buffer width established for the applicable shoreline environment. b. A fishing pier, viewing platform or other outdoor feature that provides access to the shoreline is not required to meet a setback from the OHWM. 3. Height Restrictions. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water - dependent uses and their structures, to preserve visual access to the shoreline and avoid massing of tall buildings within the shoreline jurisdiction, the maximum height for structures shall be as follows: a. 15 feet where located within the River Buffer; b. 45 feet between the outside landward edge of the River Buffer and 200 feet of the OHWM! c. Provided, no permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of more than 35 feet above average grade level on shorelines of the State that will obstruct the view of a substantial number Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 18 of 59 Commented [NG21]: This is part of the current code and the intent was to step development down toward the water. In some cases that has led developers to put parking adjacent to the river buffer so that their buildings were outside of shoreline jurisdiction and not subject to the height restriction. 28 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines. For any building that is proposed to be greater than 35 feet in height in the shoreline jurisdiction, the development proponent must demonstrate the proposed building will not block the views of a substantial number of residences. d. The Director may approve a 3'015% increase in height) for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction if the project proponent provides add+tienal-restoration and/or enhancement of the entire shoreline buffer, beyond what may otherwise be required including, but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.080060, 'Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." If the required buffer has already been restored, the project proponent may provide a 20% wider buffer, planted accordance with TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping"and/or &Rhaneed in order to obtain the 4-530% increase in height, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping," e. Incentives may not be used to increase building height above that permitted in the underlying zoning district. 4. Lighting. In addition to the lighting standards in TMC Chapter 18.60, "Board of Architectural Review," lighting for the site or development shall be designed and located so that: a. The minimum light levels in parking areas and paths between the building and street shall be one -foot candle. b. Lighting shall be designed to prevent light spillover and glare on adjacent properties and on the river channel to the maximum extent feasibly, be directed downward so as to illuminate only the immediate area, and be shielded to eliminate direct off -site illumination. c. The general grounds need not be lighted. d. The lighting is incorporated into a unified landscape and/or site plan. D. Surface Water and Water Quality. The following standards apply to all shoreline development. 1. New surface water systems may not discharge directly into the river or streams tributary to the river without pre-treatment to reduce pollutants and meet State water quality standards. 2. Such pre-treatment may consist of biofiltration, oil/water separators, or other methods approved by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. 3. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for storm water detention/infiltration. 4. Stormwater outfalls must be designed so as to cause no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adverse impacts where functions are impaired. New stormwater outfalls or maintenance of existing outfalls must include shoreline restoration as part of the project. 5. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary sewer. 6. Solid and liquid wastes and untreated effluents shall not be allowed to enter any bodies of water or to be discharged onto shorelands. 7. The use of low impact development techniques is required, unless such techniques conflict with other provisions of the SMP or are shown to not be feasible due to site conditions. E. Flood Hazard Reduction. The following standards apply to all shoreline development. 1. New structural flood hazard reduction structures shall be allowed only when it can be demonstrated by a Riverbank Analysis that: a. They are necessary to protect existing development; b. Non-structural measures are not feasible; and c. Impacts to ecological functions and priority species and habitats can be successfully mitigated so as to assure no net loss. 2. Flood hazard structures must incorporate appropriate vegetation restoration and conservation actions consistent with the standards of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 34. Publicly -funded structural measures to reduce flood hazards shall improve public access or dedicate and provide public access unless public access improvements would cause unavoidable health or Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 19 of 59 Commented [NG22]: We've had a couple building permits for structures in the shoreline that found the 45' limit limiting — and the incentives to increase the height weren't enough to be worthwhile. A 15% increase is only 6.75 feet while a 30% increase could equal an additional story, Commented [NG23]: We added to the maximum extent feasible' here based on our experience with the pedestrian bridge which required a shoreline variance for the light that came through the grating. There was a balance between safety of the bridge users and lighting of the river, Commented [CL241: We have seen an NPDES issue with a graveled parking lot in the shoreline — paving it would allow storm water controls to be installed however the shoreline regulations prevented the paving without the parking lot losing its nonconforming status. Commented [5525R24]: See non -conforming parking lot changes Commented [NG26]: The proposal is to move away from a single levee design. 29 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security problems, or significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated. 45. Rehabilitation or replacement of existing flood control structures, such as levees, with a primary purpose of containing the 1% to 0.02% annual chance flood event, shall be allowed where it can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis that the existing structure: a. Does not provide an appropriate level of protection for surrounding lands; or b. Does not meet the minimum levee profilea 2.5:1 riverside slope or other appropriate engineering design standards for stability (e.g., over -steepened side slopes for existing soil and/or flow conditions); and c. Repair of the existing structure will not cause or increase significant adverse ecological impacts to the shoreline. 56. Rehabilitated or replaced flood hazard reduction structures shall not extend the toe of slope any further waterward of the OHWM than the existing structure. 67. New structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as levees, berms and similar flood control structures shall be placed landward of the floodway as determined by the best information available. 78. New, redeveloped or replaced structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. 89. No commercial, industrial, office or residential development shall be located within a floodplain without a Flood Control Zone Permit issued by the City. No development shall be located within a floodway except as otherwise permitted. 948.New, redeveloped or replaced flood hazard reduction structures must have an overall waterward slope no steeper than 2,5:1 unless it is not physically possible to achieve such a slope. A,floodwall may be substituted for all or a portion of a levee back slope _ where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this subsection -and which structure has not lost its nonconforming status or to allow area for waterward habitat restoration development. The floodwall shall be designed to be the minimum necessary to provide 150 feet of clearance between the levee and the building, or to preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety standards. A floodwall may also be used where necessary to prevent the levee from encroaching upon a railroad easement recorded prior to the date of adoption of this subsection. If a floodwall is permitted under this subsection the levee slele must be_2.51-1:1V unless it is not physically possible to achiov such a slope; in that instance, the love slope must be as close to 2.5H:1V as physically poc ible. F. Shoreline Stabilization. The provisions of this section apply to those structures or actions intended to minimize or prevent erosion of adjacent uplands and/or failure of riverbanks resulting from waves, tidal fluctuations or river currents. Shoreline stabilization or armoring involves the placement of erosion resistant materials (e.g., large rocks and boulders, cement, pilings and/or large woody debris (LWD)) or the use of bioengineering techniques to reduce or eliminate erosion of shorelines and risk to human infrastructure. This form of shoreline stabilization is distinct from flood control structures and flood hazard reduction measures (such as levees). The terms "shoreline stabilization," "shoreline protection" and "shoreline armoring" are used interchangeably. 1. Shoreline protection shall not be considered an outright permitted use and shall be permitted only when it has been demonstrated through a riverbank analysis and report that shoreline protection is necessary for the protection of existing legally established structures and public improvements. 2. New development and re -development shall be designed and configured on the lot to avoid the need for new shoreline stabilization. Removal of failing shoreline stabilization shall be incorporated into re- development design proposals wherever feasible. 3. Replacement of lawfully established, existing bulkheads or revetments are subject to the following priority system: a. The first priority for replacement of bulkheads or revetments shall be landward of the existing bulkhead. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 20 of 59 Commented [RU27]: KCFCD is now constructing levees to provide 500-year protection plus 3 feet of freeboard, Commented [NG28]: Our experience with the SMP is that BAS has evolved and the one size fits all minimum levee profile isn't always the best solution. This language would allow for different solutions without the need for a shoreline variance if the design meets flood control and habitat goals. For example the City of Kent's Briscoe Reach #1 that was 3:1 slope (prior to the C0E redesign). Commented [NG29]: The proposal is to allow more flexibility in the use of flood walls to balance the need for greater flood protection with the already developed nature of our shoreline. The alternative would be to widen shoreline buffers and create more non -conformities. Commented [MP30]: Flood walls can be ugly and uninviting, but they can in a pinched shoreline zone like ours, provide the space to implement habitat restoration. Kent has done some good- looking flood walls that we can model from. 30 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update b. The second priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments shall be to replace in place (at the bulkhead's existing location). 4. When evaluating a proposal against the above priority system, at a minimum the following criteria shall be considered: a. Existing topography; b. Existing development; c. Location of abutting bulkheads; d. Impact to shoreline ecological functions; and, e. Impact to river hydraulics, potential changes in geomorphology, and to other areas of the shoreline. 5. Proponents of new or replacement hard shoreline stabilization (e.g. bulkheads or revetments) must demonstrate through a documented river bank analysis that bioengineered shoreline protection measures or bioengineering erosion control designs will not provide adequate upland protection of existing structures or would pose a threat or risk to adjacent property. The study must also demonstrate that the proposed hard shoreline stabilization will not adversely affect other infrastructure or adjacent shorelines. 6. Shoreline armoring such as rip rap rock revetments and other hard shoreline stabilization techniques are detrimental to river processes and habitat creation, Where allowed, shoreline armoring shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that does not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, including fish habitat, and shall conform to the requirements of the 2004 Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (or as amended) criteria and guidelines for integrated stream bank protection (Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington), U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and other regulatory requirements. The hard shoreline stabilization must be designed and approved by an engineer licensed in the State of Washington and qualified to design shoreline stabilization structures. 7. Shoreline armoring shall be designed to the minimum size, height, bulk and extent necessary to remedy the identified hazard. 8. An applicant must demonstrate the following in order to qualify for the RCW 90.58.030(30(e)(iii)(ii) exemption from the requirement to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit for a proposed single family bulkhead and to insure that the bulkhead will be consistent with the SMP: a. Erosion from currents or waves is imminently threatening a legally established single family detached dwelling unit or one or more appurtenant structures; and b. The proposed bulkhead is more consistent with the City's Master Program in protecting the site and adjoining shorelines and that non-structural alternatives such as slope drainage systems, bioengineering or vegetative growth stabilization, are not feasible or will not adequately protect a legally established residence or appurtenant structure; and c. The proposed bulkhead is located landward of the OHWM or it connects to adjacent, legally established bulkheads; and d. The maximum height of the proposed bulkhead is no more than one foot above the elevation of extreme high water on tidal waters as determined by the National Ocean Survey published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 9. Bulkheads or revetments shall be constructed of suitable materials that will serve to accomplish the desired end with maximum preservation of natural characteristics. Materials with the potential for water quality degradation shall not be used. Design and construction methods shall consider aesthetics and habitat protection. Automobile bodies, tires or other junk or waste material that may release undesirable chemicals or other material shall not be used for shoreline protection. 10. The builder of any bulkhead or revetment shall be financially responsible for determining the nature and the extent of probable adverse effects on fish and wildlife or on the property of others caused by his/her construction and shall propose and implement solutions approved by the City to minimize such effects. 11. When shoreline stabilization is required at a public access site, provision for safe access to the water shall be incorporated in the design whenever possible. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 21 of 59 31 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 12. Placement of bank protection material shall occur from the top of the bank and shall be supervised by the property owner or contractor to ensure material is not dumped directly onto the bank face. 13. Bank protection material shall be clean and shall be of a sufficient size to prevent its being washed away by high water flows. 14. When riprap is washed out and presents a hazard to the safety of recreational users of the river, it shall be removed by the owner of such material. 15. Bank protection associated with bridge construction and maintenance may be permitted subject to the provisions of the SMP and shall conform to provisions of the State Hydraulics Code (RCW 77.55) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineer regulations. G. Archaeological, Cultural and Historical Resources. In addition to the requirements of TMC 18.50.110, Archaeological/Paleontological Information Preservation Requirements, the following regulations apply. 1. All land use permits for projects within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be coordinated with affected tribes. 2. If the City determines that a site has significant archaeological, natural scientific or historical value, a substantial development that would pose a threat to the resources of the site shall not be approved. 3. Permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological resources require a site inspection or evaluation by a professional archaeologist in coordination with affected Indian tribes. The City may require that development be postponed in such areas to allow investigation of public acquisition potential, retrieval and preservation of significant artifacts and/or development of a mitigation plan. Areas of known or suspected archaeological middens shall not be disturbed and shall be fenced and identified during construction projects on the site. 4. Developers and property owners shall immediately stop work and notify the City of Tukwila, the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and affected Indian tribes if archaeological resources are uncovered during excavation. 5. In the event that unforeseen factors constituting an emergency, as defined in RCW 90.58.030, necessitate rapid action to retrieve or preserve artifacts or data identified above, the project may be exempted from any shoreline permit requirements. The City shall notify the Washington State Department of Ecology, the State Attorney General's Office and the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Office of such an exemption in a timely manner. 6. Archaeological excavations may be permitted subject to the provision of this chapter. 7. On sites where historical or archaeological resources have been identified and will be preserved in situ, public access to such areas shall be designed and managed so as to give maximum protection to the resource and surrounding environment. 8. Interpretive signs of historical and archaeological features shall be provided subject to the requirements of the Public Access Section when such signage does not compromise the protection of these features from tampering, damage and/or destruction. H. Environmental Impact Mitigation. 1. Halting the continuing decline of Puget Sound Chinook salmon and Southern Resident Orca calls for an improvement to current shoreline conditions, which have been degraded by human activity over time. All shoreline development and uses shall at a minimum occur in a manner that results in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions through the careful location and design of all allowed development and uses. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from allowed development and uses are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. 2. To the extent Washington's State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, is applicable, the analysis of environmental impacts from proposed shoreline uses or developments shall be conducted consistent with the rules implementing SEPA (TMC Chapter 21.04 and WAC 197-11). 3. For all development, mitigation sequencing shall be applied in the following order of priority: a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 22 of 59 32 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts. c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment. d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations. e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments. f. Monitoring the impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate corrective measures. 4. In determining appropriate mitigation measures applicable to shoreline development, lower priority measures shall be applied only where higher priority measures are determined by the City to be infeasible or inapplicable. 5. When mitigation measures are appropriate pursuant to the priority of mitigation sequencing above, preferential consideration shall be given to measures that replace the impacted functions directly and in the immediate vicinity of the impact. However, if mitigation in the immediate vicinity is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, waves or other factors, then off -site mitigation within the Shoreline Jurisdiction may be allowed if consistent with the Shoreline Restoration Plan. Mitigation for projects in the Transition Zone must take place in the Transition Zone. In the event a site is not available in the Transition Zone to carry out required mitigation, the project proponent may contribute funds equivalent to the value of the required mitigation to an existing or future restoration project identified in the CIP to be carried out by a public agency in the Transition Zone. I. Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements. In addition to the parking requirements in TMC 18.56, the following requirements apply to all development in the shoreline jurisdiction. 1. Any parking, loading, or storage facilities located between the river and any building must incorporate additional landscaping in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, or berming or other site planning or design techniques to reduce visual and/or environmental impacts from the parking areas utilizing the following screening techniques: a. A solid evergreen screen of trees and shrubs a minimum of six feet high; or b. Decorative fence a maximum of six feet high with landscaping. Chain link fence, where allowed, shall be vinyl coated and landscaped with native trailing vine or an approved non-native vine other than ivy, except where a security or safety hazard may exist; or c. Earth berms at a minimum of four feet high, planted with native plants in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 2. Where a parking area is located in the shoreline jurisdiction and adjacent to a public access feature, the parking area shall be screened by a vegetative screen or a built structure that runs the entire length of the parking area adjacent to the amenity. The landscape screening shall comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 3. Where public access to or along the shoreline exists or is proposed, parking areas shall provide pedestrian access from the parking area to the shoreline. 4. Parking facilities, loading areas and paved areas shall incorporate low impact development techniques wherever feasible, adequate storm water retention areas, oil/water separators and biofiltration swales, or other treatment techniques and shall comply with the standards and practices formally adopted by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. J. Land Altering Activities. All land altering activities in the shoreline jurisdiction shall be in conjunction with an underlying land development permit, except for shoreline restoration projects. All activities shall meet the following standards: 1. Clearing, Grading and Landfill. a. Land altering shall be permitted only where it meets the following criteria: (1) The work is the minimum necessary to accomplish an allowed shoreline use; (2) Impacts to the natural environment are minimized and mitigated; (3) Water quality, river flows and/or fish habitat are not adversely affected; Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 23 of 59 33 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update (4) Public access and river navigation are not diminished; (5) The project complies with all federal and state requirements; (6) The project complies with the vegetation protection criteria of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section; (7) The project will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or processes. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from an otherwise allowed land altering project are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this section. In that event, the "no net loss" standard is met; and (8) Documentation is provided to demonstrate that the fill comes from a clean source. b. Clearing, grading and landfill activities, where allowed, shall include erosion control mechanisms, and any reasonable restriction on equipment, methods or timing necessary to minimize the introduction of suspended solids or leaching of contaminants into the river, or the disturbance of wildlife or fish habitats in accordance with the standards in TMC Chapter 16.54, "Grading." 2. Dredging. a. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations. Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins must be restricted to maintaining previously dredged and/or existing authorized location, depth, and width. b. Where allowed, dredging operations must be designed and scheduled so as to ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from allowed dredging are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. K. Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks and Other Over -water Structures. 1. General Requirements. a. A dock may be allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: (1). commercial or marina moorage; (2) floating moorage buoys; (3). Joint use moorage pier/dock. ab.Prior to issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for construction of piers, docks, wharves or other over -water structures, the applicant shall present apr{ws foaaproof of application submittal to State or Federal agencies, as applicable. bc. Structures must be designed by a qualified engineer and must demonstrate the project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological function and will be stable against the forces of flowing water, wave action and the wakes of passing vessels. ed.In-water structures shall be designed and located to minimize shading of native aquatic vegetation and fish passage areas. Removal of shoreline, riparian and aquatic vegetation shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary to construct the project. All areas disturbed by construction shall be replanted with native vegetation as part of the project. de.New or replacement in -water structures shall be designed and located such that natural hydraulic and geologic processes, such as erosion, wave action or floods will not necessitate the following: (1) reinforcement of the shoreline or stream bank with new bulkheads or similar artificial structures to protect the in -water structure; or (2) dredging. ef. No structures are allowed on top of over -water structures except for properties located north of the Turning Basin. fg. Pilings or other associated structures in direct contact with water shall not be treated with preservatives unless the applicant can demonstrate that no feasible alternative to protect the materials exists and that non -wood alternatives are not economically feasible. In that case, only compounds approved for marine use may be used and must be applied by the manufacturer per current best management practices of the Western Wood Preservers Institute. The applicant must present verification that the best management Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 24 of 59 Commented [CL31 ]: We don't require approval by other agencies to be presented for other land use permits. Also, this section says the approvals must be received prior to issuance of the SSDP while 4.e. below says that the permits need to be obtained prior to construction starting. Often, applicants need our permit before either the State or Federal permit will be issued, 34 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update practices were followed. The preservatives must also be approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. gh. All over -water structures shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and sound condition. Abandoned or unsafe over -water structures shall be removed or repaired promptly by the owner. Accumulated debris shall be regularly removed and disposed of properly so as not to jeopardize the integrity of the structure. Replacement of in -water structures shall include proper removal of abandoned or other man-made structures and debris. h. Boat owners who store motorized boats on -site are encouraged to use best management practices to avoid fuel and other fluid spills. 2. Marinas, Boat Yards and Dry Docks. a. All uses under this category shall be designed to achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from uses allowed under this category are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this chapter; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. b. Commercial/industrial marinas and dry docks shall be located no further upriver than Turning Basin #3. c. Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed and operated to avoid or minimize adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, water quality, native shoreline vegetation, navigation, public access, existing in -water recreational activities and adjacent water uses. d. Marinas shall submit a fuel spill prevention and contingency plan to the City for approval. Haul - out and boat maintenance facilities must meet the City's stormwater management requirements and not allow the release of chemicals, petroleum or suspended solids to the river. e. Marinas, boat yards and dry docks must be located a minimum of 100 feet from fish and wildlife habitat areas4see=Se # e Areas in f. New marinas, launch ramps and accessory uses must be located where water depths are adequate to avoid the need for dredging. 3. Boat Launches and Boat Lifts. a. Boat launch ramps and vehicle access to the ramps shall be designed to not cause erosion; the use of pervious paving materials, such as grasscrete, are encouraged. b. Boat launch ramps shall be designed to minimize areas of landfill or the need for shoreline protective structures. c. Access to the boat ramp and parking for the ramp shall be located a sufficient distance from any frontage road to provide safe maneuvering of boats and trailers. d. Launching rails shall be adequately anchored to the ground. e. Launch ramps and boat lifts shall extend waterward past the OHWM only as far as necessary to achieve their purpose. f. Boat lifts and canopies must meet the standards of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit Number 1 for Watercraft Lifts in Fresh and Marine/Estuarine Waters within the State of Washington. 4. Over -water Structures. Where allowed, over -water structures such as piers, wharves, bridges, and docks shall meet the following standards: a. The size of new over -water structures shall be limited to the minimum necessary to support \ the structure's intended use and to provide stability in the case of floating docks. Structures must be compatible with any existing channel control or flood management structures. b. Over -water structures shall not extend waterward of the OHWM any more than necessary to permit launching of watercraft, while also ensuring that watercraft do not rest on tidal substrate at any time. c. Adverse impacts of over -water structures on water quality, river flows, fish habitat, shoreline vegetation, and public access shall be minimized and mitigated. Mitigation measures may include joint use of existing structures, open decking or piers, replacement of non-native vegetation, installation of in -water habitat features or restoration of shallow water habitat. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 25 of 59 Commented [NG32]: Not all environmentally sensitive areas are mapped. The City's maps are a starting point but site specific analysis is required. Commented [CL33]: The question came up when we worked on the new pedestrian bridge, whether the pedestrian bridge would be considered an overwater structure. The requirement for 30% grating was a safety issue for bicyclists, so I believe PW had to get a variance from this standard. Commented [NG34R33]: The proposal is to consider bridges to be overwater structures. This is clarifed in the use matrix. 35 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update d. Any proposals for in -water or over -water structures shall provide a pre -construction habitat evaluation, including an evaluation of salmonid and bull trout habitat and shoreline ecological functions, and demonstrate how the project achieves no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. e. Over -water structures shall obtain all necessary state and federal permits prior to construction or repair. f. All over -water structures must be designed by a qualified engineer to ensure they are adequately anchored to the bank in a manner so as not to cause future downstream hazards or significant modifications to the river geomorphology and are able to withstand high flows. g. Over -water structures shall not obstruct normal public use of the river for navigation or recreational purposes. h. Shading impacts to fish shall be minimized by using grating on at least 30% of the surface area of the over -water structure on residential areas and at least 50% of the over -water structure on all other properties. This standard may be modified for bridges if necessary to accommodate the proposed use. The use of skirting is not permitted. i. If floats are used, the flotation shall be fully enclosed and contained in a shell (such as polystyrene) that prevents breakup or loss of the flotation material into the water, damage from ultraviolet radiation, and damage from rubbing against pilings or waterborne debris. j. Floats may not rest on the tidal substrate at any time and stoppers on the piling anchoring the floats must be installed to ensure at least 1 foot of clearance above the substrate. Anchor lines may not rest on the substrate at any time. k. The number of pilings to support over -water structures, including floats, shall be limited to the minimum necessary. Pilings shall conform to the pilings standards contained in the US Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit No. 6. I. No over -water structure shall be located closer than five feet from the side property line extended, except that such structures may abut property lines for the common use of adjacent property owners when mutually agreed upon by the property owners in an easement recorded with King County. A copy of this agreement shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development and accompany an application for a development permit and/or Shoreline Permit. 5. Live-Aboards. New over -water residences are prohibited. Live-aboards may be allowed provided that: a. They are for single-family use only. b. They are located in a marina that provides shower and toilet facilities on land and there are no sewage discharges to the water. c. Live-aboards do not exceed 10 percent of the total slips in the marina. d. They are owner -occupied vessels. e. There are on -shore support services in proximity to the live-aboards. L. Signs in Shoreline Jurisdiction. 1. Signage within the shoreline buffer is limited to the following: a. Interpretative signs and restoration signage, including restoration sponsor acknowledgment. b. Signs for water -related uses. c. Signs installed by a government agency for public safety along any public trail or at any public park. d. Signs installed within the rights of way of any public right-of-way or bridge within the shoreline buffer. AIf s + atFmeet the r-quirements of t-Gantroi-Devices for Streets and Hicdhway curtshed-by-the-US.-0epa e. Signs installed on utilities and wireless communication facilities denoting danger or other safety information, including emergency contact information. 2. Billboards and other off -premise signs are strictly forbidden in the shoreline buffer. (Ord. 2346 §7, 2011) Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 26 of 59 Commented [RL35]: I do not see why we need to state this in this code. This is a traffic related item. 36 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 18.44.080060 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping A. Purpose, Objectives and Applicability. 1. The purpose of this section is to: a. Regulate the protection of existing trees and native vegetation in the shoreline jurisdiction; b. Establish requirements for removal of invasive plants at the time of development or re- development of sites; c. Establish requirements for landscaping for new development or re -development; d. Establish requirements for the long-term maintenance of native vegetation to prevent establishment of invasive species and promote shoreline ecosystem processes. 2. The City's goal is to: a. Preserve as many existing trees as possible and increase the number of native trees, shrubs and other vegetation in the shoreline because of their importance to shoreline ecosystem functions as listed below: (1) Overhead tree canopy to provide shade for water temperature control; (2) Habitat for birds, insects and small mammals; (3) Vegetation that overhangs the river to provide places for fish to shelter; (4) Source of insects for fish; (5) Filtering of pollutants and slowing of stormwater prior to its entering the river; and (6) A long-term source of woody debris for the river. b. In addition, trees and other native vegetation are important for aesthetics. It is the City's goal that unsightly invasive vegetation, such as blackberries, be removed from the shoreline and be replaced with native vegetation to promote greater enjoyment of and access to the river, c. The City will provide information and technical assistance to property owners for improving vegetation in the shoreline jurisdiction and will work collaboratively with local citizen groups to assist property owners in the removal of invasive vegetation and planting of native vegetation, particularly for residential areas. 3. With the exception of residential development/re-development of 4 or fewer residential units, all activities and developments within the shoreline environment must comply with the landscaping and maintenance requirements of this section, whether or not a shoreline substantial development permit is required. Single family residential projects are not exempt if implementing a shoreline stabilization project or overwater structure. 4. The tree protection and retention requirements and the vegetation management requirements apply to existing uses as well as new or re -development. 5. Minor Activities Allowed without a Permit or Exemption. a. The following activities are allowed without a permit or exemption: (1) Maintenance of existing, lawfully established areas of crop vegetation, landscaping (including paths and trails) or gardens within a regulated critical area or its buffer. Examples include, mowing lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops, pruning, and planting of non-invasive ornamental vegetation or indigenous native species to maintain the general condition and extent of such areas. Cutting down trees and shrubs within a buffer is not covered under this provision. Excavation, filling, and construction of new landscaping features, such as concrete work, berms and walls, are not covered in this provision and are subject to review; (2) Noxious weed control within vegetative buffers, if work is selective only for noxious species' is done by hand removal/spraying of individual plants; spraying is conducted by a licensed applicator and no area -wide vegetation removal or grubbing is conducted. Control methods not meeting these criteria may still apply for a restoration exemption, or other authorization as applicable. B. Tree Protection, Retention and Replacement. 1. As many significant trees and as much native vegetation as possible are to be retained on a site proposed for development or re -development, taking into account the condition and age of the trees. As part of design review, the Director of Community Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 27 of 59 37 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update alterations in the arrangement of buildings, parking or other elements of proposed development in order to retain significant non-invasive trees, particularly those that provide shading to the river. Trees located on properties not undergoing development or re -development may not be removed except those that interfere with access and passage on public trails or that present an imminent hazard to existing structures or the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA)-certified arborist. 2. To protect the ecological functions that trees and native vegetation provide to the shoreline, removal of any significant tree or native vegetation in the Shoreline Jurisdiction requires a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and is generally only allowed on sites undergoing development or re- development. Only trees that interfere with access and passage on public trails or trees that present an imminent hazard to existing structures or the public may be removed from sites without an issued building permit or Federal approval. Factors that will be considered in approving tree removal include, but are not limited to: tree condition and health, age, risks to structures, and potential for root or canopy interference with utilities. 3. Prior to any tree removal or site clearing, a Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit application must be submitted to the Department of Community Development (DCD) containing the following information: a. A vegetation survey on a site plan that shows the diameter, species and location of all significant trees and all existing native vegetation. b. A site plan that shows trees and native vegetation to be retained and trees to be removed and provides a table showing the number of significant trees to be removed and the number of replacement trees required. c. Tree protection zones and other measures to protect any trees or native vegetation that are to be retained for sites undergoing development or re -development. d. Location of the OHWM, river buffer, Shoreline Jurisdiction boundary and any ccnsitive critical areas with their buffers. e. A landscape plan that shows diameter, species name, spacing and planting location for any required replacement trees and other proposed vegetation. f. An arborist evaluation justifying the removal of hazardous trees if required by DCD. g. An application fee per the current Land Use Permit Fee resolution. 4. Where permitted, significant trees that are removed from the shoreline shall be replaced pursuant to the tree replacement requirements shown below, up to a density of 100 trees per acre (including existing trees). The Director or Planning Commission may require additional trees or shrubs to be installed to mitigate any potential impact from the loss of this vegetation as a result of new development. Tree Replacement Requirements Diameter* of Tree Removed (*measured at height of 4.5 feet from the ground) Number of Replacement Trees Required 4 - 6 inches (single trunk); 2 inches (any trunk of a multi -trunk tree) 3 Over 6 - 8 inches 4 Over 8 - 20 inches 6 Over 20inches 8 5. The property owner is required to ensure the viability and long-term health of trees planted for replacement through proper care and maintenance for the life of the project. Replaced trees that do not survive must be replanted in the next appropriate season for planting. 6. If all required replacement trees cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site, off -site tree replacement within the shoreline jurisdiction may be allowed at a site approved by the City. Priority for off -site tree planting will be at locations within the Transition Zone. If no suitable off -site location is available, the applicant shall pay into a tree replacement fund. The fee shall be based on the value of the replacement trees and their delivery, labor for site preparation and plant installation, soil amendments, mulch, and staking supplies. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 28 of 59 i Commented [NG36]: The preference is to replant on site but some sites cannot accommodate the number of replacement trees required without unhealthy crowding. This gives options so that trees can be replaced in other locations. 38 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 7. When a tree suitable for use as LWD is permitted to be removed from the shoreline buffer, the tree trunk and root ball (where possible) will be saved for use in a restoration project elsewhere in the shoreline jurisdiction. The applicant will be responsible for the cost of moving the removed tree(s) to a location designated by the City. If no restoration project or storage location is available at the time, the Director may waive this requirement. Trees removed in the shoreline jurisdiction outside the buffer shall be placed as LWD in the buffer (not on the bank), if feasible. Priority for LWD placement projects will be in the Transition Zone. 8. Dead or dying trees located within the buffer or undeveloped upland portion of the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be left in place as wildlife snags, unless they present a hazard to structures, facilities or the public. Dead or dying trees within developed or landscaped areashall be replaced 1:1 in the next appropriate season for planting. 9. Topping of trees is prohibited unless absolutely necessary to rotect overf�ead ut+tity.lies. ToppfR and will be regulated as removal and -with tree replacement wit -be -required. 10. Trees may only be pruned to lower their height to prevent interference with an overhead utility line with prior approval by the Director. The pruning must be carried out under the direction of a Qualified Tree Professional or performed by the utility provider under the direction of a Qualified Tree Professional. The crown shall be maintained to at least 2/3 the height of the tree prior to pruning. Tree Protection 10 _Fec-new-development-er re -level ones shall be indicate diamet-r. on he field prior to commence lent of any trunk diameter. All trees not proposed for removal as part of a project or development shall be protected using Best Management Practices and the standards below. 1. The Critical Root Zones (CRZ) for all trees designated for retention, on site or on adjacent property as applicable, shall be identified on all construction plans, including demolition, grading, civil and landscape site plans. 2, Any roots within the CRZ exposed during construction shall be covered immediately and kept moist with appropriate materials. The City may require a third -party Qualified Tree Professional to review long- term viability of the tree. 3. Physical barriers, such as 6-foot chain link fence or plywood or other approved equivalent, shall be placed around each individual tree or grouping at the CRZ. 4. Minimum distances from the trunk for the physical barriers shall be based on the approximate age of the tree (height and canopy) as follows: a. Young trees (trees which have reached less than 20% of life expectancy): 0.75 per inch of trunk diameter. b. Mature trees (trees which have reached 20-80% of life expectancy): 1 foot per inch of trunk diameter. c. Over mature trees (trees which have reached greater than 80% of life expectancy): 1.5 feet per inch of trunk diameter, 5. Alternative protection methods may be used that provide equal or greater tree protection if approved by the Director. 6. A weatherproof sign shall be installed on the fence or barrier that reads: "TREE PROTECTION ZONE - THIS FENCE SHALL NOT BE REMOVED OR ENCROACHED UPON. No soil disturbance, parking, storage, dumping or burning of materials is allowed within the Critical Root Zone. The value of this tree is $ [insert value of tree as determined by a Qualified Tree Professional here]. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 29 of 59 Commented [NG37]: This is a more appropriate approach for landscape islands or other parts of the developed landscape. Commented [NG38]: The language below provides more 1 direction for utility related pruning. Commented [NG39]: The proposal is to match the updated tree protection standards required outside of shoreline jurisdiction, see TMC 18.54.070, 39 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Damage to this tree due to construction activity that results in the death or necessary removal of the tree is subject to the Violations section of TMC Chapter 18.54." 7. All tree protection measures installed shall be inspected by the City and, if deemed necessary a Qualified Tree Professional, prior to beginning construction or earth moving. 8. Any branches or limbs that are outside of the CRZ and might be damaged by machinery shall be pruned prior to construction by a Qualified Tree Professional. No construction personnel shall prune affected limbs except under the direct supervision of a Qualified Tree Professional. 9. The CRZ shall be covered with 4 to 6 inches of wood chip mulch. Mulch shall not be placed directly against the trunk. A 6-inch area around the trunk shall be free of mulch. Additional measures, such as fertilization or supplemental water, shall be carried out prior to the start of construction if deemed necessary by the Qualified Tree Professional's report to prepare the trees for the stress of construction activities. 10. No storage of equipment or refuse, parking of vehicles, dumping of materials or chemicals, or placement of permanent heavy structures or items shall occur within the CRZ. 11. No grade changes or soil disturbance, including trenching, shall be allowed within the CRZ. Grade changes within 10 feet of the CRZ shall be approved by the City prior to implementation. 12. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that the CRZ of trees on adjacent properties are not impacted by the proposed development. 13. A pre -construction inspection shall be conducted by the City to finalize tree protection actions. 14. Post -construction inspection of protected trees shall be conducted by the City and, if deemed necessary by the City, a Qualified Tree Professional. All corrective or reparative pruning will be conducted by a Qualified Tree Professional. DG. Landscaping. This section presents landscaping standards for the Shoreline Jurisdiction and is divided into a general section and separate sections for the River Buffer and for the remaining part of the Shoreline Jurisdiction for each environment designation. 1. General Requirements. For any new development or redevelopment in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except single family residential development of 4 or fewer lots, invasive vegetation must be removed and native vegetation planted and maintained in the River Buffer, including the river bank. a. The landscaping requirements of this subsection apply for any new development or redevelopment in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except: single family residential development of 4 or fewer lots. The extent of landscaping required will depend on the size of the proposed project. New development or full redevelopment of a site will require landscaping of the entire site. For smaller projects, the Director will review the intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable amount of landscaping to be carried out. per-the-approved-treo permit,afreg b. Invasive vegetation must be removed as part of site preparation and native vegetation planted, including the river bank to OHWM. c. On properties located behind —landward of publicly maintained levees, an applicant is not required to remove invasive vegetation or plant native vegetation within the buffer. d. Removal of invasive species shall be done by hand or with hand-held power tools. Where not feasible and mechanized equipment is needed, the applicant must obtain a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and show how the slope stability of the bank will be maintained, and-aA plan must be submitted indicating how the work will be done and what erosion control and tree protection features will be utilized. Federal and State permits may be required for vegetation removal with mechanized equipment. e. Trees and other vegetation shading the river shall be retained or replanted when riprap is placed, as specified in the approved tree permit if a permit is required. f. Removal of invasive vegetation may be phased over several years prior to planting, if such phasing is provided for by a plan approved by the Director to allow for alternative approaches, such as sheet mulching and goat grazing. The method selected shall not destabilize the bank or cause erosion. g. A combination of native trees, shrubs and groundcovers (including grasses, sedges, rushes and vines) shall be planted. The plants listed in the Riparian Restoration and Management Table of the 2004 Washington Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 30 of 59 Commented [NG40]: Duplicated below in e. 40 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Department of Ecology, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington, as amended) shall provide the basis for plant selection. Site conditions, such as topography, exposure, and hydrology shall be taken into account for plant selection. Other species may be approved if there is adequate justification. h. Non-native trees may be used as street trees in cases where conditions are not appropriate for native trees (for example where there are space or height limitations or conflicts with utilities). i. Plants shall meet the current American Standard for Nursery Stock (American Nursery and Landscape Association — ANLA). j. Plant sizes in the non -buffer areas of all Shoreline Environments shall meet the following minimum size standards: Deciduous trees 2-inch caliper Conifers 6 — 8 foot height Shrubs 24-inch height Groundcover/grasses 4-inch or 1 gallon container k. Smaller plant sizes (generally one gallon, bareroot, plugs, or stakes, depending on plant species) are preferred for buffer plantings. Willow stakes must be at least 1/2-inch in diameter. I. Site preparation and planting of vegetation shall be in accordance with best management practices for ensuring the vegetation's long-term health and survival. m. Plants may be selected and placed to allow for public and private view corridors and/or access to the water's edge. n. Native vegetation in the shoreline installed in accordance with the preceding standards shall be maintained by the property owner to promote healthy growth and prevent establishment of invasive species. Invasive plants (such as blackberry, ivy, knotweed, bindweed) shall be removed on a regular basis, according to the approved maintenance plan. o. Areas disturbed by removal of invasive plants shall be replanted with native vegetation where necessary to maintain the density shown in TMC Section 18.44.080060.B.4. and must be replanted in a timely manner, except where a long-term removal and re -vegetation plan, as approved by the City, is being implemented. p. Landscape plans shall include a detail on invasive plant removal and soil preparation. g p. The following standards apply to utilities and loading docks located in the shoreline jurisdiction. (1) Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc. shall be suitably screened with native vegetation; (2) Utility easements shall be landscaped with native groundcover, grasses or other low - growing plants as appropriate to the shoreline environment and site conditions; (3) Allowed loading docks and service areas located waterward of the development shall have landscaping that provides extensive visual separation from the river, 2. River Buffer Landscaping Requirements in all Shoreline Environments. The River Buffer in all shoreline environments shall function, in part, as a vegetation management area to filter sediment, capture contaminants in surface water run-off, reduce the velocity of water run-off, and provide fish and wildlife habitat. a. A planting plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect or an approved biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval that shows plant species, size, number and spacing. The requirement for a tandsc-ape arohiteetor biologist may be waived by the Director for single family property owners (when planting is being required as mitigation for construction of overwater structures or shoreline stabilization), if the property owner accepts technical assistance from City staff. b. Plants shall be installed from the OHWM to the upland edge of the River Buffer unless the Director determines that site conditions would make planting unsafe. c. Plantings close to and on the bank shall include native willows, red osier dogwood and other native vegetation that will extend out over the water, to provide shade and habitat functions when mature. Species selected must be able to withstand seasonal water level fluctuations. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 31 of 59 41 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update d. Minimum plant spacing in the buffer shall follow the River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table shown in TMC Section 18.44.080060.C.2. Existing non-invasive plants may be included in the density calculations. e. Irrigation for buffer plantings is required for at least two dry seasons or until plants are established. An irrigation plan is to be included as part of the planting plan. f. In the event that a development project allows for setback and benching of the shoreline along an existing levee or revetment, the newly created mid -slope bench area shall be planted and maintained with a variety of native vegetation appropriate for site conditions. The Department Director in consultation with the City's environmentalist. mayapprove the use of shrub planting and installation of willow stakes Ito be counted toward the tree replacement standard in the buffer if proposed as a measure to control invasive plants and increase buffer function. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table Plant Material Type Planting Density Stakes/cuttings along river bank (willows, red osier dogwood) 1 - 2 feet on center or per bioengineering method Shrubs 3 - 5 feet on center, depending on species Trees 15 — 20 feet on center, depending on species Groundcovers, grasses, sedges, rushes, other herbaceous plants 1-1.5 feet on center, depending on species Native seed mixes 5 - 25 lbs per acre, depending on species 3. Landscaping Requirements for the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments — Outside of the River Buffer. For the portions of property within the Shoreline Jurisdiction landward of the River Buffer the landscape requirements in the General section of this chapter and the requirements for the underlying zoning as established in TMC Chapter 18.52 shall apply except as indicated below. a. Parking Lot Landscape Perimeters: One native tree for each 20 lineal feet of required perimeter landscaping, one shrub for each 4 lineal feet of required perimeter landscaping, and native groundcovers to cover 90% of the landscape area within 3 years, planted at a minimum spacing of 12 inches on -center. b. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: Every 300 square feet of paved surface requires 10 square feet of interior landscaping within landscape islands separated by no more than 150 feet between islands. c. Landscaping shall be provided at yards not adjacent to the river, with the same width as required in the underlying zoning district. This standard may be reduced as follows: (1) Where development provides a public access corridor between off -site public area(s) and public shoreline areas, side yard landscaping may be reduced by 25 percent to no less than 3 feet; or (2) Where development provides additional public access area(s) (as allowed by the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development Standards) equal in area to at least 2.5% of total building area, front yard landscaping may be reduced by 25 percent. D. Vegetation Management in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The requirements of this section apply to all existing and new development within the shoreline jurisdiction. 1. Trees and shrubs may only be pruned for safety, to maintain views or access corridors and trails by pruning up or on the sides of trees, to maintain clearance for utility lines, and/or for improving shoreline ecological function. No more than 25% may be pruned from a tree within a 36 month period without prior City review. This type of pruning is exempt from any permit requirements. fapptag of trees is prohibited except whoreb�@t±ieeE?r3a 2. Plant debris from removal of invasive plants or pruning shall be removed from the site and disposed of properly. 3. Use of pesticides. Zoning Code Edits Pubic Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 32 of 59 Commented [NG41]: This could help control the regrowth of invasive species while newly planted trees are establishing in a restoration area. Commented [AC42]: Excessive pruning can damage the health of trees. Commented [NG43]: This duplicates the language in 18.44_060 810 42 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update a. Pesticides (including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides) shall not be used in the shoreline jurisdiction except where: (1) Alternatives such as manual removal, biological control, and cultural control are not feasible given the size of the infestation, site characteristics, or the characteristics of the invasive plant species; (2) The use of pesticides has been approved through a comprehensive vegetation or pest management and monitoring plan; (3) The pesticide is applied in accordance with state regulations; (4) The proposed herbicide is approved for aquatic use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and (5) The use of pesticides in the shoreline jurisdiction is approved in writing by the City and the applicant presents a copy of the Aquatic Pesticide Permit issued by the Department of Ecology or Washington Department of Agriculture. b. Self-contained rodent bait boxes designed to prevent access by other animals are allowed. c. Sports fields, parks, golf courses and other outdoor recreational uses that involve maintenance of extensive areas of turf shall provide and implement an integrated turf management program or integrated pest management plan designed to ensure that water quality in the river is not adversely impacted. 4. Restoration Project Plantings: Restoration projects may overplant the site as a way to discourage the re-establishment of invasive species. Thinning of vegetation without a separate shoreline vegetation removal permit may be permitted five to ten years after planting if this approach is approved as part of the restoration project's maintenance and monitoring plan and with approval by the City prior to thinning work. E. Maintenance and Monitoring. 1. A five-year monitoring and maintenance plan must be approved by the City prior to permit issuance. The monitoring period will begin when the restoration is accepted by the City and as - built plans have been submitted. 2. Monitoring reports shall be submitted annually for City review up until the end of the monitoring period. Reports shall measure survival rates against project goals and present contingency plans to meet project goals. 3. Mitigation will be complete after project goals have been met and accepted by the City environmentalist. 4. A performance bond or financial security equal to 150% of the cost of labor and materials required for implementation of the planting maintenance and monitoring shall be submitted prior to City acceptance of project. Commented [C1441: This provision sparked by request from the City's habitat manager to use the overplanting approach as a way to prevent the re-establishment of invasives. Commented [CL45]: monitoring period. gation sequencing requires a Commented (AC461: This areas outside of the shoreline. ar to the requirement for (Ord. 2346 §8, 2011) 18.44.090070 Environmentally Sensitive Critical Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction_ Commented [C147]: This section needs to match the A, A, Purpose, concurrent SAO update. I believe this will address comments Minnie received from Donna Bunten in March, 2012 regarding \ corrections needed. See PDF of email exchange with Minnie, saved here: Annotated 18.44 - corrections needed\email exchange w Donna Bunten-EceLg A0 referencesn_df. habitat. Zoning Code Edits Pubic Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 33 of 59 Commented [NG48R47]: The proposal is to eliminate the duplication of Critical Areas regulations and apply one set of rules with the few exceptions added below. 43 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update afea-otassikation-anti-typerthe-DiTeeteive-the-recitticement-fortucliespcoviefect that-go-aelverse4mpasts-to-aensTve-areas-er-buffelt—T-here-must-tre-.substantial .Applicable Critical Areas Regulations The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC Chapter 18.45, adopted [Date to be added'', which is herein incorporated by reference into this SMP, except for the provisions excluded in subsection B of this Section. Said provisions shall apply to any use, alteration, or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. Unless otherwise stated, no development shall be constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, or altered, or land divided without full compliance with the provision adopted by reference and the Shoreline Master Program. Within shoreline jurisdiction the regulations of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be liberally construed together with the Shoreline Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between any of the adopted provisions below and the Shoreline Master Program, the most restrictive provisions shall prevail. 1. Wetlands 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) 3. Areas of potential geologic instability 4. Abandoned mine areas 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas 6. Frequently flooded areas B. The following provisions in TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply: 1. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180) Exceptions within shoreline jurisdiction shall require a shoreline variance based on the variance criteria listed in TMC Section 18.44.130.-D and WAC 173-27-170. 2. Activities and alterations to shorelines of the state and their buffers shall be subject to the provisions of this Master Program, 3. Shoreline buffer widths are defined in TMC Section 18.44.040-. 4. Future amendments to the Critical Areas Ordinance require Department of Ecology approval of an amendment to this Master Program to incorporate updated language. 5. If provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance conflict with provisions of this Master Program, the provisions the most protective of the ecological resource shall apply, as determined by the Director. 16. If there are provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance that are not consistent with the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW, and supporting Washington Administrative Code chapters, those provisions shall not apply. Commented [DN49]: This may be a placeholder for future decision. This statement would apply if reference to the CAO is not to a specific dated version but rather to the current CAO as amended, C. —Areas of seismic instability are also defined as critical areas. These areas are regulated by the Washington State Building Code rather than by Section 18.44.070 of this chapter. Additional building standards Commented [SM]: Per DOE Reviewer, this approach is applicable to frequently flooded areas are included in the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52). acceptable E. Procedures. When an apilicant stubtsaRapptk subd-ltaien-e-r-any-etherfancl-use-review -that-appr • es -a -use, Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 34 of 59 44 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update nd buffers on the site shall be indicated on the plans submitted. When 1. The applicant shall submit the relevant sensitive ar study as required by this chapter 2 --The-Department-ef-Community-Development-vili-review e nformation-submit in -the -sensitive araa studies to verif undergo pew -review, at the expense of the applicant. 3. Denial of use or development. A use or development will be denied if the Director determines sts to future inhabitants of the development, zed and mitigated to an acceptable level. 6. On site Identification. The Director may require the boundary between a sensitive area and its wood or metal-sig and Nording shall be as folle lfetland-Detersninations-and-Glassifications. 1. Wetlands and their boundaries are established by using the Washington State Wetland and Detneation-Manual, asiequired by f GW 36 0A-1-7{ celogy-Rublicatien#96-94)-and-consistent-with-the-1-987 Clomps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. 2. Wetland determinations shall be made by a qualified professional (certified Wetland Scientist or non certified with at least two years of full time work ex.erience as a wetland professional). 3. Wetland areas within the City of Tuk to the following: improving water quality; maintaining hydrologic functions (reducing peak Flows, decreasing erosion, gr.undwa functions shall be evaluated using the Washington State Functional Assessment Met od. Category I, II, III or IV as listed below: aerate (1) repres nt a u etland type; or are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attri.utes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or potentially _found-inTukwiias-SherelineJurisdic4ion-are-Gateg sounds, and coastal rivers). (b) Wetlands that perform many functions well and score at least 70 poin Fish and b. Category II wetlands are difficult, though not impossible to replace and provide high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I retlands, but still need a relatively high Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 35 of 59 45 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update disturbed and larger than 1 acre are Ga#egory EI wetlands. ions well Wetlands scoring bet Teen 51 69 points (out of e Category II wetlands. d. Category I\, wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scores Tess than 30 points) and arc 1. Watercourse ratings are based on the existing habitat functions and are rated as follows: a. Type 1 (S) Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State under RCW 1.58 (Green/Duwomish River). b. Type 2 (F) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have either perennial (year round) or intermittent flows and support salmonid fish use. c. Ty.e 3 (NP) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have .erennial flows and are not used by salmonid fish. by salmonid fish. 2. Watercourse sensitive area studies shall be performed by a qualified professional (hydrologist, g listed below: Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas within the shoreline jurisdiction include the habitats d. State natural ar oresorves and natural resource conservation areas; and 2. The approximate lorati in the Shoreli e lnventoq and Characterization Report and are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdic map 9nly the salmon -habitat enhancement project sites compieted e urtderavay-are-shown-as Fish and p. Streams are identified as regulated ea Gilliam Creek, Riverton Creek, all provide salmonid habitat, hed-adjac-ent-to-designated sensitive -areas he purpose -of the b. Buffers are intended in general to: Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 36 of 59 46 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Preserve the edges of wetlands and the banks of wat rcourscs and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas for their critical habitat value. allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects. maintai impacts. Reduce toss of or damage to preperty 9) Intercept fine sediments from surface water run off and serve to minimize water qualit (10) Protcct the semi estic animal-d+s 2. Establishment of Buffer Widths. The following standard buffers shall se established: Category I & II ietland: 100 foot buffer. y- I II-Wetland:-80-foot-buffer Category IV Wetland: 50 foot buffer, u#ers (measured from t c OHWM): c. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Aras: The buffer will be the same as the river buffer Sensitive Area Buffer Setbacks. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set back 15 the sensitive area buffer's edge. The building foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of development will be reviewed. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site plan demonstrates there will be no adverse impacts to the buffer from-eonstructe+a ar occasional-maintenanceaetivities- 4. Reduction of Standard Buffer Width. Except for the �oee71 mr " Yew ype� program) he buffer -width- ray -be red used-en-a-c-ase-by-casekas+sFprov+ded the red Geedbuffer-aree-hoes-not slopes- 59/s-or-greater: no-oaseahalikthe-approved-bufferwidth-recut-ir-greatertban-a-5&/sredae#+on water quality; a. Additional protcction to wetlands or watercourses will be provided through the implementat on b. The existing co c. Buffer enhancement includ but is not limited to, the following: 21 Enhancement of wildlife h Zoning Code Edits Pubic Review Draft Strikeouts b 3/1/2019 0 used by Page 37 of 59 47 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 5. Increase in Standard Buffer Width. Buffers for sensitive areas will be increased when sensitive areas study by a qualified biologist that documents the basis for -such increased width. An incr se in buffer width may be appropriate when: a. Thc development proposal hos the demonstrated potential for significant adverse impacts upon the sensitive area that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width; .r b. The area serves as habitat the feseral government or the State. existing viable native plant life in the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an watercourse quality will be maintained or improved. Any disturbance of the b ^ s "mace cam^ `th a diverse plant community of native northwest species that are appropriate for the specific site as determined by alke atdons of t specimens, approved by the Director, which will restore buffer functions within five years. areas: 2. Exemptions. The following areas are exempt from regulation as geoloc a. Temporary stockpiles of topsoil, gravel, beauty bark or other similar landscapi g permit may be re grad-d. recommendations on the need for and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to in ure slope stability. Deve-4m geotechnical study shall be performed by a qualified professional gcotcchnical engineer, licensed in thc State of Washington. b. Prior to permitting alteration of an arca of potential geologic instability, the applicant must demonstrate one of thc following: d within the geotechnical report. Thc Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 38 of 59 48 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update proposed development or surrounding properties; or (2) The area of potential geologic instability can be medit ied or the project can be designed -So that any potential impact to the project and surrou decreased, and the incr sc in surface water discharge or s a. Buffers arc intended to: (3) Prevent loading of potentially unstable slope formations; (4) Protect slop stability; runoff; 5. Additional Requirements. p tilt shall be the responsibility of the applicant to submit, consistent with t geoteehnicaI resort, strut- ra4-plans-which-were-prepared and -stamped -by a structure 1 engineer— he plansand should there be additions or exceptions to the original recommendations based on the plans, site conditions or plans and specifications, express his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in t geotechnianl report and state that the plans and specifications conform the g-otechnical report, understands its recommendations, has explained or has had explained to the owner report-andestablished-measures-te-reduewthe-potential-r+sk-of-injury-0rtamage-that night -be -caused -by -any e report. with-t Department of R ords and Elections at the expense o he recorded covenant f. Whenever the City determines that the public interest would not be served by the issuance of Zoning Code Edits Pubic Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 39 of 59 49 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update areas disturbed by, and repair of property damage caused by, slides arising out of or occurring during here recommended by the geotechnical report, the applicant shall retain a geotechnical bons engineer is retained, the new gcotechnical engineer shall submit a letter to the City stating whether or net -he/she h. During construction the gcotechnical engineer shall monitor compliance with the recommendations in the geotechnical report, particularly site excavation, shoring, soil support for foundations tions contained in the soils report must be implemented. The geotechnical engineer shall provide to the City written, dated monitoring reports on 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, site-observatiensand4esting-during-the monitoring of the construction; velopment-sabstantialfy report and with all geotechnical related permit by the Director. ty and the resulting public health, safety and welfare in determining whether a development should be allowed. j he-Gity may impose conditions that address site work problems which could include, but are is determined by the Director that the development will increase the- K. Sensitive Areas P 1. General Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the Shoreline Jurisdiction buffers are allowed in sensitive areas within the jurisdiction except: a. Promenades b. Recreational stru.tur e c. Public pedestrian bridges d. Vehicle bridges e. New utilities f—Plaza connectors 2- ef-vegetation he -removal of established native-trees-and-shrubsts-not permitted —Herbicide -use in -sensitive argas or their buffers is not allowed without written permission of the City, b. Vegetation maintenance as part of sensitive area enhancement, creation or restoration. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their buffers is not allowed without written permission of the City 3. Conditional Uses. Dredging, where necessary to rem diate contaminated sediments, if adverse Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 40 of 59 50 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 4. Wetland Alterations. Alterations to wetlands are discouraged, are limited to the minimum standards in this chapter, Mitigation for wetlands shall follow the mitigation sequencing steps in this chapter and may inclu 1) Creation the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics of a site to Bite with the goal of restoring wetland functions to a former w and functions; but not acreage; heighten, intensify, or improve specific functions (such as vegetation) or to change the growth stag (-5)—A-combination of -the -three -types. b. Allowed alterations per wetland type and mitigation ratios are as follows: (1) Alterations are not permitted to Category I wetla ds unless s.ecifically exempted under the provisions of this Program. Mitigation will still be required at a rate of 1:1 for creation or re establish ent, 8:1 for rehabilitation, and 16:1 for enhancement. )2) Alterations ar not permitte provisions of this Program. Mitigation will still be required at a rate of 3:1 for creation or re establishment, 6:1 3) Alterations to Category III wetlands are prohibited except where the location or configuration of the wetland provides practical difficulties that can be resolved by modifying up to . wetland, Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III wetland must be provided at a ratio of 2:1 for creation -or itigation is wetland laced weJan ens -and assessed as having low overall wetland functions (s oring belo 20 points) may be altered andlor relo^ated nelude artificial hydrology or wetlands unintentionally c-reated as the result of coastrutgon-aet u ties The deters aination-that a wetland4s-isolated4s made -the -US Army -Corps of-€ngineer 5. Watercourse Alterations. All impacts to a watercourse that degrade the functions and values of a. Diverting or rerouting may only occur with the permission of the Director and an approved mitigation plan, as well as all necessary approvals by state agencies, Any watercourse that has critical wildlife that the habitat will be improved for the benefit of the species. A watercourse may be rerouted or day lighted Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 41 of 59 51 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update for habitat. The applicant to meet the needs of the system during a 100 year c. No process that requires maintenance on a regular basis will be acceptable unless this hall be performed pursuant to the following applicable standards: recommended by the Department of Public Works, (3) ./here water is p serve multiele properties where possible, and to minimize the length of piing. (4) When required by the Director, watercourses under drivable surfaces shall be contained in an arch culvert using oversize or super span culverts for rebuilding of a streambed. These shall be provided with Check -dams to-reduce-flowsiand-shaltbe-replanted and r nl aneed-accordingle-a-pfan-approved ] the-0ireeter (5) All water crossings shall not block fish passage w ere the str ams ar fish b aring. (6) Stormwatcr run off shall le detained and infiltrated to preserve the watercourse channel' dominant discharge. surrounding environment, (8) Piping shall le constructed during periods of low flow, or as allowed by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. (9} Water quality must be as good or better for any water exiting the pipe as for the water entering the pile, and flow must be comparable. rations to the Green/Duwamish River arc L. Sensitive Areas Mitigation. Mitigation shall be required for any proposals for dredging, filling, piping, diverting elecation-order-alterations-of-sensitive areas-as-allowed-in-this-c-hapfer-and-in-ac-c-erdance with mitigation sequencing and the established mitigation ratios. The mitigation plan shall be developed as part gueneing. Appt}cants-shail demonstrate -that -reasonable -efforts -have -been exerrrired-wth the dent to avoid and minimize4rnpaets-to-sensitive areasand-buffer hen an-alterationtoa for in the following order of preference: b Minimizing sensitive area and buffer impacts by limiting the degree of impact on site; Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or substitution to Director approval, and may be approved only if the folio a. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality; b. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat; capabiliti Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 he Page 42 of 59 52 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update f. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas or the shoreline, 3. Mitigate^^�.a,o..^ w factors; or trated that: On site mit'gation is not sciontifically fgasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other Existing functional values created at the ons: or of the proposed restoration are significan functions have been established and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site. b. Off site mitigation shall occur within the shoreline jurisdiction ita a leoat on wt not result in the new sensitive ar a or buffor extending beyond the development site an y great increase, the in number and complexity. The minimum follow that established in "Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2 Developing Mitigation Plans" (Washington Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, EPA, March 2006, as amended). a. Baseline information of quantitative data col! ction or a review and synthesis of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site, functions, c. Performance standards for the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals, anda begrtning remedial-action-or-c-ontingency-measures—They-may-include water— its standards species -richness diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria, The following oved mitigation plan are achieved. {3} Acreage requirements for enhancement or creation are met. standards over time are met and maintained. {5) Buffer and bank conditions and functions exceed the original state. 6} Stream channel habitat and dimensions arc maintained or improved such that the fisheries habitat riginal stream. proposal. Zoning Code Edits Pubic Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 43 of 59 53 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update e approach and frequency for assessing progress of the completed proj ct. An outtin shalt be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated and repented- f. Maintenance plan that outlines the activities and frequency of maintenance tonsure compliance with p•rformance-standards g. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken a. Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently disturb sensitive areas or their buffers and either prior to or immediately after acti kities that will temporarily disturb sensitive fisting wildlife, flora and may allow activities that perman ntly disturb wetlands or watercourses prior to implementation of the mitigation £.-ra�rernr`"`mg-ckcumotar^rcc,�- (1) To allow planting or re vegetation to occur during optimal weathe e nd ionY (2) To avoid disturbance -during eritic l-wildlife-periods;-or ing or phasing, c. Monitoring of buffer atterationsof all mitigation components shall be required for three to five year All other alterations shall be monitored for minimum of five years. and long term monitoring of the project, for a minimum of 5 additional years, if adverse impacts to regulated sensitive areas or their buffers are identified 7. Recording. The property own r receiving approval of a use or development pursuant to the buffer with the King County Division of Records and Elections. The face of the site plan must include a and provide for any responsibility of the latent def cts or deficiencies, guarantee performance-andrn City Attorney: on-a-form-approv ter-the-term-ofthe approv c. The assurance device shall be released by the Director upon receipt of written confirmation submitted to the Department from the applicant's qualified professional that the mitigation or restoration has fourth year of monitoring, the City may quirements Ott assurances shall b p v monitoring period, the performance stand.,rds have not been mct or the mitigation has not been successfully established. d. Release of the security does not absolve the property own•r of responsibility for maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies or other duties under law. Zoning Code Edits Pubic Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 44 of 59 54 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 18.44.100080 Public Access to the Shoreline A. Applicability. 1. Public access shall be provided on all property that abuts the Green/Duwamish River shoreline in accordance with this section as further discussed below where any of the following conditions are present: a. Where a development or use will create increased demand for public access to the shoreline, the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. For the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is determined by evaluating whether the development reflects an increase in the land use intensity (for example converting a warehouse to office or retail use), or a significant increase in the square footage of an existing building. A significant increase is defined as an increase of 3,000 square feet. b. Where a development or use will interfere with an existing public access way, the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. Impacts to public access may include blocking access or discouraging use of existing on -site or nearby accesses. c. Where a use or development will interfere with a public use of lands or waters subject to the public trust doctrine, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. d. Where the development is proposed by a public entity or on public lands. e. Where identified on the Shoreline Public Access Map in the Shoreline Master Program. f. Where a land division of five or greater lots, or a residential project of five or greater residential units, is proposed. 2. For the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is determined by f-an existing -building —A The extent of public access required will be proportional to the amount of increase in the demand for public access. For smaller projects, the Director will review the intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable amount of public access to be carried out. Depending on the amount of increase, the project may utilize the alternative provisions for meeting public access in TMC Section 18.44.08400(F). The terms and conditions of TMC Sections 18.44.1-00080(A) and (B) shall be deemed satisfied if the applicant and the City agree upon a master trail plan providing for public paths and trails within a parcel or group of parcels. 3. The provisions of this section do not apply to the following: a. Short plats of four or fewer lots; b. Where providing such access would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards; e. Where an area is limited to authorized personnel and providing such access would create inherent and unavoidable security problems that cannot be mitigated through site design or fencing; or d. Where providing such access would cause significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated. An applicant claiming an exemption under items 3(b) - (d) above must comply with the procedures in TMC Section 18.44.100080(F). B. General Standards. 1. To improve public access to the Green/Duwamish River, sites shall be designed to provide: a. Safe, visible and accessible pedestrian and non -motorized vehicle connections between proposed development and the river's edge, particularly when the site is adjacent to the Green River Trail or other approved trail system; and b. Public pathway entrances that are clearly visible from the street edge and 'identified with si na ; and c. Clearly identified pathways that are separate from vehicular circulation areas. This may be accomplished through the use of special distinct paving materials such as precast poverpbomorlite, changes in color or distinct and detailed scoring patterns and textures. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 45 of 59 Commented [CL51 ]: This language duplicates the language in A 1 a. above and should be deleted from this section. Commented [NG521: This provision was difficult to understand and enforce so we have proposed more specific language. Commented [NG53]: The City has developed a sign design to indicate shoreline access points. Commented [MP54]: Brand name. 55 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update d. Site elements that are organized to clearly distinguish between public and private access and circulation systems. 2. Required public access shall be fully developed and available for public use at the time of occupancy in accordance with development permit conditions except where the decision maker determines an appropriate mechanism for delayed public access implementation is necessary for practical reasons. Where appropriate, a bond or cash assignment may be approved, on review and approval by the Director of Community Development, to extend this requirement for 90 days from the date the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Public access easements and related permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed of title or the face of the plat, short plat or approved site plan as a condition tied to the use of the land. Recording with the County shall occur prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit or final plat approval. Upon re -development of such a site, the easement may be relocated to facilitate the continued public access to the shoreline. 4. Approved signs indicating the public's right of access and hours of access, if restricted, shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the applicant in conspicuous locations at public access sites. Signs should be designed to distinguish between public and private areas. Signs controlling or restricting public access may be approved as a condition of permit approval. 5. Required access must be maintained throughout the life of the project. 6. Public access features shall be separated from residential uses through the use of setbacks, low walls, berms, landscaping, or other device of a scale and materials appropriate to the site. 7. Shared public access between developments is encouraged. Where access is to be shared between adjacent developments, the minimum width for the individual access easement may be reduced, provided the total width of easements contributed by each adjacent development equals a width that complies with Fire Department requirements and/or exceeds the minimum for an individual access. 8. Public access sites shall be connected directly to the nearest public area (e.g., street, public park, or adjoining public access easement). Where connections are not currently possible, the site shall be designed to accommodate logical future connections. C. Requirements for Shoreline Trails. Where public access is required under TMC Section 18.44.1-00080(A)1 above, the requirement will be met by provision of a shoreline trail as follows: 1. Development on Properties Abutting Existing Green River Trail. An applicant seeking to develop property abutting the existing trail shall meet public access requirements by upgrading the trail along the property frontage to meet the standards of a 4412-foot-wide trail with 2-foot shoulders on each side. If a 12 foot wide trail exists on the property it shall mean public access requirements have been met if access to the trail exists within 1000 feet of the property. 2. Development on Properties Where New Trails are Planned. An applicant seeking to develop property abutting the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments shall meet public access requirements by dedicating an 1-816-foot-wide trail easement to the City for public access along the river. D. Publicly -Owned Shorelines. 1. Shoreline development by any public entities, including but not limited to the City of Tukwila, King County, port districts, state agencies, or public utility districts, shall include public access measures as part of each development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety, security, impact to the shoreline environment or other provisions listed in this section. 2. The following requirements apply to street ends and City -owned property adjacent to the river. a. Public right-of-way and "road -ends," or portions thereof, shall not be vacated and shall be maintained for future public access. b. Unimproved right-of-ways and portions of right-of-ways, such as street ends and turn -outs, shall be dedicated to public access uses until such time as the portion becomes improved right-of-way. Uses shall be limited to passive outdoor recreation, car-tephand carry boat launching, fishing, interpretive/educational uses, and/or parking ,vhieh that accommodates these uses, and shall be designed so as to not interfere with the privacy of adjacent residential uses. c. City -owned facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall provide new trails and trail connections to the Green River Trail in accordance with approved plans and this SMP. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 46 of 59 Commented [CL55]: This trail width matches the Walk and Roll Plan standards but is not practical as it doesn't match the County's trail width standard or our Parks Dept. standard. As a result, we've had several variance requests for projects that couldn't meet the standard. I think we should go back to our earlier standard of 12 ft. paved with two -foot shoulders on either side. Commented [MP56]: A wider trail may require fill along the shoreline AND inhibits the ability to create gentler slopes per Shoreline MP, which provide shallow water habitat as well as room for trees/native vegetation. Recommend not widening trail except in specific view/access locations. 56 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update d. All City -owned recreational facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, unless qualifying for an exemption as specified in this chapter, shall make adequate provisions for: (1) Non -motorized and pedestrian access; (2) The prevention of trespass onto adjacent properties through landscaping, fencing or other appropriate measures; (3) Signage indicating the public right-of-way to shoreline areas; and (4) Mechanisms to prevent environmental degradation of the shoreline from public use. E. Public Access Incentives. 1. The minimum yard setback for buildings, uses, utilities or development from non-riverfront lot lines may be reduced as follows: a. Where a development provides a public access corridor betweenthat connects off -site areas, or public shoreline areas to public shoreline areas, one side yard may be reduced to a zero lot line placement; or b. Where a development provides additional public access area(s) equal in area to at least 2.5% of total building area, the front yard (the landward side of the development) may be reduced by 50%. 2. The maximum height for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction may be increased by 1-39'%_ when: iris asc a. Development devotes at least 5% of its building or land area to public shoreline access; or b. Development devotes at least 10% of its land area to employee shoreline access. The maximum height for structures under TMC Section 18.41.0570.C.3. and this section may b ,2 is met; and b. The applicant rostoros or enhances the cntiro shoreline buffer paved -areas ne-Monger--in--use- the --property- #a-effset Ahe- impaet restoration/enhancement-oroiests undertaken to meet bie req tirements-of including, but not limited to, 34. The maximum height for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction may be increased by 30% for properties that construct a 4412-foot-wide paved trail with a 2-foot-wide shoulder on each side for public access along the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments, or where, in the case of properties containing or abutting existing public access trails, the existing trail either meets the standard of a 4412-foot-wide trail with 2-foot-wide shoulders on either side or the property owner provides any necessary easements and improvements to upgrade the existing trail to that standard along the property frontage. 4. During the project review, the project proponent shall demonstrated tothat the increased height will: a. Not block the views of a substantial number of residences; b. Not cause environmental impacts such as, but not limited to, shading of the river buffer or light impacts adversely affecting the river corridor; and c. Achieve no net loss of ecological function; and, d. Not combine incentives to increase the allowed building height above the maximum height in the parcel's zoning district. tn-to-case-shall--the-buiIding-heght-be-greater-than-1-15-feet-pursuant-te-his previsier, F. Exemptions from Provision of On -Site Public Access. 1. Requirements for providing on -site general public access, as distinguished from employee access, will not apply if the applicant can demonstrate one or more of the following: a. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist such as active railroad tracks or hazardous chemicals related to the primary use that cannot be prevented by any practical means. b. The area is limited to authorized personnel and (inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of alternative design features or other solutions. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 47 of 59 Commented [NG57]: This reasoning is similar to the prior incentive increase for landscaping. A 6.75 foot increase is of limited value but a 13.5 foot increase could allow for an additional building story. " Commented [NG58]: This duplicates the incentive at 18.44.050 C 3 d. Commented [NG59]: We have not seen much use of these incentives, therefore this 25% limit is not necessary. Commented [MP60]: Not necessarily bad from an environmental point -of -view; many flora/fauna thrive in shade environments 57 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update c. The cost of providing the access, easement or other public amenity on or off the development site is unreasonably disproportionate to the total long-term cost of the proposed development. d. Unavoidable environmental harm or net loss of shoreline ecological functions that cannot be adequately mitigated will result from the public access. e. Access is not feasible due to the configuration of existing parcels and structures, such that access areas are blocked in a way that cannot be remedied reasonably by the proposed development. f. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between the proposed access and adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated. g. Space is needed for water -dependent uses or navigation. 2. In order to meet any of the above -referenced conditions, the applicant must first demonstrate, and the City determine in its findings through a Type II decision, that all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted including, but not limited to: a. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and/or limiting hours of use; b. Designing separation of uses and activities through fencing, terracing, hedges or other design features; or c. Providing access on a site geographically separate from the proposal such as a street end cannot be accomplished, 3. If the above conditions are demonstrated, and the proposed development is not subject to the Parks Impact Fee, alternative provisions for meeting public access are required and include: a. Development of public access at an adjacent street end; or b. Protection through easement or setbacks of landmarks, unique natural features or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential; or c. Contribution of materials and/or labor toward projects identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the Shoreline Restoration Plan, or other City adopted plan; or d. In lieu of providing public access under this section, at the Director's discretion, the -a private applicant may provide restoration/enhancement of the shoreline jurisdiction to a scale commensurate with the foregone public access. (Ord. 2346 610, 2011) 18.44.449090 Shoreline Design Guidelines The Green/Duwamish River is an amenity that should be valued and celebrated when designing projects that will be located along its length. The river and its tributaries support salmon runs and resident trout, including ESA -listed Chinook salmon, Bull Trout and Steelhead. If any portion of a project falls within the shoreline jurisdiction, then the entire project will be reviewed under these guidelines as well as the relevant sections of the Design Review Chapter of the Zoning Code (TMC Chapter 18.60). The standards of TMC Chapter 18.60 shall guide the type of review, whether administrative or by the Board of Architectural Review. A. The following standards apply to development, uses and activities in the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments and non-residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment. 1. Relationship of Structure to Site. Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. Respect and reflect the shape of the shoreline; b. Orient building elements to site such that public river access, both visual and physical is enhanced; c. Orient buildings to allow for casual observation of pedestrian and trail activity from interior spaces; d. Site and orient buildings to provide maximum views from building interiors toward the river and the shoreline; e. Orient public use areas and private amenities to the river; f. Clearly allocate spaces, accommodating parking, vehicular circulation and buildings to preserve existing stands of vegetation or trees so that natural areas can be set aside, improved, or integrated into site organization and planning; Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 48 of 59 Commented [RL61]: This section should not apply to public mitigation projects. 58 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update g. Clearly define and separate public from non-public spaces with the use of paving, signage, and landscaping. 2. Building Design. Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. To prevent building mass and shape from overwhelming the desired human scale along the river, development shall avoid blank walls on the public and river sides of buildings. b. Buildings should be designed to follow the curve of the river and respond to changes in topography; buildings must not "turn their back" to the river. c. Design common areas in buildings to take advantage of shoreline views and access; incorporate outdoor seating areas that are compatible with shoreline access. d. Consider the height and scale of each building in relation to the site. e. Extend site features such as plazas that allow pedestrian access and enjoyment of the river to the landward side of the buffer's edge. f. Locate lunchrooms and other common areas to open out onto the water -ward side of the site to maximize enjoyment of the river. g. Design structures to take advantage of the river frontage location by incorporating features such as: (1) plazas and landscaped open space that connect with a shoreline trail system; (2) windows that offer views of the river; or (3) pedestrian entrances that face the river. h. View obscuring fencing is permitted only when necessary for documentable use requirements and must be designed with landscaping per the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Other fencing, when allowed, must be designed to complement the proposed and/or existing development materials and design; and i. Where there are public trails, locate any fencing between the site and the landward side of the shoreline trail. 3. Design of Public Access. Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. Public access shall be barrier free, where feasible, and designed consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act. b. Public access landscape design shall use native vegetation, in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Additional landscape features may be required where desirable to provide public/private space separation and screening of utility, service and parking areas. c. Furniture used in public access areas shall be appropriate for the proposed level of development, and the character of the surrounding area, For example, large urban projects should provide formal benches; for smaller projects in less -developed areas, simpler, less formal benches or suitable alternatives such as boulders are appropriate/. d. Materials used in public access furniture, structures or sites shall be: (1) Durable and capable of withstanding exposure to the elements; (2) Environmentally friendly and take advantage of technology in building materials, lighting, paved surfaces, porous pavement, etc, wherever practical; and (3) Consistent with the character of the shoreline and the anticipated use. e. Public -Private Separation. (1) Public access facilities shall look and feel welcoming to the public, and not appear as an intrusion into private property. (2) Natural elements such as logs, grass, shrubs, and elevation separations are encouraged as means to define the separation between public and private space. (Ord. 2346 §11, 2011) Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 49 of 59 Commented [RL62]: Large rocks have been used for 'benches" on habitat projects. I think we should encourage this type of installation, 59 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 18.44.4-2O100 Shoreline Restoration A. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Not Required. Shoreline restoration projects shall be allowed without a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit when these projects meet the criteria established by WAC 173-27-040(o) and (p) and RCW 90.58.580. B. Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction Due to Restoration. 1. Relief may be granted from Shoreline Master Program standards and use regulations in cases where shoreline restoration projects result in a change in the location of the OHWM and associated Shoreline Jurisdiction on the subject property and/or adjacent properties, and where application of this chapter's regulations would preclude or interfere with the uses permitted by the underlying zoning, thus presenting a hardship to the project proponent. a. Applications for relief, as specified below, must meet the following criteria: (1) The proposed relief is the minimum necessary to relieve the hardship; (2) After granting the proposed relief, there is net environmental benefit from the restoration project; and (3) Granting the proposed relief is consistent with the objectives of the shoreline restoration project and with the Shoreline Master Program. (4) Where a shoreline restoration project is created as mitigation to obtain a development permit, the project proponent required to perform the mitigation is not eligible for relief under the provisions of this section. b. The Department of Ecology must review and approve applications for relief. c. For the portion of property that moves from outside Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project, the City may consider the following, consistent with the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.420100.B.1.a. (1) permitting development for the full range of uses of the underlying zoning consistent with the Zoning Code, including uses that are not water oriented; (2) waiving the requirement to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit if it is otherwise exempt from the requirement for a substantial development permit; (3) waiving the provisions for public access; (4) waiving the requirement for shoreline design review; and (5) waiving the development standards set forth in this chapter. d. The intent of the exemptions identified above in subparagraphs B.1.c.(1) to B.1.c.(5) is to implement the restoration projects of the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan, which reflects the projects identified in the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan pursuant to Policy 5.2 of the SMP. 2. Consistent with provisions in TMC Section 18.44.050.—C, building heights within shoreline jurisdiction may be increased if the project proponent provides additional restoration and/or enhancement of the shoreline buffer, beyond what may otherwise be required in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." Additional Restoration and/or enhancement shall include: a. creation of shallow -water (max slope 5H:1V) off channel rearing habitat and/or b. removal of fish passage barriers to known or potential fish habitat, and restoration of the barrier site. 3. Consistent with the provisions of subparagraphs B.1.a, 1.b and 1.c above, the Shoreline Residential Environment Buffer, High Intensity or Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer width may be reduced to no less than 25 feet measured from the new location of the OHWM for the portion of the property that moves from outside the Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project, subject to the following standards: a. The 25-foot buffer area must be vegetated according to the requirements of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section or as otherwise approved by the City; and b. The proponents of the restoration project are responsible for the installation and maintenance of the vegetation. 4. The habitat restoration project proponents must record with King County a survey that identifies the location of the OHWM location prior to implementation of the shoreline restoration project, any structures Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 50 of 59 60 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update that fall within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, and the new location of the OHWM once construction of the shoreline restoration project is completed. 5. Shoreline restoration projects must obtain all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife approvals as well as written approval from the City. (Ord. 2346 §12, 2011) 18.44.4 0110 Administration A. Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit. 1. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Based on guidelines in the SMA for a Minimum Shoreline Jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green/Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends from the OHWM landward for 200 feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. The floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. 2. Applicability. The Tukwila SMP applies to uses, change of uses, activities or development that occurs within the above -defined Shoreline Jurisdiction. All proposed uses and development occurring within the Shoreline Jurisdiction must conform to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the SMA, and this chapter whether or not a permit is required. B. Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations 1. Compliance with this Master Program does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may apply. The applicant is responsible for complying with all other applicable requirements. 2. Where this Master Program makes reference to any RCW, WAC, or other state or federal law or regulation, the most recent amendment or current edition shall apply. 3. In the case of any conflict between any federal, state or other local law and this Master Program, the provision that is most protective of shoreline resources shall prevail, except when constrained by federal or state law, or where explicitly provided in this Master Program. 4. Relationship to Critical Areas Regulations. A. For protection of critical areas where they occur in shoreline jurisdiction, this Master Program adopts by reference the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, which is incorporated into this Master Program with specific exclusions and modifications as set forth in TMC Section 18.44.070. B. All references to the Critical Areas Ordinance are for the version adopted [CAO adoption date]. Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191(2)(b), amending the referenced regulations in the Master Program for those critical areas under shoreline jurisdiction will require an amendment to the Master Program and approval by the Department of Ecology. C. Within shoreline jurisdiction, the Critical Areas Ordinance shall be liberally construed together with this Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of this Master Program and Chapter 90.58 RCW. C. Developments not required to obtain shoreline permits or local reviews. Requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the following actions as described in WAC 173-27- 044 and WAC 173-27-045: Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 51 of 59 61 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 1 , Remedial actions. Pursuant mnCW9K58,3o5, any person ovndmctinno remedial action ma facility pursuant toaconsent decree, nrde or aqreed order issued pursuant mchapter r0.10oDRCVV`mto the department of ecoloqy when it conducts a remedial action under chapter 70,105D RCW. 2. BoatVard improvements to meet NPIDES permit requirements, Pursuant to RCVV 90.58,355, any person inwanivp site improvements for storm water unmmom in an existinn |matyard facility to mom requirements of a national pollutant discharqe elimination system storm water qeneral permit, l VVSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.356, Washinqton State Department of Transportation projects and activities meetinq the conditions of RCW 90,58,356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other local review. �A. Projects consistent with an onwmnmemo| omenon,v nmqram aqroemompursuant m RCVV 90.50.045—(v). Projects amxohzou \hmun»tho Enemv Facility Site Evaluation Council pmcesn, pursuant to chapter 00.o0RCvx DB. Substantial Development Permit Requirements. 1 Permit Application Procedures. Applicants for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall comply with permit application procedures inTMCChupm,18.104. z. Exemptions. a. To qualify for an exempUon, the proposed use, activity or development mum meet the requirements for an exemption as described in WXC 173-27'040, except for properties that meet the requirements of the Shoreline Restoration Section, TMCGevtiun 10.44.42-0100. The purpose ofashoreline exemption is to provide e pm000s for uaon and activities which du not trigger the need for Substantial Development Permit, but require compliance with all provisions of the City's SMID and overlay district. b. The Director may impose conditions to the approval of exempted developments and/or uses asnecessary massure compliance of the project with the SmAand the Tukwila SMP per WAC173'27'040(e). For example, in the case ofdevelopment subject m a building permit but exempt from the shoreline permit pmoonn. the Building Offirie| or other permit authorizing official, through consultation with the Dimom,, may attach shoreline management terms and conditions to building permits and other permit approv|opvsvemm RCW80.58.140. 3. A substantial development permit oxan be granted only when No development proposed is consistent with: aThe policies and procedures ofthe Shoreline ManonomomAct. b.The provisions ofChapter 175'u7.WxC;and cThis 44e+Sxmo|inoMaster Program, EC. Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. 1. Purpose. ^sstated inv&uC 173-27-100.the purpose ofaConditional Use Permit (CUP)ism oUmw greater flexibility in the application of use regulations of this chapter in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit bythe City mthe Department ofEcology mprevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or assure consistency of the project with the GMAand the Qt/oOMP.Uses which are specifically prohibited bythe Shoreline Master Program may not boauthorized with approval ofaCUP. 2. Application. Ghum||no Conditional Use Permits are aType 4 Permit processed undorTMC Chapter 18.104. a. Application requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for permit application and approvals indicated inTMCChapter 18.104and this chapter. 4. Approval Criteria. a.Uses classified awshoreline conditional uses may boauthorized, provided that the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: (1) The proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the policies of the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program; (2) The proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines; Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 30/2019 Page 52 of 59 62 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update (3) The proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter; (4) The proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located; and (5) The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. b. In the granting of all Conditional Use Permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if Conditional Use Permits were granted to other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and all local ordinances and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. F. Shoreline Variance Permits. 1. Purpose. The purpose of a Shoreline Variance Permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this chapter where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of this chapter will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the Shoreline Management Act policies as stated in RCW 90.58.020. Reasonable use requests that are located in the shoreline must be processed as a variance, until such time as the Shoreline Management Act is amended to establish a process for reasonable uses. Variances from the use regulations of this chapter are prohibited.. 2. Application requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for a Type 3 permit application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104. 3. Shoreline Variance Permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. 4. Approval Criteria. A Shoreline Variance Permit for a use, activity or development that will be located landward of the ordinary high water mark and/or landward of any wetland may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: a. The strict application of the bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this chapter preclude or significantly interfere with a reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by this chapter. b. The hardship described in TMC Section 18.44.1130.DF.4. is specifically related to the property and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of this chapter, and not from the owners own actions or deed restrictions; and that the variance is necessary because of these conditions in order to provide the owner with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. c. The design of the project will be compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the Comprehensive Plan and SMP and will not cause adverse impacts to adjacent properties or the shoreline environment. d. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other properties in the area. e. The variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief. f. The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. In the rantin of all variance ermits consideration shall be iven to the cumulative im act of additional requests for like actions in the area such that the total of the variances would remain consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. 5. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM. a. Shoreline variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located either waterward of the ordinary high water mark or within any setnsitve critical area may be authorized only if the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 31112019 Page 53 of 59 Commented [CL6 Same comment asfor"b above.. Commented [CL64]: "b." and "c" apply to all Variance requests not just to permit waterward of the OHWM. 63 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update (1) The strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in this Master Program preclude all reasonable permitted use of the property; (2) The proposal is consistent with the criteria established under TMC Section 18.44.1130.9F.4., "Approval Criteria;" b. through q., and (3) The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected by the granting of the variance. add+t+onak-requests fie fictions to the area su #at ttae totat-o# t#e a� yes wottfd net tair� corns+ k w+t# RCW 90.58.020 and not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. c. Variances from the use regulations of this chapter are trohibited. GE. Non -Conforming Development. 1. Non -Conforming Uses. Any non -conforming lawful use of land that would not be allowed under the terms of this chapter may be continued as an allowed, legal, non -conforming use, defined in TMC Chapter 18.06 or as hereafter amended, so long as that use remains lawful, subject to the following: a. No such non -conforming use shall be enlarged, intensified, increased, moved or extended to occupy a greater use of the land, structure or combination of the two, than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of this chapter except as authorized in MC Section 18,66.120 or upon approval of a conditional use permit. tie n-3f bc. If any such non -conforming use ceases for any reason for a period of more than 24 consecutive months the non -conforming rights shall expire and any subsequent use shall conform to the regulations specified by in this chapter for the shoreline environment in which such use is located, unless re-establishment of the use is authorized through a Type 2 permit which must be applied for within the two-year period. Water - dependent uses should not be considered discontinued when they are inactive due to dormancy, or where the use is typically seasonal. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set forth in TMC Section 18.44.1030.€G.4. cd. If a change of use is proposed to a use determined to be non -conforming by application of provisions in this chapter, the proposed new use must be a permitted use in this chapter or a use approved under a Type 2 permit with public notice process. For purposes of implementing this section, a change of use constitutes a change from one permitted or conditional use category to another such use category as listed within the Shoreline Use Matrix. de.A structure that is being or has been used for a non -conforming use may be used for a different non -conforming use only upon the approval of a Type 2 permit subject to public notice. Before approving a change in non -conforming use, the following findings must be made: (1) No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical. (2) The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the SMP and as compatible with the uses in the area as the non -conforming use. (3) The use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose. (4) The structure(s) associated with the non -conforming use shall not be expanded in a manner that increases the extent of the non -conformity. (5) The change in use will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and/or processes. (6) The applicant restores and/or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property, to offset the impact of the change of use per the vegetation management standards of this chapter. This may include the restoration of paved areas to vegetated area if no longer in use. (7) _ — Commented [NG69]: This is addressed in e above. (The preference is to reduce exterior uses in the buffer to the maximum extent possible. Commented [CL65]: "b." and "c" apply to all Variance requests not just to permit waterward of the OHWM. Commented [CL66]: Same comment as for °b ." above.. Commented [NG67]: This provision covers existing animal rendering facilities. Commented [NG68]: Covered by a above. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 54 of 59 64 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update 2. Non -Conforming Structures. Where a lawful structure exists on the effective date of adoption of this chapter that could not be built under the terms of this chapter by reason of restrictions on height, buffers or other characteristics of the structure, it may be continued as an allowed, legal structure so long as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the following provisions: a. Such structures may be repaired, maintained, upgraded and altered provided that: (1) The structure may not be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its degree of nonconformity or increases its impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment except as authorized in TMC Section 18.66.120; and (2) The cost of the alterations may not exceed an aggregate cost of 50% of the value of the building or structure in any 3-year period based upon its most recent assessment, unless the amount over 50% is used to make the building or structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a building or structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. b. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means, the structure may be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided application is made for permits within 12 months of the date the damage occurred and all reconstruction is completed within two years of permit issuance. In the event the property is redeveloped, such redevelopment must be in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. c. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance it must be brought as closely as practicable into conformance with the Master Program and the Shoreline Management Actwhatcoever, it shalt thereafter conform to the regulations of this chapter after it is moved. d. When a non -conforming structure, or structure and premises in combination, is vacated or abandoned for 24 consecutive months, the structure, or structure and premises in combination, shall thereafter be required to be in conformance with the regulations of this chapter. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months may be granted using the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.1130.€G.4. e. Residential structures located in any Shoreline Residential Environment and in existence at the time of adoption of this chapter shall not be deemed nonconforming in terms of height, residential use, or location provisions of this title. Such buildings may be rebuilt after a fire or other natural disaster to their original dimensions, location and height, but may not be changed except as provided in the non -conforming uses section of this chapter. f. Single-family structures in the Shoreline Residential Environment that have legally non- conforming setbacks from the OHWM per the SMP buffer shall be allowed to expand the ground floor only along the existing building line(s) as long as the existing distance from the nearest point of the structure to the OHWM is not reduced and the square footage of new intrusion into the buffer does not exceed 50% of the square footage of the current intrusion. As a condition of building permit approval, a landscape plan showing removal of invasive plant species within the entire shoreline buffer and replanting with appropriate native species must be submitted to the City. Plantings should be maintained through the establishment period. tr�ft�re;�sf��l-ne�et 3. For the purposes of this section, altered or partially reconstructed is defined as work that does not exceed 50% of the assessed valuation of the building over a three-year period. 4. Requests for Time Extension —Non -conforming Uses and Structures. a. A property owner may request, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months. Such a request shall be considered as a Type 2 permit under TMC Chapter 18.104 and may be approved only when: (1) For a non -conforming use, a finding is made that no reasonable alternative conforming use is practical. (2) For a non -conforming structure, special economic circumstances prevent the lease or sale of said structure within 24 months. (3) The applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer on the property to offset the impact of the continuation of the non -conforming use. For non -conforming uses, the amount of buffer to be Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 55 of 59 Commented [CL70]: The process identied here conflicts with #4 below. My view is the Type 2 permit is a more reasonable process to use. Commented [NG71 ]: It is not clear what the environmental benefit is to restricting uses within an existing structure. 65 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update restored and/or enhanced will be determined based on the percentage of the existing building used by the non- conforming use for which a time extension is being requested. Depending on the size of the area to be restored and/or enhanced, the Director may require targeted plantings rather than a linear planting arrangement. The vegetation management standards of this program shall be used for guidance on any restoration/enhancement. For non -conforming structures, for each six-month extension of time requested, 15% of the available buffer must be restored/enhanced. b. Conditions may be attached to the permit that are deemed necessary to assure compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act and to assure that the use will not become a nuisance or a hazard. 5. Building Safety. Nothing in this SMP shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any non -conforming building or part thereof declared to be unsafe by order of any City official charged with protecting the public safety. a. Alterations or expansion of a non -conforming structure that are required by law or a public agency in order to comply with public health or safety regulations are the only alterations or expansions allowed. b. Alterations or expansions permitted under this section shall be the minimum necessary to meet the public safety concerns. 6. Non -Conforming Parking Lots. a. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to require a change in any aspect of a structure or facility covered thereunder including, without limitation, parking lot layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, for any structure or facility which existed on the date of adoption of this chapter. b. If a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed that requires an increase in the parking area by an increment less than 100%, the requirements of this chapter shall be complied with for the additional parking area. c. If a property is redeveloped, a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed that requires an increase in the parking area by an increment greater than 100%, the requirements of this chapter shall be complied with for the entire parking area. d. If no change in parking lot area is proposed, a non -conforming parkinq lot may be upgraded to improve water quality or meet local, state, and federal regulations. 7. Non -Conforming Landscape Areas. a. Adoption of the vegetation protection and landscaping regulations contained in this chapter shall not be construed to require a change in the landscape improvements for any legal landscape area that existed on the date of adoption of this chapter, unless and until the property is redeveloped or alteration of the existing structure is made beyond the thresholds provided herein. b. At such time as the property is redeveloped or the existing structure is altered beyond the thresholds provided herein and the associated premises does not comply with the vegetation protection and landscaping requirements of this chapter, a landscape plan that conforms to the requirements of this chapter shall be submitted to the Director for approval. H. f Revisions to Shoreline Permits 1. Revisions to previously issued shoreline permits shall be reviewed under the SMP in effect at the time of submittal of the revision, and not the SMP under which the original shoreline permit was approved and processed in accordance with WAC 173-27-100. I. Time Limits on Shoreline Permits 1. Consistent with WAC 173-27-090, shoreline permits are valid for two years, and the work authorized under the shoreline permit must be completed in five years. Construction activity must begin within this two-year period. If construction has not begun within two years, a one-time extension of one year may be approved by the Director based on reasonable factors. The permit time period does not include the time during which administrative appeals or legal actions are pending or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the project. 2. Upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of a proposed project, and consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, the City may adopt a different time limit Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 56 of 59 — — Commented [NG72]: We have a lot of parking areas in the \ shoreline buffer. We have debated how this section guides their use when the site is redeveloped or changes use. Commented [RL73]: We need to allow non -conforming parking lot upgrades to improve water quality or meet local, state, and federal regulation. This could include paving gravel or dirt parking, storm systems meeting current requirements, or other BMPs. Commented [NG74]: We realized we didn't have criteria to review this request when Tukwila South made a request for a time extension. We had at least one revision in the Boeing DSOA that took a fair amount of time to review and issue a revised permit. Commented [MD75R74]: No additional criteria is proposed [ ] P P in this section, instead it is just reiterating what WAC 173-27-100 and RCW 90.58.143 state. RCW 90.58.058 is what TMC (I) (2) is stating and it is included under WAC 173-27-100 (6). Suggest just referencing WAC and not hardwiring it into our code. Commented [CL76]: WAC 173-27-090 Commented [CM]: 173-27-090 (1) — this would address the problem we ran into with Tukwila South's shoreline substantial development permit.. 66 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update for a shoreline substantial development permit as part of an action on a shoreline substantial development permit. (Ord. 2346 § 13, 2011) 18.44.140120 Appeals Any appeal of a decision by the City on a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use or Shoreline Variance must be appealed to the Shoreline Hearing Board. (Ord. 2346 §14, 2011) 18.44.4-50130 Enforcement and Penalties A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered violations of this chapter: 1. To use, construct or demolish any structure, or to conduct clearing, earth -moving, construction or other development not authorized under a Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit or Variance Permit, where such permit is required by this chapter. 2. Any work which is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other requirements in a permit approved pursuant to this chapter, provided that the terms or conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans. 3. To remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in accordance with this chapter. 4. To misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information submitted to obtain any shoreline use or development authorization. 5. To fail to comply with the requirements of this chapter. B. Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Director to enforce this chapter subject to the terms and conditions of TMC Chapter 8.45. C. Inspection Access. 1. For the purpose of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a permit or this chapter, authorized representatives of the Director may enter all sites for which a permit has been issued. 2. Upon completion of all requirements of a permit, the applicant shall request a final inspection by contacting the planner of record. The permit process is complete upon final approval by the planner. D. Penalties. 1. Any violation of any provision of the SMP, or failure to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in Chapter 8.45 of the Tukwila Municipal Code ("Enforcement") and shall be imposed pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in that chapter. 2. Penalties assessed for violations of the SMP shall be determined by TMC Chapter 8.45.120.4[10, Penalties. 3. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a permit required by this chapter, that a contractor, subcontractor, person with responsibility on the site, or person authorizing or directing the work, erroneously believed a permit had been issued to the property owner or any other person. 4. Penalties for Tree Removal a. Each unlawfully removed or damaged tree shall constitute a separate violation. b. The amount of the penalty shall be $1,000 per tree or up to the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by an ISA certified arborist. The Director may elect not to seek penalties or may reduce the penalties if he/she determines the circumstances do not warrant imposition of any or all of the civil penalties. c. Any illegal removal of required trees shall be subject to obtaining a tree permit and replacement with trees that meet or exceed the functional value of the removed trees. In addition, any shrubs and qroundcover removed without City approval shall be replaced. d. To replace the tree canopy lost due to the tree removal, additional trees must be planted on -site. Payment may be made into the City's Tree Fund if the number of replacement trees cannot be accommodated on -site. The number of replacement trees required will be based on the size of the tree(s) removed as stated in TMC 18.44.060 B 4. Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 Page 57 of 59 Commented [NG781: This is consistent with the penalties fo unauthorized tree removal outside of the shoreline, 67 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update E. Remedial Measures Required. In addition to penalties provided in TMC Chapter 8.45, the Director may require any person conducting work in violation of this chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 1. Remedial measures must conform to the policies and guidelines of this chapter and the Shoreline Management Act. 2. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of this chapter shall be borne by the property owner and/or applicant. F. Injunctive Relief. 1. Whenever the City has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or threatening to violate this chapter or any rule or other provisions adopted or issued pursuant to this chapter, it may, either before or after the institution of any other action or proceeding authorized by this ordinance, institute a civil action in the name of the City for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation. Such action shall be brought in King County Superior Court. 2. The institution of an action for injunctive relief under this section shall not relieve any party to such proceedings from any civil or criminal penalty prescribed for violations of the Master Program. G. Abatement. Any use, structure, development or work that occurs in violation of this chapter, or in violation of any lawful order or requirement of the Director pursuant to this section, shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner provided by the Tukwila Municipal Code 8.45.1.05100. (Ord. 2346 §15, 2011) 18.44.1-60140 Liability A. Liability for any adverse impacts or damages resulting from work performed in accordance with a permit issued on behalf of the City within the City limits shall be the sole responsibility of the owner of the site for which the permit was issued. B. No provision of or term used in this chapter is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages in a civil action. (Ord. 2346 §16, 2011) AMENDMENTS TO OTHER ZONING CODE SECTIONS 18.52.030 Shoreline Landscape Requirements Additional landscape requirements apply in the Shoreline Overlay District, as directed by TMC Section 18.44.060, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping. 18.60.050 Board of Architectural Review H. Shoreline Design Criteria. The criteria contained in the Shoreline Design Guidelines (TMC Section 18.44.090) shall be used whenever the provisions of this title require a design review decision on a proposed or modified development in the Shoreline Overlay District. 18.104.010 Classification of Project Permit Applications TYPE 2 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY Shoreline buffer reduction, Community Development Director State Shoreline Hearings Board Extension of time for continuing a Community Development Director State Shoreline Hearings Board shoreline nonconforming use or structure TYPE 3 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Hearing Examin Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 3/1/2019 State Shoreline Hearings Board Page 58 of 59 68 City of Tukwila Shoreline Update Zoning Code Edits Public Review Draft Strikeouts 311/2019 Page 59 of 59 69 70 TUKWILA SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM December 14, 2009 Revised Per Ecology Letter March 24, 2011 Showing Proposed 2019 Edits Prepared by Tukwila Department of Community Development with the assistance of ESA Adolfson and The Watershed Company This report was funded in part through a grant, G0600234, from the Washington State Department of Ecology. 71 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose and Background 1 1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction 1 2.1 SMP Components 5 2.2 SMP Elements 5 .3 History of SMP Planning in Tukwila 5 2.4 Current SMP Update Process 7 3. DEFINITIONS 7 4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION - SUMMARY 8 4.1 Watershcd Context and Shoreline Modifications 8 4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions 9 4.3 Land Usc 10 4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts 12 4.5 Conclusions 14 5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN - SUMMARY 16 5.1 Background 16 5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions 16 5.3 Plans, Programs, and Completed Projects 18 5.4 Restoration Opportunities 18 5.5 Potential Projects and Priorities 19 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES 20 7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS 20 7.1 Pre 2009 Regulatory Framework 20 7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory / Characterization Report and Restoration Plan 21 7.3 State Environment Designation System 22 7.4 Environment Designations 23 72 7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers 29 7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment 34 7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment 36 7.8 High Intensity Environment 40 Section 7.9 Aquatic Environment 42 8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 42 9. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE JURISDICTION. 43 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations 43 9.2 Purpose 44 10. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE 46 11. SHORELINE DESIGN GUIDELINES 48 12. SHORELINE RESTORATION 48 13. ADMINISTRATION 49 13.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit 49 13.2 Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations 50 14. APPEALS 51 15. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS 51 16. LIABILITY 51 SNP Public Review Draft Clean 3/1/2019 73 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Pre 2009 Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44) 21 Figure 2. Briscoe Levee Profile 33 Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer 36 Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees 38 Figure 5. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees 39 Figure 6. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placement of Fill on Levee Back Slope 40 Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment 41 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila 17 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System - WAC 173-26-211 (5) 23 Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions 25 LIST OF MAPS Map 1. Potential Annexation Areas and Annexation History 5 Map 2. Transition Zone 29 Map 3. Shoreline Environments .55 Map 4. Shoreline Armoring 87 Map 5. Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline 109 Map 6. Shoreline Public Access 137 APPENDICES A. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report B. Shoreline Restoration Plan SMP Public Review Draft Clean 3/1/2019 74 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Background! This document presents the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) for the City of Tukwila. Et is an update to Tukwila's existing SMP, originally adopted in 1974. The SMP is intended to guide new shoreline development, redevelopment and promote reestablishment of natural shoreline functions, where possible. It was prepared in conformance with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) and its implementing regulations (WAC 173-26). This Shoreline Master Program reflects changes in local conditions and priorities and the evolving State regulatory environment. This Shoreline Master Program presents background information on the Shoreline Management Act, describes shoreline jurisdiction in Tukwila, summarizes the amendment process carried out to date, presents a summary of the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization, presents a summary of the Shoreline Restoration Plan, proposes shoreline environments, and establishes goals, policies and regulations, which apply to all activities on all affected lands and waters within the shoreline jurisdiction. In addition, there is a chapter that establishes design guidelines. Maps are provided to illustrate shoreline jurisdiction and environments. The Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report is provided in Appendix A. The Restoration Plan is provided in Appendix B. A Cumulative Impacts Analysis is provided as a stand-alone document. 1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction A. Jurisdiction under the Shoreline Management Act The Shoreline Management Act, or SMA, (RCW 90.58) establishes regulations for the management and protection of the state's shoreline resources and requires planning for reasonable and appropriate uses. The Act calls for a joint planning effort between state and local jurisdictions, requiring local government to develop its own Shoreline Master Program based on state guidelines. The SMA requires that local governments establish shoreline jurisdiction for those bodies of water and lands that are considered to be "shorelines of the state" or "shorelines of statewide significance." Shorelines of the state include rivers with a mean annual flow of at least 20 cubic feet per second (cfs). Shorelines of statewide significance in western Washington include rivers with a mean annual flow of at least 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). The minimum shoreline environment required by the SMA includes all lands 200 feet from the "ordinary high water mark" or floodway of a state shoreline, SMP Public Review Draft - Strikeout 1 3/1/20 [9 Commented (NCw1l This narrative has been updated to reflect the current SMP. 75 whichever is greater, and all wetlands associated with these state shorelines and located within the 100-year floodplain. The following graphic illustrates the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act. O d nary high water mark I©HWM? =ills -#Ili 1111'- Ilt! I Ii Wetland n 100 year Flood plain 1111-1111_1111 -IIII-€Ill11 11€I _ NI - III Yeaa F(vad PI7in Fgure 1.1 Lands and waters under tie iunsdiction of the hctreli B. Shoreline Jurisdiction in Tukwila The Green/Duwamish River is the only "shoreline of statewide significance" in the city (RCW 98.58.030). A small portion of the Black River, a shoreline of the state, is also located in Tukwila. Throughout the SMP document, the term "Shoreline Jurisdiction" is used to describe the water and land areas subject to shoreline jurisdiction in Tukwila. Based on SMA guidelines for shoreline jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green/Duwamish River and the Black River, its banks, the upland area which extends. from the ordinary high water mark landward for 200 feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. For the purpose of determining shoreline jurisdiction only, the floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and, therefore, have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. The Tukwila SMP applies to all development activity occurring within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, which corresponds to the Shoreline Overlay District as established by SMP Public Review Draft Clean 2 3/ 1 /2019 76 Chapter 18.44 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. All proposed uses and activities under its jurisdiction must be reviewed for compliance with the goals, policies and regulations referenced herein. All proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act and this Master Program whether or not a permit is required. This Master Program includes the two proposed annexation areas indicated in the Comprehensive Plan (Map 1). The north annexation area is located between the Green/Duwamish River on the east, Military Road to the west, and from S. 128th Street north to S. 96th Street. The south annexation area is located between 1-5 and the Green River, south of the City limits to S. 204th Street. Adoption of shoreline policies and environment designations for newly annexed areas would require an amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. To avoid having to amend the SMP later, these potential annexation areas are considered here and the environmental designations and regulations will apply upon annexation. In response to regional policies of the King County Growth Management Planning Council, Tukwila designated two key areas as its Urban Center and its Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC). The Southcenter area, from 1-405 south to S. 1801h Street was designated the "Urban Center," and the Duwamish Corridor, an area where existing industrial -employment is concentrated, was designated as Tukwila's "Manufacturing Industrial Center." Both of these areas have lands adjacent to the Green River and are identified on Map 1. The City Council adopted a Strategic Implementation Plan for the MIC on November 2, 1998. The Plan includes an analysis of existing conditions along the shoreline, narratives of various habitats, current regulations, proposed requirements and prototypes for future development along the shoreline in the MEC. The Strategic Plan was prepared in conjunction with a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement that analyzed development alternatives in the MIC area and streamlined SEPA review for development in that corridor for the past 20 years. Where changed circumstances dictate, the SMP will provide updated guidance and regulations for the MIC area. The MIC area has significant potential for redevelopment. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 3 3/ 1 /2019 77 Turning Basin' Legend TukvA city Limo, iW (Juxan Gcn�u SMP Public Review Draft Clean ndu stria) Center & undary Map 1 Annexation History and Potential Annexation Areas Tukwila Urban Center I T 4 3/1/2019 78 2. TUKWILA'S SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 2.1 SMP Components To comply with the SMA, Tukwila has included the following components in this Shoreline Master Program (SMP): • Outreach including a citizen participation process, coordination with state agencies, Indian tribes, and other local governments (see Section 2.4 below) • Inventory, analysis and characterization of shoreline conditions, environmental functions and ecosystem -wide processes • Analysis of potential shoreline restoration opportunities • Establishment of shoreline environments • Goals and policies that have been adopted in the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan • Development regulations that have been codified in TMC 18.44 and 18.45 • Shoreline Design Guidelines that have been codified in TMC 18.44 • Evaluation and consideration of cumulative impacts 2.2 SMP Elements The SMA includes eight main issues, or "elements," to be addressed in each local shoreline master program (RCW 90.58.100). To implement these elements, shoreline policies and regulations are to be developed for each. The policies are found in the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan and the regulations in Chapters 18.44 and 18.45 of the Zoning Code. The elements required by the SMA are: Economic Development Public Access Recreation Circulation Shoreline Uses Conservation Historical, cultural, educational and scientific element Preventing or minimizing flood damage Consistent with the Growth Management Act requirement to integrate the SMP and the Comprehensive Plan, the City incorporated the required elements of a SMP noted above into its Plan. Further direction for implementation of the required elements of SMPs is provided through Zoning Code and Design Review requirements. 2.3 , History of SMP Planning in Tukwila Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) was first adopted in 1974, in response to the SMP Public Review Draft Clean 5 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG2]: This reflects the elimination of duplicate language between this SMP and the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. Removing the duplicate language will streamline this document and prevent inconsistencies. Commented [NG3]: The background information has been condensed now that we have moved to the next update cycle. 79 passage of the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58). The SMP was later updated through minor amendments in 1982 and 1987, none of which required the adoption of a new SMP. In 1992-93, as part of the preparation for a major revision to the City's Comprehensive Plan, the City completed a Shorelines Background Report (1993), with the participation of the Tukwila Tomorrow Citizen's Committee. This report established the basis for the shoreline comprehensive plan goals and policies adopted in 1995. Staff began the process to prepare a new SMP in 1999, based on the draft shoreline guidelines that were in the process of adoption by the Department of Ecology at the time. A grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology provided funding for a Shoreline Inventory of all parcels within the 200 foot Shoreline jurisdiction and a Shoreline Design Manual. New shoreline regulations approved by Ecology in 2000 were immediately appealed and ultimately invalidated by the Shoreline Hearings Board in 2001. As a result, the City opted to defer completing its SMP update process until new guidelines were issued by Ecology, which occurred in 2003. In 2005, Tukwila received a grant (SMA Grant No. 0600234) to complete a comprehensive update, including new technical analyses of shoreline conditions, restoration planning, and the preparation of revised SMP goals, policies, and regulations. In order to capitalize on previous citizens' involvement in the planning process, the City decided to start the SMP update with the work begun in 1999, with revisions to address new Ecology regulations and guidance, as well as changed conditions in the City's shoreline area. The development of any SMP, as required by new shoreline regulations, involves three specific steps • Shoreline inventory and characterization, preparation of a restoration plan, preparation of a cumulative impacts analysis; • Citizen involvement in development of policies and regulations; and • Review by interested parties, including adjacent jurisdictions. As part of this 2009 SMP update process, the City: • Continued the previously started citizen involvement program utilizing the Planning Commission, which serves as the City's permanent citizen advisory body for land use issues, holding Open Houses and public hearings • Coordinated and shared information with neighboring jurisdictions • Updated and expanded the Shoreline Inventory and mapping (included as SMP Public Review Draft Clean 6 3/ 1 /2019 80 Appendix A to this document) • Prepared a Shoreline Restoration Plan (Appendix B) • Proposed shoreline environment designations • Proposed shoreline development policies • Proposed shoreline development regulations • Prepared a draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis • Coordinated with Department of Ecology, submitting a staff draft SMP for review and comment and meeting with Ecology staff 2.4 Current SMP Update Process The City of Tukwila completed a comprehensive update to its Shoreline Master Program in 2009, with additional revisions made in 2011. Washington state law requires jurisdictions to periodically review and update their SMPs every eight years in accordance with the SMA and its current guidelines and legislative rules to attain state approval. The City of Tukwila's update started with an open house the fall of 2018 and will be complete in 2019. This periodic update is focused on: • Reviewing relevant legislative updates since 2009 and incorporating any applicable amendments. • Ensuring consistency with recently adopted regulations for critical areas and flood hazard areas. • Streamlining and eliminating duplication in the documents. • Addressing a limited number of policy questions such as a required levee profile, use of flood walls and incentives for public access. This periodic update will not: • Re-evaluate the ecological baseline which was established as part of the 2009 comprehensive update. • Extensively assess no net loss criteria other than to ensure that proposed amendments do not result in degradation of the baseline condition. • Change shoreline jurisdiction or environment designations. 3. DEFINITIONS Definitions used in the administration of the Shoreline Master Program and are incorporated into the Definitions Chapter of the Zoning Code, TMC 18.06. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 7 3/1/2019 Commented [NG4]: This level of detail is no longer needed. Commented [NGS]: Updates to the definition of substantial development and other changes to match current State regulations are found in the ordinance updating TMC 1 S.44. 81 4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION - SUMMARY Local jurisdictions updating their Shoreline Master Program (SMP) are required to prepare an inventory and characterization of the shoreline resources within their boundaries. As part of the City's prior SMP update, a Draft Inventory and Characterization Report and Map Folio was prepared in December 2006, and finalized in the spring of 2007 following technical review by Ecology and King County. The final report and map folio are included as Appendix A to this SMP. While the report has been finalized, the City continues to utilize the most recent information available, such as the recently updated FEMA Revised Preliminary Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFTRM), which were issued after the completion of the Inventory and Characterization report. The purpose of the inventory and characterization report was to conduct a baseline inventory of conditions for water bodies regulated as "shorelines of the state" located in the City of Tukwila. The area regulated under Tukwila's SMP is approximately 12.5 linear miles along the banks of the Green/Duwamish River. For the baseline inventory, the river shoreline was divided into four reaches: 1) Reach G1-PAA (southern Potential Annexation Area); 2) Reach GI (from the southern City boundary downstream to the Black River/Green River confluence); 3) Reach G2 (from the Black River/Green River confluence downstream to the northern City limits); and 4) Reach G2-PAA (the northern Potential Annexation Area). The reaches are depicted on Map 3. The shoreline characterization identifies existing conditions, identifies current uses and public access, evaluates functions and values of resources in the shoreline jurisdiction, and explores opportunities for conservation and restoration of ecological functions. The findings are intended to provide a framework for updates to the City's shoreline management goals, policies, and development regulations. Key findings of the inventory and characterization are summarized below. 4.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications The City of Tukwila includes approximately 12.5 miles of the Green/Duwamish River and is situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands at the transition from the fresh water Green River to the tidally influenced Duwamish estuary ecosystem. The Green River basin is part of the Green/Duwamish Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9). Historically, the Green/Duwamish River drained a significantly larger area than it does today. The Green/Duwamish River has undergone extensive modifications in the past to reduce channel migration and limit the extent and duration of valley flooding. The modifications include both natural river course changes and major engineering projects in SMP Public Review Draft Clean 8 3/ 1 /2019 82 the early part of the 20th century that diverted the White, Black and Cedar Rivers to neighboring basins. As a result, the overall freshwater discharge in the Green/Duwamish River has been reduced to around a third of the pre -diversion era. Seven pump stations also modify flows into the Green and Duwamish Rivers. Three of the pump stations, Black River, P-17, and Segale, are operated by the Green River Flood Control District, and four stations, Lift Stations 15, 17, 18, and 19 are operated by the City of Tukwila. The Black River pump station is the largest station discharging flows to the Duwamish River. This station is approximately 1,000 feet upstream of the Green — Black River confluence, and is intended to both block floodwaters from the Green from inundating the Black River and Springbrook Creek in the City of Renton, and also regulates flows from Springbrook Creek into the Duwamish River. The P-17 pump station drains the P-17 Pond that collects surface water from a majority of the Urban Center. The Segale pump station was installed to regulate soil saturation and piping during high river events but does not add new flows to the river. The remaining City pump stations only operate when gravity discharge to the river is prevented by high river events. Levees and/or revetments were constructed along much of the Green/Duwamish River through the City of Tukwila to increase bank strength and reduce flooding. In addition, flows within the Green/Duwamish River were greatly modified by the construction of the Howard A. Hansen Dam and installation of water diversions. These modifications significantly reduced the severity of floods that historically covered much of the valley bottom. The condition of the current system of levees and revetments is a growing source of concern for King County and the cities involved, as many of the levees are aging and do not meet current standards for either flood conveyance or stability. Aside from the Tukwila 205 certified levee on the left bank of the river in the Urban Center, other levees in the City do not meet COE standards and are mapped as floodplain. These include portions of the newly annexed Tukwila South area and levees along the right bank of the river. Current development proposals in Tukwila South include the relocation of the cross -valley levee and reconstruction of the non -certified levees to meet COE standards. The permitting for this work is on -going. 4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions The Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila provides important habitat for several fish and some wildlife species, such as osprey. The aquatic environment within the channel is an important corridor located at the transition from the freshwater riverine environment to tidal estuarine environment of Elliott Bay. Almost every species of anadromous fish migrates through this transition zone. The entire length of the Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila has been declared "critical habitat" for Chinook salmon and bull trout. Both species are listed as threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 9 3/ 1 /2019 83 One particularly important feature of Tukwila's shorelines is the habitat functions provided by the transition zone between fresh and salt water associated with the Duwamish estuary. In Tukwila, this area generally extends from the East Marginal Way bridge to the city's northern limits. The transition zone between fresh and salt water has effectively been pushed upstream from its historic location due to: (1) a significant reduction (70%) of fresh water flowing into the Duwamish estuary (owing to the diversion of the White and Cedar/Black Rivers), (2) channel dredging, and (3) reduction of flows as a result of the construction of the Howard A. Hanson Dam. The establishment of heavy industrial uses in the transition zone has replaced wetlands with impervious surfaces, and the stream banks have been replaced by levees and other armoring, eliminating edge habitat which slows flows and creating unrestrained rapid downstream flows. Spatial structure, residence time, and the habitat available for fish refugia and rearing functions in the Duwamish estuary have therefore been reduced and constrained. High densities of fish have been observed utilizing what is left of this specific habitat. At the watershed scale, overall increases in salmonid survival rates are dependent on the availability of sufficient transition zone habitat to accommodate fish while they adjust from fresh to salt water (WRIA 9 Steering Committee, 2005). Modifications to the river system have resulted over time in reduced levels of ecosystem functioning, including hydrology, water quality, riparian habitat, and in -stream habitat. Changes to hydrology are the result of modified flow regime due to dam construction, diversion, and urban development. River management and levees have reduced the connection between the rivers and their floodplains, changing the spatial extent of habitats, and increasing the potential for negative water quality impacts. Disturbances to the channel banks have resulted in areas that are dominated by non-native invasive species. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in -channel wood, is generally lacking throughout the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic habitats. 4.3 Land Use A. A History of the Green/Duwamish River and Tukwila's Shoreline: Origins of Land Development Patterns The Green River drains 492 square miles extending from the western Cascade Mountains to Elliott Bay. The City of Tukwila lies at the lower 14 of the overall watershed. As the Green River flows into the southern boundary of the City of Tukwila, it has drained approximately 440 square miles, or about 78 percent of its total drainage basin. Approximately 12.5 river miles of the Green/Duwamish River are included within the City of Tukwila, from about River Mile (RM) 16 to RM 3.7. The Green/Duwamish River channel has been highly modified during the last 150 years. Modifications range from the installation of levees and revetments to straightening and dredging for navigation purposes. In general, the level of physical modification to the system increases with distance downstream, culminating at the artificial Harbor Island that SMP Public Review Draft Clean 10 3/ 1 /2019 84 supports industrial activities at the Port of Seattle. Several tuming basins are maintained by periodic dredging throughout the straightened reach. The highly modified portion of the Green/Duwamish has also been the location of significant discharge of pollutants, resulting in portions of the river being designated as Federal Superfund sites. Remediation, source control and disposal activities are ongoing throughout the area. Prior to European settlement of the Lower Green River Valley, the floodplain likely consisted of a highly interspersed pattern of active and temporarily abandoned meandering channels, secondary channels, logjams, riparian forest, and scrub -shrub wetlands. The proportion of open channel to forest in the floodplain appears to have varied depending on the severity and timing of floods. High flows resulted in wider channels and the creation of new channels across the floodplain. Accounts of the channel systems indicate that major floods resulted in channel avulsion (abrupt change in the course of a river), rerouting around logjams, and the formation of new logjams. The area presently occupied by the City of Tukwila appeared historically to contain oxbow channels, secondary and backwater channels, and extensive floodplain wetlands. As part of regional flood control and river management efforts, significant watershed -scale changes occurred to the major river drainages south of Elliott Bay, including changes to the alignments and discharge points of the Cedar, Black, Green and White Rivers. In general, these changes have reduced the amount of water flowing through the Green/Duwamish River to about one third of historic conditions. Land use changes between European settlement and the current day have occurred in two general phases. From the mid 1800s to World War 'II, agriculture and timber harvesting dominated the Lower Green River Valley. Population densities in the Lower Green River Valley remained low until the Howard A. Hanson Dam project was completed in 1962, providing flood protection for the valley. Levees have also been constructed along the banks of the Green/Duwamish River, ranging from federally -certified levees to non - engineered agricultural berms. Since the dam and levee systems have significantly decreased the extent of flooding within the Lower Green River Valley, land development and urbanization have occurred. For more discussion on the character of the Green/Duwamish River and an inventory of river conditions, see the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, prepared by ESA/Adolfson, May, 2007 found in Appendix A. Historically, the Green/Duwamish River valley was known for its farmland. Farming was established in the early 1900's after forested areas were cleared and transportation to the area was improved. In 1906, construction of the Lake Washington ship canal eliminated flows of the Black River into the valley, reducing valley flooding. As a result, the river valley developed into highly productive farmland for the region. In the early 1950's, the Port of Seattle proposed to convert much of the Green/Duwamish River valley to intensive industrial uses. These plans included converting the river into a shipping canal, possibly reaching as far south as the City of Aubum. Valley landowners countered this proposal by annexing large tracts of land into Tukwila to retain more control SMP Public Review Draft Clean 1 1 3/ 1 /2019 85 over future land use decisions. With the construction of Howard Hanson Dam in 1962 on the upper Green River, flooding in the valley was further reduced. Much of the river is now contained within levees and surrounded by commercial and industrial development. The Port's actions in the northern part of the River and drastic reduction in river flooding have had a major influence on the development of the river valley. Today, Tukwila's portion of the Green/Duwamish River is known as a center for retail, commercial and industrial uses. The river remains inaccessible to shipping activity south of the Turning Basin, where it can be accessed primarily by small water craft, kayaks and canoes only. Land uses along the river are mostly commercial and industrial activities, with a few residential areas. With the designation of the Southcenter area as an Urban Center and the Duwamish Corridor as a Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC), this development pattern is expected to continue, and to intensify as redevelopment occurs. B. Riverbank Vegetation The natural environment along the river has been significantly altered from its original riparian corridor by intense urban development and river bank modification due to the construction of levees, revetments or other shoreline armoring. Most native stands of trees are gone, but have been replaced by new trees and plants in some areas. Landscaping with native and non-native plantings have also been completed in conjunction with new development along the corridor. Birds and small mammals are supported in both habitats. While more natural habitat is found up stream, re -development of the shoreline has the potential to provide appropriate landscaping and restoration of habitat that are more attractive to wildlife, people and a more environmentally sensitive form of development C. Public Access The regional Green River Trail provides public access to existing shoreline amenities and plans anticipate future linkages to Seattle's system. As redevelopment occurs, there will be opportunities to provide other types of public access, including viewing platfonns, boat ramps and fishing areas. 4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts Past restoration work focused on the Green\Duwamish River (in Water Resource Inventory Area 9) has resulted in good data collection and identification of potential restoration opportunities. Significant restoration activities along the GreenADuwamish River are already underway in the form of the multi -agency Green River Ecosystem Restoration Project. Several opportunities have been identified on the river as part of the recently adopted King County Flood Hazard Management Plan. Restoration opportunities focus on several key elements: • Removing non-native, invasive plant species and re -vegetating with native SMP Public Review Draft Clean 12 3/ 1 /2019 86 riparian forest species; • Removing artificial debris and walls that harden channel banks; • Integrating the reconnection of floodplains, levee setbacks, and other ecosystem restoration techniques with future flood and river management efforts; and • Property acquisition to allow for levee setbacks, side channel reconnection, and channel migration. Two key issues illustrate constraints to implementing restoration and potential use conflicts in Tukwila: 1) levee maintenance and management; and 2) existing development patterns and anticipated redevelopment. Discussion of shoreline planning for the Green River in Tukwila must acknowledge the fact that, in light of the existing system of levees (including the federally certified "205" levees) and revetments, the City cannot act alone. There are a variety of regulatory jurisdictions outside of the City with different responsibilities for maintenance and management of the levee system, including the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), King County River and Floodplain Management Unit (acting as part of the Green River Flood Control Zone District), and private property owners. The City of Tukwila Public Works Department has overall responsibility for maintenance of all levees, including the federally certified levee, which extends from about the 1-405 crossing to the south City limits. The actual maintenance work on this levee is contracted by the City to King County. The restoration of native tree and shrub species along the levees would increase riparian habitat ecological functioning of this reach of the Green/Duwamish River, benefiting salmonids as well as other species. However, the Corps of Engineers (responsible for certifying the federal levee) believes that the root system of these trees could destabilize levees, resulting in water piping (e.g., water infiltrating into and through levees along root pathways at higher rates than it could through root free soil) at high flows, and potential levee failure if trees fall. For the Vegetation Free Zone of the levee, current Corps guidance only allows grass as vegetative cover on the levees (USACOE, Engineering Manual 11 10-2-301). Current guidance also specifies a root -free zone where plantings can occur, but roots will generally not penetrate this structural zone. Therefore, under current regulations, to meet the requirements for federal levee certification, some vegetation was recently removed and ongoing vegetation management will be required to maintain the levee certification. Under the SMA, removing trees and vegetation from the riparian zone of shoreline of the state is in conflict with policies for vegetation conservation and enhancement. A possible solution is to step back and re -slope the levees to create mid -slope benches where vegetation can be planted that will not interfere with the levee prism as the levee system is reconstructed to improve its stability. This would require additional easement area beyond the existing maintenance easements that have been acquired along the length of SMP Public Review Draft Clean 13 3/ 1 /2019 87 the system. The existing development pattern also represents constraints to implementing restoration projects, including levee setbacks, off -channel habitat restoration, wetland and stream restoration, and riparian zone enhancements. Most of Tukwila is fully developed, with portions having a dense, urbanized land use pattern. The City's first SMP, in place since 1974, established a 40-foot setback from the mean high water line. In places that have not been redeveloped under current regulations there is little more than this 40-foot zone that is not intensely developed. Some places have somewhat more open space and less development and thus have greater flexibility to accommodate potential habitat restoration actions. The City's vision for future land use, based on its comprehensive plan, includes maintenance and further development of its urban character, particularly its identity as a regionally significant center for manufacturing, industrial, and commercial development. A challenge lies ahead in determining how best to accommodate new and redevelopment near the shoreline in a manner consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Master Program in order to achieve "no net loss" of shoreline function. 4.5 Conclusions Like many rivers in the Puget Sound region, the course and dynamics of the Green/Duwamish River has changed significantly as a result of development and alteration of its watershed over the past century or so. Characteristic of many cities in the region, Tukwila has grown and become highly urbanized. Continued growth is anticipated and the City is planning for that growth. To a significant degree, the City has envisioned and maintained a development pattern that preserved public access to the Green River and assured setbacks of new buildings from the shoreline. Issues of concern today are focused on reconstructing existing levees and revetments to protect existing development from flood hazards, an effort that will take place over a number of years in coordination with the King County Flood Control Zone District, King County and state and federal agencies. There are many opportunities for conservation and restoration actions in the City to restore or replace habitat while managing natural hazard areas. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 14 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG6]: The current map is outdated, the ransition zone was expanded to river mile 9 in the Duwamish lueprint based on new understanding of the use of the upper ach by larger juveniles later in the year. 88 Revised Map 2 — Duwamish River Transition Zone SMP Public Review Draft Clean 15 rauramYa . Transition lone River mile and number Incorporated area 3/1/2019 89 5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN - SUMMARY 5.1 Background The state guidelines require that local governments develop SMP policies that promote "restoration" of impaired shoreline ecological functions and a "real and meaningful" strategy to implement restoration objectives. The City's shoreline inventory and characterization report identifies which shoreline ecological functions and ecosystem processes have been impaired. Local govemments are further encouraged to contribute to restoration by planning for and supporting restoration through the SMP and other regulatory and non -regulatory programs. As part of the SMP update process, the City developed a Draft Shoreline Restoration Plan in February 2007. The draft plan was finalized in May, 2008 following technical review by King County and Ecology and has since been updated to include additional potential projects, address Ecology comments and refocus priorities to projects within the Transition Zone. It is included as Appendix B to the SMP. The restoration plan builds on the Inventory and Characterization Report and provides a framework to: • Identify primary goals for ecological restoration of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; • Identify how restoration of ecological function can be accomplished; • Suggest how the SMP update process may accomplish the restoration of impaired shoreline functions associated with the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; and • Prioritize restoration projects so that the highest value restoration actions may be accomplished first. 5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions As summarized in the previous section, the Inventory and Characterization analysis examined riverine and estuarine ecosystem processes that maintain shoreline ecological functions, and identified impaired ecological functions. The inventory report identified key ecosystem processes, and provided a qualitative assessment of their levels of functioning at both a watershed and city reach scale. Key ecosystem functions identified in the inventory, their level of alteration, and potential restoration actions are summarized in Table 1. As noted in the Inventory and Characterization Report and summarized in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Summary Section, many of the alterations to shoreline functions and ecosystem processes in the Green/Duwamish River are due to watershed SMP Public Review Draft Clean 16 3/1/2019 90 scale issues within the upper watershed which cannot be fully restored or addressed in the lower river section through Tukwila. However, hydrologic, water quality, and habitat restoration measures in the City do have the potential to improve the overall functioning of this important section of the Green/Duwamish River ecosystem that includes the transition zone from fresh to salt water. Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila Function Category Function Alterations to natural functioning Potential Restoration Action within the City Hydrologic Channel-Floodplain Interaction Presence of flood protection structures (e.g., levees, river bank revetments, flood gates) and significant fill and development along the shoreline limit channel-floodplain interactions in Tukwila. 1. Modify current levees and revetments to increase channel and floodplain interaction; P 2. Excavate back or side channels; Hydrologic Upland sediment generation Fine sediment contribution to the river is increased due to build-up and wash- off from surrounding urban land uses. Implement enhanced stormwater BMPs for fine sediment removal in stormwater runoff. Water Quality Retention of particulates and contaminants Levees and revetments are virtually continuous along the riverbanks, limiting the potential to retain particulates or contaminants contained in stormwater sheet flows in the fluvially dominated reaches. Particulates, including sediment, are retained in the tidally dominated reaches, as evidenced by the need to dredge the estuary turning basin. 1. Modify current levees and revetments to increase channel and floodplain area; 2. Install native riparian species to increase bank roughness. Water Quality Nutrient cycling As channel-floodplain interaction was reduced, the channel became a conduit for nutrients, offering little opportunity for contact time with soils. 1, hncrease riverine wetland area; 2 Install native riparian plant species. 3. Set back banks (revetments and levees). Large Woody Debris (I,WD) and Organics Maintain character stic plant community The majority of the shoreline within the City of Tukwila is currently dominated by non-native invasive weed species (Himalayan blackberry, reed canary- grass, and Japanese knotweed). Some higher quality areas of cottonwood, alder, and willow exist in riparian areas bordering open space, parkland, and residential zones. 1. Remove invasive plants and install native riparian species; 2. Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization and restoration projects; 3. Institute programmatic weed control activities along shoreline. 4. Promote bioengineering techniques for shoreline stabilization projects. LWD and Organics: Source of LWD Despite the lack of many sources for LWD, there are some large cottonwoods and big leaf maples occur along the levees and revetment system. 1 hnstall native riparian species; 2.Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization and restoration projects. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 17 3/1/2019 91 5.3 Plans, Programs, and Completed Projects The importance of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem within the Puget Sound has resulted in significant focus on this area in terms of restoration potential. With the federal listing of Chinook and bull trout as endangered species, watershed planning in the region (e.g., WRIA 9) has focused on developing a Salmon Habitat Plan (WRIA 9, 2005), to which the City of Tukwila is a party. The plan establishes goals, objectives, and programmatic and site specific actions to address restoration of habitat critical to salmon species in the Green/Duwamish watershed. Tukwila has already engaged in the greater regional restoration effort for the Green/Duwamish River. The City Council has ratified the WRIA 9 Plan and contributes resources to maintain operating staff. Tukwila has worked within the larger Green/Duwamish River Ecosystem restoration project to acquire or donate properties that are either currently functioning (Cecil B. Moses Park, Codiga Farm), or have the potential for restoration (North Winds Weir, Duwamish Gardens). WRIA 9 and other regional partners are currently working together to monitor baseline conditions. Several projects from the WRIA 9 Plan are included on the City's Capital Improvement Program list; other projects will be added as CIP projects are completed and funds are identified for new projects. The restoration plan identifies several projects that have already been completed in the Green/Duwamish River. These projects provide an excellent opportunity to learn about what river restoration measures are the most effective. For example, it appears that the back channel that was excavated at Codiga Farm provides important habitat for migrating juvenile fish. 5.4 Restoration Opportunities Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be five specific types of restoration actions that will most benefit the Green/Duwamish ecosystem in Tukwila. These actions are intended to boost the levels of ecosystem functioning as part of a self-sustaining ecosystem that will limit the need for future manipulation. While these projects are intended to restore many ecosystem functions, the restoration activities will occur in the highly urban valley bottom, and as a result, cannot fully achieve pre -disturbance channel conditions. In addition, some restoration actions must occur at the watershed scale, which will restore ecosystem functions that cannot be addressed solely within Tukwila or as part of the SMP. • Enlarging channel cross -sectional area. This action could include setting back levees and re -sloping banks to reduce steepness. These actions will increase flood storage, allow for more stable levees, restore some floodplain area, provide a larger intertidal zone in this important transitional area, and provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. The Transition Zone is identified in Map 2. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 18 3/ 1 /2019 92 • Enhancing existing habitats. These actions could include the removal of non-native invasive vegetation, installation of native riparian vegetation, and installation of LWD below Ordinary High Water. This action will improve the functioning of the aquatic, riverine wetland, and riparian habitats that currently exist along the Green/Duwamish River. • Creating off -channel habitat areas. This action would create off channel areas through the excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to create back channels as fish foraging and refugia areas. • Reconnecting wetland habitat to the river. This action would reconnect an old oxbow wetland to the river, allowing for off -channel habitat (Nelson Side Channel). • Removing fish barriers where tributary streams discharge to the river. This action would remove flap gates and install fish -friendly flap gates at the mouths of Tukwila's three major streams (Gilliam, Southgate and Riverton) and possibly restore habitat area at these locations in the shoreline jurisdiction. 5.5 Potential Projects and Priorities The restoration plan summarizes 26 potential projects as specific restoration projects within the shorelines of Tukwila. Most of the restoration projects are part of ongoing restoration planning through the WRIA 9 watershed planning process. Additionally, opportunities exist to enhance riparian vegetation along the majority of the Green/Duwamish River. The restoration plan provides a preliminary qualitative (high, medium, low) project ranking system. Within this ranking system, the highest priority location for restoration projects is within the transition zone. The Transition Zone is mapped in Map 2. High priority projects will typically: • Address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions; • Have opportunity for multiple funding sources; • Include freshwater tributary channels; and/or • Not require additional property acquisition. Medium priority projects will typically: • Address limited ecosystem functions; and • Be eligible for multiple funding sources, and/or require property acquisition. Low priority projects will typically: • Only focus on habitat enhancement; • Will be used as mitigation to offset impacts elsewhere; or • Not be eligible for multiple funding sources. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 19 3/ 1 /2019 93 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES The goals and policies that lead and inspire Tukwila's shoreline actions are found in the Shoreline Element of the City's 2015 Comprehensive Plan. These, along with the narrative in that Chapter, were updated based on the 2009 SMP and 2011 revisions approved by the Department of Ecology. 7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS The City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) establishes a system to classify shoreline areas into specific "environment designations." This system of classifying shorelines is established by the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) and Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-211). The purpose of shoreline environment designations is to provide a uniform basis for applying policies and use regulations within similar shoreline areas. Generally, shoreline designations should be based on existing and planned development patterns, biological and physical capabilities and limitations of the shoreline, and a community's vision or objectives for its future development. 7.1 Pre 2009 Regulatory Framework Tukwila's first SMP adopted in 1974, designated all shorelines as "Urban." At the time the 1974 SMP was developed, all of the land in Tukwila's shoreline jurisdiction was either zoned commercial/industrial or was developed with urban uses. The SMP defined the Urban Environment as "areas to be managed in high intensive land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial development and accessory uses, while providing for restoration and preservation to ensure long -tern protection of natural and cultural resources within the shoreline" (Tukwila, 1974). The SMP further stated that the management objectives for the shoreline "are directed at minimizing adverse impacts on the river and shoreline ecology, maximizing the aesthetic quality and recreational opportunities of the river shore, and recognizing the rights and privileges of property owners" (Tukwila, 1974). Within the Urban Environment, Tukwila's SMP employed a tiered system of regulations based on the distance from the Green/Duwamish River mean high water mark (MHWM). These tiered management zones are generally described below and illustrated on Figure 1: • River Environment/Zone: a 40-foot wide zone extending landward from MHWM and having the most environmentally protective regulations; • Low -Impact Environment/Zone: the area between the River Environment and 100 feet from the MHWM; and • High -Impact Environment/Zone: the area between 100 and 200 feet from the MHWM. The City also administered the King County Shoreline Master Program for the areas SMP Public Review Draft Clean 20 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG7]: The proposal is to delete the duplicate listing of goals and policies fi'omthe Shoreline Element. Minor edits to the Element are needed to match the 2011 revisions approved by DOE and will be found in a separate ordinance. 94 which had been annexed since the adoption of the City's SMP in 1974. These areas were designated Urban and the setbacks from Ordinary High Water Mark varied from 20 feet to 50 feet depending on whether the use was water dependent, single family or commercial/industrial. See Annexation History, Map 1 for an identification of the areas where the City administered the County's SMP. 200' • URBAN ENVIRONMENT 100' HIGH IMPACT ZONE 60 LOW IMPACT ZONE RIVER ZONE 200' 40' RIVEN ZONE URBAN ENVIRONMENT 60• LOW IMPACT ZONE 1 00' MEAN HIGH WAT9~R LINE HIGH IMPACT ZONE Figure 1. Pre 2009 Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44) 7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory / Characterization Report and Restoration Plan This section summarizes findings from the Inventory and Characterization Report and Restoration Plan elements of the SMP update (Appendices A and B). These findings inform the goals, policies, regulations, and the development and application of environment designations. In this context, the key findings can be summarized as follows: • The Green/Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource, particularly in the Transition Zone portion of the river that extends from river mile 10 upstream from the Interstate 5 bridge through the north City limits (see Map 2), where juvenile salmon adjust from fresh to salt water habitat. The river provides migratory habitat for numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a variety of wildlife. • The river is a critical resource for Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing. • The river is a critical resource for some water dependent uses north of the Turning Basin. • The river is an important recreational resource for sport fishing, small water craft and Green River Trail users. • At an ecosystem scale, the habitat is largely homogenous throughout the city. In addition, many ecosystem processes are largely controlled by up -river characteristics, particularly the Howard Hanson Dam and are little affected by SMP Public Review Draft Clean 21 3/ 1 /2019 95 actions in the City, except for such functions as water quality (especially fine sediment capture and filtering of contaminants in stormwater), local surface hydrology (stormwater from increasing amounts of impervious surfaces and contribution to peak flows of the river), riparian habitat, and temperature control (shading from riparian habitat).With the exception of the functions provided by the transitional mixing zone from salt to fresh water, habitat conditions and functions are relatively similar throughout the shoreline. The transition zone needs greater protection and restoration focus than other sections of the shoreline in the city. • Restoration opportunities are numerous and spatially distributed throughout Tukwila's shoreline. Activities that provide restoration of both floodplain functions and habitat functions should be prioritized, particularly those projects in the transition zone. Policies should promote and regulations should enable the City to accomplish restoration goals and actions. 7.3 State Environment Designation System State Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-211) establish the environment designation system for shorelines regulated by the Shoreline Management Act. The guidelines (WAC 173-26-150 and 176-26-160) give local jurisdictions the option to plan for shorelines in designated Urban Growth Areas (UGA) and Potential Annexation Areas (PAA) as well. The City can "pre -designate" shoreline environments in its designated PAA as part of this planning process. However, shorelines in the PAA would continue to be regulated under the provisions of the King County SMP until the City annexes those areas. The County's SMP designates the City's North PAA and the South PAA as High Intensity. The guidelines (WAC 173-26-21 1(4)(6)) recommend six basic environment designations: high intensity; shoreline residential; urban conservancy; rural conservancy; natural; and aquatic. Local governments may establish a different designation system, retain their current environment designations and/or establish parallel environments provided the designations are consistent with the purposes and policies of the guidelines (WAC 173- 26-21 1(4)(c)). The guidelines also note that local shoreline environment designations should be consistent with the local comprehensive plan (WAC 173-26-211(3)). For each environment designation, jurisdictions must provide a purpose statement, classification criteria, management policies and environment specific regulations. Table 2 describes the purpose for each of the recommended designations in the state guidelines. For each designation, the potential applicability to Tukwila is noted. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 22 3/ 1 /2019 96 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System - WAC 173-26-211 (5) Environment Designation Purpose Applicability to Tukwila Aquatic The purpose of the "aquatic" environment is to protect, restore, and manage the unique characteristics and resources of the areas waterward of the ordinary high-water mark. This designation will be used for the area waterward of the ordinary high water mark which includes the water surface along with the underlying lands and the water column. Natural The purpose of the "natural" environment is to protect those shoreline areas that are relatively free of human influence or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline functions intolerant of human use. While the Green River shorelines in Tukwila provide some important ecological functions, the river and adjacent uplands throughout Tukwila have been significantly altered by dense urban development and are generally armored or otherwise modified. Rural Conservancy The purpose of the "rural conservancy" environment is to protect ecological functions, conserve existing natural resources and valuable historic and cultural areas in order to provide for sustained resource use, achieve natural floodplain processes, and provide recreational opportunities. Not applicable to Tukwila. All of the City's shorelines are urbanized. Potential annexation areas are either urbanized or proposed for intensive development. Urban Conservancy The purpose of the "urban conservancy" environment is to protect and restore ecological functions of open space, floodplain and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses. This designation is applicable in that the Green River is an important natural resource. The most significant shoreline function provided in Tukwila is related to fish and wildlife habitat. Open space is limited by the existing development pattern and floodplains are largely disconnected by a series of levees, revetments, and other infrastructure. Shoreline Residential The purpose of the "shoreline residential" environment is to accommodate residential development and appurtenant structures that are consistent with this chapter. An additional purpose is to provide appropriate public access and recreational uses. This designation is most applicable for those portions of Tukwila's shorelines where the existing and planned development pattern is for low density (i.c., predominantly single-family) residential uses or public recreation uses. High -Intensity The purpose of the "high -intensity" environment is to provide for high -intensity water -oriented commercial, transportation, and industrial uses while protecting existing ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. This designation is applicable along only part of Tukwila's shorelines, in the Manufacturing and Industrial Center (MIC) north of the Turning Basin. Water - dependent uses are currently limited, as only a small portion of the river in Tukwila is navigable for commercial purposes, and much of the river has levees, thus restricting use immediately adjacent to the river. 7.4 Environment Designations The Natural and Rural Conservancy Environments are not well suited to a highly developed, urbanized river that is navigable for only a small portion of the system and is SMP Public Review Draft Crean 23 3/1/2019 97 significantly constrained by levees for flood management, such as the Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila. The City's Shoreline Environments, which are identified on Map 3, are: • Shoreline Residential Environment • Urban Conservancy Environment • High Intensity Environment, and • Aquatic Environment The City designated a buffer to replace the prior system of parallel shoreline management zones. Instead of the prior River Environment, a minimum buffer was established for each shoreline environment and allowed uses were designated for the buffer area along the river and the remaining shoreline jurisdiction. This system is intended to facilitate the City's Tong -range objectives for land and shoreline management, including: • Ensuring no net loss of ecological shoreline functions; • Providing for habitat protection, enhancement, and restoration to improve degraded shoreline ecological functions over time and protection of already restored areas; • Allowing continued and increased urban development in recognition of Tukwila's role as a regionally significant industrial and commercial center; and • Providing for improved flood control in coordination with King County and the Army Corps of Engineers. Table 3, on the following page, provides a summary of the characteristics of the river shoreline in Tukwila to set the stage for the discussion in Section 7.5 on the detennination of shoreline buffers. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 24 3/ 1 /2019 98 Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification MIC/H & Fresh/Salt water High Intensity 100' The Director may reduce the standard MIC/L Zoned Transition Zone, Lower flooding buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the property risk, Less than 20' following cross section: from North difference from - 1. reslope bank from OHWM City Limits to EMWS OHWM to top of hank, tidal (not toe) to be no steeper than 3:1, using bioengineering techniques Bridge, and North influence - 2. Minimum 20' buffer landward from top of bank Potential Annexation Area - 3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Comment: Maximum slope is reduced due to measurement from OHWM and to recognize location in the Transition Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below OHWM difficult. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to the river. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. LDR Zoncd Moderate flooding Shoreline Distance Removal of invasive species and property w/o risk, Less than 25' Residential required replanting with native species of high levees from difference from to set habitat value voluntary unless EMWS to I- OHWM to top of back triggered by requirement for a 405 bank, tidal slope Shoreline Substantial Development influence on northern section from toc at 2.5:1 plus 20' setback, Min. 50' width permit SMP Public Review Draft - Strikeout 25 3/1/2019 99 LDR Zoned property with levees from EMWS to I- 405 Moderate flooding risk, Less than 25' difference from OHWM to top of bank, tidal influence on northern section Shoreline Residential 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in accordance with City levee standards, the Director may reduce the buffer to actual width required. Comment: this applies to City -owned property at Fort Dent. Commercially zoned property from 42"a Ave S. Bridge to 1- 405 Moderate flooding risk, Less than 25' difference from OHWM to top of hank Urban Conservancy 100' The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon -construction of the following cross section: • rcslopc bank from toe to be no steeper than 3:1 using bioengineering techniques • Minimum 20' buffer landward from top of bank • Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. West River bank from 1- 405 to South City Limit, Tukwila 205 Levee and South Annexation Area High flooding risk, Federally certified and County levee, large water level fluctuations Urban Conservancy 125' Upon construction or reconstruction of levee in accordance with City levee standards the Director may reduce the buffer to the actual width required. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 26 3/1/2019 Commented [PIGS]: The proposal is to change this to 3:1 to provide greater slope stability and ease of planting. This can be accommodated within the existing 100' buffer width. 100 East River bank without levee from 1- 405 south to City Limits Moderate flooding risk, 20 to 25' difference from OHWM to top of hank, Moderate slumping risk, large water level fluctuations Urban Conservancy 100' The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the following cross section: - I. reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than fl:1, fusing_ bioengineering techniques - 2. Minimum 20' buffer landward from top of bank - 3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. East River bank with levee from 1- 405 to South City Limit Moderate flooding risk, 20 to 25' difference from OH WM to top of hank, Moderate slumping risk, large water level fluctuations Urban Conservancy 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in accordance with City levee standards the Director may reduce the buffer to the actual width required for the levee. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. Any shoreline environment where street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer End buffer on river side of existing improved street or roadway. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 27 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG9]: The proposal is to change this to 3:1 to provide greater slope stability and ease of planting. This can be accommodated within the existing 100' buffer width. 101 Legend iumgaugg L PAk Pntyn1lal Annexan`k,n Arean U^trai Crimungancy Shore] ing E^ivifnn .,„.. High rniensiily Srtwefne Emitminent SMP Public Review Draft Clean Map 3 Shoreline Enviranrmen 28 3/1/2019 102 7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers The determination of the buffer distances for each shoreline environment was based on several factors including the analysis of buffer functions needed for protecting and restoring shoreline ecological function (as presented in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report) and the need to allow space for bank stability and for protecting human life and structures from damage from high flows, erosion and bank failures. Safety of residents and people who work in buildings along the shoreline has become even more important in recent years due to the increase in stormwater entering the river from increasing impervious surfaces throughout the watershed and increasing frequency and intensity of flows during high rain events. These higher and more frequent flows will put more stress on over -steepened banks all along the river, increasing the possibility of bank erosion, levee failures, and bank failures. Thus, ensuring that new structures are not built too close to the river's edge is crucial to avoid loss of human life. Staff also reviewed the rationale for the buffer widths established for watercourses under TMC 18.45, the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, as well as buffer widths recommended by resource agencies, such as the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources and the recent Biological Opinion issued by National Marine Fisheries Service in relation to FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program. The final buffer widths proposed by staff for each shoreline environment attempted to balance shoreline ecological function needs, human life and property protection needs (including future levee repair/reconstruction), existing land use patterns, and state and federal agency policies. The following information summarizes the analysis carried out and the rationale used for determining buffer widths. A. Buffer Functions Supporting Shoreline Ecological Resources, Especially Salmonids Buffers play an important role in the health of any watercourse and an even more important role when considering the health of salmonids in the Green/Duwamish River system. The key buffer functions for the river are summarized below. The Shoreline Management Act and the Department of Ecology regulations require evaluation of ecological functions and that local SMPs ensure that the policies and regulations do not cause any net loss of shoreline ecological function. In addition, the SMP must identify mechanisms for restoration of lost ecological functions. The crucial issue for the Green/Duwamish River is the presence of salmonids that are on the Endangered Species list. To protect and restore ecological functions related to these SMP Public Review Draft Clean 29 3/ 1 /2019 103 species it is important to provide for the installation of native vegetation along the shoreline. Such vegetation provides shade for improving temperature conditions in the river and habitat for insects on which fish prey. Trees along the shoreline also provide a source of large woody debris (tree trunks, root wads, limbs, etc. that fall into the water), which in turn provides pooling and areas of shelter for fish and other animals. In order to allow for planting of native vegetation, banks need to be set back to allow for less steep and more stable (requiring Tess annoring) slopes, so that they can be planted which is crucial for improving shoreline ecological functions that are needed in the river. The buffer widths needed to achieve a particular buffer function vary widely by function type from as little as 16 feet for large woody debris recruitment (assuming the buffer has large trees) to over 400 feet for sediment removal. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommends a riparian buffer width of 250 feet for shorelines of statewide significance (this applies to the Green/Duwamish River). The Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) recommends a riparian buffer of 200 feet for Class 1 Waters (the Green/Duwamish River is a Class 1 Water under the WDNR classification scheme). The National Marine Fisheries Service (responsible at the federal level for overseeing protection of endangered salmonids under the Endangered Species Act) has recommended a buffer of 250 feet in mapped floodplain areas to allow for protection of shoreline functions that support salmonids. ' Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45) has established a 100 foot buffer for Type 2 watercourses in the city (those that bear salmonid species). The key buffer functions for the river are summarized below. 1. Maintenance of Water Quality Salmonid fish require water that is both colder and has lower nutrient levels than many other types of fish. Vegetated shoreline buffers contribute to improving water quality as described below. a. Water Temperature: The general range of temperatures required to support healthy salmonid populations is generally between 39 degrees and 63 degrees. Riparian vegetation, particularly forested areas can affect water temperature by providing shade to reduce exposure to the sun and regulate high ambient air temperatures. b. Dissolved Oxygen: dissolved oxygen is one of the most influential water quality parameters for aquatic life, including salmonid fish. The most significant factor affecting dissolved oxygen levels is water Endangered Species Act — Section 7 Consultation Final Biological Opinion and Magnuson —Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Implementation of the Flood Insurance Program in the State of Washington Phase One Document Puget Sound Region September, 2008. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 30 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG10]: While the it profile requires a mid - slope bench for plantings they can also occur outside of the levee prism when designed using flood walls or shallower slopes. 104 temperature — cooler streams maintain higher levels of oxygen than warmer waters. c. Metals and pollutants: Common pollutants found in streams, particularly in urban areas, are excessive nutrients (such as phosphorous and nitrogen), pesticides, bacteria and miscellaneous contaminants such as PCBs and heavy metals. Impervious surfaces collect and concentrate pollutants from different sources and deliver these materials to streams during storm events. The concentration of pollutants increases in direct proportion to the total amount of impervious area. Undisturbed or well vegetated riparian buffer areas can retain sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens and other pollutants, protecting water quality in streams. Elevated nitrogen and phosphorus levels in runoff are a typical problem in urban watersheds and can lead to increased in -stream plant growth, which results in excess decaying plant material that consumes oxygen in streams and reduces aquatic habitat quality. 2. Contributing to in -stream structural diversity a. Large woody debris (LWD) refers to limbs and tree trunks that naturally fall into the stream bed from a vegetated buffer. LWD serves many functions in watercourses. LWD adds roughness to stream channels, which in turn slows water velocities and traps sediments. Sources of LWD in urban settings are limited where stream corridors have been cleared of vegetation and developed and channel movement limited due to revetments and levees. Under natural conditions, the nonnal movement of the stream channel, undercutting of banks, wind throw, and flood events are all methods of LWD recruitment to a stream channel. b. LWD also contributes to the formation of pools in river channels that provide important habitat for salmonids. Adult salmonids require pools with sufficient depth and cover to protect them from predators during spawning migration. Adult salmon often hold to pools during daylight, moving upstream from pool to pool at night. 3. Providing Biotic Input of Insects and Organic Matter a. Vegetated buffers provide foods for salmonids and other fish, because insects fall into the water from overhanging vegetation. b. Leaves and other organic matter falling into stream provide food and nutrients for many species of aquatic insects which in turn provide forage for fish. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 31 3/ 1 /2019 105 B. Bank Stability and Protection of Human Lives and Structures The main period of runoff and major flood events on the Green River is from November through February. The lower Green and Duwamish levees and revetments form a nearly continuous bank protection and flood containment system. Farmers originally constructed many of these levees and revetments as the protection to the agricultural lands of the area and this original material is still in place as the structural core. In particular, these protection facilities typically have over -steepened banks, areas with inadequate rock buttressing at the toe, and lack habitat -enhancing features such as overhanging vegetation or in -water large woody debris. Because of these design and construction shortcomings, the protection to river banks has not always performed as intended. Instead, there have been bank failures that have threatened structures and infrastructure; erosion of banks — making them even steeper; and damage to levees that has required a series of repair projects. The damage to the levee system in storm events lead to discussions among the City, US Army Corps of Engineers and the King County Flood Control District to determine the best levee design to prevent the recurring problem of continued levee repairs. The criteria used to design a levee profile are: • Public Safety; • Maintaining levee certification; • Solutions that eliminate or correct factors that have caused or contributed to the need for the levee repair; • Levee maintenance needs; and • Environmental considerations. To overcome the existing problems and to reduce future maintenance and repair costs, the Corps chose to lessen the overall slope to a stable grade. This selected method is consistent with recommendations set forth in the Corps of Engineers' Manual for Design and Construction of Levees (EM 1110-2-1913) for slope stability. It also is consistent with the levee rehabilitation project constructed on the nearby Briscoe School levee that has proven to be a very effective solution to scour problems — the design slows the river down, provides additional flood storage and allows a vegetated mid -slope bench for habitat improvements. This ,irofile was used to repair two areas of the federally -certified levee in Tukwilal— the Lily Point project and the Segale project, which were about 2,000 linear feet of repairs. Costs of these repairs were around $7 million dollars, not including any costs of land acquisition for laying back the levees. It is expected that the use of this levee design or an environmentally superior solution will reduce the need to continually repair the levee in those areas, thus avoiding such high expenditures in the future and saving money in the long run. The profile discussed above is illustrated in Figure 2 below: SMP Public Review Draft Clean 32 3/ 1 /2019 Commented[NG11j.However,the Briscoe profile was not used in the more recent levee reconst action in Kent. 106 Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas -Width Will Vary Reconfigured Levee Vegetated Bench 11L Maintenance Easement �G T, *Reconfigured Slope averages 2.5:1 with bench Minimum Levee Profile Not To Scale Figure 2. Briscoe Levee Profile Willows Existing Levee Ordinary High Water Mark OHWM Because of the similarities in the soil conditions and taking into consideration the tidal influence, the Green/Duwamish River can be divided into three areas — South of 1-405; North of 1-405; and areas around residential neighborhoods. Looking at the slope geometry and the difference in height between the ordinary high water mark and the 100- year flood elevation for these three areas, it was found that 125-feet of setback distance (buffer) is needed to accommodate the "lay back" of the levee in the area south of 1-405 and around Fort Dent Park.2 During high flow events, the water surface can be as much as 16 feet above the OHWM in these areas. At locations further downriver, the water surface elevation difference is much less pronounced due to the wider channel and proximity to Puget Sound. For areas without levees, north of 1-405 and those areas south of 1-405 on the east side of the river (right bank), a 100-foot setback distance is required to accommodate the slopes needed for bank stability. Within residential neighborhoods, a minimum 50-foot setback is justified because of the less intense land use associated with single-family home construction and the estimated amount of space needed to achieve the natural angle of repose for a more stable slope. Even though the above explanation for determining appropriate buffer distance used levee design as the example, the same problems exist where there are no levees. The river makes no distinction between an over -steepened slope associated with a levee or a riverbank. Scouring within the river will cause sloughing and slope stability will be weakened, potentially resulting in the loss of structures. In fact, the non -leveed riverbank 2 The 125 foot distance includes a slope no steeper than 2.5:1 with a mid -slope bench incorporated 18 feet at the top of the levee and 10 feet on the back side of the levee for access and inspection. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 33 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [AMS12]z Figure should be renamed Briscoe Levee Profile 107 can be more prone to these problems since they tend to be steeper and consist mainly of sand and silt. This makes them susceptible to erosion. Because the non -leveed riverbanks are for the most part privately owned, they are not actively monitored for damage by the City or County. C. Conclusions The determination of buffer widths was based on two important criteria: the need to achieve bank stability and protect structures along the shoreline from damage due to erosion and bank failures and to protect and enhance shoreline ecological function. Applying the 200 to 250 foot buffer widths recommended by WDFW and WDNR would not be practical given the developed nature of the shoreline. It was also felt that a buffer less than that already established for Type 2 Watercourses under the City's SAO would not be sufficiently protective of shoreline functions, unless those functions were enhanced through various restoration options. Therefore, 100 feet was established as the starting point for considering buffer widths from the standpoint of shoreline ecological function in each of the Shoreline Environments. Between 100 and 125 feet was the starting point for buffer widths from the standpoint of bank stability and property protection. Thus buffers were established taking into account (as explained in the following sections) the characteristics of each Shoreline Environment, needs for protection/restoration of shoreline ecological functions, and needs for stable banks and human life and property protection. 7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment A. Designation Criteria: All properties zoned for single-family use from the ordinary high water mark landward two -hundred (200) feet. In addition, those areas zoned for single family use but developed for public recreation or open space within 200 feet of the shoreline shall also be designated Shoreline Residential, except Fort Dent Park. B. Purpose of Environment and Establishment of River Buffer: The purpose of the Shoreline Residential Environment is to accommodate urban density residential development, appurtenant structures, public access and recreational activities. However, within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction in the Shoreline Residential Environment there will be a protective buffer along the river, where development will be limited to protect shoreline function. The purpose of the river buffer in the shoreline residential environment is to: • Ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions; SMP Public Review Draft Clean 34 3/ 1 /2019 108 • Help protect water quality and habitat function by limiting allowed uses; • Protect existing and new development from high river flows by ensuring sufficient setback of structures; • Promote restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment; and • Allow room for reconstructing over -steepened river banks to achieve a more stable slope and more natural shoreline bank conditions and avoid the need for shoreline armoring. C. Analysis of Development Character of Residential Shoreline: An analysis was prepared that looked at the residential properties along the shoreline and identified the number of parcels with structures within 50 feet and 100 feet of the OHWM. This analysis showed the following: ZONE Number of parcels within 50 feet of OHWM Number of vacant parcels within 50 feet Number of parcels with structures within 50 feet/% Number of parcels within 100 feet of OHWM Number of vacant parcels within 100 feet Number of parcels with structures within 100 feet/% LDR 135 12 67/49% 201 25 165/82% As can be seen from the chart above, almost half of the parcels in the residential neighborhoods have a structure within 50 feet of the OHWM — a direct result of the current King County regulations. To apply a buffer width that is consistent with the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) of 100 feet would create a situation where 82% of the properties along the river would have nonconforming structures as they relate to the proposed shoreline buffer. Expansion of single family nonconforming structures in the proposed SMP buffer would be governed by Section 14.5 of the SMP, which permits an expansion of only 50% of the square footage of the current area that intrudes into the buffer and only along the ground floor of the structure. For example, if 250 square feet of a building extended into the proposed buffer, the ground floor could be expanded a maximum of 125 feet in total area along the existing building line. A buffer of 100 feet was considered for the shoreline residential properties, with the potential of a property owner applying for a buffer reduction of 50%, however, under the Shoreline Management Act, this would have required an application for a shoreline variance for each requested buffer reduction, a process that requires review and approval both at the local and state level (Ecology must review and approve the variance in addition to the City of Tukwila). This did not seem a reasonable process to require of so many property owners. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 35 3/ 1 /2019 109 The river bank in the Shoreline Residential Environment is typically in a modified and degraded state but generally not stabilized with revetments, dikes or levees. Based on an analysis of the river elevations and existing banks, a 50 foot minimum buffer in the Shoreline Residential Environment would allow room to achieve a 2.5:1 bank slope with an additional 20 foot setback from the top of the slope — a distance that will allow for bank stability and in -turn, protection of new structures from high flows, and bank failures. A schematic of the shoreline jurisdiction showing the buffer is provided in Figure 3. 200' Shoreline Residential Environment 50' min Buffer Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer The proposed buffer area for the Shoreline Residential Environment will allow for removal of invasive plants, planting of native vegetation in the riparian zone and inclusion of other features to improve shoreline habitat. It also will prevent the placement of any structures in an area that could potentially prove unstable. In the event of bank erosion or slope failures, the buffer will provide sufficient space for re -sloping the bank to a more stable 2.5:1 slope, either through bank stabilization projects or through natural bank failures that result in the natural angle of repose (2.5:1 or greater). 7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment A. Designation Criteria: This environment will be designated in the area between the Ordinary High Water Mark and 200 feet landward as regulated under the Shoreline Management Act and applied to all shorelines of the river except the Shoreline Residential Environment and the High Intensity Environment. The Urban Conservancy Environment areas are currently developed with dense urban multifamily, commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or are designated for such uses in the proposed south annexation area. This environment begins at the southern end of the Turning Basin and includes portions of the river where levees and revetments generally have been constructed and where the river is not navigable to large water craft. Uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 36 3/ 1 /2019 110 B. Purpose of Environment: The purpose of the Urban Conservancy Environment is to protect ecological functions where they exist in urban and developed settings, and restore ecological functions where they have been previously degraded, while allowing a variety of compatible uses. C. Establishment of River Buffers: The Urban Conservancy environment will have two different buffers, depending on the location along the river and whether or not the shoreline has a flood control levee. The purpose of Urban Conservancy River Buffers is to: • Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, floodplain and other sensitive lands in the developed urban settings; • Ensure no net loss of shoreline function when new development or re- development is proposed; • Provide opportunities for restoration and public access; • Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of property, while accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment, wherever possible; • Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and • Protect existing and new development from high river flows. Buffer in Non -Levee Areas: A buffer width of 100 feet is established for the Urban Conservancy Environment for all non-residential areas without levees. This buffer width is consistent with that established by the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance for Type 2 streams that support salmonid use, which is based on Best Available Science. In addition, as noted above, looking at the slope geometry and the difference in height between the ordinary high water mark and the 100-year flood elevation for these areas, it was found that a 100-foot setback distance is required to accommodate the slopes needed for bank stability. The buffer width of 100 feet allows enough room to reconfigure the river bank to achieve a slope of 2.5:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope and allow for some restoration and improvement of shoreline function through the installation of native plants and other habitat features. The actual amount of area needed to achieve a 2.5:1 slope may be less than 100 feet, depending on the character of the river bank and can only be determined on a site -by -site basis. As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the river bank to be no steeper than '3:11,provide a 20 foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the river bank and the 20 foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Any buffer reduction proposal SMP Public Review Draft Clean 37 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG13]: The proposal is to change the standard for buffer reductions from 2.5:1 to 3:1 to provide greater slope stability and ease of planting. This can be accommodated within the existing 100' buffer width. 111 must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to shoreline ecosystem functions. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include removal of invasive plants, and plantings using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. In areas of the river where this condition currently exists or where the property owner has constructed these improvements, the buffer width will be the actual distance as measured from the ordinary high water mark to the top of the bank plus 20 feet. The shoreline jurisdiction and buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment are depicted in the schematic in Figures 4 and 5 below. Aliow room to. reconfigure river bank to 2.5:1 sloe 200' �I Urban Conservancy Environment k 100' Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees Buffer in Levee Areas: For properties located behind the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Certified 205 levee and County constructed levees, the buffer will extend 125 feet landward from the ordinary high water mark, determined at the time of development or redevelopment of the site or when levee replacement or repair is programmed. This buffer width is the maximum needed to reconfigure the river bank to the minimum levee profile and to achieve an overall slope of 2.5:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope. The establishment of the 2.5:1 slope along the Corps certified 205 levee in the Tukwila Urban Center will allow for incorporating a mid -slope bench that can be planted with vegetation to improve river habitat. The mid -slope bench also will allow access for maintenance equipment, when needed. A fifteen foot easement necessary to allow access for levee inspection is required on the landward side of the levee at the toe. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 38 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG141: The Briscoe profile was not used in the more recent levee reconstruction in Kent as other engineering; solutions can also provide environmental enhancement and flood protection. 112 2C0' Urban Ccnservancy Environment k Allow room for Levee 1 repair or replacement 1 125' )1 Buffer Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 5. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees As an alternative to the 125 foot buffer for leveed areas, a property owner may construct levee or riverbank improvements that meet the Army Corps of Engineers, King County Flood Control District, and City of Tukwila minimum levee standards. These standards at a minimum shall include an overall slope no steeper than 2.5:1 from the toe of the levee to the riverward edge of the crown, 16' access across the top of the levee, a 2:1 back slope, and an additional 15 foot no -build area measured from the landward toe for inspection and repairs. In instances where an existing building that has not lost its nonconforming status prevents achieving an overall slope of 2.5:1 the slope should be as close to 2.5:1 as possible. A floodwall is not the preferred back slope profile for a levee but may be substituted for all or a portion of the back slope where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this Master Program which has not lost its nonconforming status and to preserve access needed for building functionality. The floodwall shall be designed to provide 15' (fifteen foot) clearance between the levee and the building or to preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety standards. A floodwall may also be used where necessary to avoid encroachment on a railroad easement or to provide area for waterward habitat restoration. In areas of the river where the property owner or a government agency has constructed a levee with an overall waterward slope of 2.5:1 or flatter, the buffer will be reduced to the actual distance as measured from the ordinary high water mark to the landward toe of the levee or face of a floodwall, plus 15 feet. In the event that the owner provides the City and/or applicable agency with a 15-foot levee maintenance easement measured landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall (which easement prohibits the construction of any structures and allows the City and/or applicable agency to access the area to inspect the levee), then the buffer shall be reduced to the landward toe of the levee, or landward edge of the levee floodwall, as the case may be. In cases where fill is placed along the back slope of the levee, the shoreline buffer may be SMP Public Review Draft Clean 39 3/ 1 /2019 113 further reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope. The area between the landward edge of the buffer and a point fifteen (15) feet landward of the underground levee toe shall be covered by an easement prohibiting the construction of any structures and allowing the City and/or applicable agency to access the area to inspect the levee and/or floodwall and make any necessary repairs. See Figure 5 below. Buffer that could Be Replaced by Easements New Ground Plane FRI uffer Reduction Landward Levee Toe 2* Proposed Levee 18' Top Width Buffer Reduction with Backfill Option Not To Scale Figure 6. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placement of Fill on Levee Back Slope 7.8 High Intensity Environment A. Designation Criteria: The High Intensity Shoreline Environment area is currently developed with high intensity urban commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or is designated for such uses in the proposed north annexation area. This environment begins at the Ordinary High Water Mark and extends landward 200 feet and is located from the southern edge of the Turning Basin north to the City limits and includes the North PAA. This Environment is generally located along portions of the Duwamish River that are navigable to large watercraft. Uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer. The transition zone is located partly in the High Intensity Environment. The transition zone is the location where freshwater from a river and saltwater from the marine salt wedge mix creating brackish conditions. Often it is also where the river widens, stream velocities decrease and estuarine mudflats begin to appear. Habitat associated with the transition zone is critically important for juvenile Chinook and chum smolts making the transition to salt water. The transition zone moves upstream and downstream in response to the combination of stream flow and tidal elevations and as a result varies over a twenty-four hour period and seasonally. The transition zone is a crucial habitat for sal mon ids. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 40 3/ 1 /2019 114 B. Purpose of Environment and Establishment of River Buffer: The purpose of the Urban High Intensity Environment is to provide for high intensity, commercial, transportation and industrial uses and to promote water dependent and water oriented uses while protecting existing shoreline ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. The purposes of the High Intensity River Buffer are to: • Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, floodplain and other sensitive lands in the developed urban settings; • Ensure no net loss of shoreline function when new development or re- development occurs; • Provide opportunities for shoreline restoration and public access; • Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of property, while accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment, wherever possible; • Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and • Protect existing and new development from high river flows. A buffer of 100 feet is established, which allows enough room to reconfigure the river bank to achieve a slope of 3:1, (starting at the OHWM rather than the toe) the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope and allow for some restoration and improvement of shoreline function through the installation of native plants and other habitat features. The actual amount of area needed to achieve a 3:1 slope may be less than 100 feet, depending on the character of the river bank and can only be determined on a site -by -site basis. Albw room to reconfigure river bank to 3:1 slope 200' High Intensity Environment ti 100' Buffer Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment SMP Public Review Draft Clean 41 3/1/2019 115 As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the river bank to a maximum-3:1, provide a 20 foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the river bank and the 20 foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. The property owner must also demonstrate that this approach will not result in a loss of ecological functions of the shoreline. In areas of the river where this condition currently exists or where the property owner has constructed these improvements, the buffer width will be the actual distance as measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark to the top of the bank plus 20 feet. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. In any shoreline environment where an existing improved street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer, the buffer would end on the river side of the street or road. Section 7.9 Aquatic Environment A. Designation Criteria: All water bodies within the City limits and its potential annexation area under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act waterward of the ordinary high water mark. The aquatic environment includes the water surface together with the underlying lands and the water column. B. Purpose: The purpose of this designation is to protect the unique characteristics and resources of the aquatic environment by managing use activities to prioritize preservation and restoration of natural resources, navigation, recreation and commerce and by assuring compatibility between shoreland and aquatic uses. 8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use, or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment are provided in TMC 18.44.030 along with special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation adopted with this SMP. Development standards such as setbacks, height limitations, water quality regulations, flood hazard reduction, shoreline stabilization, protection of archaeological resources, environmental impact mitigation, parking and over water structures requirements are codified in TMC Chapter 18.44. The Administrative procedures codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 are designed to: • Assign responsibilities for implementation of the Master Program and Shoreline Permits. • Establish an orderly process by which to review proposals and permit SMP Public Review Draft Clean 42 3/ 1 /2019 116 applications. • Ensure that all persons affected by this Master Program are treated in a fair and equitable manner. These procedures include permit application requirements, conditional use approval criteria, variance approval criteria, and regulations for non -conforming development. 9. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE JURISDICTION. 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations - Commented [NG15]: The proposal is to adopt the revised rtical areas regulations by reference rather than duplicating them in A. The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the Le SMP and zoning Code. provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC Chapter 18.45, adopted [Date to be added], which is herein incorporated by reference into this SMP, except for the provisions excluded in subsection B of this Section: 1. Wetlands 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) 3. Areas of potential geologic instability 4. Abandoned mine areas 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas Such critical area provisions shall apply to any use, alteration, or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. Unless otherwise stated, no development shall be constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, or altered, or land divided without full compliance with the provision adopted by reference and the Shoreline Master Program. Within shoreline jurisdiction, the regulations of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be liberally construed together with the Shoreline Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between any of the adopted provisions below and the Shoreline Master Program, the most restrictive provisions shall prevail. B. The following provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply within the Shoreline jurisdiction: ] . Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 18.45.160) 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180). C. Critical areas comprised of frequently flooded areas and areas of seismic instability are regulated by the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52) and SMP Public Review Draft Clean 43 3/1/2019 117 the Washington State Building Code, rather than by TMC Section 18.44.090. 9.2 Purpose A. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) requires protection of critical areas (sensitive areas), defined as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife conservation areas, and abandoned mine areas. B. The purpose of protecting environmentally critical areas within the shoreline jurisdiction is to: 1. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural functions and values of these areas. 2. Protect quantity and quality of water resources. 3. Minimize turbidity and pollution of wetlands and fish -bearing waters and maintain wildlife habitat. 4. Prevent erosion and the loss of slope and soil stability caused by the removal of trees, shrubs, and root systems of vegetative cover. 5. Protect the public against avoidable losses, public emergency rescue and relief operations cost, and subsidy cost of public mitigation from landslide, subsidence, erosion and flooding. 6. Protect the community's aesthetic resources and distinctive features of natural lands and wooded hillsides. 7. Balance the private rights of individual property owners with the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. 8. Prevent the loss of wetland and watercourse function and acreage, and strive for a gain over present conditions. 9. Give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to protect or enhance anadromous fisheries. 10. Incorporate the use of best available science in the regulation and protection of critical areas as required by the state Growth Management Act, according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and WAC 365-190-080. C. The goal of these critical area regulations is to achieve no net loss of wetland, watercourse, or fish and wildlife conservation area or their functions. Critical areas currently identified in the shoreline jurisdiction are discussed in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of this Shoreline Master Program. The locations are mapped on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Map — Map 5. This map is based on assessment of current conditions and review of the best available information. However, additional sensitive areas may exist within the shoreline jurisdiction and the boundaries of the sensitive areas shown are not exact. It is the responsibility of the property owner to determine the presence of sensitive areas on the property and to verify the boundaries in the field. Sensitive area provisions for abandoned mine areas do not apply as none of these areas is located in the shoreline jurisdiction. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 44 3/ 1 /2019 118 Turning Bo Ty1.2 Stem P PTe SMP Public Review Draft Clean itiv . Ara In the Shoreline aa.�d 45 3 / 1 /2019 119 10. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE Public access to the shorelines of the state is one of the key goals of the Shoreline Management Act — of the seven uses identified in RCW 90.58.020 as having preference in the shoreline, two relate to public access and recreational opportunities along the shoreline. The City of Tukwila is fortunate to have a number of public access sites already along the Green/Duwamish River in addition to the Green River Trail, which runs along almost the entire length of the river through the City. Other public access points are available at the North Winds Wier, the Tukwila Community Center, Codiga Park, Bicentennial Park at Strander Boulevard and parking available on Christianson Road and at S. 180'h Street. A habitat restoration project is underway at Duwamish Riverbend Hill, on South 115''i Street, which also includes public access to the river. The Public Access Map (Map 6) identifies several street ends that could be improved or to which amenities could be added that would offer opportunities for neighborhood access to the river and/or the Green River Trail. The Shoreline Public Access Map identifies several potential trail sites on the river to supplement the existing Green River trail system. The largest stretch of potential trail runs from S. 180'h on the left bank to the end of south annexation area. A pedestrian bridge to link the area south of S. 1801h Street to the existing trail on the right bank is being discussed as well. A second area where improvement is needed in public access relates to boat launches for small hand launched boats. Several potential sites have been identified in the Tukwila Parks Department Capital Improvement Program to address this need at City -owned sites. Requirements for public access to shorelines have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 46 3/ 1 /2019 120 TT Strr.,etBub Potential Panic Armun SMP Public Review Draft Clean Shoreline Pubk Access Green Diver I Trial Interurban' 47 3/1/2019 121 11. SHORELINE DESIGN GUIDELINES The Green/Duwamish River is an amenity that should be valued and celebrated when designing projects that will be located along its length. The river and its tributaries support salmon runs and resident trout, including the ESA -listed Chinook salmon, Bull Trout and Steelhead. If any portion of a project falls within the shoreline jurisdiction, then the entire project will be reviewed under the shoreline specific guidelines codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 as well as the relevant sections of the Design Review Chapter of the Zoning Code (TMC Chapter 18.60). The standards of TMC Chapter 18.60 shall guide the type of review, whether administrative or by the Board of Architectural Review. The standards apply to development, uses and activities in the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments and non-residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment. 12. SHORELINE RESTORATION The Shoreline Restoration Plan, found in Appendix B, identifies the sites that have been identified to -date as possible locations for habitat restoration along the Green/Duwamish River. The City will continue to add sites to the Restoration Plan as they are identified and will include them in the City's Capital Improvement Program for acquisition and improvement. Project sites in the Transition Zone have the highest priority for acquisition. Amendments or revisions to the Restoration Plan do not require an amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 48 3/ 1 /2019 122 13. ADMINISTRATION The Administrative procedures below are designed to: • Assign responsibilities for implementation of the Master Program and Shoreline Permit • Establish an orderly process by which to review proposals and pen -nit applications • Ensure that all persons affected by this Master Program are treated in a fair and equitable manner. 13.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit A. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Based on guidelines in the Shoreline Management Act for a minimum shoreline jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green/Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends from the ordinary high water murk landward for 200 feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. The floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. B. Applicability The Tukwila Shoreline Master Program applies to uses, change of uses, activities or development that occurs within the above -defined Shoreline jurisdiction. All proposed uses and development occurring within the shoreline jurisdiction must conform to chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act and this Master Program whether or not a permit is required. Except that requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the following described in WAC 173-27-044 and WAC 173-27-045: 1. Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to chapter 70.105D RCW, or to the department of ecology when it conducts a remedial action under chapter 70.105D RCW. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 49 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG16]: Administrative procedures have been codified in TMC 18.44. 123 2. Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a national pollutant discharge elimination system storm water general permit. 3. WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Washington State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW 90.58.356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other local review. 4. Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045. (v) Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW. 13.2 Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations 1. Compliance with this Master Program does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may apply. The applicant is responsible for complying with all other applicable requirements. 2. Where this Master Program makes reference to any RCW, WAC, or other state or federal law or regulation, the most recent amendment or current edition shall apply. 3. When any provision of this Master Program or any other federal, state, or local provision conflicts with this Master Program, the provision that is most protective of shoreline resources shall prevail, except when constrained by federal or state law, or where specifically provided otherwise in this Master Program. 4. Relationship to Sensitive Areas Regulations. A. For protection of critical areas where they occur in shoreline jurisdiction, this Master Program adopts by reference the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, which is incorporated into this Master Program with specific exclusions and modifications in Section 10 of this SMP. B. All references to the Critical Areas Ordinance are for the version adopted [SSAO adoption date]. Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191(2)(6), amending the referenced regulations in the Master Program for those critical areas under shoreline jurisdiction will require an amendment to the Master Program and approval by the Department of Ecology. C. Within shoreline jurisdiction, the Critical Areas Ordinance shall be liberally construed together with this Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of this Master Program and Chapter 90.58 RCW. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 50 3/ 1 /2019 124 14. APPEALS Any appeal of a decision by the City on a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use, Unclassified Use or Shoreline Variance must be appealed to the Shoreline Hearing Board. 15. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS 15.1. This Master Program shall be periodically reviewed and adjustments shall be made as are necessary to reflect changing local circumstances, new information or improved data, and changes in State statutes and regulations. This review process shall be consistent with WAC 173-26 and shall include a local citizen involvement effort and public hearing to obtain the views and comments of the public. 15.2 Any provision of this Master Program may be amended as provided for in RCW 90.58.080 and WAC 173-26-090. Amendments or revisions to the Master Program, as provided by law, do not become effective until 14 days following written approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology. 15.3 Proposals for shoreline environment re -designations (i.e. amendments to the shoreline maps and descriptions) must demonstrate consistency with the criteria set forth in WAC 173- 26-040 and this program. 16. LIABILITY 16.1. Liability for any adverse impacts or damages resulting from work performed in accordance with a Permit issued on behalf of the City within the City limits, shall be the sole responsibility of the owner of the site for which the Permit was issued. 16.2 No provision of or term used in the Master Program is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages in a civil action. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 51 3/ 1 /2019 Commented [NG17]: Permit requirements and non -conforming standards have been codified at TMC 18.44, Commented [NG18]: Enforcement provisions have been codified in TMC 18,44. 125 126 City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis Report Prepared on behalf of: The City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Prepared by: H .ATERSHED :1:01NATANY 750 Sixth Street South Kirkland WA 98033 p 425.822.5242 f 425.827.8136 watersherice.com October 2018 The Watershed Company Reference Number: 180506 1 27 128 Male of Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Consistency with Legislative Amendments 3 3. Consistency with Sensitive Areas Ordinance 7 4. Consistency with Other Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan 8 S. Usability Recommendations 10 List of Tab es Table 1. Summary of gaps in consistency with legislative amendments, and associated mandatory and recommended SMP revisions. 3 Table 2. Summary of recommended SMP, TMC, and Comprehensive Plan revisions to improve consistency. 8 Table 3. Summary of recommended SMP revisions to enhance usability. 10 129 130 Introc uction In accordance with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA), local jurisdictions with shorelines of the state are required to conduct a periodic review of their Shoreline Master Programs (SMPs) (WAC 173-26-090). This review is intended to keep SMPs current with amendments to state laws or rules, changes to local plans and regulations, changes in local circumstances, and new or improved data and information. The City of Tukwila (City) adopted its current SMP in 2011 (Ordinance No. 2344). Shorelines of the State in Tukwila include the Green/Duwamish River and a small portion of the Black River. The Tukwila SMP includes goals and policies, shoreline environment designations, and development regulations that guide the development and protection of these shorelines. As a first step in the periodic review process, The Watershed Company (Watershed) reviewed the current SMP for consistency with legislative amendments made since its adoption. Watershed staff also reviewed the current SMP for consistency with the policies in the City's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2015, and with the implementing development regulations in the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). Finally, as the periodic review process represents an opportunity to revise and improve the SMP, both City and Watershed staff reviewed the current SMP for overall usability. The purpose of this gap analysis report is to provide a summary of the review and inform updates to the SMP. The report is organized into the following sections according to the content of the review: • Section 2 identifies gaps in consistency with legislative amendments. This analysis is based on a list of amendments between 2007 and 2017, as summarized by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and provided to the City as a Periodic Review Checklist. • Section 3 identifies gaps in consistency with the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) (Chapter 18.45 TMC). The SAO was most recently updated in 2010, and applies to critical areas outside of shoreline jurisdiction, while the SMP contains in Chapter 10 its own separate set of regulations that apply to critical areas within shoreline jurisdiction. • Section 4 identifies gaps in consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan, and with implementing sections of the City's development regulations other than the SAO. Specifically, the review includes Title 18 (excluding Chapters 18.44 and 18.45) of the TMC. • Section 5 identifies issues of usability by both City staff and residents. For each section, the report presents the topic, relevant section(s) in the SMP, a summary of the analysis (consistency or usability), and a recommendation for revisions to the SMP. 131 132 2. Consistency with Legislative Amendments Table 1 summarizes mandatory and recommended revisions to the Tukwila SMP regulations based on the review of consistency with legislative amendments made since SMP adoption. Topics are organized broadly by SMP subject area. In general, mandatory changes to the SMP are minor in nature. The majority of them address revised rules with regard to SMP applicability, including updated exemption thresholds and definitions. Ecology has also developed new guidance on regulating nonconforming uses, structures, and development that could be of use to the City in clarifying the nonconformance regulations in its SMP, as well as recent modifications to wetland buffer guidance that could be applied to both shoreline and non -shoreline wetland regulations. Table 1. Summary of gaps in consistency with legislative amendments, and associated mandatory and recommended SMP revisions. No. Topic (Amendment Year) Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Consistency Review Recommendation Applicability 1 Cost threshold for non-exempt substantial development updated (2017) Chapter 3, Definitions The SMP includes a definition with reference to an outdated dollar threshold. Mandatory: Revise definition of "substantial development" to refer to the updated dollar threshold and/or WAC definition, as adjusted by OFM every 5 years. 2 Definition of "development" updated to exclude dismantling or removing structures (2017) Chapter 3, Definitions The SMP does not clarify that removing structures does not constitute development. Recommended: Revise definition of "development" to clarify this exclusion. Example language from Ecology is available. 3 New rules clarify exceptions to local review under the SMA (2017) Chapter 14, Administration, section 14.2(B) and Chapter 3, Definitions The SMP addresses exemptions in WAC 173-27-040. Individual exemptions under that section are addressed elsewhere throughout the SMP. The SMP does not refer to WAC 173-27-044 or -045. Mandatory: Add reference to statutory exceptions. Recommended: Revise Chapter 14 to more comprehensively address exemptions and exceptions from all three relevant sections of the WAC, as amended. 133 The Watershed Company October 2018 City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis No. Topic (Amendment Year) Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Consistency Review Recommendation 4 Retrofitting existing structures for ADA compliance is now exempt from shoreline permit requirements (2016) Chapter 14, Administration Section 14.2(B) addresses exemptions in WAC 173-27-040. Section 14.5(B) contains provisions for non- conforming structures. Recommended: Consider revising 14.5(B) to clarify that restrictions on modifications to existing non- conforming structures do not apply to ADA retrofits. 5 Cost threshold for exempt replacement of docks on lakes and rivers increased to $20,000 from $10,000 (2014) Chapter 3, Definitions Chapter 3 includes a definition of "substantial development" with reference to the outdated dollar threshold. Mandatory: Revise text to refer to updated dollar threshold, and/or refer directly to WAC 173-27-040 and RCW.90.58.030(3)(e) for the list of exemptions. Use and Development Provisions 6 Updated wetlands critical areas guidance refers to the 2014 wetlands rating system (2016) Chapter 10, Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction Section 10.6(D) refers to the 2004 rating system. Ecology provided revised wetland buffer guidance in July of 2018. The revised guidance indicates that wetlands scoring 5 habitat points may use the same standard buffer width as wetlands scoring 3-4 habitat points, and standard buffers for wetlands scoring 6-7 habitat points may be set at 110 feet rather than 165 feet. Recommended approach to mandatory change: Revise SMP to reference updated SAO, which will incorporate 2014 wetlands rating system. Recommended: Revise SAO to include July 2018 habitat score and buffer recommendations from Ecology. 7 New definition and policy for floating on- water residences legally established before July 1, 2014 (2014) Chapter 9, Shoreline Development Standards Section 9.12(E) contains provisions for live-aboards, which are permitted in the Aquatic environment. No definition of live -aboard is provided in Chapter 3, Definitions. Mandatory: Revise Chapter 3 and Chapter 9 consistent with the new statutory definition and regulations for floating on -water residences. 134 No. Topic (Amendment Year) Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Consistency Review Recommendation 8 Wetlands must be delineated in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual (2011) Chapter 10, Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction Section 10.6(A) refers to the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (WDOE Publication #96-94). Recommended approach to mandatory change: Revise SMP to reference updated SAO, which will refer to the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements, per WAC 173- 22-035. 9 Ecology adopted a rule for certifying wetland mitigation banks (2009) N/A The SMP does not address wetland mitigation banks. Recommended: The City may wish to consider Ecology's recommendation that SMP provisions (or referenced SAO provisions) authorize the use of mitigation banks. 10 New options for defining "floodway" as either the area that has been established in FEMA maps, or the floodway criteria set in the SMA (2007) Chapter 3, Definitions The definition of "floodway" in Chapter 3 is not consistent with either option provided by the statute. Mandatory: Revise the definition of floodway to either refer to FEMA maps or use SMA criteria consistent with RCW 90.58.030(2)(b)(ii). Nonoonformance 11 Ecology clarified default provisions for nonconforming uses and development (2017) Chapter 14, Administration, section 14.5 The SMP includes provisions for nonconforming uses and development in section 14.5. Recommended: The revised WAC could provide ideas for clarifications or improvements to the existing provisions in SMP. 12 SMPs may classify legally established residential structures and appurtenant structures as conforming even if they do not meet dimensional or bulk standards. Redevelopment, expansion, and replacement consistent with the SMP would be allowed (2011) Chapter 14, Administration Sections 14.5(B)(5) and (6) provide allowances for nonconforming residential structures. Recommended: The City may wish to review these provisions and consider revising to more clearly classify existing structures as conforming. 135 The Watershed Company October 2018 City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis No. Topic (Amendment Year) Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Consistency Review Recommendation Administration 13 New rule describing the process local governments must following when conducting periodic reviews (2017) Chapter 17, Master Program Review and Amendments Chapter 17 addresses SMP review and amendments, referring to RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26. Recommended: The City may wish to consider more specific statutory references (e.g. RCW 90.58.080 and WAC 173-26-090) for the sake of usability. 14 New rule created an optional SMP amendment process that allows for a shared local/state public comment period (2017) Chapter 17, Master Program Review and Amendments Chapter 17 addresses SMP review and amendments, referring to RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26. More specific amendment procedures may be laid out in other chapters of the TMC. Recommended: The City may wish to consider the use of the new optional SMP amendment process, and if so should review local amendment procedures to ensure there are no impediments to using it. 15 New Growth Management Act —Shoreline Management Act clarifications (2009) Chapter 10, Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, and Chapter 17, Master Program Review and Amendments Chapter 10 includes provisions for critical areas in shoreline jurisdiction. Section 17.2 refers to the effective date of SMP amendments. Mandatory: Revise 17.2 to clarify that SMPs are effective 14 days from Ecology's written notice of final action. Recommended: Replace Chapter 10 with an adoption by reference of the updated SAO, with exceptions/modifications as necessary. 16 The Legislature added moratoria authority and procedures to the SMA (2009) N/A The SMP does not address this. Recommended: Consider adding provisions to address moratoria authority. Ecology has provided example language. 136 3. Consis_ency wit Sensitive Areas Orcinance Based on a review of consistency with the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO), codified in Chapter 18.45 TMC and adopted in 2010, there are numerous minor inconsistencies exist between the way the SAO and SMP designate and protect critical areas. Many of these appear to be a result of the time difference between adoptions of the two documents. We recommend that the City address these inconsistencies through direct adoption by reference in the SMP of the City's SAO, which is scheduled to be amended and adopted immediately prior to SMP adoption. Specific exceptions to the SAO required by statute may be called out in Chapter 18.45 TMC. 137 The Watershed Company Octobe,oU18 City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis 4 Consistency - t thOf 1er�l�y�|()O���Dt���u|��{)�����(-()F��r������y��|an Development ' Regulations -� - Comprehensive �� � Plan Table 2summarizes recommended revisions tnthe Tukwila SMPbased onareview cd consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the Tukwila Municipal [ode(TY0C).TheComprohenaiveE1anwzaupdatedhz2O15ondie generally consistent with the Sy0P; however, certain policies can be updated to better align with SMP language. Certain code chapters that mpy|v within shoreline jurisdiction, such aethe Tree Regulations ([hoyterTM[ l8.54),refer tooutdated SMPprovisions and should heupdated. In general, cross-references within Tide l8-both from the SMP to other code chapters and vice versa- could be strengthened to clarify applicability nfthe SMP. Table 2. Summary of recommended SMP, TMC, and Comprehensive Plan revisions to improve consistency. No. Topic Relevant Sec0mnh6in2Q1l SMP, TMC,mr Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review Recommendation Comprehensive Plan 1 Shoreline Goals and Policies SMPChapter 6 The SIVIPreferences the Oty'sl995 Comprehensive Plan, with proposed amendments. Many of these have since been adopted inthe 2Ol5Comprehensive Plan. Update Chapter Gofthe SMPtorefer tothe 2OI5Comprehensive Plan. Incorporate small language changes topolicies throughout. 2 Policies for development outside the Tukwila Urban Center orK4|C SK4PSection 6.3/ Comprehensive Plan Goal 5-3 Numbering and language for policies 5.3.8' 5.3.9,and 5.3.10differ slightly between the SMPand Comprehensive Plan. Revise the SK4Ptoalign with more recent Comprehensive Plan language and numbering for these policies. 3 Levee profile SK4P7.5(8)'Figure 2 /Comprehensive Plan Goal 5-10, Figure5'2 The SMPand Comprehensive Plan both reference the [ity'sadopted minimum levee profile with agraphic ofthe preferred profile. Amend the Comprehensive Plan and 3MPto include apolicy stating/describing the City's preferred levee profile. Development Regulations 4 Shoreline Design Guidelines TK4[18.44.l1O (SMP)/Title l8 Projects within shoreline jurisdiction are subject tothe Shoreline Design Guidelines as Where design review and shoreline projects are mentioned throughout Title 18(e.O.Chapter 138 No. Topic Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP, TMC, or Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review Recommendation part of required design review. The SMP refers to the design review process and non- shoreline criteria. Other chapters of the TMC refer to the need for shoreline design review, but do not mention the Shoreline Design Guidelines. 18.60, Board of Architectural Review), refer to both shoreline and non -shoreline design guidelines. 5 Tree Regulations Chapter 18.54 TMC Tree removal within shoreline jurisdiction is subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.54. The chapter refers to outdated shoreline environments (e.g. Low -Impact Environment, TMC 18.54.130). The SMP itself does not reference the Tree Regulations. Update outdated shoreline code references in Chapter 18.52 and 18.54 TMC, and clarify that these standards do not apply in shoreline jurisdiction, where 18.44.080 applies. 6 Definitions SMP Chapter 3 / Chapter 18.06 TMC Several definitions in the SMP are similar, but not the same as, definitions found in the TMC. For example, definition inconsistencies (including missing definitions) were found for the following terms: accessory use, high - impact environment, low -impact environment, river environment, shoreline, substantial development Amend the definitions in both documents (SMP and TMC). Where definitions differ, focus on statutory requirements. 139 The Watershed Company October 2018 City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis 5. Usabi ity Recommendations Table 3 summarizes recommended revisions to the Tukwila SMP based on a review of general usability of the document by both Watershed and City staff. Topics are organized broadly by SMP subject area. The majority of these recommendations arise from City staff experience in implementing the SMP and a desire to make the regulations clearer and more internally consistent. Note that all revisions will need to be made consistently to both the SMP and its codified regulations in Chapter 18.44 TMC. Table 3. Summary of recommended SMP revisions to enhance usability. No. Topic Permitted Uses Internal consistency Dimensional Standards 2 Shoreline buffers Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Permitted uses by SED (TMC 18.44.040-.065 / Sections 8.4-8.7) vs. Use Matrix (Figure 18-1 / Section 3) 18.44.040-.060 Usability Discussion The City has identified several inconsistencies between the permitted use provisions listed by SED and those in the matrix (e.g. utilities and utility towers allowed as "P" or "C") Subsection A of each upland SED "uses" section defines the required width of the shoreline buffer in that SED. These are described in more detail in Section 7.5 of the SMP, which does not have an analogous subsection within the SED use sections in Chapter 8. Recommendation Review both sections for consistency and determine which section shall control. Default is for written provisions to control; however, the City may wish to reinterpret some of these provisions. Alternatively, remove the written provisions and rely exclusively on the use matrix, with footnotes as necessary to provide additional conditions, as well as use -specific provisions in subsections of 18.44.070. Summarize shoreline buffers by SED in a table, and remove from the SED uses sections. This table could also contain other dimensional criteria currently incorporated into written provisions (e.g. height restrictions) to enhance usability. 140 No. Topic Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Usability Discussion Recommendation 3 Truncated shoreline buffers Section 7.4, Table 3 Table 3, Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions, was used to define the shoreline buffers included in TMC 18.44. The final entry in the table states that where a street or road runs parallel to the river through a shoreline buffer, the buffer should be truncated on the river side of the existing improved street or roadway. Incorporate this provision into the shoreline buffer standards in the TMC. Should buffers be summarized in a table, as recommended above, a table footnote could include this provision. 4 Recreational structures 18.44.070 / Sections 8.4, 8.6, 8.8 The SMP limits recreational structures to a height of 15 feet and an area of 25 square feet. In the City's experience, this is too restrictive for certain structures, e.g. viewing platforms. Revisit dimensional criteria for recreational structures. General Use and Development Provisions 5 Environmental Impact Mitigation - monitoring 18.44.070.H Mitigation sequencing requires monitoring. However, specifications are not provided on monitoring duration. Require a minimum of five years' monitoring where vegetation mitigation is required. 6 Vegetation protection and landscaping — exempt activities 18.44.080.A The code does not specify what types of vegetation management may be allowed without a permit, focusing instead on provisions applicable to land under development. Amend this section to include a list of vegetation management activities such as, e.g., removal of invasive vegetation or noxious weeds. 7 Vegetation protection and landscaping — maintenance and monitoring 18.44.080.D Where vegetation is planted as part of a required mitigation or restoration, monitoring should be required. Based on City experience, the code should provide for situations in which overplanting is necessary to protect against invasive vegetation, and thinning is required following vegetation establishment. Revise section to clarify this approach. Clarification could be placed in "exempt activities" section described in #6 of this table, above, or in 18.44.080.D. 8 Public access 18.44.100 The existing dimensional standards for trails (14' wide with two -foot shoulders) is not Revisit trail standards and consider reducing to a minimum of 12' wide with two -foot 141 The Watershed Company October 2018 City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis No. Topic Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Usability Discussion Recommendation consistent with the County or City Parks standards which require a 12' wide trail with two -foot shoulders. The City has received submittal of several variance applications due to this inconsistency. shoulders, or applying the reduced minimum where the applicant demonstrates it to be necessary due to lack of space. Specific Use and Development Standards 9 Minimum levee profile 18.44.070.D, Flood Hazard Reduction In the case that a proposed levee profile improves upon the adopted minimum levee profile, a shoreline variance should not be required. Revise subsection (10) to provide flexibility where an applicant demonstrates, and the City Engineer confirms, that the proposed levee profile will provide improved shoreline ecological functions and flood protection relative to the adopted minimum profile. 10 Permitting of over- water structures 18.44.070.K, Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks, and other Over -Water Structures Subsection 1 requires that the applicant present state and federal approvals prior to issuance of an SSDP for construction of piers, docks, wharves, and other over -water structures. This approach is inconsistent with other City land use approval procedures and may be at odds with state or federal permit requirements. Revise subsection 1 to require proof of submittal, rather than approval, of state and federal permit requirements, as applicable. 11 Classification of bridges 18.44.070.K, Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks, and other Over -Water Structures City experience permitting a new pedestrian bridge raised the question of whether a bridge would be considered an over -water structure. Requirements for grated decking may pose a safety issue for non -motorized users. Clarify how bridges are regulated, either in this section or in Chapter 18.06, Definitions. 142 No. Topic Relevant Section(s) in 2011 SMP Usability Discussion Recommendation Nonconformance 12 Amortization 18.44.130.E During original drafting of the nonconformance regulations, the City set a goal to amortize nonconforming uses and structures. No code revisions are recommended; however, the City should discuss and evaluate progress toward its amortization goal. 13 Parking lots 18.44.130.E(6) City shoreline jurisdiction includes several nonconforming parking lots. Nonconforming gravel lots within shoreline jurisdiction may not be paved without losing nonconforming status, regardless of approach to stormwater control. To provide flexibility, consider amending this section to allow for paving together with pollution controls and restoration of or other improvement to shoreline ecological functions. Administration 14 Purpose 18.44.010 Chapter 18.44 does not include an introduction or definition of purpose. To improve usability and provide context, consider adding an introductory subsection that defines the purpose of the Shoreline Overlay District chapter. 15 Shoreline Environment Designation amendments 18.44.130 This section does not address the administrative procedure/requirements for a request of change in shoreline environment designation. Consider amending this section to include a description of this process. 16 Permit revisions 18.44.130 This section does not address the administrative procedure/requirements for revisions to shoreline permits. Consider amending this section to include a description of this process, and/or a reference to WAC 173-27-100. 17 Permit timelines 18.44.130 This section does not address time limits on shoreline permits, including period of validity, requirements for project completion, extensions, etc. Consider amending this section to include a description of this process, and/or a reference to WAC 173-27-090. 18 SSDP approval criteria 18.44.130.B(3) This subsection requires that a development be consistent with the SMP as a condition for approval. Revise this subsection to require consistency with the Shoreline Management Act and applicable chapters of the WAC in addition to the SMP. 143