The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOW 2020-02-10 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETTukwila City Council Agenda • ❖ COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ❖ Allan Ekberg, Mayor Counci/members: ❖ Verna Seal •:• Kathy Hougardy David Cline, City Administrator ❖ Kate Kruller ❖ Thomas McLeod De'Sean Quinn, Council President ❖ Zak Idan ❖ Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson Monday, February 10, 2020; 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SPECIAL Fire Department Letter of Commendation to Firefighter Brian Willis. PRESENTATION Jason Konieczka, Emergency Manager, Tukwila Fire Department, 3. PUBLIC At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda COMMENTS (please limit your comments to five minutes per person). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. (Refer to back of agenda page for additional information.) 4. SPECIAL ISSUES a. 2019 3rd Quarter Financial Report. Pg.1 b. Ordinances updating the Shoreline and Critical Areas sections of the Pg.65 Tukwila Municipal Code: (1) An ordinance to amend and establish new regulations related to Pg.113 critical areas. (2) An ordinance approving and adopting a new Shoreline Master Pg.215 Program update for the City of Tukwila to incorporate new state requirements. (3) An ordinance establishing new regulations and updating zoning Pg.277 regulations related to shoreline uses. .J> Due to recent changes to the documentation, there is NO need to bring the packet previously distributed. A// changes are reflected in this packet. Q 5. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff d. Council Analyst 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is ADA accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office (206-433-1800 or TukwilaCitvClerkCaDTukwilaWA.gov). This agenda is available at www.tukwilawa.gov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio/video taped (available at www.tukwilawa.gov) HOW TO TESTIFY When recognized by the Presiding Officer to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic rules of courtesy when speaking and limit your comments to 5 minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens and members of the public, and may not be able to answer questions or respond during the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS Members of the public are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are NOT included on the agenda during PUBLIC COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. If you have a comment on an Agenda item, please wait until that item comes up for discussion to speak on that topic. SPECIAL MEETINGS/EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters as prescribed by law. Executive Sessions are not open to the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2,04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Members of the public who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at that time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings - The Mayor, elected by the people to a four-year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1 st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. and Special Meetings. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular or Special Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings - Councilmembers are elected for a four-year term. The Council President is elected by the Councilmembers to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one-year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed there are forwarded to Regular or Special Council meetings for official action. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meelinga Date Pre.pared by Ma ors review Council review 02/10/20 Jeff ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 4.A. STAFF SPONSOR: JEFF FRIEND ORIGINALAGENDA DATE: 02/10/20 AGENDA I,rE:\I TITLE 2019 3rd Quarter Financial Report CATEGORY ® Discussion Mtg Date 10/14/19 ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Resolution Alt g Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ BidAward hltg Date ❑ Public hearing llltg Date ❑ Other Alt g Date SPONSOR ❑Council ❑Mayor ❑HR ❑DCD ®Finance ❑Fire ❑TS ❑P& R ❑Police ❑Plr/ ❑Court SPONSOR'S Presentation of financial results from the third quarter of 2019 SUMMARY REVIEWED BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. ❑ CDN Comm ® Finance Comm. ❑ Public Safety Comm. ❑ Trans &Infrastructure ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: 01/27/20 COMMITI`EE CHAIR: SEAL RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADNIIN• Finance CONINIIT I'E[', For Information Only COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDI'FURI; REQUIR1iD AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02/10/20 Informational Memorandum dated 1/10/2020 Presentation Minutes from the 1/27 Finance Committee meeting 2 TO: CC: FROM: BY: DATE: SUBJECT: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Finance Committee Mayor Ekberg Vicky Carlsen, Finance Director Jeff Friend, Fiscal Manager January 10, 2020 2019 3rd Quarter Financial Report The quarterly financial report summarizes Citywide financial results and highlights significant items and trends. The third quarter financial report is based on financial data available as of January 10, 2020 for the reporting period ending September 30, 2019. Allocated budgets are calculated based on the patterns of revenue received and expenditures made in the previous year with the current year budget allocated using the same patterns. The report does not include budget amendments adopted by Council on December 2, 2019. Additional details can be found in the attached financial reports. General Fund The General Fund is the City's largest fund and accounts for most City resources and services including governance, public safety, and administration. Through September 30th, General Fund expenditures exceeded revenues by $2 million. General Fund revenues were $18 thousand over allocated budget and expenditures were under allocated budget by $623 thousand. General Fund 2019 Revenue vs. Expenditure Through September 2019 $50,000 $48,000 $46,000 $44,000 7 c: $42,000 N a $40,000 ` $38,000 $36,000 $34,000 $32,000 $30,000 Revenues ■ 2019 YTO Budget ■ 2019 Actual Expenditures 3 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 General Fund - Revenue Through the third quarter, general fund revenues totaled $46.3 million which was $18 thousand over allocated budget and was $814 thousand higher than revenues collected through the third quarter of the prior year. Year -to -Date General Fund Revenues Compared to Allocated Budget Through September2019 Sales Tax Property Tax Licenses and Permits 5.,753 $4,103 Intergovernmental Revenue 53,829 $3,835 Utility Tax $2,844 $3,397 Gambling and Excise Tax 53 $3257 $3, Charges For Services $2,350 $2,268 $1.909 Indirect Cost Allocation $1,909 Interfund Utility Tax - $1,981 $1,985 t.lisc. $822 $700 Admissions Tax $733 5616 Fines & Penalties S154 5242 SO S3,000 S6,000 ■ YTD Actual ■ YTD Budget $9,012 $8,924 S9.000 S12.000 Thousands $14,943 $15,018 S15,000 11 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 Sales Tax As of September 30th, sales tax revenue was $14.8 million; $175 thousand less than the allocated budget of $15 million and $211 thousand less than sales tax revenue collected through the third quarter of the prior year. Sales Tax Revenue 2019 - 3111 Quarter YTD $16,000,000 :13,000,000 $10,000,000 July August � 2019 Budget —0--2018 Actual —2019 Acutal Property Tax September Through the third quarter, property tax revenue was $9 million; $89 thousand more than the allocated budget of $8.9 million. Property Tax Revenue 2019 - 3rd Quarter YTD $11,000,000 $9,000,000 $7,000,000 I'll WOOMW $$,000,000 July August September �2019 Budget --w-2015 Actual �2019 Acutal 5 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 Other General Fund Revenues • Utility taxes were $2.8 million; $553 thousand less than the allocated budget of $3.4 million. Telephone taxes was $320 thousand less than allocated budget and $149 thousand less than this time in the prior year. • Gambling and excise taxes through September were $3 million which was $252 thousand less than the allocated budget of $3.3 million. One casino was temporarily closed in the prior year. The budget anticipated that revenue would remain at historical levels for this casino after it reopened; however, that has not been the case. • Licenses and permits revenue was $4.7 million; $684.9 thousand over the allocated budget of $4.1 million. Business license revenue alone was $3.1 million; $577.5 over the allocated budget of $2.5 million. • Charges for services were $2.4 million; $82.3 thousand over the allocated budget of $2.3 million. Other General Fund Revenues YTD Budget vs. Actual Through September 2019 56,000 S5,000 4,78E 4,103 S4,000 3,835 3,829 3,397 3,257 c 3,005 $3,000 2,544 r 2,268 2,350 t- 1,985 1,981 S2,ODO $1,000 $0 UTILITY TAXES INTERFUND UTILITY TAX GAMBLING AND EXCISE LICENSES AND PERMITS INTERGOVERNNIENTAL CHARGES FOR SERVICES TAXES REVENUE ■ YTD Budget ■ YTD Actual R INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 Expenditures Year to Date Department Expenditures Compared to Allocated Budget Through September 2019 0 5273c City Council S309 S1.748 Mayor - S1 844 S1 397 Administrative Services — 5584 1 5 Finance - S1865 — S2 184 Attorney S428 - SJ15 Recreation S2A70 - S2 496 Community Development S2 672 S2.591 Court S958 Municipal S963 S 13.868 Police S 14.445 Fire S9.516 S9.125 Technology & Innovation S1 444 Svcs S1499 Public Works S2.791 S2,934 S1 274 Park 6laintenance — S1.275 Street P,t aintenance & S3 171 Operations S2.735 Dept 20 S4 441 S4.441 SO S2,000 S4,000 S6,000 S8,000 S10,000 S12,000 S14,000 S16,000 Thousands ■YTDActual ■YTDBudgel Unbudgeted, Unplanned Events Code Violations During the first quarter, it was discovered that a local business's production plant violated numerous building codes. Through permitting fees and direct invoicing, the City received $79.7K for associated costs. Snow Events During the month of February, the City experienced two winter snowstorms. Unbudgeted costs related to the snow events are as follows: Department Overtime and Benefits Supplies Combined Police $ - $ 143 $ 143 Fire 30,313 285 30,598 Public Works - 286 286 Park Maintenance - 452 452 Street Maintenance and Operations 19,463 79,637 99,100 Total $ 49,777 $ 80,803 $ 130,579 7 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 East Marginal Way Power Pole Accident On April 5th, there was a large accident where numerous power poles fell over on East Marginal Way. Current estimates for this incident are as follows: Department Overtime and Benefits Supplies Combined Street Maintenance and Operations $ 34,349 $ 276,347 $ 310,696 A claim for 100% of the costs has been initiated with the Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA) for reimbursement of the current estimated expenditures. A check was received in June for $178.9 thousand and the balance is expected to be received in the first quarter of 2020. Andover Park East Propane Leak In June, faulty piping in a large propane tank on Andover Park East was discovered which required the safe burn -off of vapors remaining after the removal of the liquid gas. On August 16, the party responsible for the propane system was billed $21,707 to reimburse the city for costs associated with the event. Department Overtime and Benefits Supplies Combined Police $ 1,794 $ 1,666 $ 3,460 Fire 10,806 707 11,513 Street Maintenance and Operations 6,198 - 6,198 Water 536 - 536 Total $ 19,334 $ 2,373 $ 21,707 Major department variances were: Community Development is $81.7K over budget through September. Professional Services expenditures ($171.4K over allocated budget) have been greater than anticipated in the budget. The budget had assumed development activity would slow in 2019; however, this was not the case. Therefore, services directly related to development activity, such as peer review, that are typically outsourced, are over budget. A budget amendment of $202,000 to reflect greater revenues and expenditures resulting from this higher level of development activity was adopted at the Regular Council meeting on December 2"d • Fire is $391.6K over budget. Salaries and benefits were $499.6K over budget resulting from three retirement payouts in June ($64K), unbudgeted pipeline positions ($214.6K) as well as overtime costs that were over budget through July ($221 K). Services and supplies were under budget by about $108K partially offsetting the amount the department was over budget on salaries and benefits. A budget amendment of $522,900 for the Fire department was adopted at the Regular Council meeting on December 2"d S INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 • Street Maintenance and Operations was $435.71K over budget through September primarily due to overtime and supplies costs related to the snow events and the East Marginal Way power pole event. A budget amendment of $438K was adopted at the Regular Council meeting on December 2"d to account for costs related to these unbudgeted, unplanned events. Department Overtime and Benefits Materials Total Snow $ 19,463 $ 79,637 $ 99,100 Power Poles* 30,281 280,416 310,697 Total $ 49,744 $ 360,053 $ 409,797 *Costs to be reimbursed by WCIA Fund Balance Ending fund balances for the General and Contingency Funds are as follows: General Fund Contingency Fund Beginning Fund Balance $ 13,342,662 $ 6,557,161 Revenues 46, 271, 582 123,470 Expenditures (48,315,460) - Ending Fund Balance $ 11,298,784 $ 6,680,631 The City's reserve policy states that, at the close of each fiscal year, the General Fund unassigned balance shall equal or exceed 18% and the Contingency Fund reserve balance shall equal or exceed 10% of the previous year General Fund revenue, exclusive of significant non -operating, non -recurring revenues. It is expected that fund balances will comply with the City's reserve policy at year-end. Other Funds As of September 301h, all fund balances for Special Revenue funds, Enterprise funds, Capital Projects funds, and Internal Services funds were sufficiently positive except for the Residential Street fund. The Residential Street fund balance was a negative $741 thousand at the end of September. Seattle City Light and the City conflict over the amount of costs to be funded by the utility for their portion of undergrounding costs as the actual costs were significantly more than the original estimates. As a result, the lack of additional Seattle City Light funding has had a negative impact on the fund. Staff continue to seek funds from Seattle City Light. Despite this issue, the fund had a positive fund balance of $687 thousand as of December 31 s' due to the receipt of grant funds and a transfer from the General Fund. 9 10 CITY OF TUKW ILA V-rn AC f1F CFGTRMRFR 1A 7niQ GENERAL FUND REVENUE BUDGET ACTUAL REVENUE TYPE %C ANGE 2019 2019 2019 ANNUAL ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT %REC'D 2017/2018 2018/2019 PROPERTYTAX 15,923,442 8,923,566 8,136,439 8,545,729 9,012,233 88,667 57 % 5% 5% SALES TAX 20,444,000 15,017,906 13,591,220 15,053,433 14,842,787 (175,120) 73 % 11 % (1) % ADMISSIONS TAX 850,000 615,770 565,003 776,570 733,392 117,622 86% 37 % (6) % UTILITYTAX 4,338,200 3,396,592 3,218,288 3,051,981 2,844,000 (552,593) 66% (5)% (7)% INTERFUNDUTILITYTAX 2,373,000 1,985,471 1,877,158 1,947,248 1,980,909 (4,562) 83% 4% 2% GAMBLING&EXCISE TAX 4,426,000 3,256,944 2,973,421 2.872,936 3,005,411 (251,532) 68% (3)% 5% TOTAL GENERAL REVENUE 48,354,642 33,196,250 30,361,529 32,247,897 32,418,732 (777,517) 67 % 6 % 1 % BUSINESS LICENSES 3,547,400 2,528,749 2,426,417 2,720,742 3,106,257 577,508 88% 12% 14% RENTAL HOUSING 45,000 34,089 41,220 49,160 36,175 2,086 80% 19% (26)% BUILDING PERMITS 2,122,494 1,540,651 1,179,158 1,366,522 1,645,927 105,276 78% 16% 20% TOTAL LICENSES AND PERMITS 5,714,894 4,103,489 3,646.795 4,136,424 4,788,359 684,870 84 % 13 % 16 % SALES TAX MITIGATION 840,000 639,634 820,163 781,130 655,127 15,493 78% (5)% (16)% FRANCHISE FEE 2,399,500 1,863,942 1,621.568 1,771,146 1,851,253 (12,689) 77% 9% 5% GRANT REVENUE 907,940 531,327 566,843 357,306 406,386 (124,941) 45% (37)% 14% STATE ENTITLEMENTS 405,250 307.764 301,153 329,178 365,432 57,668 90% 9% 11% INTERGOVERNMENTAL 576,754 491,933 479,583 533,099 550,586 58,652 95 % 11 % 3 % TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 5,129,444 3,834,600 3,789,310 3,771,859 3,828,784 (5,816) 75% (0)% 2% GENERAL GOVERNMENT 57,532 44,796 38,984 22,878 43,646 (1,150) 76% (41)% 91% SECURITY 660,500 583,155 433.574 254,147 540,960 (42,195) 82% (41)% 113% TRANSPORTATION 79,000 226,930 21,527 840 226,700 (229) 287% (96)% 26879% PLAN CHECK AND REVIEWFEES 1,148,675 938,259 603,989 917,711 1,150,752 212,493 100% 52% 25% CULTURE AND RECFEES 601,000 474,876 421,944 417,873 388,267 (86,609) 65% (1)% (7)% TOTAL CHARGES FOR SERVICES 2,546,707 2,268,016 1,520,018 1,613,450 2,350,326 82,310 92 % 6 % 46 % FINES & PENALTIES 329,218 242,057 221,116 208,221 153,810 (88,247) 47 % (6)% (26) % MISC 1,160,542 700,365 794,606 1,735,525 822,339 121,974 71% 118% (53)% INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION 2,545,645 1,909,234 1,709,294 1,744,232 1,909,233 (1) 75% 2% 9% TOTAL OTHER INCOME 4,035,405 2,851,655 2,725,015 3,687,979 2,885,382 33,727 72% 35% (22)% TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE 65,781,092 46,254,010 42.042,667 45,457,607 46,271,582 17,572 70 % 8 % 2% TRANSFERS IN 200,000 - - - - - 0 % 0 % 0 % TOTAL REVENUE 65,981,092 46,254,010 1 42,042,667 45,457,607 46,271,582 17,572 70% 0 0 Percent of year /S% 11 CITY OF TUKW ILA v.— +_ n�fo . f ce. t.mho, an 7nf a GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES -BY DEPARTMENT BUDGET ACTUAL COMPARISON OF RESULTS 2019 OVER/(UNDER) ALLOCATED % CHANGE DEPARTMENT 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT % EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 01 City Council 432,111 308,814 249,547 271,040 272.796 (36,018) 63% 9% 1% 03 Mayor 2,595,514 1,843,886 1,701,538 1,913,455 1,747,753 (96,133) 67% 12% (9)% 04 Administrative Services 2,111.509 1,584,317 1,386.088 1,454,382 1,397,134 (187,184) 66% 5% (4)% 05 Finance 2,671,195 2,184,103 1,856.953 2,450,011 1,864,726 (319.377) 70% 32% (24)% 06 Attorney 710,730 514,822 379,561 665,546 428,092 (86,730) 60 % 75% (36) % 07 Recreation 3,294,138 2,495,979 2.347,060 2.336,622 2,470,133 (25,845) 75 % (0) % 6 % 08 Community Development 3,511,558 2,590,677 2,415,559 2,496,334 2,672,359 81,682 76% 3% 7% 09 Municipal Court 1,298.228 963,293 905,443 964,604 957,885 (5,408) 74% 7% (1)% 10 Police 19,427,613 14,444,807 13,089,242 13,255,256 13,867,589 (577,218) 71 % 1 % 5% 11 Fire 12,473,387 9,124,523 8,790,067 9.261,114 9,516,121 391,598 76% 5% 3% 12 Technology& Innovation Svcs 2,043.934 1,498,821 1,256.059 1,519,133 1,444,167 (54,655) 71 % 21 % (5)% 13 Public Works 3,948,613 2,933,664 2,646,766 2,639,959 2,791,322 (142.342) 71 % (0)% 6 % 15 Park Maintenance 1,630,586 1,274,795 1,075,979 1,134,680 1,273,574 (1,221) 78% 5% 12% 16 Street Maintenance & Operations 3,354,733 2.735,062 2.421,350 2,505,786 3,170,719 435,657 95% 3% 27% 59,503,849 44,497,562 40,521,212 42.867,921 43,874.371 (623,191) 74% 6% 2% Subtotal 20 Dept20 6,362,029 4,441,090 2.511.693 3,861,589 4,441,090 70% 54% 15% Total Expenditures 65,865,878 48,938,651 43,032,905 46,729,510 48,315,460 (623,191) 73% 9% 3% Percent of year completed 75 % 12 CITY OF TUKW ILA ce...e, .-tiro info GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES - BY EXPENDITURE TYPE BUDGET ACTUAL COMPARISON OF RESULTS ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVERI(UNDER) %CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPENDED 201712018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 28,891,480 21,668,610 20,057,149 20,661,663 21,166,028 (502,582) 73% 3% 2% 12 E)draLabor 762,833 600,858 537,780 553,037 661,845 60,987 87% 3% 20% 13 Overtime 1,350,099 982,731 1,257,252 1,123,086 1,316,668 333,937 98% (11)% 17% 15 Holiday Pay 504,517 97,181 79,930 91,337 91,860 (5,320) 18% 14% 1% 21 FICA 2,107,153 1,580,365 1,318,877 1,346,211 1,390,754 (189,611) 66% 2% 3% 22 Pension-LEOFF2 922,206 691,655 614,585 709,512 654,764 (36,890) 71% 15% (8)% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 1,751,656 1,313,742 1,119,321 1,263,328 1,321,081 7,339 75% 13% 5% 24 Industrial Insurance 861,417 646,063 463,078 496,068 597,297 (48,765) 69% 7% 20% 25 Medical 8 Dental 5,998,564 4,498,923 4,206.933 4,120,682 4,302,924 (195,999) 72 % (2)% 4 % 26 Unemployment - - 3,956 22,523 17,588 17,588 - 469% (22)% 28 Uniform/Clothing 8,525 6,394 1,978 2,710 2,146 (4,248) 25% 37% (21)% Total Salaries and Benefits 43,168,450 32,086,520 29,660,838 30,390,157 31,522,954 (563,566) 73% 2% 4% 0 Transfers 6,362,029 4,441,090 2,511,693 3,861,589 4,441,090 - 70% 54% 15% 31 Supplies 1,072,087 778,755 824,772 735,565 1,225,078 446,324 114% (11)% 67% 34 Items Purchased for resale 22,000 16,587 15,307 16,954 18,359 1,772 83 % 11 % 8 % 35 Small Tools 163,569 156,768 74,412 85,804 80,407 (76,361) 49% 15% (6)% 41 ProfessionalSeNlces 6,404,856 4,625,265 4,046,026 4,712,679 4,371,162 (254,104) 68% 16% (7)% 42 Communication 434,600 315,924 272,565 324,605 297,195 (18,730) 68% 19% (8)% 43 Travel 159,630 100,227 133,769 108,667 147,231 47,004 92% (19)% 35% 44 Advertising 47,550 32,037 14,343 26,254 14,255 (17,782) 30 % 83 % (46) % 45 Rentals and Leases 2,901,035 2,128,264 1,753,402 1,740,378 2,238,498 110,234 77 % (1)% 29% 46 Insurance 1,005,775 1,005,775 887,617 974,066 889,957 (115,818) 88% 10% (9)% 47 Public Utilities 1,999,424 1,746,603 1,644,421 1,697,674 1,726,097 (20,506) 86% 3% 2% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 623,150 432,166 349,930 349,573 436,924 4,758 70% (0)% 25% 49 Miscellaneous 1,271.723 1,046,448 790,373 1,654,539 861,026 (185,422) 68% 109% (48)% 64 Machinery& Equipment 240,000 26,224 53,435 51,006 45,228 19,005 19% (5)% (11)% Total Supplies, Services, and Capital 22,707,428 16,852,131 13,372,067 16,339,353 16,792,506 (59,625) 74% 22% 3% Total Expenditures 65,865,878 48,938,651 r43,032,905 46,729,510 48,315,460 (623,191) 73% 9% 3% Percent of year completed 75 % 13 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Ynar-to-Datn as of Sentemher 30. 2019 CITY COUNCIL BUDGET ACTUAL COMPARISON OF RESULTS ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER/(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 210,657 157,993 149,270 154,071 158,163 171 75% 3% 3% 21 FICA 16,861 12,646 11,747 12,108 12,449 (197) 74% 3% 3% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 13,418 10,064 8,248 9,577 10,197 133 76% 16% 6% 24 Industrial Insurance 2,685 2,014 1,642 1,815 2,089 75 78% 11 % 15% 25 Medical & Dental 61,990 46,493 44,287 44,321 46,724 232 75% 0 % 5 % Total Salaries &Benefits 306,611 229,208 215,193 221,892 229,622 414 75% 3% 3% 31 Supplies 3,500 2,697 1,212 1,458 912 (1,786) 26% 20% (37)% 41 Professional Services 76,500 45,062 - 22,800 18,893 (26,168) 25 % 0% (17)% 42 Communication 6,000 4,627 3,225 3,456 3,102 (1,525) 52% 7% (10)% 43 Travel 30,000 18,810 23,292 16,897 16,075 (2,735) 54% (27)% (5)% 49 Miscellaneous 10,500 8,410 6,625 4,536 4,192 (4,218) 40% (32)% -8%u Total Operating Expenses 126,500 79,605 34,354 49,148 43,173 (36,432) 34% 43 % (12)% Total Expenses 432,111 308,814 249,547 271,040 272,796 (36,018) 63 % 9 % 1 % Percent of year completed 75% 14 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Year -to -Date as of September 30. 2019 MAYOR BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER!(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT D(PENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 989,503 742,127 705,869 757,652 731,799 (10,328) 74% 7 % (3) % 12 Exlra Labor 48,000 36,000 9,002 24,675 49,471 13,471 103 % 174 % 100 % 21 FICA 75,110 56,333 55,175 60,120 58,868 2,536 78% 9% (2)% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 129,435 97,076 80,989 97,333 96,377 (699) 74% 20% (1)% 24 Industrial Insurance 3,953 2,965 2,307 2,645 4,355 1,390 110% 15% 65% 25 Medical B Dental 191,524 143,643 141,646 142,946 129,979 (13,664) 68% 1 % (9)% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,437,525 1,078,144 994,988 1,085,371 1,070,860 (7,294) 74% 9 % 3% 31 Supplies 44,531 29,378 19,228 20,246 24,459 (4,919) 55 % 5 % 21 % 41 Professional Services 677,000 415,387 428,705 416,535 401,797 (13,590) 59% (3)% (4)% 42 Communication 66,600 40,503 35,356 43,489 48,241 7,738 72% 23% 11 % 43 Travel 30,000 17,246 11,198 14,251 12,243 (5,003) 41 % 27% (14)% 44 Advertising 14,750 6,709 5,030 3,135 4,055 (2,655) 27% (38)% 29% 45 Rentals and Leases 36,773 27,848 29,189 24,336 32,474 4,625 88 % (17)% 33 % 48 Repairs and Maintenance 27,960 4,425 1,767 1,391 2.271 (2,153) 8% (21)% 63% 49 Miscellaneous 260,375 224.246 176,076 304,701 151,365 (72,882) 58 % 73 % -50 % Total Operating Expenses 1,157,989 765,742 706,550 828,083 676,903 (88,839) 58 % 17 % (18) Total Expenses 2,595,514 1,843,886 1 1,701,538 1,913,455 1,747,753 (96,133) 67% 12% (9)% Percent of year corrpleted 75 % 15 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL RIND EXPENDITURES ..rse.,t.-h ,%n gnio ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVB;V(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 ALLOCATEDBDGT %EXPBJDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 946,494 709,871 681,297 695,443 673.178 (36,692) 71 % 2% (3)% 12 Extra Labor 11,000 8,250 3,000 8,327 2,244 (6,006) 20% 178% (73)% 21 FICA 73,261 54,946 50,700 51,231 50,026 (4,920) 68% 1% (2)% 23 Pension-PERSlPSERS 120,574 90,431 76,676 84,657 86,447 (3,984) 72% 10% 2% 24 Industrial Insurance 3,605 2,704 1,845 2,165 3,095 391 86% 17% 43% 25 Medical & Dental 179,962 134,972 118,513 114,933 121,869 (13,103) 68% (3)% 6% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,334,896 1,001,172 932,032 956,755 937,266 (63,906) 70 % 3 % (2) 31 Supplies 23,888 17,018 11,967 14,469 21,192 4,174 89% 21 % 46% 41 Professional Services 567,045 425,284 311,036 351,802 313,982 (111,301) 55% 13% (11)% 42 Communication 40,000 30,000 10,853 10,667 21,364 (8,636) 53% (2)% 100% 43 Travel 6,500 5,375 5,097 3,186 4,522 (853) 70% (37)% 42 % 44 Advertising 8,500 6,366 2,303 3,645 300 (6,066) 4% 67% (92)% 45 Rentals and Leases 7,500 4,645 3,494 7,352 8,520 3,875 114 % 110 % 16 % 48 Repairs and Maintenance 9,230 8,730 - 17,768 6,913 (1,817) 75% - (61)% 49 Miscellaneous 113,950 85,728 109,307 88,537 83,075 (2,653) 73% (19)% (6)% Total Operating Expenses 776,613 683,145 454,056 497,626 469,868 (123,277) 59% 10% (8)% Total Expenses 2,111,509 1,584,317 1,386,088 1,454,382 1,397,134 (187,184) 66% 5% (4)% Percent of year completed 75% 16 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES vee._r.._ne re er ns Cunrnmh-,in 9MQ FINANCE BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER/(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT D(PENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 1,127.381 845,536 775,634 772,026 788,183 (57,352) 70% (0)% 2% 12 ErdfaLabor 25,000 18,750 11,870 29,066 33,196 14,446 133% 145% 14% 13 Overtime 10,000 7,500 3,978 20,926 25,335 17,835 253% 426% 21 % 21 FICA 88,310 66,233 60,011 62,684 62,882 (3,351) 71 % 4 % 0% 23 Pens ion-PERS/PSERS 143,957 107,968 89,737 100,054 103,584 (4,383) 72% 11 % 4 % 24 Industrial Insurance 4,752 3,564 2,261 2,655 3,934 370 83% 17% 48% 25 Medical & Dental 219,823 164,867 159,192 144,421 152,048 (12,819) 69% (9)% 5% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,619,223 1,214,417 1,102,684 1,131,831 1,169,163 (45,254) 72% 3% 3% 31 Supplies 18,100 13,557 7,714 13,257 7,204 (6,353) 40% 72% (46)% 35 Small Tools 5,000 5,000 254 3,491 2,881 (2,119) 58 % 1274 % (17) % 41 Professional Services 186,000 144,056 145,089 92,999 87,549 (56,507) 47% (36)% (6)% 42 Communication 600 444 322 360 360 (84) 60% 12% 0% 43 Travel 8,000 4,571 7,663 2,652 5,310 738 66 % (65) % 100 % 45 Rentals and Leases 3,500 1,192 1,648 1,268 3,885 2,694 111 % (23)% 206% 46 Insurance 394,872 394,872 352,082 393,322 346,615 (48,257) 88 % 12 % (12) % 48 Repairs and Maintenance 78,900 74,407 85,645 15,029 70,569 (3,838) 89 % (82) % 370 % 49 Miscellaneous 357,000 331.586 153.851 795,802 125,960 (205,626) 35 % 417 % -84 % 64 Miscellaneous - - - - 45,228 45,228 0% 0% 0% Total Operating Expenses 11051,972 969,685 754,269 1.318,180 695,562 (274,123) 66% 75% (47)A Total Expenses 2,671,195 2,184,103 1 1,856,953 2,450,011 1,864,726 (319,377) 70% 32% (24)% Percent of year completed 75% 17 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Yaar-tnJUfa ac of Sanfamher 30. 2019 ATTORNEY BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVez(UNDfft) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED % 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 12 Extra Labor 2,070 4,623 0% 123% (100)% 21 FICA 158 354 0% 123% (100)% 24 Industrial Insurance 25 60 5 5 0% 143% (92)% Total Salaries & Benefits 2,253 6,036 5 5 0% 124% 3% 31 Supplies 4,000 2,918 1,696 2,606 268 (2,649) 7% 54% (90)% 41 Professional Services 702,230 508,614 373,275 656,809 426,243 (82,370) 61% 76% (35)% 45 Rentals and Leases 2,100 1,240 2,337 1,079 1,575 335 75% (54)% 46% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 1,400 1,050 - - - (1,050) 0% 0% 0% 49 Miscellaneous 1,000 1,000 - 15 - (1,000) 0% 0% -100% Total Operating Expenses 710,730 514,822 377,308 660,510 428,087 (86,735) 60% 76% (35)% Total Expenses 710,730 514,822 379,561 665,546 428,092 (86,730) 60% 75% (36)% Percent of year completed 75% in CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL RIND EXPENDITURES v.-♦n-na/n as of CnNnmhnr in >nlQ RECREATION BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER/(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPEND® 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 1,423,376 1,067,532 1,025.212 1,041,323 1,054,046 (13,486) 74% 2% 1% 12 Extra Labor 496,189 404,465 391,087 376,851 412,407 7,942 83% (4)% 9% 13 Overtime 464 348 5,851 6,053 79 (269) 17% 3% (99)% 21 FICA 163,275 122,456 107,111 107,771 110,764 (11,693) 68% 1% 3% 23 Pens ion-PERS/PSERS 180.696 135,522 134,981 150,106 153,500 17,978 85% 11 % 2% 24 Industrial Insurance 57,962 43,487 48,351 49,364 51,193 7,707 88% 2% 4% 25 Medical 8 Dental 327,047 245,285 240,666 235.679 246.173 888 75% (2) % 4 % 26 Unemployment - - 2,033 1,306 178 178 - (36)% (86)% 28 Uniform/Clothing - - 225 - - - - Total Salaries & Benefits 2,649,029 2,019,095 1,955,516 1,968,453 2,028,340 9,245 77% 1% 3% 31 Supplies 124,717 78,165 97,017 71,247 69,973 11,808 72% (27)% 26% 34 Items Purchased for resale 22,000 16,587 15,307 16,954 18,359 1,772 83% 11 % 8% 35 Small Tools 4,251 4,251 1,631 7,277 - (4,251) - 346% - 41 Professional Services 204,200 158,075 120,976 105,887 158,498 423 78% (12)% 50% 42 Communication 11,450 8,885 6,209 6,255 8,869 4 78% 1% 42% 43 Travel 8,725 6,941 14,441 11,362 13,053 6,912 159% (21)% 22% 44 Advertising 21,500 16,313 6,255 11,754 9,650 (6,663) 45% 88% (18)% 45 Rentals and Leases 58,966 44,847 36,910 34,752 43,367 (1,481) 74% (6)% 25% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 50,400 45,897 2,080 10,507 25,677 (20,221) 51% 405% 144% 49 Miscellaneous 108,900 80,699 69,735 87,773 73,528 (7,171) 68% 26% (16)% 64 Machinery& Equipment 30,000 16,224 20,983 4,400 - (16,224) - (79)% - TotalOperatingExpenses 645,109 476,8841 391,544 368,169 441,793 (35,091) 68% (6)% 20% Total Expenses 3,294,138 2,495,979 2,347,060 2,336,622 2,470,133 (25,845) 75% (0)% 5% Percent of year completed 75% 19 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Vaar-fn-flafa ac of Ranfamhar 3n_ 2n19 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL OVER/(UNDER) %CHANGE EXPENDITURE TYPE 2019 ALLOCATED % 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 I3DGT EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 2,181,068 1.635,801 1,541,024 1,520,198 1,620,427 (15,374) 74% (1)% 7% 12 E)draLabor 65,864 49,398 39,885 45,347 27,366 (22,032) 42% 14% (40)% 13 Overtime 9,694 7,271 3,594 11,939 13,416 6,146 138% 232% 12% 21 FICA 172.823 129,617 120,277 120,638 125,667 (3,950) 73% 0% 4% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 279.482 209,612 181,006 194,417 203,668 (5,944) 73% 7% 5% 24 Industrial Insurance 22,280 16,710 11,775 11,491 15,568 (1,142) 70% (2)% 35% 25 Medical & Dental 403,644 302,733 282,661 268,200 289,818 (12,915) 72% (5) % 8 % 28 Uniform/Clothing 975 731 203 279 165 (566) 17 % 37 % (41)% Total Salaries & Benefits 3,135,830 2,351,873 2,180,425 2,172,509 2,296,095 (55,777) 73% (0)% 6% 31 Supplies 22,180 16,669 44,390 22,740 26,786 10,117 121% (49)% 18% 35 Small Tools 500 206 181 770 12 (194) 2% 326% (98)% 41 Professional Services 130.654 68,930 120,171 174,990 240,372 171,441 184% 46% 37% 42 Communication 7,280 4,807 7,328 7,478 8,857 4,050 122% 2% 18% 43 Travel 5,000 4,306 3,099 4,402 4,160 (146) 83 % 42 % (5) % 44 Advertising 300 225 303 - - (225) - - 45 Rentals and Leases 20,931 15,920 10,448 11,766 12,279 (3,641) 59% 13% 4% 47 Public Utilities 2,500 2,500 2,344 1,425 - (2,500) - (39)% - 48 Repairs and Maintenance 52,635 39,601 9,322 454 120 (39,481) 0% (95)% (74)% 49 Miscellaneous 133,748 85,641 37,550 99,801 83,679 (1,962) 63% 166% (16)% Total Operating Expenses 375,728 238,805 235,134 323,826 376,264 137,459 100% 38% 16% 1 Total Expenses 3,511,558 2,590,677 2,415,559 2,496,334 2,672,359 81,682 76% 3% 7% Percent of year completed 75 % 20 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Year -to -Date as of Se otember 30. 2019 MUNICIPAL COURT BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER/(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 13DGT EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 789,400 592,050 560,952 609.229 601,837 9,787 76% 9% (1)% 12 Extra Labor 3,680 2,760 558 - - (2,760) 0% (100)% 0% 13 Overtime 4,661 3,496 - - - (3,496) 0% 0% 0% 21 FICA 60,452 45,339 42,342 45,935 44,855 (484) 74% 8% (2)% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 99,506 74,630 65,713 77,057 76,736 2,106 77% 17% (0)% 24 Industrial Insurance 3,482 2,612 1,971 2,199 2,998 386 86% 12% 36% 25 Medical & Dental 173,089 129,817 121,448 126,388 132,224 2,407 76% 4% 5% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,134,270 850,703 792,984 860,809 858,649 7,947 76% 9% 3 % 31 Supplies 10,228 7,567 11,599 12,825 9,065 1,498 89% 11% (29)% 35 Small Tools 500 500 953 - 4,729 4,229 946% (100)% 0% 41 Professional Services 112,180 77,343 66,577 61,292 65,247 (12,097) 58% (8)% 6% 42 Communication 9,550 6,612 5,635 4,070 2,672 (3,941) 28% (28)% (34)% 43 Travel 6,500 3,604 8,722 3,552 3,883 280 60% (59)% 9% 45 Rentals and Leases 7,700 4,708 5,058 5,882 5,009 301 65% 16% (15)% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 1,300 750 348 5,535 - (750) 0% 1490% (100)% 49 Miscellaneous 1 16,000 11,507 13,568 10,638 8,632 (2,875) 54% (22)% -19% Total Operating Expenses 163,958 112,591 112,460 103,795 99,236 (13,354) 61 % (8) % (4) Total Expenses 1,298,228 963,293 905,443 964,604 957,885 (5,408) 74% 7% (1)% Percent of year completed 75 % 21 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES v .._a._n- ..rce.ae. h-qn onao POLICE BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVov(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT % EXPENDED 2017/2018 201812019 11 Salaries 9,518,392 7,138,794 6,404,166 6,384,274 6.600,503 (538,291) 69% (0)% 3% 12 Etdra Labor 15,600 8,110 858 3,001 30,139 22,029 193% 250% 904% 13 Overtime 768,495 546,528 683,032 553,332 602,843 56,315 78% (19)% 9% 15 Holiday/KellyPayoff 234,063 97,181 79,930 89,858 86,092 (11,089) 37% 12% (4)% 21 FICA 882,451 661,838 545,305 535,199 554,502 (107,337) 63% (2)% 4% 22 Pension-LEOFF 2 499,714 374,786 324,918 328.199 336,125 (38,660) 67 % 1 % 2 % 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 161,119 120,839 105.637 113,628 121,254 415 75% 8% 7% 24 Industrial insurance 274,717 206,038 135,996 149,853 188,718 (17,320) 69% 10% 26% 25 Medical & Dental 1,985,125 1,488,844 1,343,595 1,317,472 1,344,913 (143,930) 68% (2)% 2% 26 Unemployment - - 953 16,829 13,264 13,264 - 1665% (21)% Total Salaries & Benefits 14,339,676 10,642,967 9,624,389 9,491,646 9,878,353 (764,604) 69% (1)% 4% 31 Supplies 230.750 160,434 214,724 182,126 285,526 125,092 124 % (15) % 57 % 35 Small Tools 45,600 45,600 8,603 23,895 4,914 (40,686) 11% 178% (79)% 41 Professional Services 3,035,275 2,221,449 2,117,452 2,323,143 2,213,403 (8,045) 73% 10% (5)% 42 Communication 121,000 94,853 86,238 80,021 67,718 (27,135) 56% (7)% (15)% 43 Travel 41,880 30,144 35,961 42,734 61,284 31,140 146% 19% 43% 44 Advertising 2,500 2,424 453 7,520 205 (2,219) 8% 1561% (97)% 45 Rentals and Leases 1,119,488 831,347 657.025 648,368 869,615 38,268 78% (1)% 34% 46 Insurance 276,499 278,499 230,223 254,359 241,180 (37,319) 87% 10% (5)% 47 Public Utilities 4,400 3,963 2,774 1,946 5,200 1,236 118% (30)% 167% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 143,404 96,011 42,950 107,793 98,253 2,242 69% 151% (9)% 49 Miscellaneous 65,141 37,127 56,823 91,707 141,940 104,613 218% 61% 55% 64 Machinery& Equipment - - 11,628 - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses 5,067,937 3,801,850 3,464,853 3,763,610 3,989,237 187,387 78% 9 % 6% Total Expenses 19,427,613 14,444,807 13,089,242 13,255,256 13,867,589 (677,218) 71 % 1% 5% Percent of year completed 75% 22 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Vnar_lrlrlafn ac of It. nf-har in 9n1A FIRE BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVEPJ(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPENDED 201712018 201812019 11 Salaries 7,189,704 5,392,278 5,373,826 5,637,262 5,702,079 309,801 79% 5% 1 % 12 E#raLabor - - 3,746 5,536 6,162 6,162 - 48% 11 13 Overtime 530,648 397,986 468,894 502.816 619,410 221,424 117% 7% 23% 15 Holiday Pay 270,454 - - 1,480 5,769 5,769 2% - 290% 21 FICA 226,541 171.406 99,434 106,332 112,731 (58,675) 49% 7% 6% 22 Pension-LEOFF2 422,492 316,869 289,668 3B1,312 318,639 1,770 75% 32% (16)% 23 Pens ion-PERS/PSERS 50,017 37,513 32,796 38,667 36,562 (951) 73% 18% (5)% 24 Industrial Insurance 386,815 290,111 205,433 221,415 262,796 (27,315) 68% 8% 19% 25 Medical & Dental 1,447,642 1,085,732 1,130,155 1,064,013 1,127,322 41,590 78% (6)% 6% Total Salaries & Benefits 10,526,313 7,691,894 7,603,950 7,958,834 8,191,468 499,574 78% 5% 3% 31 Supplies 206,877 160,447 121,454 128,137 152,110 (8,337) 74% 6% 19% 35 Small Tools 87,268 86,508 4,228 12,925 25,385 (61,123) 29% 206% 96% 41 Professional Services 296,586 248,646 187,232 256,314 242,192 (6,454) 82 % 37 % (6) % 42 Communication 32,170 21,562 31,402 28,168 21,816 254 68% (10)% (23)% 43 Travel 7,000 5,190 11,929 8,166 14,039 8,849 201 % (32)% 72 % 45 Rentals and Leases 672,616 503,470 442,998 451,568 508,997 5,527 76% 2% 13% 46 Insurance 190,402 190,402 173,286 191,453 164,888 (25.514) 87% 10% (14)% 47 Public Utilities 73,360 57,717 63,414 71,398 61,201 3,484 83% 13% (14)% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 36,921 27,240 39,723 33,109 28,423 1,183 77% (17)% (14)% 49 Miscellaneous 143,874 131,447 102,517 121,043 105,602 (25,845) 73% 18% (13)% 64 Machinery&Equipment 200,000 - 7,934 - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses 1,947,074 1,432,629 1,186,117 1,302,280 1.324,653 (107,976) 68% 10% 2% Total Expenses 12,473,387 9,124,523 8,790,067 9,261,114 9,516,121 391,598 76 % 5% 3 % Percent of year completed 75% 23 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES voa�-r�_nara a� �r saga , r o� sn 7n19 TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION SERVICES BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVEPJ(UNDER) % CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 943,058 707,294 528,135 674,774 706.899 (395) 75 % 28 % 5% 12 Extra Labor 2,500 1,875 4,147 2,887 4,986 3,111 199% (30)% 73% 13 Overtime - - 64,226 2,589 121 121 0% (96)% (95)% 21 FICA 70,766 53,075 44,976 51,294 53,508 433 76% 14% 4% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 119,768 89,826 69,414 86,503 90,782 956 76% 25% 5% 24 Industrial Insurance 3,078 2,309 1,683 1,991 3,041 733 99% 18% 53% 25 Medical & Dental 186,743 140,057 106,169 133,418 133,728 (6,329) 72 % 26 % 0% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,325,913 994,435 818,749 953,455 993,065 (1,370) 75% 16 % 3% 31 Supplies 16,266 14,236 23,020 1,823 5,423 (8,813) 33% (92)% 198% 35 Small Tools - - 45,891 21,245 27,911 27,911 0% (54)% 31 % 41 Professional Services 369,686 277,292 79,471 205,016 124,598 (152,693) 34% 158% (39)°% 42 Communication 122.900 92,175 74,891 122,118 86,867 (5,308) 71% 63% (29)% 43 Travel 11,500 307 7,216 - 307 - 3% (100)% 0% 45 Rentals and Leases 162.469 88,312 142,296 139,096 146,756 58,444 90 % (2)% 6 % 48 Repairs and Maintenance - - 11,750 2,901 5,698 5,698 0% (75) % 96 % 49 Miscellaneous 25,200 22,065 46,774 26,874 53,541 31,476 212% (43)% 99% 64 Miscellaneous -Capital 10,000 10,000 6,000 46,606 - (10,000) 0% 677% (100)% Total Operating Expenses 718,021 504,387 437,310 565,678 451,102 (53,285) 63% 29% (20)% Total Expenses 2,043,934 1,498,821 1,256,059 1,519,133 1,444,167 (54,655) 71 % 21 % (5)% Percent of year completed 75 % 24 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Vaar-fnAafe ae of Rents hnr 3n 2o19 PUBLIC WORKS BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE Ovl3I/(UNDE2) % CRANGE ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL 2019 ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT %EXPENDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 2,007,483 1,505,612 1,324,786 1,330,347 1,377,241 (128,371) 69% 0% 4% 13 Overtime 13,000 9,750 15,750 20,459 12,093 2,343 93% 30% (41)% 21 FICA 154,471 115,853 99,291 102,750 104,925 (10,928) 68 % 3% 2 % 23 Pens ion -PER S/PSERS 254,934 191,201 152,062 164.396 177,774 (13.426) 70% 8% 8% 24 Industrial Insurance 33,647 25,235 17,231 17,873 20,816 (4,419) 62 % 4 % 16 % 25 Medical & Dental 430,251 322,688 261,386 260,969 295,093 (27,595) 69 % (0) % 13 % 28 Uniform/Clothing 3,200 2,400 565 777 480 (1,920) 15% 38% (38)% Total Salaries & Benefits 2,896,986 2,172,740 1,872,949 1,900,722 1,991,014 (181,725) 69 % 1 % 5 % 31 Supplies 92,950 67,277 65,503 55,547 61,397 (5,880) 66% (15)% 11% 35 Small Tools 4,250 2,447 630 1,722 5,662 3,215 133% 173% 229% 41 Professional Services 2,500 954 30,567 15,083 25,551 24,597 1022 % (51) % 69 % 42 Communication 12,050 8,072 8,200 12,382 13,695 5,624 114 % 51 % 11 % 43 Travel 1,100 581 828 576 855 274 78 % (30) % 48 % 45 Rentals and Leases 202,642 148,923 115,396 114,638 151,554 2,632 75% (1)% 32% 46 Insurance 107,900 107,900 107,271 107,561 107,742 (158) 100% 0% 0% 47 Public Utilities 433,000 317,535 282,274 282,169 274,026 (43,509) 63 % (0) % (3) % 48 Repairs and Maintenance 167,400 85,139 144,329 132,309 148,619 63,480 89% (8)% 12% 49 Miscellaneous 27,835 22,097 11,928 17,229 11,207 (10,890) 40% 44% (35)% Total Operating Expenses 1,051,627 760,9241 773,816 739,237 800,307 39,303 76% (4)% 8% Total Expenses 3,948,613 2,933,664 1 2,646,766 2,639,959 2,791,322 (142,342) 71% (0)% 6% Percent of year expired 75% 25 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Year -to -Date as of September 30. 2019 PARK MAINTENANCE BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER/(UNDER) % CFJA GE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPBJDED 2017/2018 2018/2019 11 Salaries 716,720 537,540 410,253 481.875 500,624 (36,916) 70 % 17 % 4 % 12 E)draLabor 50,000 37,500 24,049 22,215 51,275 13,775 103% (8)% 131% 13 Overtime 2,137 1,603 1,669 249 341 (1,262) 16% (85)% 37% 21 FICA 60,900 45,675 33,276 39,341 42,165 (3,510) 69% 18% 7% 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 91,023 68,267 48,008 65,089 69,802 1,535 77% 36% 7% 24 Industrial Insurance 24,672 18,504 12,958 13,981 16,517 (1,987) 67% 8% 18% 25 Medical & Dental 163,035 122,276 98,376 108,286 110.968 (11,308) 68 % 10 % 2 % 26 Unemployment - - - 664 2,680 2,680 0 % 0% 304 % 28 Uniform/Clothing 1,950 1,463 316 935 433 (1,030) 22% 196% (54)% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,110,437 832,828 628,905 732,635 794,804 (38,024) 72 % 16% 3 31 Supplies 73,400 50,626 66,497 52,999 87,061 36,435 119% (20)% 64% 35 Small Tools 3,000 2,186 5,318 7,713 5,745 3,559 191 % 45 % (26) % 41 Professional Services 40,800 30,600 51,508 25,065 48,824 18,224 120% (51)% 95% 42 Communication 700 474 1,705 3,135 5,541 5,067 792% 84% 77% 43 Travel 225 225 1,214 - 1,952 1,727 868 % (100) % 0 % 45 Rentals and Leases 112,960 88,240 85,695 75,514 86,975 (1,266) 77% (12)% 15% 47 Public Utilities 263,064 245,987 224,047 227,854 237,517 (8,470) 90% 2% 4% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 23,000 21,940 5,302 7,148 1,041 (20.899) 5% 35% (85)% 49 Miscellaneous 3,000 1,690 5,789 2,617 4,071 2,381 136% (55)% 56% Total Operating Expenses 520,149 441,967 447,074 402,045 478,771 36,804 92% (10)% 19% Total Expenses 1,630,586 1,274,795 1,075,979 1,134,680 1,273,574 (1,221) 78% 5% 12% Percent of year completed 75% 26 CITY OF TUKW ILA GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Year -to -Date as of Sentember 30. 2019 STREET MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCES ACTUAL EXPENDITURE TYPE OVER/(UNDER) %CHANGE 2019 ALLOCATED 2019 ANNUAL ALLOCATED 2017 2018 2019 BDGT EXPENDED 201712018 201812019 11 Salaries 848,244 636,183 576,726 603,188 651,049 14,866 77^/ 5% 8% 12 Extra Labor 45,000 33,750 45,630 27.360 42,007 8,257 93 % (40) % 54 % 13 Overtime 11,000 8,250 10,259 4,724 42,621 34,371 387 % (54)% 802 % 21 FICA 59,932 44,949 49,074 50,454 57,413 12,464 96 % 3% 14 % 23 Pension-PERS/PSERS 107,727 80,795 74,053 81,845 94,398 13,603 88% 11% 15% 24 Industrial Insurance 39,749 29,812 19,601 18,560 22,172 (7,640) 56% (5)% 19% 25 Medical & Dental 228,689 171,517 158,839 159,635 172,065 548 75 % 1 % 8% 26 Unemployment - - 970 3,724 1,466 1,466 0% 284% (61)% 28 Uniform/Clothing 2,400 1,800 669 719 1,068 (732) 45% 8% 48% Total Salaries & Benefits 1,342,741 1,007,056 935,821 950,209 1,084,260 77,204 81% 2% 3% 31 Supplies 200,700 157,766 138,751 156,085 453,704 295,937 226% 12% 191% 35 Small Tools 13,200 10,071 6,724 6,767 3,170 (6,901) 24 % 1 % (53) % 41 Professional Services 4,200 3,575 6,327 4,945 4,012 437 96% (22)% (19)% 42 Communication 4,300 2,911 1,200 3,005 8,073 5,162 188% 150% 169% 43 Travel 3,200 2,928 3,110 890 8,749 5,821 273 % (71) % 883 % 45 Rentals and Leases 493,390 367,571 220,908 224,757 367,493 (79) 74 % 2 % 64 % 46 Insurance 34,102 34,102 24,755 27,351 29,532 (4,570) 87 % 10 % 8% 47 Public Utilities 1,223,100 1,118,901 1,069,569 1,112,883 1,148,154 29,253 94% 4% 3% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 30,600 26,975 6,712 15,629 49,339 22,364 161 % 133 % 216 % 49 Miscellaneous 5,200 3,206 7,473 3,266 14,234 11,028 274% (56)% 336% Total Operating Expenses 2,011,992 1,728,006 1,485,529 1,555,577 2,086,459 358,453 104 % 5 % 34 % Total Expenses 3,354,733 2,735,062 2,421,350 2,505,786 3,170,719 435.657 95 % 3% 27 % Percent of year completed 75% 27 City of Tukwila Contingency Fund 105 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings $ 90,000 $ 61,932 $ 123,470 $ 61,538 137.2% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 90,000 61,932 123,470 61,538 137.2% Transfers in 58,568 - - - 0.0% Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: Indirect Cost Allocation Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 148,568 61,932 123,470 61,538 83.1% 0.0% 148,568 61,932 123,470 61,538 83.1% 6,557,161 6,557,161 6,557,161 - 100.0% $6,705,729 $6,619,093 $ 6,680,631 $ 61,538 99.6% City of Tukwila Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 101 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: General Revenue HotellMotel Taxes $ 775,000 $ 533,521 $ 584,490 $ 50,970 75.4% Total General Revenue 775,000 533,521 584,490 50,970 75.4% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 3,000 1,796 28,646 26,850 954.9% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 3,000 1,796 28,646 26,850 954.9% Total Revenues 778,000 535,317 613,136 77,820 78.8% EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 55,457 41,593 42,313 720 76.3% 21 FICA 4,221 3,166 3,111 (54) 73.7% 23 PERS 7,043 5,282 5,352 70 76.0% 24 Industrial Insurance 168 126 165 39 98.0% 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 6,414 4,811 4,682 (128) 73.0% 31 Office and operating supplies 5,000 4,267 279 (3,988) 5.6% 41 Professional Services 452,500 207,635 103,510 (104,125) 22.9% 43 Travel 10,000 7,621 352 (7,269) 3.5% 44 Advertising 113,586 42,011 30,383 (11,629) 26.7% 45 Operating Rentals and Leases - - 225 225 - 49 Miscellaneous 20,000 20,000 13,056 (6,944) 65.3% Indirect Cost Allocation Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 18,741 14,056 14,056 75.0% 693,130 350,567 217,484 (133,083) 31.4% 84,870 184,750 395,652 210,902 466.2% 1,617,625 1,617,625 1,617,625 - 100.0% $ 1,702,495 $ 1,802,375 $ 2,013,277 $ 210,902 118.3% 29 City of Tukwila Drug Seizure Fund 109 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget NATA ZIJIJ=F Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings $ $ - $ 3,806 $ 3,806 - Seizure Revenue - - - Confiscated and Forfeited Property 25,000 4,267 33,242 28,974 133.0% Confiscated and Forfeited Property - Federal 30,000 30,000 45,978 15,978 153.3% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 55,000 34,267 83,025 48,758 151.0% Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 31 Office & Operating Supplies 35 Small Tools & Minor Equipment 41 Professional Services 42 Communication 43 Travel 45 Operating Rentals & Leases 48 Repairs and Maintenance 49 Miscellaneous 64 Capital Outlay Total E.Venditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 55,000 34,267 83,025 48,758 151.0% 25,000 24,909 8,421 (16,489) 33.7% 11,000 10,750 3,765 (6,985) 34.2% 8,000 8,000 498 (7,502) 6.2% 11,000 5,981 5,760 (221) 52.4% - - 5,400 5,400 - 5,000 3,007 5 (3,002) 0.1% - - 13,336 13,336 - 60,000 52,648 37,185 (15,463) 62.0% (5,000) (18,380) 45,841 64,221-916.8% 226,507 226,507 233,688 7,181 103.2% $ 221,507 $ 208,127 $ 279,529 $ 71,402 126.2% 30 City of Tukwila Debt Service Funds 2XX - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings $ - $ $ 5,651 $ 5,651 Contribution - SCORE 427,869 - - - Other 49,807 49,807 23,360 (26,447) 46.9% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 477,676 49,807 29,011 (20,796) 6.1 % Transfers In 4,179,519 2,746,490 3,048,065 301,575 72.9% Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 71 Debt Service Principal 83 Debt Service Interest Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 4,657,195 2,796,297 3,077,075 280,779 66.1% 2,578,697 49,247 48,278 (969) 1.9% 2,012,873 864,684 828,169 (36,515) 41.1% 4,591,570 913,931 876,447 (37,484) 19.1% 65,625 1,882,366 2,200,629 318,263 3353.3% 445,848 445,848 445,652 (196) 100.0% $ 511,473 $ 2,328,214 $ 2,646,281 $ 318,067 517.4% 31 City of Tukwila Debt Service UTGO - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: General Revenue Property Taxes $ 2,841,675 $ 1,592,502 $ 1,679,813 $ 87,310 59.1% Total General Revenue 2,841,675 1,592,502 1,679,813 87,310 59.1% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings - - 150 150 - Total Miscellaneous Revenue - 150 150 Total Revenues 2,841,675 1,592,502 1,679,963 87,460 59.1% EXPENDITURES: 71 Debt Service Principal 1,370,000 - - - 0.0% 83 Debt Service Interest/Misc Fees 1,471,675 735,838 735,838 - 50.0% Total Expenditures 2,841,675 735,838 735,838 - 25.9% Change in fund balances - 856,665 944,125 87,460 - Beginning Fund Balance 40,117 40,117 95,114 54,997 237.1% Ending Fund Balance $ 40,117 $ 896,782 $ 1,039,239 $ 142,457 2590.5% 32 City of Tukwila Debt Service LID, Guaranty Funds - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Miscellaneous Revenue LID Assesment Interest 243,937 71,096 149,573 78,476.77 61.3% LID Assesment Principal 445,000 147,311 305,470 158,159 68.6% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 688,937 218,408 455,043 236,635 66.1 % Total Revenues 688,937 218,408 455,043 236,635 66.1% EXPENDITURES: 71 Debt Service Principal 445,000 445,000 410,000 (35,000) 92.1% 83 Debt Service Interest/Misc Fees 243,637 243,637 217,763 (25,875) 89.4% Total E)Venditures 688,637 688,637 627,763 (60,875) 91.2% Change in fund balances 300 (470,229) (172,719) 297,510 -57573.1% Beginning Fund Balance 1,392,324 1,392,324 1,365,098 (27,226) 98.0% Ending Fund Balance 1,392,624 922,095 1,192,379 270,284 85.6% 33 City of Tukwila Residential Street Fund 103 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Intergovernmental Revenue Indirect Federal - Cascade View 201,000 201,000 - (201,000) 0.0% State Grant - 53rd Ave 514,000 332,923 981,968 649,045 191.0% State Entitlements - MVFT Cities 285,000 203,148 216,434 13,285 75.9% Total Intergovernmental Revenue 1,000,000 737,071 1,198,402 461,331 119.8% Miscellaneous Revenue Charges for services 1,682,000 981,729 75,431 (906,298) 4.5% Investment earnings 20,000 19,269 1,859.97 (17,409) 9.3% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 1,702,000 1,000,999 147,829 (853,169) 8.7% Transfers In 1,850,000 - 1,300,000 1,300,000 70.3% Total Revenues 4,552,000 1,738,070 2,646,231 908,161 58.1% EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 13 Overtime 20 Benefits 35 Small Tools and Minor Equipment 41 Professional Services 48 Repairs and Maintenance Total Operating Expenses Capital Expenses 64 Capital outlay Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance - 67,936 67,936 - - 719 719 - - - 27,795 27,795 - - - 83,665 83,665 - 270,000 190,250 10,319 (179,931) 3.8% 130,000 97,500 - (97,500) 0.0% 400,000 287,750 190,434 (97,316) 4,216,000 5,144,307 3,313,276 (1,831,031) 78.6% 4,616,000 5,432,057 3,503,711 (1,928,347) 75.9% (64,000) (3,693,987) (857,479) 2,836,508 1339.8% 115,544 115,544 115,544 - 100.0% 51,544 (3,578,443) (741,935) 2,836,508-1439.4% 34 City of Tukwila Arterial Street Fund 104 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: General Revenue Parking Tax 325,000 238,423 258,614 20,191 80% MVFT Cities 135,000 96,228 110,165 13,937 82% Real Estate Excise Taxes 500,000 338,741 299,579 (39,162) 60% Total General Revenue 960,000 673,392 668,359 (5,034) 69.6% Charges for Sevices Park impact Fees 800,000 369,333 711,069 341,737 88.9% Traffic Impact Fees 535,000 382,483 409,848 27,365 76.6% Total Charges for Services 1,335,000 751,816 1,120,917 369,102 84.0% Intergovernmental Revenue Department of Trasnportation - Tukw ila 187,000 - 367,230 367,230 196.4% Boeing Access Bridge 1,071,000 1,071,000 823,433 (247,567) 76.9% State Grant - TUC Pedestrian Bridge 566,000 - - - 0.0% Total Charges for Services 1,824,000 1,071,000 1,190,664 119,664 65.3% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 20,000 11,687 39,652 27,964 198.3% Contributions/Donations 30,000 29,297 4,900 (24,397) 16.3% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 50,000 40,984 44,552 3,568 89.1 % Transfers In Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 21 FICA 23 PIERS 24 Industrial Insurance 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 41 Professional Services 43 Travel 44 Advertising 47 Public Utility Services 48 Repairs and Maintenance Total Operating Expenses Capital Expenses 64 Capital Outlay 4,169,000 2,537,192 3,024,491 487,299 72.5% 352,034 264,026 238,461 (25,565) 67.7% 33,268 24,951 17,987 (6,964) 54.1% 44,708 33,531 30,542 (2,989) 68.3% 6,795 5,096 2,685 (2,412) 39.5% 40,794 30,596 33,691 3,096 82.6% 856,000 606,012 667,407 61,395 78.0% - - 29 29 - 243 243 - - 2,714 2,714 - 1,325,000 1,324,555 1,160,789 (163,766) 87.6% 2,658,599 2,288,766 2,154,547 (134,219) 81.0% 3,196,000 5,131,885 1,575,065 (3,556,820) 49.3% 3,196,000 5,131,885 1,575,065 (3,556,820) 49.3% Total Expenditures 5,854,599 7,420,651 3,729,612 (3,691,039) 63.7% Change in fund balances (1,685,599) (4,883,458) (705,121) 4,178,338 41.8% Beginning Fund Balance 2,873,425 2,873,425 2,873,425 - 100.0% Ending Fund Balance 1,187,826 (2,010,033) 2,168,304 4,178,338 182.5% 35 City of Tukwila Land Acquisition, Rec and Park Development Fund 301 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: General Revenue Excess Prop Tax Levy - Dw rnsh Hill 60,000 33,944.05 33,944.05 0.57 Real Estate Excise Taxes - 39,691 39,691 - Total General Revenue 60,000 73,635 73,635 122.7% Intergovernmental Revenue State Grants- Duw amish Hill Preserve 695,000 17,769 17,769 2.6% Total Charges for Services 695,000 - 17,769 17,769 2.6% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 15,000 10,074 19,453 9,379 129.7% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 15,000 10,074 19,453 9,379 129.7% Total Revenues 823,320 10,074 164,177 154,103 19.9% EXPENDITURES: 24 Industrial Insurance 12 12 31 Office and Operating Supplies - - 4,570 4,570 - 41 Professional Services 325,000 325,000 99,544 (225,456) 30.6% Total Operating Expenses 325,000 325,000 169,856 (155,144) 52.3% Capital Expenses 65 Capital Outlay 950,000 280,000 - (280,000) 0.0% 950,000 280,000 - (280,000) 0.0% Total Expenditures 1,275,000 605,000 169,856 (435,144) 13.3% Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance (451,680) (594,926) (5,679) 589,247 1.3% 1,019,562 1,019,562 1,133,268 113,706 111.2% 567,882 424,636 1,127,589 702,953 198.6% 36 City of Tukwila Urban Renewal Fund 302 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 10,000 6,626 48,486 41,861 484.9% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 6,626 48,486 41,861 484.9% Total Revenues 10,000 6,626 48,486 41,861 484.9% EXPENDITURES: 20 Benefits - - 1 1 41 Professional Services - - 17,582 17,582 - 47 Public Utility Services - - 11,083 11,083 - Total Operating Expenses - - 28,666 28,666 - Capital Expenses 64 Capital Outlay 35,000 - - - 0.0% Total Capital Expenses 35,000 - - 0.0% Transfers Out 200,000 150,000 (150,000) 0.0% Total EVenditures 235,000 150,000 28,666 (121,334) 12.2% Change in fund balances (225,000) (143,374) 19,820 163,194 -8.8% Beginning Fund Balance 7,575,693 7,575,693 7,575,693 - 100.0% Ending Fund Balance 7,350,693 7,432,319 7,595,513 163,194 103.3% 37 City of Tukwila General Government Improvements Fund 303 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 500 343 8,409 8,066 1681.7% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 500 343 8,409 8,066 1681.7% Transfers In Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 13 Overtime 21 FICA 23 PIERS 24 Industrial Insurance 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 41 Professional Services Total Operating Expenses Capital Expenses 65 Capital Outlay Total Capital Expenses Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 2 00, 000 150,000 150,000 75.0% 200,500 150,343 158,409 8,066 79.0% 111,502 83,891 2,941 (80,950) 2.6% 8,723 6,542 224 (6,319) 2.6% 14,206 10,655 378 (10,276) 2.7% 2,324 1,743 120 (1,623) 5.2% 16,340 12,255 541 (11,714) 3.3% - 15,000 - (15,000) - 153,095 130,086 4,204 (125,882) 2.7% - 134,735 - (134,735) - - 134,735 - (134,735) - 153,095 264,821 4,204 (260,618) 2.7% 47,405 (114,478) 154,205 268,683 325.3% 477,761 477,761 477,761 - 100.0% 525,166 363,283 631,966 268,683 120.3% City of Tukwila Fire Improvement Fund 304- Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Charges for Sevices Fire Impact Fees 950,000 419,394 708,880 289,486 74.6% Total Charges for Services 950,000 419,394 708,880 289,486 74.6% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 100 47 2,212 2,165 2211.6% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 100 47 2,212 2,165 2211.6% Total Revenues 950,100 419,441 711,092 291,651 74.8% EXPENDITURES: Transfers Out 1,100,000 375,000 (375,000) 0.0% Total ETenditures 1,100,000 375,000 - (375,000) 0.0% Change in fund balances (149,900) 44,441 711,092 666,651 -474.4% Beginning Fund Balance 167,135 167,135 444,252 277,117 265.8% Ending Fund Balance 17,235 211,576 1,155,344 943,768 6703.5% 39 City of Tukwila Public Safety Plan Fund 305- Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: General Revenue Mitigation Fees (Tukwila South) 300,000 - - - 0.0% Excise Tax 500,000 259,888 260,995 1,107 52.2% Total Intergovernmental Revenue 800,000 259,888 260,995 1,107 32.6% Miscellaneous Revenue Bond Proceeds 58,175,046 - - - 0.0% Investment earnings 300,000 227,697 244,836 17,138 81.6% Unrealized Gain/(Loss) on Investments - - - - - Facilities Rent - - 25,070 25,070 - Total Miscellaneous Revenue 300,000 227,697 269,905 42,208 90.0% Transfers In 2,850,000 _ 0.0% Sale of Capital Assets 4,889,300 - - - 0.0% Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 35 Small Tools and Minor Equipment 41 Professional Services 45 Operating Rentals & Leases 47 Public Utility Services 49 Miscellaneous 61 Capital Outlay Transfer Out 67,014,346 487,585 530,900 43,315 0.8% 324,578 324,578 20,905 (303,673) 6.4% - - 117 117 - - 10,969 10,969 - - 10,474 10,474 - - - 38,654 38,654 - 39,272,000 19,206,738 12,952,077 (6,254,661) 33.0% 39,596,578 19,531,316 13,033,197 (6,498,120) 32.9% 300,000 225,000 - (225,000) 0.0% Total Expenditures 39,896,578 19,756,316 13,033,197 (6,723,120) 32.7% Change in fund balances 27,117,768 (19,268,731) (12,502,296) 6,766,435 -46.1% Beginning Fund Balance 15,232,963 15,232,963 15,232,963 - 100.0% Ending Fund Balance 42,350,731 (4,035,768) 2,730,667 6,766,435 6.4% M City of Tukwila City Facilities Fund 306- Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Miscellaneous Revenue Bond proceeds 7,500,000 7,500,000 (7,500,000) 0.0% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 7,500,000 7,500,000 (7,500,000) 0.0% Trannfers In - - 0 - Total Revenues 7,500,000 7,500,000 (7,500,000) 0.0% EXPENDITURES: 49 Mscellaneous - - - - - 62 Capital Outlay 12,479,000 1,280,066 12,564,801 11,284,735 100.7% Transfers Out 1,750,000 1,312,500 - (1,312,500) 0.0% Total Expenditures 14,229,000 2,592,566 12,564,801 9,972,235 88.3% Change in fund balances (6,729,000) 4,907,434 (12,564,801) (17,472,235) 186.7% Beginning Fund Balance 13,079,590 13,079,590 13,079,590 - 100.0% Ending Fund Balance 6,350,590 17,987,024 514,789 (17,472,235) 8.1 % 41 City of Tukwila Water Fund 401 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 REVENUE: Charges for Services Water Sales Security Total Charges for Services Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings Connection Fees Other Total Miscellaneous Revenue Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 12 Extra Labor 13 Overtime 21 FICA 23 PERS 24 Industrial Insurance 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 28 Uniform Clothing 31 Office and Operating Supplies 33 Water Purchased for Resale 35 Small Tools and Minor Equipment 41 Professional Services 42 Communication 43 Travel 45 Operating Rentals and Leases 46 Insurance 47 Public Utility Services 48 Repairs and Maintenance 49 Miscellaneous Total Operating Expenses Capital Expenses 64 Capital Outlay 71 Debt Service Principal 83 Debt Service Interest Transfers Out Indirect Cost Allocation Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget 7,206.000 5,729,269 5,382,672 (346,597) 74.7% - - 150 150 - 7,206,000 5,729,269 5,382,822 (346.447) 74.7% 31,000 19.146 87,604 68,458 282.6% 80,000 73,648 17,620 (56,027) 22.0% - - 425 425 - 111,000 92,794 105.649 12,855 95.2% 7,317,000 5,822,063 5,488,471 (333,592) 75.0% 607,746 455,810 441,167 (14,643) 72.6% 4,000 3,000 - (3,000) 0.0% 7,000 5,250 8,710 3,460 124.4% 48,679 36,509 34,723 (1,787) 71.3% 77.184 57,888 55,089 (2,799) 71.4% 16,416 12,312 10,321 (1,991) 62.9% 139,605 104,704 95,606 (9,097) 68.5% 1,330 998 455 (543) 34.2% 144,300 107,636 63,174 (44.462) 43.8% 3,060,250 2,670,360 2.228,088 (442,272) 72.8% 11,000 10,375 3,304 (7,071) 30.0% 482.500 357,340 80,284 (277,056) 16.6% 2,500 2,291 4,226 1,935 169.0% 1,500 497 229 (269) 152% 162,646 148,498 122,364 (26,134) 75.2% 18,051 18,051 17,227 (824) 95.4% 25,370 20,267 16.840 (3,427) 66.4% 15,000 15,000 17,922 2,922 119.5% 1,071,000 787,077 773,925 (13,152) 72.3% 5,896,077 4,813,862 3.973.654 (840,208) 67.4% 622,500 414,097 158,850 (255,247) 25.5% 134,242 - 80,625 80,625 60.1% 13,006 6,605 6,388 (217) 49.1% 769,748 420,702 245,863 (174,838) 31.9% 985,076 738,807 581,744 (157,063) 59.1% 0.0% 7,650,901 5,973,370 4,801,262 (1,172,109) 62.8% (333,901) (151,308) 687.210 838,517-205.8% 6,057,771 6,057,771 6,057,771 - 100.0% 5,723,870 5,906,463 6,744,981 838,517 117.8% 42 City of Tukwila Sewer Fund 402 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget VWTj9►M4 Charges for Services Sew er Sales 9,732,000 7,375,919 7,665,990 290,071 78.8% Total Charges for Services 9,732,000 7,375,919 7,665,990 290,071 78.8% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 55,000 36,169 123,292 87,122 224.2% Connection Fees 125,000 107,148 88,884 (18,264) 71.1% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 180,000 143,318 212,175 68,858 117.9% Total Revenues 9,912,000 7,519,237 7,878,165 358,928 79.5% EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 385,088 288,816 293,783 4,967 76.3% 13 Overtime 4,442 3,332 5,981 2,650 134.7% 21 FICA 29,946 22,460 22,815 355 76.2% 23 PERS 48,907 36,680 38,382 1,702 78.5% 24 Industrial Insurance 9,538 7,154 6,673 (481) 70.0% 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 86,267 64,700 73,536 8,836 85.2% 28 Uniform Gothing 570 428 - (428) 0.0% 31 Office and Operating Supplies 21,600 14,484 21,304 6,820 98.6% 33 Metro Sewage Treatment 4,762,000 3,961,583 3,648,940 (312,643) 76.6% 35 Small Tools and Mnor Equipment 5,000 3,275 87 (3,188) 1.7% 41 Professional Services 536,000 338,066 60,189 (277,878) 11.2% 42 Communication 2,500 2,139 2,954 814 118.1% 43 Travel 2,000 2,000 996 (1,004) 49.8% 44 Advertising 150 113 - (113) 0.0% 45 Operating Rentals and Leases 92,930 83,465 68,212 (15,253) 73.4% 46 Insurance 10,968 10,968 10,828 (140) 98.7% 47 Public Utility Services 43,000 34,818 27,391 (7,427) 63.7% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 49,000 45,250 37,159 (8,091) 75.8% 49 Mscellaneous 1,188,700 867,440 913,785 46,345 76.9% Total Operating Expenses 7,278,606 5,787,169 5,233,014 (554,155) 71.9% Capital Expenses 64 Capital Outlay 2,436,000 2,321,104 37,616 (2,283,488) 1.5% 71 Debt Service Principal 326,892 - 233,436 233,436 71.4% 83 Debt Service Interest 32,382 19,201 18,115 (1,086) 55.9% 2,795,274 2,340,305 289,167 (2,051,138) 10.3% Transfers Out 701,036 525,777 459,772 (66,005) 65.6% Indirect Cost Allocation Total Expenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 0.0% 10,774,916 8,653,251 5,981,952 (2,671,299) 55.5% (862,916) (1,134,014) 1,896,213 3,030,227-219.7% 10,212,080 10,212,080 10,212,080 - 100.0% 9,349,164 9,078,066 12,108,293 3,030,227 129.5% 43 City of Tukwila Foster Golf Course 411 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: General Revenue Excise Taxes 2,900 2,008 1,003 (1,005) 34.6°% Total General Revenue 2,900 2,008 1,003 (1,005) 34.6% Charges for Services Sale of Merchandise 135,000 116,928 134,184 17,256 99.4% Green Fees, Instruction 1,041,500 938,495 998,793 60,298 95.9% Total Charges for Services 1,176,500 1.055,423 1,132,977 77,554 96.3% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 500 280 8,169 7,889 1633.8% Rents and Concessions 306,000 261,439 280,506 19,067 91.7% Other 8,000 7,983 16,635 8,652 207.9% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 314,500 269,701 305,310 35,609 97.1% Transfers In 300.000 225,000 225,000 - 75.0% Total Revenues 1.793,900 1,552,133 1,664,290 112,157 92.8% EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 616.346 455,576 457,603 2,025 74.2% 12 Extra Labor 101,000 63,750 80,065 16,315 79.3°% 13 Overtime 1,000 750 1,720 970 172.0% 21 FICA 55,887 41,404 40,539 (865) 72.5°% 23 PERS 78,330 57,896 63.834 5,938 81.5% 24 Industrial Insurance 16,999 12,641 16,621 3,980 97.8% 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 148,062 109,450 107.036 (2,414) 72.3% 26 Unenployment Compensation 5,600 4,200 42 (4,158) 0.7% 28 Unitform Clothing 1,100 825 235 (590) 21.4% 31 Office and Operating Supplies 87,000 80,988 78,891 (2,097) 90.7% 34 Items purcashed for resale 92,000 78,458 119,836 41,379 130.3% 35 Small Tools and Minor Equipment 62,000 36,661 11,936 (24,725) 19.3% 41 Professional Services 6,000 5.199 5,910 711 98.5°% 42 Communication 5,600 4,560 6,388 1,828 114.1% 43 Travel 500 425 2,148 1,723 429.7% 44 Advertising 5,000 3,432 2,345 (1,087) 46.9% 45 Operating Rentals and Leases 149,537 127,318 121,536 (5,782) 81.3% 46 Insurance 23,000 23,000 21,516 (1,484) 93.5% 47 Public Utility Services 71,700 65,321 59,465 (5,856) 82.9% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 60,000 13.905 38,691 24,786 64.5% 49 Miscellaneous 41,500 36,635 46,409 9,774 111.8% Total Operating Expenses 1,628,161 1,222,394 1,282,766 60,372 78.8% Capital Expenses 64 Capital Outlay 50,000 37.500 - (37,500) 0.0% 50,000 37,500 - (37,500) 0.0% Transfers Out 190,183 142,637 142,762 125 75.1°% Indirect Cost Allocation - - - - 0.0°% Total Expenditures 1,868,344 1,402.531 1,425,528 22,997 76.3% Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance (74,444) 149,602 238,763 89,161-320.7°% 640,081 640.081 313.282 (326.799) 48.9°% 565,637 789,683 552,045 (237,638) 97.6% City of Tukwila Surface Water Fund 412 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Charges for Services Surface Water Sales 6,663,000 6,663,000 6,738,140 75,140 101.1% Total Charges for Services 6,663,000 6,663,000 6,738,140 75,140 101.1% Intergovernmental Revenue 2,367,000 113,370 113,370 5% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 40,000 29,496 39,093 9,597 97.7% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 40,000 29,496 39,579 10,083 98.9% Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 12 Extra Labor 13 Overtime 21 FICA 23 PERS 24 Industrial Insurance 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 28 Uniform Clothing 31 Office and Operating Supplies 35 Small Tools and Minor Equipment 41 Professional Services 42 Communication 43 Travel 44 Advertising 45 Operating Rentals and Leases 46 Insurance 47 Public Utility Services 48 Repairs and Maintenance 49 Miscellaneous Total Operating Expenses Capital Expenses 64 Capital Outlay 71 Debt Service Principal 83 Debt Service Interest 9,070,000 6,692,496 6,891,089 198,592 76.0% 1,072,529 804,397 717,963 (86,433) 66.9% 8,000 6,000 2,261 (3,739) 28.3% 9,000 6,750 12,100 5,350 134.4% 84,489 63,367 56,208 (7,159) 66.5% 136,212 102,159 94,765 (7,394) 69.6% 27,463 20,597 16,654 (3,943) 60.6% 232,509 174,382 150,300 (24,081) 64.6% 1,500 1,125 264 (861) 17.6% 87,500 85,057 29,122 (55,934) 33.3% 5,000 2,361 692 (1,669) 13.8% 1,966,850 1,336,134 237,375 (1,098,759) 12.1% 2,000 1,342 7,491 6,149 374.6% 2,000 1,684 568 (1,116) 28.4% 500 375 985 610 197.1 % 407,386 353,792 302,554 (51,238) 74.3% 27,077 27,077 30,763 3,686 113.6% 107,200 81,258 21,422 (59,836) 20.0% 37,000 36,000 13,004 (22,996) 35.1% 726,300 545,387 731,825 186,438 100.8% 4,940,515 3,649,244 2,426,318 (1,222,925) 49.1% 2,585,000 1,768,444 335,097 (1,433,347) 13.0% 289,042 - 259,356 259,356 89.7% 12,127 9,786 9,613 (173) 79.3% 2,886,169 1,778,230 604,065 (1,174,164) 20.9% Transfers Out 1,106,540 829,905 652,417 (177,488) 59.0% Total Expenditures 8,933,224 6,257,378 3,682,801 (2,574,578) 41.2% Change in fund balances 136,776 435,118 3,208,288 2,773,170 2345.7% Beginning Fund Balance 2,595,103 2,595,103 2,595,103 - 100.0% Ending Fund Balance 2,731,879 3,030,221 5,803,391 2,773,170 212.4% 45 City of Tukwila Equipment Rental/Replacement Fund 501 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Charges for Services ERR O&M Dept Charges 2,071,944 1,742,233 1,553,959 (188,274) 75.0% Equipment Replacement Charges 1,202,726 648,290 902,044 253,754 75.0% Total Charges for Services 3,274,670 2,390,524 2,456,003 65,480 75.0% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 14,269 7,255 85,126 77,871 596.6% Insurance Proceeds - - 149,123 149,123 - Other 150 - 293 293 195.3% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 14,419 7,255 234,542 227,287 1626.6% Sale of Capital Assets 30,000 1,000 4,716 3,716 15.7% Transfers In 300,000 282,641 - (282,641) 0.0% Total Revenues 3,619,089 2,681,420 2,695,262 13,842 74.5% EXPENDITURES: 11 Salaries 405,959 304,469 291,595 (12,874) 71.8% 12 Extra Labor 32,000 24,000 7,975 (16,025) 24.9% 13 Overtime 1,858 1,394 210 (1,183) 11.3% 21 FICA 33,859 25,394 22,765 (2,629) 67.2% 23 PERS 51,557 38,668 38,493 (175) 74.7% 24 Industrial insurance 12,349 9,262 8,034 (1,227) 65.1% 25 Medical, Dentail, Life, Optical 104,544 78,408 76,220 (2,188) 72.9% 28 Uniform Clothing 950 713 358 (354) 37.7% 31 Office and Operating Supplies 3,000 1,977 2,605 628 86.8% 34 items Purchased for Resale 750,000 585,780 559,125 (26,655) 74.6% 35 Small Tools and Minor Equipment 5,000 4,944 3,300 (1,643) 66.0% 41 Professional Services 4,000 2,022 1,733 (289) 43.3% 42 Communication 2,000 1,745 2,867 1,123 143.4% 43 Travel 1,500 1,500 1,469 (31) 97.9% 45 Operating Rentals and Leases 77,617 68,455 63,084 (5,371) 81.3% 46 Insurance 68,853 68,853 70,152 1,299 101.9% 48 Repairs and Maintenance 120,000 104,002 38,284 (65,718) 31.9% 49 Miscellaneous 12,000 10,985 12,962 1,977 108.0% 64 Capital Outlay 2,380,000 2,294,779 564,294 (1,730,485) 23.7% Transfers Out 368,158 276,119 276,119 (0) 75.0% Total Expenditures 4,435,204 3,903,467 2,041,647 (1,861,820) 46.0% Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance (816,115) (1,222,047) 653,615 1,875,662 -80.1% 4,294,902 4,294,902 4,294,902 - 100.0% 3,478,787 3,072,855 4,948,517 1,875,662 142.2% City of Tukwila Insurance Fund 502 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget REVENUE: Charges for Services Employee Benefit Programs 1,200 733 2,395 1,663 199.6% Total Charges for Services 1,200 733 2,395 1,663 199.6% Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 55,995 55,995 39,720 (16,275) 70.9% Employee Trust Contibutions 349,024 216,834 150,008 (66,826) 43.0% Employer Trust Contributions 6,157,653 4,646,286 4,387,358 (258,928) 71.3% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 6,562,672 4,919,115 4,577,086 (342,029) 69.7% Total Revenues 6,563,872 4,919,848 4,579,481 (340,367) 69.8% EXPENDITURES: 25 Medical, Dental, Life, Optical 6,656,300 4,992,225 4,636,963 (355,262) 69.7% 41 Professional Services 85,199 71,489 17,878 (53,612) 21.0% 49 Mscellaneous 20,204 5,135 5,158 23 25.5% Transfers Out 142,959 107,219 107,219 75.0% Total Expenditures 6,904,662 5,176,069 4,767,218 (408,850) 69.0% Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance (340,790) (256,221) (187,737) 68,484 55.1% 1,137,704 1,137,704 610,576 (527,128) 53.7% 796,914 881,483 422,839 (458,644) 53.1% 47 City of Tukwila LEOFF Insurance Fund 503 - Revenue and Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 2019 Variance Annual Allocated Actual Over/(Under) % of Annual Budget Budget Year -To -Date Allocated Budget Budget Miscellaneous Revenue Investment earnings 1,533 1,030 2,531 1,501 165.1% Employer Trust Contributions 265,000 198,750 185,832 (12,918) 70.1 % Total Miscellaneous Revenue 266,533 199,780 188,363 (11,417) 70.7% Total Revenues EXPENDITURES: 25 Medical, Dental, Life, Optical 41 Professional Services 49 Miscellaneous Total E.Wenditures Change in fund balances Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 266,533 199,780 188,363 (11,417) 70.7% 458,756 344,067 308,093 (35,974) 67.2% 6,499 5,416 195 (5,221) 3.0% 500 375 - (375) 0.0% 465,755 349,858 308,288 (41,569) 66.2% (199,222) (150,078) (119,926) 30,152 60.2% 527,005 527,005 597,983 70,978 113.5% 327,783 376,927 478,057 101,130 145.8% �J�yJILA k,4� O Z I908City Council Finance Committee Meeting Minutes January 27, 2020 - 5:30 p. m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers Present: Verna Seal, Chair; De'Sean Quinn, Zak Idan Staff Present: David Cline, Vicky Carlsen, Jeff Friend, Aaron Williams Chair Seal called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. I. BUSINESS AGENDA A. 2019 3rd Quarter Financial Report Committee question(s) requiring follow up 1. Follow up with Public Works staff and City Attorney regarding Seattle City Light's full financial responsibility on the 42"d Avenue South project. 2. Provide a summary of definitions. Committee Recommendation Forward to February 10, 2020 Committee of the Whole. B. 2019 3rd Quarter Sales Tax & Miscellaneous Revenue Report Committee question(s) requiring follow up Include revenue sources that have been adjusted per Council action in future reports (examples include business licenses and parking taxes). Committee Recommendation Discussion only. C. 2020 Committee Work Plan Committee question(s) requiring follow up 1. Include Fire Department budget proviso requirements in both Finance and Community & Public Safety Committees. 2. Provide detailed monthly report on Fire Department budget. 3. Provide regular budget check -ins. Committee Recommendation Discussion only. . • 50 J 2019 3rd Quarter Financial Report General Fund Revenues and Expenditures Overview Expenditures Revenues $55,000 $50,000 $45,000 $46,254 $46,271 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 cc to o $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 0 Revenues $48,939 $48,316 YTD Budget YTD Actual Expenditures w -- General Fund Revenues Through September 30, 2019 Sales Tax Other Property Tax $16,000,000 $15,053,433 $15,017,906 814.842.787 2018 Actual 0 2019 Budget • 2019 Actual Un $10,000,000 $9,000,000 S8.9�3.56f� $9,012,233 2018 Actual 2019 Budget • 2019 Actual Utility Taxes Gambling and Excise Tax Licenses and Permits Charges for Services 0 $3,397 $2,844 $3,005 $4,103 $4,788 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 Thousands YTD Budget `. YTD Actual J General Fund Expenditures As of September 30, 2019 Unbudgeted, Unplanned Events Departmental Variances Unbudgeted, Unplanned Events Through September 30, 2019 Snow Events Propane Leak Power Poles e $100,000 Fire Street Maintenance Overtime and Benefits Supplies Feb 2019 Snow Events $350,000 1, Overtime and Benefits Repairs and Maintenance J East Marginal Way Power Poles (3) N $12,000 Police Fire Street Water Maintenance Overtime and Benefits Supplies Andover Park East Propane Leak Thousands YTD Budget YTD Actual rn w II] ILA 2019 3rd Quarter Financial Report COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meefinga Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 02/10/20 MD 03/02/20 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 4.B. STAFF SPONSOR: MINNIE DHALIWAL 0IZIGINAI,AGINDADA'I'1-: 2/10/20 AGENDA Iri.,"m TrrI,F, Critical Area Code Update Shoreline Master Program and Shoreline Regulations update CATEGORY ® Discussion g Date 2/10/20 Ali ® Motion Aftg Date 3/2/20 ❑ Resolution Alt g Date ® Ordinance Altg Date 3/2/20 ❑ Bidllward Altg Date ❑ Public Hearin Aft g Date ❑Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑Council ❑Mayor ❑HR ®DCD ❑Finance ❑Fire ❑TS ❑P&R ❑Police ❑PW ❑Court SPONSOR'S The City of Tukwila is required to periodically update its Critical Areas Code, Shoreline SUMMARY Master Program and associated regulations for compliance with changes to the Shoreline Management Act, the Department of Ecology guidelines, and other legislative rules. The Council is being asked to consider and approve the ordinances. *(Due to recent changes to the documentation; there is NO need to bring the packet distributed previously. All changes are in this packet.)* REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure ❑ CommunitySvs/Safety ❑ Finance Comm. ® Planning/Economic Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: 2/3 COMMITTEE CHAIR: MCLEOD RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Department of Community Development CO;\11\-11r1'EE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDPI'URI,', RIQLIIIZED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 02/10/20 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02/10/20 Informational Memorandum (updated after 2/3/20 PED Committee) w/ attachments Draft Ordinances in Strike -Through Underline (Updated after 2/3/20 PED Committee) Minutes from the 11/26 CDN, 12/10 CDN, & 2/3/20 PED Committee Powerpoint *Due to recent changes in the materials; there is NO need to bring the packet previously distributed. ALL CHANGES ARE IN THIS PACKET* 65 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director BY: Minnie Dhaliwal, Deputy Director, DCD CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: February 4, 2020 SUBJECT: Critical Areas Code and Shoreline Master Program Update ISSUE The City of Tukwila is required to periodically update its Critical Areas Code, Shoreline Master Program and associated regulations for compliance with changes to the Shoreline Management Act, the Department of Ecology guidelines, and other legislative rules. BACKGROUND Critical Areas Code Update All cities in Washington are required to adopt critical areas regulations by the Growth Management Act (GMA). Critical areas, as identified in the GMA include wetlands, frequently flooded areas, streams, geologically hazardous areas (steep slopes), and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Cities are required to include the best available science in developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas. Tukwila's current critical area regulations were adopted nine years ago in 2010. Washington State Department of Ecology oversees critical area updates and provides direction on BAS. As part of the current update the Committee of the Whole held a public hearing on September 23, 2019, on the draft regulations that were recommended by the Planning Commission. Subsequently, the Community Development and Neighborhood (CDN) Committee reviewed the public comments on November 26, 2019 and December 10, 2019. The Planning and Economic Development Committee finalized their recommendation on February 3, 2020. Shoreline Master Program Update 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 (SMP), Shoreline Element in the City's Comprehensive Plan, and zoning regulations in TMC Chapter 18.44 Shoreline Overlay. 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 the Department of Ecology guidelines and other legislative rules. 67 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 As part of the current update the Committee of the Whole held a public hearing on June 24, 2019, on the draft SMP and the Shoreline regulations that were recommended by the Planning Commission. Subsequently, the CDN Committee reviewed the public comments and the draft ordinances on August 13, 2019. The Committee of the Whole reviewed the CDN Committee recommended draft ordinances on August 26th, 2019. At the Regular meeting on September 3, 2019, the City Council finalized their review, except for one item pertaining to non -conforming structures located in the shoreline jurisdiction. This item was reviewed by the CDN Committee on December 10, 2019. The Planning and Economic Development Committee finalized their recommendation on February 3, 2020. DISCUSSION Listed below are the key revisions incorporated in the draft ordinances based on the review of the public comments by the CDN Committee. Additionally, the draft ordinances include final review edits by the city attorney and the city clerk's office. Critical Areas Code Update See Attachment A for the CDN Committee's response to all public comments for Critical Areas Code update. Attachment B includes the summary of key Critical Areas code update. 18.45.80 Wetlands Designations, Ratings and Buffers F. Variation of standard wetland buffer width 2. Interrupted Buffer: Waiver for interrupted buffer may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 permit if it complies with the following: i) The buffer is interrupted by a paved public or private road; existing or future levee legally constructed adjacent to an off channel habitat; legally constructed buildings; or legally appr parking lots. This waiver does not apply to accessory structures such as sheds and garages. ij) The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; iii) The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and iv) The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife functions. This waiver does not apply if large trees or other significant native vegetation exists. v) Enhancement of remaining buffer is required if feasible. 18.45.100 Watercourse Designations, Ratings and Buffers E. Variation of standard watercourse buffer width 2. Interrupted Buffer: Waiver for interrupted buffer may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 permit if it complies with the following: The buffer is interrupted by a paved public or private road; legally constructed buildings; or legally appr parking lots. This waiver does not apply to accessory structures such as sheds and garages. ij) The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer 68 function; INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 iii) The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and iv) The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife functions. This waiver does not apply if large trees or other significant native vegetation exists. v) Enhancement of remaining buffer is required if feasible. 18.45.160 Critical Area Master Plan Overlay The critical area buffers widths for those areas that were altered, created or restored as mitigation (Wetland 10, 1, Johnson Creek and the Green River off -channel habitat) at the time of approval of the Sensitive Area Master Plan Permit No. L10-014 (SAMP) shall be vested as shown on [Map A]; provided the adjacent land was cleared and graded pursuant to a city approved grading permit; and provided further that those mitigation measures required by the SAMP were performed and meet the ecological goals, in accordance with the terms of the SAMP. 18.45.190 Time Limitation, Appeals and Vesting C. Vesting: Projects are vested to critical area ordinance in effect at the time a complete building permit is submitted except for short plats, subdivisions, binding site plans and shoreline permits. Short plats or subdivisions or binding site plans are vested to the critical area ordinance in effect at the time complete application is submitted for preliminary plats or for the binding site plan. The final plat and all future building permits on the lots remain vested to that same critical areas ordinance in effect for the preliminary plat or preliminary binding site plan application, so long as building permits are applied for within five years of the final plat. For single family residential short plats and subdivisions which received preliminary plat approval prior to the adoption of this ordinance, building permits on the lots shall be considered under the critical areas ordinance in effect on the date of the preliminary plat application provided complete building or construction permits are submitted within five years of the final plat approval. Vesting provisions for shoreline permits are provided in TMC 18.44 Shoreline Master Program Update See Attachment C for the Committee's response to all public comments for the updates to the Shoreline regulations. Attachment D includes the Department of Ecology's recommended changes that have been incorporated in the draft ordinances. Attachment E is the summary of key code updates for the Shoreline update. Listed below are revisions incorporated since the last Council review. Nonconforming structures in the Shoreline Zone: At the September 3, 2019, meeting the City Council asked staff to review amendments to the section pertaining to the non- conforming structures located in the shoreline jurisdiction. The Councilmembers discussed the impact of adding the phrase "and there is a minimum of 12-foot vegetative buffer landward from the top of the bank" to TMC 18.44.110.G.2.a.(2). Planning Commission had recommended no limit on the cost of alterations of non- conforming structures on properties that have no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer. The City Council recommended that no limit on the cost of alterations be tied to shoreline buffer restoration requirement. Additionally, the City Council 69 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 wanted staff to review how adding a minimum width requirement for buffer restoration would impact the affected properties. There are approximately ten small lots along the river in Tukwila that have no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer. Waiving the limit on the cost of improvements to non -conforming structures in exchange for a minimum of 12-foot vegetative buffer landward from the top of the bank appears feasible for all of them. Additionally, these lots could apply for a Shoreline Variance for relief from standards where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances related to the physical character or configuration of property. Also, a minimum width of 12 feet could accommodate two rows of trees. The CDN committee recommended the following the revisions: 18.44.110. G.2.a. (2) If the structure is located on a property that has no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, there shall be no limit on the cost of alterations, provided the applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer from above the Ordinary High Water Mark to at least 12 feet landward of the top of the slope along the entire lenqth of the subject property to meet the vegetation management standards of this chapter. If the structure is located on a property that has reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, the cost of the alterations may not exceed an aggregate cost of 50% of the value of the building or structure in any 3-year period based upon its most recent assessment, unless the amount over 50% is used to make the building or structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a building or structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. Docks -criteria for demonstrated need for moorage: Additionally, the following changes were incorporated in the draft ordinances after the public hearing based on direction from the City Council. 18.44.050.K.1.a. A dock maybe allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: (1) commercial or marina moorage; (2) floating moorage buoys; (3) joint use moorage pier/dock. The Director shall use the following criteria to determine if the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage: 1. Applicant has provided adequate documentation from a commercial marina within five river miles that moorage is not available 2. Floating moorage buoy is technically infeasible as determined by a professional hydrologist 3. Applicant has provided adequate documentation from any existing moorage pier/dock owner within five river miles that joint use is not possible. Clarify language to meet the legislative intent of requiring non -conforming parking lots to meet the vegetation requirement at the time of redevelopment: The Department of Ecology has also weighed in to make the language clearer to meet the legislative intent. 18.44. 110. G. 6. a. "Parking lot regulations Nothing contained in this chapter shall not be construed to require a change in any aspect of a structure or facility which existed on the date of adoption of this chapter covered thereunder including, without firv,itation, parking lot 70 e, layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, for onStrYGtuFeor- fa^i'ity which exi to INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 OR the date Of adOptiOR Of t4S Ghapte-F, except as necessary to meet vegetation protection and landscaping standards consistent with TMC 18.44.110(G)(7)." FINANCIAL IMPACT No direct impacts are expected due to these changes. The Department of Ecology provided $20,000 grant for the Shoreline Master Plan update. RECOMMENDATION The Committee is asked to review the draft ordinances and make a recommendation for Committee of the Whole review on February 10, 2020. The Department of Ecology has made an initial determination at this time. Final approval by the Department of Ecology will be made after adoption of the ordinances by the City Council. Attachments A. Public Comment Matrix -Critical Areas B. Summary of key revisions to Critical Areas Code C. Public Comment Matrix -Shoreline D. The Department of Ecology's initial determination comments E. Summary of key revision to the Shoreline Master Plan and Shoreline regulations F. CDN Committee meeting minutes -Nov 26, 2019 and Dec 10, 2019. PED Committee meeting minutes -February 3, 2020. G. Draft Ordinance Critical Areas H. Draft Ordinance Shoreline Master Plan I. Draft Ordinance Shoreline Regulations 71 72 ATTACHMENT A Committee's recommendation in response to public comments -Critical Areas ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF DISCUSSION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 1. Ion Manea, 13407 TMC Planning Commission recommended draft Ion Manea, property owner requested the city to not No change. 481h Ave S, Tukwila 18.45.100. deletes the buffer reduction provision with delete the 50% buffer reduction provisions. He states E the following buffer averaging provision: that replacing buffer reduction with buffer averaging is not based on best available science and is being VARIATION OF STANDARD proposed just for consistency with wetland regulations. WATERCOURSE BUFFER WIDTH He claims that the proposed regulations could be 1 Buffer averaging may be allowed by the construed as in non-compliance with TMC 18.45.10, Director as a Type 2 decision if the total 18.45.20 and RCW 36.70a.172 and could be subject of area of the buffer after averaging is equal to a petition under RCW.36.70A.290. Staff notes that 2011 the area required without averaging and the Washington State Department of Ecology's Green River buffer at its narrowest point is never less Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load assessment is than either 3/4 of the required width; and the Best Available Science that justifies larger buffers and following criteria is met: need for shading the streams to address the concern of a. The watercourse has significant raising temperature of the Green/Duwamish River, differences in characteristics that affect its which is detrimental to fish. Additionally, Washington habitat functions, and the buffer is State Department of Ecology's guidance for the streams increased adjacent to the higher -functioning that lie within Shoreline Zone is for buffer averaging area of habitat or more -sensitive portion of rather than buffer reduction. the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower -functioning or less -sensitive portion Mr. Manea is correct in his assessment that stream as demonstrated by a critical areas report buffer averaging is inconsistent with BAS. BAS (WDFW from a qualified wetland professional. et al.) clearly indicates that wider buffers, which are b. There are no feasible alternatives to the vegetated with native species, are essential to lower site design that could be accomplished water temperature, improve water quality by mitigating without buffer averaging, and the averaged of surface water runoff, and provide habitat and buffer will not result in degradation of the insect/detritus input to streams. Therefore, buffer wetland's functions and values as reduction is also not consistent with BAS. demonstrated by a critical areas report. Smaller streams that discharge into major tributaries c. Compliance with mitigation sequencing and rivers (in this case the Green-Duwamish River) requirements. have direct impact on salmonid and other aquatic d. Compliance with TMC 18.45 Vegetation species through the water temperature, quality, and Protection and Management section. nutrient production. Water temperature and quality is e. Submittal of buffer enhancement plan, known to be one of the biggest limiting factors in mitigation monitoring and maintenance plan salmon recovery. Thus, maintaining healthy buffers on along with financial guarantee in lower order streams is essential to overall salmonid and accordance with TMC 18.45. aquatic habitat. ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF DISCUSSION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION f. Buffer averaging will not adversely affect water quality. Buffer averaging is intended to aid property owners in g. No adverse effect to water temperature site development by allowing for some buffer reduction or shade potential per 2011 Washington in locations where it is less critical while widening State Department of Ecology's Green River buffers in areas that are more so. For example, a wider Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load buffer adjacent to a parking lot is more important in assessment or as amended. mitigating runoff than a buffer next to a building. If an individual property is not able to use the buffer averaging (due to size, grade, etc.) reasonable use exception is still an option for that property owner. TMC 18.45.180 lists Reasonable Use Exception as a Type 3 permit approved by the hearing examiner. Under this provision the applicant demonstrates that strict application of the code prevents any reasonable use of their property, and requests waiver from the critical area provisions for some reasonable use of their property. The applicant is still responsible for mitigation, which could be onsite or offsite. The mitigation is proportional to the impact and has to be meet the nexus and proportionality test. 2. David Halinen 18.45.80.F. Revisions proposed by the letter dated These comments are submitted by the owner of a No change. w/Halinen Law 2 September 23, 2019 submitted at the property that is along the Interurban Trail and West Representing Interrupted public hearing: Valley Highway. Currently the property is incumbered AnMarCo LLC Buffer with a 100ft buffer that is adjacent to the Category 2 2. Interrupted Buffer: Waiver for interrupted wetland to the east. The Interurban Trail in this area is buffer may be allowed by the Director as a approximately 12 feet wide. All paved trails in the City Type 2 permit if the following criteria are is are between 12 and 14 feet wide. If this change to the met: proposed code was approved, approximately 30-35 i) The buffer is interrupted by a paved properties could be affected and able to apply for the public or private road; a paved public trail; a waiver. legally constructed buildings; or a legally constructed approved parking lots; or some The proposed interrupted buffer section of the code is other egally constructed substantial to address those area of the City where there is a wide Page 2 of 5 ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF DISCUSSION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION improvement. On lots with a primary single- (2 to 4 lane) paved road, or other large obstruction that family residence, Tthis waiver does not eliminates the environmental benefit of the buffer to the apply to a buffer interrupted by a minor critical area — trees won't cast shade across the barrier, accessory structures -such as a tool sheds water quality can't be improved because of the barrier, or a garages a� Giated; habitat is adversely effected because of the barrier, etc. ii) The existing legal improvement creates a A trail that is less than 15ft across does not create a substantial barrier to the buffer function; large enough barrier to interrupt the shade from a large iii)The interrupted buffer does not provide tree, or the habitat provided by a vegetated buffer, like additional protection of the critical area from a 4-lane road can (see ii) in the proposed code. Trees the proposed development; and planted on the other side of the trail (away from the iv) The interrupted buffer does not provide wetland) will provide shade, habitat, rain/storm significant hydrological, water quality and attenuation (and therefore reduced run-off across the wildlife functions. This wamyer lees ne+ apply if large trees or ether significant trail surface and improved water quality). pati„eyege+atien exists Since the public hearing David Halinen discussed the v) Enhancement of remaining buffer is proposed changes with staff. He submitted revised required if feasible. amendments narrowing the scope of interrupted buffer for a particular section of the Interurban Trail due to the Revisions proposed via email to the City presence of the Puget Sound Energy's easement. He Council on 11/20/19 makes a case that due to PSE's right for vegetation 2. Interrupted Buffer: Waiver for interrupted trimming and removal on the west side of the trail buffer may be allowed by the Director as a adjacent to his client's property, the buffer should stop Type 2 permit if the following criteria are is at the trail's edge. met: i) The buffer is interrupted by a paved public or private road; by the segment of PSE generally trims vegetation in this area but does not the paved public Interurban Trail located remove it. Wetlands exist all along the trail. Additionally, within the 60-footwide strip of street right -of- the code language is not crafted for individual way and reserved perpetual easements for properties but is applicable city wide. Staff suggested electrical purposes and vegetation cutting, that the applicant consider looking at non -conforming removal, disposal, and management provisions. It should be noted that the property is a recorded under County Recording No. graveled parking lot and there are stormwater issues, 9409130817; a legally constructed including a current code enforcement case. buildings; sr a legally constructed moved parking lots; or some other legally constructed substantial improvement. On lots with a primary single-family residence, Tthis waiver does not apply to a buffer Page 3 of 5 cn ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF DISCUSSION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION interrupted bV a minor accessory structures such as a tool sheds or a garages asseeiated; ii) The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; iii)The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and iv) The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife functions. This waiver does no+ apply if largo frees er other sigRifinanf native vegetation exists v) Enhancement of remaining buffer is required if feasible. 3. Cairncross 18.45.160 The critical area buffers widths for those Nancy Rogers representing Segale Properties Make changes noted in &Hempelmann areas that were altered, created or restored submitted a comment letter dated September 23, 2019 red. as mitigation (Wetland 10, 1, Johnson representing at the public hearing. Since then they have worked with Creek and the Green River off -channel Segale Properties staff to revise the language to narrow the scope of habitat) at the time of approval of the vesting and the latest comment letter is dated October Sensitive Area Master Plan Permit No. L10- 23, 2019. 014 (SAMP) shall be vested as shown on [Map Al; provided the adjacent land was Sensitive Areas Master Plan (SAMP) was approved for cleared and graded pursuant to a city the Tukwila South area (approximately 400 acres south approved grading permit; and provided of 18011) in 2010. This approval allowed filling of further that those mitigation measures smaller wetlands in exchange for enhancing larger required by the SAMP were performed and wetlands located south of S. 20011 St. Additionally, an meet the ecological goals, in accordance off -channel habitat area was created as mitigation. The with the terms of the SAMP. request is to vest the project to the buffers approved as part of the SAMP if the land has been cleared and graded. Page 4 of 5 ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF DISCUSSION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The existing provisions for sensitive areas master plan (TMC18.45) allow creation of higher quality wetlands in exchange for filling some small wetlands provided there is a net environmental gain. There will be no incentive to creating wetlands with better habitat value if it will result in larger buffers. 2. Interrupted Buffer: Waiver for interrupted An off -channel habitat area was created as mitigation Make changes noted in buffer may be allowed by the Director as a under the SAMP approval. Creation of an off -channel red. Type 2 permit if the following criteria are habitat area is a significant environmental benefit and met: construction of a levee does interrupt the buffer for an i) The buffer is interrupted by a paved any wetlands associated with the off -channel habitat public or private road; existing or future area. levee legally constructed ad'lacent to an off channel habitat; legally constructed buildings; or legally approved parking lots. This waiver does not apply to accessory structures such as sheds and garages; ii) The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; iii)The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and iv) The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife functions. This waiver does not apply if larger trees or other significant native vegetation exists. v) Enhancement of remaining buffer is required if feasible. Page 5 of 5 4 m ATTACHMENT B Summary of Key Critical Areas Code changes Wetlands 1. Designation: • Reference to State delineation manual removed and replaced with language from WAC 173-22-035, that states identification of wetlands and delineation of their boundaries shall be done in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. Five year time limit on wetland reports/delineations established. Generally, any delineation done more than five years ago needs to be revisited as wetlands can change significantly in a five-year period due to changes in hydrology, land uses, and plant species composition. Additionally, approved jurisdictional determinations by the Corps expire after five years. Revisiting a wetland delineation that is five or more years old does not necessarily mean a new wetland delineation needs to be done. It means it may be necessary to revisit the site to determine whether the delineation is still accurate or needs to be redone based on current conditions. 2. Rating: State rating system referenced, which is the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby 2014, Ecology publication No. 14-06-029). To avoid the need for future updates related to rating system versions language added, "or as revised and approved by Ecology". 3. Buffer Widths: Adopt the standard buffer widths recommended by the Department of Ecology; but allow alternate buffer if impact minimization measures are taken AND buffer is replanted. See table below for the current buffer width requirements and the proposed changes required based on habitat score. 79 Wetland buffer width (ft), Ecology 2014, high -intensity land use impact Wetland buffer width (ft), Habitat Habitat Habitat Habitat score current score score score 6-7 Habitat Habitat score Category TMC <6 <6 6-7 score 8-9 8-9 Standard Alternate Standard Alternate Buffer if Standard Alternate Buffer Buffer if Buffer impact Buffer Buffer if impact minimization impact minimization measures taken minimization measures AND buffer is measures taken AND replanted. Also, taken AND buffer is 100 feet buffer is replanted vegetated corridor replanted. between wetland Also, 100 feet and priority vegetated habitats is corridor maintained. between wetland and priority habitats is maintained. 1 100 100 75 150 110 300 225 II 100 100 75 150 110 300 225 111 80 80 60 150 110 300 225 IV 50 50 40 50 40 50 40 Impact minimization measures to qualify for alternate buffers include the following: Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Lights • Direct lights away from wetland Noise 0 Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source • For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10' heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer Toxic runoff 0 Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland • AppIy integrated pest management Stormwater runoff 0 Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development • Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use Low Intensity Development (LID) techniques where appropriate for more information refer to the drainage ordinance and manual Change in water regime . Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Pets and Human . Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer Disturbance edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement Dust 0 Use best management practices to control dust 4. Interrupted Buffer: Establishes an administrative waiver process for an interrupted buffer. a) Defines what qualifies as interrupting the buffer: a public or private road; buildings; or parking lots. The criteria for waiver include: i) The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; ii) The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and iii) The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife buffer functions relating to the portion of the buffer adjacent to the critical area. iv) The remaining buffer is enhanced 5. Buffer averaging instead of buffer reduction: Replaces buffer reduction provision with buffer averaging. The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging and the buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either % of the required width or 75 feet for Category I and 11, 50 feet for Category III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater. 6. Alterations: No changes to the exemption level. The existing code provides an exemption for certain wetlands that are under 1,000 square feet. The exemption is from sequencing (showing that the impact cannot be avoided or minimized). Mitigation of the impacts is still required per Ecology. Exempt wetlands have to meet the following criteria: a) habitat score under six; b) are not associated with a riparian habitat or Shorelines of the State; c) are not part of a wetland mosaic, and d) do not contain priority habitat. 7. Mitigation Standards: Mitigation ratio for buffer impacts is added at 1:1 8. Wetland and buffer mitigation location: The current code prefers off -site mitigation be located within City of Tukwila's boundaries. However State and federal agencies advocate use of alternative mitigation methods such as mitigation banks or in -lieu -fee programs. In order to be consistent with regulations of these agencies the proposed changes allow for purchase of mitigation credit from an in -lieu fee program or bank, if that is the best choice ecologically for a project. 9. Wetlands buffers associated with restoration projects that include creation of an off -channel habitat projects. For shoreline restoration projects that result in a change in the location of the ordinary high water mark and associated shoreline jurisdiction on the subject property and/or adjacent properties, relief may be granted from Shoreline Master Program standards and use regulations. However, the relief for restoration projects is limited to ordinary high water mark and not buffers of any associated critical areas such as wetlands. Therefore, a new subsection is added: TMC 18.45.90 Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation (D) Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Location: 7. Wetland creation for restoration projects may only be approved if the applicant can show (1) that the adjoining property owners are amenable to having wetland buffers extend onto or across their property, or (2) that the on -site wetland buffers are sufficient to protect the functions and values of the wetland and the project as a whole results in net environmental benefit. II. Watercourses 1. Rating and buffer widths: Ratings nomenclature updated to reflect Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife ratings for simplicity. Type 1, 2, 3, 4 changed to S (Shoreline), F (Fish bearing), Np (Non - fish bearing perennial), Ns (Non -fish bearing seasonal). No change in the buffers of S, F, Ns. The standard buffers of Np could be lowered from 80 feet to 50-65 range with buffer enhancement. Stream Type Watercourse Buffer (ft), TMC S Regulated under Shoreline Master Program F 100 Np Standard buffer 80 Alternate buffer in the range of 50-65 with buffer enhancement Ns 50 2. Buffer averaging vs reduction: Replaces buffer reduction provision with buffer averaging so long as the total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging and the buffer at its narrowest point is never less than 3/4 of the required width. 3. Interrupted buffer: Establishes an administrative waiver process for an interrupted buffer. a) Defines what qualifies as interrupting the buffer: a public or private road; buildings; or parking lots. The criteria for waiver include: i) The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; ii) The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and iii) The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife buffer functions relating to the portion of the buffer adjacent to the critical area. iv) The remaining buffer is enhanced III. Geologically Hazardous Areas Reference to mapping sources added and protective provisions such as slope vegetation protection and guidelines on erosion control and best management practices included. IV. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas a) The city's list of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas made consistent with GMA definition b) Reference to mapping sources added. c) A requirement for a habitat assessment prepared by a qualified professional to better reflect BAS so that buffers could be based on site specific conditions. V. Special Hazard Flood Areas Reference added to Special Hazard Flood Areas TMC Chapter 16.52; and floodplain habitat assessment requirements included. VI. Housekeeping Code Amendments Vesting: Language added to clarify that only submittal of a complete building permit vests a project to critical areas code. For instance, if a short plat is approved but homes are not constructed and the code is updated, any future development is subject to the new updated code. An exception added for projects that currently have a preliminary approval but not final approval to be vested until the expiration of the preliminary approval; provided building permits are submitted within five years of the final approval. 2. Expiration of decisions related to critical areas: Five years term limit established for any approvals to be consistent with time limits for permits obtained from the state and federal agencies. 3. Permitted uses changed to permitted activities section 4. Vegetation Management in the Tree, Landscape, Critical Areas and Shoreline Chapter The purpose of these proposed amendments is to provide consistency between the four chapters and address lessons learned during implementation of the newly adopted Tree and Landscape Code. Additionally, applicability sections are added to explain which Chapter applies when there is an overlap. These include regulations pertaining to tree retention, removal and replacement requirements. 5. Reorganization: In order to improve the organization and make it easy to implement the code it is reorganized to sequentially address 1. Mitigation sequencing; 2. What is allowed outright/what requires Special Permission approval; 3. Criteria for approving deviations; 4. Mitigation requirements; 5. Monitoring 6. Penalties for unauthorized alterations: Penalties for illegal clearing in critical areas added. 7. Non -conforming provisions: New non -conforming thresholds for development in the wetland and stream buffers established; and tied to incentives for improving the buffer. a) Allow existing buildings to expand vertically to add upper stories in exchange for buffer enhancement b) Allow lateral expansion to the building side that is opposite of critical area up to a maximum of 1000 sq. ft; in exchange for buffer enhancement. Further this option is limited to situations where the buffer width is at least 75 percent of the required buffer. c) Allow lateral expansion along the existing building lines in exchange for buffer enhancement; and limit the sq. ft. of new intrusion into the buffer to less than 50 percent of the current intrusion or 500 sq. ft, whichever is less. Further this option is limited to situations where the buffer width is at least 75 percent of the required buffer. d) Allow enclosing within existing footprint in exchange for buffer enhancement. 8. Inventory update: Add requirement for the applicant to provide surveyed data for maintenance of the City's Critical Areas inventory map ATTACHMENT C Committee's recommendation in response to public comments -Shoreline ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION 1. Ion Manea, TMC The comments submitted were related to Committee discussed these under 13407 481h Ave S, 18.45.080 the critical areas code update and are Critical Areas and recommended Tukwila 18.45.090 addressed as part of the critical areas no changes. 18.45.100 code update. 2. Jami Balint w/ 18.44.110.G. d. The area beneath a non -conforming The Department of Ecology has Committee agreed with revised Summit Law 6.d structure may be converted to a contiguous expressed concern with the proposed section parking lot area if the non -conforming structure Group revisions to TMC 18.44.130.G..6.d on is demolished and only when the contiguous representing non -conforming parking lots, allowing the parking is accessory to a legally established Desimone Family area under a structure to be converted to use. The converted parking area must be parking if the structure is demolished. located landward of existing parking areas DOE believes this is inconsistent with SMP policies that do not support parking as a primary use within the shoreline buffer. Ms Balint suggested revising this section to clarify that paved parking will only be allowed if it is accessory to an otherwise permitted use. She also asked clarification be provided concerning whether gravel or dirt can be paved to meet stormwater or use requirements in situations where structures have been demolished. 3. Jami Balint w/ 18.44.030 (11) The maximum height of the fence along Planning Commission recommended Committee agreed to increase the the shoreline shall not exceed four feet in Summit Law footnote 11 increasing commercial fencing height height from 4 to 6 feet in Group residential areas or six feet in commercial from 4 to 6 feet to address public commercial areas and that no areas where there is a demonstrated need to representing comments. TMC currently requires that code change is needed to address ensure public safety and security of property. Desimone Family chain -link fences be vinyl coated. Ms. temporary fencing that is put in The fence shall not extend waterward beyond Balint suggested adding language to place for six months or less. the top of the bank. Chain -link fences must be clarify that temporary fencing does not vinyl coated. need to be vinyl coated, as fencing companies typically do not have vinyl coated chain -link fencing available to rent. Staff notes that no permit is necessary for temporary fencing and generally six months or less is deemed temporary. The •• ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION existing code language only applies to permanent fencing. 4. Joe Desimone, 18.44.110.G. He shared his family owns approximately 5609 SW 2.a.(2) 80-85 acres of property in the City and Manning Street they are here to work with the community Seattle 18.44.110.G. and increase the public benefit. He made 2.a.(3) the following suggestions: 18.44.110.G. Committee recommended the 6.d. 18.44.110.G.2.a.(2) If the structure is located 1) There should be no limit to the cost of code to have no limit on the cost on a property that has no reasonable alterations or renovations for structures of alterations if there is no development potential outside the shoreline located on a property that has no reasonable development potential buffer, there shall be no limit on the cost of reasonable development potential outside outside the shoreline buffer and alterations. If the structure is located on a the shoreline buffer. the proposal includes buffer Property that has reasonable development restoration. potential outside the shoreline buffer, Tthe cost of the alterations may not exceed an aggregate Jami Balint, representing the property 18.44.110.G.2.a.(2) If the structure cost of 50% of the value of the building or owner has clarified that the intent of the is located on a property that has structure in any 3-year period based upon its proposed revision is to allow a property no reasonable development most recent assessment, unless the amount owner to invest in a structure when there potential outside the shoreline buffer, there shall be no limit on over 50% is used to make the building or is no development opportunity outside the structure more conforming, or is used to restore buffer. The intent is to encourage the cost of alterations, provided to a safe condition any portion of a building or property owners to invest in the property the applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. rather than let it become dilapidated from above the Ordinary High (which could lead to transient and public safety issues). Their opinion is that the Water Mark to at least 12 feet current code puts arbitrary limits on landward of the top of the slope along the entire length of the rehabilitation, which is more likely to result in abandoned structure than subject property to meet the restoration of buffer areas. Limiting the vegetation management dollar value of rehabilitation does nothing standards of this chapter. If the structure is located on a property to improve the buffer. As an alternate to that has reasonable development having no limit on the cost of potential outside the shoreline improvements one option they have buffer, the cost of the alterations asked City Council to consider is to revise the code to allow no limits on may not exceed an aggregate cost Page 2 of 10 ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION rehabilitation if the property owner agrees of 50% of the value of the building to perform some buffer restoration as long or structure in any 3-year period as the cost of the buffer restoration does based upon its most recent not exceed the benefit of improving the assessment, unless the amount structure. over 50% is used to make the building or structure more Also, note that the existing code allows conforming, or is used to restore improvements greater than 50% to a safe condition any portion of a aggregate cost IF the additional cost over building or structure declared 50% is for making the structure more unsafe by a proper authority. conforming or to restore unsafe portions of the structure. Also note, Ecology grants local jurisdictions flexibility when it comes to making nonconforming rules. As long as the impact from development would not negatively impact a shoreline or critical area, then in Ecology's view, nonconforming structures could be repaired, maintained, replaced, and potentially expanded (as long as the level of nonconformity is not expanded). 18.44.110.G.2.a.Q) Maintenance or repair of 2) Minor maintenance or repair of an Committee agreed with the an existing private bridge is allowed without a existing private bridge be allowed without proposed revision conditional use permit when it does not involve a conditional use permit when it does not the use of hazardous substances, sealants or involve the use of hazardous substances other liquid oily substances. or sealants. 18.44.110.G.6.d. The area beneath a non- 3)The area beneath a non -conforming Committee agreed with the conforming structure may be converted to a structure may be converted to a proposed revision along with contiguous parking lot area if the non- contiguous parking lot area if the non- DOE's recommended edits conforming structure is demolished and only conforming structure is demolished. DOE when the contiguous parking is accessory to a Page 3 of 10 COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION legally established use. The converted parking recommended some edits that are area must be located landward of existing incorporated in the language. parking areas 5. Greg Haffner, 18.44.030 Request to add a new footnote to shoreline use He shared that they submitted concerns Committee agreed that no change Curran Law Firm footnotes matrix stating that Vehicle bridges not to the Planning Commission. He repeated is needed representing permitted in the transition zone their request to have a footnote added to Strander LLC the Shoreline Use Matrix that prohibits new bridges within the Transition Zone of the Duwamish/Green River. He stated that the SMP describes the Transition Zone as crucial in providing habitat for salmonids to adjust to the change between fresh and saltwater conditions. Extending another bridge across the river in that location will contribute to lighting, noise and vibration pollution that will be disruptive to salmon. Staff notes that per note 31 vehicle bridges are already limited to locations where they connect public rights -of -way. Essential streets are defined as limited to locations "where no feasible alternative location exists based on an analysis of technology and system efficiency."18.06.285 6. Nancy Rogers, TMC Replace public/private promenades, footpaths The purpose of this request is to allow Based on DOE's initial Cairncross & 18.44.030 or trails with private/public open space. use of shoreline buffer to count towards determination the Committee Hempelmann Shoreline PubliG and private recreation space requirement for decided to make no changes. representing Use Matrix prernenades feetpathc „r residential development. DOE Segale Properties try Private and public open space recommended against this change. These comments Delete footnote (25) Parks, recreation and were received on open space facilities operated by public August 9, 2019 Page 4 of 10 ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION (after the public agencies and non-profit organizations are hearing) permitted 7. Councilmember SMP 7.2 Key Findinas of the Shoreline A clear explanation of the critical habitat Committee agreed with the Robertson Section 7.2 Inventory / Characterization Report resource and the importance of transition proposed revision and Restoration Plan zone is needed for context. 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 habitat resource for salmonids and other species. Adult salmon heading upstream to spawn require cool water; and juveniles heading downstream require food and refuge from high flows ; paFtiGUlarly n +The Transition Zone, "ref the FffiveFwhichthat-extends from river mile 10 m f� u pstFea tke Rterstate 5 bridgedownstrearn through the northern City limits (see Map 2), wherejuvenile salmon adjust from fresh to salt water habitat (osmoregulate), is of critical importance because of significant habitat losses over the years. Additionally, Tthe river provides migratory habitat for numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a variety of wildlife. Page 5 of 10 P. e ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION 8. Councilmember SMP Table Replace the riverbank reslope A less steep riverbank allows more Committee recommended Robertson 3. requirement from 2.5:1 slope to 3:1 opportunities for habitat enhancement; changing from 2.5:1 to 3:1 slope in slope. improves slope stability; and increases all areas except in the Residential SMP the river water carrying capacity thus environment where it is used to Section 7 reducing flood risk. determine the required buffer Urban width. Conservancy Environment subsection C TMC 18.44.040 Footnote 4(a) TMC 18.44.050 EA (b) and E. 9 9. Councilmember TMC 3. Height Restrictions. Except for bridges, Height incentive for Committee agreed with the Robertson 18.44.050.C3 approved above ground utility structures, and enhancement/restoration of the shoreline proposed revision. water -dependent uses and their structures, to buffer should be for shoreline buffer preserve visual access to the shoreline and enhancement/restoration that is done avoid massing of tall buildings within the beyond what may otherwise be required. 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. Page 6 of 10 ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION Provided, pe permit shall he issued for aRy C pew or expanded building Or stp Gt ire of mere than 35 feet above average grade level on shorelines of the State that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines. For any building that is proposed to be greater than 35 feet in height in the shoreline jurisdiction, the development proponent must demonstrate the proposed building will not block the views of a substantial number of residences. The Director may approve a 15 % increase in height for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction if the project proponent provides dal 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 in accordance with TMC Section 18.44.060 ,"Vegetation Protection and Landscaping," and/or enhanGed in order to obtain the 15-PA,00t increase in height. in acco n i.yi�Y Ch TUE CoeGtinp 18.44.080, "Vegetati eettc�eeR `"'may aRa I andsrapinry 10. Councilmember TMC K. Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Clarity is needed that demonstrated need Committee agreed with the Robertson 18.44.050.K. Launches, Piers, Docks and Other Over- is to the satisfaction of the Director. At the proposed revision and added 1 water Structures COW meeting criteria to be used to criteria. 1. General Requirements. determine the need for moorage was also added. 18.44.050.K.1.a. A dock maybe allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moora e Page 7 of 10 c0L Q0 N ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF DISCUSSION Committee Recommendation a. A dock may be allowed when the applicant to the satisfaction of the Director has demonstrated a need for moorage to the of Community Development, and satisfaction of the Director of Community that the following alternatives have Development, and that the following alternatives been investigated and are not available or feasible: (1) commercial or marina moorage; (2) floating moorage buoys; Q) joint use moorage pier/dock. have been investigated and are not available or feasible: (1) commercial or marina moorage; (2) floating moorage buoys; (3) joint use moorage pier/dock. The Director shall use the following criteria to determine if the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage: Applicant has provided adequate documentation from a commercial marina within five river miles that moorage is not available Floating moorage buoy is technically infeasible as determined by a professional hydrologist Applicant has provided adequate documentation from any existing moorage pier/dock owner within five river miles that joint use is not possible. 11 Councilmember Robertson TMC 18.44.060.D. 3 3. Criteria for Shoreline Tree Removal. A Clarity is needed so that the Director makes a decision if the applicable criteria are met. Committee agreed with the proposed revision T e 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit shall only be approved a Direc or o ommuni y Development if the proposal complies with the following criteria as applicable: Page 8 of 10 ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION a. The site is undergoing development or redevelopment; b. Tree poses a risk to structures; c. There is imminent potential for root or canopy interference with utilities; d. Trees interfere with the access and passage on public trails; e. Tree condition and health is poor, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist; f. Trees present an imminent hazard to the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist; and q. The proposal complies with tree retention, replacement, maintenance and monitoring requirements of this Chapter. 12 Councilmember TMC C. On properties located behind'nndward Exemption from removal of invasive Committee agreed with the Robertson 18.44.060.F. of publicly maintained levees, an applicant is vegetation and replanting should be only proposed revision 1.c. not required to remove invasive vegetation or for the levees and any remaining buffer plant native vegetation on the levees, however landward of the levee should be the remaining wi+"buffer landward of the improved. levee shall be improved and irmiaaive ve etation planted. 13 Councilmember TMC be. If any such non -conforming use ceases Clarity is needed as to Shoreline Committee agreed with the Robertson 18.44.110.G for any reason for a period of more than 24 Conditional Use Permit should be applied proposed revision 1.b consecutive months, the non -conforming within two year from the time the non - rights shall expire and any subsequent use conforming use ceases to exist. shall conform to the regulations specified by in this chapter for the shoreline environment Page 9 of 10 w e ITEM COMMENTATOR SECTION PROPOSED CHANGE COMMENT SUMMARY/STAFF Committee Recommendation DISCUSSION in which such use is located, unless re- establishment of the use is authorized through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, which must be applied for within the two - ear period when the non-conforminclMe ase�ia' 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 COURG41 may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set forth in TMC Section 18.4^ .1030 Erg n 18.44.110.G.4. Page 10 of 10 ATTACHMENT D Ecology's Recommendations dated June 6, 2019 Ecology recommendations in red are required to comply with the SMA (RCW 90.58) and the SMP Guidelines (WAC 173-26, Part III). Ecology recommendations in blue are recommended and consistent with SMA (RCW 90.58) policy and the SMP Guidelines (WAC 173-26, Part III). Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions Req-1 SMP Section 2 2.1 SMP Components The City is proposing to go from a standalone Shoreline Master Program to a more Requirement 1: This revision has Tukwila's To comply with the SMA, Tukwila has included the integrated approach which includes SMP policies and regulations in other Tukwila been implemented in the Draft SMP Shoreline following components in this Shoreline Master Municipal Code Sections. In order to successfully make this transition the City must ordinance. Ordinance numbers will Master Program (SMP): identify all code sections that will be utilized to meet the SMP policy and regulation be inserted when the ordinances Program This SMP document contains the SMA overview requirements. These provisions will be incorporated by reference as part of the SMP, as are adopted. and background related to the development of the such they need to be identified with a specific dated ordinance number, and it should be SMP Comprehensive Update in 2011 as updated clear within the SMP that any subsequent updates or modifications to these codified through the 2019 Periodic Review process. provisions will not be effective in the shoreline jurisdiction until a formal SMP • Outreach including a citizen participation amendment has been approved by Ecology is accordance with WAC 173-26-110. process, coordination with state agencies, Indian tribes, and other local governments WAC 173-26-191(2)(b) provides, in relevant part, (see Section 2.4 below) Shoreline master programs may include other policies and regulations by referencing a • Inventory, analysis and characterization of shoreline conditions, environmental specific, dated edition. When including referenced regulations within a master program, local governments shall ensure that the public has an opportunity to participate in the functions and ecosystem -wide processes formulation of the regulations or in their incorporation into the master program, as called • Analysis of potential shoreline restoration opportunities for in WAC 173-26-201 (3)(b)(i). In the approval process the department will review the referenced development regulation sections as part of the master program. A copy of • Establishment of shoreline environment designations • Evaluation and consideration of cumulative impacts The Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan the referenced regulations shall be submitted to the department with the proposed master program or amendment. If the development regulation is amended, the edition referenced within the master program will still be the operative regulation in the master program. Changing the referenced regulations in the master program to the new edition will require a master program amendment. • Contains the SMP gGoals and policies that have been adopted in the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance #, date) WAC 173-26-191(2)(c) also provides that, Local governments shall identify all documents which contain master program provisions and which provisions constitute part of the master program... The Shoreline Regulations • egul Development regulations that have been codified in Development 18ati (Ordinance #, date); and In this case it appears that the City is proposing to include the Shoreline Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, along with portions of TMC 18.06, TMC 18.44, TMC 18.45, TMC 18.52 and TMC 18.60 as the relevant policies and codified regulations that would now constitute the SMP along with the background and overview information still contained within the Shoreline Master Program document. Ordinance # daLeJ should CD Cn e Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions • Development regulations that have been be added at the time of local adoption of this SMP Periodic Review amendment and must be included with the formal submittal to Ecology for final approval. codified in TMC 18.45 (Ordinance #, date) • Shoreline Design Guidelines that have been codified in TMC 18.44 (Ordinance #, date) • Board of Architectural Review Shoreline Design Criteria found in MC 18.60.050 (Ordinance #, date) • Shoreline Landscape Requirements that have been codified in TMC 18.52 (Ordinance #, date) Definitions provided in TMC 18.06 (Ordinance #, date Portions of the Critical Areas Protection Provisions that have been codified in TMC 18.45 (Ordinance #, date) with exclusions identified in Subsection 9 of this document and within TMC 18.44. Req-2 SMP Section 3 Definitions used in the administration of the The City proposed to reference the zoning code definitions section in TMC 18.06 rather Requirement 2: This revision has Definitions Shoreline Master Program and are incorporated into than have those definitions housed in the SMP or duplicated in both the SMP and the been implemented in the Draft SMP the Definitions Chapter of the Zoning Code TMC codified TMC sections of 18.06 and 18.44. This approach is fine, but the definitions ordinance. 18.06. In addition to the definitions provided in TMC must be consistent with those previously approved in the SMP and with the SMA and 18.06, Chapter 90.58 RCW, Chapter 173-26 WAC, Guideline definitions of RCW 90.58.030, WAC 173-26-020 and WAC 173-27-030. These proposed revisions to and Chapter 173-27 WAC apply within the shoreline Ordinance 2347 adopted in 2011 codified the SMP section 3 definitions into TMC 18.06. definitions in 18.06 have been jurisdiction. Where definitions in TMC conflict with However, having all these definitions housed in one place outside the SMP could result implemented in the Draft Zoning state definitions, the definitions provided in RCW or in definitions within TMC 18.06 that are not consistent with definitions within the SMA. Code Ordinance at TMC 18.06. The WAC shall control. Additional clarification is required to ensure that if a conflict does exist, the SMA and reference to sensitive areas to Guideline definition shall prevail. This is necessary to ensure that the purpose, intent, critical areas will be addressed in ------------------- and goals of the SMA are given the required weight when reviewing projects within the the ordinance related to critical TMC 18.06 — shoreline jurisdiction. areas code update. Definitions-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- 18.06.210 Development "Development" means the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure that requires a building permit. "Development" dGeS e+ As noted in the Periodic Review Checklist, the state definition of "development' was incl de dismantling or removing structures if there is amended to clarify that demolition is not development in the shoreline. The City has added this clarification to the wrong definition. The required changes noted to TMC 18.06.210 and 18.06.217 are necessary for consistency with the SMA. Page 2 of 12 Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions no other associated development or re_ development. 18.06.217 Development, Shoreline "Development, shoreline" means, when conducted within the Shoreline Jurisdiction on shorelands or shoreland areas as defined herein, a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of Large Woody Debris and Non -conforming Structures definitions from the SMP are structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; proposed to be deleted and replaced with a reference to TMC 18.06, but these removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; definitions are not in 18.06. Need to add to 18.06 or explain why these definitions are no construction of bulkheads; driving of piling; placing longer needed. of obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature that interferes with the normal public use of the waters overlying lands subject to the Shoreline Management Act at any stage of water level. "Development, shoreline" does not include dismantling or removing structures if there is Sensitive Areas should be changed to Critical Areas. This term has been changed no other associated development or re- throughout the City's code. It should be updated here as well for internal consistency development. and implementation. Large Woody Debris (LWD): means whole trees with root wars and limbs attached, cut loges at least 4 inches in diameter along most of their length, root wads at least 6.5 feet long and 8 inches in diameter. Large woody debris is installed to address a deficiency of habitat and natural chanel forming processes. Non -conforming Structure, Shoreline: means a structure legally established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Master Program, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. 18.06.710 — 18.06.730 Change references from Sensitive Area to Critical Area. Critical SeRSitiVe Area Page 3 of 12 co 4 Item Section Required and recommended changes (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions DOE Rationale City Staff Response Req-3 SMP Section 6 The goals and policies that lead and inspire The City has proposed to delete this entire section, except for the first sentence that Requirement 3: In conjunction with Shoreline Tukwila's shoreline actions are found in the references the Shoreline Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan as noted in the the City's desire to reference the Goals and Shoreline Element of the City's 2015 column to the left. The City Staff comment for this proposed change, notes that minor 2015 Comprehensive Plan's Policies Comprehensive Plan. These, along with the edits to the Element are needed to match the 2011 revisions approved by Ecology. The Shoreline Element in the SMP narrative in that Chapter, were updated based on proposed language in SMP Section 6 Shoreline Goals and Policies is not sufficient to instead of duplicating it in SMP, the the 2009 SMP and 2011 revisions approved by the meet the requirements of the SMA and the existing Shoreline Element of the City has provided: (1) the specific Department of Ecology. Comprehensive Plan has not been reviewed for consistency with the SMA as part of a ordinance and date of the SMP amendment; therefore it cannot be used to fulfill the SMA policy and goal Comprehensive Plan and (2) a requirements of the City's SMP. strikethrough/underline version of the 2011 SMP Section 6 Goals and Required: Policies identifying the changes The 2011 Approved SMP Policies cannot be deleted from SMP Section 6 unless they necessary to replace it with the are formally replaced by the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan — any current Shoreline Element of the inconsistency between these two sets of policies and goals must be rectified during this Comprehensive Plan will be Periodic Review Process. This can be accomplished by: provided to the Department of • Providing a strikethrough/underline version of the 2011 SMP Section 6 Goals Ecology. and Policies identifying the changes necessary to replace it with the current Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan. This is a SMP amendment and must be reviewed for consistency with the SMA and Guidelines. —OR— • Modifying the current Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan to match the already approved 2011 SMP Section 6 Goals and Policies. This would not require additional Ecology review for consistency with the SMA and Guidelines, because this would not include any edits to the approved language — it would only be a re -organization that changed where the City houses these policies and goals. In coordination with the incorporation by reference noted in Req-1, the City must identify the exact version of the Shoreline Element that will be utilized to meet the SMA requirements. Once an option is chosen to resolve this issue, an Ordinance No. and date will need to be added to any Shoreline Element reference, because these Policies and Goals cannot be modified or edited without a formal SMP amendment. Req-4 SMP Section 9 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations Critical areas provisions proposed to be incorporated by reference into the SMP must Requirement 4: This ordinance Environmental A. The following critical areas shall be regulated in include a "specific, dated edition." To meet this requirement the Ordinance number and date revision has been ly Critical accordance with the dated must be added at the time of local adoption. implemented in the Draft SMP Areas Within provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC ordinance and Draft Zoning Code The Shoreline Chapter 18.45 (Ordinance #, date), adopted rnate to The City is also undertaking a Critical Areas Ordinance Update at this time. An update Ordinance at TMC18.44.070. *Also be armed}, which is herein incorporated by version of all CAO provisions proposed for incorporation into the SMP must be included TMC 18.44.070 in the final submittal for this SMP amendment, because all SMP provisions must use Page 4 of 12 Item Section Required and recommended changes (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions DOE Rationale City Staff Response reference into this SMP, except for the provisions "the most current, accurate and complete scientific and technical information available" excluded in subsection B of this Section: [WAC 173-26-201 (2)(a)]. All sections of TMC 18.45 will need to be reviewed to ensure 1. Wetlands that regulations and procedures that are not consistent with the SMA or associated 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) Guidelines, such as reasonable use exceptions, administrative exemptions, waivers, 3. Areas of potential geologic instability appeals, permit procedures, and enforcement, are excluded from incorporation into the 4. Abandoned mine areas SMP. See our SMP Handbook Chapter 18 for additional guidance on this topic. 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas Such critical area provisions shall apply to any use, *The required changes herein are based on the language provided within SMP alteration, or development within shoreline Section 9. A final version or updated draft of the CAO proposed to be jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or incorporated must be submitted to Ecology for review for consistency with the written statement of exemption is required. Unless SMA and applicable guidelines of WAC 173-26. This may result in additional otherwise stated, no development shall be required changes necessary to ensure that critical areas protection, reviews, and constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, permitting are conducted consistent with the SMA and Guidelines. 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 9.2 - Change required for consistency with WAC 173-26-221 and RCW 36.70A.480. objectives and purposes of the provisions of the Critical areas within the shoreline jurisdiction are regulated by the SMP. Those specific Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline (based on ordinance # and date) provisions are incorporated into the SMP to meet the Management Act. If there is a conflict or critical area protection requirements of the SMA and will be administered through the inconsistency between any of the adopted authorities of the SMA. provisions below and the Shoreline Master Program, the most restrictive provisions shall The GMA (RCW 36.70A.480(4) provides that, prevail. Shoreline master programs shall provide a level of protection to critical areas located B. The following provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions do not apply within the Shoreline jurisdiction: necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources as defined by department of ecology 1. Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060. Section 18.45.160) 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section RCW 36.70A030(5) of the GMA defines critical areas as, 18.45.180). "Critical areas" include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) Wetlands; (b) areas with 3. Permitting, Appeals, and Enforcement a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat Procedures conservation areas; (d) frequently flooded areas; and (e) geologically hazardous areas. C. Critical areas comprised of frequently flooded "Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas" does not include such artificial features or areas and areas of seismic instability are regulated constructs as irrigation delivery systems, irrigation infrastructure, irrigation canals, or by the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC drainage ditches that lie within the boundaries of and are maintained by a port district or an irrigation district or company. Page 5 of 12 P. O O Item Section Required and recommended changes (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions DOE Rationale City Staff Response Chapter 16.52) and the Washington State Building Code, rather than by TMC Section 18.44.090. The SMA Guideline (WAC 173-26-020(8) defines critical areas as, 9.2 Purpose (8) "Critical areas" as defined under chapter 36.70A RCW includes the following areas A. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) and and ecosystems: Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) requires (a) Wetlands; protection of critical areas (SeRSitive area&), defined (b) Areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable waters; as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded (c) Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; areas, geologically hazardous areas, critical aquifer (d) Frequently flooded areas; and recharge areas, fish and wildlife conservation areas, (e) Geologically hazardous areas. and abandGRed mine areas-. B. The purpose of protecting environmentally critical Abandoned mines are not on the above referenced list and according to the City's areas within the shoreline Inventory and Characterization completed as part of the SMP Comprehensive update in jurisdiction is to: 2011, there are no abandoned mine areas located within the shoreline; therefore 1. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural abandoned mine areas should be removed from the SMP critical areas list. functions and values of these areas. 2. Protect quantity and quality of water resources. 3. Minimize turbidity and pollution of wetlands and The protection and regulation of critical areas within the shoreline jurisdiction is fish -bearing waters and maintain wildlife habitat. governed by the SMA, not the GMA. These references were updated to reflect the 4. Prevent erosion and the loss of slope and soil accurate WACs. stability caused by the removal of trees, shrubs, and root systems of vegetative cover. 5. Protect the public against avoidable losses, public *Similar issues with TMC 18.44.070 please amend both the SMP Section 9 and TMC emergency rescue and relief operations cost, and 18.44.070 for internal consistency and consistency with the above referenced RCW and subsidy cost of public mitigation from landslide, WAC requirements. 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. Page 6 of 12 Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions 10. Incorporate the use of hest available science the most current, accurate, and complete scientific and technical information available in the regulation and protection of critical areas as required by the state Grewth n aRage en+ n^+ Shoreline Management Act, according to WAC 173-26-201 and WAC 173- 26-221 365 195 900 through 365 195 925 . and WAG 365 190 080. C. The goal of these critical area regulations is --to less fish aGhieue no net ef wetland,aterGGUrse, er and-yiild-life nn ncenio+inn area nr their fi inn+ions Is to provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. Critical areas currently identified in the shoreline jurisdiction are discussed in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of this Shoreline Master Program. The locations are mapped on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline 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 previsiens fer dnne.d de not apple othese abaR MiRe areas a nGRe is IGGated on the areas sherel'Re jurisdiGtien. Req-5 TMC Type 2 Decisions Matrix Shoreline buffer reductions and time extension for nonconforming uses/structures are Requirement 5: This revision has 18.104.010 Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker not a shoreline permit type. All development and new uses within the shoreline been implemented in the Draft Classification Appeal Body jurisdiction must be reviewed for consistency with the City's SMP, but the only permit Zoning Code ordinance. Proposed of Project Shnrplmnp :fferTedh-^*i^n C types that exist within the shoreline authorized by the SMA are Shoreline Substantial revision to 18.104.010 has been ornmunity Permit Development Director c•a•^ ch„r^lin^ Development Permits, Shoreline Conditional Use Permits, and Shoreline Variances. All removed. Applications Hearings B^ development that occurs within the shoreline jurisdiction must be processed as a shoreline substantial development permit, unless the activity meets the one of the Page 7 of 12 0 O N Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions Extension of timeforcontinuing Community narrowly construed exemptions from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Developmentr�+ +e Cheri` process. These permit types are not consistent with RCW 90.58 or WAC 173-27, and Hearings Be chereline n�nn)nforming use or cti need to be deleted. Rec-1 TMC 18.44.120 Any anneal Sh re"Re d8GiSi„n by the City This provisions is not consistent with RCW 90.58.180, which provides that Recommendation 1: This revision of a OR a Appeals SubstaRtial Development o„ere (1) Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying, or rescinding of a permit on has been implemented in the Draft r nal Use Permit, r eh rorne %IariaRGe shorelines of the state pursuant to RCW 90.58.140 may seek review from the Zoning Code Ordinance at TMC Rdi+, must he appealed to the chereiine Hearings Beard Any shorelines hearings board by filing a petition for review within twenty-one days 18.44.120. person aggrieved by the granting, denying, or of the date of filing of the decision as defined in RCW 90.58.140(6). rescinding of a Shoreline Substantial Development RCW 90.58.140(6) establishes the "date of filing" and therefore the start of the 21-day Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, or state appeal period. The City's decision on a shoreline conditional use permit or Shoreline Variance may seek review from the variance is not the final decision because Ecology has final decision making authority shorelines hearings board by filing a petition for on those permit types. review within twenty-one days of the date of filing of the decision as defined in RCW 90.58.140(6). Replacement language is suggested to more to accurately describe SMP permit appeal procedures for City staff, applicants, and the general public. This is not a section that the City is currently proposing to amendment and the procedural requirements of the SMA and WAC 173-27 apply regardless of the specific language in the SMP, so this is being suggested as a recommended change rather than a required change. Rec-2 TMC Non -Conforming Parking Lots. a. The City staff comment on the proposed SMP draft indicates that the City has a lot Recommendation 2: The 18.44.110 a. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be of parking areas within the shoreline buffer, however, they debate how this section recommended revision to Req-6 Subsection construed to require a change in any aspect of a guides their use when the site is redeveloped or changes use. Recommend adding subsection 6.a has not been G.6. structure or facility covered thereunder language to clarify that no changes to existing non -conforming parking is required implemented. Subsection 6.c including, without limitation, parking layout, unless the site is redeveloped or the use is changed as described the subsections addresses change in use or loading space requirements and curb -outs, for below. redevelopment. The recommended any structure or facility which existed on the change to subsection 6.c has been date of adoption of this chapter, unless the implemented as suggested in the property is proposed for a change of use or Draft Zoning Code Ordinance at otherwise redeveloped. c. Proposed re -wording to clarify that this is applicable if no changes to a non- TMC 18.44.110. b. If a change of use takes place or an addition is conforming parking area is required rather than if it is not proposed. Also recommend proposed that requires an increase in the area adding clarification that any water quality improvements cannot result in increased non- Requirement 6: This section has by an increment of less than 0100%, the conformity. For example, if an existing gravel parking area is paved and treatment or been revised to allow conversion to requirements of this chapter shall be complied detention is added the proposed upgrades cannot impact existing shoreline buffer parking area only when the existing with for the additional parking area. vegetation, encroach closer to the OHWM, or include new impacts within the buffer parking is already accessory to an c. If a property is redeveloped, a change of use such as stormwater treatment or detention facilities. upland use and any converted takes place, or an addition is proposed that Page 8 of 12 Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions requires an increase in the parking area by an d. This allowance is not consistent with the WAC 173-26-241(3)(k) Transportation parking is located in a landward increment greater than 100%, the requirements and parking, which provides in relevant part, location. of this chapter shall be complied with for the Parking facilities in shorelines are not a preferred use and shall be allowed entire parking area. if nn nhanne in narking area only as necessary to support an authorized use. Shoreline master programs An shall include policies and regulations to minimize the environmental and visual existing non -conforming parking lot, which is not impacts of parking facilities. otherwise subject to the requirements of this chapter, may be upgraded to improve water As proposed, this allowance to convert a non -conforming structure into non - quality or meet local, state, federal regulations conforming parking has no use nexus and could be applied on vacant property (with provided the upgrade does not result in an no authorized use) or associated with an unauthorized use. increase in non -conformity. d. The rea neafh a neno StrUGtUre area if the nnn_rn nfnrminn ofrU Gt Ure is rlemnlicher! Req-7 TMC 18.44.110 If any such non -conforming use ceases for any See also Req-5. The SMA only provides for shoreline substantial development permits, Requirement 7: This revision has Subsection reason for a period of more than 24 consecutive shoreline conditional use permits, and shoreline variances. The State Shorelines been implemented in the Draft G.1.b months the non -conforming rights shall expire and Hearings Board is only authorized to review these types of permits. The authorization Zoning Code Ordinance at TMC Rec-3 any subsequent use shall conform to the regulations must fit into one of these permit types. 18.44.110. specified by in this chapter for the shoreline environment in which such use is located, unless re- A shoreline substantial development permit would not be triggered, so the only potential Recommendation 3: This revision establishment of the use is authorized threugh a shoreline permit to review this under would be the Shoreline Conditional Use permit has been implemented in the Draft Type 2 peFFRit which must he applied for through a process. Zoning Code Ordinance at TMC Shoreline Conditional Use Permit which must be 18.44.110. applied for within the two-year period. Water- It doesn't appear that this is the right cross reference. dependent uses should not be considered discontinued when they are inactive due to dormancy, or where the use is typically seasonal. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set forth in TMC Section 18.44.100.G.4 Req-8 TMC 18.44.100 1. Relief may be granted from Shoreline Master The City proposes to add critical area buffers to the relief allowances of TMC Requirement 8: This revision has Shoreline Program standards and use regulations in cases 18.44.100.B(1) and (3). However, this relief allowance must be provided consistent with been implemented in the Draft Restoration where shoreline restoration projects result in a the SMA and Guidelines, which provide that relief may be granted from Master Program Zoning Code Ordinance at TMC Subsection B. change in the location of the OHWM and associated development standards and use regulations resulting from shoreline restoration projects 18.44.100. Change in Shoreline Jurisdiction an,_/nr r.ri+iraI area bluffers on that shift the OHWM. Restoration projects that result in a change in the location of a Page 9 of 12 0 w O Item Section Required and recommended changes (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions DOE Rationale City Staff Response Shoreline the subject property and/or adjacent properties, and critical area buffer do not result in a shift in the shoreline OHWM and would not be Jurisdiction where application of this chapter's regulations would subject to new shoreline use and development regulations. Shoreline jurisdiction is Due to preclude or interfere with the uses permitted by the extended to include the any associated wetlands, but not their buffers. So larger critical Restoration. underlying zoning, thus presenting a hardship to the area buffers as a result of a shoreline restoration would not extend the shoreline project proponent. jurisdiction and its use or development regulations onto portions of the property where it a. Applications for relief, as specified below, must did not previously exist. Therefore, this relief mechanism is not applicable to changes in meet the following criteria: critical area buffers resulting from restoration projects. (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 The proposed addition of subsection 2 to 18.44.100.B is not appropriately located within outside Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline subsection B because this section is title Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction Due to Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration Restoration. See suggested relocation into new subsection C. Shoreline Restoration project, the City may consider the following, Building Height Incentive. However, the allowance provided along with TMC 18.44.050 consistent with the criteria in TMC Section 18.44. appear consistent with addresses the necessary view blockage issues consistent with 100.B.1.a. RCW 90.58.320, which provides, (1) permitting development for the full range of uses No permit shall be issued pursuant to this chapter for any new or expanded building or of the underlying zoning consistent with the Zoning structure of more than thirty-five feet above average grade level on shorelines of the Code, including uses that are not water oriented; state that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining (2) waiving the requirement to obtain a shoreline such shorelines except where a master program does not prohibit the same and then substantial development permit if it is otherwise only when overriding considerations of the public interest will be served. 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 Page 10 of 12 Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions (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. GORs+sfen+ in TMG Sestkc with PFOV'S'GRS R 18.441.050. (' building heights i.yithin shoreline iirisrl ig+inn may he in^reaserl if the nrnie^andler enter amen+ of +he shoreline buffer, heyand what may nthepNise he reguired in aggord_anne with the standards of Try N.iC-- n 18.44.060, "Vegetation PreteGtien d L-andSGap:,,g" ndd ResteratiGr< a anr!/or enhanoemen+ shall inG de• firm f alle�.�_water 5 A V) a. c�ea�,-ers�i�.�--�,-,. Tsslepe e nhannel rearing habitat and/or h of fish harriers +e Lnewn o remegal passage potential fish habitat and restoration of the harrier se 3.2. Consistent with the provisions of subparagraphs B.1.a, 1.b and 1.c above, the Shoreline Residential Environment, High Intensity, or Urban Conservancy Environment Shoreline Buffer, eF ^ri+i^al area Bb offer 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 Page 11 of 12 0 Cn O Item Section Required and recommended changes DOE Rationale City Staff Response (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions 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 structuresthat 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. C. Shoreline Restoration Building Height Incentive 1. Consistent with provisions in TMC Section 18.44.050. C, building heights within shoreline jurisdiction may be increased if the project proponent provides additional restoration and/or enhancement of the shoreline buffer, beyond what may otherwise be required in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." Additional Restoration and/or enhancement shall include: a. creation of shallow -water (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. Page 12 of 12 Ecology Recommendations dated December 4, 2019 The changes in red are required to comply with the SMA (RCW 90.58) and the SMP Guidelines (WAC 173-26, Part III). Changes in blue are recommended and consistent with SMA (RCW 90.58) policy and the SMP Guidelines (WAC 173-26, Part III). THIS REVIEW IS BASED ON THE 8/28/2019 SMP Public Review Draft and 11/26/2019 Critical areas rwrlinnnra draft Otaff hac inch irlPrl thacP rhannPc in tha draft nrrlinnnr a Item Provision BILL FORMAT CHANGES (underline = additions; strikethrough = deletions) RATIONALE Rec- SMP Section 9 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations Recommended Change: Delete Abandoned mine Environmentally A. The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the areas from these lists and re -number accordingly. This Critical Areas provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance (TMC Chapter 18.45), (Ordinance #, date), which is herein incorporated by is not a critical area required under the SMA. Within The reference into this SMP, except for the provisions excluded in subsection B of this Section: Additionally, according to the City's 2011 SMP Shoreline 1. Wetlands Comprehensive Update record, no abandoned mine 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) areas exist within the City's shoreline jurisdiction. 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 iation 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. 18.44.070 A. Applicable Critical Areas Regulations. The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions Environmentally of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC Chapter 18.45, (Ordinance #, date), which is herein incorporated by reference into this Critical Areas SMP, except as provided in TMC Section 18.44.070(B). Said provisions shall apply to any use, alteration, or development within the within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. Unless otherwise Shoreline stated, no development shall be constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, or altered, or land divided without full Jurisdiction compliance with the provisions 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 it Abandoned ine m areas 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas o Page 1 of 2 4 cD 12.04.2019 City of Tukwila SMP Periodic Review Initial Determination of Consistency - Attachment 1 Req- SMP Section 9 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations Required Change: Update exclusions lists to ensure Environmentally B. The following provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply within the Shoreline jurisdiction: that all CAO provisions incorporated into the SMP are Critical Areas 1. Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 18.45.160) consistent with the SMA and implementing Guidelines. Within The 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180). Shoreline 3. Time Limitation, Appeals, and Vesting Pernniffin^ Appeals and EnfOrromonf DrOGedures (TMC 18.45.1904-95)_ The City is also undertaking a Critical Areas Ordinance 4. Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation (TMC Section 18.45.90) Activities and alterations to wetlands and their buffers Update at this time. An update version of all CAO located within shoreline jurisdiction shall be subject to the provisions and permitting mechanisms of this Master Program. provisions proposed for incorporation into the SMP must be included in the final submittal for this SMP ............................................................................................. B. The following provisions in TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply: amendment, because all SMP provisions must use "the ****************** 1. Critical Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 8.45.160) most current, accurate and complete scientific and p 18.44.070 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180). Exceptions within shoreline jurisdiction shall require a shoreline technical information available" WAC 173-26-201 � Environmentally variance based on the variance criteria listed in TMC Section 18.44.110(F) and WAC 173-27-170. (2)(a)]. All sections of TMC 18.45 will need to be Critical Areas 3. Time Limitation, Appeals, and Vesting Perm.iffinn Appeals and ERfE)FG8rnent PFGGedures (TMC 18.45.1904-95)_ reviewed to ensure that regulations and procedures within the Shoreline 4. Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation (TMC Section 18,45,90) Activities and alterations to wetlands and their buffers that are not consistent with the SMA or associated Jurisdiction located within s"e��t^ and their buffers shoreline jurisdiction shall be subject to the provisions and permitting Guidelines, such as reasonable use exceptions, p mechanisms of this Master Program. administrative exemptions, waivers, permit procedures, 5. Shoreline buffer widths are defined in TMC Section 18.44.040. and appeals are excluded from incorporation into the 6. Future amendments to the Critical Areas Ordinance require Department of Ecology approval of an amendment to this SMP. Master Program to incorporate updated language. 7. If provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance conflict with provisions of this Master Program, the provisions that are the most protective of the ecological resource shall apply, as determined by the Director. 8. If there are provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance that are not consistent with the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW, and supporting Washington Administrative Code chapters, those provisions shall not apply. Req- 18.44.030 Required Change: Delete the recently added language. 2 Principally RECREATIO" Public and private promenades, footpaths and trails are Recreation facilities (corn merc)a — indoor) x x x P x P (22) x Permitted Uses allowed as forms of public and private access to the Recreation facilities (corn merc)a — outdoor) C(23,24) C (24) Q23, C(24) X and Shoreline shoreline consistent with SMA Policy. Other non -water - Use and X x 24) oriented uses should occur outside of the buffer. WAC Modification Matrix 173-26-191(2)(a)(ii)(A) requires that SMP regulations Recreation facilities, includin¢ boat launching P(23) P P�23,24_ C P'23 P P�3) * NEW (public) 25 be sufficient in scope and detail to ensure the ADDITION IN implementation consistent implementation of the SMA, Publi€ and private promenades, footpaths, er P R P (26) P P (26) P x THE 8/28/2019 trails or other uncovered recreation space Guidelines and SMP policies. It is unclear what is Draft added after provided it meets vegetation and landscaying meant by "other uncovered recreational spaces" Ecology June 6, requirements of ThAC Section 19.44.c&0 allowed in both the buffer and non -buffer meeting TMC 2019 Initial Determination RFSIf}FNTIAI-SIN[;I F FAh+IIIYlI41111TI�AMIIY 18.44.060. TMC 18.44.060 does not set impervious surface limits or other standards that would provide was provided. clarity for the allowance of "uncovered recreational Page 2of2 ATTACHMENT E Summary of key revisions to the Shoreline Master Program and Shoreline regulations. The main areas of change that are policy related are listed below: 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 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 -Width Will Vary Reconfigured Levee Vegetated Bench 18' 10, $ Willows 2 $ ILI �i 1.g Existing Levee r Maintenance Easement ordinary High 2* Water Mark 1 oHWM ' Reconfigured Slope averages 2.5:1 with bench 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 109 so significant that the need to allow site specific design solutions may be desirable to reach life safety and economic goals. Increased Heieht 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. The draft ordinance increases the shoreline foot height limit from 45 to 65 feet and allow another 15 foot increase on properties that restore shoreline buffers or build shoreline public access amenities. These incentives would not allow heights greater than that permitted by the underlying zoning district. Public Access and Recreation The Draft Ordinance allows recreational structures to be larger than 25 square feet and 15 feet tall for greater usability by the public. The trail width requirements are reduced from the 14 feet with 2 feet shoulders to 12 feet with 2 feet shoulders to match King County and City Park standards. Additionally, no additional public access is required if there is an existing trail on the property and access to trail is within 1000 feet. Non -Conforming Structures The Draft Ordinance removes the cost limitation on alterations or improvements to non- conforming structures within the shoreline buffer if the buffer covers most of the parcel. Additionally, if a non -conforming structure is demolished the footprint may be incorporated into an adjacent parking lot if the existing parking is accessory to a legally established upland use and any converted parking is located in a landward location. Also, the Draft Ordinance allows water quality improvements for non -conforming parking lots such as gravel parking lots can be paved. Vegetation Management The Draft Ordinance clarifies that permits are not required for removal of invasive species; requires restoration planting to be monitored for survival for five years; and includes updated tree protections similar to Tree Code update. During review of the Critical Areas update the Planning Commission recommended some additional consistency edits to how trees and vegetation are regulated under shoreline and these are reflected in the Draft Ordinance. The other proposed changes are technical edits and are described below: 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. 110 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. 111 112 ".1 r AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADDING, REPEALING AND AMENDING VARIOUS DEFINITIONS AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) CHAPTER 18.06, "DEFINITIONS," AS IDENTIFIED HEREIN; AMENDING AND RECODIFYING VARIOUS ORDINANCES AS CODIFIED IN MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF TMC CHAPTER 18.52, "LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS;" AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2443 §25, AS CODIFIED AT TMC SECTION 18.28.240.C; AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2570 §3, §4, §5, §6, §7, §9, §12, §17 AND §20, AND ORDINANCE NO. 1758 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF TMC CHAPTER 18.54, "URBAN FORESTRY AND TREE REGULATIONS;" AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2518 §15 AND ORDINANCE NO. 1819 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TMC SECTION 18.70.050; REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 2175 AND 2077, AS CODIFIED AT TMC SECTION 18.70.050; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2301, AS CODIFIED IN MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF TMC CHAPTER 18.45, "ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS;" REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2368 §47, §48, §49 AND §50, AS CODIFIED AT VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TMC CHAPTER 18.45 AS IDENTIFIED HEREIN; REENACTING TMC CHAPTER 18.45, "ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS," TO AMEND AND ESTABLISH NEW REGULATIONS RELATED TO CRITICAL AREAS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila adopted new regulations governing development on sensitive areas and buffers in 2010 based on State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements to adopt development regulations that protect the functions of sensitive areas, including wetlands, watercourse, fish and habitat conservation areas, and areas of potential geological instability, and WHEREAS, the City's critical area regulations should be consistent with the Washington State Department of Ecology wetland classification system, which is based on best available science; and w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 100 113 WHEREAS, the City's critical area regulations should be consistent with the Washington State Department of Natural Resources' stream classification system; and WHEREAS, the City is conducting a required periodic update of its critical areas regulations per RCW 36.70A.130; and WHEREAS, after administering the critical area regulations for the past nine years the City has determined there are certain clarifications and refinements needed to improve the effectiveness of the ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Public Outreach Plan that incorporated a variety of methods to notify the general public and property owners including an open house, mailings to property owners and tenants, notice in a stormwater bill, postings on the City's web site, creation of a broadcast e-mail group that received updates of the critical areas review process, and articles in the City's newsletter "The Hazelnut;" and WHEREAS, after receiving public input and administering the recently adopted tree and landscaping regulations, the City has determined there are certain clarifications and refinements needed to the "Urban Forestry and Tree Regulations" chapter and the "Landscape Requirements" chapter of the Tukwila Municipal Code to improve the effectiveness of those ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a public review Draft Critical Areas Regulations, held a public hearing on April 11, 2019, and recommended adoption of revised regulations to the City Council on June 27, 2019; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Draft Critical Areas Regulations as recommended by the Planning Commission and a Determination of Non - Significance was issued September 9, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 23, 2019, to review the Planning Commission recommended Draft Critical Areas Regulations, and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission recommended Draft Critical Areas Regulations to address issues raised by interested parties, individual councilmembers, staff and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 100 114 Section 1. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2075 §1 (part), as codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Adaptive Management," is hereby amended to read as follows: Adaptive Management "Adaptive management" means the use of scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and non -regulatory actions protect a seRsitivecritical area. Section 2. New Definition Adopted. A new section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," as follows: Alteration "Alteration" means any human -induced change in an existing condition of a critical area or its buffer. Alterations include but are not limited to, grading, filling, channelizing, dredging clearing of vegetation, construction, compaction, excavation, or anV other activity that changes the character of the critical area. Section 3. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2075 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Best Available Science," is hereby amended to read as follows: Best Available Science "Best Available Science" means that scientific information applicable to the seRsitovecritical area prepared by appropriate local, state or federal agencies, a qualified scientist or team of qualified scientists, which will be consistent with the criteria established in WAC 365-195-900 through WAC 365-195-925. Characteristics of a valid scientific process will be considered to determine whether information received during the permit review process is reliable scientific information. A valid scientific process includes some or all of the following characteristics: 1. Peer reviewed research or background information. 2. Study methods clearly stated. 3. Conclusions based on logical assumptions. 4. Quantitative analysis. 5. Proper context is established. 6. References are included that cite relevant, credible literature and other pertinent information. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 100 115 Section 4. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Essential Street, Road, Right of Way or Utility," is hereby amended to read as follows: Essential Street, Road, or Right -of -Way or tility "Essential street, road, or right-of-wayer utility" means a utility facility, utility SYS street, road or right-of-way where no feasible alternative location exists based on an analysis of technology and system efficiency. Section 5. New Definition Adopted. A new section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," as follows: Essential Utility "Essential utility" means a utility facility or utility system where no feasible alternative location exists based on an analysis of technology and system efficiency. Section 6. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part) and 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Mitigation," are hereby amended to read as follows: Mitigation "Mitigation" means replacing project induced ceecritical area and buffer losses or impacts, and includes but is not limited to the following: 1. Restoration: Actions performed to reestablish seecritical area and its buffer functional characteristics and processes w#iEh-that have been lost by alterations, activities or catastrophic events within an area `"'hamthat no longer meets the definition of a se ecritical area; 2. Creation: Actions performed to intentionally establish a &ens4yecritical area and its buffer at a site where it did not formerly exist; 3. Enhancement: Actions performed to improve the condition of an existing degraded se��p_s_i�ecritical area or its buffer so that the functions it provides are of higher quality. Section 7. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Sensitive Area Buffer," is hereby amended to read as follows: cone -Critical Area Buffer "ceRsot eCritical area buffer" means an area lying adjacent to but outside a seRsitivecritical area as defined by this Title, whose function is to protect sensitive critical areas from the potential adverse impacts of development, land use, or other activities. A wetland or watercourse sewcritical area buffer also provides critical habitat value, bank stabilization, aad-or water overflow area functions. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 4 of 100 116 Section 8. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Sensitive Area Regulated Activities," is hereby amended to read as follows: Sensitive -Critical Area Regulated Activities "SensitoveCritical area regulated activities" means any of the following activities WhiGh that are directly undertaken or originate in a regulated wetland or watercourse or their buffers: 1. Removal, excavation, grading or dredging of soil, sand, gravel, minerals, organic matter or material of any kind; 2. Dumping, discharging or filling with any material; 3. Draining, flooding or disturbing the water level or water table; 4. Driving of pilings; 5. Placing of obstructions; 6. Construction, reconstruction, demolition or expansion of any structure; 7. Destruction or alteration of wetlands, watercourses or their buffers through clearing, harvesting, shading, intentional burning or planting of vegetation that would alter the character of a regulated wetland, watercourse or buffer, provided that these activities are not part of a forest practice governed under RCW 76.09 and its rules; or 8. Activities that result in a significant change to the water sources of wetlands or watercourses. These alterations include a significant change in water temperature; physical or chemical characteristics, including quantity, and the introduction of pollutants. Section 9. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part) and 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Sensitive Areas," are hereby amended to read as follows: Se e-Critical Areas "SeRsitiveCritical areas" means wetlands, watercourses, areas of potential geologic instability (other than Class I areas), abandoned coal mine areas, aPA-fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, and special hazard flood areas. Section 10. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part) and 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Sensitive Areas Ordinance," are hereby amended to read as follows: Sens eCriticaI Areas Ordinance "cow sitiveCritical Areas Ordinance" means the Environmentally SeCritical Areas chapter of this title or as amended hereafter which establishes standards for land development on lots with se��ecritical areas (e.g. steep slopes, wetlands, W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 5 of 100 117 watercourses, etc.). Section 11. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part) and 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Sensitive Areas Tract or Easement," are hereby amended to read as follows: S�itiveCritical Area Tract or Easement "Seso�eCritical area tract or easement" means a tract or portion of a parcel that is created to protect the cpeecritical area and its buffer, whose maintenance is assured, and which is recorded on all documents of title of record for all affected lots and subsequent owners. Section 12. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2368 §3 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Wetland Edge," are hereby amended to read as follows: Wetland Edge "Wetland edge" means the delineated boundary of a wetland as delineated based ei4 # ie pp rformed in accordance with approved federal wetland delineation manual and current applicable regional supplements. Section 13. Section Numbers within TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. As a result of amendments contained herein, the section number for some definitions in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," may be changed as part of codification of this ordinance including, but not limited to, the following. - Current Section Number Definition 18.06.017 Adaptive Management 18.06.064 Best Available Science 18.06.285 Essential Street, Road or Right -of -Way 18.06.581 Mitigation 18.06.710 Critical Area Buffer 18.06.715 Critical Area Regulated Activities 18.06.720 Critical Areas 18.06.725 Critical Areas Ordinance 18.06.730 Critical Area Tract or Easement 18.06.924 Wetland Edge w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 118 Page 6 of 100 Section 14. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Wetlands or Watercourses Constructed," is hereby repealed. � ..=,'.- .- - �,-.M ,..".-.:.e.-tee. � - --- - V. Section 15. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Wetland, Emergent," is hereby repealed. Section 16. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part) and 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Wetland, Forested," are hereby repealed. Section 17. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2301, as codified in multiple sections of TMC Chapter 18.45, "Environmentally Sensitive Areas," is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 18. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2368 §47, §48, §49 and §50, as codified at TMC Sections 18.45.040, 18.45.080, 18.45.120 and 18.45.180 respectively, are hereby repealed. Section 19. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 2175 and 2077, as codified at TMC Section 18.70.050, "Nonconforming Structures," are hereby repealed. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 7 of 100 119 Section 20. Chapter Title. Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45 is hereby retitled to read as follows: CHAPTER 18.45 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE CRITICAL AREAS Sections: 18.45.010 Purpose 18.45.020 Best Available Science 18.45.030 SeRSitiveCritical Area Applicability, Maps and Inventories 18.45.040 Critical Areas Special Studies tom--` 5.05 i 18.45.060 Inforp.nrofafinn PMGe ii ire 18.45.070 SeRsmtoveCritical Area Permitted U-se-sActivities 18.45.075 Mitigation Sequencing 18.45.080 Wetlands Designations, Ratings and Buffers 18.45.090 Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation 18.45.100 Watercourse Designations, Ratings and Buffers 18.45.110 Watercourse Alterations and Mitigation 18.45.120 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Designations, Ratings and Buffers 18.45.130 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Uses, Exemptions, Alterations and Mitigation 18.45.140 Coal Mine Hazard Areas 18.45.150 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas — Designation, Mapping, Uses and Standards 18.45.155 Special Hazard Flood Areas 18.45.158 Vegetation Protection and Management 18.45.160 SeRsot#veCritical Area Master Plan Overlay 18.45.170 2,-eCritical Areas Tracts and Easements 18.45.180 Exceptions 18.45.190 Time Limitation, Appeals and Vesting 18.45.195 GnfGrnomonf and PenaltmesViolations 18.45.197 Enforcement 18.45.200 Recording Required 18.45.210 Assurance Device 18.45.220 Assessment Relief MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 120 Page 8 of 100 Section 21. TMC Section 18.45.010 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.010 Purpose A. The purpose of TMC Chapter 18.45 is to protect the environment, human life and property;; to designate and classify ecologically se sit vecritical areas including but not limited toffs regulated wetlands and watercourses and geologically hazardous areas and to protect these critical areas and their functions while also allowing for reasonable use of public and private property. These regulations are prepared to comply with the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, to apply best available science according to WAC 365-195-900 through 925 and to protect critical areas as defined by WAC 365-190- 080. B. Standards are hereby established to meet the following goals of protecting environmentally seRSitivecritical areas: 1. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural functions 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 seRSitivecritical 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 ceperitical areas as required by the State Growth Management Act, according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and WAC 365-190-080. W:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 9 of 100 121 Section 22. TMC Section 18.45.020 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.020 Best Available Science A. Policies, regulations and decisions concerning sensitivecritical areas shall rely on best available science to protect the functions of these areas and must give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish and their habitats. B. Nonscientific information may supplement scientific information, but is not an adequate substitution for valid and available scientific information. C. Incomplete or unavailable scientific information leading to uncertainty for permitting seRsitivecritical area impacts may require application of effective adaptive management on a case by case basis. Adaptive management relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory or non -regulatory actions protect sewcritical areas or replace their functions. Section 23. TMC Section 18.45.030 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.030 Sensmtmve Critical Area Applicability, Maps, and Inventories A. APPLICABILITY. The provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall apply to all land uses and all development activities in a Se critical area or a SeRsitivecritical area buffer as defined in the "Definitions" chapter of this title. The provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 apply whether or not a permit or authorization is required within the City of Tukwila. No person, company, agency, or applicant shall alter a SeRSitivecritical area or buffer except as consistent with the purposes and requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. The following are sensitivecritical areas regulated by TMC Chapter 18.45: Coal Mine Hazard Areas; 2. Areas of potential geologic instability: Class 2, 3, 4 areas (as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title and TMC Section 18.45.120.A); 3. Wetlands; 4. Watercourses; 5. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas; and 6. Special Hazard Flood Areas (see TMC Chapter 16.52 for additional regulations). B. Tie -Areas of seismic instability are identified as critical areas by the Growth Management Act and also -ideRtifesfregR +'e flooded areas andareas of s T-MG Ghapter 16.52 Fleed �;ti Management Areas of seismic instability -are defined �-,-�� , t�TTl-7 1T�GrJ �TJCTJTTTiIJ CUFF!! and regulated through the Washington State Building Code. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 10 of 100 122 _ ■ . - - - _ . _ - ME M-1 €C. Whealn the event of a conflict between this TMC Chapter 18.45 and any other laws regulations ordinances or restrictive covenants, the provision that imposes greater restrictions or higher standards upon the development or use of land than other laws rdi StriGti RtS the pFeyisiens ref TMG Ghaptor 18.45 shall prevail. GD. SENSITIVE -CRITICAL AREAS MAPS AND INVENTORIES. 1. The distribution of many se sitivecritical areas and potential critical areas in Tukwila is displayed on the Sege -Critical Areas Maps, on file with the Department of Community Development (DCD). These maps are based on site assessment of current conditions and review of the best available scientific data and are hereby adopted by reference. Not all critical areas are shown on the map. Thus it is the responsibility of property owners and applicants to verify actual presence or absence of a critical area or critical area buffer based on the definitions in this code. Applicant is also responsible for delineation and categorization of potential wetland based on methodology required under TMC Section 18.45.080 and verifying that watercourse typing and location is consistent with TMC Section 18.45.100. 2. Studies, preliminary inventories and ratings of potential sus ti e critical areas are on file with the Department of Community Development. 3. As new environmental information related to Cep critical areas becomes available, the Director is hereby designated to periodically add, remove, or alter new information to the Sensitive —Critical Areas Maps. Removal of any information from the SeRsitive Critical Areas Maps is a Type 1 decision as described in TMC Chapter 18.108. - - - - Fell— WN IM-00, ■ - - - - - w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 11 of 100 123 Section 24. TMC Section 18.45.040 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.040 Se�e Critical Area Special Studies A. Application Required. An applicant for a development proposal within a parcel that may include a sensitive critical area and/or its buffer shall submit those studies as required by the City and specified below --within this section to adequately identify and evaluate the sensitive critical area and its buffers. 1. A required some critical area study shall be prepared by a person with experience and training in the scientific discipline appropriate for the relevant Somme critical area as outlined within this section and in accordance with WAC 365-195-905(4). A qualified professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in ecology or related science, , environmental studies, fisheries, geotechnical or related field, and two years of related work experience. a. A qualified professional for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas must have a degree in ecology or related sciences and professional experience related to the subject species. b. A qualified professional for wetland some critical area studies must be a certified Professional Wetland Scientist or a non Geptifiorl Drnfossinnol Wetland Scientist with at least two years of full-time work experience as a wetlands professional, including delineating wetlands using the state e approved federal manuals and applicable regional supplements, preparing wetland reports, conducting functional assessments, and developing and implementing mitigation plans. c. A qualified professional for a geological hazard study must be a professional geotechnical engineer as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title, licensed in the state of Washington. d. A qualified professional for watercourses and frequently flooded areas means a hydrologist, geGlogist biologist, engineer or other scientist with experience in preparing watercourse assessments. 2. The Somme -critical area study shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of see critical area data and shall use field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. The sensitive critical area study shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to sensitive critical areas_. in aGGerdaRGe with the pFeyi inns of TEAG GhapteF 18.45. B. Wetland and Watercourse ce�.ti-Critical Area Studies. Wetland and watercourse special studies are valid for five years following the date of the study, unless otherwise determined by the Director. The SeRsiti e critical area study shall contain the following information, as applicable: 1. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal, and identification of the permit requested; 2. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal showing: sensitive critical areas and buffers and the development proposal with dimensions, clearing limits, w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 124 Page 12 of 100 proposed storm water management plan, and mitigation plan for impacts due to drainage alterations; 3. The dates, names and qualifications of the persons preparing the study and documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site; 4. Identification and characterization of all sensitive critical areas, water bodies, and buffers on or adjacent to the proposed project area or potentially impacted by the proposed project as described in the following sections: a. Characterization of wetlands must include: (1) A wetland delineation report that includes methods used, field indicators evaluated and the results. Wetland delineation must be performed in accordance with approved federal wetland delineation manual and current applicable regional supplements. Field data forms are to be included in the report. Data collection points are to be shown on the site plan with their corresponding numbers indicated. After the City of Tukwila confirms the boundaries, they are to be professionally surveyed to the nearest square foot and the site plan modified as necessary to incorporate the survey data. Exact wetland acreage will be calculated after the boundaries have been surveyed. Applicant must submit electronic survey data in Autocad, GIS or similar format at the time of as -built submittal. (2) Cowardin (Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the U.S. — U.S. Department of Interior) classification of the wetland(s). (3) Hydrogeomorphic classification of the wetland(s). (4) Hydroperiod. (5) Brief landscape assessment of the wetland (identify hydrologic basin/sub-basin; inlets, outlets; surrounding land use- habitat quality and connectivity; ultimate point of discharge; presence of culverts or other constraints to flow; relationship to other wetlands/watercourses adjacent to or potentially impacted by the proposed project). (6) Description of buffer size per this chapter, conditions (topographic considerations, existing vegetation types and density, habitat features, watercourse edges, presence of invasive species, etc.) and functions. (7) FURGtiOnal aAssessment For proposed wetland filling or proposed projects that will impact buffers, the most current Washington Wetland Classification System shall be used as a functional assessment. ►�. ter...._,_., e.:_e.�,::�:��,._.:a� " - �.'::.. b. Characterization of the watercourses on site, adjacent to the site or Potentially impacted by the proposed protect must include: (1) Description of: flow regime, physical characteristics of streambed, banks, dimensions and bank -full width, stream gradient, stream and buffer vegetation conditions, habitat conditions, and existing modifications. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 13 of 100 125 (2) Brief landscape assessment of the watercourse (identify hydrologic basin/sub-basin, and contributing basin area acreage, outlets, surrounding land use, habitat quality and connectivity, ultimate point of discharge, presence of culverts or other constraints to flow, presence of man-made or natural barriers to fish passage, relationship to wetlands or other watercourses adjacent to or potentially impacted by the proposed project, flow regime). (3) Classification of the watercourse under Tukwila's rating system. (4) Description of buffer size per this chapter, conditions (topographic considerations, existing vegetation types and density, habitat features, watercourse edges, presence of invasive species, etc.) and functions. (5) Description of habitat conditions, wildlife/fish use of the watercourse, including sensitive, threatened or endangered species. c. Citation of any literature or other resources utilized in preparation of the report. 5. A statement specifying the accuracy of the study and assumptions used in the study. 6. Determination of the degree of hazard and risk from the proposal both on the site and on adjacent properties. 7. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to senSitiVe critical areas, their buffers and other properties resulting from the proposal. 8. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to SeRs;tivcritical areas. 9. Plans for adequate mitigation to offset any impacts. 10. Recommendations for maintenance, short-term and long-term monitoring, contingency plans and bonding measures. 11. Any technical information required by the Director to assist in determining compliance with TMG Chapter 18.45this chapter. C. Geotechnical Report. 1. A geotechnical report appropriate both to the site conditions and the proposed development shall be required for development in Class 2, Class 3, Class 4 areas, and any areas identified as Coal Mine Hazard Areas_. unless waived p ,rs pan+ +„ T--M CSC +eR 18.45 .-840- 2. Geotechnical reports for Class 2 areas shall include at a minimum a site evaluation review of available information regarding the site and a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas potentially impacted by the proposed rp oiect. Subsurface exploration of site conditions is at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 126 Page 14 of 100 3. Geotechnical reports for Class 3, Class 4 and Coal Mine Hazard Areas shall include a site evaluation review of available information about the site, a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas potentially impacted by the proposed rp oject, a feasibility analysis for the use of infiltration on -site and a subsurface exploration of soils and hydrology conditions. Detailed slope stability analysis shall be done if the geotechnical engineer recommends it in Class 3 or Coal Mine Hazard Areas, and must be done in Class 4 areas. 4. Applicants shall retain a geotechnical engineer to prepare the reports and evaluations required in this subsection. The geotechnical report and completed site evaluation checklist shall be prepared in accordance with the generally accepted geotechnical practices, under the supervision of and signed and stamped by the geotechnical engineer. The report shall be prepared in consultation with the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 5. The opinions and recommendations contained in the report shall be supported by field observations and, where appropriate or applicable, by literature review conducted by the geotechnical engineer, which shall include appropriate explorations, such as borings or test pits, and an analysis of soil characteristics conducted by or under the supervision of the engineer in accordance with standards of the American Society of Testing and Materials or other applicable standards. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations or interpretations, the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geotechnical engineer. D. Sensitive Critical Area Study — Modifications to Requirements. 1. The Director may limit the required geographic area of the SeRSitiVe critical area study as appropriate ifs Tthe applicant, with assistance from the City, cannot obtain permission to access properties adjacent to the project area. 2. The Director may allow modifications to the required contents of the study where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential SeRSitive critical area impacts and required mitigation. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 15 of 100 127 F-E. Review of Studies. The Department of Community Development will review and verify the information submitted in the sensitive critical area study to verify confirm the nature and type of the some critical area, and eRJuFe the study „s;steRt with T-MG G#apter18.45. The Public Works Department shall seek a peer review of the geotechnical report on Class 3 and 4 slopes; and peer review on Class 2 slopes may be required at the discretion of the Public Works Director. Peer review of the geotechnical reports shall be at the expense of the applicants. For all other critical areas and Aat the discretion of the Director, SeRsitive-critical area studies may undergo peer review, at the expense of the applicant. NAII ..I I 1 _ I1 �. f MIMMV— "Iffr"Mr.7'" • - - - - ... I1 �I I � 11 • I rr 1 . .. . _ _ ■ _mEK1 u _ Lim_. • _ MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 16 of 100 128 - - - -- - - - - - -MIMI=- - - - - -- Section 25. TMC Section 18.45.070 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.070 Sensotove Critical Area Permitted UsesActivities A General Us,-& tright Permitted Activities. The uses set fe Fth in this entire seEtiGR, ia^161d bseEtiGRs A. through D, aThe following general uses, may he roeated—w+thip-a—sensitive area er buffer, activities are outright permitted subject to the provisions of TMC Chapter 21.04 and of the mitigation requirements of TMG Ghap 4-9-45this chapter, if applicable.- 1 . Maintenance and repair of existing uC,e-s-aTrd-facilities provided no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used in the seRsiti e-critical area or buffer. 2. Site exploration or research that does not include use of heavy equipment or native vegetation removal.N9RdeStr„„+i„e ed Haden and recearGh 43. Maintenance and repair of essential streets, roads, rights -of -way, or utilities., and placement maintenance, and repair of new fiberoptic utilities within existing improved and paved roads. -54. Actions to remedy the effects of emergencies that threaten the public health, safety or welfare. 65. Maintenance activities of existing landscaping and gardens in a sense critical area buffer including, but not limited, to mowing lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops and pruning and planting of vegetation. T;E This provision does not apply to removal of established native trees and shrubs is Rot nern-+, or to the excavation. fillina. and construction of new landscaping features, such as concrete work. berms and walls w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 17 of 100 129 6. Voluntary native revegetation and/or removal of invasive species that does not include use of heavy equipment. The use of herbicide by a licensed contractor with certification as needed from the Washington Department of Ecology and the Washington Department of Agriculture is permitted but requires notification prior to application to the City and shall comply with TMC Section 18.45.158.E.3 B. Permitted UsesActivitiesSubject to Administrative Review. The following uses may be permitted only after administrative review and approval of a Type 2 Special Permission application by the Director.- 1 . Maintenance and repair of existing uses and facilities where alteration or additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used in the critical area or buffer. 2. New surface water discharges to sensitive critical areas or their buffers from detention facilities, pre -settlement ponds or other surface water management structures may be allowed provided that the discharge meets the clean water standards of RCW 90.48 and WAC 173-200 and 173-201A as amended, and does not adversely affect wetland hydrology or watercourse flow. w ter—levet-#lEtuations_ in the wetIand e existing rWater quality monitoring may be required as a condition of use. 3. Construction of 9bioswales and dispersion outfallstrenches are the only stormwater facilities allowed in wetland or watercourse buffers. Water quality monitoring may be required as a condition of use. 4. Enhancement or other mitigation including landscaping with native plants that requires heavy equipment. 5. Construction or maintenance of essential utilities if designed to •- _ _ . _ ras+s h. All GOH +r,,,.t4GR must be deli Red to protect the sego critical area and its buffer against erosion, uncontrolled storm water, restriction of groundwater movement, slides, pollution, habitat disturbance, any loss of flood carrying capacity and storage capacity, and excavation or fill detrimental to the environment. their buffers must be resteFed te pre pFejeGt GGRfiguratieR, FeplaRted as required ap'd 6. Construction or maintenance of essential public streets, roads and rights - of -way as defined by TMC Section 18.06.285, provided the following criteria are met: w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 130 Page 18 of 100 ba. Essential public streets, -reads rand Fights..f-nrway, as defined y T-MG designed and maintained to prevent erosion and avoid restricting the natural movement of groundwater. Eb. Essential publin streets, reads r+n�9hts of as defined by SeGtinn 1 Q n6 2 5 must be Are located to conform to the topography so that minimum alteration of natural conditions is necessary. The number of crossings shall be limited to those necessary tto� provide essential access. dC. £SeeRtial public streets, reads and rights of way, as defiRed by T- contion 1 sz na 7QF must. be Are constructed in a way that does not adversely affect the hydrologic quality of the wetland or watercourse and/or its buffer. Where feasible, crossings must allow for combination with other essential utilities. e. I�IpPGR GGMple-tien Gf GGRStrUGtIE)F,the area affected-i- must be Festered to provided With Gape 6IRtil ReWly plaRted vegetati9R as established. IR additien, MitigatiOR to the tl+Rdard and mitigation ratios cot fG14h in this nhap 7. Public/Private Use and Access. a. Public and private access shall be limited to trails, boardwalks, covered or uncovered viewing and seating areas, footbridges only if necessary for access to other areas of the property, and displays (such as interpretive signage or kiosks), and must be located in areas that have the lowest sensitivity to human disturbance or alteration. Access features shall be the minimum dimensions necessary to avoid adverse impacts to the sere critical area. Trails shall be no wider than 5 feet and are only allowed in the outer half 25 percent of the buffer, except for allowed wetland or stream crossings. habitat funGtieR feF wildlife) well be required and must be prepared by a qualified biologist, Crossings and trails must be designed to avoid adverse impacts to se Sitr Ve critical area functions. The Director may require mechanisms to limit or control public access when environmental conditions warrant (such as temporary trail closures during wildlife breeding season or migration season). b. Public access must be specifically developed for interpretive, educational or research purposes by, or in cooperation with, the City or as part of the adopted Tukwila Parks and Open Space Plan. Private footbridges are allowed only for access across a ce e critical area that bisects the property. c. No motorized vehicle is allowed within a sere -critical area or its buffer except as required for necessary maintenance, agricultural management or security. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 19 of 100 131 d. Any public access or interpretive displays developed along a corgi critical area and its buffer must, to the extent possible, be connected with a park, recreation or open -space area. e. Vegetative edges, structural barriers, signs or other measures must be provided wherever necessary to protect some critical areas and their buffers by limiting access to designated public use or interpretive areas. f. Access trails and footbridges must incorporate design features and materials that protect water quality and allow adequate surface water and groundwater movement. Trails must be built of permeable materials. g. Access trails and footbridges must be located where they do not disturb nesting, breeding and rearing areas and must be designed so that sensitive plant and critical wildlife species are protected. Trails and footbridges must be placed so as to not cause erosion or sedimentation, destabilization of watercourse banks, interference with fish passage or significant removal of native vegetation. Footbridges must be anchored to prevent their movement due to water level or flow fluctuations. Any work in the wetland or stream below the OHWM will require additional federal and state permits. 8. Dredging, digging or filling may occur within a critical area or its buffer only with the permission of the Director provided it meets mitigation sequencing requirements and is permitted under TMC Section 18.45.090 (alteration of wetland), TMC Section 18.45.110 (alteration of watercourse) or TMC Sections 18.45.120 and 18.45.130 (areas of geologic instability). Dredging digging or filling shall only be permitted for flood control, improving_ water quality and habitat enhancement unless otherwise permitted by this chapter. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 20 of 100 132 ... - - - MW ■ - �- - - - -0 W.Im - - - - _ _ �� •� • - - - .. Section 26. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.45.075, "Mitigation Sequencing," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.45.075 Mitigation Sequencing Applicants shall demonstrate that reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas and critical area buffers. When an alteration to a critical area or its required buffer is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided minimized or compensated for in the following order of preference: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. Minimizing critical area or critical area buffer impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technologV, or bV taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; 3. Rectifying the impact bV repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment; 4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or 6. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 21 of 100 133 Section 27. TMC Section 18.45.080 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.080 Wetlands Designations, Ratings and Buffers A. WETLAND DESIGNATIONS. 1. For the purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45, "wetlands" are defined in the Definitions chapter of this title. A wetland boundary is the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland established by using the in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. 2. Wetland determinations and delineation of wetland boundaries shall be made by a qualified professional, as described in TMC Section 18.45.040. 3. Wetland determinations and delineation or wetland boundaries must be conducted within no more than five years prior to the date of permit application. fURGtiens iRG!Hde, but are nn+ limited to he f�vuGRg: B. WETLAND RATINGS. Wetlands shall be designated in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Washington State Department of Ecology, „rv„o+ 2004, D„hri-+inr, #n.t _na_mti) 2014, Publication # 14-06-029); or as otherwise amended by Ecology, as Category I, II, III, or IV. as listedbelow: plir ■_ _ .. _ _11 ..MME- MMARIEP.Mf P.M -- - -- - - - --10 M1.7-19MI Flap - ■- w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 22 of 100 134 C. WETLAND BUFFERS. A buffer ea shall be establishedd;aceRt te desigRated wetland areas. The purpose of the buffer area shall be to protect the integrity and functions of the wetland area. Any land alteration must be located out of the buffer areas as required by this section. Wetland buffers are intended in general to: 1. Minimize long-term impacts of development on properties containing wetlands; 2. Protect wetlands from adverse impacts during development; 3. Preserve the edge of the wetland and its buffer for its critical habitat value; 4. Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high water events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects; 5. Reduce erosion and increased surface water runoff; 6. Reduce loss of or damage to property; 7. Intercept fine sediments from surface water runoff and serve to minimize water quality impacts, and 8. Protect the eeRSit+ve—critical area from human and domestic animal disturbances. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 23 of 100 135 D. BUFFER REQUIREMENTS. Buffer widths in Table 18.45.080-1 have been established in accordance with the best available science. They are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score. Table 18.45.080-1 — Wetland Buffer Widths Wetland buffer width (feet), Ecology 2014, high -intensity land use impact Category Habitat score <6 Habitat score <6 Habitat score 6=7 Habitat score 6=7 Habitat score 8=9 Habitat score 8=9 Standard Alternate Buffer if impact minimization Standard Alternate Buffer Standard Alternate Buffer Buffer Buffer if impact minimization Buffer if impact minimization measures taken measures taken measures taken AND AND buffer is AND buffer is replanted. Also, replanted. Also, 100 feet buffer is replanted 100 feet vegetated corridor between vegetated corridor between wetland and any wetland and any nearby Priority nearby Priority Habitats is maintained (see Habitats is maintained. (see footnote 1) footnote') 1 100 75 150 110 300 225 II 100 75 150 110 300 225 III 80 60 150 110 300 225 IV 50 40 50 40 50 40 (1) A relatively undisturbed vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide is protected between the wetland and any nearby Priority Habitats as defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The corridor must be protected for the entire distance between the wetland and the Priority Habitat by some type of legal protection such as a conservation easement Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a qualified biologist. If no option for providing a corridor is available, Table 18.45.080-1 may be used with the required measures in Table 18.45.080-2 alone. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 136 Page 24 of 100 Table 18.45.080-2 — Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Lights . Direct lights away from wetland Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland • If warranted enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source • For activities that generate relativelV continuous potentiallV disruptive noise such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10-foot heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outer edge of wetland buffer Toxic runoff . Route all new, untreated runoff awaV from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland • Apply integrated pest management Stormwater runoff . Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development o Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use Low IntensitV Development (LID) techniques where appropriate (for more information refer to the drainage ordinance and manual) Change in water regime . Infiltrate or treat detain and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns Pets and human disturbance • Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion • Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement Dust • Use best management practices to control dust E. BUFFER SETBACKS. 1. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set back 15 feet and all other development shall be set back 10 feet from the buffer's edge. The building setbacks shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge. Building plans shall also identify a 20-foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of development will be reviewed. 2. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site plan demonstrates there will be no impacts to the buffer from construction or occasional maintenance activities a T-MG Fine ire 8 F. VARIATION OF STANDARD WETLAND BUFFER WIDTH. d . =-e - - - - - - - - - - _ MLegislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 25 of 100 137 Maintained. Fw4her, a geOteGhniGal review ef the proposed buffer eRhanGerneRt plan slope. The appFeved buffer width shall not Fes�flt in greater thaR a area weth the Class 1 slepes, and a 10 fGGt planted setbaGk frem the tep ef the slope is reduGtieR on Width. 2-1. Bufferrerd„n+inn With enhaRGemen+ averaging may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 permit -with an approved bHffer enhancement plan prepared by a qualified wetland , if the total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging and the buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either 3/4 of the required width or 75 feet for Category I and II, 50 feet for Category III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater, and so long �,a,Is�,�the following criteria is �me+t�:: a /\dditinnal nrnte'Gtien to wwetIands� will be Feyid,C��---through the I mnlementatlnn of a buffer enhancement nlon• , /'It r aRtiRg vegetati9R that RGrease Va lue for fish and �niiIdIifo "� , likely —te--be--used by wildlife, ORGludiRg weed d6lGk-boxes, at-bexes, stags, Feet wads/stumpsbirdhouses and heron nesting areas• nr , , /4\ Qemn�iing non netive plant snenies and nnvin,,s weeds from the b 6i #eFare a and Fep!aRt.'Rg the aec`Z-subjeG to 2 n / 1\ a h e e a. The wetland has significant differences in characteristics that affect its habitat functions and the buffer is increased adjacent to the higher -functioning area of habitat or more -sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower - functioning or less -sensitive portion as demonstrated by a critical areas report. b. There are no feasible alternatives to the site design that Could be accomplished without buffer averaging, and the averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the wetland's functions and values as demonstrated by a critical areas report. c. Compliance with mitigation sequencing requirements (TMC Section 18.45.075). d. Compliance with TMC Chapter 18.45, "Vegetation Protection and Management" section. e. Submittal of buffer enhancement plan, mitigation monitoring and maintenance plan along with financial guarantee in accordance with this chapter. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 26 of 100 138 2. Interrupted Buffer. Waiver for interrupted buffer may be allowed bV the Director as a Type 2 permit if it complies with the following: a. The buffer is interrupted by a paved public or private road; existing or future levee legally constructed adjacent to an off -channel habitat; legally constructed buildings or parking lots. This waiver does not apply to accessory structures such as sheds and aaraaes: b. The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; c. The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and d. The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife functions. This waiver does not apply if large trees or other significant native vegetation exists. e. Enhancement of remaining buffer is required if feasible. 3. Buffers for all types of wetlands will be increased when they are determined to be particularly sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development will create unusually adverse impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required only after completion of a wetland study by a qualified wetlands SpeGialist professional or expert that documents the basis for such increased width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when: a. The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant adverse impacts upon the wetland that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width; or; b. The area serves as a habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive or monitor species listed by the federal government or the State. -- - - -- ■ - - - ---- - - - - 91-11MVINIM HOW III vf- IA .. - - - - - ■ - - - w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 27 of 100 139 Section 28. TMC Section 18.45.090 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.090 Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation A. No use or development may occur in a GategeFywetland or its buffer except as specifically allowed by TMC Chapter 18.45. Any use or development allowed is subject to review and approval by the Director. Where required, a mitigation plan must be developed and must comply with the standards of mitigation required in TMC—this chapter 18.45. Where unauthorized alterations occur within a critical area or its buffer, the City will require the applicant to submit a critical area study that includes mitigation, subject to approval. The applicant shall be responsible for implementing the mitigation and for additional penalties as determined by the Director. In addition, federal and/or state authorization is required for direct impacts to waters of the United States or the State of Washington. B. ALTERATIONS. 1. Alterations to wetlands are discouraged and are limited to the minimum necessary for project feasibility. Requests for alterations must be accompanied by a mitigation plan, are subject to Director approval, and may be approved only if the following findings are made: a. The alteration complies with mitigation sequencing requirements (TMC Section 18.45.075); ab. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality; bc. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat; Ed. The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and/or storm water detention capabilities; Gle. The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion hazard or contribute to scouring actions; ef. The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property; fg. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other soo critical areas-; and h. Complies with the maintenance and monitoring requirements listed within this section. 2. Alterations are not permitted to Category I and II wetlands unless specifically exempted under the provisions of TIVIG this chapter 18.45. 3. Alterations to Category III and IV wetlands are allowed only where unavoidable and adequate mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards of this section. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 140 Page 28 of 100 4. Alterations to isolated Category IV wetlands less than 1,000 square feet in size that meet all of the following conditions are allowedly where unavoidable and adequate mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards of 4 8. 4 5.090th is section. buffers; tThey are not associated with a riparian corridor; b. They are not associated with Shorelines of the State or their associated c. tThey are not part of a wetland mosaic d. They do not contain habitat identified as essential for local populations of priority species identified by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and e. They do not score 20-6 points or greater for habitat in the Western Washington Wetland Rating System. Gt -- - ---1-240. "Mr -MINA. MIN- W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 29 of 100 141 - -- - - - - ......■� -. ■ • - - - _ _ _ - _ - 01111 ON - •. _ C. MITIGATION STANDARDS. Types of Wetland Mitigation: a. Mitigation for wetlands shall follow the mitigation sequencing steps in this chapter and may include the following types of actions in order of decreasing preference: MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 142 Page 30 of 100 (1) Restoration: (a) Re-establishment. The manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of restoring wetland functions to a former wetland, resulting in a net increase in wetland acres and functions. (b) Rehabilitation. The manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing historic functions and processes of a degraded wetland, resulting in a gain in wetland functions but not acreage. (2) Creation (establishment). The manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics to develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site, where a biological wetland did not previously exist. (3) Enhancement. The manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics to heighten, intensify, or improve specific functions (such as vegetation) or to change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present, resulting in a change in wetland functions but not in a gain in wetland acreage. (4) A combination of the three types of actions listed above. b. Required mitigation ratios are described in TMC Section 18.45.090.€C.1.b.(1)-(4) (below). Alternate mitigation ratios may be accepted by the Director upon presentation of justification based on best available science that shows the proposed compensation represents a roughly proportional exchange for the proposed impacts. (1) Alterations are not permitted to Category I or II wetlands unless specifically exempted under the provisions of this program. When alterations are allowed, mitigation ratios for Category I wetlands shall be at a 4:1 for creation or re- establishment, 8:1 for rehabilitation, and 16:1 for enhancement. Mitigation ratios for Category 11 wetlands shall be at 3:1 for creation or re-establishment, 6:1 for rehabilitation and 12:1 for enhancement. Creation or re-establishment shall be contiguous to the wetland, unless an exception is authorized by the Director. For Category II estuarine wetlands, re- establishment, creation and enhancement ratios will be decided on a case -by -case basis. (2) Alterations to Category III wetlands are prohibited except where unavoidable and mitigation sequencing in accordance with this chapter has been utilized and where mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards in the section. Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III wetland must be provided at a ratio of 2:1 for creation or re-establishment, 4:1 for rehabilitation and 8:1 for enhancement alone. (3) Mitigation for alteration to a Category IV wetland will be 1.5:1 for creation or re-establishment, 3:1 for rehabilitation or 6:1 for enhancement. Where only a portion of a Category IV wetland is filled, the potential functionality of the remaining reduced wetland must be considered in mitigation planning. (4) Mitigation for alteration to wetland buffers will be 1:1. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 31 of 100 143 2. The following shall be considered the minimum performance standards for approved wetland alterations: a. Wetland functions improved over those of the original conditions. b. Hydrologic conditions and hydroperiods are improved over existing conditions and the specific hydrologic performance standards specified in the approved mitigation plan are achieved. c. AereageSguare feet requirements for creation, reestablishment, rehabilitation or enhancement and for proposed wetland classes are met. d. Vegetation native to the Pacific Northwest is installed and vegetation survival and coverage standards over time are met and maintained. improved. e. Habitat features are installed, if habitat is one of the functions to be Buffer and bank conditions and functions exceed the original state. 3. Maintenance and monitoring of mitigation shall be done by the property owner for a period of no less than five years and for ten years when the mitigation plan includes establishing forested wetland and/or buffers. Maintenance shall be carried out in accordance with the approved mitigation plan. Monitoring reports must be submitted to the City for review with the frequency specified in the approved mitigation plan. 1 D. WETLAND AND BUFFER MITIGATION LOCATION. 1. In instances where portions of a wetland or wetland buffer impacted by development remain after buffer averaging, mitigation for buffer impacts shall be provided on -site, if feasible. Where an essential public road, street or right-of-way or essential w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 32 of 100 144 public utility cannot avoid FedWGiRg a buffer by mere thaR 50-04alterations, add+tianal buffer enhancement must be carried out at other locations around the impacted wetland. 2. On -site mitigation for wetland impacts shall be provided, except where the applicant can demonstrate that: a. On -site wetland mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, waves or other factors; or b. Mitigation is not practical due to potentially adverse impact from surrounding land uses; or c. Existing functions created at the site of the proposed restoration are significantly greater than lost wetland functions; or d. Regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions have been established and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site, and where off -site mitigation is demonstrated to provide a greater ecological benefit to the watershed. Refer to 2005 WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan as it now reads and hereafter updated or amended, for potential offsite mitigation locations. 3. Off sit�itigati^��GGUr Win the watershed where the wet'and Tr--.�r "y r-vvr rr mc-vvcrccrn�ccr-v�aT r�r�crrc,�ry � c into GGG erred 3. Purchase of mitigation credits through mitigation banks and in lieu fee programs is preferred over permittee responsible offsite mitigation. 4. The Community Development Director may approve, through a Type 2 decision the transfer of wetland mitigation to a wetland mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program using the criteria in 4.a. through 4.f. below. Wetland mitigation bank credits shall be determined by the certified mitigation banking or in -lieu fee instrument. a. Off -site mitigation is proposed in a wetland mitigation bank that has been approved by all appropriate agencies, including the Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, EPA and certified under state rules; and b. The proposed wetland alteration is within the designated service area of the wetland bank; and c. The applicant provides a justification for the number of credits proposed; and d. The mitigation achieved through the number of credits required meets the intent of TMC Chapter 18.45; and e. The Director bases the decision on a written staff report, evaluating the equivalence of the lost wetland functions with the number of wetland credits required; and f. The applicant provides a copy of the wetland bank ledger demonstrating that the approved number of credits has been removed from the bank. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 33 of 100 145 5. Where off -site mitigation location is proposed it shall comply with the following criteria: 4a. Mitigation sites located within the Tukwila City limits are preferred. b. Mitigation bank or in -lieu fee option is not feasible. c. The proposed mitigation will not alter or increase buffers on adjacent properties without their permission. 6. The Director may approve permittee-responsible offsite mitigation sites outside the city upon finding that: a. Adequate measures have been taken to ensure the non -development and long-term viability of the mitigation site; and b. Adequate coordination with the other affected local jurisdiction has occurred. 5C in Selontinn mitigation s4e- , The applicants shall has selected a site in a location where the targeted functions can reasonably be performed and sustained and s#am has pursued sites in the following order of preference: aMSites within the immediate drainage sub -basin; bMSites within the next higher drainage sub -basin; and sLLSites within Green/Duwamish River basin. 7. Wetland creation for restoration projects may only be approved if the applicant can show: (1) that the adjoining property owners are amenable to having wetland buffers extend onto or across their property; or (2) that the on -site wetland buffers are sufficient to protect the functions and values of the wetland and the project as a whole results in net environmental benefit. GE. MITIGATION TIMING. Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently disturb wetlands and either prior to or immediately after activities that will temporarily disturb wetlands. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. The Director may allow activities that permanently disturb wetlands prior to implementation of the mitigation plan under the following circumstances: 1. To allow planting or re -vegetation to occur during optimal weather conditions; 2. To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or 3. To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing or phasing. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 146 Page 34 of 100 F. WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN CONTENT. 1. The mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a critical area study by a qualified professional. Wetland and/or buffer alteration or relocation may be allowed only when a mitigation plan clearly demonstrates that the changes would be an improvement of wetland and buffer quantitative and qualitative functions. The plan shall show how water quality, habitat, and hydrology would be improved. 2. The scope and content of a mitigation plan shall be decided on a case -by - case basis taking into account the degree of impact and the extent of the mitigation measures needed. As the impacts to the critical area increase, the mitigation measures to offset these impacts will increase in number and complexity. 3. For wetlands, the format of the mitigation plan should follow that established in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2 — Developing _Mitigation Plans (Washington Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, EPA, March 2006 or as amended). 4. The components of a complete mitigation plan are as follows: a. Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site. b. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation measures. This should include a description of site selection criteria, identification of target evaluation species and resource functions. c. Performance standards of the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. They may include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. d. A detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction sequence construction management and tree protection and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development proposal. e. A monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the performance standards and methods for assessing whether those performance standards are achieved during the specified monitoring period, at least 5 years. At a minimum, the monitoring plan should address vegetative cover, survival, and species diversity. Any protect that alters the dimensions of a wetland or creates a new wetland shall also monitor wetland hydrology. An outline shall be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the mitigation project's progress. f. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards have not been met. q. Performance security or other assurance devices as described in TMC Section 18.45.210. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 35 of 100 147 Section 29. TMC Section 18.45.100 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.100 Watercourse Designations, Ratings and Buffers A. WATERCOURSE RATINGS. Watercourse ratings are consistent with the Washington Department of Natural Resources water typing categories (noted —in paFeRtheses afteF each Gateg.,n,WAC 222-16-030) or as amended, which are based on the existing habitat functions and aFe Fateaclassified as follows: 1. Type a --ES) Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State, under RCW 90.58. These watercourses shall be regulated under TMC Chapter 18.44, Shoreline Overlay. 2. Type 2-(F) Watercourse: Those watercourses that are known to be used by fish or meet the physical criteria to be potentially used by fish (as established in WAC 222-16-031(3) or as amended) and that have perennial (year-round) or seasonal flows. 3. Type 3--(Np) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial flows and do not meet the criteria of a Type F stream or have been proven not to contain fish using methods described in the Forest Practices Board Manual Section 13. 4. Type 44Ns) Watercourse: Those watercourses that have intermittent flows (do not have surface flow during at least some portion of the year)and-ido not meet the physical criteria of a Type F watercourse; or have been proven to not support fish using methods described in the Forest Practices Board Manual Section 13. B. WATERCOURSE BUFFERS. Any land alteration must be located out of the buffer areas as required by this section. Watercourse buffers are intended in general to: 1. Minimize long-term impacts of development on properties containing watercourses; 2. Protect the watercourse from adverse impacts during development; 3. Preserve the edge of the watercourse and its buffer for its critical habitat value; 4. Provide shading to maintain stable water temperatures and vegetative cover for additional wildlife habitat; 5. Provide input of organic debris and uptake of nutrients; 6. Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high water events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects; 7. Reduce erosion and increased surface water runoff; 8. Reduce loss of, or damage to, property; 9. Intercept fine sediments from surface water runoff and serve to minimize water quality impacts; and w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 36 of 100 HM 10. Protect the seRSitecritical area from human and domestic animal disturbance. An undisturbed and high quality sensitive critical area or buffer may substitute for the yard setback and landscape requirements of TMC Chapter 18.50 and 18.52. C. WATERCOURSE BUFFER WIDTHS. The following buffer widths, measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM), apply to each side of a watercourse. If the OHWM cannot be determined, then the buffer will be measured from the top of bank: Overlay. Type a--(S) Watercourse: Regulated under TMC Chapter 18.44, Shoreline 2. Type 24F) Watercourse: 100-foot-wide buffer. 3. Type 3-(Np) Watercourse: Standard 80-foot-wide buffer: alternate buffer in the 50-65 range allowed with buffer enhancement. 4. Type 4{Ns) Watercourse: 50-foot-wide buffer. D. BUFFER SETBACKS. 1. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set back 15 feet and all other development shall be set back 10 feet. Building setbacks shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge. Building plans shall also identify a 20-foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of development will be reviewed. 2. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site plan demonstrates there will be no impacts to the buffer from construction or occasional maintenance activities (see T- Q Fine E. VARIATION OF STANDARD WATERCOURSE BUFFER WIDTH. .. �- - - _ - Mi - ■- IN 11 MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 37 of 100 149 b. if there i's ne } vegetation in the buffer, a buffer mw be rFedHGed ProVideS additional ro}on}ion for the waternoi rrse fi RGtin 1. Buffer averaging may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 decision if the total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging and the buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either 3/4 of the required width; and the following criteria is met: a. The watercourse has significant differences in characteristics that affect its habitat functions and the buffer is increased adiacent to the higher -functioning area of habitat or more -sensitive portion of the watercourse and decreased adjacent to the lower - functioning or less -sensitive portion as demonstrated by a critical areas report from a qualified professional. b. There are no feasible alternatives to the site design that could be accomplished without buffer averaging and the averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the watercourse's functions and values as demonstrated bV a critical areas report. c. Compliance with mitigation sequencing requirements (TMC Section 18.45.075). d. Compliance with TMC Chapter 18.45.158, "Vegetation Protection and Management." e. Submittal of buffer enhancement plan, mitigation monitoring and maintenance plan along with financial guarantee in accordance with this chapter. f. Buffer averaging shall not adversely affect water quality. a. No adverse affect to water temperature or shade potential will occur to the watercourse using methodology per 2011 Washington State Department of Ecology's Green River Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) assessment or as amended. 2. Interrupted Buffer. Waiver for interrupted buffer may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 permit if it complies with the following: a. The buffer is interrupted by a paved public or private road; legally constructed buildings or parking lots. This waiver does not apply to accessory structures such as sheds and garages; b. The existing legal improvement creates a substantial barrier to the buffer function; c. The interrupted buffer does not provide additional protection of the critical area from the proposed development; and d. The interrupted buffer does not provide significant hydrological, water quality and wildlife functions. This waiver does not apply if large trees or other significant native vegetation exists. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 150 Page 38 of 100 e. Enhancement of remaining buffer is required if feasible. 2-3. Buffers for all types of watercourses will be increased when they are determined to be particularly sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development will create unusually adverse impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required only after completion of a watercourse study by a qualified SpeEia4st—professional or expert that documents the basis for such increased width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when: a. The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant adverse impacts upon the watercourse that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width; or b. The area serves as habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive monitor species listed by the federal government or the State. 3. Every reasonable effert shall be made to maiRtain the_ existiRg va.--'—"-- --- - --- - - - i ■ - - - - - 02 Section 30. TMC Section 18.45.110 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.110 Watercourse Alterations and Mitigation A. WATERCOURSE ALTERATIONS. No use or development may occur in a watercourse or its buffer except as specifically allowed by TMGthis chapter18.45. Any use or development allowed is subject to the standards of T-MGthis chapter 18.45. B. ALTERATIONS. Daylighting and meandering of watercourses is encouraged. Culvert replacement is required where applicable, and upgrades are required to meet State standards. Piping, dredging, Odiverting or rerouting may eRl 9ccUr w6th nnrmi inn of the Dirontnr and an nnnrnve d mitigation nlan_is discouraged. Culverts are piped segments of streams that flow under a road, trail or driveway. Daylighting of a stream refers to taking a stream out of a pipe that is flowing underground, but not necessarily under a road. All watercourse alterations shall be carried out as specified by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife in accordance with an approved Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA). W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 39 of 100 151 1. The City encourages daylighting of a watercourse that is located in a pipe or meandering of a previously altered watercourse to restore the stream to a more natural and open condition. As an incentive for daylighting, the Director may approve reduced buffers or setbacks. Daylighting or meandering of a watercourse is only permitted if the followina criteria are met: a. The values and functions of the watercourse are improved, including reducing stream flow during storm and flood events, and providing fish and wildlife habitat. b. No adverse impact to fish are expected to occur. c. Water quality is equal or better than existing condition. d. Hydraulic capacity is maintained within the new channel. e. The watercourse design complies with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Water Crossing Design Guidelines Manual 2013 as it now reads and hereafter updated or amended. 2. On properties with culverts that are being developed or re -developed, or when stream crossings in public or private rights -of -way are being replaced, existing culverts that carry fish -bearing watercourses or those that could bear fish (based on the criteria in WAC 222-16-031 Washington Forest Practices Rules and Regulations) shall be upgraded to meet the standards in the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Water Crossing Design Guidelines Manual 2013, or as amended, if technically feasible. Any culvert replacement shall comply with the following criteria: a. The values and functions of the watercourse are improved including reducing stream flow during storm and flood events, and providing fish and wildlife habitat. b. No adverse impact to fish are expected to occur. c. Water quality is equal or better than existing condition. d. Hydraulic capacity is maintained within the new channel. e. The watercourse design complies with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Water Crossing Design Guidelines manual 2013 as it now reads and hereafter updated or amended. 3. Piping dredging diverting or rerouting of any watercourse shall be avoided, if possible. Relocation of a watercourse or installation of a bridge is preferred to piping. If piping occurs in a watercourse it shall be limited to the degree necessary for stream crossings for access. Additionally, these alterations may only occur with the permission of the Director as a Type 2 decision and subject to mitigation sequencing and an approved mitigation plan, and shall meet the following criteria: 2a. The watercourse alteration shall comply with the standards in current use and the standards of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Water Crossing Design Guidelines Manual 2013 or as amended. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 40 of 100 152 b. The watercourse alteration shall not cause adverse impacts to fish, confine the channel or floodplain or adversely affect riparian habitat (including downstream habitat). {4}c. Maintenance dredging of watercourses shall be allowed only when necessary to protect public safety, structures and fish passage and shall be done as infrequently as possible. Long-term solutions such as stormwater retrofits are preferred over ongoing maintenance dredging. d. Stormwater runoff shall be detained and infiltrated to preserve the existing hydrology of the watercourse Ghannol' dGMinant disnharno e. All construction shall be designed to have the least adverse impact on the watercourse, buffer and surrounding environment. Construction shall minimize sedimentation through implementation of best management practices for erosion control. 3. A waxteTGn"-vaFse may be rerouted nr day lighted as _a mitigation measure to irnpFeyo waterGGu-rs�Gtien- .. 4: f. As a condition of approval, the Director may require water quality monitoring for stormwater discharges to streams, and additional treatment of stormwater if water quality standards are not being met. area, Ot shall be limited te FeqUiFeMeRtS for stFeaM GFOSSiRgS fer aGGess and shall Fequire approval of the Qirontor ■ M r EMA3.. - r SEE (11 Thy n`"' eyaRGe system shall be designed to rmmPlY with —the (`ulvepts nr Gish Passage" mane gal (2003 or as ameRde i-. R)g_ Where allowed, piping shall be limited to the shortest length possible as determined by the Director to allow access onto a property. 04 . Where water is piped for an access point, those driveways or entrances shall be consolidated to serve multiple properties where possible, and to minimize the length of piping. i. Piping shall not create an entry point for road runoff, create downstream scour, or cause erosion or sedimentation. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 41 of 100 153 (4) WheR required by the ■ ••- �- • GUIvert WSiRg Oversize rebuildiRg of a streambed. These shall be provided with GheGk darns to redIAG ireGt All waterGOUrSe - L_�C�Water quality must be as good or better for any water exiting t pipe as for the water entering the pipe, and flow must be comparable. f. All piping E)F ether alterati9RS shall be peFieds of low flew, er as SpeGified■- paptmeRt of Fish aR ■- E)f way are beiRg replaGed, ' fish beaFing wateFGG61rses oF these that G061'd bear fish (based on the GFiteria OR VVAG 22 ■ 1 ■ - ■ - ■ - PC. MITIGATION STANDARDS. 11. The WashiRgte'R—Streaid shnr�nvgFarmrr, VVashi }g+ceR Depal:tm R Of EG910gy, US Fish and Wildlife SeFV*Ge, WashiR&R DepaltmeRt of Fish and Wildlife, 2004 er as ameRded) shall be used as Best Available SGieRGe f9F the developmeRt ef w aternoi 1rse and b iffer mitigation teGhniq sec 21. The following shall be considered the minimum standards for approved stream alteFationsmitigation projects: a. Maintenance or improvement of stream channel habitat and dimensions such that the fisheries habitat functions of the compensatory stream Fearh meet or exceed that of the original stream; b. Bank and buffer configuration restored to an enhanced state; c. Channel, bank and buffer areas replanted with native vegetation that improves upon the original condition in species diversity and density, d. Stream channel bed and biofiltration systems equivalent to or 4 Gae of ni lblin drainage mainro nroiertS) and better than in the original stream4R the Gale of other kiRds of nroientcl• e. Original fish and wildlife habitat enhanced unless technically not feasible; and f. If onsite mitigation is not possible and to ensure there is no net loss of watercourse functions including but not limited to, shading, the applicants may pay into an in -lieu fund if available to ensure that protects are fully mitigated. W:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 42 of 100 154 32. Relocation of a watercourse shall not result in the new SeRsotive critical area or buffer extending beyond the development site and onto adjacent property. without the written agreement of the affected property owners. D. MITIGATION TIMING. Department of Community Development -approved plans are Type 2 decisions and must have the mitigation construction completed before the existing watercourse can be modified. The Director may allow activities that permanently disturb a watercourse prior to implementation of the mitigation plan under the following circumstances: 1. To allow planting or re -vegetation to occur during optimal weather conditions; or 2. To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or 3. To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing or phasing. GE. MITIGATION PLAN CONTENT. All impacts to a watercourse that degrade the functions of the watercourse or its buffer shall be avoided. If alteration to the watercourse or buffer is unavoidable, all adverse impacts resulting from a development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated in accordance with an approved mitigation plan as described below. 1. Mitigation plans shall be completed for any proposals of dredging, filling, diverting, piping and rerouting of watercourses or buffer impacts and shall be developed as part of a �,S;+�critical area study by a-speG*al;st qualified professional the n�tGf. The plan must show how water quality, treatment, erosion control, pollution reduction, wildlife and fish habitat, and general watercourse quality would be improved. 2. The scope and content of a mitigation plan shall be decided on a case -by - case basis taking into account the degree of impact and extent of mitigation measures needed. As the impacts to the watercourse or its buffer increase, the mitigation plan to offset these impacts will increase in extent and complexity. 3. The components of a complete mitigation plan are as follows: a. Baseline information including existing watercourse conditions such as hydrologic patterns/flow rates, stream gradient, bank full width, stream bed conditions, bank conditions, fish and other wildlife use, in -stream structures, riparian conditions, buffer characteristics, water quality, fish barriers and other relevant information. b. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation measures. This should include a description of site selection criteria, identification of target evaluation species and functions. c. Performance standards for fulfilling environmental goals and objectives and for triggering remedial action or contingency measures. Performance standards may include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, creation of fish habitat, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 43 of 100 155 d. Detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction sequence and construction management, and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development proposal. e. Monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the approach for assessing a completed project. At least five years of monitoring is required. An outline shall be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the mitigation project's process. For projects that discharge stormwater to a stream, the Director may require water quality monitoring. f. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards have not been met. g. Performance security or other assurance devices as described in TMC Section 18.45.210. Section 31. TMC Section 18.45.120 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.120 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Designations, Ratings and Buffers A. DESIGNATION. Potential areas of geologic instability include areas of potential erosion and landslide hazards. Areas of potential geologic instability are classified as follows: 1. Class 1 areas, wheFe landslide potential is low, aR4 which have a slope +sof less than 15%; 2. Class 2 areas, where landslide nntontial is medeFoto which have a slope is between 15% and 40%, and which are underlain by relatively permeable soils; 3. Class 3 areas, where landslide potential is high which include areas sloping between 15% and 40%, and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock, and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than 40%; 4. Class 4 areas, wheFe landslide potential is veFy high which include sloping areas with mappable zones of groundwater seepage, and which also include existing mappable landslide deposits regardless of slope. B. MAPPING. 1. The aagroximate location, extent, and desiqnation of areas of potential geologic instability are depicted in the City's Critical Areas Map. Actual boundaries and designations shall be determined by a qualified professional on a site -specific basis. 2. In addition to the City's Critical Areas Map, the following publicly available mapping information may be used to determine appropriate designations: w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 44 of 100 156 a. For historic landslides areas designated as quaternary slumps, earthflows mudflows or landslides on maps published by the U.S. Geological Survey or the WDNR Division of Geology and Earth Resources; b. For potential or historic landslides, those areas mapped by the WDNR (slope stability mapping) as unstable (U or Class 3), unstable old slides (UOS or Class 4), or unstable recent slides (URS or Class 5); c. For soil characteristics, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Official Soil Survey Data; and d. For general instability those areas mapped by the NRCS as having a significant limitation for building site development. 9C. BUFFERS. The buffers for areas of potential geologic instability are intended to: 1. Minimize long-term impacts of development on properties containing eRSit-e critical areas; 2. Protect eeRSitiVo critical areas from adverse impacts during development; 3. Prevent loading of potentially unstable slope formations; 4. Protect slope stability; 5. Provide erosion control and attenuation of precipitation surface water and stormwater runoff; and 6. Reduce loss of or damage to property. requirements of TMG Se/"tion 18.50 and 18 F2 SD. Each development proposal containing or threatened by an area of potential geologic instability Class 2 or higher shall be subject to a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45.040.C, a—� 4 5.060. The geotechnical report shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to achieve the goals and requirements of this chapterTMG Chap 4-8.45. Development proposals shall then include the buffer distances as defined within the geotechnical report. D. Ri iffer may heRrreSed by the Direntnr when an area is determined to he �-O rITfQ'�{7 ZCo TITl11 IL Gf Z� r✓L anaT,d by a site -visit. Section 32. TMC Section 18.45.130 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.130 Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Uses, Exemptions, Alterations and Mitigation w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 45 of 100 157 A. GENERAL. The uses permitted in the underlying zoning district may be undertaken on sites that contain areas of potential geologic instability subject to the standards of this section and the recommendations of a geotechnical study. B. EXEMPTIONS. The following areas are exempt from regulation as geologically hazardous areas: 1. Temporary stockpiles of topsoil, gravel, beauty bark or other similar landscaping or construction materials; 2. Slopes related to materials used as an engineered pre -load for a building pad; under aR approved permit may be re graded without appliGatiGR ef TIVIC Ghapter 18.45 u Rder an approved normil• 43. Roadway embankments within right-of-way or road easements; and 54. Slopes retained by approved engineered structures. C. ALTERATIONS. 1. Prior to permitting alteration of an area of potential geologic instability, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. There is no evidence of past instability or earth movement in the vicinity of the proposed development, and, where appropriate, quantitative analysis of slope stability indicates no significant risk to the proposed development or surrounding properties; or b. The area of potential geologic instability can be modified or the project can be designed so that any potential impact to the project and surrounding properties is eliminated, slope stability is not decreased, and the increase in surface water discharge or sedimentation shall not decrease slope stability. 2. Where any portion of an area of potential geologic instability is cleared for development, a landscaping plan for the site shall include tree replanting of preferably native trees w4h—fan equal mix of evergreen and deciduous) trees, shrubs and groundcover. r pre# a"e,�, lRat+ve,a„d--The landscaping plan must be approved by the Director. Replacement vegetation shall be sufficient to provide erosion and stabilization protection. 3. Critical facilities shall not be sited within or below an area of potential geologic instability unless there is no practical alternative (demonstrated by the applicant). 4. Land disturbing activities in an area of potential geologic instability shall provide for storm water quality and quantity control including preparation of a TESC and permanent drainage plan prepared by a professional engineer licensed in Washington. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 46 of 100 158 5. Unless otherwise provided or as part of an approved alteration, removal of vegetation from an area of potential geologic instability or its buffer shall be prohibited. When permitted as part of an approved alteration, vegetation removal shall be minimized to the extent practicable. 6. Surface drainage including downspouts, shall not be directed across the face of an area of potential geologic instability; if drainage must be discharged from the top of a hazard to its toe it shall be collected above the top and directed to the toe by tight line drain and provided with an energy dissipative device at the toe for discharge to a swale or other acceptable natural drainage areas. 7. Structures and improvements shall minimize alterations to the natural contour of the slope and foundations shall be tiered where possible to conform to existing topography (minimize grading/cut and fill to amount necessary). 8. The proposed development shall not result in greater risk or a need for increased buffers on neighboring properties. D. DISCLOSURES, DECLARATIONS AND COVENANTS. 1. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to submit, consistent with the findings of the geotechnical report, structural plans that were prepared and stamped by a structural engineer. The plans and specifications shall be accompanied by a letter from the geotechnical engineer who prepared the geotechnical report stating that in his/her judgment the plans and specifications conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report, the risk of damage to the proposed development site from soil instability will be minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the report, and the proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. 2. Further recommendations signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer shall be provided should there be additions or exceptions to the original recommendations based on the plans, site conditions or other supporting data. If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the plans and specifications is not the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer shall, in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and state that the plans and specifications conform to his or her recommendations. 3. The architect or structural engineer shall submit to the City, with the plans and specifications, a letter or notation on the design drawings at the time of permit application stating that he or she has reviewed the geotechnical report, understands its recommendations, has explained or has had explained to the owner the risks of loss due to slides on the site, and has incorporated into the design the recommendations of the report and established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by any earth movement predicted in the report. 4. The owner shall execute a Sensitive Critical Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless Agreement running with the land on a form provided by the City. The City will file the completed covenant with the King County Department of Records and E'e�PS Licensing Services at the expense of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 47 of 100 159 covenant will be forwarded to the owner. E. ASSURANCE DEVICES. Whenever the City determines that the public interest would not be served by the issuance of a permit in an area of potential geologic instability without assurance of a means of providing for restoration of areas disturbed by, and repair of property damage caused by, slides arising out of or occurring during construction, the Director may require assurance devices pursuant to TMC Section 18.45.210. F. CONSTRUCTION MONITORING. 1. Where recommended by the geotechnical report, the applicant shall retain a geotechnical engineer to monitor the site during construction. The applicant shall preferably retain the geotechnical engineer who prepared the final geotechnical recommendations and reviewed the plans and specifications. If a different geotechnical engineer is retained by the owner, the new geotechnical engineer shall submit a letter to the City stating whether or not he/she agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the original geotechnical engineer. Further recommendations, signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer, and supporting data shall be provided should there be exceptions to the original recommendations. 2. The geotechnical engineer shall monitor, during construction, compliance with the recommendations in the geotechnical report, particularly site excavation, shoring, soil support for foundations including piles, subdrainage installations, soil compaction and any other geotechnical aspects of the construction. Unless otherwise approved by the City, the specific recommendations contained in the soils report must be implemented by the owner. The geotechnical engineer shall make written, dated monitoring reports on the progress of the construction to the City at such timely intervals as shall be specified. Omissions or deviations from the approved plans and specifications shall be immediately reported to the City. The final construction monitoring report shall contain a statement from the geotechnical engineer that based upon his or her professional opinion, site observations and testing during the monitoring of the construction, the completed development substantially complies with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and with all geotechnical-related permit requirements. Occupancy of the project will not be approved until the report has been reviewed and accepted by the Director. G. CONDITIONING AND DENIAL OF USE OR DEVELOPMENTS. 1. Substantial weight shall be given to ensuring continued slope stability and the resulting public health, safety and welfare in determining whether a development should be allowed. 2. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dryer season, or sequencing activities such as installing erosion control and drainage systems well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined by the Director that the development will increase the potential of soil movement that results in an unacceptable risk of damage to the proposed development, its site or adjacent properties. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 160 Page 48 of 100 Section 33. TMC Section 18.45.140 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.140 Abandoned -Coal Mine Hazard Areas A. Development of a site containing an abandoned mine area may be permitted when a geotechnical report shows that significant risks associated with the abandoned mine workings can be eliminated or mitigated so that the site is safe. Approval shall be obtained from the Director before any building or land -altering permit processes begin. B. Any building setback or land alteration shall be based on the geotechnical report. C. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dryer season, or sequencing activities such as installing drainage systems or erosion controls well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined that the development will increase the potential of soil movement or result in an unacceptable risk of damage to the proposed development or adjacent properties. D. The owner shall execute a cow Critical Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless Agreement running with the land on a form provided by the City. The City will file the completed covenant with the King County Division of Records and F=!eGtieRs Licensing Services at the expense of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded covenant will be forwarded to the owner. Section 34. TMC Section 18.45.150 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.150 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Designation, Mapping, Uses and Standards A. DESIGNATION. 1. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas include the habitats listed below: 4- a. Areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association; 2—b. Habitats and species of local importance, including but not limited to bald eagle habitat, heron rookeries mudflats and marshes, and areas critical for habitat connectivity; 5c. Naturally occurring ponds under 20 acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat; w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 49 of 100 161 mod. Waters of the State; Vie. State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas; and f. Lakes ponds streams and rivers planted with game fish by a governmental or tribal entity. 2. Type S watercourses including the Green/DLtwamish River, are regulated under TMC Chapter 18.44 and not under this chapter. 3. Wetlands and watercourses are addressed under TMC Sections 18.45.080, 18.45.090 18.45.100 and 18.45.110, and not under this section. B. MAPPING. 1. The approximate location and extent of known fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are identified by the City's Sego -Critical Areas Maps, inventories, open space zones, and Natural Environment Background Report. The (wit„ designates 2. Fish and wildlife habitat GGRServati9R areas GGFFelate C-lGsely with the areas (shewR GR the Sensitive Apeas Map) *R the SheFeliRe j6IFiSdiGtOOR. Gilliam Greek, Rqveftei4 Greek, Southgate Greek, jehRSE)R C;Feek, and Hamm GFeek (OR the ReFth PAA) all prev salrnE)Rid habitat. lR -additleR, the Native Grewth PFGteGtiGR Area OR the Tukwila South PFGjeGt area provides aR impeftaRt upland wildlife habitat GeFridoF. Tukwiia Pend and its assGGqated wetlands alse meet the defiRitiGR of a fish and wildlife habitat for wateFfe I A and ter birds G161ring all seaS9Trs o#the year. In addition to the Sege -Critical Areas Maps, the following maps are to be used as a guide for the City, but do not provide a final habitat area designation: a. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species Maps; b. Anadromous and resident salmonid distribution maps contained in the Habitat Limiting Factors reports for the Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watersheds published by King County and the Washington Conservation Commission; and c. Washington StateNOAA Digital Coasta4 for Washington Statea-Rd Geastal Zeno Management Program C. BUFFERS. 1. Each development proposal on, adjacent to, or with the potential to impact a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas shall have bu#ers ne loss than Inn foot in Wirth. s other than wetlands and watercourses shall be subiect to a habitat assessment report pursuant to the requirements of TMC Sections 18.45.040.B. The habitat w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 50 of 100 162 assessment shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to achieve the goals and requirements of this chapter, with specific consideration of Priority Habitats and Species Management Recommendations from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Recommended buffers shall be no less than 100 feet in width. 2. Buffers may be increased by the Director when an area is determined to be particularly sensitive to the disturbance created by a development. Such a decision will be based on a City review of the report as prepared bV a qualified biologist and bV a site visit. D. USES AND STANDARDS. Fish and wildlife habitat GGRseryatir,n areas Will be regulated thr$ugh TMGChan+18.4 4SheTefi„ Overlays DiStFiGt,and the regi ilatinn apply speGifiGally to GenseFyatien Areas. Each development proposal on, adjacent, or with the potential to impact a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area that is not fully addressed under TMC Sections 18.45.080 18.45.090, 18.45.100 and 18.45.110 shall be subject to a habitat assessment report pursuant to the requirements of TMC Sections 18.45.040.B. The habitat assessment shall analyze potential impacts to Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas and make recommendations to minimize such impacts, with specific consideration of Priority Habitats and Species Management Recommendations from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Section 35. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.45.155, "Special Hazard Flood Areas," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.46.155 Special Hazard Flood Areas A. Regulations governing Special Hazard Flood Areas are found in TMC Chapter 16.52 "Flood Plain Management," and TMC Section 18.45.155.13. B. Floodplain Habitat Assessment. 1. When development is proposed within a Special Hazard Flood area, a floodplain habitat assessment shall be prepared pursuant to the requirements of TMC Sections 18.45.040.B. 2. The floodplain habitat assessment shall address the effects of the development on federally listed salmon including but not limited to the following: a. Impervious surfaces, b. Floodplain storage and conveyance, c. Floodplain and riparian vegetation, and d. Stormwater drainage. w:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 51 of 100 163 3. If the floodplain habitat assessment concludes that the project is expected to have an adverse effect on listed species as evaluated under the guidance issued for ESA compliance under the National Flood Insurance Program in Puget Sound, the applicant shall mitigate those impacts. Such mitigation shall be consistent with, or in addition to any mitigation required by this chapter and shall be incorporated into the approved protect plans. 4. Activities Exempt from Floodplain Habitat Assessment. A floodplain habitat assessment is not required under the following circumstances: a. Projects that are undergoing or have undergone consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service under the Endangered Species Act. b. Repair or remodeling of an existing structure, if the repair or remodeling is not a substantial improvement. c. Expansion of an existing structure that is no greater than 10 percent beyond its existing footprint; provided that the repairs or remodeling are not a substantial improvement or a repair of substantial damage. This measurement is counted cumulatively from September 22 2011. If the structure is in the floodway, there shall be no change in the dimensions perpendicular to flow. d. Activities with the sole purpose of creating, restoring, or enhancing natural functions provided the activities do not include construction of structures, grading, fill, or impervious surfaces. e. Development of open space and recreational facilities, such as parks and trails that do not include structures, fill, impervious surfaces or removal of more than 5 percent of the native vegetation on that portion of the property in the regulatory floodplain. f. Repair to on -site septic systems provided the ground disturbance is the minimum necessary. g. Other minor activities considered to have no effect on listed species, as interpreted using ESA guidance issued by the National Flood Insurance Program in Puget Sound and confirmed through City review of the development proposal. Section 36. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.45.158, "Vegetation Protection and Management," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.45.158 Vegetation Protection_ and Management A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to: 1. Regulate the protection of existing trees and native vegetation in the critical areas and their buffers: 2. Establish requirements for removal of invasive plants at the time of development or re -development of sites; w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 52 of 100 164 3. Establish requirements for the long-term maintenance of native vegetation to prevent establishment of invasive species and promote ecosystem processes. B. Applicability. This chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control maintenance and clearing of trees within the City of Tukwila for properties located within a critical area or its associated buffer. For properties located within the Shoreline jurisdiction the maintenance and removal of vegetation shall be governed by TMC Chapter 18.44 "Shoreline Overlay." TMC Chapter 18.54, "Urban Forestry and Tree Regulations," shall govern tree removal on any undeveloped land and any land zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) that is developed with a single-family residence. TMC Chapter 18.52 "Landscape Requirements," shall govern the maintenance and removal of landscaping on developed properties zoned commercial, industrial, or multifamily, and on properties located in the LDR zone that are developed with a non -single family residential use. The most stringent regulations shall apply in case of a conflict. C. Vegetation Retention and Replacement. 1. Retention. a. Native vegetation in critical areas and their buffers must be protected and maintained. No removal of native vegetation is allowed without prior approval by the City except in cases of emergency where an imminent hazard to public life, safety or Property exists. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an enhancement plan approved by the Director. Enhancements will ensure that slope stability and wetland quality will be maintained or improved. Any temporary disturbance of the buffers shall be replanted with a diverse plant community of native northwest species. b. Invasive vegetation (blackberry, ivy, laurel, etc.) may be removed from a critical area or its buffer except steep slopes without a permit if removal does not utilize heavy equipment. The use of herbicide by a licensed contractor with certifications as needed from the Washington Department of Ecology and the Washington Department of Agriculture is permitted but requires notification prior to application to the City and shall comply with TMC Section 18.45.158.E.3. Invasive vegetation removal on steep slopes requires prior City approval. c. Hazardous or defective trees, as defined in TMC Chapter 18.06, may be removed from a critical area if threat posed by the tree is imminent. If the hazard is not obvious an assessment by a certified professional, as defined in Chapter TMC 18.06, may be required by the Director. Dead and hazardous trees should remain standing or be cut and placed within the critical area to the extent practicable to maximize habitat. Tree replacement in accordance with this chapter is required for any hazardous tree removed from a critical area. d. In the case of development or re -development, as many significant trees and as much native vegetation as possible are to be retained on a site, taking into account the condition and age of the trees. As part of a land use application including, but not limited to subdivision or short plat design review or building permit review, the Director of Community Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 53 of 100 165 alterations in the arrangement of buildings, parking or other elements of proposed development in order to retain significant vegetation. 2. Permit Requirements. Prior to any tree removal or site clearing, unless it is part of Special Permission approval for interrupted buffer, buffer averaging or other critical areas deviation a Type 2 Critical Area 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 stream buffer, wetland, wetland buffer, steep slope or any other 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 iustifying the removal of hazardous trees if required by DCD. q An application fee in accordance with the Consolidated Permit Fee Schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council. 3. Criteria for Tree Removal in a Critical Area or its Buffer. A Type 2 Critical Area Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit shall only be approved if the proposal complies with the following criteria as applicable: a. The site is undergoing development or redevelopment. b. Tree poses a risk to structures. c. There is imminent potential for root or canopy interference with utilities. d. Tree interferes with the access and passage on public trails. e. Tree condition and health is poor; the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist. f. Trees present an imminent hazard to the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist. q The proposal complies with tree retention replacement maintenance and monitoring requirements of this chapter. 4. Tree Replacement Requirements. Where permitted, significant trees that are removed illegally topped or pruned by more than 25% within a critical area shall be replaced pursuant to the Tree Replacement Requirements Table (below), up to a density MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 54 of 100 166 of 100 trees per acre (including existing trees). Significant trees that are part of an approved landscape plan on the developed portion of the site are subject to replacement per TMC Chapter 18.52. Dead or dying trees removed that are part of an approved landscape plan on the developed portion of the site shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio in the next appropriate plantinq season Dead or dying trees located within the critical area or its buffer shall be left in place as wildlife snags unless they present a hazard to structures, facilities or the public. Removal of dead dying or otherwise hazardous trees in non - developed areas are subject to the replacement requirements listed in the "Tree Replacement Requirements" Table below. The Director may require additional trees or shrubs to be installed to mitigate any potential impact from the loss of this vegetation as a result of new development. Table 18.45.158-1 — Tree Replacement Requirements Diameter* of Tree Removed (*measured at height of 4.5 feet from the ground) Number of Replacement Trees Required 4 - 6 inches (single trunk); 2 inches (any trunk of a multi -trunk tree 3 Over 6 - 8 inches 4 Over 8 - 20 inches 6 Over 20 inches 8 5. If all reauired replacement trees cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site the applicant shall pay into a tree replacement fund in accordance with the Consolidated Permit Fee Schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council. 6 Topping of trees is prohibited and will be regulated as removal subject to the Tree Replacement Requirements Table listed above. 7 Pruning of trees shall not exceed 25% of canopy in a 36-month period. Pruning in excess of 25% canopy shall be regulated as removal with tree replacement required per the Tree Replacement Requirements Table listed above. Trees may only be pruned to lower their height to prevent interference with an overhead utility line with prior approval by the Director as part of Type 2 Critical Area Tree Permit. 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. D. Tree Protection. 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. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 55 of 100 167 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 herel. 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 18.45." 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. 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. w:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 56 of 100 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. E. Plant Materials Standards. For any new development redevelopment or restoration in a Critical Area, invasive vegetation must be removed and native vegetation planted and maintained in the Critical Area and its buffer. 1 A planting plan prepared by a qualified biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval that shows plant species size number, spacing, soil preparation irrigation and invasive species removal. The requirement for a biologist may be waived by the Director for single family property owners when the mitigation area is less than 1,500 square feet. 2 Invasive vegetation must be removed as part of site preparation and native vegetation planted in the Critical Area and its buffer where impacts occur. 3 Removal of invasive species shall be done by hand or with hand-held power tools The use of herbicide by a licensed contractor with certifications as needed from the Washington Department of Ecology and the Washington Department of Agriculture is permitted but requires notification prior to application to the City and shall comply with this TMC Section 18 45 158.E.3. Where removal is not feasible by hand or with hand-held power tools and mechanized equipment is needed the applicant must obtain a Type 2 permit prior to work being conducted. Removal of invasive vegetation must be conducted so that the slope stability, if applicable will be maintained and native vegetation is protected A plan must be submitted indicating how the work will be done and what erosion control and tree protection features will be utilized. Federal and State permits may be required for vegetation removal with mechanized equipment. 4 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. 5 A combination of native trees shrubs and groundcovers (including but not limited to grasses sedges rushes and vines) shall be planted. 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. 6 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). w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 57 of 100 169 7 Plants shall meet the current American Standard for Nursery Stock (American Nursery and Landscape Association — ANLA). 8 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. For existing developed areas refer to TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," for plant sizes in required landscape areas. 9 Site preparation and planting of vegetation shall be in accordance with Best Management Practices for ensuring the vegetation's long-term health and survival. Irrigation is required for all plantings for the first three years as approved by the Director. 10. Plants may be selected and placed to allow for public and private view corridors with approval by Director. 11 Native vegetation in critical areas and their buffers 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. 12. Critical areas including steep slopes disturbed by removal of invasive plants or development shall be replanted with native vegetation where necessary to maintain the density shown in the Critical Area Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table below, 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. Table 18.45.158-2 — Critical Area Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table Plant Material Type Planting Density Stakes/cuttings along streambank 1 - 2 feet on center or per bioen ineering method willows red osier dogwood Shrubs 3 - 5 feet on center, depending on species Trees 15 — 20 feet on center, depending n s ecies Groundcovers rasses sedges, 1 — 1.5 feet on center, depending rushes other herbaceous lants on sped Native seed mixes 5 — 25 Ibs. per acre depending on ecies 13 The Department Director, in consultation with the City's environmentalist, may approve the use of shrub planting and installation of willow stakes to be counted toward the tree replacement standard in the buffer if proposed as a measure to control invasive plants and increase buffer function. W:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 58 of 100 170 F. Vegetation Management in Critical Areas. The requirements of this section apply to all existing and new development within critical areas. 1. Trees and shrubs may only be pruned for safety, to maintain access corridors and trails by pruning up or on the sides of trees, to maintain clearance for utility lines and/or for improving critical area 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. 2. Plant debris from removal of invasive plants or pruning shall be removed from the site and disposed of properly unless on -site storage is approved by the Director. Per King County Noxious Weed Control Program guidelines, regulated noxious weeds shall be disposed of in the landfill/trash and non -regulated noxious weeks may be disposed of in green waste or composted on site. 3. Use of pesticides. a. Pesticides (including herbicides insecticides, and fungicides) shall not be used in the critical area or its buffer 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 and herbicide is determined to be least ecologically impactful; (2) The use of pesticides has been approved by the City through a comprehensive vegetation or pest management and monitoring plan, or a King County Noxious Weed Control Program Best Management Practices document; (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 critical area jurisdiction is approved 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, if required. 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 implement an integrated turf management program or integrated pest management plan designed to ensure that water quality in the critical area 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 Type 2 Special Permission or critical area tree 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. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 59 of 100 171 G. Maintenance and Monitoring. The property owner is required to ensure the viability and long-term health of vegetation planted for replacement or mitigation through proper care and maintenance for the life of the project subject to permit requirements as follows: 1. Tree Replacement and Vegetation Clearin_g Permit Requirements. a. Schedule an inspection with the City of Tukwila's Urban Environmentalist to document planting of the correct number and type of plants. years. b. Submit annual documentation of tree and vegetation health for three 2. Restoration and Mitigation Project Requirements. a. A five-year monitorinq 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. b. Monitoring reports shall be submitted annually for City review up until the end of the monitoring period. Reports shall measure survival rates against protect goals and present contingency plans to meet project goals. c. Mitigation will be complete after project goals have been met and accepted by the City of Tukwila's Urban Environmentalist. d. A performance bond or financial security equal to 150% of the cost of labor and materials required for implementation of the planting, maintenance and monitoring shall be submitted prior to City acceptance of project. Section 37. TMC Section 18.45.160 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.160 Sensitive Critical Area Master Plan Overlay A. The purpose of this section is to provide an alternative to preservation of existing individual wetlands, watercourses and their buffers in situations where an area -wide plan for alteration and mitigation will result in improvements to water quality, fish and wildlife habitat and hydrology beyond those that would occur through the strict application of the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. B. The City Council may designate certain areas as Sensitive Critical Area Master Plan Overlay Districts for the purpose of allowing and encouraging a comprehensive approach to seRsitive critical area protection, restoration, enhancement and creation in appropriate circumstances utilizing best available science. Designation of co�e Critical Area Master Plan Overlay Districts shall occur through the Type 5 decision process established by TMC Chapter 18.104. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 60 of 100 172 C. Criteria for designating a cow Critical Area Master Plan Overlay District shall be as follows: The overlay area shall be at least 10 acres. 2. The City Council shall find that preparation and implementation of a comae Critical Area Master Plan is likely to result in net improvements in SeR it-ive critical area functions when compared to development under the general provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45. D. Within a SensitiveCriticalArea Master Plan Overlay District, only those uses permitted under TMC Sections 18.45.070, 18.45.090 and 18.45,110 shall be allowed within a Category I wetland, a Type 1 (S) wateFGG 1FSe or their buffers. E. Within a See Critical Area Master Plan Overlay District, the uses permitted under TMC Sections 18.45.070, 18.45.090 and 18.45.110 and other uses as identified by an approved See Critical Area Master Plan shall be permitted within Category III and Category IV wetlands and their buffers; and within Type 2-,4Fj -34Np-,) and 4-(Ns) watercourses and their buffers, provided that such uses are allowed by the underlying zoning designation. F. A SeRSitive Critical Area Master Plan shall be prepared under the direction of the Director of Community Development. Consistent with subsection A, the Director may approve development activity within a SensitiveCriticalArea Overlay District for the purpose of allowing and encouraging a comprehensive approach to sensitive critical areas protection, creation, and enhancement that results in environmental benefits that may not be otherwise achieved through the application of the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. G. The Director shall consider the following factors when determining whether a proposed SeRSitive Critical Areas Overlay and Master Plan results in an overall net benefit to the environment and is consistent with best available science: 1. Whether the Master Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Natural Environment Element and the Shorelines Element (if applicable) of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. 2. Whether the Master Plan is consistent with the purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45 as stated in TMC Section 18.45.010. 3. Whether the Master Plan includes a Mitigation Plan that incorporates stream or wetland restoration, enhancement or creation meeting or exceeding the requirements of TMC Section 18.45.090 and/or TMC Section 18.45.110, as appropriate. 4. Whether proposed alterations or modifications to ceperitical areas and their buffers and/or alternative mitigation results in an overall net benefit to the natural environment and improves Sege critical area functions. 5. Whether the Mitigation Plan gives special consideration to conservation and protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 61 of 100 173 6. Mitigation shall occur on -site unless otherwise approved by the Director. The Director may approve off -site mitigation only upon determining that greater protection, restoration or enhancement ofs critical areas could be achieved at an alternative location within the same watershed. 7. Where feasible, mitigation shall occur prior to grading, filling or relocation of wetlands or watercourses. 8. At the discretion of the Director, a proposed Master Plan may undergo peer review, at the expense of the applicant. Peer review, if utilized, shall serve as one source of input to be utilized by the Director in making a final decision on the proposed action. H. A Se+�Critical Area Master Plan shall be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development. Such approval shall not be granted until the Master Plan has been evaluated through preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the requirements of TMC Chapter 21.04. The EIS shall compare the environmental impacts of development under the proposed Master Plan relative to the impacts of development under the standard requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. The Director shall approve the Sensitive —Critical Area Master Plan only if the evaluation clearly demonstrates overall environmental benefits, giving special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. I The critical area buffer widths for those areas that were altered, created or restored as mitigation (Wetland 10 1 Johnson Creek and the Green River off -channel habitat) at the time of approval of the Sensitive Area Master Plan (SAMP) Permit No. L10-014 shall be vested as shown on Map A to be codified as Figure 18-XX; provided the adjacent land was cleared and graded pursuant to a City -approved grading permit; and provided further that those mitigation measures required bV the SAMP were performed and meet the ecological goals in accordance with the terms of the SAMP. Section 38. TMC Section 18.45.170 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.170 SezCritical Area Tracts and Easements A. In development proposals for planned residential or mixed use developments, short subdivisions or subdivisions, and boundary line adjustments and binding site plans, applicants shall create so„�e-critical areas tracts or easements, in lieu of an open space tract, per the standards of the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. B. Applicants proposing development involving uses other than those listed in TMC Section 18.45.170.A, on parcels containing ssRsit-e-critical areas or their buffers, may elect to establish a se^ itdVe critical areas tract or easement which shall be: 1. If under one ownership, owned and maintained by the ownership; 2. If held in common ownership by multiple owners, maintained collectively; or MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 174 Page 62 of 100 3. Dedicated for public use if acceptable to the City or other appropriate public agency. C. A notice shall be placed on the property title or plat map that seRSitiVe-critical area tracts or easements shall remain undeveloped in perpetuity. Section 39. TMC Section 18.45.180 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.180 Exceptions A. REASONABLE USE EXCEPTIONS. 1. If application of TMC Chapter 18.45 would deny all reasonable use of the property containing wetlands, waterGe61rS&S, designated critical areas or their buffers, the property owner or the proponent of a development proposal may apply for a reasonable use exception. 2. Applications for a reasonable use exception shall be a Type 3 decision and shall be processed pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.104. 3. If the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Hearing Examiner that application of the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 would deny all reasonable use of the property, development may be allowed that is consistent with the general purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45 and the public interest. 4. The Hearing Examiner, in granting approval of the reasonable use exception, must determine that: a. There is no feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, modifications of setbacks, buffers or other land use restrictions or requirements, phasing of project implementation, change in timing of activities, revision of road and lot layout, and/or related site planning that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts to the sensitive critical area. b. As a result of the proposed development there will be no unreasonable threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site. c. Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property. d. The proposed development is compatible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property if such similar sites exist. e. Disturbance of seRsitffive—critical areas and their buffers has been minimized by IGGatinn aRY neGessery alterations rrr'r-the -varlrc'" s—to the greatest extent possible. f. All unavoidable impacts are fully mitigated. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 63 of 100 175 fg. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of: (1) a segregation or division of a larger parcel on which a reasonable use was permittable after the effective date of Sensitive Areas Ordinance No. 1599, June 10, 19911 (2) actions by the owner of the property (or the owner's agents, contractors or others under the owner's control) that occurred after the effective date of the sens+tiVecritical areas ordinance provisions that prevents or interferes with the reasonable use of the property; or (3) a violation of the sensitivecritical areas ordinance. gh. The Hearing Examiner, when approving a reasonable use exception, may impose conditions, including but not limited to a requirement for submission and implementation of an approved mitigation plan designed to ensure that the development.. (1) complies with the standards and policies of tie—seRsitve aFeas ^rde-this chapter to the extent feasible; and (2) does not create a risk of damage to other property or to the public health, safety and welfare. ki. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. B. EMERGENCIES. Alterations in response to an emergency that poses an immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare, or that poses an immediate risk of damage to private property may be excepted. Any alteration undertaken as an emergency shall be reported within one business day to the Community Development Department. The Director shall confirm that an emergency exists and determine what, if any, mitigation and conditions shall be required to protect the health, safety, welfare and environment and to repair any damage to the seRsitive critical area and its required buffers. Emergency work must be approved by the City. If the Director determines that the action taken, or any part thereof, was beyond the scope of an allowed emergency action, then the enforcement provisions of TMC Section 18.45.195 shall apply. Section 40. TMC Section 18.45.190 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.190 Time Limitation, Appeals and Vesting A. Time Limitation. Type 2 Special Permission decisions for interrupted buffer, buffer averaging or other alterations shall expire one year after the decision unless an extension is granted by the Director. Type 1 tree permits for tree removal within critical areas or their buffers shall expire one year after the permit is issued, unless an extension is granted by the Director. Extensions of a Type 2 Special Permission or Type 1 tree permit may be granted if: w:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 64 of 100 176 1. Unforeseen circumstances or conditions necessitate the extension of the permit; and 2. Termination of the permit would result in unreasonable hardship to the applicant; and the applicant is not responsible for the delay; and 3. The extension of the permit will not cause substantial detriment to existinq uses critical areas or critical area buffers in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. AB. Appeals. Any appeal of a final decision made by the Community Development Department, pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.45, shall be an appeal of the underlying permit or approval. Any such appeal shall be processed pursuant to TMC Section 18.108.020 and TMC Chapter 18.116. -9C.In considering appeals of decisions or conditions, the following shall be considered: The intent and purposes of thethis chapterseRSitiyve areas GFd*,aR e; 2. Technical information and reports considered by the Community Development Department; and 3. Findings of the Director, which shall be given substantial weight. D. Vesting. Projects are vested to the critical areas ordinance in effect at the time a complete building permit is submitted except for short plats, subdivisions, binding site plans and shoreline permits. Short plats or subdivisions or binding site plans are vested to the critical area ordinance in effect at the time complete application is submitted for preliminary plats or for the binding site plan. The final plat and all future building permits on the lots remain vested to that same critical areas ordinance in effect for the preliminary plat or preliminary binding site plan application so long as building permits are applied for within five years of the final plat. For single-family residential short plats and subdivisions that received preliminary plat approval prior to the adoption of this ordinance, building permits on the lots shall be considered under the critical areas ordinance in effect on the date of the preliminary plat application provided complete building or construction permits are submitted within five years of the final plat approval. Vesting provisions for shoreline permits are provided in TMC Chapter 18.44. Section 41. TMC Section 18.45.195 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.195 EnforGe ment and Pe na ft. - Violations A. VIOLATIONS. Failure to comply with any requirement of this chapter shall be deemed a violation subiect to enforcement pursuant to this chapter and TMC Chapter 8.45. The following actions shall be considered a violation of this chapter: 1. To use, construct or demolish a structure or to conduct clearing, earth - moving, construction or other development not authorized under a Special Permission, Reasonable Use or other permit where such permit is required by this chapter. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 65 of 100 177 2. Any work that is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other requirements in a permit approved pursuant to this chapter, provided 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 seasi#ecritical area use, buffer reduction or development authorization. 5. To fail to comply with the requirements of this chapter. 913. PENALTIES. 1. Except as provided otherwise in this section, Aany violation of any provision of this chapter, or failure to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter, shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in TMC Chapter 8.45, "Enforcement;" ante 2. 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. 3. Penalties for Tree Removal. a. In addition to any other penalties or other enforcement allowed by law, any person who fails to comply with the provisions of this chapter also shall be subiect to a civil penalty assessed against the property owner as set forth herein. Each unlawfully removed or damaged tree shall constitute a separate violation. b. Removal or damage of tree(s) without applying for and obtaining required City approval is subject to a fine of $1 000 per tree or up to the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by a Qualified Tree Professional, whichever is greater. c. Any fines paid as a result of violations of this chapter shall be allocated as follows: 75% paid into the City's Tree Fund; 25% into the General Fund. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 66 of 100 178 d. 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. e. Penalties are in addition to the restoration of removed trees through the remedial measures listed in TMC Section 18.54.200. f. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for a 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 believes a permit was issued to the property owner or any other person. €C. REMEDIAL MEASURES REQUIRED. In addition to penalties assessed, the Director shalln4ay require any person conducting work in violation of this chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 1. Remedial rneaswFes MUSt GG RfGrm to � PGIinies and g iideliReS of this ��rgTTq�pTQ'GT7TfG.7yT� ^hcnaptcFAny 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. 2. To replace the tree canopy lost due to the tree removal, additional trees must be planted on -site. Payment shall 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 Table 18.45.158-1, Tree Replacement Requirements. 3. The applicant shall satisfy the permit provisions as specified in this chapter. 4. Remedial measures must conform to the purposes and intent of this chapter. In addition remedial measures must meet the standards specified in this chapter. 5. Remedial measures must be completed to the satisfaction of the Director within 6 months of the date a Notice of Violation and Order is issued pursuant to TMC Chapter 8.45 or within the time period otherwise specified by the Director. 2-6. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of this chapter shall be borne by the property owner and/or applicant. Upon the applicant's failure to implement required remedial measures the Director may redeem all or any portion of any security submitted by the applicant to implement such remedial measures, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. VA N. - =..11. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 67 of 100 179 - - - ■ - Section 42. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.45.197, "Enforcement," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.45.197 Enforcement A. General. In addition to the Notice of Violation and Order measures prescribed in TMC Chapter 8.45 the Director may take any or all of the enforcement actions prescribed in this chapter to ensure compliance with, and/or remedy a violation of this chapter; and/or when immediate danger exists to the public or adjacent property, as determined by the Director. 1. The Director may post the site with a "Stop Work" order directing that all vegetation clearing not authorized under a Tree Permit cease immediately. The issuance of a "Stop Work" order may include conditions or other requirements which must be fulfilled before clearing may resume. 2 The Director may after written notice is given to the applicant, or after the site has been posted with a "Stop Work" order, suspend or revoke any Tree Permit issued by the City. 3. No person shall continue clearing in an area covered by a "Stop Work" order, or during the suspension or revocation of a Tree Permit except work required to correct an imminent safety hazard as prescribed by the Director. B. Iniunctive Relief. Whenever the Director has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or threatening to violate this chapter or any provision of an approved Special Permission or Tree Permit the Director may institute a civil action in the name of the City for iniunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation. Such civil action may be instituted either before or after, and in addition to, any other action proceeding or penalty authorized by this chapter or TMC Chapter 8.45. C. Inspection Access. 1. The Director may inspect a property to ensure compliance with the provisions of a Tree Permit or this chapter, consistent with TMC Chapter 8.45. 2. The Director may require a final inspection as a condition of a Special Permission or Tree Permit issuance to ensure compliance with this chapter. The permit process is complete upon final approval by the Director. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 68 of 100 im Section 43. TMC Section 18.45.200 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.200 Recording Required The property owner receiving approval of a use or development permit pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.45 shall record the City -approved site plan, clearly delineating the wetland, watercourse, areas of potential geologic instability or abandoned mine and their buffers designated by TMC Sections 18.45.080, 18.45.090, 18.45.100, 18.45.120, 18.45.140 and 18.45.150 with the King County Division of Records and �'�s Licensing Services. The face of the site plan must include a statement that the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45, as of the effective date of the ordinance from which TMC Chapter 18.45 derives or is thereafter amended, control use and development of the subject property, and provide for any responsibility of the property owner for the maintenance or correction of any latent defects or deficiencies. Additionally, the applicant shall provide data (GPS or survey data) for updating the City's critical area maps. Section 44. TMC Section 18.45.210 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.210 Assurance Device A. In appropriate circumstances, such as when mitigation is not completed in advance of the project, the Director may require a letter of credit or other security device acceptable to the City to guarantee performance and maintenance requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. All assurances shall be on a form approved by the City Attorney and be equal to 150% of the cost of the labor and materials for implementation of the approved mitigation plan. B. When alteration of a Sore critical area is approved, the Director may require an assurance device, on a form approved by the City Attorney, to cover the cost of monitoring and maintenance costs and correction of possible deficiencies for five years. of o�ity required will be fnr the five years and "ears;and 1 OM If at the end of five years performance standards are not being achieved, an increase in the security device may be required by the Director. When another agency requires monitoring beyond the City's time period, copies of those monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. C. The assurance device shall be released by the Director upon receipt of written confirmation submitted to the Department from the applicant's qualified professional, and confirmed by the City, that the mitigation or restoration has met its performance standards and is successfully established. Should the mitigation or restoration meet performance standards and be successfully established in the third or fourth year of monitoring, the City may release the assurance device early. The assurance device may be held for a longer period, if at the end of the monitoring period, the performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been successfully established. In such cases, the w:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 69 of 100 181 monitoring period will be extended and the bond held until the standards have been met. D. Release of the security does not absolve the property owner of responsibility for maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies or other duties under law. Section 45. TMC Section 18.45.220 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.45.220 Assessment Relief A. Fair Market Value. The King County Assessor considers sensitive critical area regulations in determining the fair market value of land under RCW 84.34. B. Current Use Assessment. Established seRsitive -critical area tracts or easements, as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title and provided for in TMC Section 18.45.170, may be classified as open space and owners thereof may qualify for current use taxation under RCW 18.34; provided, such landowners have not received density credits, or setback or lot size adjustments as provided in the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. C. Special Assessments. Landowners who qualify under TMC Section 18.45.220.13 shall also be exempted from special assessments on the sensitive critical area tract or easement to defray the cost of municipal improvements such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers and water mains. Section 46. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.52.020, "Applicability," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.52.020 Applicability This chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control maintenance, clearing and planting of landscaping and vegetation within the City of Tukwila on any developed properties that are zoned commercial industrial, or multifamily; and on properties that are zoned LDR and developed with a non -single-family residential use. For properties located within the Shoreline jurisdiction, the maintenance and removal of vegetation shall be governed by TMC Chapter 18.44 "Shoreline Overlay." For properties located within a critical area or its associated buffer, the maintenance and removal of vegetation shall be governed by TMC Chapter 18.45 "Critical Areas." Clearing and removal of trees on undeveloped land and any land zoned LDR that is developed with a single-family residence is regulated by TMC Chapter 18.54, "Urban Forestry and Tree Regulations." In case of conflict the most stringent regulations apply. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 70 of 100 182 Section 47. TMC Section 18.52.020 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.030. Ordinance Nos. 2523 §7, 2518 §11, 2251 §62 and 1872 §14 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.52.020, "Landscaping Types," are hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.030, which shall read as follows: 18.52.030 Landscaping Types A. General Standards for All Landscaping Types. 1. Trees. a. Trees shall be spaced based on the stature tree selected (small, medium or large stature of tree), excluding curb cuts and spaced regularly, except where there are conflicts with utilities. b. Large and medium stature tree species are required, per the Tukwila Approved Tree List, except where there is insufficient planting area (due to proximity to a building, street light, above or below ground utility, etc.) or the planned tree location does not permit this size tree at maturity. 2. Shrubs. Shrubs shall be spaced based on the mature size of the plant material selected and shall achieve a continuous vertical layer within 3 years. The shrubs will provide 4 feet clearance when mature when adjacent to any fire hydrant or fire department connection. 3. Groundcover. a. Sufficient live groundcovers of varying heights, colors and textures to cover, within 3 years, 100% of the yard area not needed for trees and shrubs. b. If grass is being used as the groundcover, a 4-foot diameter ring of bark mulch is required around each tree. B. Type I — Light Perimeter Screening. 1. The purpose of Type I landscaping is to enhance Tukwila's streetscapes, provide a light visual separation between uses and zoning districts, screen parking areas, and allow views to building entryways and signage. 2. Plant materials shall consist of the following: a. Trees: A mix of deciduous and evergreen trees. b. One shrub per 7 linear feet. c. Groundcover. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 71 of 100 183 C. Type II — Moderate Perimeter Screening. 1. The purpose of Type II landscaping is to enhance Tukwila's streetscapes, provide a moderate visual separation between uses and zoning districts, screen blank building walls and parking areas, and allow views to building entryways and signage. 2. Plant materials shall consist of the following: a. Trees: A mix of deciduous and evergreen trees. b. One shrub per 4 linear feet, excluding curb cuts. c. Groundcover. D. Type III — Heavy Perimeter Screening. 1. The purpose of Type III landscaping is to provide extensive visual separation along property lines between highly incompatible development, such as warehousing and residential uses. 2. Plant materials shall consist of the following: a. Trees consisting of at least 50% evergreen along the applicable property line (75% along property line adjacent to residential uses). b. Privacy screen utilizing evergreen shrubs, screening walls or fences (up to 7 feet tall). c. Groundcover. E. Parking Lot Landscaping. This landscaping is required to mitigate adverse impacts created by parking lots such as noise, glare, stormwater run-off, and increased heat and to improve their physical appearance. 1. Trees shall be evenly distributed throughout the parking lot. Planting in continuous, landscaped planting strips between rows of parking is encouraged. Surface water management design may also be combined with landscaping in parking lots. In industrial districts (C/LI, LI, HI, MIC/L, MIC/H), clustering of interior parking lot landscaping may be permitted to accommodate site usage. 2. Landscape islands. a. Landscape islands must be a minimum of 6 feet wide, exclusive of overhang, and a minimum of 100 square feet in area. All landscaped areas must be protected from damage by vehicles through the use of curbs, tire stops, or other protection techniques. b. Landscape islands shall be placed at the ends of each row of parking to protect parked vehicles from turning movements of other vehicles. c. The number and stature of trees shall be based on the area available in the landscape island. A minimum of one large stature evergreen or deciduous tree or two medium stature trees are required for every 100 square feet of landscaped island, with the remaining area to contain a combination of shrubs, living groundcover, and mulch. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton im Page 72 of 100 d. For parking lots adjacent to public or private streets, if I-,ndSGape iSlaRGIS the islands must be placed at minimum spacing of 1 for every 10 parking spaces. For parking areas located behind buildings or otherwise screened from public or private streets or public spaces, if landscape islands are used, islands shall be placed at a minimum of 1 for every 15 parking stalls. 3. Bioretention, which includes trees, shrubs and groundcover, may be used to meet interior parking lot landscaping requirements. The bioretention facility must be designed by a professional trained or certified in low impact development techniques as set forth in TMC Chapter 14.30. All bioretention facilities must be protected by curbing to prevent vehicle damage to the facility and for public safety. 4. Vehicular Overhang. a. Vehicle overhang into any landscaping area shall not exceed two feet. b. No plant material greater than 12 inches in height shall be located within two feet of the curb or other protective barrier in landscape areas adjacent to parking spaces and vehicle use areas. c. Raised curbs or curb stops shall be used around the landscape islands or bioretention facilities to prevent plant material from being struck by automobiles. Where bioretention is used, curb cuts shall be placed to allow stormwater runoff from adjacent pavements to enter the bioretention system. 5. Pervious pavement shall be used, where feasible, including parking spaces and pedestrian paths. 6. Parking lot landscape design shall accommodate pedestrian circulation. F. Street Trees in the Public Frontage. 1. Street tree spacing. a. Street tree spacing in the public frontage shall be as specified in TMC Section 18.52-960.080.B.2. based on the stature size of the tree. b. Spacing must also consider sight distance at intersections, driveway locations, and utility conflicts as specified in TMC Section 18.52-969.080.B.3. c. Street trees in the public frontage shall be planted using the following general spacing standards: (1) At least 3-1/2 feet back from the face of the curb. (2) At least 5 feet from underground utility lines. front for access). (3) At least 10 feet from utility poles. (4) At least 7-1/2 feet from driveways. (5) At least 3 feet from pad -mounted transformers (except 10 feet in (6) At least 4 feet from fire hydrants and connections. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 73 of 100 185 d. Planting and lighting plans shall be coordinated so that trees are not planted in locations where they will obstruct existing or planned street or site lighting, while maintaining appropriate spacing and allowing for their size and spread at maturity. e. Planting plans shall consider the location of existing or planned signage to avoid future conflicts with mature trees and landscaping. 2. Tree grates. a. Tree grates are not encouraged, but when used, shall be designed so that sections of grate can be removed incrementally as the tree matures and shall be designed to avoid accumulation of trash. b. When used, tree grates and landscaped tree wells shall be a minimum 36 square feet in size (6' x 6'). Tree well size may be adjusted to comply with ADA standards on narrower sidewalks. See TMC Section 18.52-.07-9.090.A.1., "Soil Preparation and Planting," for structural soil requirements. Root barriers may be installed at the curb face if structural soils are not used. 3. Maintenance and Pruning. a. Street trees are subject to the planting, maintenance, and removal standards and Best Management Practices (BMPs) as adopted by the International Society of Arboriculture, as it now reads and as hereafter amended. Street trees planted prior to the adoption of the most current tree planting standards shall be exempt from these planting standards but are still subject to current removal and maintenance standards. b. The following standards apply to street tree maintenance: (1) Street trees shall be maintained consistent with International Society of Arboriculture BMPs. (2) Street trees shall be maintained in a manner that does not impede public street or sidewalk traffic, consistent with the specifications in the Public Works Infrastructure Design Manual, including: streets. (a) 8 feet of clearance above public sidewalks. (b) 13 feet of clearance above public local and neighborhood (c) 15 feet of clearance above public collector streets. (d) 18 feet of clearance above public arterial streets. (3) Street trees shall be maintained so as not to become a defective tree as per the definition in TMC Chapter 18.06. 4. Trees planted in a median shall be appropriate for the planting environment and meet the following requirements: a. Trees shall be consistent with previously approved median tree plans, given space constraints for roots and branches at maturity. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 74 of 100 im b. Median plantings shall provide adequate species diversity Citywide and reasonable resistance to pests and diseases. c. Columnar trees may be considered for median plantings to avoid conflicts with vehicles and utilities. Cl. Structural soils shall be used to avoid the need for root barriers and to ensure the success of the median plantings. e. Any median tree that is removed must be replaced within the same median unless spacing constraints exist. Replacement trees shall be of the same stature or greater at maturity as the removed tree, consistent with other space considerations. Section 48. TMC Section 18.52.030 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.040. Ordinance Nos. 2580 §6, 2523 §8, 2442 §1, 2251 §61, 2235 §13 and 1872 §14, as codified at TMC Section 18.52.030, "Perimeter and Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements by Zone District," are hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.040, and to amend the "Notes" in TABLE A to read as follows: TABLE A — Perimeter and Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements by Zone District FRONT ZONING YARD LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING FOR DISTRICTS (SECOND TYPE FOR FOR SIDE FOR REAR TYPE FOR PARKING LOTS FRONT) FRONTS YARD YARD SIDE/REAR (square feet) (linear feet) (linear feet) (linear feet) LDR 152 Type I 10 10 Type I 20 per stall for (for uses other non-residential than residential) uses; 15 per stall if parking is placed behind building MDR 151.2. 11 Type I 10 10 Type I Same as LDR HDR 151.2.11 Type 1 10 10 Type I Same as LDR ZONING DISTRICTS FRONT LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCANG FOR YARD TYPE FOR FOR SIDE FOR REAR TYPE FOR PARKING LOTS (SECOND FRONTS YARD YARD SIDE/REAR (square feet) FRONT) (linear feet) (linear feet) (linear feet) MUO 15 (12.5)2.11 Type 1' 64 64, 11 Type 1' 20 per stall adjacent to street; 15 per stall if parking is placed behind building O 15 (12.5)Z Type 1' 64 64 Type I' Same as MUO RCC 20 (10)2,1 Type 1' 64 loll Type 11 Same as MUO NCC 104,11 Type I',13 04 04,11 Type II Same as MUO RC 10 Type 113 64 04 Type III Same as MUO RCM 10 Type I 64 04 Type III Same as MUO C/LI 15 Type 18 65.12 05,12 Type III 15 per stall; 10 per stall for parking placed behind building W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 75 of 100 187 LI 152 Type II 04.12 04,12 Type III 15 per stall; 10 per stall for parking placed behind building HI 152 Type II 04.12 04,12 Type III 15 per stall MIC/L 105 Type 11 05.12 05.12 Type 111 10 per stall MIC/H 105 Type II 05,12 05,12 Type III 10 per stall TUC — See TMC Chapter 18.28 TVs 152.3 Type 11 04 04 Type III Same as C/LI TSO 152, 9 Type 1 010• 010 Type III Same as C/LI for non-residential uses. Same as LDR for residential uses. Notes: 1. Minimum required front yard landscaped areas in the MDR and HDR zones may have up to 20% of their required landscape area developed for pedestrian and transit facilities subject to the approval criteria in TMC Section 18.52.190.v 18.52.120.C. 2. In order to provide flexibility of the site design while still providing the full amount of landscaping required by code, the front yard landscape width may be divided into a perimeter strip and one or more other landscape areas between the building and the front property line if the perimeter strip is a minimum of 10 feet and the landscape materials are sufficient to provide landscaping along the perimeter and screening of the building mass. 3. Required landscaping may include a mix of plant materials, pedestrian amenities and features, outdoor cafe -type seating and similar features, subject to the approval criteria in TMC Section! 8. 18.52.120.C. Bioretention may also be used as required landscaping subject to the approval criteria in TMC Section 18— 52.100..E 18.52.120.E. Required plant materials will be reduced in proportion to the amount of perimeter area devoted to pedestrian- oriented space. 4. Increased to 10 feet if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 5. Increased to 15 feet if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 6. Increased to Type 11 if the front yard contains truck loading bays, service areas or outdoor storage. 7. Increased to Type II if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 8. Increased to Type III if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 9. Only required along public streets. 10. Increased to 10 feet for residential uses; or if adjacent to residential uses or non-TSO zoning. 11. In the MDR and HDR districts and other districts where multifamily development is permitted, a community garden may be substituted for some or all of the landscaping. In order to qualify, a partnership with a nonprofit (501(c)(3)) with community garden expertise is required to provide training, tools and assistance to apartment residents. Partnership with the nonprofit with gardening expertise is required throughout the life of the garden. If the community garden is abandoned, the required landscaping must be installed. If the garden is located in the front landscaping, a minimum of 5 feet of landscaping must be placed between the garden and the street. 12. To accommodate the types of uses found in the C/LI, LI, HI and MIC districts, landscaping may be clustered to permit truck movements or to accommodate other uses commonly found in these districts if the criteria in TMC Section D 18.52.120.D are met. 13. For NCC and RC zoned parcels in the Tukwila International Boulevard District, the front landscaping may be reduced or eliminated if buildings are brought out to the street edge to form a continuous building wall, and if a primary entrance from the front sidewalk as well as from off-street parking areas is provided. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 76 of 100 im Section 49. TMC Section 18.52.050 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.060. Ordinance No. 2523 §10, as codified at TMC Section 18.52.050, "Significant Tree Retention," is hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.060, which shall read as follows: 18.52.060 Significant Tree Retention A. All significant trees located within any required landscape area that are not dead, dying, diseased, or a nuisance species, as identified in the Tukwila Approved Tree List, and that do not pose a safety hazard or conflict with overhead utility lines as determined by the City or an ISA certified arborist, shall be retained and protected during construction with temporary fencing or other enclosure, as appropriate to the site and following Best Management Practices for tree protection (see TMC Chapter 18.54). B. Topping of trees is prohibited and is subject to replacement. Additionally, pruning of more than 25% of canopy in a 36-month period is prohibited and is subject to replacement per TMC Section 18.52.130, Table C. 9C. Retained significant trees may be counted towards required landscaping. Additionally, the required landscaping may be reduced in exchange for retaining significant trees subject to Director approval and per TMC Section � 18.52.120.F. G.,yrr r ehT -aG z-% of -effe EaiRGPy— iGd preserved tFees- i- -__-r,-IeFat W _@ 0 redUGtiGR OR the minimum landSGape requii:eimieRt may gFaRted. Ne mere than 0 GD. The area designated for protection will vary based on the tree's diameter, species, age, and the characteristics of the planted area, and Best Management Practices for protection shall be utilized (see TMC Chapter 18.54). Property owners may be required to furnish a report by an ISA certified arborist to document a tree's condition if a tree is to be retained. The Director may require that an ISA certified arborist be retained to supervise tree protection during construction. Grade changes around existing trees within the critical root zone are not allowed. Section 50. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.52.070, "Tree Protection Standards," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.52.070 Tree Protection Standards All trees not proposed for removal as part of a project or development shall be protected using Best Management Practices and the standards below. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 77 of 100 We 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). Damaqe 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. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 78 of 100 190 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. Section 51. TMC Section 18.52.070 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.090. Ordinance No. 2523 §12, as codified at TMC Section 18.52.070, "Soil Preparation, Planting and Irrigation," is hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.090, which shall read as follows: 18.52.090 Soil Preparation, Planting and Irrigation A. Soil Preparation and Planting. 1. For landscaping in sidewalks and parking lots, or in limited areas of soil volume, structural soils (Cornell University product or similar) must be used to a preferred depth of 36 inches to promote tree root growth and provide structural support to the paved area. Minimum soil volumes for tree roots shall be 750 cubic feet per tree (see specifications and sample plans for CU-Structural Soils). Trees and other landscape materials shall be planted according to specifications in "CU Structural Soils — A Comprehensive Guide," as it now reads and as hereafter amended, or using current Best Management Practices (BMPs) as approved by the Director. Suspended pavement systems (Silva Cells or similar) may also be used if approved by the Director. 2. For soil preparation in bioretention areas, existing soils must be protected from compaction. Bioretention soil media must be prepared in accordance with standard specifications of the Surface Water Design Manual, adopted in accordance with TMC Chapter 14.30, to promote a proper functioning bioretention system. These specifications shall be adhered to regardless of whether a stormwater permit is required from the City. 3. For all other plantings (such as large planting areas where soil volumes are adequate for healthy root growth with a minimum volume of 750 cubic feet per tree), soils must be prepared for planting in accordance with BMP T5.13, "Post Construction Soil Quality and Depth," from the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (as it now reads and as hereafter amended), regardless of whether a stormwater permit is required by the City. 4. The applicant will be required to schedule an inspection by the City of the planting areas prior to planting to ensure soils are properly prepared. Soil must be amended, tilled and prepped to a depth of at least 12 inches. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 79 of 100 191 5. Installation of landscape plants must comply with BMPs including: a. Planting holes that are the same depth as the size of the root ball and two to three times wider than the root ball. b. Root balls of potted and balled and burlapped (B&B) plants must be loosened and pruned as necessary to ensure there are no encircling roots prior to planting. All burlap and all straps or wire baskets must be removed from B&B plants prior to planting. c. The top of the root flare, where the roots and the trunk begin, should be placed at grade. The root ball shall not extend above the soil surface and the flare shall not be covered by soil or mulch. d. If using mulch around trees and shrubs, maintain at least a 6-inch mulch - free ring around the base of the tree trunks and woody stems of shrubs. If using mulch around groundcovers until they become established, mulch shall not be placed over the crowns of perennial plants. B. Irrigation. 1. The intent of this standard is to ensure that plants will survive the critical establishment period when they are most vulnerable due to lack of watering and to ensure their long term viability. 2. All required plantings must be served by a permanent automatic irrigation system, unless approved by the Director. a. Irrigation shall be designed to conserve water by using the best practical management techniques available, including BMPs, for daily timing of irrigation to optimize water infiltration and conservation. These techniques may include, but not be limited to: drip irrigation (where appropriate) to minimize evaporation loss, moisture sensors to prevent irrigation during rainy periods, automatic controllers to ensure proper duration of watering, sprinkler head selection and spacing designed to minimize overspray, and separate zones for turf and other landscaping and for full sun exposure and shady areas to meet watering needs of different sections of the landscape. b. Exceptions to the irrigation requirement may be approved by the Director, such as xeriscaping (i.e., low water usage plantings), plantings approved for low impact development techniques, established indigenous plant material, or landscapes where natural appearance is acceptable or desirable to the City. However, those exceptions will require temporary irrigation until established. 3. All temporary irrigation must be removed at the end of the 3-year plant establishment period. w:\Legislative Develop ment\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 80 of 100 192 Section 52. TMC Section 18.52.080 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.100. Ordinance No. 2523 §13, as codified at TMC Section 18.52.080, "Maintenance and Pruning," is hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.100, which shall read as follows: 18.52.100 Maintenance and Pruning A. Any landscaping required by this chapter shall be retained and maintained by the property owner for the life of the development in conformance with the intent of the approved landscape plan and this chapter. Maintenance shall also include keeping all planting areas free of weeds and trash and replacing any unhealthy or dead plant materials. B. Green roofs or rooftop gardens shall be maintained to industry standards and any dead or dying plant material replaced. C. Pruning of trees and shrubs is only allowed for the health of the plant material, to maintain sight distances or sight lines, or if interfering with overhead utilities. All pruning must be done in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A-300 specifications, as it now reads and as hereafter amended. D. No tree planted by a property owner or the City to fulfill landscape requirements, or any existing tree, may be topped or removed without prior approval from the City. Any tree topped or removed without approval shall be subject to code enforcement action per TMC Chapter 8.45 in addition to the requirements of TMC Section 18.524-0.130, "Violations." E. Private property owners shall collect and properly dispose of all landscaping debris. Private property landscaping debris shall not be placed or blown into the public right-of-way for City collection. Violations will be subject to code enforcement action per TMC Chapter 8.45. F. As trees along the street frontages mature, they shall be limbed up, using proper ISA pruning techniques, to a minimum height of 8 to 18 feet depending on location of tree (over sidewalk, adjacent to road, etc.) to allow adequate visibility and clearance for vehicles. Trees may be pruned to improve views of signage and entryways by using such techniques as windowing, thinning, and limbing up; however, no more than 1/4 of the canopy may be removed within any 2-year period. All pruning shall be done in accordance with ANSI Standard A-300 specifications, as it now reads and as hereafter amended. G. 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 an ISA certified arborist. The crown shall be maintained to at least 2/3 the height of the tree prior to pruning. Otherwise, trees shall not be topped. Illegal topping is subject to replacement. Additionally, pruning of more than 25% of canopy in a w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 81 of 100 193 36-month period is prohibited and is subject to replacement per TMC Section 18.52.130, Table C. Section 53. TMC Section 18.52.100 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.120. Ordinance No. 2523 §15, as codified at TMC Section 18.52.100, "Request for Landscape Modifications," is hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.120, which shall read as follows: 18.52.120 Request for Landscape Modifications SA. Revisions to existing landscaping may be approved only if the following criteria are met: 1. The FnGdifiGatinn or revision does not reduce the landscaping to the point that activities on the site become a nuisance to ee}ghbG4-,adjacent properties. a - 2 The ration or re h Q al0ty e the cite �,-,Te—m e�i#+� ,--o,—,-�a+ste-n—d�es ,mot-k►c�-�-r�� landscape as a whole• and eitcrhr+ a2. Proposed vegetation removal, replacement, and any mitigation measures proposed are consistent with the purpose and intent Hof this chapter and bring landscaping into conformance with standards of TMC Chapter 18.52,. e b3 The grantinn of an eXGentien or stag derrd red u^t�Proposed revision will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity. 34. Any trees proposed to be removed shall be replaced with trees of similar or larger size at a minimum ratio of 1:1. In eddotinn if tree aFe removed due tG nonflintc ,n,ith utilities, these trees shall be replaGed based E)R the tree FePlaGemeRt table (-Table G) iR TPnr�Fter 18 57 11n - AB. The following MOdifiGatinncdeviations to the requirements of this chapter may be considered either as a Type 2, Special Permission Director decision, or through design review if the project is subject to that process. 1. MedifiGatffiGRS to Deviation from the requirements of Type I, ll, or III landscaping, including but not limited to the use of the landscape area for pedestrian and transit facilities, landscape planters, rooftop gardens or green roofs, terraced planters or green walls, or revisions to existing landscaping. The amount of landscaping on commercial IV -zoned properties maV be reduced bV 15% if buildings are moved to the front of the site with no parking between the building and the front landscaping, to create a more pedestrian-friendlV site design. 2. Clustering and/or averaging of required landscaping. The landscape perimeter may be clustered if the total required square footage is achieved, unless the landscaping requirement has been increased due to proximity to LDR, MDR or HDR. In addition, up to 50% of the perimeter landscaping may be relocated to the interior parking to provide more flexibility for site organization. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 82 of 100 194 3. Substitution of bioretention facility for required landscaping for Type I or II landscaping. Landscaping in a bioretention facility that includes trees, shrubs and groundcover may be counted up to 100% towards required landscaping depending on the location, type of bioretention facility proposed and proposed use. 4. Credit for retained significant trees towards landscaping requirement. 43C. The following criteria apply to requests to-mod#y-for deviation from any required landscaping standards. MedifiGati„RS W IaRGloremeRtS may he appFeyed GRI!V if the fGlIGWiRg nriterio are met: 1. The deviation does not reduce the landscaping to the point that activities on the site become a nuisance to neighbors; and 2. The modification or revision does not diminish the quality of the site landscape as a whole; and 3. One or more of the following are met: a. The modification or revision more effectively screens parking areas and blank building walls; or b. The modification or revision enables significant trees or existing built features to be retained; or c. The modification or revision is used to reduce the number of driveways and curb cuts and allow joint use of parking facilities between neighboring businesses; or d. The modification or revision is used to incorporate pedestrian or transit facilities; or e. The modification is for properties in the NCC or RC districts along Tukwila International Boulevard, where the buildings are brought out to the street edge and a primary entrance from the front sidewalk as well as from off-street parking areas is provided; or f. The modification is to incorporate alternative forms of landscaping such as landscape planters, rooftop gardens, green roof, terraced planters or green walls; or g. The modification is to incorporate a community garden, subject to the provisions of TMC Section 18.52-.030.040, Note 11. D. Clustering or perimeter averaging of landscaping may be considered if: 1. It does not diminish the quality of the site landscape as a whole; and 2. It does not create a nuisance to adjacent properties; and 3. If adjacent to residential development, the impacts from clustering are minimized; and 4. One or more of the following criteria are met: a. Clustering or perimeter averaging of plant material allows more effective use of the industrial property; or w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 83 of 100 195 b. Clustering or perimeter averaging of landscaping enables significant trees to be retained; or c. Clustering or perimeter averaging is used to reduce the number of driveways and curb cuts and/or allow joint use of parking facilities between neighboring businesses; or d. Clustering or perimeter averaging avoids future conflicts with signage. E. Landscaping in a bioretention facility, whi,* that includes trees, shrubs, and groundcovers as identified on the City's approved Bioretention Plant List and as regulated in TMC Chapter 14.30, may be counted up to 100% towards required Type I or Type II landscaping. Bioretention facilities shall not be counted towards required Type III landscaping. All of the following criteria must be met: 1. The bioretention facility has been designed by a professional trained or certified in low impact development techniques; and 2. The landscaping meets the screening requirements of the specified landscape type; and 3. Public safety concerns have been addressed; and 4. The number of trees required by the landscape type are provided. F. p, *��aCredit for Significant Trees. 1. Credit for retained significant trees may be counted towards required landscaping if the following criteria are met: a. Assessment of trees by an ISA certified arborist as to tree health, value of the trees and the likelihood of survivability during and after construction is provided; and b. Retention of tree(s) supports the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan urban tree canopy goals and policies; and c. A financial assurance is posted based on a0°/c, 150% of the value of the retained tree(s) to ensure tree replacement should the retained trees be damaged or die as a result of construction impacts. The financial assurance shall be retained for three years. 2. The value of the significant tree(s) to be retained, as determined by an ISA certified arborist, shall be posted on the tree prior to site preparation and retained throughout the construction of the project. Section 54. TMC Section 18.52.110 Amended and Recodified to TMC 18.52.130. Ordinance No. 2523 §16, as codified at TMC Section 18.52.110, "Violations," is hereby amended to recodify this section as TMC Section 18.52.130, which shall read as follows: MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 84 of 100 196 18.52.130 Violations A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered a violation of this chapter: 1. Any removal or damage of landscaping that is required by this chapter. 2. Topping or excessive pruning of trees or shrubs, except as explicitly allowed by this chapter. 3. Failure to replace dead landscaping materials. B. Penalties. In addition to any other penalties or other enforcement actions, any person who fails to comply with the provisions of this chapter also shall be subject to a civil penalty assessed against the violator as set forth herein. Each unlawfully removed or damaged tree shall constitute a separate violation. 1. The amount of the penalty shall be assessed based on Table B below. 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. 2. Penalties are in addition to the restoration of removed plant materials through the remedial measures listed in TMC Section 18.52.41-0130.C. 3. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for a 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 believes a permit was issued to the property owner or any other person. TABLE B — Fines Type of Violation Allowable Fines per Violation Removal or damage of trees or specimen shrubs without applying for and obtaining required City approval $1,000 per tree, or up to the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by an ISA certified arborist. C. Remedial Measures. In addition to the penalties provided in TMC Section 18.52.44-0130.13, the Director shall require any person conducting work in violation of this chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 1. Any illegal removal of required trees shall be subject to obtaining a tree permit and replacement with trees that meet or exceed the functional value of the removed trees. In addition, any shrubs and groundcover removed without City approval shall be replaced. 2. 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 Table C. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 85 of 100 197 TABLE C — 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) OR 2 inches (any trunk of a multi -trunk tree) 3 Over 6-8 inches 4 Over 8-20 inches 6 Over 20 inches 8 D. Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Community Development Director to enforce this chapter pursuant to the terms and conditions of TMC Chapter 8.45 or as otherwise allowed by law. E. Inspection Access. 1. For the purposes of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a permit or this chapter, authorized representatives of the Community Development 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 an authorized representative of the Community Development Director. Section 55. TMC Sections Recodified. The following sections in TMC Chapter 18.52 are hereby renumbered to be codified as follows: Old Section # New Section # 18.52.040 18.52.060 18.52.090 18.52.050 18.52.080 18.52.110 Section Name Screening and Visibility Plant Material Requirements and Tree Standards Landscape Plan Requirements Section 56. TMC Section 18.28.240 Amended. Ordinance No. 2443 §25, as codified at TMC Section 18.28.240, "General Landscaping," subparagraph C, is hereby amended to correct a section reference and shall read as follows: C. General Landscaping Considerations. 1. Plant Materials. a. Drought resistant species are encouraged in order to minimize irrigation requirements, except where site conditions within the required landscape areas ensure adequate moisture for growth. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 86 of 100 HE b. The mature size of selected tree species should be suitable to lot size, the scale of adjacent structures, and the proximity to utility lines. c. In general, deciduous trees with open branching structures are recommended to ensure visibility to retail establishments. More substantial shade trees are recommended in front of private residences. d. All trees should be selected and located so they will not obstruct views to showroom windows and building signage as they mature. e. Evergreen landscaping (Figure 18-48) is appropriate for screening utility vaults, loading docks and some storage areas. (Also see TMC Section 18.52.040050 for screening outdoor storage areas.) f. Species selection is very important in grouped plantings (Figure 18-49). Drought tolerant species are strongly recommended and monoculture plantings are discouraged. Low maintenance cost and low replacement costs are two advantages of planting drought tolerant species in grouped configurations. Low (24-30 inches) shrubs, perennial or groundcover plantings that provide a superior degree of separation between the sidewalk and street at reduced maintenance costs may be used. 2. Design. a. Shade trees should be planted to shade buildings' east and west -facing windows to provide a balance between summer cooling and winter heating through solar gain. b. All landscaped areas should be designed to allow aquifer filtration and minimize stormwater run-off utilizing bio-swales,"filtration strips, and bio-retention ponds where appropriate. Section 57. TMC Section 18.54.020 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §3 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.020, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.020 SGopeApplicability This chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control maintenance and clearing of trees within the City of TukwilaeXGeptfer on any undeveloped land and any land zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) that is developed with a single family residence. For properties located within the Shoreline jurisdiction, maintenance and removal of trcree;vegetation shall be governed by TMC Chapter 18.44, "Shoreline Overlay." For properties located within a critical area or its associated buffer, the maintenance and removal of vegetation shall be governed by TMC Chapter 18.45, "Environmentally Critical Areas". TMC Chapter 18.52 "Landscape Requirements," shall govern the maintenance and removal of landscaping on developed properties that are zoned commercial, industrial or multifamily; and on properties located in the LDR zone that are developed with a non -single family residential use. The most stringent regulations shall apply in case of a conflict. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 87 of 100 199 Section 58. TMC Section 18.54.030 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §4 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.030, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.030 Tree Permit Required A. Permit Required. 1. A Tree Permit is required prior to work within the Critical Root Zone of any Significant, Exceptional or Heritage Tree or prior to the removal or destruction of any of these trees within the City, unless the action is exempt from this chapter. 2. A Tree Permit is required when any person wishes to prune a Heritage Tree in excess of 20% of the existing crown in a two-year period. 3. A request for an exception to the requirements of the chapter shall be processed under a Tree Exception Permit. OB. Tree Removal Exemptions. The following activities are exempt from the permit requirements of this chapter except as noted below: 1. The removal of trees that are less than 6 inches in Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) on a property zoned Low Density Residential and improved with a single-family dwelling. 2. Removal of no more than four trees that are 6-8" DBH on a property zoned Low Density Residential and improved with a single-family dwelling in any 36-month period as long as the property owner submits a tree inventory survey that includes the following: a. Number of and size of trees to be removed; b. The location of any affected utility lines within the overhead "fall zone" or other built infrastructure; c. Photos of the tree(s) to be removed; d. The method of removal and identification of contractor; and e. Time schedule of tree removal. 2-3. The removal of Dead Trees outside of the shoreline jurisdiction or a sensitive area or its buffer. 34. Routine maintenance of trees necessary to maintain the health of cultivated plants, or to contain noxious weeds or invasive species as defined by the City of Tukwila or King County, and routine maintenance within rights -of -way related to Interference, Sight Distance, Emergencies or Topping, as codified in TMC Chapter 11.20. Routine maintenance includes the removal of up to 2-0OA25% of the existing tree crown in a fwe- yea- 6-month period. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 88 of 100 200 45. Emergency actions necessary to remedy an immediate threat to people or property, or public health, safety or welfare by a high -risk or extreme -risk tree may be undertaken in advance of receiving a permit. Any person, utility or public entity undertaking such an action shall submit a Tree Permit application within one week of the emergency action and replace tree(s) if required by this chapter. Additional time to apply for a Tree Permit may be granted at the discretion of the Director. 56. The removal of trees in the right-of-way related to a capital project that has a landscaping component that includes trees, where there is adequate room in the right- of-way. 67. Removal of trees as allowed with a Class I -IV forest practices permit issued by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Section 59. TMC Section 18.54.040 Amended. Ordinance No. 2570 §5, as codified at TMC Section 18.54.040, is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.040 Permit Submittal Requirements w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 89 of 100 201 9A. Permit Application. Prior to any tree removal, site clearing or work within the Critical Root Zone, a Tree Permit application must be submitted to the Department of Community Development containing the following information: 1. Site Plan of the proposal showing: a. Diameter, species name, location and canopy of existing Significant Trees in relation to proposed and existing structures, utility lines, and construction limit line; b. Identification of all Significant Trees to be removed and/or relocated; c. Existing and proposed topography of the site at 2-foot contour intervals; and d. Limits of any seRsitivecritical area and seRs+tive critical area buffer and/or shoreline jurisdiction. 2. Landscape Plan for the proposal showing: a. Diameter, species name, spacing and location of replacement trees to be planted; b. Diameter, species name and location of all Significant Trees to be retained; and c. Vegetation protection measures consistent with the criteria in TMC Section 18.54.060. 3. Professional review or recommendation- for removal of Heritage Trees or as otherwise required. A Qualified Tree Professional report is not required for the permitted removal of trees other than Heritage Trees, on a lot zoned Low Density Residential and improved with a single-family dwelling. A,'ee-Res"^'I-req�ro n„�l;f,o� Troo PrefessieRal report unless etheRvise stated On this GhapteF, er wheR the DiFeGtG deteFMOReS that tree GleaFiRg, Sete GleaFiRg eF work withiR the Gritic-al ReGt ZeReS may FeSH't OR adverse iFnpaGts reqHiFiRg remedial measures. A Qualified Tree PFE)feSSieRal Fepert is RE)t required feF the permitted remOval of tFees, E)theF thaR Heritage Trees, eR a The Director may require a report from a Qualified Tree Professional if replacement trees are required or when the Director determines that tree removal, site clearing, or work within the Critical Root Zone may result in adverse impacts requiring remedial measures. Third party review of the report or recommendation may be required. The report or recommendation shall address the following: a. The anticipated effects of proposed construction or tree removal on the viability of Significant Trees to remain on -site; b. Recommendations on replacement trees, spacing and maintenance of proposed replacement trees once installed; c. Post -construction site inspection and evaluation, and d. Estimated cost of maintenance of replacement trees for the purposes of calculation of financial assurance, if required. MLegislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 90 of 100 202 4. A photo of the tree(s) to be impacted or removed. 5. Time schedule. Proposed time schedule of vegetation removal, relocation and/or replacement, and other construction activities that may affect on -site vegetation, sensitive area, sensitive area buffer, and/or shoreline zone. 813. Permit Materials Waiver. The Director may waive the requirement for any or all plans or permit items specified in this section upon finding that the information on the application is sufficient to demonstrate that the proposed work will meet the approval criteria detailed in this chapter and other City ordinances. Such waiver of a requirement shall not be construed as waiving any other requirements of this chapter or related regulations. €C. Permit Application Fee. A Tree Permit fee shall be paid at the time an application or request is filed with the department, pursuant to TMC Section 18.88.010, except as otherwise noted in this chapter. All fees shall be paid according to the Land Use Fee Schedule in effect at the time of application. There is no permit fee for submittal of the Tree Inventory Survey. Section 60. TMC Section 18.54.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §6 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.050, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.050 Permit Approval Criteria, General All Tree Permit applications shall meet the criteria outlined below for approval. 1. Existing trees will be retained on -site to the maximum extent possible as required by TMC Section 18.54.060 and as recommended in the Qualified Tree Professional report, if applicable. 2. Tree protection will be implemented as required in TMC Section 18.54.070. 3. Tree replacement will be implemented as required in TMC Section 18.54.080; unless no replacement is required per TMC Section 18.54.080, Table A. 4. Tree replacement funds will be deposited into the City of Tukwila Tree Fund, as described in TMC Section 18.54.100, if required. 5. A performance assurance will be submitted as required in TMC Section 18.54.110. Section 61. TMC Section 18.54.060 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §7 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.060, are hereby amended to read as follows: w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 91 of 100 203 18.54.060 Tree Retention Standards A. As many Significant, Exceptional and Heritage Trees as possible are to be retained on a site proposed for development or re -development, particularly to provide a buffer between development, taking into account the condition and age of the trees. As part of a land use application such as, but not limited to, subdivision or short plat review, design review or building permit review, the Director of Community Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require reasonable alterations to the arrangement of buildings, parking or other elements of the proposed development in order to retain Significant, Exceptional or Heritage non-invasive Trees. B. Topping and pruning of more than 25% of the canopy of trees is prohibited and considered removal and subject to replacement requirements of TMC Section 18.54.080. C. Removal or topping of Ttrees located on vaeaRtundeveloped properties met ho remn;iort o... ^^+:is prohibited except: Those that interfere with access and/or passage on public trails; or 2. When trees, including alders and cottonwoods, have been determined to be one of the following by a Tree Risk Assessment prepared by a Tree Risk Assessor, and where the risk cannot be reduced to Low with mitigation, such as pruning: a. Moderate risk with significant consequences; b. Moderate risk with severe consequences; c. High risk with a Target or Risk Target; or d. Extreme risk. 3. Factors that will be considered in approving such tree removal include, but are not limited to, tree condition and health, age, risks to life or structures, and potential for root or canopy interference with utilities. family GlWellffiRg, these trees shall be FeplaGed based OR the FeplaGemeRt requirements set fgrth in TIVIG SeGti^n 18 54 020 anri Table B. The Dire GteF gr Planning GeMMiSSinn may ttev r4—. €D. Protection of trees shall be a major factor in the location, design, construction and maintenance of streets and utilities. Removal or significant damage that could lead to tree death of Significant, Exceptional or Heritage Trees shall be mitigated with on- or off -site tree replacement as required by this chapter. FE. A Qualified Tree Professional shall provide an assessment of any tree proposed for retention in a proposed development to ensure its survivability during construction. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 92 of 100 204 GF. The Department shall conduct a tree canopy assessment every five years from the date of the adoption of this chapter to ensure the tree canopy goals of the Comprehensive Plan are being met. Section 62. TMC Section 18.54.080 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §9 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.080, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.080 Tree Replacement Standards A. Replacement Exemption for Single -Family Tree Removal. Except for Heritage Trees the removal of Significant Trees, depending on the size within any 36- month period on a property zoned Low Density Residential and improved with a single- family dwelling is permitted, subject to the requirements of Table A below. TABLE A — Single Family Tree Removal without Replacement Limits Trees (DBH) # of Trees in 36 month period that can be removed without replacement >6-8" 4 >8-18" 2 >18" 1 1 and no other trees (1) A combination of trees of different sizes may be removed without replacement so long as the total number of trees removed does not exceed the number allowed for the largest tree removed in a 36-month period. See Tree Permit Application for additional details. B. Replacement Standards. 1. Each existing Significant Tree removed, including removal of trees in easements and rights -of -way for the purposes of constructing public streets and utilities, shall be replaced with new tree(s), based on the size of the existing tree as shown below, up to a maximum density of 7-0100 new trees per acre, generally 12-15 feet apart. If the number of required replacement trees exceeds site capacity, payment is required into the City's Tree Fund. 2. Tree Replacement Ratios. Table B below establishes tree replacement ratios when Significant, Exceptional or Heritage Trees are removed. For properties zoned Low Density Residential and improved with a single-family dwelling, when the number of trees permitted to be removed in a 36-month period, as shown in Table A, has been exceeded, the replacement ratios set forth in Table B apply. Trees damaged due to natural disasters, such as wind storms, hail, ice or snow storms, and earthquakes, are not required to be replaced. Trees determined to be Defective by the City or a Qualified w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 93 of 100 205 Tree Professional, are not required to be replaced. Any tree removal on undeveloped properties is subject to replacement ratios in Table B. Illegal topping and pruning more than 25% in a 36-month period is subject to replacement ratios in Table B. 3. 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 site's improvement. Replaced trees that do not survive must be replanted in the next appropriate season for planting. 4. If all required replacement trees cannot be accommodated reasonably on the site, the applicant shall pay into the Tree Fund in accordance with the Consolidated Permit Fee Schedule adopted by resolution of the Citv Council. The fee shall be —based a TABLE B — Tree Replacement Requirements Arnount of Mature Tree Mature Canopy- Reeved Equivalent- Rt;tuiree Tree Alumber „f i�er�laremen+ Trees Trees (DBH) Replacement ratio for trees that are subject to replacement Up to Small GaRGP)�- 4- 6-8" 111 T- r2e Medium - 2- >8-18" 1-2 >1 0n1 &n ++ LaMe 3 >18„ eGaRGPY Tre 5. Tree replacement shall also meet the standards in TMC Section 18.54.160. Section 63. TMC Section 18.54.110 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §12 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.110, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.110 Performance Assurance To mitigate potential damages that may result from unauthorized tree removal or maintenance, the Director may require the applicant to submit a bond, letter of credit, or other means of assurance acceptable to the City prior to issuance of a Tree Permit, subject to the following provision: 1. Tree Protection Assurance. The applicant may be required to post a three year performance bond or other acceptable security device to ensure the installation, maintenance and adequate performance of tree protection measures during the construction process. The amount of this bond shall equal 150 percent of the City's estimated cost of replacing each replacement tree. The estimated cost per tree shall be w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 94 of 100 206 the foe established by the rityfair market value of the tree. Prior to DCD final inspection, any protected tree found to be irreparably damaged, severely stressed or dying shall be replaced according to the standards identified in this chapter. The City may release all or part of the bond prior to the conclusion of the bonding period if the applicant demonstrates that the requirements of this section have been satisfied and there is evidence that the protected trees will survive. If trees designated for retention are damaged, they shall be subject to replacement. 2. Tree Maintenance Assurance. Where replacement trees are required, the applicant may be required to post a one-year replacement tree maintenance bond or other acceptable security device to ensure the survival of replacement trees. The amount of the maintenance bond shall equal 150 percent of the cost of plant material, periodic fertilizing and pruning, and labor until tree survival is ensured. In the event a required replacement tree becomes irreparably damaged, severely stressed or dies, the tree shall be replaced according to the standards in this chapter. The City may release all or part of the bond prior to the conclusion of the bonding period if the applicant demonstrates that the requirements of this section have been satisfied and there is evidence that the protected trees will survive. The requirePneRt fer tree rnaiRteR RGe shall be Fe Gerde ran ^6 1r^�m chimer Submission of annual photos for three years documenting that the tree is in good health will satisfy this requirement for properties zoned Low Density Residential and improved with a single-family dwelling. Trees that do not survive the three-year maintenance period shall be replanted and the three year maintenance period shall restart at the time of replanting. �Mv I MY* I emi 43. The applicant shall provide an estimate of the costs associated with the required performance bond or other security as described above. In lieu of an applicant's estimate, the performance assurance shall be equal to City staff's best estimate of possible costs to meet the above requirements. In no case shall the performance - assurance exceed an amount equal to two and one-half times the current cost of replacing the plants in accordance with the tree replacement provisions of this chapter. 54. The performance assurances shall not be fully released without final inspection and approval of completed work by the City, submittal of any post -construction evaluations or following any prescribed trial maintenance period required in the permit. 65. Performance assurances provided in accordance with this chapter may be enforced in whole or in part by the City upon determination by the Director that the applicant has failed to fully comply with approved plans and/or conditions. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 95 of 100 207 Section 64. TMC Section 18.54.160 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §17 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.160, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.160 Soil Preparation, Plant Material and Maintenance Standards A. Soil Preparation. 1. Soils must be prepared for planting by incorporating compost and/or topsoil to a depth of 12 inches throughout the planting area. 2. An inspection of the planting areas prior to planting may be required to ensure soils are properly prepared. 3. Installation of plants must comply with Best Management Practices including, but not limited to: a. Planting holes that are the same depth as the size of the root ball and two to three times wider than the root ball. b. Root balls of potted and balled and burlapped (B&B) plants must be loosened and pruned as necessary to ensure there are no encircling roots prior to planting. All burlap and all straps or wire baskets must be removed from B&B plants prior to planting. c. The top of the root flare, where the roots and the trunk begin, should be placed at grade. The root ball shall not extend above the soil surface and the flare shall not be covered by soil or mulch. For bare root plants, ensure soil beneath roots is stable enough to ensure correct height of the tree. d. If using mulch around trees and shrubs, maintain at least a 4-inch mulch - free ring around the base of the tree trunks and woody stems of shrubs. If using mulch around groundcovers until they become established, mulch shall not be placed over the crowns of perennial plants. B. Plant Material Standards. 1. Plant material shall be healthy, vigorous and well -formed, with well - developed, fibrous root systems, free from dead branches or roots. Plants shall be free from damage caused by temperature extremes, pre -planting or on -site storage, lack of or excess moisture, insects, disease, and mechanical injury. Plants in leaf shall show a full crown and be of good color. Plants shall be habituated to outdoor environmental conditions (i.e. hardened -off. 2. Evergreen trees shall be a minimum of 6 feet in height at time of planting. 3. Deciduous trees shall have at least a 2-inch caliper at time of planting as measured 4.5 feet from the ground, determined according to the American Standard for Nursery Stock as it now reads and as hereafter amended. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 96 of 100 M 4. Smaller plant stock may be substituted on a case -by -case basis with approval of the City's environmental specialist. 5. Tree spacing shall take into account the location of existing and new trees as well as site conditions. 6. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines or require pruning to maintain necessary clearances. C. Tree Maintenance and Pruning. 1. Pruning of trees should be (1) for the health of the plant material, (2) to maintain sight distances or sight lines, or (3) if interfering with overhead utilities. All pruning must be done in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 specifications, as it now reads and as hereafter amended. No more than 25% of the tree canopy shall be pruned in any two-year period, except for fruit trees that are being pruned to increase harvest potential. Any tree pruned in excess of 25% of the canopy shall be subject to replacement ratios listed under TMC Section 18.54.080. 2. All protected and replacement trees and vegetation shown in approved Tree Permit shall be maintained in a healthy condition by the property owner throughout the life of the project, unless otherwise approved by the Director in a subsequent Tree Permit. 3. 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. Section 65. TMC Section 18.54.190 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2570 §20 and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.54.190, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.54.190 Violations A. Failure to comply with any requirement of this chapter shall be deemed a violation subject to enforcement pursuant to this chapter and TMC Chapter 8.45. B. Penalties. 1. In addition to any other penalties or other enforcement allowed by law, any person who fails to comply with the provisions of this chapter also shall be subject to a civil penalty assessed against the property owner as set forth herein. Each unlawfully removed or damaged tree shall constitute a separate violation. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 97 of 100 209 2. Removal or damage of tree(s) without applying for and obtaining required City approval is subject to a fine of $1,000 per tree, or up to three times the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by a Qualified Tree Professional, whichever is greater. 3. Any fines paid as a result of violations of this chapter shall be allocated as follows: 75% paid into the City's Tree Fund; 25% into the General Fund. 4. 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. 5. Penalties are in addition to the restoration of removed trees through the remedial measures listed in TMC Section 18.54.200. 6. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for a 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 believes a permit was issued to the property owner or any other person. Section 66. TMC Section 18.70.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2518 §15 and 1819 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.70.050, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.70.050 Nonconforming Structures Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption of this title that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on area, development area, height, yards or other characteristics of the structure, it may be continued so long as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the following provisions: 1. No such structure may be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its degree of nonconformity. Ordinary maintenance of a nonconforming structure is permitted, pursuant to TMC Section 18.70.060, including but not limited to painting, roof repair and replacement, plumbing, wiring, mechanical equipment repair/replacement and weatherization. These and other alterations, additions or enlargements may be allowed as long as the work done does not extend further into any required yard or violate any other portion of this title. Complete plans shall be required of all work contemplated under this section. 2. Should such structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 50% of its replacement cost at time of destruction, in the judgment of the City's Building Official, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with provisions of this title, except that in the LDR zone, structures that are nonconforming in regard to yard setbacks or sensitive area buffers, but were in conformance at the time of construction may be reconstructed to their original dimensions and location on the lot. W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 98 of 100 210 3. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance whatsoever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zone in which it is located after it is moved. 4. When a nonconforming structure, or structure and premises in combination, is vacated or abandoned for 24 consecutive months, the structure, or structure and premises in combination, shall thereafter be required to be in conformance with the regulations of the zone in which it is located. Upon request of the owner, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months. 5. Residential structures and uses located in any single-family or multiple - family residential zoning district and in existence at the time of adoption of this title shall not be deemed nonconforming in terms of bulk, use, or density provisions of this title. Such buildings may be rebuilt after a fire or other natural disaster to their original dimensions and bulk, but may not be changed except as provided in the non -conforming uses section of this chapter. 6. Single-family structures in single- or multiple -family residential zone districts that have legally nonconforming building setbacks, shall be allowed to expand the ground floor only along the existing building line(s), so long as the existing distance from the nearest point of the structure to the property line is not reduced, and the square footage of new intrusion into the setback does not exceed 50% of the square footage of the current intrusion. 7. In wetlands, watercourses and their buffers, existing structures that do not meet the requirements of the SeTSitiveCritical Areas Overlay District chapter of this title may be remodeled, reconstructed or replaced, provided that: a. The new construction does not further intrude into or adversely impact an undeveloped sewcritical area or the required buffer, except where an interrupted buffer waiver has been granted by the Director. However, legally constructed buildings, other than accessory structures, may: (1) Expand vertically to add upper stories in exchange for buffer enhancement, provided no significant tree is removed. (2) Expand laterally along the building side that is opposite of critical area up to a maximum of 1,000 square feet, provided that expansion is outside 75 percent of the required buffer; buffer enhancement is proposed; and no significant tree is removed. (3) Expand laterally along the existing building lines in exchange for buffer enhancement, provided the expansion into the buffer is less than 50 percent of the current encroachment or 500 square feet, whichever is less; expansion is outside 75 percent of the required buffer; and no significant tree is removed. (4) Enclose within existing footprint in exchange for buffer enhancement, provided no significant tree is removed. b. The new construction does not threaten the public health, safety or welfare_ ; a- c. The structure otherwise meets the requirements of this chapter. w:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 99 of 100 211 8. In areas of potential geologic instability, coal mine hazard areas, and buffers, as defined in the SeRGitiveCritical Areas Overlay District chapter of this title, existing structures may be remodeled, reconstructed or replaced, provided that: a. The new construction is subject to the geotechnical report requirements and standards of TMC Sections 18.45.120.13 and 18.45.120.C; b. The new construction does not threaten the public health, safety or welfare; c. The new construction does not increase the potential for soil erosion or result in unacceptable risk or damage to existing or potential development or to neighboring properties; and d. The structure otherwise meets the requirements of this chapter. 9 A nnnnnnfnrminn use, within a nnnnn nrminp GtF anti pro shall net ho_al'E)W d to expaRrd into any other nnrtion of the nnnnnnfnrmiRg stn Urtur Section 67. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 68. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 69. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 12020. ATTEST/AUTH E NTI CATE D: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Attachment: Map A — Critical Area Tracts in Tukwila South W:\Legislative Development\Critical Areas update strike-thru 1-28-20 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 212 Page 100 of 100 Critical Area Tracts in Tukwila South '-LS tRnZ H.Lf= 0.1 iiMM z --JL < E IU 213 214 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2344; REPEALING THE 2011 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM; APPROVING AND ADOPTING A NEW SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Green/Duwamish River, a shoreline of the state regulated under RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila, and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 finds that shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and that unrestricted construction on privately and publicly owned shorelines of the state is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 establishes a hierarchy of preference for uses in shorelines of state-wide significance: recognizing and protecting the state-wide interest over local interest; preserving the natural character of the shoreline; resulting in long term over short term benefit; protecting the resources and ecology of the shoreline; increasing public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines; increasing recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and providing for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop and administer local shoreline master programs for regulation of uses on shorelines of the state; and WHEREAS, Tukwila's current Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 2009 and revised per Department of Ecology comments in 2011; and WHEREAS, the City is conducting a required periodic update of its Shoreline Master Program per RCW 90.58.080 (4)(a)(i) using the joint review process with the Department of Ecology; and W: Legislative Development\SMP-Adopting update -repeal Ord 2344 8-28-19 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 3 215 WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Public Outreach Plan that incorporated a variety of methods to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update including an open house, mailings to property owners and tenants, notice in a stormwater bill, postings on the City's website, creation of a broadcast e-mail group who received updates of the shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter "The Hazelnut;" and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a public review draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on March 28, 2019, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council on April 25, 2019; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Planning Commission recommended draft Shoreline Master Program update and a Determination of Non - Significance was issued May 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 24, 2019 to review the Planning Commission recommended draft Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission recommended draft Shoreline Master Program to address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers, staff and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Shoreline Master Program established. The Shoreline Master Program with accompanying maps, as set forth in "Attachment A," is hereby adopted and shall become binding as of the effective date of this ordinance on all properties within the shoreline jurisdiction. Section 2. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2344, including the Shoreline Master Program adopted by reference in Section 1 thereof, is hereby repealed. Section 3. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/ subsection numbering. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Adopting update -repeal Ord 2344 8-28-19 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 216 Page 2 of 3 Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 12020. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney Attachment A — Shoreline Master Program Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk:_ Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Adopting update -repeal Ord 2344 8-28-19 MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 3 217 218 TUKWILA SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 1 ' -ar._ December 14, 2009 Revised Per Ecology Letter March 24, 2011 PC Recommended Draft 4-25-2019 Prepared by Tukwila Department of Community Development with the assistance of ESA Adolfson and The Watershed Company - EC0L0GI This report was funded in part through a grant, G0600234, from the Washington State Department of Ecology. 219 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose and Background.......................................................................1 1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction............................................................................1 2. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM...............................................................5 2.1 SMP Components..................................................................................5 2.2 SMP Elements........................................................................................6 2.3 History of SMP Planning in Tukwila....................................................6 2.4 Current SMP Update Process................................................................7 3. DEFINITIONS...................................................................................................8 4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION —SUMMARY .8 4.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications..................................9 4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions...................................10 4.3 Land Use..............................................................................................11 4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts .......................13 4.5 Conclusions..........................................................................................15 5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN - SUMMARY...................................17 5.1 Background..........................................................................................17 5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions.....................................................17 5.3 Plans, Programs, and Completed Projects...........................................19 5.4 Restoration Opportunities....................................................................19 5.5 Potential Projects and Priorities...........................................................20 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES.........................................................21 7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS.......................................21 7.1 Pre 2009 Regulatory Framework.........................................................21 7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory/...........................................22 Characterization Report and Restoration Plan i 220 7.3 State Environment Designation System...............................................23 7.4 Environment Designations...................................................................26 7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers.....................................................31 7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment.....................................................36 7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment........................................................38 7.8 High Intensity Environment.................................................................42 Seetiert 7.9 Aquatic Environment...................................................................44 8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS AND....................................................44 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE JURISDICTION.......................................................................45 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations................................................45 9.2 Purpose.................................................................................................46 10. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE.....................................................49 11. SHORELINE DESIGN GUIDELINES...........................................................51 12. SHORELINE RESTORATION......................................................................51 13. ADMINISTRATION.......................................................................................52 13.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit.........................................................52 13.2 Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations.....................................53 14. APPEALS........................................................................................................53 15. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS .............................54 16. LIABILITY......................................................................................................54 SMP Public Review Draft Clean ll 2/5/2020 221 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Pre 2009 Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44) 22 Figure 2. Briscoe Levee Profile............................................................................................. 35 Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer ................................ 38 Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees .................................. 40 Figure 5. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees ....................................... 41 Figure 6. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placement of Fill on LeveeBack Slope................................................................................................... 42 Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment........................................................................ 43 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila ........................... 18 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System — WAC173-26-211 (5)............................................................................................. 25 Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline ............................ 27 Ecological Conditions LIST OF MAPS Map 1. Annexation History and Potential Annexation Areas......................................4 Map 2. Duwamish River Transition Zone ......................................................... 16 Map 3. Shoreline Environments................................................................... 30-2-9 Map �^--colzer-elin Map-54. Sensitive Critical Areas in the Shoreline .......................................... ...484-7 Map-65. Shoreline Public Access.................................................................. 5049 APPENDICES A. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report B. Shoreline Restoration Plan 222 SMP Public Review Draft Clean iii 2/5/2020 i. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Background This document presents the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) for the City of Tukwila. It is an update to Tukwila's existing SMP, originally adopted in 1974. The SMP is intended to guide new shoreline development, redevelopment and promote reestablishment of natural shoreline functions, where possible. It was prepared in conformance with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) and its implementing regulations (WAC 173-26). This Shoreline Master Program reflects changes in local conditions and priorities and the evolving State regulatory environment. This Shoreline Master Program presents background information on the Shoreline Management Act, describes shoreline jurisdiction in Tukwila, summarizes the amendment process carried out to date, presents a summary of the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization, presents a summary of the Shoreline Restoration Plan, proposes shoreline environments, and establishes goals, policies and regulations, which apply to all activities on all affected lands and waters within the shoreline jurisdiction. In addition, there is a chapter that establishes design guidelines. Maps are provided to illustrate shoreline jurisdiction and environments. The Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report is provided in Appendix A. The Restoration Plan is provided in Appendix B. A Cumulative Impacts Analysis is provided as a stand-alone document. 1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction A. Jurisdiction under the Shoreline Management Act The Shoreline Management Act, or SMA (RCW 90.58), establishes regulations for the management and protection of the state's shoreline resources and requires planning for reasonable and appropriate uses. The Act calls for a joint planning effort between state and local jurisdictions, requiring local government to develop its own Shoreline Master Program based on state guidelines. The SMA requires that local governments establish shoreline jurisdiction for those bodies of water and lands that are considered to be "shorelines of the state" or "shorelines of statewide significance." Shorelines of the state include rivers with a mean annual flow of at least 20 cubic feet per second (cfs). Shorelines of statewide significance in western Washington include rivers with a mean annual flow of at least 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). The minimum shoreline environment required by the SMA includes all lands 200 feet from the "ordinary high water mark" or floodway of a state shoreline, whichever is greater, and all wetlands associated with these state shorelines and located within the 100- year floodplain. The following graphic illustrates the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act. SMP Public Review Draft - Strikeout 1 2/5/2020 223 Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) =IIII — =1111 -IIII -IIII IIII-IIII-IIII— Hill -IIII- Hill -IIII-IIII-IIII-III IIII=IIII-IIII-IIII=IIII-IIII-III I. I 200' _I Wetland in 100 year Flood plain 100 Year Flood Plain 200' from OHWM or Flood way and all marshes, bogs, and swamps in 100 year Flood plain 200' from OHWM and 100 year flood plain Figure 1.1 Lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act B. Shoreline Jurisdiction in Tukwila The Green/Duwamish River is the only "shoreline of statewide significance" in the city (RCW 98.58.030). A small portion of the Black River, a shoreline of the state, is also located in Tukwila. Throughout the SMP document, the term "Shoreline Jurisdiction" is used to describe the water and land areas subject to shoreline jurisdiction in Tukwila. Based on SMA guidelines for shoreline jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green/Duwamish River and the Black River, its banks, the upland area which extends from the ordinary high water mark landward for 200 feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. For the purpose of determining shoreline jurisdiction only, the floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and, therefore, have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. The Tukwila SMP applies to all development activity occurring within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, which corresponds to the Shoreline Overlay District as established by Chapter 18.44 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 224 2/5/2020 All proposed uses and activities under its jurisdiction must be reviewed for compliance with the goals, policies and regulations referenced herein. All proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act and this Master Program whether or not a permit is required. This Master Program includes the two proposed annexation areas indicated in the Comprehensive Plan (Map 1). The north annexation area is located between the Green/Duwamish River on the east, Military Road to the west, and from S. 128th Street north to S. 96th Street. The south annexation area is located between I-5 and the Green River, south of the City limits to S. 204th Street. Adoption of shoreline policies and environment designations for newly annexed areas would require an amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. To avoid having to amend the SMP later, these potential annexation areas are considered here and the environmental designations and regulations will apply upon annexation. In response to regional policies of the King County Growth Management Planning Council, Tukwila designated two key areas as its Urban Center and its Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC). The Southcenter area, from I-405 south to S. 180th Street was designated the "Urban Center;" and the Duwamish Corridor, an area where existing industrial employment is concentrated, was designated as Tukwila's "Manufacturing Industrial Center." Both of these areas have lands adjacent to the Green River and are identified on Map 1. The City Council adopted a Strategic Implementation Plan for the MIC on November 2, 1998. The Plan includes an analysis of existing conditions along the shoreline, narratives of various habitats, current regulations, proposed requirements and prototypes for future development along the shoreline in the MIC. The Strategic Plan was prepared in conjunction with a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement that analyzed development alternatives in the MIC area and streamlined SEPA review for development in that corridor for the past 20 years. Where changed circumstances dictate, the SMP will provide updated guidance and regulations for the MIC area. The MIC area has significant potential for redevelopment. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 3 2/5/2020 225 Turning Basin Legend m" Tukwila City Limits Tukwila Urban Center Manufarting /Industrial Center Potential Annexation Areas Green / Duwamish River Shoreline Annexed After 1974 Map 1 I& Annexation History and Potential Annexation Areas Manufacturing/Industrial Center Boundary x • : Tukwila Urban Center �i A FJ ) Lt] i r.._.5 MILE SMP Public Review Draft Clean 226 4 2/5/2020 2. TUKWILA'S SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 2.1 SMP Components This SMP document contains the SMA overview and background related to the development of the SMP Comprehensive Update in 2011 as updated through the 2019 Periodic Review process. To comply with the SMA, Tukwila has included the following components in this Shoreline Master Program (SMP): • Outreach including a citizen participation process, and coordination with state agencies, Indian tribes, and other local governments (see Section 2.44ie-lew) • 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 polieies that have adepted in the Sher-eline Element of the • Development regulations that have been eadifiedin T-N4C 19.44 and 14 4 c • Shoreline Design Guidelines that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 • Evaluation and consideration of cumulative impacts The Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan: • Contains the SMP goals and policies that have been adopted in the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance #, date) The Shoreline Regulations: • Development regulations that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 (Ordinance #, date) • Development regulations that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.45 (Ordinance # to be inserted after City Council adoption in 2019. d te) • Shoreline Design Guidelines that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 (Ordinance #, date) • Board of Architectural Review Shoreline Design Criteria found in TMC Section 18.60.050 (Ordinance #, date) • Shoreline Landscape Requirements that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.52 (Ordinance #, date) • Definitions provided in TMC Chapter 18.06 (Ordinance #, date) • Portions of the Critical Areas Protection Provisions that have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.45 (Ordinance #, date) with exclusions identified in Subsection 9 of this document and within TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 2/5/2020 227 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 Ci 's Zoning Code. The elements required by the SMA are: Economic Development Public Access Recreation Circulation Shoreline Uses Conservation Historical, cultural, educational and scientific element Preventing or minimizing flood damage Consistent with the Growth Management Act requirement to integrate the SMP and the Comprehensive Plan, the City incorporated the required elements of a SMP noted above into its Plan. Further direction for implementation of the required elements of SMPs is provided through Zoning Code and Design Review requirements. 2.3 History of SMP Planning in Tukwila Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) was first adopted in 1974, in response to the passage of the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58). The SMP was later updated through minor amendments in 1982 and 1987, none of which required the adoption of a new SMP. In 1992-1993, as part of the preparation for a major revision to the City's Comprehensive Plan, the City completed a Shorelines Background Report (1993), with the participation of the Tukwila Tomorrow Citizen's Committee. This report established the basis for the shoreline comprehensive plan goals and policies adopted in 1995. Staff began the process to prepare a new SMP in 1999, based on the draft shoreline guidelines that were in the process of adoption by the Department of Ecology at the time. A grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology provided funding for a Shoreline Inventory of all parcels within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction and a Shoreline Design Manual. New shoreline regulations approved by Ecology in 2000 were immediately appealed and ultimately invalidated by the Shoreline Hearings Board in 2001. As a result, the City opted to defer completing its SMP update process until new guidelines were issued by Ecology, which occurred in 2003. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 6 2/5/2020 228 In 2005, Tukwila received a grant (SMA Grant No. 0600234) to complete a comprehensive update, including new technical analyses of shoreline conditions, restoration planning, and the preparation of revised SMP goals, policies, and regulations. In order to capitalize on previous citizens' involvement in the planning process, the City decided to start the SMP update with the work begun in 1999, with revisions to address new Ecology regulations and guidance, as well as changed conditions in the City's shoreline area. The development of any SMP, as required by new shoreline regulations, involves three specific steps: • Shoreline inventory and characterization, preparation of a restoration plan, preparation of a cumulative impacts analysis; • Citizen involvement in development of policies and regulations; and • Review by interested parties, including adjacent jurisdictions. As part of this 2009 SMP update process, the City: • Continued the previously started citizen involvement program utilizing the Planning Commission, which serves as the City's permanent citizen advisory body for land use issues, holding open houses and public hearings • Coordinated and shared information with neighboring jurisdictions • Updated and expanded the Shoreline Inventory and mapping (included as Appendix A to this document) • Prepared a Shoreline Restoration Plan (Appendix B) • Proposed shoreline environment designations • Proposed shoreline development policies • Proposed shoreline development regulations • Prepared a draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis • Coordinated with Department of Ecology, submitting a staff draft SMP for review and comment and meeting with Ecology staff 2.4 Current SMP Update Process The City of Tukwila completed a comprehensive update to its Shoreline Master Program in 2009, with additional revisions made in 2011. Washington State law requires jurisdictions to periodically review and update their SMPs every eight years in accordance with the SMA and its current guidelines and legislative rules to attain state approval. The City of Tukwila's update started with an open house in the fall of 2018 and will be complete in 2019. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 7 2/5/2020 229 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 an-d—are incorporated into the Definitions Chapter of the Zoning Code, TMC Chapter 18.06. In addition to the definitions provided in TMC Chapter 18.06, Chapter 90.58 RCW, Chapter 173-26 WAC and Chapter 173-27 WAC apply within the shoreline jurisdiction. Where definitions in the Tukwila Municipal Code conflict with state definitions, the definitions provided in RCW or WAC shall control. 4. SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION— SUMMARY Local jurisdictions updating their Shoreline Master Program (SMP) are required to prepare an inventory and characterization of the shoreline resources within their boundaries. As part of the City's prior SMP update, a Draft Inventory and Characterization Report and Map Folio was prepared in December 2006, and finalized in the spring of 2007 following technical review by Ecology and King County. The final report and map folio are included as Appendix A to this SMP. While the report has been finalized, the City continues to utilize the most recent information available, such as the recently updated FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) Revised Preliminary Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM), which were issued after the completion of the Inventory and Characterization report. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 8 2/5/2020 230 The purpose of the Inventory and Characterization Report was to conduct a baseline inventory of conditions for water bodies regulated as "shorelines of the state" located in the City of Tukwila. The area regulated under Tukwila's SMP is approximately 12.5 linear miles along the banks of the Green/Duwamish River. For the baseline inventory, the river shoreline was divided into four reaches: 1) Reach G1-PAA (southern Potential Annexation Area); 2) Reach G1 (from the southern City boundary downstream to the Black River/Green River confluence); 3) Reach G2 (from the Black River/Green River confluence downstream to the northern City limits); and 4) Reach G2-PAA (the northern Potential Annexation Area). The reaches are depicted on Map 3. The shoreline characterization identifies existing conditions, identifies current uses and public access, evaluates functions and values of resources in the shoreline jurisdiction, and explores opportunities for conservation and restoration of ecological functions. The findings are intended to provide a framework for updates to the City's shoreline management goals, policies, and development regulations. Key findings of the inventory and characterization are summarized below. 4.1 Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications The City of Tukwila includes approximately 12.5 miles of the Green/Duwamish River and is situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands at the transition from the fresh water Green River to the tidally influenced Duwamish estuary ecosystem. The Green River basin is part of the Green/Duwamish Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9). Historically, the Green/Duwamish River drained a significantly larger area than it does today. The Green/Duwamish River has undergone extensive modifications in the past to reduce channel migration and limit the extent and duration of valley flooding. The modifications include both natural river course changes and major engineering projects in the early part of the 20th Century that diverted the White, Black and Cedar Rivers to neighboring basins. As a result, the overall freshwater discharge in the Green/Duwamish River has been reduced to around a third of the pre -diversion era. Seven pump stations also modify flows into the Green and Duwamish Rivers. Three of the pump stations, Black River, P-17, and Segale, are operated by the Green River Flood Control District, and four stations, Lift Stations 15, 17, 18, and 19 are operated by the City of Tukwila. The Black River pump station is the largest station discharging flows to the Duwamish River. This station is approximately 1,000 feet upstream of the Green —Black River confluence, and is intended to both block floodwaters from the Green from inundating the Black River and Springbrook Creek in the City of Renton, and also regulates flows from Springbrook Creek into the Duwamish River. The P-17 pump station drains SMP Public Review Draft Clean 9 2/5/2020 231 the P-17 Pond that collects surface water from a majority of the Urban Center. The Segale pump station was installed to regulate soil saturation and piping during high river events but does not add new flows to the river. The remaining City pump stations only operate when gravity discharge to the river is prevented by high river events. Levees and/or revetments were constructed along much of the Green/Duwamish River through the City of Tukwila to increase bank strength and reduce flooding. In addition, flows within the Green/Duwamish River were greatly modified by the construction of the Howard A. Hanson Dam and installation of water diversions. These modifications significantly reduced the severity of floods that historically covered much of the valley bottom. The condition of the current system of levees and revetments is a growing source of concern for King County and the cities involved, as many of the levees are aging and do not meet current standards for either flood conveyance or stability. Aside ft-e r '-The Tukwila 205 eertifiedlevee on the left bank of the river in the Urban Center is not certified and areas protected by this levee have been designated as "secluded" and regulated as outside of the 100-year Special Flood Hazard on the proposed 9/15/2017 FEMA Revised Preliminary Digital Flood Hazard Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM).; e Other levees in the City also do not meet Corps of Engineers EOM standards and are mapped as floodplain. These include portions of the newly annex a Tukwila South area and levees along the right bank of the river. r t developmet4 pfoposals in Tukwila Soutt, i elude the yei,,,.atio,, of the -crass-valley 'evee and Feeenstruetion of the eA flea levees t meet Gnu: Jta'nd-[LtttrJ.The permitting f6r this `rvrk is vii 4.2 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions The Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila provides important habitat for several fish and some wildlife species, such as osprey. The aquatic environment within the channel is an important corridor located at the transition from the freshwater riverine environment to tidal estuarine environment of Elliott Bay. Almost every species of anadromous fish migrates through this Transition Zone. The entire length of the Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila has been declared "critical habitat" for Chinook salmon. Steelhead trout and bull trout. B4,These species are listed as threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. One particularly important feature of Tukwila's shorelines is the habitat functions provided by the Transition Zone between fresh and 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 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 10 2/5/2020 232 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. piping of streams including the use of tide -gates, pumped storm discharges, and levees have reduced the connection between the rivers and their floodplains, changing the spatial extent of habitats, and increasing the potential for negative water quality impacts. Disturbances to the channel banks have resulted in areas that are dominated by non-native invasive species and generally devoid of sufficient riparian vegetation. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in -channel wood, is generally lacking throughout the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic habitats as well as river temperatures that periodically exceed state standards and create lethal and sublethal conditions for adult salmon. 4.3 Land Use A. A History of the Green/Duwamish River and Tukwila's Shoreline: Origins of Land Development Patterns The Green River drains 492 square miles extending from the western Cascade Mountains to Elliott Bay. The City of Tukwila lies at the lower 1/4 of the overall watershed. As the Green River flows into the southern boundary of the City of Tukwila, it has drained approximately 440 square miles, or about 78 percent of its total drainage basin. Approximately 12.5 river miles of the Green/Duwamish River are included within the City of Tukwila, from about River Mile (RM) 16 to RM 3.7. The Green/Duwamish River channel has been highly modified during the last 150 years. Modifications range from the installation of levees and revetments to straightening and dredging for navigation purposes. In general, the level of physical modification to the system increases with distance downstream, culminating at the artificial Harbor Island that supports industrial activities at the Port of Seattle. Several turning basins are maintained by periodic dredging throughout the straightened reach. The highly modified portion of the Green/Duwamish has also been the location of significant discharge of pollutants, resulting in portions of the river being designated as Federal Superfund sites. Remediation, source control and disposal activities are ongoing throughout the area. Prior to European settlement of the Lower Green River Valley, the floodplain likely consisted of a highly interspersed pattern of active and temporarily abandoned meandering channels, secondary channels, logjams, riparian forest, and scrub -shrub wetlands. The proportion of open channel to forest in the floodplain appears to have varied depending on the severity and timing of floods. High flows resulted in wider channels and the creation of new channels SMP Public Review Draft Clean 11 2/5/2020 233 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 approximately_one third of historic conditions and have impacted fish habitat. Land use changes between European settlement and the current day have occurred in two general phases. From the mid 1800s to World War II, agriculture and timber harvesting dominated the Lower Green River Valley. Population densities in the Lower Green River Valley remained low until the Howard A. Hanson Dam project was completed in 1962, providing flood protection for the valley. Levees have also been constructed along the banks of the Green/Duwamish River, ranging from federally -certified levees to non -engineered agricultural berms. Since the dam and levee systems have significantly decreased the extent of flooding within the Lower Green River Valley, land development and urbanization have occurred. For more discussion on the character of the Green/Duwamish River and an inventory of river conditions, see the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report prepared by ESA/Adolfson, May 2007, found in Appendix A. Historically, the Green/Duwamish River Valley was known for its farmland. Farming was established in the early 1900's after forested areas were cleared and transportation to the area was improved. In 1906, construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal eliminated flows of the Black River into the valley, reducing valley flooding. As a result, the river valley developed into highly productive farmland for the region. In the early 1950's, the Port of Seattle proposed to convert much of the Green/Duwamish River Valley to intensive industrial uses. These plans included converting the river into a shipping canal, possibly reaching as far south as the City of Auburn. Valley landowners countered this proposal by annexing large tracts of land into Tukwila to retain more control over future land use decisions. With the construction of the Howard A. Hanson Dam in 1962 on the upper Green River, flooding in the valley was further reduced. Much of the river is now contained within levees and surrounded by commercial and industrial development. The Port's actions in the northern part of the River and drastic reduction in river flooding have had a major influence on the development of the river valley. Today, Tukwila's portion of the Green/Duwamish River is known as a center for retail, commercial and industrial uses. The river remains inaccessible to shipping activity south of the Turning Basin, where it can be accessed primarily by small watercraft, kayaks and canoes only. Land uses along the river are mostly commercial and industrial activities, with a few residential areas. With the designation of the Southcenter area as an Urban Center and the Duwamish Corridor as a SMP Public Review Draft Clean 12 2/5/2020 234 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 riverbank modification due to the construction of levees, revetments or other shoreline armoring. Most native stands of trees are gone, but have been replaced by new trees and plants in some areas. Landscaping with native and non-native plantings have also been completed in conjunction with new development along the corridor. Birds and small mammals are supported in both habitats. While more natural habitat is found upstream, redevelopment of the shoreline has the potential to provide appropriate landscaping and restoration of habitat that are more attractive to wildlife and people and a more environmentally sensitive form of development C. Public Access The regional Green River Trail provides public access to existing shoreline amenities and plans anticipate future linkages to Seattle's system. As redevelopment occurs, there will be opportunities to provide other types of public access, including viewing platforms, boat ramps and fishing areas. 4.4 Restoration Opportunities and Potential Use Conflicts Past restoration work focused on the Green\Duwamish River (in Water Resource Inventory Area 9) has resulted in good data collection and identification of potential restoration opportunities. Significant restoration activities along the Green\Duwamish River are already underway in the form of the multi -agency Green River Ecosystem Restoration Project. Several opportunities have been identified on the river as part of the recently adopted King County Flood Hazard Management Plan. Restoration opportunities focus on several key elements: • Removing non-native, invasive plant species and re -vegetating with native riparian forest species; • Removing artificial debris and walls that harden channel banks; • Integrating the reconnection of floodplains, levee setbacks, and other ecosystem restoration techniques with future flood and river management efforts; and • Property acquisition to allow for levee setbacks, side channel reconnection, and channel migration. Two key issues illustrate constraints to implementing restoration and potential use conflicts in Tukwila: 1) levee maintenance and management; and 2) existing development patterns and anticipated redevelopment. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 13 2/5/2020 235 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 ^off authorized "205" levees) and revetments, the City cannot act alone. There are a variety of regulatory jurisdictions outside of the City with different responsibilities for maintenance, aPA-management, and regulating of the levee system, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), King County River -and Flea,a,-.i,,i r anag-eflie ,, Unit (acting as ra4 f the Gfee Riv Flood Control Zene District K( CFCD), and private property owners. The City of Tukwila Public Works Department has overall responsibility for maintenance of all levees, including the federallyeet4ified authorized Tukwila 205 levee, which extends from about the I-405 crossing to the lout City limitsapproximately S. 196th Street. The actual maintenance work on tkis up blic levees is eent eted by the City to King Getin "performed by KCFCD. The restoration of native tree and shrub species along the levees would increase riparian habitat ecological functioning of this reach of the Green/Duwamish River, benefiting salmonids as well as other species. However, the Corps of Engineers (responsible for certifying the federal levee) believes that the root system of these trees could destabilize levees, resulting in water piping (e.g., water infiltrating into and through levees along root pathways at higher rates than it could through root -free soil) at high flows, and potential levee failure if trees fall. For the Vegetation Free Zone of the levee, current Corps guidance only allows grass as vegetative cover on the levees (USACOE, Engineering Manual 1110- 2-301). Current guidance also specifies a root -free zone where plantings can occur, but roots will generally not penetrate this structural zone. Therefore, under current regulations, to meet the requirements for federal levee certification, some vegetation was recently removed and ongoing vegetation management will be required to maintain the levee certification. Under the SMA, removing trees and vegetation from the riparian zone of shorelines of the state is in conflict with policies for vegetation conservation and enhancement. A possible solution is to step back and re -slope the levees to create mid -slope benches where vegetation can be planted that will not interfere with the levee prism as the levee system is reconstructed to improve its stability. This would require additional easement area beyond the existing maintenance easements that have been acquired along the length of the system. The existing development pattern also represents constraints to implementing restoration projects, including levee setbacks, off -channel habitat restoration, wetland and stream restoration, and riparian zone enhancements. Most of Tukwila is fully developed, with portions having a dense, urbanized land use pattern. The City's first SMP, in place since 1974, established a 40-foot setback from the mean high water line. In places that have not been redeveloped under current regulations there is little more than this 40-foot zone that is not intensely developed. Some places have somewhat more open space and less development and thus have greater flexibility to accommodate potential habitat restoration actions. The City's vision for future land use, based on its Comprehensive Plan, includes maintenance and further development of its urban character, particularly its identity as a regionally significant center for manufacturing, industrial, and commercial development. A challenge lies ahead in determining how best to accommodate new and redevelopment SMP Public Review Draft Clean 14 2/5/2020 236 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 -have changed significantly as a result of development and alteration of its watershed over the past century or so. Characteristic of many cities in the region, Tukwila has grown and become highly urbanized. Continued growth is anticipated and the City is planning for that growth. To a significant degree, the City has envisioned and maintained a development pattern that preserved public access to the Green River and assured setbacks of new buildings from the shoreline. Issues of concern today are focused on reconstructing existing levees and revetments to protect existing development from flood hazards and restore habitat, an effort that will take place over a number of years in coordination with the King County Flood Control Zone District, King County and state and federal agencies. There are many opportunities for conservation and restoration actions in the City to restore or replace habitat while managing natural hazard areas. SMP Public Review Draft Clean I � 2/5/20-20 237 S la fer St fi 's .t o West 5 z Seattle 99 ' _..Bridge 5w Q L Z �,•� -� -S Luc ie St ,b ,P R O r 1 7.. fit' 9a"Sri yoO0 ,t 5 co 1st Ave S Bridge - _ SW Holden- 3 South Park Bridge 3 a �509 SW Thisue St rn C SW D'an.0 St, Qy� • • he �. poxbury St • �; s Tukwila Intl Blvd Bridge S ��a .mot.. E Marginal Wy S Bridge 599 s 509 & 3 ° 1-5 Bridge S 128 St •URIEN J •_ 7 N r 9 ro t" a y 518 5 5. SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN -SUMMARY 5.1 Background The state guidelines require that local governments develop SMP policies that promote "restoration" of impaired shoreline ecological functions and a "real and meaningful" strategy to implement restoration objectives. The City's Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report identifies which shoreline ecological functions and ecosystem processes have been impaired. Local governments are further encouraged to contribute to restoration by planning for and supporting restoration through the SMP and other regulatory and non -regulatory programs. As part of the SMP update process, the City developed a Draft Shoreline Restoration Plan in February 2007. The draft plan was finalized in May 2008 following technical review by King County and Ecology, and has since been updated to include additional potential projects, address Ecology comments and refocus priorities to projects within the Transition Zone. 1t-The Shoreline Restoration Plan is included as Appendix B to the SMP. The restoration plan builds on the Inventory and Characterization Report and provides a framework to: • Identify primary goals for ecological restoration of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; • Identify how restoration of ecological function can be accomplished; • Suggest how the SMP update process may accomplish the restoration of impaired shoreline functions associated with the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; and • Prioritize restoration projects so that the highest value restoration actions may be accomplished first. 5.2 Assessment of Shoreline Functions As summarized in the previous section, the shoreline inventory and characterization analysis examined riverine and estuarine ecosystem processes that maintain shoreline ecological functions, and identified impaired ecological functions. The inventory report identified key ecosystem processes, and provided a qualitative assessment of their levels of functioning at both a watershed and city reach scale. Key ecosystem functions identified in the inventory, their level of alteration, and potential restoration actions are summarized in Table 1. As noted in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report and summarized in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Summary Section, many of the alterations to shoreline functions and ecosystem processes in the Green/Duwamish River are due to watershed scale issues within the upper watershed whiehrthat cannot be fully restored or addressed in the lower river section through Tukwila. However, hydrologic, water quality, and habitat restoration measures in the City do have the potential to improve the overall functioning of this important section of the Green/Duwamish River ecosystem that includes the Transition Zone from fresh to salt water. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 17 2/5/2020 239 Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila Function Function Alterations to natural functioning Potential Restoration Action within the Category City Presence of flood protection structures (e.g., levees, riverbank revetments, 1. Modify current levees and revetments to flood gates) and significant fill and increase channel and floodplain Hydrologic Channel-Floodplain development along the shoreline limit interaction; Interaction channel-floodplain interactions in 2. Excavate back or side channels. Tukwila. Implement enhanced stormwater Best Upland sediment Fine sediment contribution to the river is Management Practices for fine sediment Hydrologic generation increased due to build-up and wash -off removal in stormwater runoff. from surrounding urban land uses. Levees and revetments are virtually continuous along the riverbanks, limiting the potential to retain Retention of particulates or contaminants contained 1. Modify current levees and revetments .o Water Particulates and in stormwater sheet flows in the fluvially increase channel and floodplain area; Quality contaminants dominated reaches. Particulates, 2. Install native riparian species to increase including sediment, are retained in the bank roughness. tidally dominated reaches, as evidenced by the need to dredge the estuary turning basin. As channel-floodplain interaction was 1. Increase riverine wetland area; Water Nutrient cycling reduced, the channel became a conduit 2 Install native riparian plant species; Quality for nutrients, offering little opportunity for contact time with soils. 3. Set back banks (revetments and levees). The majority of the shoreline within the City of Tukwila is currently dominated 1. Remove invasive plants and install native by non-native invasive weed species riparian species; Large Woody Maintain (Himalayan blackberry, reed canary- 2. Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization Debris characteristic plant grass, and Japanese knotweed). Some and restoration projects; (LWD) and community higher quality areas of cottonwood, 3. Institute programmatic weed control Organics g alder, and willow exist in riparian areas P activities along shoreline. bordering open space, parkland, and 4. Promote bioengineering techniques for residential zones. shoreline stabilization projects. Despite the lack of many sources for 1. Install native riparian species; EgDan Source of LWD LWD, there are some large cottonwoodsO and big leaf maples that occur along the 2. Incorporate LWD into bank stabilization levees and revetment system. and restoration projects. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 18 240 2/5/2020 5.3 Plans, Programs, and Completed Proiects 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 oither eur-rendy f inetia^i^^for restoration (Cecil B. Moses Park, Codiga Farm_) -er have the r tenti,' f r ries*^rraltio ( orth 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 C( IP) list; other projects will be added as CIP projects are completed and funds are identified for new projects. The restoration plan identifies several projects that have already been completed in the Green/Duwamish River. These projects provide an excellent opportunity to learn about what river restoration measures are the most effective. For example, it appears that the back channel that was excavated at Codiga Farm provides important habitat for migrating juvenile fish. 5.4 Restoration Opportunities Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be five specific types of restoration actions that will most benefit the Green/Duwamish ecosystem in Tukwila. These actions are intended to boost the levels of ecosystem functioning as part of a self-sustaining ecosystem that will limit the need for future manipulation. While these projects are intended to restore many ecosystem functions, the restoration activities will occur in the highly urban valley bottom, and as a result, cannot fully achieve pre - disturbance channel conditions. In addition, some restoration actions must occur at the watershed scale, which will restore ecosystem functions that cannot be addressed solely within Tukwila or as part of the SMP. • Enlarging channel cross -sectional area. This action could include setting back levees and re -sloping banks to reduce steepness. These actions will increase flood storage, allow for more stable levees, restore some floodplain area, provide a larger intertidal zone in this important transitional area, and provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. The Transition Zone is identified in Map 2. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 19 2/5/2020 241 • 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 Proiects and Priorities The restoration plan summarizes 26 potential projects as specific restoration projects within the shorelines of Tukwila. Most of the restoration projects are part of ongoing restoration planning through the WRIA 9 watershed planning process. Additionally, opportunities exist to enhance riparian vegetation along the majority of the 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 ffhWLdentified in Map 2. High priority projects will typically: • Address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions; • Have opportunity for multiple funding sources; • Include freshwater tributary channels; and/or • Not require additional property acquisition. Medium priority projects will typically: • Address limited ecosystem functions; and • Be eligible for multiple funding sources, and/or require property acquisition. Low priority projects will typically: • Only focus on habitat enhancement; • Will be used as mitigation to offset impacts elsewhere; or • Not be eligible for multiple funding sources. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 20 242 2/5/2020 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES The goals and policies that lead and inspire Tukwila's shoreline actions are found in the Shoreline Element of the City's 2015 Comprehensive Plan. These, along with the narrative in that Chapter, were updated based on the 2009 SMP and 2011 revisions approved by the Department of Ecology. 7. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATIONS The City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) establishes a system to classify shoreline areas into specific "environment designations." This system of classifying shorelines is established by the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) and Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-211). The purpose of shoreline environment designations is to provide a uniform basis for applying policies and use regulations within similar shoreline areas. Generally, shoreline designations should be based on existing and planned development patterns, biological and physical capabilities and limitations of the shoreline, and a community's vision or objectives for its future development. 7.1 Pre 2009 Regulatory Framework Tukwila's first SMP, adopted in 1974, designated all shorelines as "Urban." At the time the 1974 SMP was developed, all of the land in Tukwila's shoreline jurisdiction was either zoned commercial/industrial or was developed with urban uses. The SMP defined the Urban Environment as "areas to be managed in high intensive land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial development and accessory uses, while providing for restoration and preservation to ensure long-term protection of natural and cultural resources within the shoreline" (Tukwila, 1974). The SMP further stated that the management objectives for the shoreline "are directed at minimizing adverse impacts on the river and shoreline ecology, maximizing the aesthetic quality and recreational opportunities of the river shore, and recognizing the rights and privileges of property owners" (Tukwila, 1974). Within the Urban Environment, Tukwila's SMP employed a tiered system of regulations based on the distance from the Green/Duwamish River mean high water mark (MHWM). These tiered management zones are generally described below and illustrated on Figure 1: • River Environment/Zone: A 40-foot wide zone extending landward from MHWM and having the most environmentally protective regulations; • Low -Impact Environment/Zone: The area between the River Environment and 100 feet from the MHWM; and • High -Impact Environment/Zone: The area between 100 and 200 feet from the MHWM. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 21 2/5/2020 243 The City also administered the King County Shoreline Master Program for the areas which had been annexed since the adoption of the City's SMP in 1974. These areas were designated Urban and the setbacks from Ordinary High Water Mark varied from 20 feet to 50 feet depending on whether the use was water dependent, single family or commercial/industrial. See Annexation History (Map 1) for an identification of the areas where the City administered the County's SMP. 200' URBAN ENVIRONMENT I I I j 100' I 0' I4 - I I I I HIGH j LOW j RIVER IMPACT I IMPACT I ZONE i j ZONE ZONE I I I I I RIVER I 200' I I I URBAN ENVIRONMENT 40' 60' 100' IE I I RIVER j LOW I I HIGH ZONE I IMPACT I IMPACT i ! ZONE ! ZONE *--MEAN HIGH WATER LINE Figure 1. Pre 2009 Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC Chapter 18.44) 7.2 Key Findings of the Shoreline Inventory / Characterization Report and Restoration Plan This section summarizes findings from the Inventory and Characterization Report and Restoration Plan elements of the SMP update (Appendices A and B). These findings inform the goals, policies, regulations, and the development and application of environment designations. In this context, the key findings can be summarized as follows: • The Green/Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource for salmonids and other species. Adult salmon heading upstream to spawn require cool water; and juveniles heading downstream require food and refine from high flows.,, „ iti7-tThe Transition Zone, of the rivef t which extends from river mile 10 upstr-the intefst-ate 5 br-idgzdownstream through the northern City limits (see Map 2), where juvenile salmon adjust from fresh to salt water habitat (osmoregulate) is of critical importance because of significant habitat losses over the years. Additionally,- Tthe river provides migratory habitat for numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a variety of wildlife. • The entire Green/Duwamish River and its tributaries is -are a critical resource for federally protected Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing. • The river is a critical resource for some water dependent uses north of the Turning Basin. • The river is an important recreational resource for sport fishing, small watercraft and Green River Trail users. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 244 22 2/5/2020 • At an ecosystem scale, the habitat is largely homogenous throughout the city. In addition, many ecosystem processes are largely controlled by up -river characteristics, particularly the Howard A. Hanson Dam and are little affected by actions in the City, except for such functions as water quality (especially fine sediment capture and filtering of contaminants in stormwater), local surface hydrology (stormwater from increasing amounts of impervious surfaces and contribution to peak flows of the river), riparian habitat, and temperature control (shading from riparian habitat). With the exception of the functions provided by the transitional mixing zone from salt to fresh water, habitat conditions and functions are relatively similar throughout the shoreline. The Transition Zone needs greater protection and restoration focus than other sections of the shoreline in the city. • Restoration opportunities are numerous and spatially distributed throughout Tukwila's shoreline. Activities that provide restoration of both floodplain functions and habitat functions should be prioritized, particularly those projects in the Transition Zone. Policies should promote and regulations should enable the City to accomplish restoration goals and actions. 7.3 State Environment DesijZnation System State Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-211) establish the environment designation system for shorelines regulated by the Shoreline Management Act. The guidelines (WAC 173-26-150 and 176-26-160) give local jurisdictions the option to plan for shorelines in designated Urban Growth Areas (UGA) and Potential Annexation Areas (PAA) as well. The City can "pre -designate" shoreline environments in its designated PAA as part of this planning process. However, shorelines in the PAA would continue to be regulated under the provisions of the King County SMP until the City annexes those areas. The County's SMP designates the City's North PAA and the South PAA as High Intensity. The guidelines (WAC 173-26-211(4)(b)) recommend six basic environment designations: High -intensity Shoreline residential Urban conservancy Rural conservancy Natural Aquatic Local governments may establish a different designation system, retain their current environment designations and/or establish parallel environments provided the designations are consistent with the purposes and policies of the guidelines (WAC 173-26-211(4)(c)). The guidelines also note that local shoreline environment designations should be consistent with the local comprehensive plan (WAC 173-26-211(3)). SMP Public Review Draft Clean 23 2/5/2020 245 For each environment designation, jurisdictions must provide a purpose statement, classification criteria, management policies and environment specific regulations. Table 2 describes the purpose for each of the recommended designations in the state guidelines. For each designation, the potential applicability to Tukwila is noted. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 24 246 2/5/2020 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System - WAC 173-26-211 (5) Environment Purpose I Applicability to Tukwila Designation Aquatic Natural Rural Conservancy Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential High -Intensity The purpose of the "aquatic" environment is to protect, restore, and manage the unique characteristics and resources of the areas waterward of the ordinary high-water mark. The purpose of the "natural" environment is to protect those shoreline areas that are relatively free of human influence or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline functions intolerant of human use. The purpose of the "rural conservancy" environment is to protect ecological functions, conserve existing natural resources and valuable historic and cultural areas in order to provide for sustained resource use, achieve natural floodplain processes, and provide recreational opportunities. The purpose of the "urban conservancy" environment is to protect and restore ecological functions of open space, floodplain and other critical areas where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses. The purpose of the "shoreline residential" environment is to accommodate residential development and appurtenant structures that are consistent with this chapter. An additional purpose is to provide appropriate public access and recreational uses. The purpose of the "high -intensity" environment is to provide for high -intensity water -oriented commercial, transportation, and industrial uses while protecting existing ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. 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. While the Green River shorelines in Tukwila provide some important ecological functions, the river and adjacent uplands throughout Tukwila have been significantly altered by dense urban development and are generally armored or otherwise modified. Not applicable to Tukwila. All of the City's shorelines are urbanized. Potential annexation areas are either urbanized or proposed for intensive development. This designation is applicable in that the Green River is an important natural resource. The most significant shoreline function provided in Tukwila is related to fish and wildlife habitat. Open space is limited by the existing development pattern and floodplains are largely disconnected by a series of levees, revetments, and other infrastructure. This designation is most applicable for those portions of Tukwila's shorelines where the existing and planned development pattern is for low density (i.e., predominantly single-family) residential uses or public recreation uses. This designation is applicable along only part of Tukwila's shorelines, in the Manufacturing and Industrial Center (MIC) north of the Turning Basin. Water - dependent uses are currently limited, as only a small portion of the river in Tukwila is navigable for commercial purposes, and much of the river has levees, thus restricting use immediately adjacent to the river. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 25 2/5/2020 247 7.4 Environment Designations The Natural and Rural Conservancy Environments are not well suited to a highly developed, urbanized river that is navigable for only a small portion of the system and is significantly constrained by levees for flood management, such as the Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila. The City's Shoreline Environments, which are identified on Map 3, are: • Shoreline Residential Environment • Urban Conservancy Environment • High -Intensity Environment • Aquatic Environment The City designated a buffer to replace the prior system of parallel shoreline management zones. Instead of the prior River Environment, a minimum buffer was established for each shoreline environment and allowed uses were designated for the buffer area along the river and the remaining shoreline jurisdiction. This system is intended to facilitate the City's long-range objectives for land and shoreline management, including: • Ensuring no net loss of ecological shoreline functions; • Providing for habitat protection, enhancement, and restoration to improve degraded shoreline ecological functions over time and protection of already restored areas; • Allowing continued and increased urban development in recognition of Tukwila's role as a regionally significant industrial and commercial center; and • Providing for improved flood control in coordination with King County and the Army Corps of Engineers. Table 3, on the following page, provides a summary of the characteristics of the river shoreline in Tukwila to set the stage for the discussion in Section 7.5 on the determination of shoreline buffers. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 26 2/5/2020 KM Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification MIC/H & Fresh/Salt Water High Intensity 100, The Director may reduce the MIC/L Transition Zone, standard buffer on a case -by -case zoned Lower flooding basis by up to 50% upon property risk, Less than 20' construction of the following cross from North difference from section: City Limits OHWM to top of - 1. Reslope bank from OHWM to EMWS bank, tidal (not toe) to be no steeper than Bridge, and influence 3:1, using bioengineering North techniques Potential - 2. Minimum 20' buffer landward Annexation from top of bank Area - 3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Comment: Maximum slope is reduced due to measurement from OHWM and to recognize location in the Transition Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below OHWM difficult. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to the river. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. LDR zoned Moderate flooding Shoreline Distance Removal of invasive species and property risk, Less than 25' Residential required replanting with native species of w/o levees difference from to set high habitat value voluntary unless from OHWM to top of back triggered by requirement for a EMWS to bank, tidal slope Shoreline Substantial Development 1-405 influence on from toe permit. northern section at 2.5:1 plus 20' setback, Min. 50' width SMP Public Review Draft - Strikeout 27 2/5/2020 249 Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification LDR zoned Moderate flooding Shoreline 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in property with risk, Less than 25' Residential accordance with City levee levees from difference from standards, the Director may reduce EMWS to OHWM to top of the buffer to actual width required. I-405 bank, tidal Comment: This applies to City - influence on owned property at Fort Dent. northern section Commercially Moderate flooding Urban 100' The Director may reduce the zoned risk, Less than 25' Conservancy standard buffer on a case -by -case property from difference from basis by up to 50% upon 42nd Ave S. OHWM to top of construction of the following cross Bridge to bank section: I-405 - 1. Reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than 24 3:1, using bioengineering techniques - 2. Minimum 20' buffer landward from top of bank - 3. Bank and remaining buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long-term adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. West River High flooding risk, Urban 125' Upon construction or bank from Federally certified Conservancy reconstruction of levee in I-405 to and County levee, accordance with City levee South City large water level standards the Director may reduce Limit, fluctuations the buffer to the actual width Tukwila 205 required. In no case shall the Levee and buffer be less than 50 feet. South Annexation Area SMP Public Review Draft Clean 28 250 2/5/2020 Area Characteristics Environment Buffer Modification East River Moderate flooding Urban The Director may reduce the bank risk, 20 to 25' Conservancy 100' standard buffer on a case -by -case without difference from basis by up to 50% upon levee from OHWM to top of construction of the following cross I-405 south bank, Moderate section: to City slumping risk, - 1. Reslope bank from toe to be no Limits large water level steeper than 15 3:1, using fluctuations 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 Moderate flooding Urban 125' Upon reconstruction of levee in bank with risk, 20 to 25' Conservancy accordance with City levee levee from difference from standards the Director may reduce I-405 to OHWM to top of the buffer to the actual width South City bank, Moderate required for the levee. In no case Limit slumping risk, shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. large water level fluctuations Any End buffer on river side of existing shoreline improved street or roadway. environment where street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer SMP Public Review Draft Clean 29 2/5/2020 251 Reach G2 PAA Turning Basin ' Reach G2 Legend Tukwila City Limits PAA Potential Annexation Areas •� Urban Conservancy Shoreline Environment +�—• High Intensity Shoreline Environment ..gym ��M• Shoreline Residential Environment Map 3 t = 5 MILE Shoreline Environments i I Reach G1 Reach G 1 PAA SMP Public Review Draft Clean 30 252 2/5/2020 7.5 Determination of Shoreline Buffers The determination of the buffer distances for each shoreline environment was based on several factors including the analysis of buffer functions needed for protecting and restoring shoreline ecological function (as presented in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report) and the need to allow space for bank stability and for protecting human life and structures from damage from high flows, erosion and bank failures. Safety of residents and people who work in buildings along the shoreline has become even more important in recent years due to the increase in stormwater entering the river from increasing impervious surfaces throughout the watershed and increasing frequency and intensity of flows during high rain events. These higher and more frequent flows will put more stress on over -steepened banks all along the river, increasing the possibility of bank erosion, levee failures, and bank failures. Thus, ensuring that new structures are not built too close to the river's edge is crucial to avoid loss of human life. Staff also reviewed the rationale for the buffer widths established for watercourses under TMC Chapter 18.45, the Sens'�eCritical Areas Ordinance, as well as buffer widths recommended by resource agencies, such as the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources and the recent Biological Opinion issued by National Marine Fisheries Service in relation to FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program. The final buffer widths proposed by staff for each shoreline environment attempted to balance shoreline ecological function needs, human life and property protection needs (including future levee repair/reconstruction), existing land use patterns, and state and federal agency policies. The following information summarizes the analysis carried out and the rationale used for determining buffer widths. A. Buffer Functions Supporting Shoreline Ecological Resources, Especially Salmonids Buffers play an important role in the health of any watercourse and an even more important role when considering the health of salmonids in the Green/Duwamish River system. The key buffer functions for the river are summarized below. The Shoreline Management Act and the Department of Ecology regulations require evaluation of ecological functions and that local SMPs ensure that the policies and regulations do not cause any net loss of shoreline ecological function. In addition, the SMP must identify mechanisms for restoration of lost ecological functions. The crucial issue for the Green/Duwamish River is the presence of salmonids that are on the Endangered Species list. To protect and restore ecological functions related to these species it is important to provide for the installation of native vegetation along the shoreline. Such vegetation provides shade for improving temperature conditions in the river and habitat for insects on which fish prey. Trees along the shoreline also provide a SMP Public Review Draft Clean 31 2/5/2020 253 source of large woody debris (tree trunks, root wads, limbs, etc. that fall into the water), which in turn provides pooling and areas of shelter for fish and other animals. In order to allow for planting of native vegetation, banks need to be set back to allow for less steep and more stable (requiring less armoring) slopes, so that they can be planted, which is crucial for improving shoreline ecological functions that are needed in the river. The buffer widths needed to achieve a particular buffer function vary widely by function type from as little as 16 feet for large woody debris recruitment (assuming the buffer has large trees) to over 400 feet for sediment removal. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommends a riparian buffer width of 250 feet for shorelines of statewide significance (this applies to the Green/Duwamish River). The Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) recommends a riparian buffer of 200 feet for Class 1 Waters (the Green/Duwamish River is a Class 1 Water under the WDNR classification scheme). The National Marine Fisheries Service (responsible at the federal level for overseeing protection of endangered salmonids under the Endangered Species Act) has recommended a buffer of 250 feet in mapped floodplain areas to allow for protection of shoreline functions that support salmonids.l Tukwila's SensitiveCritical Areas Ordinance (TMC Chapter 18.45) has established a 100-foot buffer for Type 2 watercourses in the city (those that bear salmonid species). The key buffer functions for the river are summarized below. 1. Maintenance of Water Quality Salmonid fish require water that is both colder and has lower nutrient levels than many other types of fish. Vegetated shoreline buffers contribute to improving water quality as described below. a. Water Temperature: The general range of temperatures required to support healthy salmonid populations is generally between 39 degrees and 63 degrees. Riparian vegetation, particularly forested areas, can affect water temperature by providing shade to reduce exposure to the sun and regulate high ambient air temperatures. b. Dissolved Oxygen: Dissolved oxygen is one of the most influential water quality parameters for aquatic life, including salmonid fish. The most significant factor affecting dissolved oxygen levels is water temperature — cooler streams maintain higher levels of oxygen than warmer waters. c. Metals and Pollutants: Common pollutants found in streams, particularly in urban areas, are excessive nutrients (such as phosphorous and nitrogen), pesticides, bacteria and miscellaneous contaminants such as PCBs and heavy metals. Impervious surfaces collect and concentrate pollutants from different sources and deliver these materials to streams during storm events. The ' Endan eg red Species Act — Section 7 Consultation, Final Biological Opinion and Magnuson —Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation, Implementation of the Flood Insurance Program in the State of Washington, Phase One Document, Puget Sound Region, September, 2008. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 32 2/5/2020 254 concentration of pollutants increases in direct proportion to the total amount of impervious area. Undisturbed or well vegetated riparian buffer areas can retain sediment, nutrients, pesticides, pathogens and other pollutants, protecting water quality in streams. Elevated nitrogen and phosphorus levels in runoff are a typical problem in urban watersheds and can lead to increased in -stream plant growth, which results in excess decaying plant material that consumes oxygen in streams and reduces aquatic habitat quality. 2. Contributing to in -stream structural diversity a. Large woody debris (LWD) refers to limbs and tree trunks that naturally fall into the stream bed from a vegetated buffer. LWD serves many functions in watercourses. LWD adds roughness to stream channels, which in turn slows water velocities and traps sediments. Sources of LWD in urban settings are limited where stream corridors have been cleared of vegetation and developed and channel movement limited due to revetments and levees. Under natural conditions, the normal movement of the stream channel, undercutting of banks, wind throw, and flood events are all methods of LWD recruitment to a stream channel. b. LWD also contributes to the formation of pools in river channels that provide important habitat for salmonids. Adult salmonids require pools with sufficient depth and cover to protect them from predators during spawning migration. Adult salmon often hold to pools during daylight, moving upstream from pool to pool at night. 3. Providing Biotic Input of Insects and Organic Matter a. Vegetated buffers provide foods for salmonids and other fish, because insects fall into the water from overhanging vegetation. b. Leaves and other organic matter falling into streams provide food and nutrients for many species of aquatic insects, which in turn provide forage for fish. B. Bank Stability and Protection of Human Lives and Structures The main period of runoff and major flood events on the Green River is from November through February. The lower Green and Duwamish levees and revetments form a nearly continuous bank protection and flood containment system. Farmers originally constructed many of these levees and revetments as the protection to the agricultural lands of the area and this original material is still in place as the structural core. In particular, these protection facilities typically have over -steepened banks; and areas with inadequate rock buttressing at the toe, and lack habitat -enhancing features such as overhanging vegetation or in -water large woody debris. Because of these design and construction shortcomings, the protection to riverbanks has not always performed as intended. Instead, there have been bank failures that have threatened structures and infrastructure; erosion of banks — making them even steeper; and damage to levees that has required a series of repair projects. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 33 2/5/2020 255 The damage to the levee system in storm events lead -led to discussions among the City, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the King County Flood Control District to determine the best levee design to prevent the recurring problem of continued levee repairs. The criteria used to design a levee profile are: • Public safety; • Maintaining levee certification; • Solutions that eliminate or correct factors that have caused or contributed to the need for the levee repair; • Levee maintenance needs; and • Environmental considerations. To overcome the existing problems and to reduce future maintenance and repair costs, the Corps chose to lessen the overall slope to a stable grade. This selected method is consistent with recommendations set forth in the Corps of Engineers' Manual for Design and Construction of Levees (EM 1110-2-1913) for slope stability. It also is consistent with the levee rehabilitation project constructed on the nearby Briscoe School levee that has proven to be a very effective solution to scour problems —the design slows the river down, provides additional flood storage and allows a vegetated mid -slope bench for habitat improvements. This profile was used to repair two areas of the federally -certified levee in Tukwila —the Lily Point project and the Segale project, which were about 2,000 linear feet of repairs. Costs of these repairs were around $7 million dollars, not including any costs of land acquisition for laying back the levees. It is expected that the use of this levee design or an environmentally superior solution will reduce the need to continually repair the levee in those areas, thus avoiding such high expenditures in the future and saving money in the long run. The profile discussed above is illustrated in Figure 2 below: SMP Public Review Draft Clean 34 256 2/5/2020 Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas -Width Will Vary Reconfigured Levee Vegetated Bench 18' 10' Willows 2 2' 1.5 Existing Levee 1� n rff T -11 I1 -'=5 I -III Maintenance Easement � � _ Ordinary High Water Mark 15' —IZ` 1 OHWM WuI. Reconfigured Slope averages 2.5:1 with bench Minimum Levee Profile Not To Scale Figure 2. Briscoe Levee Profile Because of the similarities in the soil conditions and taking into consideration the tidal influence, the Green/Duwamish River can be divided into three areas —South of I-405; North of 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.Z 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 I-405 on the east side of the river (right bank), a 100-foot setback distance is required to accommodate the slopes needed for bank stability. Within residential neighborhoods, a minimum 50-foot setback is justified because of the less intense land use associated with single-family home construction and the estimated amount of space needed to achieve the natural angle of repose for a more stable slope. Even though the above explanation for determining appropriate buffer distance used levee design as the example, the same problems exist where there are no levees. The river makes no distinction between an over -steepened slope associated with a levee or a riverbank. Scouring within the river will cause sloughing and slope stability will be weakened, potentially resulting in the loss of structures. In fact, the non -leveed riverbank can be more 2 The 125 foot distance includes a slope no steeper than 2.5:1 with a mid -slope bench incorporated, 18 feet at the top of the levee and 10 feet on the back side of the levee for access and inspection. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 35 2/5/2020 257 prone to these problems since they tend to be steeper and consist mainly of sand and silt. This makes them susceptible to erosion. Because the non -leveed riverbanks are for the most part privately owned, they are not actively monitored for damage by the City or County. C. Conclusions The determination of buffer widths was based on two important criteria: (1) the need to achieve bank stability and protect structures along the shoreline from damage due to erosion and bank failures; and (2) to protect and enhance shoreline ecological function. Applying the 200 to 250 foot buffer widths recommended by WDFW and WDNR would not be practical given the developed nature of the shoreline. It was also felt that a buffer less than that already established for Type 2 Watercourses under the City's SAO Sensiti Critical Areas Ordinance would not be sufficiently protective of shoreline functions, unless those functions were enhanced through various restoration options. Therefore, 100 feet was established as the starting point for considering buffer widths from the standpoint of shoreline ecological function in each of the Shoreline Environments. Between 100 and 125 feet was the starting point for buffer widths from the standpoint of bank stability and property protection. Thus buffers were established taking into account (as explained in the following sections) the characteristics of each Shoreline Environment, needs for protection/restoration of shoreline ecological functions, and needs for stable banks and protection of human life and property -per. 7.6 Shoreline Residential Environment A. Designation Criteria All properties zoned for single-family use from the ordinary high water mark landward 200 feet. In addition, those areas zoned for single family use but developed for public recreation or open space within 200 feet of the shoreline shall also be designated Shoreline Residential, except Fort Dent Park. B. Purpose of Environment and Establishment of River Buffer The purpose of the Shoreline Residential Environment is to accommodate urban density residential development, appurtenant structures, public access and recreational activities. However, within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction in the Shoreline Residential Environment there will be a protective buffer along the river, where development will be limited to protect shoreline function. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 36 2/5/2020 258 The purpose of the river buffer in the shoreline residential environment is to: • Ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions; • Help protect water quality and habitat function by limiting allowed uses; • Protect existing and new development from high river flows by ensuring sufficient setback of structures; • Promote restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment; and • Allow room for reconstructing over -steepened riverbanks to achieve a more stable slope and more natural shoreline bank conditions and avoid the need for shoreline armoring. C. Analysis of Development Character of Residential Shoreline An analysis was prepared that looked at the residential properties along the shoreline and identified the number of parcels with structures within 50 feet and 100 feet of the OHWM. This analysis showed the following: Number of Number of Number of Number of Number of Number of ZONE parcels vacant parcels with parcels vacant parcels with within 50 parcels structures within parcels structures feet of within within 100 feet of within within OHWM 50 feet 50 feet / % OHWM 100 feet 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 SensifiveCritical Areas Ordinance (SAO) of 100 feet would create a situation where 82% of the properties along the river would have nonconforming structures as they relate to the proposed shoreline buffer. Expansion of single family nonconforming structures in the proposed SMP buffer would be governed by Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.44.110, which permits an expansion of only 50% of the square footage of the current area that intrudes into the buffer and only along the ground floor of the structure. For example, if 250 square feet of a building extended into the proposed buffer, the ground floor could be expanded a maximum of 125 feet in total area along the existing building line. A buffer of 100 feet was considered for the shoreline residential properties, with the potential of a property owner applying for a buffer reduction of 50%; however, under the Shoreline Management Act, this would have required an application for a shoreline variance for each requested buffer reduction, a process that requires review and approval both at the local and state level (Ecology must review and approve the variance in addition to the City of Tukwila). This did not seem a reasonable process to require of so many property owners. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 37 2/5/2020 259 The riverbank in the Shoreline Residential Environment is typically in a modified and degraded state but generally not stabilized with revetments, dikes or levees. Based on an analysis of the river elevations and existing banks, a 50-foot minimum buffer in the Shoreline Residential Environment would allow room to achieve a 2.5:1 bank slope with an additional 20-foot setback from the top of the slope —a distance that will allow for bank stability and, in -turn, protection of new structures from high flows, and bank failures. A schematic of the shoreline jurisdiction showing the buffer is provided in Figure 3. 200' Shoreline Residential Environment _ 50' min 20 feet from top of Buffer reconfigured river bank 20' --{ 1 Ordinary High Water Ma a Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer The proposed buffer area for the Shoreline Residential Environment will allow for removal of invasive plants, planting of native vegetation in the riparian zone and inclusion of other features to improve shoreline habitat. It also will prevent the placement of any structures in an area that could potentially prove unstable. In the event of bank erosion or slope failures, the buffer will provide sufficient space for re -sloping the bank to a more stable 2.5:1 slope, either through bank stabilization projects or through natural bank failures that result in the natural angle of repose (2.5:1 or greater). 7.7 Urban Conservancy Environment A. Designation Criteria This environment will be designated in the area between the Ordinary High Water Mark and 200 feet landward as regulated under the Shoreline Management Act and applied to all shorelines of the river except the Shoreline Residential Environment and the High Intensity Environment. The Urban Conservancy Environment areas are currently developed with dense urban multifamily, commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or are designated for such uses in the proposed south annexation area. This environment begins at the southern end of the Turning Basin and includes portions of the river where levees and revetments generally have been constructed and where the river is not navigable to large watercraft. Uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 38 2/5/2020 260 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, critical areas 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 S ensitiv eCritical Areas Ordinance for Type 2 streams that support salmonid use, which is based on Best Available Science. In addition, as noted above, looking at the slope geometry and the difference in height between the ordinary high water mark and the 100-year flood elevation for these areas, it was found that a 100-foot setback distance is required to accommodate the slopes needed for bank stability. The buffer width of 100 feet allows enough room to reconfigure the riverbank to achieve a slope of 2� 3:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope and allow for some restoration and improvement of shoreline function through the installation of native plants and other habitat features. The actual amount of area needed to achieve a 2-53 :1 slope may be less than 100 feet, depending on the character of the riverbank and can only be determined on a site -by -site basis. As an alternative to the 100-foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the riverbank to be no steeper than 2.5 3:1, provide a 20-foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the riverbank and the 20-foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or SMP Public Review Draft Clean 39 2/5/2020 261 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. I I 200' I Urban Conservancy Environment I Allow room to j �— 100� reconfigure I I river bank to I I 3:1 slope Buffer I I I I Ordinary High Water Marker ARI Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees Buffer in Levee Areas: For properties located behind the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Certified 205 levee and County constructed levees, the buffer will extend 125 feet landward from the ordinary high water mark, determined at the time of development or redevelopment of the site or when levee replacement or repair is programmed. This buffer width is the maximum needed to reconfigure the riverbank to the minimum levee profile and to achieve an overall slope of 2-.5 3:1, the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope. The establishment of the 2-4 3 :1 slope along the Corps certified 205 levee in the Tukwila Urban Center will allow for incorporating a mid -slope bench that can be planted with vegetation to improve river habitat. The mid -slope bench also will allow access for maintenance equipment, when needed. An fifteen wt easement nesessafyto allow access for levee inspection is required on the landward side of the levee at the toe. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 40 2/5/2020 262 I I IF 200' Urban Conservancy Environment I k 12 5' I I I I Allow room —� for Levee I I repair or I Buffer replacement I I I I I I Ordinary High Water Mark River 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 24 3:1 from the toe of the levee to the riverward edge of the crown, W foot access across the top of the levee, a 2:1 back slope, and an additional '--*ono-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. 3:1 the slope should be as close to 23 3:1 as possible. A floodwall is not the preferred back slope profile for a levee but may be substituted for all or a portion of the back slope where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this Master Program which has not lost its nonconforming status and to preserve access needed for building functionality. The floodwall shall be designed to provide 15 fifLeen=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 23 3:1 or flatter, the buffer will be reduced to the actual distance as measured from the ordinary high water mark to the landward toe of the levee or face of a floodwall, plus 15 feet. In the event that the owner provides the City and/or applicable agency with a 15 feet levee maintenance easement measured landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall (which easement prohibits the construction of any structures and allows the City and/or applicable agency to access the area to inspect the levee), then the buffer shall be reduced to the landward toe of the levee, or landward edge of the levee floodwall, as the case may be. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 41 2/5/2020 263 In cases where fill is placed along the back slope of the levee, the shoreline buffer may be further reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope. The area between the landward edge of the buffer and a point 15 feet landward of the underground levee toe shall be covered by an easement prohibiting the construction of any structures and allowing the City and/or applicable agency to access the area to inspect the levee and/or floodwall and make any necessary repairs. See Figure -6 below. Buffer Reduction Buffer that could - Proposed Levee Be Replaced y 18' Top Width by Easements New Ground 10' 2 Plane Inspection� 12* Fill Landward Levee Toe Buffer Reduction with Backfill Option Not To Scale Figure 6. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placement of Fill on Levee Back Slope 7.8 High Intensity Environment A. Designation Criteria The High Intensity Shoreline Environment area is currently developed with high intensity urban commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or is designated for such uses in the proposed north annexation area. This environment begins at the Ordinary High Water Mark and extends landward 200 feet and is located from the southern edge of the Turning Basin north to the City limits and includes the North PAA. This Environment is generally located along portions of the Duwamish River that are navigable to large watercraft. Uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer. The Transition Zone is located partly in the High Intensity Environment. The Transition Zone is the location where freshwater from a river and saltwater from the marine salt wedge mix creating brackish conditions. Often it is also where the river widens, stream velocities decrease and estuarine mudflats begin to appear. Habitat associated with the Transition Zone is critically important for juvenile Chinook and chum smolts making the transition to 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 *we uf SMP Public Review Draft Clean 42 2/5/2020 264 24-hour period and seasonally. The Transition Zone is a crucial habitat for salmonids. B. Purpose of Environment and Establishment of River Buffer The purpose of the Urban High Intensity Environment is to provide for high intensity, commercial, transportation and industrial uses and to promote water dependent and water oriented uses while protecting existing shoreline ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. The purposes of the High Intensity River Buffer are to: • Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, floodplain and other sensitive land critical areas in the developed urban settings; • Ensure no net loss of shoreline function when new development or re- development occurs; • Provide opportunities for shoreline restoration and public access; • Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of property, while accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment, wherever possible; • Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and • Protect existing and new development from high river flows. A buffer of 100 feet is established, which allows enough room to reconfigure the riverbank to achieve a slope of 3:1 (starting at the OHWM rather than the toe), the "angle of repose" or the maximum angle of a stable slope and allow for some restoration and improvement of shoreline function through the installation of native plants and other habitat features. The actual amount of area needed to achieve a 3:1 slope may be less than 100 feet, depending on the character of the riverbank, and can only be determined on a site -by -site basis. I I 200' High Intensity Environment I I Imo- 100� Allow room to I I I reconfigure I I river bank to Buffer 3:1 slope I I I I Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment SMP Public Review Draft Clean 43 2/5/2020 265 As an alternative to the 100-foot buffer, a property owner may re -slope the riverbank to a maximum 3:1, provide a 20-foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the riverbank and the 20-foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. The property owner must also demonstrate that this approach will not result in a loss of ecological functions of the shoreline. In areas of the river where this condition currently exists or where the property owner has constructed these improvements, the buffer width will be the actual distance as measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark to the top of the bank plus 20 feet. In no case shall the buffer be less than 50 feet. In any shoreline environment where an existing improved street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer, the buffer would end on the river side of the street or road. 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 Section 18.44.030 along with special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation adopted with this SMP. Development standards such as setbacks, height limitations, water quality regulations, flood hazard reduction, shoreline stabilization, protection of archaeological resources, environmental impact mitigation, parking and over water structures requirements are codified in TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 44 2/5/2020 266 The Administrative procedures codified in TMC Chapter 18.44 are designed to: • Assign responsibilities for implementation of the Master Program and Shoreline Permits. • Establish an orderly process by which to review proposals and permit applications. • Ensure that all persons affected by this Master Program are treated in a fair and equitable manner. These procedures include permit application requirements, conditional use approval criteria, variance approval criteria, and regulations for non -conforming development. 9. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS WITHIN THE SHORELINE JURISDICTION 9.1 Applicable Critical Areas Regulations A. The following critical areas shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC Chapter 18.45), (Ordinance 4, date), which is herein incorporated by reference into this SMP, except for the provisions excluded in subsection B of this section: 1. Wetlands 2. Watercourses (Type F, Type Np, Type Ns) 3. Areas of potential geologic instability 4. Abandoned ned mine -54. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas Such critical area provisions shall apply to any use, alteration, or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. Unless otherwise stated, no development shall be constructed, located, extended, modified, converted, or altered, or land divided without full compliance with the provision adopted by reference and the Shoreline Master Program. Within shoreline jurisdiction, the regulations of TMC Chapter 18.45 shall be liberally construed together with the Shoreline Master Program to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the provisions of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between any of the adopted provisions below and the Shoreline Master Program, the most restrictive provisions shall prevail. B. The following provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply within the Shoreline jurisdiction: 1. Sensitive Critical Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 18.45.160) 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180) n itt Appeals, ra Ens , n a (--N4G c t 1 Q n c 7. h"GGT1Z'GTtCTrO CC�.aQTGJ-��Tr T�cJ iJ c�Livil 1 v.�✓. a l ✓ / SMP Public Review Draft Clean 45 2/5/2020 267 3. Time Limitation, Appeals, and Vesting (TMC Section 18.45.190) 4. Wetlands Uses, Alterations and Mitigation (TMC Section 18.45.090). Activities and alterations to wetlands and their buffers located within shoreline jurisdiction shall be subject to the provisions and permitting mechanisms of this Master Program. C. Critical areas comprised of frequently flooded areas and areas of seismic instability are regulated by the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52) and the Washington State Building Code, rather than by TMC Chapter 18.44. 9.2 Purpose A. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) and Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58)requires protection of critical areas , defined as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, and fish and wildlife conservation areas, and abandoned mine are 18.44 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 sensitivecritical 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 seise -the most current, accurate, and complete scientific and technical information available in the regulation and protection of critical areas as required by the state FrerShoreline Management Act, according to WAC 365 195 900 thfough 365 195 925 d WAC 365 ion 040173-26-201 and WAC 173-26-221. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 46 2/5/2020 C. The goal of these critical area regulations is ae-hieve ne net less -of etlan4,- watereafish a wildlife eenser-vatient tians is to provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. Critical areas currently identified in the shoreline jurisdiction are discussed in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of this Shoreline Master Program. The locations are mapped on the SensitiveCritical Areas in the Shoreline T��ri�Map (Map-S4). This map is based on assessment of current conditions and review of the best available information. However, additional sensitivecritical areas may exist within the shoreline jurisdiction and the boundaries of the sensitivecritical areas shown are not exact. It is the responsibility of the property owner to determine the presence of sensitivecritical areas on the property and to verify the boundaries in the field. fet: abandoned ffline areas do net apply as nene of these areas is leeated in the shoreline jurisdietion. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 47 2/5/2020 269 �s-1 ranee ra la ! .� •� tows. 11 ssc9`u �' •♦i �P+y C \ W a Turning Basin Legend tl l_l I_• Tukwila City Limits ® Type F Shoreline Welland �1 Type F Shoreline Welland Buffer (801 ® Fish 8 Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area - - i Fish 8'Nildlife Habitat Buffer (100') 0 o o o Type F Stream �^ Type F Stream in Pipe Type Np Stream Type Np Stream In Pipe Type Ns Stream Type Ns Stream in Pipe OType F Watercourse Buffer (100) QType Np Watercourse Buffer (801 OType Ns Watercourse Buffer (50) ® 200ft River Buffer Slope Classifications Landslide potential is moderate: slope is between 15% and 40 % Z and underlain by relatively permeable soils. Landslide potential Is high: slope is between 15%and 40% and underlain by relatively impermeable will or by bedrock: also 3 Includes all areas sloping more than 40%. 10 Landslide potential is veryhigh: lndudes sloping areas 4 with mappable zones of groundwater seepage am ousting mappable landslide deposits regardless of slopemnr w,� 'Fish and Wildlife Habllal Con abet Areas shovm are Salmon habitat onhancemenl pf lects completed a underway. The river �'�• iL•olf is also a fish and Wildlife Habitat ConservaUm Ales. j sl M 9 I& Critical Areas in the Shoreline Tho mapping of moos of po!onual Geologicim,t ily is apyta>amale. On sile verification of lcpogisony and gndaJy Is m"'nary. Welland and locations we approximate only and walotcoulsos shovm on Nis map have not been surveyed. �• zra® f 990MA j1 1"0.5 MILE 270 10. PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE Public access to the shorelines of the state is one of the key goals of the Shoreline Management Act. Of the seven uses identified in RCW 90.58.020 as having preference in the shoreline, two relate to public access and recreational opportunities along the shoreline. The City of Tukwila is fortunate to have a number of public access sites already along the Green/Duwamish River in addition to the Green River Trail, which runs along almost the entire length of the river through the City. Other public access points are available at the North Winds Wier, the Tukwila Community Center, Codiga Park, Bicentennial Park at Strander Boulevard and parking available on Christianson Road, and at S. 180th Street. A habitat restoration project is underway at Duwamish Riverbend Hill on South 115th Street, which also includes public access to the river. The Shoreline Public Access Map (Map 65) identifies several street ends that could be improved or to which amenities could be added that would offer opportunities for neighborhood access to the river and/or the Green River Trail. The Shoreline Public Access map identifies several potential trail sites on the river to supplement the existing Green River trail system. The largest stretch of potential trail runs from S. 180th on the left bank to the end of the south annexation area. A pedestrian bridge to link the area south of S. 180th Street to the existing trail on the right bank is being discussed as well. A second area where improvement is needed in public access relates to boat launches for small hand -launched boats. Several potential sites have been identified in the Tukwila Parks Department Capital Improvement Program to address this need at City -owned sites. A comprehensive regional inventory of public access points to the River should be completed to identify gaps and opportunities. Requirements for public access to shorelines have been codified in TMC Chapter 18.44. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 49 2/5/2020 271 SMP Public Review Draft Clean 50 272 2/5/2020 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. 11 12. SHORELINE RESTORATION The Shoreline Restoration Plan, found in Appendix B, identifies the sites that have been identified to -date as possible locations for habitat restoration along the Green/Duwamish River. The City will continue to add sites to the Restoration Plan as they are identified and will include them in the City's Capital Improvement Program for acquisition and improvement. Project sites in the Transition Zone have the highest priority for acquisition. Amendments or revisions to the Shoreline Restoration Plan do not require an amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 51 2/5/2020 273 13. ADMINISTRATION The Administrative procedures below are designed to: • Assign responsibilities for implementation of the Master Program and Shoreline Permit • Establish an orderly process by which to review proposals and permit applications • Ensure that all persons affected by this Master Program are treated in a fair and equitable manner. 13.1 Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit A. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Based on guidelines in the Shoreline Management Act for a minimum shoreline jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green/Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends from the ordinary high water mark landward for 200 feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. The floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. B. Applicability The Tukwila Shoreline Master Program applies to uses, change of uses, activities or development that occurs within the above -defined shoreline jurisdiction. All proposed uses and development occurring within the shoreline jurisdiction must conform to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act, and this Master Program whether or not a permit is required. Except that requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the following described in WAC 173-27-044 and WAC 173-27-045: 1. Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to Chapter 70.105D RCW, or to the Department of Ecology when it conducts a remedial action under Chapter 70.105D RCW. 2. Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a national pollutant discharge elimination system storm water general permit. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 52 274 2/5/2020 3. WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Washington State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW 90.58.356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other local review. 4. Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045. 5. Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to Chapter 80.50 RCW. 13.2 Relationship to Other Codes and Regulations 1. Compliance with this Master Program does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may apply. The applicant is responsible for complying with all other applicable requirements. 2. Where this Master Program makes reference to any RCW, WAC, or other state or federal law or regulation, the most recent amendment or current edition shall apply. 3. When any provision of this Master Program or any other federal, state, or local provision conflicts with this Master Program, the provision that is most protective of shoreline resources shall prevail, except when constrained by federal or state law, or where specifically provided otherwise in this Master Program. 4. Relationship to Critical Areas Regulations. (a) For protection of critical areas where they occur in shoreline jurisdiction, this Master Program adopts by reference the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, which is incorporated into this Master Program with specific exclusions and modifications in Section 9 of this SMP. (b) All references to the Critical Areas Ordinance are for the version adopted [SAO-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. 14. APPEALS Any appeal of a decision by the City on a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use, Unclassified Use or Shoreline Variance must be appealed to the Shoreline Hearing Board. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 53 2/5/2020 275 15. MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS 15.1. This Master Program shall be periodically reviewed and adjustments shall be made as are necessary to reflect changing local circumstances, new information or improved data, and changes in State statutes and regulations. This review process shall be consistent with WAC 173-26 and shall include a local citizen involvement effort and public hearing to obtain the views and comments of the public. 15.2 Any provision of this Master Program may be amended as provided for in RCW 90.58.080 and WAC 173-26-090 and 173-26-100. Amendments or revisions to the Master Program, as provided by law, do not become effective until 14 days following written approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology. 15.3 Proposals for shoreline environment re -designations (i.e. amendments to the shoreline maps and descriptions) must demonstrate consistency with the criteria set forth in WAC 173- 26 and this program. 16. LIABILITY 16.1. Liability for any adverse impacts or damages resulting from work performed in accordance with a permit issued on behalf of the City within the City limits, shall be the sole responsibility of the owner of the site for which the permit was issued. 16.2 No provision of or term used in the Master Program is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages in a civil action. SMP Public Review Draft Clean 54 276 2/5/2020 NOTE: Shaded text denotes changes made after the Planning and Economic Development Committee packet of February 3, 2020. See pages 16, 27, 35, 42, 46, 85 and 88. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON; REPEALING VARIOUS DEFINITIONS AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) CHAPTER 18.06, "DEFINITIONS"; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2346 AND 2549 §23; REENACTING TMC CHAPTER 18.44, "SHORELINE OVERLAY," TO ESTABLISH NEW REGULATIONS RELATED TO SHORELINE USES; AMENDING VARIOUS ORDINANCES AS CODIFIED IN TMC SECTIONS 18.52.030, 18.60.050 AND 18.104.010 TO UPDATE ZONING REGULATIONS RELATED TO SHORELINE USES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 finds that shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and that unrestricted construction on privately and publicly owned shorelines of the state is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58 establishes a hierarchy of preference for uses in shorelines of state-wide significance: recognizing and protecting the state-wide interest over local interest; preserving the natural character of the shoreline; resulting in long term over short term benefit; protecting the resources and ecology of the shoreline; increasing public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines; increasing recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and providing for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop and administer local shoreline master programs for regulation of uses on shorelines of the state; and WHEREAS, the Green/Duwamish River, a shoreline of the state regulated under RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and WHEREAS, Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout have been listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act, and the Green/Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource for these species, making shoreline habitat protection and restoration crucial, particularly in the Transition Zone portion of the river that extends from the East Marginal Way South bridge through the north City limits; and W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 1 of 94 277 WHEREAS, Tukwila's current Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 2009 and revised per Department of Ecology comments in 2011; and WHEREAS, the City is conducting a required periodic update of its Shoreline Master Program per RCW 90.58.080 (4)(b)(i) using the joint review process with the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Public Outreach Plan that incorporated a variety of methods to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update including an open house, mailings to property owners and tenants, notice in a stormwater bill, postings on the City's web site, creation of a broadcast e-mail group who received updates of the shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter "The Hazelnut;" and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a public review draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on March 28, 2019, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council on April 25, 2019; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the draft Shoreline Master Program update as recommended by the Planning Commission and a Determination of Non -Significance was issued May 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 24, 2019, to review the Planning Commission recommended draft Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission recommended draft Shoreline Master Program to address issues raised by interested parties, individual councilmembers, staff and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §8, as codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Development, Shoreline," is hereby amended to read as follows. - Development, Shoreline "Development, shoreline" means, when conducted within the Shoreline Jurisdiction on shorelands or shoreland areas as defined herein, a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; construction of bulkheads; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature that interferes with the normal public use of the waters overlying lands subject to the Shoreline Management Act at any stage of W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 2 of 94 278 water level. "Development Shoreline" does not include dismantling or removing structures if there is no other associated development or re -development. Section 2. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §15, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Floodway," is hereby amended to read as follows: Floodway i R G Feta s i n g the water�-sli Ff ac- e elevatieRTmere th&r�--9rni-ee-�vvt "Floodway" means the area that has been established in effective federal emergency management agency flood insurance rate maps or floodway maps. The floodway does not include lands that can reasonably be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or maintained under license from the federal government the state, or a political subdivision of the state. Section 3. TMC Section Adopted. A new section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," as follows: Nonconforming Structure, Shoreline "Nonconforming Structure Shoreline" means a structure legally established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Master Program, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. Section 4. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "River Channel," is hereby amended to read as follows: River Channel "River Channel" means that area of the river en_rn __t lying riverward of the mean high water mark. Section 5. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §33, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Shoreline Areas," is hereby amended to read as follows: Shorelines or Shoreline Areas "Shorelines" or "Shoreline areas" means all "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. Section 6. TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. Ordinance No. 2347 §33, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Shoreline Areas," is hereby amended to read as follows: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 3 of 94 279 Substantial Development. "Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceed s$5,900 7 047.00 or any development that materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this definition must be adjusted for inflation by the Office of Financial Management every five years, beginning July 1, 2007, based upon changes in the Consumer Price Index during that time period. "Consumer Price Index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average Consumer Price Index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, United States Department of Labor. In accordance with WAC 173-27-040, as it now reads and as hereafter amended, the following shall not be considered developments which require a shoreline substantial development permit, although shall still comply with the substantive requirements of the Shoreline Master Program: 1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including repair of damage caused by accident, fire, or elements. 2. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. 3. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, and alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations. 4. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. 5. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his own use or for the use of his or her family, which residence does not exceed a height of 35 feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter. 6. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private non-commercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multiple family residences. This exception applies if either: (a) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed $2,500; or W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 4 of 94 WE (b) in fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed , _ (1) $20 000 for docks that are constructed to replace existing docks, and are of equal or lesser square footage than the existing dock being replaced; or (2) $10,000 for all other docks constructed on fresh waters.-4ut (3) However, if subsequent construction having a fair market value eXGeediRg $2,500 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; b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values; c. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550 (Oil and Natural Gas exploration in marine waters). 11. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the Department of Agriculture or the department jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21 C RCW. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 5 of 94 281 12. Watershed restoration projects, which means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: a. A project that involves less than 10 miles of stream reach, in which less than 25 cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings. 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_; er c. A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than 200 square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary high water mark of the stream. 13. Watershed restoration plan, which means a plan, developed or sponsored by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Department of Ecology, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act. 14. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: a. The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife; b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Chapter 77.55 RCW; and c. The local government has determined 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 for the exclusive purpose of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seg.) or to otherwise provide physical access to the structure by individuals with disabilities. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 6 of 94 282 Section 7. Section Numbers within TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," Amended. As a result of amendments contained herein, the section number for some definitions in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," may be changed as part of codification of this ordinance including, but not limited to, the following: Current Section Number 18.06.330 Definition Floodplain 18.06.472 Large Woody Debris (LWD) 18.06.590 Nonconforming Use 18.06.591 Non -Water -Oriented Uses 18.06.592 Office 18.06.593 Open Record Appeal 18.06.594 Open Record Hearing 18.06.595 Open Space Section 8. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "High -Impact Environment," is hereby repealed. Section 9. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2347 §19, as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Levee, Minimum Profile," is hereby repealed. 7MIIIQ�� ace low - Section 10. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Low -Impact Environment," is hereby repealed. .. - IN-MOMM, - M OW W-1 -O- ■ Section 11. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "River Environment," is hereby repealed. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 7 of 94 283 - - - - ■ - Section 12. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," under the subparagraph entitled "Shoreline," is hereby repealed. Section 13. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2346 as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.44 is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 14. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2549 (S 23) is hereby repealed. Section 15. TMC Chapter 18.44 Reenacted. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.44, "Shoreline Overlay," is hereby reenacted to read as follows: CHAPTER 18.44 SHORELINE OVERLAY Sections: 18.44.010 Purpose and Applicability 18.44.020 Shoreline Environment Designations 18.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses and Shoreline Use and Modification Matrix 18.44.040 ShE)reti;e Resiaet+arEn�nTe"TUse-sShoreline Buffers 4944465 inn, atiG ERd re eT+,t Uses 18.44.07-0050 Development Standards 18.44.08-0060 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping 18.44.G0070 Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction 18.44.4-00080 Public Access to the Shoreline 18.44.44-0090 Shoreline Design Guidelines 18.44.42-0100 Shoreline Restoration 18.44.430110 Administration 18.44.440120 Appeals 18.44.400130 Enforcement and Penalties 18.44.4-60140 Liability W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 8 of 94 ME Section 16. TMC Section 18.44.010 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.010 Purpose and Applicability A. The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 as amended and the rules and regulations thereunder as codified in the Washington Administrative Code; and to provide for the regulation of development that affects those areas of the City under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act. In particular, the purpose of this chapter is to: 1. Recognize and protect shorelines of State-wide significance; 2. Preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3. Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 4. Increase public access to publicly -owned areas of the shoreline; 5. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline: 6. Protect and create critical Chinook salmon habitat in the Transition Zone of the Green River. B. Applicability of Amended Zoning Code. After the effective date of this ordinance, Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Code, as hereby amended, shall apply to all properties subject to the shoreline overlay, provided that nothing contained herein shall be deemed to override any vested rights or require any alteration of a non -conforming use or non -conforming structure, except as specifically provided in Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Code, as amended. C. Pursuant to WAC 173-26-191 (2)(c), this chapter, together with the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan, constitutes the City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program. Any modifications to these documents will be processed as a Shoreline Master Program Amendment and require approval by the Department of Ecology. Section 17. TMC Section 18.44.020 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.020 Shoreline Environment Designations All shoreline within the City is designated "urban" and further identified as follows: 1. Shoreline Residential Environment. All lands zoned for residential use as measured 200 feet landward from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). 2. Urban Conservancy Environment. All lands not zoned for residential use upstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM. 3. High Intensity Environment. All lands downstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM. 4. Aquatic Environment. All water bodies within the City limits and its potential annexation areas under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark. The Aquatic Environment includes the water surface together with the underlying lands and the water column. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 9 of 94 285 Section 18. TMC Section 18.44.030 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses and Shoreline Use and Modification Matrix A. TMC Section 18.44.030.A, including the Use Matrix (Figure 18-1), specifies the uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment. Also included are special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation. B. In the matrix, shoreline environments are listed at the top of each column and the specific uses are listed along the left-hand side of each horizontal row. The cell at the intersection of a column and a row indicates whether a use may be allowed in a specific shoreline environment and whether additional use criteria apply. The matrix shall be interpreted as follows: 1. If the letter "P" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use may be allowed within the shoreline environment if the underlying zoning also allows the use. Shoreline (SDP, CUP and Variance) permits may be required. 2. If the letter "C" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use may be allowed within the shoreline environment subject to the shoreline conditional use review and approval procedures specified in TMC Section 18.44.139:G110 E . 3. If the letter "X" appears in the box at the intersection of the column and the row, the use is prohibited in that shoreline environment. C. In addition to the matrixe, 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 18.44.070050.K. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 10 of 94 4. Parking as a primary use is not permitted, except for existing Park and Ride lots, where adequate stormwater collection and treatment is in place to protect water quality. Parking is permitted only as an accessory to a permitted or conditional use in the shoreline jurisdiction. 5. All development, activities or uses, unless it is an approved overwater, flood management structure or shoreline restoration project, shall be prohibited waterward of the OHWM. SHORELINE USE MATRIX* P = May be aliewed permitted subject to development standards and peFmitting reqUiFements set f9kh On this Soso C = May be allowed -permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use. X = The use er aetivity is ehihite Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction Fn e R t. Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environmen t Buffer} Non- Buffer Buffer {2} Non- Buffer Buffer Non- Buffer AGRICULTURE Farming and farm -related activities X X X P X X X Aguaculture X X X X X X X COMMERCIAL (41) General X X X P X P (92) P (53) Automotive services, gas (outside pumps allowed), washing, body and engine repair shops (enclosed within a building) X X X C X C (92) X Contractors storage yards X C X C (92) X Water -oriented uses IQC P RC P PC P QC Water -dependent uses P 4 P 5 P 4 P EL41 P P Storage LL61 L 5 LL61 P L 6 P X CIVIC/INSTITUTIONAL General X P X P X P X DREDGING Dredging for remediation of contaminated C 7 NA C 7 NA C 7 NA C 7 substances Dredging for maintenance of established NA NA NA NA NA NA P 8 navigational channel 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) GP CP CID CID CP GP P (54 ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY (Nonwater Dependent) (810) C C C C C C C W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 11 of 94 287 P = May be a!!owe4 permitted subject to development standards and "^.mitt;.,^ FequiiFements set f9Fth in this Sono C = May be aflewecJ-permitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use. X = The activity is 9hihited Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction env;t. Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environmen t Buffer-44 Non- Buffer Buffer Non- Buffer Buffer 4) Non- Buffer FENCES P 11 P C 11 P C 11 P X FILL General C 12 P C 12 P C 12 p C 12 Fill for remediation, flood hazard reduction P 13 P P 13 P P 13 P P 13 or ecological restoration FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT Flood hazard reduction 14 P P P P P P P Shoreline stabilization 15 P P P P P P P INDUSTRIAL (16:7.) General X X P(§3) P P(§3) P (92) P(&3) Animal rendering X X X C X X X Cement manufacturing X X X C X C (K) X Hazardous substance processing and handling & hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities (on or off -site) (617) 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 (92) X Water -oriented uses X X PC P -PC P RC Water -dependent uses (17) X X P 4 P L 4 P P MINING General X X X X X X X gFedwsg X X X X X X G OVERWATER STRUCTURES (18) Piers, docks, and other overwater structures p 19 NA p 20 NA LL201 NA P (20,21) Vehicle bridges (public) P 31 4 P 31 P 31 4 P 31 P 31 41 P 31 P 31 Vehicle bridges (private) C C C C C C C Public pedestrian bridges P P P P P P P W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 12 of 94 KE P = May be allowe4 permitted subject to development standards and peHnitti^^ requireme.,tr set feFth i.. thiS CLAD . C = May be allowedpermitted as a Shoreline Conditional Use. X = The use eF activity is 9hihft.,4Not Allowed in Shoreline Jurisdiction eRt. Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Environmen t Buffer{} Non- Buffer Buffer �24 Non- Buffer Buffer 1(-3} Non- Buffer PARKING — ACCESSORY Parking areas limited to the minimum necessary to support permitted or conditional uses X P5) X P X P X RECREATION Recreation facilities (commercial — indoor) X X X P X P (2234) X Recreation facilities (commercial — outdoor) X X C (23,24) 12 C_LL41 AFC 23 24 SEC 24 X Recreation facilities, including boat launching (public) P (123) P P 23 24 C P (23� P25) P P (k3) P25 GR-24 Public and private promenades, footpaths, or P P P 26 P P 26 P X trails RESIDENTIAL —SINGLE FAMILY/MULTI-FAMILY Dwelling X (3927) P X P X X X Houseboats X X X X X X X Live-aboards X X X X X X P (47321,28) Patios and decks EL291 P P P X Signs 30 P P P P P P X Shoreline Restoration P P P P P P P TRANSPORTATION General C C C C C C C(§3) Park & ride lots X X X C (9) X C (9) X Levee maintenance roads P 321 P 32 P 32 P 32 P 32 P 32 NA Railroad X P X X X X X UTILITIES General (S10) C-L 4 P GP 4 P C 4 P C Provision, distribution, collection, transmission, or disposal of refuse X — X — X — X — X — X — X — Hydroelectric and private utility power generating plants X X X X X X X Wireless towers X X X X X X X Support facilities, such as outfalls EL331 P P 33 P P 33 P C 33 Regional detention facilities X USES NOT SPECIFIED C C C C C C C *This matrix is a summary. Individual notes modify standards in this matrix. Deta#ed e tapda .-el are f „r d 4 the Text of this „ha pter. Permitted or conditional uses listed herein may also require a shoreline substantial development permit and other permits. (1) AdditiGRal permitted uses foi IRd at T-MC; 1 S2 Ail 040 are allewed in the buffer. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 13 of 94 M (41) 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. (82) 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. (53) 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. (�R10) Allowed in shoreline jurisdiction when it is demonstrated that there is no feasible alternative to locating the use within shoreline iurisdiction. (11) The maximum height of the fence along the shoreline shall not exceed four feet in residential areas or six feet in commercial areas where there is a demonstrated need to ensure public safety and security of property. The fence shall not extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain -link fences must be vinyl coated. (12) Fill minimally necessary to support water -dependent uses, public access, or for the alteration or expansion of a transportation facility of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline when it is demonstrated that alternatives to fill are not feasible is conditionally allowed. (13) Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments is permitted. (14) Any new or redeveloped levee shall meet the applicable levee requirements of this chapter. (15) Permitted when consistent with TMC Section 18.44.050.F. (716) Industrial uses mean those uses that are facilities for manufacturing, processing, assembling and/or storing of finished or semi -finished goods with supportive office and commercial uses. Examples include manufacturing processing and/or assembling such items as electrical or mechanical equipment, previously manufactured metals, chemicals, light metals, plastics, solvents, soaps, wood, machines, food, pharmaceuticals, previously prepared materials; warehousing and wholesale distribution; sales and rental of heavy machinery and equipment; and internet data centers. (617) Subject to compliance with state siting criteria RCW Chapter 70.105 (See also Environmental Regulations, ; ^nr 18.44. nan Section 9, SMPZ (18) Permitted when associated with water -dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control or channel management. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 14 of 94 290 (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) ioint 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. (4422) Limited to athletic or health clubs. (23) Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters are permitted in the buffer provided no such structure shall block views to the shoreline from adjacent properties. (4�24)Permitted only if water oriented. (25) Parks recreation and open space facilities operated by public agencies and non-profit organizations are permitted. (26) Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping purposes. (4827) Additional development may be allowed consistent with TMC Section 18.44.4-30110.€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. (29) Patios and decks are permitted within the shoreline buffer so long as they do not exceed 18 inches in height and are limited to a maximum of 200 square feet and 50% of the width of the river frontage whichever is smaller. Decks or patios must be located landward of the top of the bank and be constructed to be pervious and of environmentally -friendly materials. If a deck or patio will have an environmental impact in the shoreline buffer, then commensurate mitigation shall be required. (30) Permitted when consistent with TMC Section 18.44.0501. (31) Permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way. (32) May be co -located with fire lanes. (33) Allowed if they require a physical connection to the shoreline to provide their support function, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible. (34) Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls vested as of the effective date of this program or if no feasible alternative location exists. Any regional detention facility located in the buffer shall be designed such that a fence is not required planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the surrounding environment and provide design features that serve both public and private use, such as an access road that can also serve as a trail. The facility shall be designed to locate access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 15 of 94 291 Section 19. TMC 18.44.040 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.040 Shoreline Buffers Buffer widths. The following shoreline buffer widths apply in shoreline jurisdiction. Environment Shoreline Residential Urban Conservancy High Intensity Aquatic Buffer width (1)(2) 50 feet OR the area needed to achieve a slope no steeper than 2.5:1, measured from the toe of the bank to the top of the bank, plus 20 linear feet measured from the top of the bank landward, whichever is greater Areas without 100feet levees Areas with levees 125 feet 100 feet Not Applicable Modification ll ll ll ll (1) Unless otherwise noted all buffers are measured landward from the OHWM. (2) In any shoreline environment where an existing improved street or road runs parallel to the river through the buffer, the buffer ends on the river side of the edge of the improved right- of-way. (3) Removal of invasive species and replanting with native species of high habitat value is voluntary unless triggered by requirement for a Shoreline Substantial Development permit. (4) The Director may reduce the standard buffer on a case -by -case basis by up to 50% upon construction of the following cross section: (a) Reslope bank from toe to be no steeper than 2,54- 3:1 in the Urban Conservancy Environment or reslope bank from OHWM (not toe) to be no steeper than 3:1 in the High Intensity Environment, using bioengineering techniques; and (b) Minimum 20-foot buffer landward from top of bank; and c) Bank and remainina buffer to be planted with native species with high habitat value Maximum slope is reduced due to measurement from OHWM and to recognize location in the Transition Zone where pronounced tidal influence makes work below OHWM difficult. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct indirect or long-term adverse impacts to the river. In all cases a buffer enhancement plan must also be approved and implemented as a condition of the reduction. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the shoreline ecological functions. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 292 Page 16 of 94 5) Upon reconstruction of levee to the levee standards of this chapter, the Director may reduce the buffer to actual width required for the levee. If fill is placed along the back slope of a new levee the buffer may be reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope of the levee. If the property owner provides a levee maintenance easement landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall which: 1) meets the width required by the agency providing maintenance: 2) prohibits the construction of any structures; and 3) allows the City to access the area to inspect the levee and make any necessary repairs, then the _Director may place that area outside of the shoreline buffer and allow incidental uses in the area, such as parking. v.AA 040 Shoreline Revrirentmal Gnyrmre-nmen+ Uses Zavei, Buffer shall GG)RSiSt of the area Reeded to aGhieve a 2.5A slepe ef the Fiver baRk-,, Reasured from the toe Gf the bank to the tep ef the baRk, plus 29 linear feet measured W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 17 of 94 293 cocGtie1 44$78 (€). W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 18 of 94 294 mom• E A W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 19 of 94 295 •- - -arm WN I • - - - - W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 20 of 94 296 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 21 of 94 297 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 22 of 94 ME M- - - - - mmm •- - - - IN MI M N _ ME, - - W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 23 of 94 299 - ■ - -- - ■- ■. ■ - �� - - ■ - - - ■ - mmm■ - •- - - - to be •• steeper tha-R 3A above the Q_ <t M setbaGk area- PreteGtmen and LandSGapiRg SeGtk)R, _ <t 1 1 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 24 of 94 300 Section 20. TMC 18.44.050 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.070050 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 18.44.999060, 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 18.44.4-3-9110.€G, "Non -Conforming Development." B. Shoreline Residential Development Standards. A shoreline substantial development permit is not required for construction within the Shoreline Residential Environment by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his/her own use or for the use of a family member. Such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to this chapter. Short subdivisions and subdivisions are not exempt from obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 1. Shoreline Residential Environment Standards. The following standards apply to the Shoreline Residential Environment: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 25 of 94 301 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 2:5.1-3:1 slope with a 20-foot setback from the top of the bank. The Director may require a Riverbank Analysis as part of any development proposal. c. Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc., shall be suitably screened with native vegetation per the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, TMC Section 18.44.060. 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.&7-0050.F. e. Short plats of five to nine lots or formal subdivisions must be designed to provide public access to the river in accordance with the Public Access Section, TMC Section 18.44.0804-89. 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 18.44.979050.1. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 26 of 94 302 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 to the Shoreline Section, TMC Section 18.44.080. 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 18.44.099060. d. Any new shoreline stabilization or repairs to existing stabilization must comply with Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.07-0050.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 18.44.070050. 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 Shoreline Buffer; b. 6545 feet between the outside landward edge of the River Shoreline Buffer and 200 feet of the OHWM. C Preyided no permit hall he issued far anv new or expanded b iildinn_nr stFuetu-e of more than 35 feet above average grade level on shorelines of the State that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines. For any building that is proposed to be greater than 35 feet in height in the shoreline jurisdiction, the development proponent must demonstrate the proposed building will not block the views of a substantial number of residences. The Director may approve a 15 foot% increase in height for structures within the shoreline iurisdiction if the project proponent provides mat —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 18.44.0€0060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." If the required buffer has already been restored, the project proponent may provide a 20% wider buffer, planted in accordance with TMC Section 18.44.060 ,"Vegetation Protection and Landscaping," and/or enhanned in order to obtain the 15-%foot increase in height. in a^norr:anr•e ,e,ifh irr-acccTa-c+rrcc�vTcrr 1-MG SeGtion�.080 "Vegetation Drofeofion arld I andSGaninn " W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 27 of 94 303 4. Lighting. In addition to the lighting standards in TMC Chapter 18.60, "Board of Architectural Review," lighting for the site or development shall be designed and located so that: a. The minimum light levels in parking areas and paths between the building and street shall be one -foot candle. b. Lighting shall be designed to prevent light spillover and glare on adjacent properties and on the river channel to the maximum extent feasible, be directed downward so as to illuminate only the immediate area, and be shielded to eliminate direct off -site illumination. c. The general grounds need not be lighted. Cl. The lighting is incorporated into a unified landscape and/or site plan. D. Surface Water and Water Quality. The following standards apply to all shoreline development. 1. New surface water systems shall not discharge directly into the river or streams tributary to the river without pre-treatment to reduce pollutants and meet State water quality standards. 2—Such pre-treatment may consist of biofiltration, oil/water separators, or other methods approved by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. 62. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for storm water detention/infiltration. 43. 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. 64. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary sewer. 65. Solid and liquid wastes and untreated effluents shall not be allowed to enter any bodies of water or to be discharged onto shorelands. 7-6. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 28 of 94 304 2. Flood hazard structures must incorporate appropriate vegetation restoration and conservation actions consistent with the standards of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, TMC Section 18.44.060. redeveloped, shall be desigRed to rneet the MiRiMUM levee profile, eXGept as PIrevided iR eGtien 18.44.070.E.10 bele n, 43. Publicly -funded structural measures to reduce flood hazards shall improve public access or dedicate and provide public access unless public access improvements would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security problems, or significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated. --544_. 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 MiROMUMlevee pr a 3:1 riverside slope or other appropriate engineering design standards for stability (e.g., over -steepened side slopes for existing soil and/or flow conditions); and c. Repair of the existing structure will not cause or increase significant adverse ecological impacts to the shoreline. 65. Rehabilitated or replaced flood hazard reduction structures shall not extend the toe of slope any further waterward of the OHWM than the existing structure. 76. 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. 97. New, redeveloped or replaced structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. -98. 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. 4-99. New, redeveloped or replaced flood hazard reduction structures n4ay +o frnm +ho minimium TcoepPe ile „nly fellows -must have an overall waterward slope no steeper than 3:1 unless it is not physically possible to achieve such as slope. A floodwall may be substituted for all or a portion of a levee back slope erg where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this subsection, and whiiGh if structure has not lost its nonconforming status or to allow area for waterward habitat restoration development. The floodwall shall be designed to be the minims im necewaFy to provide 4-0-15 feet of clearance between the levee and the building, or the minims im nossaFy-to preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety standards. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 29 of 94 305 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. #-a fleedwall is peFmitted 6lRdeF this subseGtieFl the levee slope must be 2.5H:!V URIess it is R9t physiGally possible tG aGhweve SUGh a slGpei iR that iRstaRGe, the levee slope must be as nln e to 7 514- !V as phySiGally possible. F. Shoreline Stabilization. The provisions of this section apply to those structures or actions intended to minimize or prevent erosion of adjacent uplands and/or failure of riverbanks resulting from waves, tidal fluctuations or river currents. Shoreline stabilization or armoring involves the placement of erosion resistant materials (e.g., large rocks and boulders, cement, pilings and/or 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. b. The second priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments shall be to replace in place (at the bulkhead's existing location). 4. When evaluating a proposal against the above priority system, at a minimum the following criteria shall be considered: a. Existing topography; b. Existing development; c. Location of abutting bulkheads; d. Impact to shoreline ecological functions; and, e. Impact to river hydraulics, potential changes in geomorphology, and to other areas of the shoreline. 5. Proponents of new or replacement hard shoreline stabilization (e.g. bulkheads or revetments) must demonstrate through a documented Riverbank Analysis that bioengineered shoreline protection measures or bioengineering erosion control designs will not provide adequate upland protection of existing structures or would pose W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 30 of 94 306 a threat or risk to adjacent property. The Study must also demonstrate that the proposed hard shoreline stabilization will not adversely affect other infrastructure or adjacent shorelines. 6. Shoreline armoring such as riprap rock revetments and other hard shoreline stabilization techniques are detrimental to river processes and habitat creation. Where allowed, shoreline armoring shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that does not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, including fish habitat, and shall conform to the requirements of the 2004 Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (eras amended) criteria and guidelines for integrated stream bank protection and shall conform to the requirements of the 2004 {Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife criteria and guidelines for Integrated Stream Bank Protection (2003 as amended), the Wa hiRgtGR Depa fmonf of EGG!eg„ anti U.S. Fish @Rd Wildlife contin4 Olympia, WashiRgtG U. S. Army Corps of Engineers standards (if required), 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(3)(e)(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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 31 of 94 307 on the property of others caused by his/her construction and shall propose and implement solutions approved by the City to minimize such effects. 11. When shoreline stabilization is required at a public access site, provision for safe access to the water shall be incorporated in the design whenever possible. 12. Placement of bank protection material shall occur from the top of the bank and shall be supervised by the property owner or contractor to ensure material is not dumped directly onto the bank face. 13. Bank protection material shall be clean and shall be of a sufficient size to prevent its being washed away by high water flows. 14. When riprap is washed out and presents a hazard to the safety of recreational users of the river, it shall be removed by the owner of such material. 15. Bank protection associated with bridge construction and maintenance may be permitted subject to the provisions of the SMP and shall conform to provisions of the State Hydraulics Code (RCW Chapter 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 32 of 94 M 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 #die-TMC Section 18.44.080, "Public Access to the Shoreline," �e�-when such signage does not compromise the protection of these features from tampering, damage and/or destruction. H. Environmental Impact Mitigation. 1. All shoreline development and uses shall at a minimum occur in a manner that results in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions through the careful location and design of all allowed development and uses. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from allowed development and uses are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. 2. To the extent Washington's State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, is applicable, the analysis of environmental impacts from proposed shoreline uses or developments shall be conducted consistent with the rules implementing SEPA (TMC Chapter 21.04 and WAC 197-11). 3. For all development, mitigation sequencing shall be applied in the following order of priority: a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. 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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 33 of 94 309 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 Chapter 18.56, the following requirements apply to all development in the shoreline jurisdiction. 1. Any parking, loading, or storage facilities located between the river and any building must incorporate additional landscaping in accordance with # 1e-TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping," Se��;R-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, TMC Section 18.44.060. 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, TMC Section 18.44.060. 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: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 34 of 94 310 1. Clearing, Grading and Landfill. a. Land altering shall be permitted only where it meets the following criteria: shoreline use; affected; (1) The work is the minimum necessary to accomplish an allowed (2) Impacts to the natural environment are minimized and mitigated; (3) Water quality, river flows and/or fish habitat are not adversely (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, TMC Section 18.44.060; (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 ce"+"'^ TMC Section 18.44.050.H above. 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 Gin TMC Section 18.44.050.H above; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. K. Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks and Other Over -water Structures. 1. General Requirements. a. A dock may be allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 35 of 94 311 (1) commercial or marina moorage; (2) floating moorage buoys; (3) joint use moorage pier/dock. The Director shall use the following criteria to determine if the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage: (a) Applicant has provided adequate documentation from a commercial marina within 5 river miles that moorage is not available. (b) Floating moorage buoy is technically infeasible as determined by a professional hydrologist. (c) Applicant has provided adequate documentation from any existing moorage pier/dock owner within 5 river miles that joint use is not possible. 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 approvals f ernproof 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. fie. 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 practices were followed. The preservatives must also be approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 36 of 94 312 nh. 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. hi. 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 Ghapter TMC Section 18.44.050.H above, in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. b. Commercial/industrial marinas and dry docks shall be located no further upriver than Turning Basin #3. c. Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed and operated to avoid or minimize adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, water quality, native shoreline vegetation, navigation, public access, existing in -water recreational activities and adjacent water uses. d. Marinas shall submit a fuel spill prevention and contingency plan to the City for approval. Haul -out and boat maintenance facilities must meet the City's stormwater management requirements and not allow the release of chemicals, petroleum or suspended solids to the river. e. Marinas, boat yards and dry docks must be located a minimum of 100 feet from fish and wildlife habitat areas (see "Sees+t-ive AFeas iR the Sherei"Re" "Map 511 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 37 of 94 313 f. Boat lifts and canopies must meet the standards of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit Number 1 for Watercraft Lifts in Fresh and Marine/Estuarine Waters within the State of Washington. 4. Over -water Structures. Where allowed, over -water structures such as piers, wharves, bridges, and docks shall meet the following standards: a. The size of new over -water structures shall be limited to the minimum necessary to support the structure's intended use and to provide stability in the case of floating docks. Structures must be compatible with any existing channel control or flood management structures. b. Over -water structures shall not extend waterward of the OHWM any more than necessary to permit launching of watercraft, while also ensuring that watercraft do not rest on tidal substrate at any time. c. Adverse impacts of over -water structures on water quality, river flows, fish habitat, shoreline vegetation, and public access shall be minimized and mitigated. Mitigation measures may include joint use of existing structures, open decking or piers, replacement of non-native vegetation, installation of in -water habitat features or restoration of shallow water habitat. d. Any proposals for in -water or over -water structures shall provide a pre - construction habitat evaluation, including an evaluation of salmonid and bull trout habitat and shoreline ecological functions, and demonstrate how the project achieves no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. e. Over -water structures shall obtain all necessary state and federal permits prior to construction or repair. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NGlMD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 38 of 94 314 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. All S!gRS shall mood the its of the MaR al nn the U.S. C deportment of TronspeFtat4GR- e. Signs installed on utilities and wireless communication facilities denoting danger or other safety information, including emergency contact information. 2. Billboards and other off -premise signs are strictly forbidden in the shoreline buffer. Section 21. TMC 18.44.060 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 39 of 94 315 18.44.ON060 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping A. Purpose, 1. The purpose of this section is to: a. Regulate the protection of existing trees and native vegetation in the shoreline jurisdiction; b. Establish requirements for removal of invasive plants at the time of development or re -development of sites; c. Establish requirements for landscaping for new development or re- development; d. Establish requirements for the long-term maintenance of native vegetation to prevent establishment of invasive species and promote shoreline ecosystem processes. 2. The City's goal is to: a. Preserve as many existing trees as possible and increase the number of native trees, shrubs and other vegetation in the shoreline because of their importance to shoreline ecosystem functions as listed below: control; shelter; the river; and (1) Overhead tree canopy to provide shade for water temperature (2) Habitat for birds, insects and small mammals; (3) Vegetation that overhangs the river to provide places for fish to (4) Source of insects for fish; (5) Filtering of pollutants and slowing of stormwater prior to its entering (6) A long-term source of woody debris for the river. 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 ndteGhRiGa,,, al assista to property owners for improving vegetation in the shoreline jurisdiction and will work collaboratively with local citizen groups to assist property owners in the removal of invasive vegetation and planting of native vegetation, particularly for residential areas. B. Applicability. 1. This chapter sets forth rules and regulations to control maintenance and clearing of trees and other vegetation within the City of Tukwila for properties located within the shoreline iurisdiction. For properties located within a critical area or its associated buffer, the maintenance and removal of trees shall be governed by TMC W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 40 of 94 316 Chapter 18.45. TMC Chapter 18.54 "Urban Forestry and Tree Regulations" chapter shall govern tree removal on any undeveloped land and any land zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) that is developed with a single family residence. TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," shall govern the maintenance and removal of trees on developed properties that are zoned commercial industrial, or multifamily, and on properties located in the LDR zone that are developed with a non -single family residential use. The most stringent regulations shall apply in case of a conflict. 32. 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. 43. The tree protection and retention requirements and the vegetation management requirements apply to existing uses as well as new or re -development. C. Minor Activities Allowed without a Permit or Exemption. 1. The following activities are allowed without a permit or exemption: a. Maintenance of existing lawfully established areas of crop vegetation, landscaping (including paths and trails) or gardens within shoreline jurisdiction. Examples include mowing lawns weeding harvesting and replanting of garden crops, pruning, and planting of non-invasive ornamental vegetation or indigenous native species to maintain the general condition and extent of such areas. Cutting down trees and shrubs within the shoreline jurisdiction is not covered under this provision. Excavation, filling, and construction of new landscaping features such as concrete work, berms and walls, are not covered in this provision and are subject to review; b. Noxious weed control within shoreline jurisdiction, if work is selective only for noxious species; is done bV hand removal/spraying of individual plants; spraying is conducted by a licensed applicator (with the required aquatic endorsements from the Washington State Department of Ecology if work is in an aquatic site); and no area -wide vegetation removal or grubbing is conducted. Control methods not meeting these criteria may still be approved under other provisions of this chapter. 43D. Tree PreteGtion Retention and Replacement. Retention. a. As many significant trees and as much native vegetation as possible are to be retained on a site proposed for development or re -development, taking into account the condition and age of the trees. As part of a land use application such as but not limited to subdivision or short plat, design review, or development permit review, the Director of Community Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require alterations in the arrangement of buildings, parking or other elements of proposed development in order to retain significant non-invasive trees, particularly those that provide shading to the river. TFees lGGated „n prepeptieS RGt U RdeF„eiRg deyelepmon+ rtc re develepmeRt may Ret be Femeved eXGept these that interfere with aGc-ess and passage W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 41 of 94 317 the hazard is RGt readily apparent, the Gity may require aR evaluatieR by an lRterRationa SE)Gioty of 4rborists (IC4)_noFtified arborist 9b. Topping of trees is prohibited unless abselutol„ ReGessaFy to protort overhead utility liRes. TeppiRg of trees and will be regulated as removal aP -with tree replacement wilkrequired. 4GC. Trees may only be pruned to prevent interference with an overhead utility line with prior approval by the Director. The pruning must be carried out under the direction of a Qualified Tree Professional or performed by the utility provider under the direction of a Qualified Tree Professional. The crown shall be maintained to at least 2/3 the height of the tree prior to pruning. Pruning more than 25% of the canopy in a 36 month period shall be regulated as removal with tree replacement required. hazard te exiStiRg StFUGtHres er the PHbl4G may be Femeved from sites witheut aR issued bUildiRg permit eF Federal approval. FaGt9FS that will be GORsidered iR appFGVeRg tree remeval iRGlude, but are RE)t limited te: tree GG)RditiOR and health, age, risks to that iRterfeFe with aGGess and passage eR P61bliG trails er trees that pFeseRt aR IM MIR-Ri and Qtcntial f Fe9tF GaWith „tilitioc 32. Permit Requirements. Prior to any tree removal or site clearing, a Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit application must be submitted to the Department of Community Development (DCD) containing the following information: a. A vegetation survey on a site plan that shows the diameter, species and location of all significant trees and all existing native vegetation. b. A site plan that shows trees and native vegetation to be retained and trees to be removed and provides a table showing the number of significant trees to be removed and the number of replacement trees required. c. Tree protection zones and other measures to protect any trees or native vegetation that are to be retained for sites undergoing development or re -development. Cl. Location of the OHWM, F4ver shoreline buffer, Shoreline Jurisdiction boundary and any Sewcritical 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. 3. Criteria for Shoreline Tree Removal. A Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit shall only be approved by the Director of Community Development if the proposal complies with the following: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 42 of 94 318 a. The site is undergoinq development or redevelopment; b. The proposal complies with tree retention, replacement, maintenance, and monitoring requirements of this chapter; and utilities; c. Either: (1) Tree poses a risk to structures; (2) There is imminent potential for root or canopy interference with (3) Trees interfere with the access and passage on public trails; (4) Tree condition and health is poor; the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist; or (5) Trees present an imminent hazard to the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA) certified arborist; and Tree Replacement Requirements. a. VVheFe pe tted—,&Significant trees that are removed, illegally topped, or pruned by more than 25 percent in 36 month period within —the shoreline jurisdiction shall be replaced pursuant to the tree replacement requirements shown below, up to a density of 100 trees per acre (including existing trees). b. Significant trees that are removed as part of an approved landscape plan on a developed site are subject to replacement per TMC Chapter 18.52. Dead or dying trees removed from developed or landscaped areas shall be replaced 1:1 in the next appropriate season for planting. c. Dead or dying trees located within the buffer or undeveloped upland portion of the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be left in place as wildlife snags, unless they present a hazard to structures, facilities or the public. Removal of non -hazardous trees as defined by TMC Chapter 18.06 in non -developed areas are subject to the tree replacement requirements listed in the table below. d. The Director or Planning Commission may require additional trees or shrubs to be installed to mitigate any potential impact from the loss of this vegetation as a result of new development. Tree Replacement Requirements Diameter* of Tree Removed (*measured at height of 4.5 feet from the round) Number of Replacement Trees Required 4 - 6 inches (single trunk); 2 inches (any trunk of a multi -trunk tree 3 Over 6 - 8 inches 4 Over 8 - 20 inches 6 Over 20 inches 8 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 43 of 94 319 6e. 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. 6f. If all required replacement trees cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site, off -site tree replacement within the shoreline jurisdiction may be allowed at a site approved by the City. Priority for off -site tree planting will be at locations within the Transition Zone. If no suitable off -site location is available, the applicant shall pay a fee into a tree replacement fund per the adopted fee resolution The fee shall be basen aRstallr+ eil m �C mi,lnh and Staking c„nnlioc rrrscarrcr rrcn-rT r-m-arcn; ar-ra-.Tccrrcrrr9�aWF'rr-�. 75. Large Woody Debris (LWD). When a tree suitable for use as LWD is permitted to be removed from the shoreline buffer, the tree trunk and root ball (where possible) will be saved for use in a restoration project elsewhere in the shoreline jurisdiction. The applicant will be responsible for the cost of moving the removed tree(s) to a location designated by the City. If no restoration project or storage location is available at the time, the Director may waive this requirement. Trees removed in the shoreline jurisdiction outside the buffer shall be placed as LWD in the buffer (not on the bank), if feasible. Priority for LWD placement projects will be in the Transition Zone. fi [Dead nr dyiRg tFeeS IGGated Within the buffer nr „Rdeyeloped HpIand pE)FtiG4 ef the 9hGFeIiRe J6lFiSd*GtieR shall be left in pl@Ge as wildlife sRagS, URIeSS they present a h- Fd to tr, Gt re faGilities or the r",hlin GE. Tree Protection During Development and Redevelopment. All trees not proposed for removal as part of a project or development shall be protected using Best Management Practices and the standards below. 1. The Critical Root Zones (CRZ) for all trees designated for retention, on site or on adjacent property as applicable shall be identified on all construction plans, including demolition grading, civil and landscape site plans. 2. Any roots within the CRZ exposed during construction shall be covered immediately and kept moist with appropriate materials. The City may require a third -party Qualified Tree Professional to review longterm viability of the tree. 3. Physical barriers such as 6-foot chain link fence or plywood or other approved equivalent shall be placed around each individual tree or grouping at the CRZ. 1 0TcP Rew dev pmer�+i.� rt OF re-deveIoncrvpment where trees are prepesed fer FeteRtiGR, tFee proteGtiGR zeRes shall be iRdiGated on site PlaRs and shall be established 4 feet high GGRStFUGtion baFrier shall be installed areuRd SigRifiGaRt tFees and standS E) e- trees ervege+^+=t-be-reta+Red.—Minimum distances from the trunk for the G E)RStrl lGtier, 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 44 of 94 320 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. 4. Alternative protection methods may be used that provide equal or greater tree protection if approved by the Director. 5. A weatherproof sian shall be installed on the fence or barrier that reads: "TREE PROTECTION ZONE — THIS FENCE SHALL NOT BE REMOVED OR ENCROACHED UPON. No soil disturbance, parking, storage, dumping or burning of materials is allowed within the Critical Root Zone. The value of this tree is $ [insert value of tree as determined by a Qualified Tree Professional here]. Damage to this tree due to construction activity that results in the death or necessary removal of the tree is subiect to the Violations section of TMC Chapter 18.44." 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that the CRZ of trees on adjacent properties are not impacted by the proposed development. 12. A pre -construction inspection shall be conducted by the City to finalize tree protection actions. 13. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 45 of 94 321 iRe GF. Landscaping. This- eEtiOn-presents IaRGISGaping-sta aFds for the Shore' 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 Shoreline 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. TFee-s and otherveete' ^ shad Rg the Fiver shag!-pe 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 behiRd-landward of publicly maintained levees, an applicant is not required to remove invasive vegetation or plant native vegetation on the levees, however the remaining With he buffer landward of the levee shall be improved and invasive vegetation planted. d. Removal of invasive species shall be done by hand or with hand-held power tools. Where not feasible and mechanized equipment is needed, the applicant must obtain a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and show how the slope stability of the bank will be maintained. 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 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 46 of 94 322 h. Non-native trees may be used as street trees or in approved developed landscape areasR Gases 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 18.44.9W060.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. pg. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NGlMD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 47 of 94 323 2. Rover Shoreline Buffer Landscaping Requirements in all Shoreline Environments. The 47�c VeF Shoreline 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—liGeRsed landsGape arnhitGGt er an approved biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval that shows plant species, size, number and spacing. The requirement for a lands^ape aFGhitont or biologist may be waived by the Director for single family property owners (when planting is being required as mitigation for construction of overwater structures or shoreline stabilization)_,Of the nrnnorty GWRer annonts tonhninal assistanGe from Gity staff. b. Plants shall be installed from the OHWM to the upland edge of the Rite Shoreline 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. d. Minimum plant spacing in the buffer shall follow the der Shoreline Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table shown in TMC Section 18.44.GK060.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. q. The Director, in consultation with the City's Urban Environmentalist, may approve the use of- shrub planting and installation of willow stakes to be counted toward the tree replacement standard in the buffer if proposed as a measure to control invasive plants and increase buffer function. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table Plant Material Type Planting Density Stakes/cuttings along river bank willows, red osier dogwood) 1 - 2 feet on center or per bioengineering method Shrubs 3 - 5 feet on center, depending on species Trees 15 — 20 feet on center, depending on species Groundcovers, grasses, sedges, rushes, other herbaceous plants 1 — 1.5 feet on center, depending on species Native seed mixes25 r5- Ibs per acre, depending on species W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 48 of 94 324 3. Landscaping Requirements for the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments — Outside of the River Shoreline Buffer. For the portions of property within the Shoreline Jurisdiction landward of the River. Shoreline 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. €G. Vegetation Management in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The requirements of this section apply to all existing and new development within the shoreline jurisdiction. 1. Trees and shrubs may only be pruned for safety, to maintain views or access corridors and trails by pruning up or on the sides of trees, to maintain clearance for utility lines, and/or for improving shoreline ecological function. No more than 25% may be pruned from a tree within a 36 month period without prior City review and is subject to replacement ratios of this chapter. This type of pruning is exempt from any permit requirements. Topping of trees is prohibited and shall be regulated as removal with tree replacemet required except where absolutely necessary to avoid interference with existing utilities. 2. Plant debris from removal of invasive plants or pruning shall be removed from the site and disposed of properly. 3. Use of pesticides. a. Pesticides (including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides) shall not be used in the shoreline jurisdiction except where: (1) Alternatives such as manual removal, biological control, and cultural control are not feasible given the size of the infestation, site characteristics, or the characteristics of the invasive plant species, W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 49 of 94 325 (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 Gity and-the appliGaRt pFeseRts a GeP of the -Aqua+GpeStiGide PeFrni ;ssued 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 to improve plant survival and health without a separate shoreline vegetation removal permit may be permitted five to ten years after planting if this approach is approved as part of the restoration proiect's maintenance and monitoring plan. H. Maintenance and Monitoring. The property owner is required to ensure the viability and long term health of vegetation planted for replacement or mitigation through proper care and maintenance for the life of the project subject to the permit requirements as fnllnws- 1. Tree Replacement and Vegetation Clearing Permit Requirements: a. Schedule an inspection with the City's Urban Environmentalist to document planting of the correct number and type of plants. b. Submit annual documentation of tree and vegetation health to the City for three years. 2. Restoration and Mitigation Project Requirements: a. A five-year maintenance and monitoring plan must be approved by the City prior to permit issuance. The monitoring period will begin when the restoration is accepted by the City and as -built plans have been submitted. b. Monitoring reports shall be submitted annually for City review up until the end of the monitoring period. Reports shall measure survival rates against project goals and present contingency plans to meet project goals. c. Mitigation will be complete after project goals have been met and accepted by the City's Urban Environmentalist. d. A performance bond or financial security equal to 150% of the cost of labor and materials required for implementation of the planting, maintenance and monitoring shall be submitted prior to City acceptance of project. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 50 of 94 326 Section 22. TMC 18.44.070 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.ON070 Environmentally Sensitive Critical Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction A. Purpose. 1 The Grewth Management Gt /RGVV 36 70A) requires nrotertien of critic al -r--n�-�arw�crr'ivrCtrrCnJc n� � � , ...... ...� . , ... . � requires .,, , , .... r. � ............ , . ... ... , .....,.. i geelegiGally hazardous areas, GritiGal aquifeF Fec-haFge areas, fish and wildliflee GeRSe Va-tc�GR aFeas, and -abaTRd-eRed riRe-areaa-ss. shoreline jurisdiction is tG• h Prated quantity Fnaintain wildlife habitat d . PFeVeRt eFeSiGR rerun val of trees,shri ibs anrd rent anrd qualityof water reset irces d less of clone and soil stability cap Isar: by the systems of vegetative cover fl66dffiRg. of environmentally sensitive areas for a gain over conrditiens present to protect er enhance anarlremei is fisheries of hest science in the regi ilatinn_7RG j.IrnTcornerate the use available fretnnGtiGR it!Ve area rernilatiens is to achieve ne net Wet!aR(JT v. The ggcaali of these en i,Se fish canseFVatinn areas nr their fi inctinns Inventeriec watteercni or Nnrl Wildlife R A nnlisahility Maps and octior. of the 7oair,g Gerde (T11 G Ghanter 18.45), W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 51 of 94 327 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 52 of 94 328 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 53 of 94 329 b. The DireGter may allow m9dmfiGatmGRS to the required rnntentc of the mitigation G. If tl-eF is WFmtten agreement between the ireGtnr and the annlirant C—Tr— —� iGTfCCC+TTQ�TG GTTTCeTI"�rJ`—CYYG'�.1' `' 1 ��iCOT—CiTfG�C7TG�lfLaG �-1Y deloReatiGR and GlassifiGati(DR are G9FFeGt, that there will be RE) detrimental impaGt te the a ---A. Applicable Critical Areas Regulations. The following critical areas, located in the shoreline jurisdiction shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance TMC Chapter 18.45, (Ordinance #, date), which is herein incorporated by reference into this SMP except as provided in TMC Section 18.44.070.B. Said provisions shall apply to any use alteration or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required Unless otherwise stated no development shall be constructed located, extended modified converted or altered or land divided without full compliance with the provisions adopted by reference and the Shoreline Master 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- Abandnned mine arer+o -54. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas B. The following provisions in TMC Chapter 18.45 do not apply to critical areas in the shoreline jurisdiction: 1. Critical Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC Section 8.45.160). W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 54 of 94 330 2. Reasonable Use Exception (TMC Section 18.45.180). Exceptions within shoreline jurisdiction shall require a shoreline variance based on the variance criteria listed in TMC Section 18.44.110.F and WAC 173-27-170. 3. Time Limitation Appeals, and Vesting (TMC Section 18.45.190). 4. Wetlands Uses Alterations and Mitigation (TMC Section 18.45.090). Activities and alterations to wetlands and their buffers located within shoreline jurisdiction shall be subject to the provisions and permitting mechanisms of this Master Program. C. Shoreline buffer widths are defined in TMC Section 18.44.040 . D. Future amendments to the Critical Areas Ordinance require Department of EcologV approval of an amendment to this Master Program to incorporate updated language. E. If provisions of the Critical Areas Ordinance conflict with provisions of this Master Program the provisions that are the most protective of the ecological resource shall applV, as determined by the Director. F. 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. G. Areas of seismic instability are also defined as critical areas. These areas are regulated bV the Washington State Building Code, rather than bV TMC Section 18.44.070. Additional building standards applicable to frequently flooded areas are included in the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52). • - YM - _ - WN ■ _ - . - - - ---- - - - - - W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 55 of 94 331 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 56 of 94 332 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 57 of 94 333 ME W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 58 of 94 334 - - ■■ - - W ■ •■ - _ ■ .. - MI. _M 2 V MY., ■ ■ - .- AM - - .. .. - - -CZT.1r.Urr.M!!M r.TMTATtr.93-Myrm a- -- ■ - - - - -r2r.-_ - - -• - - - e - _P.M W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 59 of 94 335 :r_��rentrr_la -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - •- - ■ - - . - - - +haR 1 5 rnurr—rv7T . -M IMMANCYTI2. WA W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 60 of 94 336 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 61 of 94 337 a. - area - Am -• engiReer. The plaRS and speGifiGatmens&4 kii Inff- •- te the - __ - - _ -- sealed by the geeteGhRiG FeGeMMeRdatiGRs based -- the plaRs, Sit8 G9Rditiens- - peptiRg - - - - -- - -- - - - MMU --- -- IlTz -- Mwmt ■-- W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 62 of 94 338 111MIC12M�2 I'MIMMM". dIzz. - M___ W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 63 of 94 339 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 64 of 94 340 enhaRGeMeHt. -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - .A A 1 1 - NINE . • _ _ _ r _ 1 1 I - . • M MINITAMM-2 M.2 17-MIUM1,17-T-M-2-1-1. r _ - W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 65 of 94 341 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 66 of 94 342 C u1 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 67 of 94 343 �. .. - - - -- - - -no. MOWN W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 68 of 94 344 -- 101 - ■ - - W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 69 of 94 345 deviGe, ferm by the Gity Attemey, on a approved maiRtenaRGe that the qualifi- - PFGfeSS09Ral mitigation eF FesteFatiORmet -- Should the mitigatiOR 9F resteratiOR meet- third or fourth SUGGeSSfUlly establishedthe be e - - - - waa.ri -- wca - - -- - zmm - - - - -rr- - Section 23. TMC 18.44.080 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.4-09080 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 at least 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 70 of 94 346 2. -Grease of nnn square feet.The extent of public access required will be proportional to the amount of increase in the demand for public access. For smaller projects, the Director will review the intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable amount of public access to be carried out. Depending on the amount of increase, the project may utilize the alternative provisions for meeting public access in TMC Section 18.44.1-98080.F. The terms and conditions of TMC Sections 18.44.1-99080.A and 18.44.080.B shall be deemed satisfied if the applicant and the City agree upon a master trail plan providing for public paths and trails within a parcel or group of parcels. 3. The provisions of this section do not apply to the following: a. Short plats of four or fewer lots; b. Where providing such access would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards; c. Where an area is limited to authorized personnel and providing such access would create inherent and unavoidable security problems that cannot be mitigated through site design or fencing; or Cl. 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 18.44.1-99080.F. B. General Standards. 1. To improve public access to the Green/Duwamish River, sites shall be designed to provide: a. Safe, visible and accessible pedestrian and non -motorized vehicle connections between proposed development and the river's edge, particularly when the site is adjacent to the Green River Trail or other approved trail system; and b. Public pathway entrances that are clearly visible from the street edge and identified with signage; and c. Clearly identified pathways that are separate from vehicular circulation areas. This may be accomplished through the use of speGia;-distinct paving materials SHGh as pre Gast pavers, homochanges in color or distinct and detailed scoring patterns and textures. d. Site elements that are organized to clearly distinguish between public and private access and circulation systems. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 71 of 94 347 2. Required public access shall be fully developed and available for public use at the time of occupancy in accordance with development permit conditions except where the decision maker determines an appropriate mechanism for delayed public access implementation is necessary for practical reasons. Where appropriate, a bond or cash assignment may be approved, on review and approval by the Director of Community Development, to extend this requirement for 90 days from the date the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Public access easements and related permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed of title or the face of the plat, short plat or approved site plan as a condition tied to the use of the land. Recording with the County shall occur prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit or final plat approval. Upon re -development of such a site, the easement may be relocated to facilitate the continued public access to the shoreline. 4. Approved signs indicating the public's right of access and hours of access, if restricted, shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the applicant in conspicuous locations at public access sites. Signs should be designed to distinguish between public and private areas. Signs controlling or restricting public access may be approved as a condition of permit approval. 5. Required access must be maintained in perpetuityt#r^ugheut the life 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 18.44.4-99080.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 4-4 12-foot-wide trail with 2-foot shoulders on each side. If a 12-foot-wide trail exists on the property it shall mean public access requirements have been met if access to the trail exists within 1,000 feet of the property. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 72 of 94 IM 2. Development on Properties Where New Regional Trails are Planned. An applicant seeking to develop property abutting the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments shall meet public access requirements by dedicating an 4-9 16- foot-wide trail easement to the City for public access along the river. 3. On -site Trail Standards. Trails providing access within a property, park or restoration site shall be developed at a width appropriate to the expected usage and environmental sensitivity of the site. D. Publicly -Owned Shorelines. 1. Shoreline development by any public entities, including but not limited to the City of Tukwila, King County, port districts, state agencies, or public utility districts, shall include public access measures as part of each development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety, security, impact to the shoreline environment or other provisions listed in this section. 2. The following requirements apply to street ends and City -owned property adjacent to the river. a. Public right-of-way and "road -ends," or portions thereof, shall not be vacated and shall be maintained for future public access. b. Unimproved right-of-ways and portions of right-of-ways, such as street ends and turn -outs, shall be dedicated to public access uses until such time as the portion becomes improved right-of-way. Uses shall be limited to passive outdoor recreation, GaF tephand carry boat launching, fishing, interpretive/educational uses, and/or parking; �A/� 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. Cl. 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: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 73 of 94 349 a. Where a development provides a public access corridor hetweeR-that connects off -site areas, or public shoreline areas to public shoreline areas, one side yard may be reduced to a zero lot line placement; or b. Where a development provides additional public access area(s) equal in area to at least 2.5% of total building area, the front yard (the landward side of the development) may be reduced by 50%. 2. The maximum height for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction may be increased by 15%feet when: a. Development devotes at least 5% of its building or land area to public shoreline access; or b. Development devotes at least 10% of its land area to employee shoreline access. b The applinGa Rt Feste es or eR hhaRGes the entire shoreline buffer, inrli iding, for pi irpeses of the height ORnentiVe provided iR this si bseGtiOR womhinatioR of innentives magi he used to gain mere then e_?_50% total �.rrrrv-rr�tr crorrvrn-rcc..rrcra cct-co 9 crrrrrrrc-rc-rrrarra �—� .. �... height increase for a stri Intl ire 43. The maximum height for structures within the shoreline jurisdiction may be increased by 15 feet for properties that construct a a-4 12-foot-wide paved trail with a 2- foot-wide shoulder on each side for public access along the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments, or where, in the case of properties containing or abutting existing public access trails, the existing trail either meets the standard of a 44 12-foot- wide trail with 2-foot-wide shoulders on either side or the property owner provides any necessary easements and improvements to upgrade the existing trail to that standard along the property frontage. 4. During the project review, the project proponent shall ,Rnreased height shall beaffirmatively demonstrated—ts that the increased height for structures authorized in subparagraphs E.2 and E.3 of this section will: a. Not block the views of a substantial number of residences; b. Not cause environmental impacts such as; the rider buffer or light impacts adversely affecting the river corridor; aft 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. IIR-rrR9 Ga e hall the building height he greater than 115 feet p irsuaRt to this prevision_ W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 74 of 94 350 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 railroad tracks or hazardous chemicals related to the primary use that cannot be prevented by any practical means. as active b. The area is limited to authorized personnel and (inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of alternative design features or other solutions. c. The cost of providing the access, easement or other public amenity on or off the development site is unreasonably disproportionate to the total long-term cost of the proposed development. d. Unavoidable environmental harm or net loss of shoreline ecological functions that cannot be adequately mitigated will result from the public access. e. Access is not feasible due to the configuration of existing parcels and structures, such that access areas are blocked in a way that cannot be remedied reasonably by the proposed development. f. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between the proposed access and adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated. g. Space is needed for water -dependent uses or navigation. 2. In order to meet any of the above -referenced conditions, the applicant must first demonstrate, and the City determine in its findings through a Type II decision, that all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted including, but not limited to: a. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and/or limiting hours of use; b. Designing separation of uses and activities through fencing, terracing, hedges or other design features; or c. Providing access on a site geographically separate from the proposal such as a street end cannot be accomplished. 3. If the above conditions are demonstrated, and the proposed development is not subject to the Parks Impact Fee, alternative provisions for meeting public access are required and include: 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 W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 75 of 94 351 d. In lieu of providing public access under this section, at the Director's discretion, tftea private applicant may provide restoration/enhancement of the shoreline jurisdiction to a scale commensurate with the foregone public access. Section 24. TMC 18.44.090 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.44-0090 Shoreline Design Guidelines The Green/Duwamish River is an amenity that should be valued and celebrated when designing projects that will be located along its length. If any portion of a project falls within the shoreline jurisdiction, then the entire project will be reviewed under these guidelines as well as the relevant sections of the Design Review Chapter of the Zoning Code (TMC Chapter 18.60). The standards of TMC Chapter 18.60 shall guide the type of review, whether administrative or by the Board of Architectural Review. A. The following standards apply to development, uses and activities in the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments and non-residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment. 1. Relationship of Structure to Site. Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. Reflect the shape of the shoreline; b. Orient building elements to site such that public river access, both visual and physical is enhanced; c. Orient buildings to allow for casual observation of pedestrian and trail activity from interior spaces; Cl. Site and orient buildings to provide maximum views from building interiors toward the river and the shoreline; e. Orient public use areas and private amenities towards the river, f. Clearly allocate spaces, accommodating parking, vehicular circulation and buildings to preserve existing stands of vegetation or trees so that natural areas can be set aside, improved, or integrated into site organization and planning; g. Clearly define and separate public from non-public spaces with the use of paving, signage, and landscaping. 2. Building Design. Development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 76 of 94 352 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: trail system, (1) plazas and landscaped open space that connect with a shoreline (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 TMC Section 18.44.060, the -"Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Sec +se." 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 t-he TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping can." 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. Cl. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 77 of 94 353 e. Public -Private Separation. (1) Public access facilities shall look and feel welcoming to the public, and not appear as an intrusion into private property. (2) Natural elements such as logs, grass, shrubs, and elevation separations are encouraged as means to define the separation between public and private space. 4. Design of Flood Walls. The exposed new floodwalls should be designed to incorporate brick or stone facing, textured concrete block, design elements formed into the concrete or vegetation to cover the wall within 3 years of planting. Section 25. TMC 18.44.100 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.4,9-0100 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(2)(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. criteria: a. Applications for relief, as specified below, must meet the following (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 18.44.4-2-0100. B.1. a. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 78 of 94 354 (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. Cl. The intent of the exemptions identified above in su TMC Section 18.44.100. B.1.c.(1) to through 18.44.100.B.1.c.(5) is to implement the restoration projects of the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan, which reflects the projects identified in the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan pursuant to Goals and Policies PeIiGy-5.2 of theme Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. 2 Gen istent with 4 r9 4/Islnns in I9 /lil 050 hi iilrling heights may he innreased. sheFelqRe bier he\/nnrd what magi nthenA e he rogUmFe t'Pr-aGG FdaRGe with the- ni-1aFd of TEAQ S ,,+O,. R 10 nag "Vegetating 17rnteGt0nn rJ I nnrlsr nninn " �tG��az+'rcrs-v�r-ra-rv—d�CtYtitf—Fty . 4 -rev v��cgCta-crvrr�-rQccCtivrr a�}�Ca,-rcr�caprrrc� Addotinnal Ike tnratinn andler enhanGement shall innlu de h removal of fish passage harriers to known nr nntential fish habitat -and restoration of the harrier life r�.scvizrcrvrrrvrcrrc-r�crmcrsr c c- -92. Consistent with the provisions of subparagraphs TMC Section 18.44.100.B.1.a, 1.b and 1.c-abev , the Shoreline Residential Environment Buffs , High Intensity, eFUrban Conservancy Environment Shoreline Buffer width may be reduced to no less than 25 feet measured from the new location of the OHWM for the portion of the property that moves from outside the Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project, subject to the following standards: a. The 25-foot buffer area must be vegetated according to the requirements of the-TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping," Steen or as otherwise approved by the City; and b. The proponents of the restoration project are responsible for the installation and maintenance of the vegetation. 3. The habitat restoration project proponents must record with King County a survey that identifies the location of the OHWM location prior to implementation of the shoreline restoration project, any structures that fall within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, and the new location of the OHWM once construction of the shoreline restoration project is completed. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 79 of 94 355 4. Shoreline restoration projects must obtain all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife approvals as well as written approval from the City. C. Shoreline Restoration Building Height Incentive. 1. Consistent with provisions in TMC Section 18.44.050.C, building heights within shoreline jurisdiction may be increased if the project proponent provides additional restoration and/or enhancement of the shoreline buffer, beyond what may otherwise be required in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.060, "Vegetation Protection and Landscaping." Additional restoration and/or enhancement shall include: a. creation of shallow -water (maximum slope 5H:1V) off channel rearing habitat and/or b. removal of fish passage barriers to known or potential fish habitat, and restoration of the barrier site. Section 26. TMC 18.44.110 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.440110 Administration A. Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit. 1. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Based on guidelines in the Shoreline Management Act (SMAJ 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 80 of 94 356 3. In the case of any conflict between any other federal, state, or local law and this Master Program, the provision that is most protective of shoreline resources shall prevail except when constrained by federal or state law, or where specifically provided in this Master Proaram. 4. Relationship to Critical Areas Regulations. (a) For protection of critical areas where they occur in shoreline jurisdiction, this Master Program adopts by reference the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, which is incorporated into this Master Program with specific exclusions and modifications in TMC Section 18.44.070. (b) All references to the Critical Areas Ordinance are for the version adopted jCAO adoption datel. 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 as described in WAC 173-27-044 and WAC 173-27-045: 1. Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to Chapter 70.105D RCW, or to the Department of Ecology when it conducts a remedial action under Chapter 70.105D RCW. 2. Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355 any person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a national pollutant discharge elimination system storm water general permit. 3. WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.356 Washington State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW 90.58.356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other local review. 4. Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045. 5. Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 81 of 94 357 OD. Substantial Development Permit Requirements. 1. Permit Application Procedures. Applicants for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall comply with permit application procedures in TMC Chapter 18.104. 2. Exemptions. a. To qualify for an exemption, the proposed use, activity or development must meet the requirements for an exemption as described in WAC 173-27-040, except for properties that meet the requirements of the Shoreline Restoration Section, TMC Section 18.44.42-9100. The purpose of a shoreline exemption is to provide a process for uses and activities which do not trigger the need for a Substantial Development Permit, but require compliance with all provisions of the City's SMP and overlay district. b. The Director may impose conditions to the approval of exempted developments and/or uses as necessary to assure compliance of the project with the SMA and the Tukwila SMP, per WAC 173-27-040(e). For example, in the case of development subject to a building permit but exempt from the shoreline permit process, the Building Official or other permit authorizing official, through consultation with the Director, may attach shoreline management terms and conditions to building permits and other permit approvals pursuant to RCW 90.58.140. 3. A substantial development permit shall be granted only when the development proposed is consistent with: a. The policies and procedures of the Shoreline Management Act; b. The provisions of Chapter 173-27 WAC; and c. This Shoreline Master Program. BE. Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. 1. Purpose. As stated in WAC 173-27-160, the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is to allow greater flexibility in the application of use regulations of this chapter in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by the City or the Department of Ecology to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or assure consistency of the project with the SMA and the City's SMP. Uses which are specifically prohibited by the Shoreline Master Program ►4ayshall not be authorized with approval of a CUP. 2. Application. Shoreline Conditional Use Permits are a Type 4 Permit processed under TMC Chapter 18.104. 3. Application requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for permit application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104 and this chapter. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 82 of 94 358 4. Approval Criteria. a. Uses classified as shoreline conditional uses may be authorized, provided that the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: (1) The proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the policies of the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program; (2) The proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines; (3) The proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter; (4) The proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located; and (5) The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. b. In the granting of all Conditional Use Permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if Conditional Use Permits were granted to other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of Chapter 90.58 RCW and all local ordinances and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. €F. Shoreline Variance Permits. 1. Purpose. The purpose of a Shoreline Variance Permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this chapter where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of this chapter will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the Shoreline Management Act policies as stated in RCW 90.58.020. Reasonable use requests that are located in the shoreline must be processed as a variance, until such time as the Shoreline Management Act is amended to establish a process for reasonable uses. Variances from the use regulations of this chapter are prohibited. 2. Application requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for a Type 3 permit application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104. 3. Shoreline Variance Permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the -a permit would result in inconsistencies with the policies of the Shoreline Management Act a —thwarting „f the ^^!,.y e-m-atca—iR RCW 90.58.0201. In all instances, the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. 4. Approval GriteriaShoreline Variance Permits Landward of OHWM and Landward of Wetlands. 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: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 83 of 94 359 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 deSGribed in T-MG c ,ctGR 1g.44.1�. for which the applicant is seeking the variance is specifically related to the property and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of this chapter, and not from the owner's own actions or deed restrictions; and that the variance is necessary because of these conditions in order to provide the owner with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. 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. The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. q. In the grantinq of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area such that the total of the variances would remain consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. 5. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM or Within Critical Areas. a. Shoreline Variance Permits for development and/or uses that will be located either waterward of the ordinary high water mark or within any seRsit�0 critical area may be authorized only if the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: (1) The strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in this Master Program preclude all reasonable permitted use of the property, (2) The proposal is consistent with the criteria established under TMC Section 18.44.139110DFA., "Approval Criteria;" and (3) The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected by the granting of the variance. h In the gFaRtinn of all Marianne permits nensidera+inn shall he given-te the GUM6flative impaGt Gf additiGnal req6iests fE)F like aGtiGRS on the area SuGh that the total e adverse effec-t6-tG the shereline eRVirE)RMen+ W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 84 of 94 360 F-G. Non -Conforming Development. 1. Non -Conforming Uses. Any non -conforming lawful use of land that would not be allowed under the terms of this chapter may be continued as an allowed, legal, non -conforming use, defined in TMC Chapter 18.06 or as hereafter amended, so long as that use remains lawful, subject to the following: a. No such non -conforming use shall be enlarged, intensified, increased, moved or extended to occupy a greater use of the land, structure or combination of the two, than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of this chapter except as authorized in TMC Section 18.66.120 or upon approval of a conditional use permit. h NO RGR GenfGrming use shall be moved er eXteR ed in where nr in mart adGPtiGR of this Ghaptef-. be. 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 Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, which must be applied for within the two-year period when the non -conforming use ceases to exist. Water -dependent uses should not be considered discontinued when they are inactive due to dormancy, or where the use is typically seasonal. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Seib -may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set forth in TMC Section 18.44.1-�4 18.44.110.G.4. dc. 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. ed. 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. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 85 of 94 361 (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. {&DThe preference is to reduce exterior uses in the buffer to the maximum extent possible. 2. Non -Conforming Structures. Where a lawful structure exists on the effective date of adoption of this chapter that could not be built under the terms of this chapter by reason of restrictions on height, buffers or other characteristics of the structure, it may be continued as an allowed, legal structure so long as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the following provisions: a. Such structures may be repaired, maintained, upgraded and altered provided that: (1) The structure may not be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its degree of nonconformity or increases its impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment except as authorized in TMC Section 18.66.120; and (2) If the structure is located on a property that has no reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, there shall be no limit on the cost of alterations provided the applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer from above the Ordinary High Water Mark to at least 12 feet landward of the top of the slope along the entire length of the subject property to meet the vegetation management standards of this chapter (TMC Section 18.44.060). If the structure is located on a Property that has reasonable development potential outside the shoreline buffer, Tthe cost of the alterations may not exceed an aggregate cost of 50% of the value of the building or structure in any 3-year period based upon its most recent assessment, unless the amount over 50% is used to make the building or structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a building or structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. (3) Maintenance or repair of an existing private bridge is allowed without a conditional use permit when it does not involve the use of hazardous substances, sealants or other liquid oily substances. b. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means, the structure may be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided application is made for permits within 42 Menthstwo years of the date the damage occurred and all reconstruction is completed within two years of permit issuance. In the event the property is redeveloped, such redevelopment must be in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 86 of 94 362 c. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distanceLit must be brought as closely as practicable into conformance with the applicable master program and the act.whatseever, it iic�vcd. Cl. 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 Gity GGWRGii may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months may be granted using the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.4-30110.€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 shoreline 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. allowedtGex pa Rd into aRY ether PGFt;GR ofthe Str, c 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 GGRSeGUtiVe MORthstwo-year period, an extension of time beyond the-24 GG ;secuti„e months two- year period. Such a request shall be considered as a Type 2 permit under TMC Chapter 18.104 and may be approved only when: (1) For a non -conforming use, a finding is made that no reasonable alternative conforming use is practical; (2) For a non -conforming structure, special economic circumstances prevent the lease or sale of said structure within 24 months; and (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- W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 87 of 94 363 conforming uses, the amount of buffer to be restored and/or enhanced will be determined based on the percentage of the existing building used by the non -conforming use for which a time extension is being requested. Depending on the size of the area to be restored and/or enhanced, the Director may require targeted plantings rather than a linear planting arrangement. The vegetation management standards of this „r„nram TMC Section 18.44.060 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 p City -approved extension that are deemed necessary to assure compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the Shoreline 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. NethipKj Parking lot regulations contained in this chapter shall not be construed to require a change in any aspect of a structure or facility that existed on the date of adoption of this chapter covered thereunder including, witheut limitation parking lot layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, f^ Gtcr61Fe E)F fa lily hiGh existed eR the date except as necessary to meet vegetation protection and landscaping standards consistent with TMC Section 18.44.110.E.7. 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. An existing non -conforming parking lot which is not otherwise subject to the requirements of this chapter, may be upgraded to improve water quality or meet local, state, and federal regulations provided the upgrade does not result in an increase in non -conformity. d. The area beneath a non -conforming structure may be converted to a contiguous parking lot area if the non -conforming structure is demolished and only when the contiguous parking is accessory to a legally established use. The converted parking area must be located landward of existing parking areas. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 88 of 94 364 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. FH. Revisions to Shoreline Permits. Revisions to previously issued shoreline permits shall be reviewed under the SMP in effect at the time of submittal of the revision, and not the SMP under which the original shoreline permit was approved and processed in accordance with WAC 173-27-100. #I. Time Limits on Shoreline Permits. 1. Consistent with WAC 173-27-090 shoreline permits are valid for two years, and the work authorized under the shoreline permit must be completed in five years. Construction activity must begin within this two-year period. If construction has not begun within two years a one-time extension of one year may be approved by the Director based on reasonable factors. The permit time period does not include the time during which administrative appeals or legal actions are pending or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the project. 2. Upon a finding of good cause based on the requirements and circumstances of a proposed project and consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, the City may adopt a different time limit for a shoreline substantial development permit as part of an action on a shoreline substantial development permit. Section 27. TMC 18.44.120 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.440120 Appeals HeaFiRg Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying, or rescinding of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, or Shoreline Variance may seek review from the Shorelines Hearings Board by filing a petition for review within 21 days of the date of filing of the decision as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 89 of 94 365 Section 28. TMC 18.44.130 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.4 0130 Enforcement and Penalties A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered violations of this chapter: 1. To use, construct or demolish any structure, or to conduct clearing, earth - moving, construction or other development not authorized under a Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit or Variance Permit, where such permit is required by this chapter. 2. Any work which is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other requirements in a permit approved pursuant to this chapter, provided that the terms or conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans. 3. To remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in accordance with this chapter. 4. To misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information submitted to obtain any shoreline use or development authorization. 5. To fail to comply with the requirements of this chapter. B. Enforcement. This chapter shall be enforced subject to the terms and conditions of TMC Chapter 8.45. C. Inspection Access. 1. For the purpose of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a permit or this chapter, authorized representatives of the Director may enter all sites for which a permit has been issued. 2. Upon completion of all requirements of a permit, the applicant shall request a final inspection by contacting the planner of record. The permit process is complete upon final approval by the planner. D. Penalties. 1. Any violation of any provision of the SMP, or failure to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in TMC Chapter 8.45 of the Tukwila Municipal Code ("Enforcement") and shall be imposed pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in that chapter. 2. Penalties assessed for violations of the SMP shall be determined by TMC Chapter 8.45AGG120, Penalties. 3. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a permit required by this chapter, that a contractor, subcontractor, person with responsibility on the site, or person authorizing or directing the work, erroneously believed a permit had been issued to the property owner or any other person. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 90 of 94 366 4. Penalties for Tree Removal: a. Each unlawfully removed or damaged tree shall constitute a separate violation. b. The amount of the penalty shall be $1,000 per tree or up to the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by an ISA certified arborist The Director may elect not to seek penalties or may reduce the penalties if he/she determines the circumstances do not warrant imposition of any or all of the civil penalties. c Any illegal removal of required trees shall be subject to obtaining a tree permit and replacement with trees that meet or exceed the functional value of the removed trees. In addition any shrubs and groundcover removed without City approval shall be replaced. d To replace the tree canopy lost due to the tree removal, additional trees must be planted on -site. Payment may be made into the City's Tree Fund if the number of replacement trees cannot be accommodated on -site. The number of replacement trees required will be based on the size of the tree(s) removed as stated in TMC Section 18.44.060. B.4. E. Remedial Measures Required. In addition to penalties provided in TMC Chapter 8.45, the Director may require any person conducting work in violation of this chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 1. Remedial measures must conform to the policies and guidelines of this chapter and the Shoreline Management Act. 2. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of this chapter shall be borne by the property owner and/or applicant. F. Injunctive Relief. 1. Whenever the City has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or threatening to violate this chapter or any rule or other provisions adopted or issued pursuant to this chapter, it may, either before or after the institution of any other action or proceeding authorized by this ordinance, institute a civil action in the name of the City for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation. Such action shall be brought in King County Superior Court. 2. The institution of an action for injunctive relief under this section shall not relieve any party to such proceedings from any civil or criminal penalty prescribed for violations of the Master Program. G. Abatement. Any use, structure, development or work that occurs in violation of this chapter, or in violation of any lawful order or requirement of the Director pursuant to this section, shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner provided by the TMC Section 8.45.4G-5100. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 91 of 94 367 Section 29. TMC 18.44.140 is hereby reenacted to read as follows: 18.44.4-"140 Liability S-.—No provision of or term used in this chapter is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages in a civil action. Section 30. TMC 18.52.030 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2580 §6, 2523 §8, 2442 §1, 2251 §61, 2235 §13, and 1872 §14 (part), as codified in the first paragraph at TMC Section 18.52.030 (above TABLE A — Perimeter and Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements by Zone District), are hereby amended for the first paragraph to read as follows: 18.52.030 Perimeter and Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements by Zone District In the various zone districts of the City, landscaping in the front, rear and side yards and parking lots shall be provided as established by the various zone district chapters of this title. These requirements are summarized in the following table (Table A), except for Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) requirements, which are listed in TMC Chapter 18.28. Additional landscape requirements apply in the Shoreline Overlay District, as directed by TMC 18.44.060, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping. Section 31. TMC 18.60.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2580 §7 and §8, 2442 §5, 2368 §62, 2235 §16 and §17, 2199 §20, 1986 §16, 1865 §51, and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.60.050, are hereby amended to add Section H to read as follows: 18.60.050 Board of Architectural Review H. Shoreline Design Criteria. The criteria contained in the Shoreline Design Guidelines (TMC Section 18.44.090) shall be used whenever the provisions of this title require a design review decision on a proposed or modified development in the Shoreline Overlay District. Section 32. TMC 18.104.010 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2442 §6, 2368 §70, 2294 §1, 2251 §75, 2235 §19, 2135 §19, and 2119 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.104.010, "Classification of Project Permit Applications," subparagraph 3, "Type 3 Decisions," are hereby amended to read as follows: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 92 of 94 3. TYPE 3 DECISIONS are quasi-judicial decisions made by the Hearing Examiner following an open record hearing. Type 3 decisions may be appealed only to Superior Court, except for shoreline variances and shoreline conditional uses that may be appealed to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. TYPE 3 DECISIONS INITIAL APPEAL BODY TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION (closed record MAKER appeal) Resolve uncertain zone district Hearing Superior Court boundary Examiner Variance (zoning, shoreline, Hearing Superior Court sidewalk, land alteration, sin) Examiner TSO Special Permission Use Hearing Superior Court TMC Section 18.41.060 Examiner Conditional Use Permit Hearing Superior Court Examiner Modifications to Certain Parking Hearing Superior Court Standards Examiner TMC Cha ter 18.56 Reasonable Use Exceptions Hearing Superior Court under Sensitive Areas Ordinance Examiner TMC Section 18.45.180 Variance for Noise in excess of Hearing Superior Court 60 days Examiner TMC Section 8.22.120 Variance from Parking Standards Hearing Superior Court over 10% Examiner TMC Section 18.56.140 Subdivision - Preliminary Plat Hearing Superior Court with no associated Design Examiner Review application TMC Section 17.14.020 Wireless Communication Facility, Hearing Superior Court Major or Waiver Request Examiner TMC Chapter 18.58) Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Hearing Examiner State Shorelines Hearings Board Section 33. Codification Clarification. Due to amendments to TMC Chapter 18.44 as stated in this ordinance, TMC sections formerly numbered 18.44.150 and 18.44.160 no longer exist. Section 34. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton Page 93 of 94 369 Section 35. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 36. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of .2020. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Legislative Development\SMP-Zoning Code changes -COW 2-10-20-shaded text 2-5-20 NG/MD:bjs Review and analysis by Barbara Saxton 370 Page 94 of 94 Community Development& Neighborhoods Minutes.................................................................................... November26, 2019 continuing the master planning process for Tukwila Pond Park, working with private developers and other agencies on redevelopment opportunities, improving and monitoring Tukwila Pond water quality, updating the Transit Plan, and connecting the Interurban Trail to West Valley Highway. Councilmembers and staff discussed challenges and opportunities in the area. DISCUSSION ONLY. D. Ordinance: Critical Areas Staff is seeking Council approval of ordinances that will update the Critical Areas regulations to reflect current best available science as required by the Growth Management Act. The Committee reviewed Attachment A, staff's response to comments submitted atthe September 23, 2019 Public Hearing and made the following recommendations: 18.45.80 Wetlands Designations, Ratings and Buffers • Add language to clarify that interrupted buffer waivers will only be available to those that are pre-existing. • In 18.45.80(F)(2)(i), strike "legally approved" as there is no difference between legally constructed and legally approved. 18.45.190 Time Limitation, Appeals and Vesting • Clarify that the new language around vesting only refers to residential projects. Staff will return to Committee with an update reflecting these changes. The Department of Ecology has not submitted its comments yet, so final presentation to Council will not occur until 2020. RETURN TO COMMITTEE. III. MISCELLANEOUS Adjour d 6:27 p.m. 401. Committee Chair Approval 371 City of Tukwila City Council Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes December 10, 2019 - 5:30 p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers: De'Sean Quinn, Chair; Dennis Robertson, Kathy Hougardy Staff: David Cline, Minnie Dhaliwal, Andrea Cummins, Derek Speck, Rick Still, Craig Zellerhoff, Robert Eaton, Brandon Miles, Jack Pace, Laurel Humphrey Guests: Mike Pruitt, Segale Properties, LLC; Nicole Deleon, Cairncross & Hemplemann CALL TO ORDER: Chair Quinn called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS II. BUSINESS AGENDA The Committee agreed to consider the PROS Plan item later in the agenda. A. 2019 Parks & Recreation Projects and Initiatives Staff provided an overview of Parks and Recreation's 2019 programs and activities. DISCUSSION ONLY. B. Legislation: Foster Golf Links Fees Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution and an ordinance that would repeal existing golf fees legislation and establish a "dynamic pricing" system that would authorize the Parks and Recreation Director to set and adjust green fees as needed as opposed to the current method of Council adoption everytwo years. The proposed ordinance also removes a Junior fee to those 17 and younger and adds a Senior fee to those 62 and older. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JANUARY 6, 2019 REGULAR CONSENT AGENDA. C. Critical Areas and Shoreline Master Program Legislation Staff is seeking Council approval of ordinances to update the Critical Areas Code, Shoreline Master Program and associated regulations for compliance with state rules and guidelines. The CDN Committee has spent multiple meetings reviewing the proposals and the City Council has held public hearings on both issues. Staff presented proposed language incorporating previous committee direction and will return to the successor committee in 2020. RETURN TO COMMITTEE. 372 City of Tukwila City Council Planning & Economic Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 3, 2020 - 5:30 p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers Present: Thomas McLeod, Kathy Hougardy, Zak Idan Staff Present: Minnie Dhaliwal, Andrea Cummins, Rachel Bianchi, Laurel Humphrey, Derek Speck, Brandon Miles Others Present: Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette, resident; Nicole Deleon, Cairncross & Hemplemann Chair McLeod called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. I. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Request for Qualifications: Economic Development Plan Staff is seeking Committee concurrence to issue a request for qualifications for a consultant to prepare an economic development plan, for a cost estimated to be between $50,000 - $70,000 requiring a budget amendment at year-end. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. B. Grant Application: Economic Development Staff is seeking Committee approval to apply for an economic development grant from the Port of Seattle in the amount of $20,930 to be used for Kent Valley business recruitment and tourism digital media programming. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. C. Ordinances: Critical Areas, Shoreline Master Program, Shoreline Uses Staff is seeking Council approval of three ordinances to update the Critical Areas Code, Shoreline Master Program, and shoreline regulations. Staff noted that some minor clean up edits will be included in the final Shoreline ordinances. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. D. Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Regulations Staff is planning to update ADU regulations based on experience with the amnesty program and is seeking Committee direction on potential code changes. Committee question(s) requiring follow up Staff will monitor HB 2570 regarding Accessory Dwelling Units and potential impacts to cities. 373 374 CA) 4 cn w What is regulated under the Critical Area Ordinance? • Wetlands and their Buffers • Streams and their Buffers • Steep slopes and Geologically Hazardous Areas • Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas I Tukwila is updating its Critical Areas Regulations: • Critical Areas Regulations for wetlands, watercourses and steep slopes • The following regulations in the Zoning Code are being updated: •Critical Areas Chapter 18.45 • Tree Chapter 18.54 • Landscape Chapter 18.52 • Non -conforming Chapter 18.70 W { W 4 00 Tukwila is updating its Shoreline Regulations for the Green/Duwamish River *Shoreline Element in the Comprehensive Plan *Shoreline Master Program (SMP) •Zoning Code Chapter 18.44 Shoreline Overlay 4 Tukwila Shoreline Regulations Shoreline Master Program • Regulates development forzoofeeton each side of the Green River • Inner Buffer - the area closest to the water is the most protective • Outer Buffer allows more uses and development • 13 Miles of Shoreline in Tukwila • Includes transition zone between fresh and salt water • Critical Habitat for endangered chinook salmon and bull trout W Ordinary hiigh water mark (OHM) =IIII IIII IIII =IIII IIII=IIII-IIII— eIIII-IIII-IIII-EIEI-IIII-IIII-1 IIIIlIIII�IIIIlIIII�IIIIlIIIIIII 111 = I111 � ICI � kl 111 = rl�lll�' IIII � IIII = Wetland in 100 year Flood plain =nn-nn- IIII-IIII�lllls 1111 IIII IIII L 2DU 100 Year Flood Plain 200' frorn OHWM or FloW way and all marshes. bogs, and swamps in 100 year flood plain 2W From 0HWN1 and 100 year flood plain Figure 1.1 Lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act State Shoreline Goals • Overarching goal is "to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines." • The Shoreline Management Act hastill'22 broad policy goals: Shoreline Use Environmental protection • Promote public access. 0 Shoreline Environments High Intensity Environment • Areas downstream from the turning basin • Buffer is Zoo feet Urban Conservancy Environment • Non-residential areas upstream from the turning basin • Buffer is 125 feet where there is a levee, too feet elsewhere Shoreline Residential Environment • Areas zoned for residential use • Buffer is distance needed for 2.5:1 slope plus 20 feet Aquatic Environment • River area between the ordinary high water marks (OHWM) RrmhGI • } Pal+ 1 L Tuming 3sah Mao 13.2 Le Wd _;T.kvd�glyU'A § PA.'L PCV rim f,7* VR;m f.m;0 _ roAkEn%ixrrid'L +w.KJiIOPia:; Str_idie1eiiWTiffl1 .rM SOYN !r�lA Map 3 t G) r..F hK1 Ssrmhe Enuironracrts 7 W 00 N Why now? Periodic updates are required byWashington State to ensure that local regulations: • Keep up with changes to State Law • Reflect Best Available Science (BAS) • Critical Areas Regulations were last updated in Neal • SMP rewritten in zoog • Shoreline Regulations were last updated in Zo11 0 MW W W Public Outreach • Mailings • Webpage updates • Stormwater bill inserts • eHazelnut newsletter • Open house • Interested parties email list • Planning Commission —work sessions &Public hearing • City Council public hearing 10 Update Process Public Comment Matrix for Critical Areas update is Attachment A Public Comment Matrix for Shoreline update is Attachment C Ecology's initial comments are Attachment D w 00 Cn Open House to/9 Public Comment Planning Commission Work Sessions & Public Hearinq City Council Review & Public Hearing Changes made to address public comments and the Ecology's initial comments Ecology Approval after City Council adoption I f Proposed Critical Areas Updates Attachment Btothe memo is the summary of key revisions V Wetlands: • Wetland assessment protocol Approved Federal Delineation Manual Current Ecology rating system will be incorporated into the new code Five-year term limit on reports • Wetland buffer width Adopt the standard buffer widths recommended b the Department of Ecology; but allow alternate b5fer if impact minimization measures are taken and buffer is replanted. Buffer averaging replaces buffer reduction. Interrupted buffer provisions added w CO 4 13 2/5/2020 w CO Wetlands: • Alterations: No change to exemption size of l000 sf • Mitigation Standards- buffer mitigation at 1:1 • Wetland and buffer mitigation location- fee in lieu and mitigation banking added • Wetlands buffers associated with restoration projects that include creation of an off -channel habitat projects -adjacent property owner permission required or on -site wetland buffers sufficient to protect functions and values of the wetland. 14 2/5/2020 Wetland buffer width (ft), Ecology 2014, high -intensity land use impact Wetland buffer width (ft), Habitat Habitat Habitat score current score score Habitat score 6-7 Habitat score Habitat score Category TMC <6 <6 6-7 8-9 8-9 Standard Alternate Standard Alternate Buffer if Standard Alternate Buffer Buffer if Buffer impact Buffer Buffer if impact minimization impact minimization measures taken minimization measures AND buffer is measures taken AND replanted. Also, taken AND buffer is 100 feet buffer is replanted vegetated replanted. corridor between Also, 100 feet wetland and vegetated priority habitats corridor is maintained. between wetland and priority habitats is maintained. 1 100 100 75 150 110 300 225 II 100 100 75 150 110 300 225 w III GG 80 80 60 150 110 300 225 (0 IV 50 50 40 50 40 50 40 2/5/2020 Add a footer 1-6 •A; "PY IJ 2 5/2020 Example Wetland # 37 Category III Wetland (2004) Current buffer of 8o feet Category III Wetland (2014) with habitat score Of 5 (moderate) Buffer of 6o feet with minimization measures per X Ecology guidance Legend Wetland Area Current Buffer (2004) Bufferwith Ecology Guidance (2014) 'Aat e rc o u rs e s IN L 280 Feet k'. gend h y, Wetland Area Current Buffer (004) Buffer with Ecology Guidance (2G14): -L: Example Wetland # 31 • Category III Wetland (2004) • Current buffer of 8o feet • Category II Wetland (2014) with habitat score of 6 (moderate) • Buffer of 110 feet with minimization measures per Ecology guidance 17 2/5/zozo W CO N Streams: • Stream typing designation update City typing will be updated to correspond with that of WDFW • Stream buffer width -no change Stream Type Watercourse Buffer (ft) S Regulated under Shoreline Shoreline Master Program F Zoo Fish bearing Np Non -fish perennial Ns Non -fish seasonal Standard buffer 8o Alternate buffer in the range of 50-65 with buffer enhancement 50 Buffer averaging substitutes for buffer reductions Interrupted buffer 18 2/5/2020 Steep Slopes • Geologically Hazardous Areas clarifications Reference to mapping sources added and protective provisions such as slope vegetation protection and guidelines on erosion control and best management practices included. W W 19 W • Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas The city's list of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas made consistent with GMA definition Reference to mapping sources added. A requirement for a habitat assessment prepared by a qualified professional to better reflect BAS so that buffers could be based on site specific conditions. • Special Hazard Flood Areas Reference added to Special Hazard Flood Areas TMC Chapter 16.52; and floodplain habitat assessment requirements included. 20 2/5/2020 Add a footer Housekeeping Amendments 1. Vesting. 2. Expiration of decisions related to critical areas: Five years 3. Permitted uses changed to permitted activities section 4. Vegetation Management in the Tree, Landscape, Critical Areas and Shoreline Chapter 5. Reorganization: 1. Mitigation sequencing; 2. What is allowed outright/what requires Special Permission approval; 3. Criteria for approving deviations; 4. Mitigation requirements, 5. Monitoring 6. Penalties for unauthorized alterations 7. Non -conforming provisions: New non -conforming thresholds for development in the wetland and stream buffers established; and tied to incentives for improving the buffer. Vertical expansion Lateral expansion opposite side Lateral expansion along sides W 8. Inventory update: Add requirement for the applicant to provide surveyed data for CO maintenance of the City's Critical Areas inventory map I f Proposed Shoreline Updates Attachment Etothe memo is the summary of key revisions Proposed Updates • Shoreline Master Program • Zoning Code Chapter 18.44 Policy Discussion • Additional Flexibility for Levee Profile • Additional Flexibility for Floodwalls • Increased Height Incentives • Public Access • Non -Conforming Structures • Vegetation Management Technical Edits: • Consistency with State Regulations W • Streamlining/Eliminating Duplication CO 23 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing w CO SMP Proposed Edits - Updates and Streamlining Update background and history Eliminate duplication by deleting: • Definitions also in Zoning Code • Goals and policies also in the Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Element • Use regulations adopted in the Shoreline OverlayTMC 18.44 • Development standards adopted in the Shoreline OverlayTMC 18.44 • Critical Areas regulations and referencing TMC 18.45 Updating the Transition Zone Map Update references to state regulations (WAC and RCW) Allow flexibility in levee profile and flood walls 24 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing W CO Proposed Zoning Edits and Updates - Consistency Clarify that consistency with the State Law (SMA and WAC) is required and align inconsistent definitions •Update definition of development to exclude demolition •Remove outdated dollar threshold for substantial development including docks and replace with reference to WAC definition •Exempt ADA retrofitting from shoreline permit requirements and non -conforming regulations per WAC •Update references to state regulations (WAC and RCW) 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing A O O Proposed Edits and Updates - Housekeeping • Streamline and reorganize the code for ease of use • Add a purpose and applicability section • Replace use list with a matrix • Replace written Shoreline Buffer standards with a matrix • Correct permit process inconsistencies, create a process for changes to shoreline environment designations. include process to review changes to shoreline permits; include time extensions for permits • Reference Shoreline Design Guidelines in TMC 18.6o • Overwater Structures: Require proof of submittal rather than approval for state and federal permits and a demonstrated need for any new docks. • Bridges: Clarify that bridges are regulated as overwater structures 26 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing Policy Proposal — Levee Profile • Allow flexibility in the preferred profile to account for varying conditions and allow improved functions • Allow greater use of floodwalls to reduce levee width while increasing height Typical Shoreline Buffer in Leveed Areas -Width Will Vary Reconfigured Levee 18' 1 �Willows 2 2* 1 averages 2.5-1 with bench Minimum Levee Profile Not To Scale OH Vegetated Bench Maintenance Easement Slop * Reconfigured 15' 1,5 Existing Levee �1 Ordinary High 2* Water Mark WM 2 7 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing A O N Policy Proposal — Levee Floodwalls • Allow greater use of floodwalls to reduce levee width while increasing height • Allows for more vegetation on riverbank 28 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing O W Policy Proposal— Incentives Increase the allowed building height to 65 feet and allow another 15 feet incentive for: • Riverbank habitat restoration • Increased public access to the shoreline Buffer reduction in Urban Conservancy requires resloping the riverbank. 3:1 slope vs 2.5:1 Summer/Fall Water Line 1 Enhancement Flood Plain Bench Native Emergent Wetland Vegetation f Existing 1 Feature 1 (Example) Revetment Native Riparian Gtass-Levee 51 Vegetation ! Top of Levee *'-- Soil and Revetment LWD Countersunk into Stream Bank (example) Not to Scale 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing A O A Proposed Edits —Public Access& Recreation • Allow recreational structures to be larger than 25 square feet and 15 feet tall for greater usability for the public • Trail Width — reduce the standard from 14' with 2' shoulders to 12' with 2' shoulders to match King County and City Park standards • Public access requirements met if there is an existing trail on the property and access to 30 3-28-19 PC Shoreline Public Hearing 0 Cn Proposed Edits — Nonconforming uses and structures • Clarify use regulations per new WAC section • No limit on repairs to nonconforming buildings where most of site is within shoreline buffer • Water quality improvements for non -conforming parking lots — allow gravel parking lots to be paved 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing A O Proposed Edits and Updates -Vegetation • Clarify that permits are not required for removal of invasive species • Require restoration plantings to be monitored for survival for 5 years • Match the updated tree protections for areas outside of Shoreline Jurisdiction 32 6-24-19 CC Shoreline Public Hearing - -_ "-kL_ O 4 m UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS FEBRUARY 2020 FEB 10 MONDAY FEB 11 TUESDAY FEB 12 WEDNESDAY FEB 13 THURSDAY FEB 14 FRIDAY FEB 15 SATURDAY i Tukwila Rack -Commission International Rescheduled to Feb 19 Boulevard Action Committee Public Hearing before the 7:00 PM FREE dental, vision and Hearing Examiner will be Valley View Sewer District 3460 S 148th �� medical care to anyone who struggles to access or afford on a Reasonable Use Exception to construct a Kin COun Housi distributed health care. Tickets will be day beginning single family residence Author ttt each ni at 5 AM, on first - within an environmentally Section B Waitlist Lottery s Onefirst-ticket served basis. One ticket per sensitive area located at 5416 S 150°' St. The affordable housing person and it is only good for waitiist for King County that day. Interpreters available. 10:00 AM Housing Authority's Section Patients should come prepared 8 Vouchers opens today, for a long day with food, Hazelnut Conference February 12, and closes on comfortable clothing and any Room February 25. daily medications. For more information, visit 5:00 AM - 6:00 PM Civil Service www.kcha.org/housing/ Seattle Center- Fisher Commission vouchers/list. Pavilion 5:00 PM 305 Harrison St Human Resources Free parking Mercer St Garage Conference Room at 650 31 Ave N. For more information, visit Community Services & y seattlecenter.org/skcclinic Safety Committee or call 206-684-7200. 5:30 PM Foster Conference Room Equity & Social Finance Justice Commission C Committee PM 5:30 PM Hazelnut Conference Haz Hazelnut Room Conference Room Community 'r City Council Oriented Policing Committee of the Citizens Advisory Whole Meeting Board 7:00 PM 6:30 PM Council Chambers Duwamish Conference Room FEB 17 MONDAY FEB 1a TUESDAY FEB 19 WEDNESDAY FEB 20 THURSDAY FEB 21 FRIDAY FEB 22 SATURDAY TRANSPORTATION „� .. No Meetings Scheduled DROP -IN • • Q i 7:00 PM ' Talk to representatives from Valley View Sewer District "A Relentless King County Metro's ORCA 3460 S 148th St Determination" concert Cityoffices and Community Center To -Go, King County Public Health's Access and www.actiontukwila.org with Rainier Symphony. closed. Outreach, South King Feb 22 - 7:30 PM County Transportation Feb 23 - 3:00 PM Options and Hopelink to U Foster High team about riding the tight FlISTORI Performing Arts rail, bus or bicycle, shuttles, c IV Center or to get an ORCA card � �Y 4242 S 1441h St 7:00 PM 1:30 PM - 3:30 PM Tukwila Heritage & For more information Tukwila Library Cultural Center and tickets, visit 14380 Tukwila Intl Blvd 14475 59'h Avenue S www.RainierSymphony. www.tukwilahistory.org org. Park Commission 5:30 PM Community Center 7ukwiCa City of Opportunity SchoCarship-AppCLcation due March 31 The Tukwila Scholarship Program was established in 2014. The mission of the scholarship is to provide financial assistance to individuals enrolled for undergraduate study in community colleges, colleges, trade schools and universities. This program principally targets two and four year academic • programs, however, certificatellicensing programs are also eligible. Awards will range from $1.000 to $5,000 as determined by the City of Tukwila Selection Committee. Must be a resident of Tukwila and be equivalent to a senior in high school. For more information and criteria, visit records.tukwilawa.gov/Web Link/l/edoci328044/pagel.aspx. FREE TAX February 11 -April 18 If you make less than $66,000, United Way will help you prepare and file your taxes for FREE. No appointment is Riverton Park United Methodist Church Tue&Thu 5pm-8pm required. If you do not need in -person tax help, simply visit PREPARATION 3118 S 1401h St Saturdays 10 am - 2 pm MyFmeTaxes.com where you can quickly and easily file your taxes online for free. Em For information on what to bring and other locations, visit www.uwkc.org/need-help/tax-help/. Flyers are also available in other languages. Arts Commission: 4th Wed., 6:00 PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Tracy Gallaway at 205-767-2305. D Civil Service Commission: 2nd Mon., 5:00 PM, Human Resources Conference Room. Contact Michelle Godyn at 206431-2187. > COPCAB (Community Oriented Policing Citizens Advisory Board): 2nd Thurs., 6:30 PM, Duwamish Conference Room. Contact Sergeant Anderson at 206433-7187. Y Community Services and Safety Committee: 2nd & 4th Mon., 5:30 PM, 6300 Building Suite 100 - Foster Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. (1A) Police records digitization project in the amount of $150,000. (1B) Additional Transport Officers for inmate appearances in Court, in the amount of $188,000. (1C) 2019 4"' Quarter Police Department Report. (1D) Tukwila Works annual update. Equity and Social Justice Commission: 1 st Thurs., 5:15 PM, Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Niesha Fort -Brooks at 206454-7564. Finance Committee: 2nd & 4th Mon., 5:30 PM, City Hall - Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. (1A) A contract for ORCA Business Passports in the amount of $73,695. (1B) Review of responses from Request for Proposals for City Attorney services. (1C) Financing for the 42" Avenue South Bridge Replacement project. (11)) 2019 4" Quarter Investment Report. Library Advisory Board: 1 st Tues., 5:30 PM, Community Center. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206-767-2342. Park Commission: 2nd Wed., 5:30 PM, Community Center. Contact Robert Eaton at 206-767-2332. ➢ Planning and Economic Development Committee: 1 st & 3rd Mon., 5:30 PM, City Hall - Hazelnut Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. D Planning Commission I Board of Architectural Review: 4th Thurs., 6:30 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Contact Wynetta Bivens at 206-431-3670. ➢ Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: 1st & 3rd Mon., 5:30 PM, 6300 Building Suite 100 - Foster Conference Room. Contact Laurel Humphrey at 206-433-8993. 9 Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 PM, Tukwila Heritage & Cultural Center, 14475 591 Avenue S. Contact Louise Jones -Brown at 206-244-4478. 409 'r Tukwila International Boulevard Action Committee: 2nd Tues., 7:00 PM, Valley View Sewer District Contact Chief Bruce Linton at 206-433-1815. Tentative Agenda Schedule MONTH MEETING 1 — MEETING 2 — MEETING 3 — MEETING 4— REGULAR C.O.W. REGULAR C.O.W. February 3 10 17 24 See agenda packet Special Presentation cover sheet for this NO COUNCIL OR Review of responses from week's agenda: COMMITTEE MEETING Request for Proposals for City SCHEDULED Attorney services to include questions from Council. February 10, 2020 Committee of the Whole . Public Hearing Meeting An ordinance on the Draft Parks, ' Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Special Issues A contract for a Finance budget tool. A contract with Dell for laptops in the amount of $450,000. Funding for additional Transport Officers for Inmate Appearance in Court in the amount of $188,000. Funding for Police records digitization project in the amount of $150,000. Financing for 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement project. C.O.W. Meeting to be followed by a Special Meeting. Consent Agenda Accept as complete Tukwila Urban Center Pedestrian - Bicycle Bridge project with SB Structures for $6,309,080.12. Accept as complete 2019 Overlay and Repair Project with Tucci and Sons Inc for $1, 223, 799.43. Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with KPG Inc for on - call engineering and design services for Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program in the amount of $80,000. Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Hartcrowser Associates for geo-tech engineering services for the Public Works Fleet and Facilities Buildings in the amount of $80,000. Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with King County for CIRCA Business Passport Contract for $73,695. MONTH MEETING 1 — MEETING 2 — MEETING 3 — MEETING 4 — REGULAR C.O.W. REGULAR C.O.W. March 2 9 16 23 Special Presentations Unfinished Business Special Presentations New employee introductions. Year in Review for Artist in Update on the Public Safety Plan Residency Program. Disadvantaged Business Unfinished Business Enterprise (DBE) Apprenticeship Authorize the Mayor to sign an and Local Hire. agreement with Dell for City laptops. Special Issues Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract for a Finance 2019 Fire Department Annual Department budgeting tool. Review. Authorize the approval of hiring additional Transport Officers for inmate appearance in C.O.W. Meeting Court. to be followed by a Authorize the approval of Special Meeting. funding for the Police records digitization project in the amount of $150,000. Authorize financing for the 42nd Avenue South Bridge Replacement Project. Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract for attorney services. Shoreline and Critical Areas Code Updates. 410