Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHAPTER 9-The Environment Page 9-1 Amended 2009 CHAPTER 9 THE ENVIRONMENT Introduction One of the key attractions of Auburn and the Puget Sound Region has always been the abundant natural resources found throughout the area. The Green River Valley was once a major supplier of agricultural goods for the region and farming remains in some parts of the valley. Thick forests, wetlands, and wildlife habitats are found throughout the area. As the area develops, many of these features, which serve to make the area attractive in the first place, are being lost. The strong emphasis placed on the designation and protection of resource lands and critical areas in the Growth Management Act, the Countywide Policies and this plan reflect the important role that these areas play in maintaining the health, safety and welfare of the area's citizens. Issues Environmental Constraints and Land Use The City's overall environmental policy should describe the kinds of environmental information and factors that are important to the community. This information can be used to decide if, where and how certain kinds of development and other activities should be allowed. City policy should recognize the natural constraints placed on development by such factors as unstable slopes, flooding and wetlands. A critical environmental concern is the proper management of gravel extraction. This is an industry which has been active in Auburn for many years and which remains a viable industry. The City should establish clear policies to guide the retention of valued aspects of the City's environment, such as protection of the City's open space and significant wildlife habitats. The policy should seek to ensure ample opportunity for the City's residents to meet their recreational needs. Policies should be established to protect the public health, safety and quality of life, and to also protect the area's most unique, sensitive and productive Environment Page 9-2 Amended 2009 environmental resources. New development should be directed toward areas where their adverse impacts can be minimized. This Plan has increased the specificity of the City's policies relating to use and protection of the natural environment. It also provides a set of general policies which will be used to require the mitigation of significant adverse impacts. GOAL 18. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES To maintain and promote a safe and healthy environment and preserve the quality of life, and to protect the area's most unique, sensitive and productive natural resources. To encourage natural resource industries within the city to operate in a manner which enhances, (rather than detracts from), the orderly development of the City. Objective 18.1. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of surface water, ground water, and shoreline resources in the City and Region. Policies: EN-1 The City shall seek to ensure adequate and healthful supplies of domestic water by protecting groundwater from degradation, by providing for surface water infiltration, by minimizing or prohibiting unnecessary withdrawals of groundwater and by preventing unintended groundwater discharges caused by disturbance of water-bearing geological formations. EN-2 Stormwater drainage improvement projects that are proposed to discharge to groundwater, such as open water infiltration ponds, shall provide for surface water pretreatment designed to standards outlined in the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Drainage improvement projects that may potentially result in the exchange of surface and ground waters, such as detention ponds, shall also incorporate these standards. EN-3 The City shall seek to minimize degradation to surface water quality and aquatic habitat of creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies for contact recreation and fishing and to preserve and enhance the aesthetic quality of such waters by requiring the use of current Best Management Practices for control of stormwater and nonpoint runoff. Environment Page 9-3 Amended 2009 EN-4 The City will regulate any new storm water discharges to creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies with the goal of no degradation of the water quality or habitat of the receiving waters, and where feasible seek opportunities to enhance the water quality and habitat of receiving waters. EN-5 The City Shoreline Master Program, shall govern the development of all designated Shorelines of the City (Map 9.1). Lands adjacent to these areas should be managed in a manner consistent with that program. EN-6 Where possible, streams and river banks should be kept in a natural condition, and degraded streambanks should be enhanced or restored. EN-7 Uses along the Green and White Rivers should be limited to residential, agricultural, open space, recreational, mineral resource extraction and public and quasi-public uses. Commercial development shall only be allowed on the rivers, if such development adds new public access to the shoreline area and is constructed in a manner that will protect the shoreline and water quality of the rivers through the use of Best Management Practices. EN-8 Storm drainage structures and facilities located within the shoreline environment, parklands, or public open space shall incorporate high standards of design to enhance the natural appearance, protect significant cultural resources and appropriate use of the site and surrounding area. Any such facilities located within the shoreline environment shall be consistent with the State Shoreline Management Act and the City's Shoreline Management Program. If accessible to the general public, such facilities should, whenever possible, be designed to preclude the need for security fencing, and should use native vegetation and be properly maintained. EN-9 The City shall discourage the use of septic tanks except in those areas which are designated for rural uses and have suitable soils. EN-10 The City's design standards shall ensure that the post development peak stormwater runoff rates do not exceed the predevelopment rates. EN-11 The City will seek to ensure that the quality of water leaving the City is of equivalent quality to the water entering. This will be accomplished by emphasizing prevention of pollution to surface Environment Page 9-4 Amended 2009 and ground waters through education programs and implementation and enforcement of Best Management Practices. EN-12 The City shall continue to work with adjacent jurisdictions to enhance and protect water quality in the region through coordinated and consistent programs and regulations. EN-13 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on water quality as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Impacts on fish resources shall be a priority concern in such reviews. EN-14 The City shall require the use of Best Management Practices to enhance and protect water quality as dictated by the City's Design and Construction Standards and the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. In all new development, approved water quality treatment measures that are applicable and represent the best available science or technology shall be required prior to discharging storm waters into the City storm drainage system or into environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. wetlands, rivers, and groundwater.) EN-15 The City recognizes that new development can have impacts including, but not limited to, flooding, erosion and decreased water quality on downstream communities and natural drainage courses. The City shall continue to actively participate in developing and implementing regional water quality planning and flood hazard reduction efforts within the Green River, Mill Creek and White River drainage basins. The findings and recommendations of these regional efforts, including, but not limited to, the “Draft” Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the Mill Creek Basin, the “Draft” Mill Creek Flood Control Plan, the Green River Basin Program Interlocal Agreement, and the Mill Creek Water Quality Management Plan, shall be considered by the City as City programs and plans are developed and updated. EN-16 The City recognizes the value and efficiency of utilizing existing natural systems (e.g., wetlands) for storm water conveyance and storage. However, these natural systems can be severely impacted or destroyed by the uncontrolled release of contaminated storm waters. Prior to utilizing natural systems for storm drainage purposes, the City shall carefully consider the potential for adverse impacts through the environmental review process. Important natural systems shall not be used for storm Environment Page 9-5 Amended 2009 drainage storage or conveyance, unless it can be demonstrated that adverse impacts can be adequately mitigated to a less than significant level EN-17 The City recognizes that stormwater treatment facilities do not function efficiently unless maintained. The City shall strive to ensure that public and private stormwater collection, detention and treatment systems are properly maintained and functioning as designed. EN-17A Encourage the use of low impact development techniques in public and private development proposals in order to minimize impervious surfaces and improve water quality. Objective 18.2. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of air resources in the City and Region. Policies: EN-18 The City shall seek to secure and maintain such levels of air quality as will protect human health, prevent injury to plant and animal life, prevent injury to property, foster the comfort and convenience of area inhabitants, and facilitate the enjoyment of the natural attractions of the area. EN-19 The City will continue to support and rely on the various State, Federal and local programs to continue to protect and enhance air quality. EN-20 The City shall encourage the retention of vegetation and encourage landscaping in order to provide filtering of suspended particulates. EN-21 The City shall support an increased role for public transportation as a means to reduce locally generated air emissions. EN-22 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on air quality as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Objective 18.3. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of land, wildlife and vegetative resources in the City and region. Environment Page 9-6 Amended 2009 Policies: EN-23 The City shall seek to protect any unique, rare or endangered species of plants and animals found within the City by preventing the indiscriminate and unnecessary removal of trees and groundcover; by promoting the design and development of landscaped areas which provide food and cover for wildlife; and by protecting and enhancing the quality of aquatic habitat. EN-24 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of land, known or suspected fish and wildlife habitats (Map 9.2) and vegetative resources as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Such mitigation may involve the retention of significant habitats and the use of native landscape vegetation. EN-25 The preferred method of crossing a watercourse that has habitat suitable for anadromous fish use or that has the potential to be rehabilitated for fish use in the future is a bridge. The use of culverts shall be discouraged as a crossing method for such watercourses. Culvert systems may be considered if streambeds similar to natural channels can be provided, no loss of anadromous fish habitat will occur or the cost of a bridge is prohibitive as reasonable method of mitigation. EN-26 The City shall work in collaboration with other agencies, the development community and other affected or interested parties to protect identified wildlife corridors and encourage the clustering of significant or adjacent resources to maintain connectivity of these systems. Objective 18.4. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of important wetland resources in the City and region. Policies: EN-27 The City recognizes the important biological and hydrological roles that wetlands play in providing plant and animal habitat, protecting water quality, reducing the need for man-made flood and storm drainage systems, maintaining water quality, and in providing recreational, open space, educational and cultural opportunities. The City will consider these roles and functions in all new development and will also pursue opportunities to enhance the existing wetland system when these multiple benefits can be achieved. Environment Page 9-7 Amended 2009 EN-28 The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying degrees of biological and hydrological functions and values to the community depending on the size, complexity and location of the individual system, and that the overall degree of functions and values should be considered when reviewing proposals which impact wetlands. In a similar manner, the levels of protection afforded to a wetland shall be consistent with its existing function and values. The City shall continue to promote policies and practices of enhancing the wetlands that are hydraulically connected to the river systems to improve fish resources and aquatic habitat. EN-29 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of wetland resources as part of its environmental review process and shall require appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures of important wetland areas. Such mitigation may involve conservation, enhancement or restoration or replacement of important wetlands, and provisions for appropriate buffering. The goal of the mitigation should be no net loss of wetland functions and values. A permanent deed restriction shall be placed on any wetlands created or enhanced to ensure that they are preserved in perpetuity. EN-30 Wetlands which are associated with a river or stream, or provide significant plant and animal habitat opportunities are recognized by the City as the most important wetland systems, and shall receive the highest degree of protection and mitigation through conservation, enhancement or relocation measures. Wetlands which are limited in size, are isolated from major hydrological systems or provide limited hydrological or plant and animal habitat opportunities may be considered by the City for development and displacement in conjunction with appropriate mitigation. EN-31 Speculative filling of wetlands shall only be permitted if in compliance with the Special Area Management Plan for Mill Creek, when it is adopted. EN-32 It is the City's intent to pursue development of an area-wide wetlands management program for the entire City to establish a systems approach to wetlands management. The City shall work with adjacent communities to adopt and implement the Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the Mill Creek Basin, a draft version of which has been developed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The purpose of the SAMP is to establish uniform wetland definitions and methodology throughout the planning Environment Page 9-8 Amended 2009 area, to develop a regional consensus and predictability by identifying important wetlands which must be conserved and less important wetlands which may be developed. The SAMP is intended to ensure a balance of the City's commitment between environmental and economic development interests. The City shall strive to streamline the permitting process for development in the areas covered by the SAMP. Map 9.3: General Location of Wetlands Map Note: This map provides an illustration of wetlands located within Auburn. Prepared on an area-wide basis, the inventory map provides a general delineation of known wetlands based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers definition and the 1989 Federal Manual For Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands field methodology. It is important to note that this map is only a wetland inventory and not a wetland plan. Over time wetlands develop, expand and contract in conjunction with changing climatic, natural and artificial conditions. The map does not imply that a parcel covered by a wetland designation is fully occupied by wetlands. It is an indicator, however, that an in depth wetland delineation is required. Therefore, future site specific wetland studies conducted by the property owner will identify the precise location, delineation and functional characteristics of known wetland areas, and additional wetland areas not previously inventoried. The Auburn Planning Department has wetland reports that can provide information regarding soils, hydrology, vegetation and wildlife for these wetlands. Objective 18.5. To recognize the aesthetic, environmental and use benefits of vegetation and to promote its retention and propagation. Consideration shall be given to promoting the use of native vegetation. Policies: EN-33 The City recognizes the important benefits of native vegetation including its role in attracting native wildlife, preserving the natural hydrology, and maintaining the natural character of the Pacific Northwest region. Native vegetation can also reduce the use of pesticides (thereby reducing the amount of contaminants that may enter nearby water systems) and reduce watering required of non-native species (thereby promoting conservation). The City shall encourage the use of native vegetation as an integral part of public and private development plans through strategies that include, but are not limited to, the following: Environment Page 9-9 Amended 2009 o Encouraging the use of native plants in street landscapes and in public facilities. o Providing greater clarity in development regulations in how native plants can be used in private development proposals. o Pursuing opportunities to educate the public about the benefits of native plants. EN-33A Development regulations shall emphasize the use of native plant materials that complement the natural character of the Pacific Northwest and which are adaptable to the climatic hydrological characteristics of the region. Regulations should provide specificity as to native plant types in order to facilitate their use. EN-34 The City shall discourage the unnecessary disturbance of natural vegetation in new development. EN-35 The City shall encourage the use of water conserving plants in landscaping for both public and private projects. EN-36 The City shall update and amend its landscaping ordinances to ensure that sufficient landscaping is a required component of all development. Emphasis should be placed on higher quality and quantity of landscaping. EN-37 The City shall strengthen the tree protection ordinance targeted at protecting large stands of trees and significant trees within the City. EN-38 The City shall develop a tree planting and maintenance program. Objective 18.6. To promote energy efficiency and management of resources in the development and operation of public facilities and services, as well as in private development. Policies: EN-39 The City shall encourage the use of renewable energy and other natural resources over non-renewable resources wherever practicable and shall protect deposits or supplies of important non-renewable natural resources from developments or activities which will preclude their future utilization. EN-40 The City of Auburn Energy Management Plan is hereby incorporated as an element in this Comprehensive Plan. Environment Page 9-10 Amended 2009 EN-41 The City encourages site design practices that maximize winter exposure to solar radiation. Objective 18.7. Enhance and maintain the quality of life for the City's inhabitants by promoting a healthy environment and reducing the adverse impact of environmental nuisances. Policies: EN-42 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants to the harmful effects of excess noise. Performance measures for noise impact on surrounding development should be adopted and enforced. EN-43 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants to excessive levels of light and glare. Performance measures for light and glare exposure to surrounding development should be adopted and enforced. EN-44 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants from noxious plant species. Objective 18.8. To establish management policies which effectively control the operation and location of mineral extraction in the City, in order to reduce the inherent adverse impacts that such activities produce in an urban environment. Policies: EN-45 The cost effective availability of sand and gravel materials is needed to support the development of freeways, roads, public works, and private construction. Mineral extraction may therefore be permitted if in accord with these policies. EN-46 Existing mineral extraction operations (as specifically authorized by a City permit to mine) shall be allowed to continue operation for the duration of, and in accord with, their existing permits. EN-47 Mineral extraction operations shall not be considered a permitted use in any zoning district. They are to be reviewed as special uses and shall be conducted only in accord with the measures needed to mitigate any adverse impact. Permits for the operation shall be denied whenever any impact is deemed by the City Council to be unacceptable or cannot be acceptably mitigated. Environment Page 9-11 Amended 2009 EN-48 A final grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted with every application. Conditions of operation shall be spelled out in detail with performance bonds required to ensure compliance. Failure to comply with the provisions will be adequate grounds for suspension and subsequent termination of the permit. EN-49 The burden to demonstrate compliance with these policies and to demonstrate the need for a new permit or a renewal of a permit for any mineral extraction operation rests solely on the operator. The burden to operate in compliance with these policies and any permit issued in accord with the same shall also be on the operator. EN-50 The City shall consider impacts of mining on groundwater and surface water quality as well as possible changes in hydrology as a result of the mining during the environmental review process and require appropriate mitigating measures to prevent water quality degradation. EN-51 Mineral resource areas or lands are those lands which have high quality resources that can be commercially mined for a minimum of twenty years (Map 9.4). Properties around which urban growth is occurring should not be considered as mineral resource areas. As required by RCW 36.70A.060, the City shall require notification on all plats, short plats, development permits and building permits issued for development within 500 feet of these lands on which a variety of commercial activities may occur that are not compatible with residential development for certain periods of limited duration. EN-52 Additional mineral extraction operations or major expansion of existing operations onto adjacent parcels shall be permitted within mineral resource areas. Impacts of the operations must be studied thoroughly under the provisions of SEPA, and the City shall require implementation of all reasonable mitigating measures identified in those studies. Permits for the operation and renewal of permits for existing operations shall be denied whenever any impact cannot be acceptably mitigated. EN-53 Additional mineral extraction operations or expansions of existing operations will only be allowed outside of mineral resource areas where it is advisable to modify slope to create usable land (or to provide another public benefit associated with the site) and where the community will suffer no substantial short Environment Page 9-12 Amended 2009 or long term adverse effect. Impacts of the operations must be studied thoroughly under the provisions of SEPA, and the City shall require implementation of all reasonable mitigating measures identified in those studies. Permits for the operation and renewal of permits for existing operations shall be denied whenever any impact cannot be acceptably mitigated. EN-54 New mineral extraction operations and expansion of existing mineral extraction operations will not be permitted in areas designated for "open space" uses. EN-55 The creation of usable land consistent with this comprehensive plan should be the end result of a mineral extraction operation. The amount of material to be removed shall be consistent with the end use. While this policy shall be rigidly applied to developed areas and to all areas outside of mineral resource areas, some flexibility may be appropriate within mineral resource areas. EN-56 Aesthetic qualities, erosion control, the effect on community and the creation of usable land which is consistent with approved Washington State Department of Natural Resources and City Reclamation Plans shall be the primary considerations in a decision to grant a permit for a new mineral extraction operation or to extend the scope of an existing mineral extraction operation outside designated mineral resource areas. GOAL 19. HAZARDS To minimize the risk from environmental and manmade hazards to present and future residents of the community. Objective 19.1. To reduce potential hazards associated with flood plains without unduly restricting the benefits associated with the continued development of the Lower Green River Valley floor. Policies: EN-57 The City shall seek to protect human health and safety and to minimize damage to the property of area inhabitants by minimizing the potential for and extent of flooding or inundation. EN-58 Flood prone properties outside of the floodway may be developable provided that such development can meet the standards set forth in the Federal flood insurance program. Environment Page 9-13 Amended 2009 EN-59 Any subdivision of property within the flood plain shall avoid creating lots which would be subject to serious threats to life, health and property from floodwaters. EN-60 Site plan review shall be required under SEPA for any significant (e.g. over the SEPA threshold) development in the flood plain. Appropriate mitigating measures shall be required whenever needed to reduce potential hazards. EN-61 Any development within the floodway which would reduce the capacity of the floodway shall be prohibited. EN-62 The City shall enact ordinances and review development proposals in a manner which restricts and controls the discharge of storm water from new development. At a minimum the peak discharge rate after development shall not exceed the peak discharge rate before development. EN-63 The City's development standards should require control and management of storm waters in a manner which minimizes impacts from flooding. EN-64 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on frequently flooded areas (Map 9.5) as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. As part of this review process, flood engineering and impact studies may be required. Within FEMA designated 100 year floodplains and other designated frequently flooded areas, such mitigation may include flood engineering studies, the provision of compensatory flood storage, floodproofing of structures, elevating of structures, and downstream or upstream improvements. EN-65 Areas designated as frequently flooded areas should include 100 year future condition floodplains wherever future condition flows have been modeled and adopted by the City as part of a basin plan. EN-66 Land uses and public and quasi-public facilities which would present special risks, such as hazardous waste storage facilities, hospitals, schools, nursing homes, and police and fire stations, should not be constructed in designated frequently flooded areas unless no reasonable alternative is available. If these facilities are located in designated frequently flooded areas, these facilities and the access routes needed for their operation, should be built in a manner that protects public health and safety during at least Environment Page 9-14 Amended 2009 the 100 year flood. In addition, special measures should be taken to ensure that hazardous or toxic substances are not released into flood waters. EN-67 Developers in floodprone areas shall provide geotechnical information which identifies seasonal high groundwater elevations for a basis to design stormwater facilities in conformance with City design criteria. EN-68 The Mill Creek Basin Flood Control Plan, when completed, shall be the basis for the establishment of downstream drainage conditions for development in that area. Objective 19.2. To ensure that development is properly located and constructed with respect to the limitations of the underlying soils and subsurface drainage. Policies: EN-69 The City shall seek to ensure that land not be developed or otherwise modified in a manner which will result in or significantly increase the potential for slope slippage, landslide, subsidence or substantial soil erosion. The City's development standards shall dictate the use of Best Management Practices to minimize the potential for these problems. EN-70 Where there is a high probability of erosion (see Map 9.6), grading should be kept to a minimum and disturbed vegetation should be restored as soon as feasible. The City's development standards shall dictate the use of Best Management Practices for clearing and grading activity. EN-71 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on hazards associated with soils and subsurface drainage as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. EN-72 Large scale speculative filling and grading activities not associated with a development proposal shall be discouraged as it reduces a vegetated site's natural ability to provide erosion control and biofiltration, absorb storm water, and filter suspended particulates. In instances where speculative filling is deemed appropriate, disturbed vegetation shall be restored as soon as possible, and appropriate measures to control erosion and sedimentation until the site is developed shall be required. Environment Page 9-15 Amended 2009 EN-73 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on Class I and Class III landslide hazard areas (Map 9.7) as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. The impacts of the new development, both during and after construction, on adjacent properties shall also be considered. EN-74 Auburn will seek to retain areas with slopes in excess of 40 percent as primarily open space areas in order to protect against erosion and landslide hazards and to limit significant removal of vegetation to help conserve Auburn's identity within the metropolitan region. Slopes greater than 15 percent with zones of emergent water (springs or ground water seepages) and all slopes with mapable landslide potential identified by a geotechnical study shall be protected from alteration. EN-75 The City will require that a geotechnical report prepared by a professional engineer licensed by the State of Washington with expertise in geotechnical engineering be submitted for all significant activities proposed within Class I and Class III landslide hazard areas (Map 9.7). The City shall develop administrative guidelines which identify the procedures and information required for the geotechnical reports. EN-76 New development within Class I and Class III landslide hazard areas (Map 9.7) shall be designed and located to minimize site disturbance and removal of vegetation, and to maintain the natural topographic character of the site. Clustering of structures, minimizing building footprints, and retaining trees and other natural vegetation, shall be considered. Objective 19.3. To reduce risks associated with the transportation and storage of hazardous materials. Policies: EN-77 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants to the risk of explosion or hazardous emissions, and to require proposals involving the potential risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances to include specific measures which will protect the public health, safety and welfare. EN-78 The risk of hazardous materials, substances and wastes shall be incorporated into the City's emergency management programs. Environment Page 9-16 Amended 2009 EN-79 New commercial (other than retail commercial) or industrial uses which involve the transport or storage of hazardous materials, substances or wastes shall only be located in that portion of the designated Region Serving Area of the City between the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and east of the West Valley Highway. EN-80 Any existing wholesale storage or manufacturing of hazardous materials, substances or wastes in the designated Community Serving Area of the City, or within 2000 feet of a school or medical facility, shall be considered a non-conforming use and the City should assertively seek its removal. EN-81 The treatment, storage, processing, handling and disposal of any hazardous material, substances or wastes shall be only in the strictest compliance with any applicable local, state or federal law. EN-82 The City shall consider the impacts posed by new development on risks associated with hazardous materials, substances and wastes as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. EN-83 The Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan for Seattle/King County, and the King County Solid Waste Interlocal Resolution No. 90-001, are hereby adopted and incorporated as an element of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. EN-84 The City's surface water, ground water, sanitary, and storm drainage systems shall be protected from contamination by hazardous materials or other contaminants. EN-85 Use or removal of existing underground storage tanks shall only be done in the strictest compliance with applicable local, state and federal law. GOAL 20 POLICIES FOR PROTECTION OF ENDANGERED FISH SPECIES The City recognizes that anadromous Salmonids require clean, cool, well- oxygenated water in adequate quantity for survival and especially during the critical periods of rearing and migration both before spawning and after juveniles emerge. Salmonid eggs are highly affected during incubation and hatching by water temperature, flow velocity, water quality and excessive turbidity. Streams composed of complex habitats with a Environment Page 9-17 Amended 2009 high proportion of riffles and pools provide productive spawning habitats, as well as juvenile rearing areas in eddying and off-channel areas. Objective 20.1 To aid in the protection of listed and candidate endangered fish species. Policies: EN-86 The City will continue to participate and support the various State, Federal and local programs including Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) No. 9 (Green River) and WRIA No. 10 (White-Stuck River) to protect and restore endangered species. EN-87 The City shall seek to minimize surface water quality and aquatic habitat degradation of creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies as habitat for restoration of endangered species. EN-88 The City shall obtain information during the review of development proposals, as it relates to the Endangered Species Act, so that best management practices and best available science are considered and included in the City’s evaluation and decision-making process. EN-89 The City shall identify the types and qualities of aquatic resources within its borders and further develop plans and program for the protection and enhancement of these resources based on their characteristics. GOAL 21 GENERAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS WITHIN AUBURN’S SHORELINES The following general policies and regulations apply to all shorelines of the state that are located in Auburn, regardless of the specific shoreline environment designation in any one location. Objective 21.1 Ensure conservation and restoration within Auburn’s shorelines. Polices: EN-90 Prioritize enhancement and restoration efforts at public parks and public open space lands. Environment Page 9-18 Amended 2009 EN-91 Work with owners of other publicly-owned land to encourage restoration and enhancement projects. EN-92 Work with the public and other interested parties to prioritize restoration opportunities identified in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report. EN-93 Promote vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds and nonnative species to avoid adverse impacts to hydrology, and reduce the hazard of slope failures or accelerated erosion. EN-94 Integrate bioengineering and/or soft engineering approaches into local and regional flood control measures, infrastructure, and related capital improvement projects. EN-95 Develop a program to implement restoration projects, including funding strategies. EN-96 Monitor and adaptively manage restoration projects. EN-97 Continue to work with the State, King County, Pierce County, Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 and 10 Forums, the Muckleshoot Tribe, and other governmental and non- governmental organizations to explore how local governments (with their assistance) can best address the needs of preserving ecological processes and shoreline functions. EN-98 Continue to work with the State, King County, Pierce County, Green River Flood Control Zone District, and the Inter-County River Improvement Agency to identify and implement flood management strategies that protect existing development and restores floodplain and channel migration functions. EN-99 Continue to work with the WRIA 9 and 10 Forums to restore shoreline habitats and seasonal ranges that support listed endangered and threatened species, as well as other anadromous fisheries. Environment Page 9-19 Amended 2009 EN-100 Create incentives that will make it economically or otherwise attractive to integrate shoreline ecological restoration into development projects. EN-101 Encourage restoration or enhancement of native riparian vegetation through incentives and non-regulatory programs. EN-102 Establish public education materials to provide shoreline landowners technical assistance about the benefits of native vegetation plantings. EN-103 Explore opportunities with other educational organizations and agencies to develop an on-going program of shoreline education for all ages. EN-104 Identify areas where kiosks and interpretive signs can enhance the educational experiences of users of shoreline areas. EN-105 Develop strategies to fund shoreline-related educational and interpretive projects. Objective 21.2 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation. Polices: EN-106 Developments and activities in the City’s shoreline should be planned and designed to retain native vegetation or replace shoreline vegetation with native species to achieve no net loss of the ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes performed by vegetation. EN-107 Woody debris should be left in river corridors to enhance wildlife habitat and shoreline ecological functions, except where it threatens personal safety or critical infrastructure, such as bridge pilings. In such cases where debris poses a threat, it should be dislodged, but should not be removed from the river. Environment Page 9-20 Amended 2009 Objective 21.3 Environmental Impact Mitigation. Polices: EN-108 All shoreline use and development should be carried out in a manner that avoids and minimizes adverse impacts so that the resulting ecological conditions do not become worse than the current condition. This means assuring no net loss of ecological functions and processes and protecting critical areas designated in Appendix A, Chapter 16.10 “Critical Areas” that are located in the shoreline. Should a proposed use and development potentially create significant adverse environmental impacts not otherwise avoided or mitigated by compliance with the master program, the Director should require mitigation measures to ensure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Objective 21.4 Critical Areas. Policies: EN-109 Provide a level of protection to critical areas within the shoreline that is at least equal to that which is provided by the City’s critical areas regulations adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Act and the City’s Comprehensive Plan. EN-110 Allow activities in critical areas that protect and, where possible, restore the ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes of the City’s shoreline. If conflicts between the SMP and the critical area regulations arise, the regulations that are most consistent with the SMA or its WAC provisions will govern. EN-111 Preserve, protect, restore and/or mitigate wetlands within and associated with the City’s shorelines to achieve no net loss of wetland area and wetland functions. EN-112 Developments in shoreline areas that are identified as geologically hazardous or pose a foreseeable risk to people and improvements during the life of the development should not be allowed. Objective 21.5 Public Access (including views). Environment Page 9-21 Amended 2009 Policies: EN-113 Public access improvements should not result in adverse impacts to the natural character and quality of the shoreline and associated wetlands or result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Developments and activities within the shoreline should not impair or detract from the public’s visual or physical access to the water. EN-114 Protection and enhancement of the public’s physical and visual access to shorelines should be encouraged. EN-115 The amount and diversity of public access to shorelines should be increased in a manner consistent with the natural shoreline character, property rights, and public safety. EN-116 Publicly owned shorelines should be limited to water-dependent or public recreation uses, otherwise such shorelines should remain protected, undeveloped open space. EN-117 Public access should be designed to provide for public safety. Public access facilities should provide auxiliary facilities, such as parking and sanitation facilities, when appropriate, and should be designed to be ADA accessible. Objective 21.6 Flood Hazard Reduction. Policies: EN-118 The City should manage flood protection through the City’s Comprehensive Drainage Plan, Comprehensive Plan, stormwater regulations, and flood hazard area regulations. EN-119 Discourage development within the floodplains associated with the City’s shorelines that would individually or cumulatively result in an increase to the risk of flood damage. EN-120 Non-structural flood hazard reduction measures should be given preference over structural measures. Structural flood hazard reduction measures should be avoided whenever possible. When Environment Page 9-22 Amended 2009 necessary, they should be accomplished in a manner that assures no net loss of ecological function and ecosystem-wide processes. Non-structural measures include setbacks, land use controls prohibiting or limiting development in areas that have are historically flooded, stormwater management plans, or bioengineering measures. EN-121 Where possible, public access should be integrated into publicly financed flood control and management facilities. Objective 21.7 Water Quality, Storm Water and Non-Point Pollution. Policies: EN-122 The City should prevent impacts to water quality and storm water quantity that would result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, or a significant impact to aesthetic qualities, or recreational opportunities. EN-123 Storm water management treatment, conveyance, or discharge facilities should be discouraged in the shoreline jurisdiction, unless no other feasible alternative is available. EN-124 Low impact development techniques that allow for greater amount of storm water to infiltrate into the soil should be encouraged to reduce storm water run-off. EN-125 Encourage conservation of existing shoreline vegetation which provides water quality protection by slowing and filtering storm water run-off. Objective 21.8 Educational and Archeological Areas and Historic Sites. Policies: EN-126 Where possible, Educational and Archeological Areas and Historic sites in the shoreline should be permanently preserved for scientific study, education, and public observation. Environment Page 9-23 Amended 2009 EN-127 Consideration should be given to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Chapter 43.51 RCW to provide for the protection, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects located or associated with the shoreline that are significant in American, Washington and local history, architecture, archeology or culture. EN-128 Where feasible and appropriate, access trails to shorelines should incorporate access to educational signage acknowledging protected, historical, cultural and archeological sites or areas in the shoreline. Objective 21.9 Nonconforming Use and Development Standards. Policies: EN-129 Legally established uses and developments that predate the City’s Shoreline Master Program (1973, as amended) should be allowed to continue as legal nonconforming uses provided that future development or redevelopment does not increase the degree of nonconformity with this program. GOAL 22 SHORELINE MODIFICATION Shoreline modifications are generally related to construction of a physical element such as a levee, bulkhead, or pier at or near the edge of a river or extending into the channel. Other modification actions include dredging, filling, or vegetation clearing. Modifications are usually undertaken in support of or in preparation for an allowed shoreline use or development. Objective 22.1 Prohibited Modifications The following shoreline modifications are prohibited in all shoreline environments unless addressed separately in this shoreline master program under another use: 1. Breakwaters, jetties, groins and weirs: 2. Dune modifications; and 3. Piers and docks. Environment Page 9-24 Amended 2009 Objective 22.2 Dredging Dredge Material Disposal. Policies: EN-130 Dredging and dredge material disposal should be done in manner which avoids or minimizes significant ecological impacts. Where impacts cannot be avoided, mitigation measures are required that result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. EN-131 Dredge spoil disposal in water bodies, on shorelands, or wetlands within a river’s channel migration zone should be discouraged, except as needed for habitat improvement. EN-132 New development shall be sited and designed to avoid or, if that is not possible, to minimize the need for new and maintenance dredging. Objective 22.3 Piers and Docks. Policies: EN-133 The City should discourage the construction of new piers, docks, or floats in the shoreline jurisdiction along the Green and White Rivers. Objective 22.4 Shoreline Stabilization (bulkheads and revetments). Policies: EN-134 Shoreline stabilization activities that may necessitate new or increased shoreline stabilization on the same or other affected properties where there has been no previous need for stabilization should be discouraged. EN-135 New shoreline uses and development should be located away from the shoreline in order to preclude the need for new stabilization structures. Environment Page 9-25 Amended 2009 EN-136 Structural or “hard” shoreline stabilization techniques and structures should be allowed only after it is demonstrated that non-structural or “soft” shoreline protection measures are not feasible. EN-137 The cumulative effect of allowing bulkheads or revetments along river segments should be evaluated. If it is determined that the cumulative effects of bulkheads or revetments would have an adverse effect on shoreline functions or processes, then permits for them should not be granted. EN-138 Bulkheads should not be permitted as a solution to geo-physical problems such as mass slope failure, sloughing, or land slides. Bulkheads and revetments should only be approved for the purposes of protecting existing developments by preventing bank erosion by the rivers. Objective 22.4 22.5 Clearing and Grading. Policies: EN-139 Clearing and grading activities should only be allowed in association with a permitted shoreline development. EN-140 Clearing and grading activities shall be limited to the minimum necessary for the intended development, including residential development. Objective 22.6 Fill. Policies: EN-141 Fill placed waterward of the OHWM should be prohibited and only allowed to facilitate water dependent uses restoration projects. EN-142 Where permitted, fill should be the minimum necessary to provide for the proposed use and should be permitted only when Environment Page 9-26 Amended 2009 tied to a specific development proposal that is permitted by the Shoreline Master Program. EN-143 The perimeter of fill activities should be designed to avoid or eliminate erosion and sedimentation impacts, both during initial fill activities and over time. Objective 22.7 Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects. Policies: EN-144 All proposed shoreline habitat and natural systems enhancement projects should assure that the activities associated with each project address legitimate restoration needs and priorities and facilitate implementation of the Restoration Plan developed with this Shoreline Master Program pursuant to WAC 173-26- 201(2)(f). GOAL 23 SHORELINE USE Shoreline use activities are developments or activities that exist or are anticipated to occupy shoreline locations. Objective 23.1 Prohibited Uses within the Shoreline Environment. Policies: EN-145 The following uses should be prohibited in all shoreline environments unless addressed separately in this the Shoreline Master Program under another use: See Section 1-2 of the Shoreline Master Program for definitions of the following uses: 1. Boat houses; 2. Commercial development; 3. Forest practices; and 4. Industrial development; 5. New or expanded mining; and 6. Permanent solid waste storage or transfer facilities. Environment Page 9-27 Amended 2009 Objective 23.2 Agriculture Policies: EN-146 This Program allows for existing, ongoing agricultural activities while also maintaining shoreline ecological functions and processes. EN-147 Agricultural activities that do not meet the definition for existing and ongoing agricultural activities should not be allowed in the shoreline. EN-148 Appropriate farm management techniques and new development construction should be encouraged to prevent contamination of nearby water bodies and adverse effects on valuable plant, fish, and animal life from fertilizer, herbicides and pesticide use and application. EN-149 A vegetative buffer should be encouraged to be placed and maintained between agricultural lands and water bodies or wetlands in order to reduce harmful bank erosion and resulting in sedimentation, enhance water quality, provide shade, reduce flood hazard, and maintain habitat for fish and wildlife. EN-150 Public access to the shoreline should be encouraged where it does not conflict with agricultural activities. EN-151 Proposals to convert agricultural uses to other uses should comply with all policies and regulations established by the Comprehensive Plan and this Master Program for said uses and should not result in a net loss of ecological functions. Objective 23.3 Aquaculture Policies: EN-152 Aquaculture is a water-dependent use, and when consistent with control of pollution and avoidance of adverse impacts to the Environment Page 9-28 Amended 2009 environment and preservation of habitat for resident native species, is an accepted use of the shoreline. EN-153 Development of aquaculture facilities and associated activities, such as hatcheries and fish counting stations should assure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes. Aquacultural facilities should be designed and located so as not to spread disease to native aquatic life, establish new non-native species which cause significant ecological impacts, or significantly impact the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. EN-154 Since locations for aquaculture activities are somewhat limited and require specific water quality, temperature, oxygen content, and adjacent land use conditions, and because the technology associated with some forms of aquaculture is still experimental, some latitude should be given when implementing the regulations of this section, provided that potential impacts on existing uses and shoreline ecological functions and processes are given due consideration. Experimental aquaculture projects should be monitored and adaptively managed to maintain shoreline ecological functions and processes. Objective 23.4 Boating Facilities. Policies: EN-155 Boating facilities should not be allowed unless they are accessible to the general public or serve a community. EN-156 New boat launching ramps should be allowed only where they are located at sites with suitable environmental conditions, shoreline configurations, access and neighboring uses. EN-157 Development of new or modifications to existing boat launching ramps and associated and accessory uses should not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or other significant adverse impacts. Objective 23.5 In-Stream Structural Use. Policies: EN-158 Approval of applications for in-stream structures should require inclusion of provisions for the protection and preservation of Environment Page 9-29 Amended 2009 ecosystem-wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural resources, including, but not limited to, fish and fish passage, wildlife and water resources, shoreline critical areas, hydro geological processes, and natural scenic vistas. EN-159 The location and planning of in-stream structures should give consideration to the full range of public interests, watershed functions and processes, and environmental concerns, with special emphasis on protecting and restoring priority habitats and species. EN-160 Non-structural and non-regulatory methods to protect, enhance, and restore shoreline ecological functions and processes and other shoreline resources should be encouraged as an alternative to structural in-stream structures. Objective 23.6 Mining. Policies: EN-161 Limit mining activities near the shoreline to existing mining uses. Objective 23.7 Recreation. Policies: EN-162 Prioritize shoreline recreational development that provides public access, enjoyment and use of the water and shorelines of the State over other non water-oriented recreational uses. EN-163 Shoreline areas with the potential for providing recreation or public access opportunities should be identified for this use and, wherever possible, acquired and incorporated into the Public Park and open space system. EN-164 Public recreational facilities should be located, designed and operated in a manner consistent with the purpose of the environment designation in which they are located and such that no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or ecosystem-wide processes result. Environment Page 9-30 Amended 2009 EN-165 The coordination of local, state, and federal recreation planning should be encouraged so as to mutually satisfy needs. Shoreline recreational developments should be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. EN-166 Recreational development should not interfere with public use of navigable waters. Objective 23.8 Residential Development. Policies: EN-167 New over-water residences, including floating homes, are not a preferred use and should be prohibited. EN-168 New multiunit residential development and land subdivisions for more than four parcels should provide community and/or public access in conformance to the City’s public access planning and this Shoreline Master Program. Adjoining access shall be considered in making this determination. EN-169 Accessory development (to either multiple family or single family) should be designed and located to blend into the site as much as possible. EN-170 New residential development should avoid the need for new shoreline stabilization or flood hazard reduction measures that would cause significant impacts to other properties or public improvements or a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Objective 23.9 Signs. Policies: EN-171 Signs should be designed, constructed and placed so that they are compatible with the natural quality of the shoreline environment and adjacent land and water uses. Environment Page 9-31 Amended 2009 Objective 23.10 Transportation. Policies: EN-172 Plan, locate, design and where appropriate construct, proposed roads, non-motorized systems and parking facilities where routes will have the least possible adverse effect on unique or fragile shoreline features, will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adversely impact existing or planned water-dependent uses. Where other options are available and feasible, new roads or road expansions should not be built within shoreline jurisdiction. EN-173 The number of river crossings should be minimized. EN-174 Parking facilities in shorelines are not preferred and shall be allowed only as necessary to support an authorized use and then as remote from the shoreline as possible. EN-175 Trail and bicycle systems should be encouraged along the White and Green Rivers wherever possible. EN-176 Joint use of transportation corridors within the shoreline jurisdiction for roads, utilities, and non-motorized transportation should be encouraged. EN-177 New railroad corridors should be prohibited. Objective 23.11 Utilities. Policies: EN-178 Utility facilities should be designed and located to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, preserve the natural landscape and vistas, preserve and protect fish and wildlife habitat, and minimize conflicts with present and planned land and shoreline uses. EN-179 Primary utility production and processing facilities, such as power plants, sewage treatment plants, water reclamation plants, Environment Page 9-32 Amended 2009 or parts of those facilities that are non-water-oriented should not be allowed in shoreline areas. EN-180 Utilities should utilize existing transportation and utilities sites, rights-of-way and corridors, whenever possible. Joint use of rights-of-way and corridors should be encouraged. EN-181 Transmission facilities for the conveyance of services, such as power lines, cables, and pipelines, shall be located outside of the shoreline area where feasible. Where no other option exists, utilities should be placed underground or alongside or under bridges. EN-182 New utilities facilities should be located so as not to require extensive shoreline protection structures. EN-183 Where storm water management, conveyance, and discharge facilities are permitted in the shoreline, they should be limited to the minimum size needed to accomplish their purpose and should be sited and designed in a manner that avoids, or mitigates adverse effects to the physical, hydrologic, or ecological functions. EN-184 Stormwater conveyance facilities should utilize existing transportation and utility sites, rights-of-way and corridors, whenever possible. Joint use of right-of-way and corridors should be encouraged.