HomeMy WebLinkAbout6212 Policy-Text Amendment #6
POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT #6
Miscellaneous Policy/Text Amendments to
various plan chapters include:
Introduction
Chapter 1 - Plan Background
Chapter 2- General Planning Approach
Chapter 3 - Land Use
Chapter 4 - Housing
Chapter 5 - Capital Facilities
Chapter 8 - Economic Development
Chapter 9 - Environmental
Chapter 13 - Development in the Unincorporated Areas
and Annexation
Chapter 14 - Comprehensive Plan Map
Chapter 15 - Implementation
~
INTRODUCTION
Where is
Auburn? The City of Auburn is located in the Puget Sound region of Washington
State near the convergence of the Green and the White River valleys.
Theugh Auburn municipal boundaries fall within is4* both King County
and; Pierce County bera°rs n„b„rr +h° s„+h. Map I-1 displays the
City's municipal boundaries and the City's potential annexation areas
which have been designated in compliance with the Washington State
Growth Management Act and the King County and Pierce County I
Countywide Planning Policies. (For more details see Chapter 1). The
terms potential annexation area and urban growth area are used
interchangeably throughout this document. A portion of Auburn's
remaining potential annexation area extends into Pierce County. While ~
• this Comprehensive Plan covers the area within the City's municipal
limits, many of the policies should be applied to the potential annexation
areas as well, since these areas will most likely become incorporated
within the City of Auburn sometime in the future. The map delineates the
location of the Muckleshoot Indian Reservation, of which two and one-
half square miles of the six square mile reservation lie within the City
limits.
What is a
Comprehensive
Plan? A comprehensive plan is a policy statement adopted by the City to guide
decisions affecting the community's physical development. A
comprehensive plan indicates how the City envisions the community's
future, and sets forth strategies for achieving the desired community. A
plan generally has three characteristics. First, it is comprehensive: the plan
encompasses all the geographic and functional elements which have a
bearing on the community's physical development. Second, it is general:
The plan summarizes the major policies and proposals of the City, but
does not usually indicate specific locations or establish detailed
• regulations. Third, it is long range: the plan looks beyond the current
pressing issues confronting the community, to the community's future.
Page i-i
Introduction
Why is a ~
Comprehensive
Plan Needed? Many of the day-to-day decisions made by City officials can have a
significant impact on how the community develops and functions. When
these decisions are made in a piecemeal, uncoordinated manner, the result
is likely to be land use and development patterns that are conflicting,
inefficient and difficult to serve with public facilities and services.
Piecemeal decisions frustrate a community's ability to manage its own
destiny. By establishing the community's long-range general policy for its
own physical development, a comprehensive plan coordinates and guides
individual decisions in a manner that efficiently moves the community
toward its overall goals. While other government agencies, financial
institutions, developers and citizens all have a substantial impact on the
community through their individual investment and development
decisions, City government is the only entity with both the opportunity and
responsibility to guide the community's overall development. The City is
in the best position to coordinate and balance the often competing needs
and pressures that confront the community as it approaches the future.
What Are the
Functions of a
Comprehensive •
Plan? A comprehensive plan serves many functions, including:
Policy Determination: In developing a comprehensive plan, the Planning
Commission and the City Council set forth a coherent set of policies. This
process has two functions. First, it encourages City officials to look at the
big picture, to step away from current pressing needs to develop overriding
policy goals for their community. Second, it allows the City Council to
make explicit the policies that are guiding their decisions so that those
policies may be viewed critically and subjected to open and democratic
review.
Policy Implementation: A community can move more effectively toward
its goals and implement its policies after they have been agreed to and
formalized through adoption of a comprehensive plan. The
Comprehensive Plan is a basic source of reference for officials as they
consider the enactment of ordinances or regulations affecting the
community's physical development (e.g. a zoning ordinance or a particular
rezone), and when they make decisions pertaining to public facility
investments (e.g. capital improvement programming or construction of a
specific public facility). This ensures that the community's overall goals
and policies are furthered, or implemented, by those decisions. ~
Page i-ii
Introductionl
• The plan also provides a practical guide to City officials as they administer
City ordinances and programs. This ensures that the day-to-day decisions
of City staff are consistent with the overall policy direction established by
the City's legislative body.
Communication/Education: . The comprehensive plan communicates to
the public and to City staff the policy of the legislative body. This allows
the staff, the public, private developers, business people, financial
institutions, and other interested parties to anticipate what the decisions of
the City are likely to be on any particular issue. As such, the plan provides
predictability. Everyone is better able to plan activities knowing the
probable response to their proposals and to protect investments made on
the basis of policy. In addition, the comprehensive plan can educate the
public, the business community, the staff and the legislative body itself on
the workings, conditions, and issues within their City. This can stimulate
interest about the community's affairs and increase the citizen participation
in government.
Basis for Coordination: The plan serves to focus, direct and coordinate
the efforts of the departments within City government by providing a
general comprehensive statement of the City's policies and goals.
• In addition to the above functions, the plan also provides a comprehensive
means for the Planning Commission and the Planning staff to supply
advice to the legislative body; it fulfills certain legal prerequisites for the
regulation of land use and development; it serves as a basis for
coordination between various governmental agencies; and it serves as a
guide to the courts when reviewing the City's land use decisions.
How is the
City's Policy
Expressed? This Comprehensive Plan is a"policy plan" which provides policy
guidance in two forms. First, it sets forth the City's policies addressing the
full range of issues which confront the community. Second, 4-it I
graphically illustrates, through the use of the Comprehensive Plan map,
how policy should be implemented geographically within the community.
These two aspects of the City's policy are interrelated and must be consider
when considering a land use or development decision.
A policy plan is considered to be a dynamic document, designed to
provide guidance and predictability while being flexible and responsive to
changing times and conditions. A good policy plan must be able to
• balance the need to anticipate the future with the need to be flexible to
respond to actual demands as they occur.
Page i-iii
Introduction
A comprehensive plan should be based upon sound planning principles i
and practices. However, it is critical that the comprehensive plan also take
into account the uniqueness of the place and the community it addresses.
Structure of this
Comprehensive
Plan This comprehensive plan is composed of five basic parts:
1. Background and Goals
2. Plan Elements and Policies
3. Comprehensive Plan Map
4. Implementation
5. Appendix
Parts 1, 3 and 4 and 5 are comprised of individual chapters. Part 2, Plan
Elements and Policies, is made up of 12 chapters, each representing an
individual policy area.
Chapter 1, Background and Goals, begins with a brief history of the City
of Auburn, a community profile of Auburn residents and the process used
to develop this comprehensive plan in 1986. It includes a description of •
the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and the
framework the Act established for planning in the State and King and
Pierce Counties. As a result of the Act, a number of amendments were
made to this comprehensive plan between 1990 and 1995. The chapter
closes with a description of the City's Comprehensive Plan goals.
Part 2, Plan Elements and Policies, is comprised of chapters 2 through 13.
These chapters comprise the main body of the plan. Each chapter begins
with a general introduction of the issues which were identified through the
public involvement process and other background information. Policies
which address these issues and background information follow. Each
chapter covers a specific element such as land use or transportation. The
chapters are arranged so that the five elements required by the GMA - land
use, housing, capital facilities, utilities and transportation come first and
additional "optional" chapters covering topics such as economic
development, the environment and parks and recreation follow.
In addition, a number of separate plans have been prepared to address
specific planning areas or specific services within the Citv. These plans
support the Comprehensive Plan and are formall irporated into it as
elements. These include plans such as the City of Auburn Comprehensive •
Page i-iv
Introduction
Transportation Plan, er-and the Citv of Auburn Parks, Recreation
• Mastefand Openspace Plan.
Part 3(Chapter 14) presents the Comprehensive Plan Map. The Plan Map
gives geographic form to the Comprehensive Plan's land use policies by
designating appropriate land use categories for the various areas within the
City. Since it is intended that these land use categories guide future policy
decisions, the Plan Map is accompanied by text which describes in detail
the purpose of each category. Part 3 provides policies regarding
management recommendations for some specific areas.
Part 4, Implementation, is covered in chapter 15. This chapter describes
how this Comprehensive Plan will be used, and how the policies set forth
in chapters 2 through 12 will be implemented.
Part 5, the Appendix, includes a glossary of terms used within this plan
and a list of background reports and studies.
~
•
Page i-v
•
CHAPTER 1
PLAN BACKGROUND
Introduction Auburn's Comprehensive Plan unfolds as several layers of background,
data, policies and plans set the direction to the future. While the Growth
~ Management Act, Vision 2040 2028, and the King and Pierce County
Planning Policies provide an overall framework for the plan; the
foundation of the Plan exists in the aspirations of the people whom it will
affect.
History From its beginnings, Auburn was a crossroads. Tribal groups such as the
Skopamish, Smalhkamish, and Stkamish lived along the Green and
White/Stuck Rivers. They forged trails over the Cascade Mountains,
traded with tribes living east of the mountains and canoed down river to
gather shellfish and trade with coastal tribes.
The 1800s In the mid-1800's, the first pioneers arrived in the White River Valley
• lured by the free and fertile land. In 1856 and 1857, a series of clashes
occurred between the Indians who had long inhabited the area and the
newly arrived settlers. The Point Elliott and Medicine Creek Treaties were
signed which eventually resulted in the establishment of the Muckleshoot
Reservation and recognized the Tribe's rights to off-reservation resources.
Railroads reached the area in the 1880's and brought adventurers from the
East and Midwest United States, as well as Europe and Asia. Early
farmers, many emigrants from Europe and Japan, tilled the rich soil and
planted hops and other crops. The harvests were abundant and soon the
White River Valley became one of the prime agricultural centers in the
region.
In 1891, the future City of Auburn incorporated as the Town of Slaughter,
named in honor of Lieutenant Slaughter who was killed in the Indian
Wars. The name did not remain for long. The State legislature passed a
bill on February 21, 1893, which changed the town's name to Auburn. A
number of stories exist as to the name's origin with the most romantic
concerning a reference to the first line of Oliver Goldsmith's 1770 poem,
The Deserted Village: "Sweet Auburn! Loveliest village of the plain." In
1895, Auburn's population was approximately 300 people.
~ The 1900s As the area became more populated, the annual flooding of the rivers that
provided the area with its fertile soils began to create problems. The White
Page 1-1
Plan Background
River had a particularly broad floodplain and flood waters would spread •
over a large portion of the valley. During floods, debris would often
choke the river and water would be diverted to the Stuck River. A record
. flood in 1906 resulted in a decision to permanently seal off the White
River channel and to divert a11 water into the Stuck River. The diversion
dam was built in 1913 and over the ensuing years, the former channel of
the White River has been filled in and developed. Flooding remained an
issue in the valley, however. To resolve these continuing problems, the
Mud Mountain Dam was completed in 1950 on the upper White River and
the Howard Hanson Dam was completed in 1962 on the Upper Green
River.
Auburn's central location between Seattle and Tacoma has been a key
factor in the rapid growth of the area. A powerhouse built in 1911 on the
upper White River served Auburn and the cities of Seattle and Tacoma.
This facility also served the legendary Interurban Railway. In 1910 the
Northern Pacific Railroad selected the town as the site of its western
freight terminal. When scores of permanent rail workers arrived and
needed housing, Auburn experienced its first population boom. Between
1910 and 1920, the City's population expanded from 960 to 3,160 people,
an increase of almost 230 percent.
World War II saw the second transformation of Auburn. The most
dramatic change, however, affected the local Japanese American .
community. When the federal government relocated the residents of
Japanese ancestry to distant internment camps for the duration of the war,
many families lost businesses, homes and farms. Most of these families
never returned.
Although Auburn remained a strong agricultural community for some
time, the city became more industrialized in the years following the War.
The Boeing Company opened an aircraft plant in Auburn in the 1960's and
by the 1980s employed over 10,000 people at its Auburn plant. Other
large employers moved into the area including the Federal Aviation
Agency (FAA) and the General Services Administration (GSA). Auburn
Regional Medical Center has increased in size and provides health care to
the South King County region. Numerous other businesses moved to
Auburn as the availability of high quality industrial land with good access
to transportation and relatively low cost lured them to the area. In 1994,
over 26,000 people worked within the City of Auburn.
With the increase in the number of jobs came a rapid increase in the
number of residents. By 1970, the population of the City reached over
21,000 people and by 2004 approximately 46,000 people.
As Auburn grew, its role within the Puget Sound region has evolved.
Historically, Auburn has been treated as a relatively minor player in the 7 •
-2
Plan Background
• region. Its relatively small population and perceived isolation in South
King County led to its being overshadowed in the region by the larger and
more centrally located cities further north.
The present
and future The SuperMall signaled the beginning of a new era of Auburn's evolution.
Auburn shoppers no longer needed to travel to regional malls outside of
the community for most purchases. More importantly, consumers
throughout the region now come to Auburn to do their shopping and
Auburn is a major player in regional retailing. The construction of the
Emerald Downs Racetrack, increased development on the Muckleshoot
Reservation, Auburn Station with its parking garage and ground floor
retail, and Auburn Downtown's designation as an urban center have
greatly increased Auburn's significance in the region.
Community
Profile Demographics
This section provides demographic information about Auburn primarily
taken from the 2000 United States Census. Census data tends to put the
features and attributes of a community into prescribed groups of
information. Grouping the data into prescribed categories enables the
• comparison of one community to another. It helps identify averages and
trends. Since the information pertains primarily to average tendencies, a
lot of individual exceptions are likely to exist. Nonetheless, from these
average tendencies a common character begins to emerge that generally
describes Auburn.
Population Characteristics
In 200-78, 2894; Auburn ranks as the -17th-13th most populated city within
the State of Washington.
It is located
within the two most populous counties in the state (King and Pierce
counties).
•
Page 1-3
Plan Background
Figure 1.1 •
Population of Auburn
soooo
80000
~ 70000
60000
c
0
« 50000 -
~
a
0 40000
a
30000
u -
20000
10000
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F O N M V U7 (D 1~ 00 01 O N
OD F OD O) 0) 0) m m O~ 6~ 01 O O O
N N N
OAdual ~Projected
Source: City of Auburn's 2020 Population Estimate, April 6, 2004
Since the 1950's, Auburn's population has steadily increased. Between
1960 to 1980, Auburn's population increased an average of 8% per year.
From 1980 to 1994, Auburn's population growth slowed to approximately
1.7°Io per year. In 1998 the City of Auburn began annexing several large ~
I tracts of land that ~~eeipate4preci2itated the start of several large housing
developments. The annexation of southwest Lea Hill in Year 2000
increased Auburn's population by nearly 3,000 people. As a result,
Auburn's population growth has doubled to an -average of nearly 3.6°Io per
year. More recent annexations have increased the City's population
significantly. Based on figures from the Washington State Office of
Financial Manae~ement and City records, Auburn's 2008 population is
approximately 67,000.
Racial Characteristics
Approximately 79°Io of Auburn's population are white/non-Hispanic and
21% are people of color and/or Hispanic. This compares to 90%
white/non-Hispanic and 10°Io people of color/Hispanic in 1990. From
1990 to 2000, approximately 28°Io of Auburn's new residents were white
and the remaining 72% were people of color. Approximately 42% of
Auburn's new residents between 1990 to 2000 were Latinos. Another
racial group that increased its population in Auburn over the past 10 years
was Native Americans. Figure 1.2 represents the projected racial
distribution of Auburn if existing trends continue over the next 20 years2
however it dvcs not reflcct the added population resultinLi, frotn the recent
annexations in 200$ .-as detailed inforlnatioii was not available. ~
Page 1-4
Plan Background
• Figure 1.2
Auburn's Proiected Ethnic Population
Tatal Population 2000 2000 2010 2010 2020 2(120
Camt %Total Count %TOtal COUnt %TOrtal
Total 40,314 1000/0 54,596 100°Io 71,608 1000/0
White 33,382 83% 41,525 760/o 51,348 72%
Black/ Afi-ican Attetican 977 2% 1,824 301o 2,818 4%
Amaican Inclian azxl Alaska Native 1,024 3% 1,609 3% 2,300 3%
Asiart, Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander 1,614 4% 2,671 5% 3,916 5%
QhetRaoe 1,477 4% 3,121 60/o 5,037 7%
TwoorMaeRaces** 1,840 5% 3,847 7% 6,189 9%
Total: Ppople of Color 6,932 17% 13,072 247b 20,260 28%
I-Lsparvc 3,019 7% 6,104 11% 9,710 14%
Source: Extrapolated from the Year 1980, 1990, 2000 U.S. Census
Household Characteristics
The year 2000 Census indicates Auburn had 16,108 households. Families
with children comprise less than one-third of Auburn's total households.
• Single parents, mostly, women, head approximately 12% of family
households with children. A nearly equal number of households are
people living alone or married couples with no children.
•
Page 1-5
Plan Background
. Figure 1.3 •
Types of Auburn Households
Non-Family Married w/
$ % Children
20%
Living Alone ;
29%
4 -
~ r.
~
Married w/out
Children
31%
Single Parent
12%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Year 2000 Census •
Age Characteristics
The median age of the Auburn resident has increased from 31.6 years in
1990 to 34.1 years of age in the year 2000. Figure 1.4 illustrates the
change in Auburn's age groups between 1990 and 2000. Of note is that
the age groups between 35-60 years increased. Approximately 22 percent
of Auburn's population are school age children (5-19 years). Seniors
account for 15% of Auburn's total population - which is about the same as
1990 and slightly higher than the King County average (13°Io).
.
•
Page 1-6
Plan Background
• Figure 1.4
Auburn's Population Sorted by Age Group
25%
1990 2000
20%
c
0
M
-5 15%
a
0
a
0 10% -
H
0
5%
0% -
~ VN y N
4 4 ~ O~ ON M V ~ r v1
'n
o J, o J, n o
N N M V D
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Year 2000 Census
English Speaking
• Approximately 14 percent of Auburn's population speaks a language other
than English in their homes. A total of 750 (five percent) households
identify themselves as households where no person 14 years of age or
older speak only English or speak English very well. The principal
household languages other than English are Spanish, Ukraine, Vietnamese
and Russian.
Resident Labor Force
Since its population boom during the construction of the railroad freight
terminals at the start of the 20th Century; Auburn has remained a blue
collar community. The term blue collar-- refers to communities where a
large number of its residents earn their livelihoods by wearing work
clothes (i.e. blue denim overalls) or protective clothing. This trend,
however, is declining. In 1990 one out_ of four of Auburn's residents
worked in the manufacturing industries. Between 1990 and 2000
Auburn's resident labor force lost 1,000, or approximately one-fourth, of
these manufacturing workers. Although Auburn's resident labor force
increased by 2,540 workers, nearly 70% of these new jobs were in
hospitality and entertainment industries. Over the next twenty years, new
development in areas such as Lakeland Hills South the City can expect its
• resident labor force to be engaged to a greater degree in non-
manufacturing employment. Figure 1.5 compares the composition of
Page 1-7
Plan Background
Auburn's resident labor force in the Year 2000 to the 1980 and 1990 •
Census data.
Figure 1.5
Change in Auburn's Resident Labor Force
35%
1980 01990 ~
30%
25 %
`o
. LL ZO %
a°
J
. W 15%
O
H
0
10%
iP
5%
0%
C O ~ V ~ ~ W y L C 0 O
m Z
. 3 J U ¢ U ~ E U
m ~p N ~ LL N = ~ N ~
t/i N W t C
76
~ L
¢ O ~ W 0. N
< o a . r a •
a` W ¢ a'
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
According to the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), approximately
38,058 jobs are located in Auburn. More than half of these jobs are
located in the City's west side which is characterized by region serving
uses. The Census indicates Auburn residents fill approximately 5,811
(15°Io) of these. Roughly 69% of Auburn's adult labor force work outside
of Auburn. Their average commute time in Year 2000 was 23 minutes
compared to 19 minutes in Year 1990.
Income Characteristics
Low-income is defined as a household that earns less than 80% of the
King County median household income (KCMI). In the year 2000, the
King County median household income increased to $53,000 per year.
The definition of low income subsequently increased to include those
households earning less than $42,000 per year. In the year 2000, 53% of
Auburn's households earned less than $42,000 per year and, therefore, are
low income.
.
Page 1-8
Plan Background
~
Figure 1.6
Auburn's Median Incomes
Aubuni mng Courdy
1990 2000 % O=W 1990 2000 % ChwW
Per 'ta Inconu $13,866 $19,630 420/o $18,587 $29,521 59°Io
Nledian Household IrCOrre $30,007 $39,208 31% $36,179 $53,157 47%
Nfeclian F&ri1 Itxon-e $35,198 $45,42629°Io $44,555 $66,035 48%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Poverty
One reason Auburn's median household income lag behind the rest of
King County is the increase in the number of Auburn households who live
in poverty. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Auburn residents
living in poverty increased 43%. It is unclear how much of this increase is
due to poverty-stricken people moving into Auburn or existing low-
income households losing ground and slipping into poverty. In any event,
it is one of the reasons Auburn's median income levels remained
comparatively lower than the rest of King County. In the year 2000,
roughly 5,000 Auburn residents, or 12% of its total population, live in
• poverty.
Housing Characteristics
The number of housing units increased 31 °Io from 14,786 in 1994 to
19,420 in 2004. A large number of these new homes were the result of
recent annexations. The City of Auburn recently annexed Southwest Lea
Hill and portions of Pierce County. Both of these annexation areas are
growing at a substantially higher rate than the areas within Auburn's city
limits prior to year 2000. Single-family housing remains the predominant
type of housing at 46°Io of the total compared to 42% for multi-family
housing and 12°Io for mobile homes.
.
Page 1-9
\
Plan Background
~
Figure 1.7
Auburn's Housing Supply: 1990-2004
117 6,366 7,913 8,990 46% 2, 624 41%
lltotaff1 90 994 % Total 10 r Diff % Diff
81 813 916 976 5% 163 366 1,485 1,670 1,717 9% 232 16%
751 3,916 4,782 5,385 281,469 ,041 2,106 2,359 2,298 1292 9%
00 100 44 54 0% n,156
14,786 6 17,684 19,420 100% 4,634 31%
Source: State of Washington Office of F inancial Management
More than half (53°Io) of the housing units in Auburn are owner-occupied.
The median year in which both rental and homeowner housing units were
built was 1976 or 24 years ago. The average length of tenure of an
Auburn homeowner is six years; whereas the average tenure of a renter is
one year.
Emplovment Characteristics
The City of Auburn's Comprehensive Land Use Plan divides the city into •
three parts. The west Auburn is designed to serve the Central Puget Sound
region. East Auburn contains the majority of residential areas and
downtown Auburn connects the two. In the year 2000 the Puget Sound
Regional Council estimated nearly 38,500 people worked in Auburn.
he Year 2000 Census, Auburn residents fill approximately
According to t
5,811 or 15% of the jobs located in Auburn. Over 32,000 people drive
into Auburn each day to wark. Some observe that Auburn has two distinct
populations, a daytime population of people who earn their livelihoods in
Auburn and a night/weekend population of people who live in Auburn but
earn their livelihoods in other communities.
Figure 1.8 represents the distribution of jobs covered by unemployment
insurance that located in Auburn. Since 1990 Auburn has lost nearly one-
fourth of its manufacturing jobs. However, jobs in all of the other
industries have significantly increased. Retail jobs have increased due, in
large part, to the developments in and around the SuperMall. Construction
jobs have increased as result of the large housing subdivisions underway
in South Auburn. Jobs provided by the Muckleshoot Nation at their
casino and other industries have more than doubled the number of jobs in
the "Government / Tribal" category.
•
Page 1-10
Plan Background
~ Figure 1.8
Jobs Located In Auburn
1990 1995 2000 2002
ConsURes 871 1,681 3,64 2,79
FIRES 4,267 5,30 7,15 6,37
Manufacturin 13,402 11,43 11,85 9,99
Retail 4,267 4,56 6,978 6,93
WTCU 2,214 3,264 5,94 4,71
Education 1,368 1,16 1,422 1,42
Gvmt/Tribe 1,202 1,24 1,49 3,65
Total 27,591 28,6631 38,49 35,89
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council,
In 2004 the area in the vicinity of Downtown Auburn was designated as an
urban center. The King County Countywide Planning Policies establish a
criteria for a minimum of 15,000 jobs within a half-mile radius of transit
centers, which in Auburn's case is located in downtown. As result of this
urban center designation and the implementation of the long-range plans
that it entails, the number of jobs located in Downtown Auburn will
significantly increase over the next 20 years.
•
Planning
PrOCess Through a comprehensive planning process a community seeks to under-
stand itself, its problems and potentials, and the forces which will shape its
future. On the basis of this understanding a city develops a response
which can shape and prepare the community for the future. This plan
culminates this process and states the City's policy to guide its way into
the future.
Initial development of this plan in 1986 involved a range of diverse
activities organized into four general steps.
Step 1: Issue Identification
Planning Department staff completed a series of discussion papers which
assessed various aspects of the community. These papers were prepared
in close consultation with the City Planning Commission and the City
Council Committee on Planning and Community Development to assure
relevance of those studies to the concerns of the City's policy officials.
(See the Appendix for a description of these studies.)
•
Page 1-11
Plan Background~
Step 2: Public Input ~
A key component of the process was to actively solicit and encourage
general public comment regarding the community and the public's view of
its future. A series of neighborhood meetings were held between April
and June of 1985 to gain citizen input to the planning process and to
ensure that the City officials had a good understanding of citizen views as
they established the goals and policies of the Plan.
Step 3: Policy Development
The information gathered and obtained regarding the community and the
views of its people became the basis for the Plan's policies. These policies
were developed through an analysis of the issues that were raised by the
first two steps. Staff then prepared recommendations regarding policy
alternatives. The Planning Commission spent approximately 6 months
reviewing these recommendations.
Step 4: Adoption
The "Staff Draft and Recommendations" for the City of Auburn
Comprehensive Plan was submitted to the Planning Commission in
January, 1986. The Planning Commission reviewed and refined the Draft ~
Plan during several regular and special meetings during the next four
months, assisted by public input received at two public hearmgs held
during that period. On May 6, 1986 the Planning Commission completed
its review and formulated its recommendation to the City Council to
adopt the "Staff Draft and Recommendations" as revised by 31 specific
modifications.
Following receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, the City
Council held a public hearing and referred the proposed Comprehensive
Plan to its Committee on Planning and Community Development (PCDC).
The Committee completed its review in July and forwarded its
recommendations to the full Council. The Comprehensive Plan was
formally adopted by the City Council on August 18, 1986.
Amendments
for GMA
Compliance The passage of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) in
1990 (see below) necessitated an uPdate of this ComPrehensive Plan. The
update occurred in phases based upon the deadlines for compliance which
were included in the Act. In 1991, the City revised its Urban Growth and
Expansion Element. The following year, Auburn amended this plan and
its development regulations to ensure that critical lands such as wetlands, ~
aquifer recharge areas, steep slopes and floodplains were identified and
Page 1-12
~Plan Background
~ protected. In 1995, additional amendments were adopted to bring this
plan into compliance with the Act.
Public
Participation As with the initial adoption of this plan, the public played a key role in
amending it for growth management compliance. To ensure that the
widest range of the public was involved, Auburn used a multifaceted
approach toward public involvement as shown below:
Neighborhood Meetings:
Seven neighborhood meetings were held during the Summer of 1992
throughout the community to provide for both formal and informal
interaction between citizens and planning staff inembers. Information was
' disseminated concerning planning and Growth Management, written
surveys distributed and oral comments were taken. These meetings did
not exclusively focus on planning to attract a wider spectrum of the public
those interested in health and safety issues, crime, recreation, or
community facilities and services in addition to those interested in
planning issues. A total of over 150 residents attended these meetings.
Speaker Availability
~ Numerous presentations were made to organizations, neighborhood groups
and other groups of individuals who desired more information regarding
growth management or planning issues. These informal talks were
typically held in settings that the group felt most comfortable in, and
during the regularly scheduled meeting time of the groups. These
meetings were held throughout the planning process.
Articles in the AUBURN UPDATE Community Newsletter
Easy to understand articles provided the public with information regarding
growth management issues, Growth Management contacts, and the
availability of speakers. The Auburn Update is distributed to all postal
customers both residential and commercial within the two zip codes
that cover the Auburn area.
News Releases
The media was provided with updates regarding neighborhood meetings,
planning issues, and growth management contacts.
~
Page 1-13
Plan Background
Planning Commission Workshops ~
From April to July 1994, the Planning Commission held a series of
workshops to review the draft amendments to the comprehensive plan.
All of these meetings were open to the public. These drafts were made
available prior to the meeting and public comment was encouraged on the
drafts at any time.
Open Houses
In September and October 1994, three open houses were held to gain
public comment on the Draft Amended Plan. Over 100 residents attended these informal meetings.
Public Hearings
In addition to these opportunities for informal input, the formal adoption
process included the required public hearings in front of both the Planning
Commission and the City Council. The Planning Commission held
hearings in October, November and December, 1994. At the December 6,
1994, hearing the Commission voted unanimously to forward the Plan to
the City Council (as modified by an addendum) with a recommendation
for adoption. Final Council adoption of the amendments occurred after a
public hearing on April 17, 1995. ~
Annual Amendment Process
Since the time of the GMA Comprehensive Plan's adoption in 1995 the
City of Auburn has amended the comprehensive plan on an annual basis as
provided for by State law. Amendments outside of the annual amendment
process have also occurred during this time frame using the emergency
provision allowed by the Growth Management Act.
The amendment process affords the public an opportunity to request
changes to the plan annually to address changing circumstances and also
has allowed the City to address amendments to State law and the changing
needs of the community.
Washington
State's GMA The Washington State Growth Management Act
During the 1980's, Auburn, King County and the entire Puget Sound
region experienced an extremely rapid rate of growth in both population
and employment. This rapid growth brought with it increased traffic
congestion, air and water pollution, increased housing costs and the loss of
acres of natural areas and resource lands. In response to these problems, ~
the State Legislature passed HB 2929, the Washington State Growth
Page 1-14
Plan Background
~ Management Act (GMA) in 1990 and amendments in each of the
following years.
The GMA requires that Auburn, King County and all jurisdictions within
the county develop comprehensive plans which meet statewide goals. The
GMA contains the following 14 statewide planning goals which must be
considered as local jurisdictions develop and adopt comprehensive plans.
GOAL 1 Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public
facilities exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.
GOAL 2 Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into
sprawling, low-density development.
GOAL 3 Encourage efficient multi-modal transportation systems that are
based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and
city comprehensive plans.
GOAL 4 Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all
segments of the population, promote a variety of residential
densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of
existing housing stock.
GOAL 5 Encourage economic development throughout the state that is
consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote
~ economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially
for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, and encourage
growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all
within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public
services, and public facilities.
GOAL 6 Private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation having been made. The property rights of
landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and
discriminatory actions.
GOAL 7 Applications for both state and local government permits
should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure
predictability.
GOAL 8 Maintain and enhance natural resource based industries,
including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries
industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest
lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage
incompatible uses.
GOAL 9 Encourage the retention of open space and development of
recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat,
increase access to natural resource lands and water, and
• develop parks.
Page 1-15
Plan Background
GOAL 10 Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of
life, including air and water quality, and the availability of ~
water.
GOAL 11 Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process
and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions
to reconcile conflicts.
GOAL 12 Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to
support development shall be adequate to serve the
development at the time the development is available for
occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels
below locally established minimum standards.
GOAL 13 Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and
structures that have historical or archaeological significance.
GOAL 14 The goals and policies of the shoreline management act as set
forth in RCW 98.58.020.
The basic objective of the GMA is to give guidance and encouragement to
all jurisdictions planning under the Act as they develop their vision in
accordance with state-wide goals. While meeting these goals required a
significant rewrite of the existing comprehensive plans for some
jurisdictions, Auburn's comprehensive plan was adopted in 1986 and
included many of the goals and provisions of the Act. Even taking this
into account however, Auburn undertook a number of activities to make
its comprehensive plan consistent with the requirements of the Act.
These activities included the following:
Designation of, in conjunction with King and Pierce Counties, an
urban growth area sufficient to accommodate population growth to
2012.
Designation of, in conjunction with King and Pierce Counties and
adjacent jurisdictions, a potential annexation area for the City of
Auburn. (The Comprehensive Plan was amended in 1991 to
' designate an interim boundary and manage growth in these areas).
Development of, in conjunction with King, Pierce, Snohomish and
Kitsap Counties and the jurisdictions within them, a multi-county
planning framework (see below Multi-county Planning Policies:
I Vision 2020 aiid 2040) which serves to guide the development of
comprehensive plans within these counties and ensure consistency
of those plans.
Development of, in conjunction with King and Pierce Counties and
the jurisdictions within them, a county-wide planning framework •
(see below Countywide Policies) which serves to guide the
Page 1-16
Plan Background
• development of comprehensive plans within the counties and
ensure consistency of those plans.
0 Designation and protection •of resource lands (forest, agricultural
and mineral) and critical areas (wetlands, geologically hazardous
areas, fish and wildlife fiabitat conservation areas, aquifer recharge
areas, and frequently flooded areas). (The Cornprehensive Plan
was amended in 1992 to designate and protect these areas.)
Provision of separate plan elements, including land use, housing,
utilities, transportation and capital facilities. T'hese elements
require substantial inventorying and data coliection, maps and
descriptive text, and analysis. In addition, these elements must be
consistent and coordinated.
Adoption of•a comprehensive plan in compliance with the Act.
0 Adoption of development regulations whieh implement the plan.
Multi-County
Policies ( Vision 2020 and Vision 2040 -
The GMA ~~°~~~~;y required the development of multi-county planning
poticies for Snohomish, Pierce and King Counties resulting in Vision
2020. . ,
• g.
fflanagemefit b. ~
V!-810I~
. The vision is for diverse, economically
healthy, and environmentally sensitive communities connected and served
by a hi,gh-quality transportation system that emphasizes the movement of
people.
a plaees, thereby .
. .
,.ffie ,,t w..a~,;t . it~„~cu, y ~;,,.,,~,~.,1 +..,,,,~.~tid,thH~~-:T'~`'i~
. n~i-utrtrrnrmur-cc-ar~~
VISION 2020 represents a public policy cammitment to both the land use
. patterns that can achieve a compact centers concept, and a reordering of
~ transportation investment priorities to emphasize transit, ride-sharing,
efficiency, demand management and the maintenance of cunent facilities.
Page 1-17
. . E.. . .
i Plan Background
To achieve this end, UISION 2020 supports the development of mare
? compact living an.d worktng places, limiting tlle exgansion of the urban ~
' area and focusiu, a sipjiifcant amaunt of new employment a.nd housing
i into mixed-use eenters serveci by an efficzent, transit-arientecl, multimocial
;systems. It results in accommodating growth in regional travel demand
I through greater commitment ta, and investment in, public transii.
;
,
,
. :t . . . . . . ' .
. . . . . t . . . . . . . ' . . . .
. . . . . . . 7 . . ' .
~ In A ril 2008, te Pu~;et Sound Regianal Council (PSRC
p h ) u pdated Vision
12020 with a new planning document, Vision 2040. This,document
? continues the principtes included within Vision 2020 and pravides a
} stronger environmental focus in recognition of the need to ensure long-.
term sustainability in the region, including' addressing issues of climate
i change•
' . _ . . . . . ia . . , . . . . .
' Vision 2040 continues to reeog,nize Auburn as a Regi.onal Growth Center.
; Re;ional Growth Centers are "designated areas of high-intensity
{ residential and emglovment develonment.... Re '~onal growth centers serve
; as a primary framework for regi~onai transtaortation and economic
~ development ptanning." (Vision 2040, M. 52)
= For more details on Vision 2040, see Vision 2040: Peaple Pxosperitv-
; Planet: The Growth Management. Environmental, Economic and
; Transportation Strat= for the Central Puget Sound Region.
~
County-Wide
Planning
POItCies King County Countywide Planning Policies
;
" The Growth Management Act requires representatives of the caunty and
' each of its municipalities to establish county-wide planning policies.
These policies are intended to (1) provide processes for coordinating
; planning activities in the region; (2) obtain consistency between -state,
~ regional, and local jurisdictians; and (3) provide a policy framew4rk for'
the development and adoption of coordinated and consistent
; eomprehensive iand use plans throughout the county. The county-wide
; planning policies cover the establishment of urban growth areas, the
provision of urban services, the siting af essential public facilities,
~ economic development, transportation and affordable housing.
' The Countywide Planning Policies are a frarnework ta guide the
i development of the comprehensive plans for King County and each city
within the county. The Countywide Planning Policies do nat dictate the
~
i
~ Page 1-18
Plan Background
. The Countywide Planning Policies' Vision
As adopted in 1992, the Countywide Planning Policies are a vision
statement of how King County should grow over the next 20 years.
Amendments to these policies were adopted in 1994. The policies
established an Urban Growth Area within the western one-third of the
county where most future growth and development would occur in order
to reduce urban sprawl, enhance open space, protect rural areas and more
efficiently use social services, transportation and utilities.
Urban Centers were designated within existing cities which serve as
areas of concentrated employment and housing and a wide variety of land
uses, including retail, recreational, cultural and public facilities, parks and
open spaces, with direct service by high-capacity transit. Emphasizing
growth in the urban centers will contribute to achieving the GMA goal of
concentrating infrastructure investments and preventing further urban
sprawl. Auburn achieved urban center status in 2004. Some other Urban
Centers include the downtowns of Bellevue, Seattle, Renton, Federal Way,
~ SeaTac, Kent and Redmond. :
The policies also call for designation of Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers, recognizing that these sites are key components of a strong .
• regional economy. These centers would be zoned to preserve and
encourage industrial growth. Examples include the Duwamish River
industrial area and Kent.
The 1994 amendments to the King County Countywide Planning Policies
placed an increased emphasis on Activity Areas. Activity areas are
locations that contain a mix of uses and function as a significant focal
point of the local community. These areas will typically have a
pedestrian-oriented environment and be served by a high level of peak
hour transit service. 15th Street SW and 15th Street NW clearly fit this
designation.
The Countywide Planning Policies contain growth targets for each
jurisdiction. These targets represent commitments by jurisdictions to
provide sufficient land and infrastructure to accommodate these targets,
but recognize that achievement of targets is dependent on many variables
including the marketplace. Auburn has a King County residential target
range of approximately 5-,9246,003- new households and an employment
target of 6,079 -new jobs to the year 2022. These pre-annexation targets
i:ntist are to be accommodated within the euF;-ent 2005 (pre-annexation)city
limits Of 20053.
One of the critical issues facing the region as it grows is the provision of
~ affordable housing. In the Puget Sound Region, housing prices have
skyrocketed over the past ten years. The County-wide policies recognize
Page 1-19
Plan Background
housing affordability as a regional issue and seek to encourage that all •
jurisdictions accept their fair share of affordable housing.
Auburn has historically had a positive response to providing a range of
housing opportunities to all groups. The City has demonstrated a
willingness to accept its "fair share" of these units on a regional basis
(some would say more than its fair share). Auburn is willing to continue
to meet regional housing goals, however, this willingness will only be the
case if it can be demonstrated that there is a regional effort to spread these
units and their related costs on an equitable basis throughout all of the
communities in the region.
The Planning Policies also address "Urban Separators," which are low-
density areas or areas of little development within the Urban Growth Area.
These areas are considered to be permanent low-density lands that cannot
be redesignated within the 20-year planning cycle (which began in 2004)
to other urban uses or higher densities. (KinQ County Couritywide
Planning Policies°, pg. 27)
There are significant areas of lands desiC7nated as "Urban Separator"
within the Lea Hill portion of the City of Auburn (see the Comprehensive
Land Use Ma,p). Pursuant to the King County Countywide Planning
Policies, these areas are zoned far residential development not to exceed
densities of approxirnately one dwellina unit per acre. No modifications to •
the development regulations governing these areas can occur without King
County review and concurrence.
Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies
I The ~eiithefn-soufhern portion of Auburn lies within Pierce County.
As with the King County Countywide Policies, the Pierce County policies
establish guidelines and a framework from which county and municipal
comprehensive plans are to be developed and adopted. While the
Growth Management Act requires the policies to cover eight general
I areas, the Pierce County Policies address a total of eleve*--twelve
including: affordable housing; agricultural lands; economic development;
education; historic, archaeological and cultural preservation; natural
resources; open space and protection of environmentally sensitive lands;
siting of public capital facilities of countywide or statewide nature;
I transportation facilities and strategies; urban growth areas; buildable
lands; and amendments and transition.
The development of the Countywide Planning Policies involved a
significant level of coordination and cooperation between the county and ~
the incorporated Cities and towns within it. The Countywide Planning
Page 1-20
Plan Background
• Policies were adopted in June 1992 by the Pierce County Council and
ratified by the cities and towns. In 2002, the City of Auburn obtained
voting member status in the Pierce County Regional Council (PCRC) - the
body of elected officials that oversees the Countywide Planning Policies.
The PCRC has assigned 2022 population allocations to the jurisdictions.
I Auburn's 2022 population allocation is 7,950-14,500 people (based on
-2882 L2005 city limits).
For more detailed information, see the Countywide Planning Policies for
Pierce County.
CITY OF AUBURN
COMPREHENSIVE .
PLAN GOALS This comprehensive plan is based upon 22 goals which were developed in
response to the wide range of issues identified by the public involvement
process. These 22 goals form the framework for all of the policies
contained in this comprehensive plan. To achieve balance in the City's
development, these goals must be viewed as a whole without pursuing one
to the exclusion of the others. When viewed in total, these goals form the
Community's vision for the City of Auburn and its surrounding areas.
• Following each goal there is a brief discussion of the intent of that goa1.
In addition, there is a listing of the chapters of this comprehensive plan
which contain references to that goal. The policies which implement the
goal follow that discussion and analysis in the individual chapters.
GOAL 1. PLANNING APPROACH
To manage growth in a-manner which enhances, rather than detracts from
community quality and values by actively coordinating land use type and
intensity with City facility and service provision and development.
Discussion: The City of Auburn will change and evolve as
approximately 6,000 new households, 6,000 new
employees locate in the City's King County portion to the
~ year 2022, and 7,95810,500 people reside in the City's
Pierce County portion by the same time frame. By
planning for and managing this growth and recognizing the
crucial link between public service and facility provision
and land use, Auburn can ensure that this new development
will further the community goals and aspirations outlined in
• this plan rather than degrading the high quality of life that
its residents currently enjoy.
Page 1-21
Plan Background
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in •
Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning, and Chapter 5: Capital
Facilities.
GOAL 2. FLEXIBILITY
To provide predictability in the regulation of land use and development,
especially where residential uses are affected, but to also provide
flexibility for development through performance standards that allow
development to occur while still protecting and enhancing natural
resources, cultural resources and critical lands and in overall compliance
with this Comprehensive Plan.
Discussion: Predictability of land development regulation is important
to both existing and future property owners and to new
development. It assures property owners that adjacent
properties will develop in a consistent manner and it helps
new development to plan for their development based on
knowing what is allowed and what is not. Since all parcels
are not identical, however, it is helpful to have some
flexibility in land development regulation. While a •
variance can sometimes resolve some of these issues,
regulations which provide some flexibility in the form of
performance standards can help to provide development
which better meets the goals and policies of this
Comprehensive Plan rather than strict adherence to a set
standard established in the zoning ordinance.
A discussion of issues and polices related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning.
GOAL 3. REGIONAL COORDINATION
To work together with both local and regional agencies and jurisdictions
to promote coordinated regional growth, recognizing Auburn's regional
role as an urban center, while maintaining local self- determination.
Discussion: Auburn is firm in its commitment to work with other
jurisdictions and agencies throughout the region to address
regional issues and opportunities. Auburn's designation as
an urban center reflects its commitment to the region's
planning strategy. Auburn is just as strongly committed,
however, to local self determination and the ability of local ~
Page 1-22
Plan Background
• jurisdictions to determine what is in its best self interest.
These two commitments are not necessarily in conflict and
can and will be balanced to assure that both the City and
the region benefit from these efforts.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning.
GOAL 4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER
To maintain and enhance Auburn's character as a family oriented commu-
nity while managing potential economic opportunities in a manner that
provides necessary employment and fiscal support for needed services,
and while recognizing the need to provide social services and
opportunities for housing to a wide array of household types and sizes.
Discussion: Auburn prides itself on its small city atmosphere. This is a
character that the residents of Auburn wish to maintain while recognizing that economic development
opportunities provide tax revenue, important services and
• employment opportunities to the community and the
region. Auburn has always recognized that there is a wide
array of household types and sizes throughout the region
and reaffirms its commitment to allow for the development
of a variety of housing types to meet the diverse needs of
these groups.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning.
GOAL 5. CITY EXPANSION AND ANNEXATION
To ensure the orderly development and annexation of the City's potential
annexation areas in a manner that provides for the adequate and cost-
effective provision of required urban services and facilities, reduces
sprawl, implements the goals, objectives and policies of the Auburn
Comprehensive Plan, and protects designated rural areas.
Discussion: The successful completion of the Lea Hill and West Hil.l
Annexations in 2007 has left little unineorporated land
within the City's potential annexation area. A,few isolated
islands remain within the Kin Couzlty portion of the city,
~ while a single area (2"a St. E.) relnains within Pierce
Countv. While development on these unincorporated lands
Page 1-23
Plan Background
I an have ~~t-impacts on the
City itself, including, but not limited to, traffic, parks and `
city utilities, the city can exert limited control over the
development which takes place in these areas. For these
reasons, Auburn has a vested interest in seeing that the City
increases its ability to manage development in these areas
through conditional provision of utilities and/or by
requiring annexation.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 13: Development in the
Unincorporated Areas and Annexation.
GOAL 6. URBAN FORM
To establish an orderly urban form which separates uses on the basis of
their functional relationship to the community, and which reinforces the
identity of the community.
Discussion: City form can be described as the general shape of the
community and how its individual parts relate to one
another. The overall shape of Auburn is heavily influenced
by its location in a deep river valley surrounded by ~
relatively steep hillsides. In the past, there were land use
conflicts as a result of the city's limited topography with
incompatible uses locating near one another. To resolve
these problems, City policy on the "urban form" of Auburn
has been to separate uses based on their relationship to the
community. This plan separates the City into three areas:
the region serving area (western Auburn) which is a
concentration of the employment base with sufficient
existing and potential jobs to be of regional significance;
the community serving area (eastern Auburn) which
contains the majority of residential areas and locally
oriented businesses; and the downtown which uniquely
serves both the region and the local community.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use.
GOAL 7. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
To emphasize housing development at single family densities, in order to
reestablish a mix of housing types appropriate for a family oriented •
I community, while recognizing the need and desire for both fur-a! low
Page 1-24
Plan Background
• density and moderate density housing appropriately located, to meet the
housing needs of all members of the community.
Discussion: During the late 1980's and early 1990's, much of the
residential development which has occurred in Auburn was
in the form of multi-family housing. This had a significant
impact on community character as the percentage of
multifamily housing has increased markedly. While
Auburn recognizes that many households cannot afford or
do not desire single family detached housing and therefore
allows a wide range of housing types within the
community, the development of new single family detached
housing is a priority of the City in order to maintain its
traditional community character.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 4: Housing.
GOAL S. NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY
To maintain and protect all viable and stable residential neighborhoods.
• Discussion: Stable residential neighborhoods are a key component of
the Auburn Community. Auburn values its residential
neighborhoods and seeks to maintain and protect those that
are viable and stable.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 4: Housing.
GOAL 9. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
To maintain and establish a variety of commercial environments which
provide the full range of commercial services to the community and region
in a manner which reduces conflicts between different types of
commercial services and other uses.
Discussion: Commercial uses range from a small corner store providing
service primarily to the neighborhood around it to a large
shopping mall which serves the entire region. Auburn
contains both of these types of commercial uses and
recognizes their importance in providing service to both
. Auburn and regional residents. The City will provide
opportunities for the full range of commercial uses while
Page 1-25
I \
Plan Background
insuring that their impacts on each other and on other uses •
are minimized.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use.
GOAL 10. DOWNTOWN
To encourage development and redevelopment within Downtown Auburn
which reflects its unique character as the community's historic center, that
is consistent with the Auburn Downtown Plan's vision for and designation
of Downtown Auburn as an urban center within King County and the
Puget Sound Region.
Discussion: Downtown Auburn plays a unique role within the city as it
serves as both a regional and a local center. It is a key
component of Auburn's identity and therefore the City is
committed to its revitalization and stability as the city's
cultural and governmental center.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use. •
•
Page 1-26
Plan Background
• GOAL 11. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
To provide for, establish and maintain a balance of industrial uses that
respond to local and regional needs and enhance the City's image through
. optimal siting and location, while taking into consideration tax policy
impacts of streamlined sales taY and/or other similar legislation.
Discussion: The Auburn area has historically been a good location for
industrial uses due to the ease of access provided by the
railroads and by its location near several major highways.
Auburn recognizes the important role industry plays in
providing tax revenue and employment opportunities to the
residents of Auburn and the region. The City seeks to
diversify the types of businesses and industries located here
to ensure that the local economy is independent of the ups
and downs of any given industry. Further, since much of
the City's industrial land is located in highly visible areas, it
is extremely crucial that these facilities be well designed
and sited. Far many, these facilities provide a first
impression of Auburn as they pass through the area.
However, land made available for industrial development
• shall take into consideration impacts of tax policy and tax
structure upon the City of Auburn.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 3: Land Use.
GOAL 12. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT
To encourage redevelopment of underutilized areas to reduce sprawl and
take full advantage of the City's investment in existing infrastructure.
Discussion: There is already a large area served by a comprehensive
network of infrastructure both within and adjacent to the
City limits. The provision of this network has required a
significant investment of money and resources. Within this
area, there is significant acreage of underutilized land. The
City seeks to encourage development and redevelopment of
these parcels, particularly in the downtown area to fully
utilize this investment.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
• Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 4: Housing.
Page 1-27
Plan Background
GOAL 13. CITY UTILITIES •
To protect the public health and safety by providing efficient and cost-
effective water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and solid waste services to
the community. Ensure that development will only occur if the urban
services necessary to support the development will be available at the time
of development.
Discussion: The provision of urban services to its residents and its
, utility customers is a critical role played by the city of
Auburn. Auburn is committed to providing these services
in the most efficient and cost effective manner. As rapid
growth occurs it can become difficult to provide these
services to support the new development. Auburn will only
permit development if adequate public utilities are, or can
be guaranteed to be, available to support new development.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 5: Capital Facilities.
GOAL 14. PUBLIC BUILDINGS
To maYimize Public access and Provide for the aPProPriate location and •
development of public and quasi-public facilities that serve the cultural,
educational, recreational, religious and public service needs of the
community.
Discussion: Buildings which house City departments or other agencies
which provide services to the general public should be sited
in areas which are accessible to all segments of the
population.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 5: Capital Facilities.
GOAL 15. PRIVATE UTILITIES
To ensure safe, efficient provision of private utilities to serve all segments
and activities of the community.
Discussion: Some private utility companies provide services, such as
cable television and natural gas, within the City of Auburn.
Auburn is committed to ensuring that the companies that •
provide these services provide them to all segments of the
Page 1-28
Plan Background
• City's population and are integrated, where appropriate,
into the City's development process.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 6: Private Utilities.
GOAL 16. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
Auburn will plan, expand, and improve its transportation system in
cooperation and coordination with adjacent and regional jurisdictions to
ensure concurrency compliance with the Growth Management Act, and to
provide a safe and efficient multimodal system that meets the community
needs and facilitates the land use plan. `
Discussion: The increase in traffic congestion in the region is probably
the most apparent indicator that the growth occurring in the
. region is outstripping the ability of the area's infrastructure
to support it. The City of Auburn recognizes that the high
cost and difficulty of continually expanding the City's road
network to meet the increased demand, and the lowering of
the region's air quality, have placed an emphasis on
encouraging modes other than the automobile
• (multimodalism), decreasing the demand for travel (TDM-
transportation demand management) and most fully
utilizing its existing network (TSM-transportation system
management). The encouragement and support of
multimodalism, TDM and TSM are key components of the
City's approach to addressing its transportation needs.
Further, Auburn recognizes that if it is to address its
transportation problems, it must work together with others
in the region to address these issues. To ensure that new
development does not outstrip the ability of the city's
transportation system to serve it, Auburn will only permit
development if adequate transportation facilities are, or can
be guaranteed to be, available to support new development.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 7: Transportation.
•
Page 1-29
Plan Background
GOAL 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT •
To ensure the long term economic health of the City and the region
through a diversified economic base which supports a wide range of
employment opportunities for Auburn's residents and those of the region
and through the promotion of quality industrial and commercial
development which matches the aspirations of the community.
Discussion: Auburn strongly supports economic development within
the City as it provides taY revenue, important services and
employment to the residents of both Auburn and the entire
region. The City seeks to diversify its economic base to
ensure long term economic stability independent of the up
and down cycles of individual businesses and industries.
Economic development will not be pursued blindly,
however, and any potential development will be reviewed
in relation to the goals and policies of this comprehensive
plan.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 8: Economic Development.
•
GOAL 18. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
To maintain and promote a safe and healthy environment, 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.
Discussion: Thick forests, wildlife habitats, and river shorelines are but
some of the attractions of Auburn and its surrounding areas.
As development occurs however, some of these features,
which serve to make the area attractive are being lost.
Auburn is committed to the maintenance, enhancement and
preservation of these features in recognition of the
important role they play in Auburn and the region's high
quality of life.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 9: The Environment.
GOAL 19. HAZARDS •
Page 1-30
Plan Background
• To minimize the risk from environmental and manmade hazards to present
and future residents of the community.
Discussion: Natural and manmade hazards exist in the Auburn area
which can threaten the health, safetY and ProPertY of
Auburn residents and businesses. Some of these hazards
include flooding, landslides, earthquakes, volcanic activity
and waste materials. The City will seek to limit the
exposure of the residents and businesses of this community
to these hazards.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 9: The Environment.
GOAL 20. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
To maintain, preserve and enhance the City's historic, cultural and
archaeological resources to provide a sense of local identity and history to
the residents and visitors of the community.
• Discussion: Unlike many cities within the Puget Sound Region, Auburn
has a long and established history. Auburn has been a
vibrant and freestanding community for over 100 years. In
the past several decades, the region has experienced
significant population growth. Due to the nature of this
growth, the differences between one community and
another have blurred and communities are becoming more
and more alike. If Auburn is to retain its identity as a
unique community, it must seek to emphasize its
differences and celebrate them. Auburn's history is a part
of its identity that is unique to Auburn. Through the
recognition and preservation of its past, Auburn can ensure
its uniqueness and strengthen its identity as it moves into
the future.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 10: Historic Preservation. •
Page 1-31
Plan Background
GOAL 21. PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE •
To provide and maintain a comprehensive system of parks and open
spaces that responds to the recreational, cultural, environmental and
aesthetic needs and desires of the City's residents.
Discussion: The availability of parks and open spaces to the residents of
Auburn play a key role in the resident's high quality of life.
As mare development occurs in this area, the importance of
these places increase. Auburn is committed to expanding
and maintaining the City's park and open space system to
ensure that its residents are adequately served by this vital
community service.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 11: Parks, Recreation and Open Space.
GOAL 22. URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL QUALITY
To ensure a high quality visual environment through appropriate design
standards and procedures which encourage high quality architectural and •
landscape design in all development and through the placement of artwork
in public places. The City recognizes the linkages between transportation,
land use and site design and encourage development which eases access
by pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users.
Discussion: As urban areas develop, and particularly as densities
increase, the quality of development plays a major factor in
maintaining the quality of life for the area's residents and
employees. Auburn places a high value on good design,
visual quality and landscaping in all development - new
and old. Auburn will seek to develop standards and
programs to ensure that all development is of high quality
and is visually appealing.
A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in
Chapter 4: Housing and Chapter 12: Urban Design.
•
Page 1-32
•
CHAPTER 2
GENERAL APPROACH TO
PLANNING
Introduction Planning infers the development of a strategy or program to reach a
desired outcome. The nature of planning can vary considerably in focus,
substance and style depending on the type of community or area being
planned. A framework is provided for these jurisdictions through the
Growth Management Act, the Multi-County Policies and the County-wide
Policies, but the issues facing each jurisdiction are different and each
jurisdiction will address them in its own way. How Auburn addresses
these issues is dependent upon its general approach to planning. The
• policies in this section provide the framework for how Auburn will
address future development and growth, work with other jurisdictions
within the region and shape the development and character of the City and
the region.
Issues and
Background
Planning Approach The development of this Comprehensive Plan involves preparing the City
for addressing future development so that the end result moves the City
closer to accomplishing its goals. Several approaches or "styles" of
planning can be used to accomplish this :
1. reactive - accent flexibility in responding to changing conditions
and to individual situations problems and issues as they arise;
2. predictive - anticipate future needs and plan to meet them; or
3. proactive - seek to influence future events to achieve community
objectives.
• The approach used establishes a key element of the City's basic
philosophy regarding land use management and planning. The proactive
Page 2-1
General
Approach
approach blended with the predictive approach will assure that basic •
community values and aspirations are reflected in the City's planning
program as the City responds to existing and future pressure for growth
and change.
Growth The City of Auburn faces the potential for significant growth in the
upcoming decades with as many as 6,000 new households and 6,000 new
jobs in the King County portion of the City (based on year 2005 298- City
limits) to the year 2022 and achieve a population of almost 8-,89010,500
people in the Pierce County portion of the City limits (based on year 298-
2005 City limits). Much of this growth is due to basic factors beyond the
City's control; however, other aspects of growth can be appropriately
managed. Therefore, it will be through the implementation of strong
policies that will enable the City to influence patterns of desired future
growth.
GOAL 1. PLANNING APPROACH
To manage growth in a manner which enhances, rather than detracts from
community quality and values by actively coordinating land use type and
intensity with City facility and service provision and development.
Policies:
GP-1 The City should strive to assure that basic community values and •
aspirations are reflected in all City plans and programs, while
recognizing the rights of individuals to use and develop private
property in a manner that is consistent with City codes and
regulations.
GP-2 The City should develop its plans and programs after thorough
analysis of community problems, potentials and needs.
GP-3 The Planning Department will develop an annual work program
that includes work elements directed toward studying basic
community needs, policy development, and code administration.
Objective 1.1 To provide a policy framework to support growth management.
Policies:
GP-4 The City shall seek to influence both rates and patterns of future
growth to achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan in all of its
land use and facility and service decisions.
•
Page 2-2
General
Approach
• GP-5 The City shall resist growth pressures which could adversely affect
community values and amenities, but will seek and support
development when it will further the goals of the community.
Objective 1.2 To establish a procedure to assess the growth impacts of major
development proposals.
Policies:
GP-6 The growth impacts of major private or public development which
place significant service demands on community facilities,
amenities and services, and impacts on the City's general quality of
life shall be carefully studied under the provisions of SEPA prior
to development approval. Siting of any major development
(including public facilities such as, but not limited to, solid waste
, processing facilities and landfills) shall be carefully and thoroughly
evaluated through provisions of SEPA prior to project approval,
conditional approval, or denial. Appropriate mitigating measures
to ensure conformance with this Plan shall be required.
GP-7 Regional scale development shall be encouraged to provide a
• balance between regional service demands and impacts placed on
the City's quality of life versus the local benefits derived from such
development.
Objective 1.3. To establish and support an effective regional system of growth
management, based on an efficient system of urban service delivery and
appropriate development of unincorporated areas.
Policies:
GP-8 Auburn designates 15th Street NW and 15 Street SW as activity
areas as defined in the King County Countywide Planning Policies.
I GP-8A Auburn designates downtown Auburn, as defined in the Auburn
Downtown Plan, as an urban center in accordance with the King
County Countywide Planning Policies. Auburn's downtown area
is also designated as a Regional Growth Center by Puget Sound
Regional Council.
GP-9 Provision of urban level services by the City of Auburn or a special
district should be a prerequisite for development within Auburn's
• potential annexation area. Annexation should be required as a
condition of the provision of utility services by the City of Auburn.
Page 2-3
General
Approach
Development should look to Auburn as the ultimate service ~
provider.
GP-10 The cities and counties in the region should coordinate planning
and infrastructure development to meet regional goals and policies
as outlined in the King and Pierce County Countywide Planning
Policies and in the Multi-county Policies.
Predictability
and Flexibility: Predictability in land use regulation fosters confidence in land and
improvement investments (both private development and public facilities),
and can have a positive effect on long term property values. It also fosters
fairness and consistency, and eases administration. It has the disadvantage
of not dealing well with changing conditions (e.g. new manufacturing
technologies), unique circumstances or when someone simply comes
forward with a"better" idea. Flexible regulations can deal with such
conditions and circumstances, but may require a large commitment of
time, expertise and other resources to manage. Auburn's policy will be
mixed; stressing predictability in single family neighborhoods, while
allowing flexibility in areas committed to industrial or commercial uses
where performance standards are usually more important than specific use
restrictions.
GOAL 2. FLEXIBILITY •
To provide predictability in the regulation of land use and development,
especially where residential uses are affected, but to also provide
flexibility for development through performance standards that allow
development to occur while still protecting and enhancing natural
resources and criticallands in overall compliance with this comprehensive
plan.
Objective 2.1. To provide assurance that residential areas will be protected from
intrusions by incompatible land uses.
Policies:
GP-11 Ordinance provisions designed to protect residential areas shall
give priority to providing predictability and stability to the
neighborhood.
GP-12 Adequate buffering shall be required whenever new commercial or
industrial uses abut areas designated for residential uses.
Objective 2.2. To provide flexibility for major new commercial or industrial
developments to respond to changing market conditions without •
threatening the purposes of this Comprehensive Plan.
Page 2-4
General
Approach
• Policies:
GP-13 Ordinances regulating developing commercial or industrial
areas should be based on performance standards which provide
flexibility to respond to market conditions while ensuring
compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, and with present
and potential adjacent uses.
GP-14 Review procedures for all new development should be
integrated or coordinated with SEPA as much as possible.
GP-15 In interpreting plan provisions or in considering a plan
amendment, plan designations in the Region Serving Area
should be treated in a more flexible manner than in the
Community Serving Area (see Map 3.2.).
Objective 2.3. To provide flexibility in areas where a transition from existing uses to
planned uses is appropriate.
Policies:
• GP-16 Contract zoning can be used to manage the transition between
existing uses and future uses. Contract zoning allows new uses
to be conditioned in a manner which controls potential conflicts
during such transition. Contract zoning may be particularly
useful as a timing device to ensure that the necessary public
facilities are available to support new development.
an exisning zone and use te-a plafined-tise- T-his . e4y
Objective 2.4. To provide for the development of innovative land management
techniques to implement this Comprehensive Plan.
Policies:
I GP-4-917 Flexible land development techniques including, but not limited
to, clustering and planned unit developments (PUDs) for the
development of residential, commercial, and industrial
properties shall be considered to implement this comprehensive
plan.
•
Page 2-5
General
Approach
~ GP-4-918 Flexibility should be provided to encourage compact urban
•
development, to protect critical areas and resource lands, to
facilitate the use of transit or non-motorized transportation, and
to encourage the redevelopment of underutilized or deteriorated
property.
( GP-?819 Any flexibility should be easy to administer and should provide
the community with an adequate level of predictability.
I GP-2420 Within single family neighborhoods, flexibility should be
limited to ensure that the neighborhood retains a conventional
single family character.
~ GP-2421 Flexibility to allow the maintenance, expansion, or
redevelopment of historic structures or features should also be
considered. The goal of this flexibility should be to retain the
historic character of the structure, feature, or property while at
the same time ensuring protection of the public health and
safety.
~ GP-2-3-22 Innovative techniques that lead to the development of
multifamily housing that is sensitive to the needs of children
and seniors shall be considered to implement this •
comprehensive plan. Techniques that consider recreation,
safety, aesthetic, privacy, and transportation needs should be
emphasized.
Jurisdictional
Coordination While most aspects of land use and community development are managed
locally (by the City), other important aspects of community development
are significantly influenced or even controlled by other governmental
entities (regional, state, federal, and tribal). It is therefore important that
the City monitor and, when necessary, influence the decisions of those
governmental bodies. To this end, the City should actively develop
working relationships with these units of government and, whenever
possible, be directly represented in their decision making process.
Auburn's Regional
Role Auburn has histarically been a treated as relatively minor player in the
Puget Sound region. Its relatively small population and perceived
isolation in South King County led to its being overshadowed in the region
by the larger and more centrally located cities further north.
Recent years have seen a marked shift in Auburn's role in the region. A
number of facilities of regional significance have located in the area •
includin.g: Green River Community College, Auburn Regional Medical
Page 2-6
General
Approach
~ Center, Auburn Municipal Airport, the SuperMall of the Great Northwest,
I the Aubur-n • Emerald Downs Racetrack4. In addition,
Auburn is--a-step:functions as a station on the regional Commuter Rail
system. Taken as a whole, these facilities greatly increase Auburn's
significance in the region.
The City of Auburn has chosen to designate its Downtown Area as an
"urban center" as defined by the King County Countywide Planning
Policies. The formal ratification of Auburn's Downtown as an urban
center occurred in 2004. 15th Street SW and 15th Street NW meet the
criteria for designation as activity areas under the County wide policies.
Activity areas will serve as a focus for new transit investments.
As it relates to urban centers, the King County Countywide Planning
Policies (CPP's) envision urban centers as areas of concentrated
employment and housing with direct service by high capacity transit and a
range of land uses such as retail, recreational, public facilities, parks and
open space. Urban centers are intended to strengthen existing communities
by promoting housing opportunities close to employment, supporting the
development of an extensive transportation system to reduce dependency
on automobiles, consume less land with urban development and maximize
the benefit of public investments in infrastructure and services. The King
• I County C-WPP's generally define urban centers as concentrated mixed-use
areas with a maximum size of 960 acres and oriented around a high
capacity transit station.
The urban center concept is part of a larger regional growth management
~ strategy. Vision 2040 2029, ",b°°^„°^+'y ^ e^aea b., r,,,s*;H„*;,,,,. 2020
envisions a multi-county (Pierce, Snohomish, Kitsap and King) growth
management strategy comprised of a hierarchy of "centers" connected by
a multi-modal transportation system. Auburn has also been recognized as
a"Regional Growth Center" bv the Puget Sound Regional Council,
further emphasizin it~ s importance to the reg.ion. These centers are areas
intended to accommodate a significant portion of additional new
development the Puget Sound region.
In May 2001, the City of Auburn City Council adopted the Auburn
Downtown Plan.
Overall, the Downtown Plan sees the Auburn Downtown as a central
gathering place for the community. High quality design is expected of all
development including streets, buildings and landscaping. In addition to
general services to draw people from outside of the region such as retail
and office uses, the Auburn Downtown is also a principal commercial
center providing local goods and services to surrounding neighborhoods
~ and to residents and employees within the downtown area.
. Page 2-7
General
Approach
To this end, the Auburn Downtown Plan specifically addresses the ~
principles, criteria and incentives required of urban centers pursuant to the
I King County Countywide Planning Policies and the Multi-county rg owth
management strateg.v. The urban centers concept is evolving, and it is in
the City's interest to stay engaged in efforts that affect the regional growth
management strategy.
GOAL 3. COORDINATION
To work together with both local and regional agencies and jurisdictions
to promote coordinated regional growth, recognizing Auburn's intended
regional role as an urban center, while maintaining local self
determination.
Objective 3.1. To ensure that the concerns of the City are reflected in the affairs of other
agencies whose decisions and activities affect the development of the
Auburn community and its environs.
Policies:
I GP--2423 The City should continue its participation in various State and
Federal agencies and organizations concerned with land use
planning and development and the protection of natural and •
cultural resources and critical areas.
I GP-2524 The City should maintain an active role in regional planning
agencies and organizations.
I GP-2-625 The City should support interjurisdictional programs to address
problems or issues that affect the City and larger geographic
areas.
I GP-2-726 The City shall seek to be involved in county land use planning
programs.
~ GP-2-427 The City should seek, where appropriate, to coordinate its
planning with the Muckleshoot Tribe, King and Pierce
Counties, Federal Way, Kent and other adjacent jurisdictions.
Character of the
Community Communities are often associated with a particular character. This
character should not only be reflected in the comprehensive plan but the
plan can also aid in the development or reinforcement of desirable
characteristics. A distinct character for a community also aids in ~
establishing the community's identity both to itself and its region.
Page 2-8
General
Approach
• Auburn's flavor and values as a family community should be protected and
enhanced. This should be the priority basis of City policy. A community,
however, does not consist solely of residential neighborhoods. A healthy
community needs expanding employment, convenient shopping areas and
a strong fiscal base to support the services needed by growing families.
Consequently, a balanced policy which appropriately nurtures and
manages all these roles is needed.
GOAL 4. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
To maintain and enhance Auburn's character as a family community,
while managing potential economic opportunities in a manner that
provides necessary employment_ and fiscal support for needed services,
and while recognizing the need to provide seeW-human services and
opportunities for housing to a wide array of household types and sizes.
Objective 4.1. To strike a balance between the need to protect Auburn's residential
~ qualities, sustainability in the community and the need to ensure an
adequate economy for the area.
Policies:
I GP-N28 Auburn's character as a°family" community will be a priority
consideration in the City's land use management decisions.
• I This priority must be balanced, however., with the following:
a. City policy will address various related community
needs. This includes nurturing and managing the other
I roles necessary for both-maintaining a healthy community.,
recognizing the irnportance of sustainabilitv in the City
and responding to regional needs. Such roles include
ensuring the expansion of employment opportunities,
providing a full range of commercial, retail and service
opportunities, providing recreational and cultural
I opportunities, managing traffic2 encouraging energy and
resource efficiencv and maintaining a balance with the
natural environment.
b. The City needs to develop a strong fiscal base to support
the services required for a growing community of maturing
lower and middle income families, while coping with
~ regional problems.
c. The City should also respond to the needs of a relatively
high share of the community's families and single residents
~ • who cannot afford, or do not choose to live in traditional
single family structures.
Page 2-9
General
Approach
I GP--3929 Within areas designated for economic development2 the City •
shall actively promote desired types of development to assure
an expanding range of employment opportunities and to build
the City's fiscal base.
~ GP--34-30 The City should seek to establish and maintain an image
appropriate for the community to assist in most effectively
attracting the types of economic activities which best meet the
needs and desires of the community.
•
•
Page 2- l 0
~
CHAPTER 3
LAND USE
Introduction Land use planning enables the City of Auburn to manage its anticipated
growth and development while taking into consideration the specific
community vision and desires. By designating how land can be used,
those considerations necessary for orderly growth including the creation of
jobs, the provision of recreational opportunities, strong and stable
neighborhoods and an efficient transportation system can be pursued. Auburn Today
To better understand and evaluate the context for the City's future growth,
• it is helpful to evaluate the City's existing land use and zoning.
Figure 3.1 provides an overview of the zoned acreage within the City of
Auburn and the percentage that acreage represents of the City's overall
land area. Land zoned for residential puiposes, especially single family
residential, is clearly predominant and represents about 4 0-4349_percent
(RR, RS, RI-affd= R2 and R3 zones) of the Cify's zoned acreage. Of
commercial and industrial zoned land, the M1 (Light Industrial) zone is
most predominant, consisting of almost9_percent of the zoned acreage
in the city. Land zoned P 1(Public Use District) is another significant land
use zone consisting of alinest ten8_5 percent of the city's zoned acreage.
~
Page 3-1
Land Use ~
;
f Figure 3.1 ~
City of Auburn .
Acreage of Land by Zaning District
s
; PERCENTAGE
ZONE ACREAGE OF CITY
~ ~RR (Rural Residential) 931.481 48-.237. 8%
~ ;,RS (Single Family Residential) 3"1.405 2497.19%
( 'iRl (Singte Family Residential) 1;94-84~281 43:8921.92%0
I aR2 (Single Family Residential) 2;9442.076 44;A10.639% •
~ '43 (Two Family Residential) 2q4244 4:S$1.25%0
~`1 R4 (Multiple Family Resideniial) 358608 3;843.130%
~ ?RMHP (Residential Mobile Home Park) 359455 2-.6-72.L30%
~ 'RO (Residential Offiee) 43:395 8:6-50.4 %
( '!RO-H (Residential Office Hospital) +541-0 B4WW.OOS%
~'CN (Neighborhood Commercial) 12 9:080.060/o
~ sC1 (Light Commercial) 24-7302 4:441.550/o
;
1C2 (Central Business Districd 48733 : 8rM.17%
~IDUC (Downtown Urban Center) 135 O.fr9°lo
~ '10 (Heavy Commercial) S7K1.432 6.Q7.33°fo
~ ;BP (Business Park) 4.90 9-1-30_000/o
~ 'EP (Environmental Park) 2-72276 TBB1.41
~ aM1 (Light Industrial) -}-;5831.762 -1-4-139.02% ~
~ 1M2 (Heavy Industrial) 1;2431.U99 $325.63%
~ iLF (Landing Field) 112 0.7 .57%
~ ;P1 (Public Use .Diskrict) +,4W 1;665 944B.42%
~ ~I (Institutional) 427-5584 2-942~9-910/-
~ JU (Unclassified) 432 -2-. %2.21%a
~ 'iPUD (Planned Unit Development) 647984 4:435.04%
~ iTV (Terrace View) 3559 8.4 90. 0%
~ 40TAL 14,675.5919.533 100%
;Source: City of Auburn. Geographic Information 8ervices (GIS)
~
;The above data includes area in the West Hi11 and Lea Hill annexations.
;The small remaining do-fte"nehtde-areas outside of the city limits but
'Within the city's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) are not included. In
, ' ,
{
rBUILDABLE LANDS - LAND SUPPLY AND DEVELOPMENT
;CAPACITY
Page 3-2
;
Land Use
~ In 1997 the Washington State legislature adopted a Buildable Lands
amendment to the Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A.215).
T'he amendment requires certain Washington State counties and their cities
to determine the amount of land suitable for urban development and to
~ evaluate their capacity for growth based on past development history.
Both Pierce and King Counties wer-e-are subject to the State Buildable
Lands requirement. In addition, both counties used the Buildable. Lands
effort to assist in the allocation of tpdated-population/housing
unit/employment targets to individual jurisdictions within the respective
counties as required by the GMA. The first buildable lands reports were
based upon data through 2002; the second reports, published in 2007, are
current throu 20Q5.
~ The Buildable Lands analysis iftitia4y-involves the identification of vacant
and redevelopable land suitable for development over the planning
~ horizon throuv 2022. Land suitability teel(-takes into eonsideration
estimates of how critical areas, land that might be needed for public
purposes (e.g. parks, storm drainage), and land needed for future streets
would-wili effect development of these vacant and redevelopabte parcels.
It also ffteent-means adjusting the amount of vacant and redevelopable
land using a market factor to exclude land that was-is not reasonably
• expected to become available during the planning horizon.
Land Supply and Housing Unit Capacity
As indicated above, both King and Pierce Counties wefc-are subject to the
( State's Buildable Lands legislation. An approximation of Auburn's
developrnent capacity was made through an analysis of all vacant and
underutilized land within the City. Vacant land is defined as.any parcel
with no structures. Underutilized or redevelapable tand is defined as a
I parcel with potenfial for infill or redevelopment_
The following summarizes the results and conclusions of tfiese analyses by
county (King and Pierce). While the objective behind each counties'
Buildable Lands effort was similar, the approaches were slightly different.
Detailed information regarding the Buildable Lands analysis may be found
in the individual Buildable Lands reports prepared by the respective
County.
i 2007 King County Buildable Lands Analysis
Figure 3.2 identifies the gross and adjusted net vacant and redevelopable
land by residential land use type from the Buildable Lands analysis for
King County. Adjusted net acres represent the amount of gross acres
• available for development after assumptions about critical areas, future
right of way needs, future land for public uses and the market factor have
Page 3-3
Land Use
; been considered. (Note: this analysis was based upon the Citv limits as of
' December 31 2005 and therefore does not include the recent annexations ~
' of Lea and West Hitls, The 2007 Kin County Buildable Lands Re on rt did
; not provide specific analvsis for the large Lea Hill and West Hiil PAAs
' 'that in 2005, were stiil unincorporated).
Figure 3.2
; Gross and Adjusted Net Acres af Vacant
+ and Redevelopable Land by Residential Zoning Type (King County)
~ Gross Acres Adjusted
Net Acres 1
Single Family 1,57 1,323.5 5-78888.2
Vacant
SingleFamily 4;$85603.7 .944349
r Redevelo able
` Multi-Family/ 6-237 3-532.5
I ! Mixed Use
Vacant
Multi-Famiiy/ +-5145.8 52107.9
' Mixed Use
I
' •Redevelo able
4- . ~
TOTAL 3,7"2110 1,90H 377.6
~
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land available for deve2opment after
; critical areas, anticipated right-of-way and public purposes needs and a market facWr
' have been taken into account.
7 (2) "Other" represents mixed-use opportunities in certain zones.
;
~ After deducting for constraints, future right-of-way and public purpose
"needs, and after applying a market factor, the Buildable Lands analysis
shows that Auburn has approximately -1,9021,377.5 adjusted net acres of
'vacant and redevelopable residentially zaned land during the planning
period through 2022. As seen in Figure 3.21 the majority of available land
for development is zoned for single-family residential purposes.
~Based on the residential land supply analysis and historical densities, an
;estimate of housing unit capacity was developed. Figure 3.3 identifies the
estimated capacity (in housing units) in King Caunty by the predaminant
zoning type. This estimate shows a capacity of approximately 6Q-76
I`6,525 housing units in the King County portion of the City exists to the
, ;year 2022.
. ~
~
;i 1'sge 3-4
Land Use
•
Figure 3.3
Housing Unit Capacity By Residential Zoning Type (King County)
Capacity
Aousin Units
~ Sin e Famil 4,9463,958
( Multi-Famil 1,44-2,002 ,
I 8*her-+'-)Mixed 790565
Use
~ TOTAL 6,3766 525
(1) Capacitv figures include units in the pi ep Iine•
. . `l)"Outl.e..» ' ..l..,iesi.......... e,.ts : , tl, pipelifte F i, tinie sl. a 'fd bf T .i` .
. . . .
Employment Capacity (King County)
As part of the King County Buildable Lands analysis, employment
~ capacity was a.lso estimated. TYus methodology involved a similar
approach as the residential capacity analysis. The supply of both vacant
and redevelopable commercial and industrial land was determined. As
• with residential capacity, net land supply for commercial and industrial
purposes took into consideration critical areas, anticipated future right-of
ways, land for public purposes and applied a market factor to land that
~ may not be available for c~evclopr Tietit during the planning period.
Estimates of how much commercial and industrial square footage could be
developed on property were calcuiated. Employment capacity was
developed applying a floor area per employee ratio.
Figure 3.4 identifies the gross and adjusted net vacant and redevelopable
land by commercial and industrial land use from the King County
Buildable Lands analysis. Again, adjusted net acres represents the amount
of gross acres available for development after assumptions about critical
areas constraints, future right of way needs, land for public uses and the
market factor have been considered.
.
Page 3-5
Land Use
Figure 3.4 ~
Gross and Adjasted Net Acres of Commercial and Indastrial
Land Supply (King County)
Gross Acres Adjusted
Net Acres 1
Commercial 4431E4 q3136.1
Vacant
Commercial 4-"81.8 40266
Redevel able
` Industrial Vacant M-9494.3 2683273
Industrial 688256.9 3-5-51763
Redevelo able
Mixed Use 2 21.6
Vacant
Mixed Use 4456.4 4445.5
Redevelo able
TOTAL ~-44410 0.2 893753
' 1. "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land after critical areas, future anticipated
streets, land for public purposes and market factor have been considered.
Figure 3.4 indicates that approximately 4-,444i ,060 gross acres of vacant
; and redevelopable commercial, industrial and mixed use zoned land exists,
; with most of this land being industrially zoned. Adjusted for constraints,
future infrastructure needs and a market factar, slightly more than $W750 ~
; net acres exists.
`t Figure 3.5 below summarizes employment capacity developed as part of the Buildable Lands analysis by land use zone type. It shows that the City
( j of Auburn has employment capacity for over -12;89817750 jobs, with a
' majority of those jobs being on industrially zoned land.
Figure 3.5
Employment Capacity by Zoning Type (King County)
7Ane T e Em lo ment Ca aci
~ .i Commercial 4,2-943.559
Industrial Fi;34-912,053
Mixed Use 2-84736
Other 1 4-,~91410
~ TOTAL 4Z,4,8617 759
: (1) "Other" includes estimates of employment associated with pipeline projects
identified at the time of the Buildable Lands analysis.
; Pierce County Buildable Lands Analysis
; While the overall objective of the Pierce County Buildable Lands analysis
; was similar to King County's, certain elements were done differently. ~
;
Page 3-6
Land Use
~ rVeoYt f ..,.ol,..;.,oly Jfn„l, p ,.el., aa,,,,toa , f-,-+ , al, ~The
majority of land within the city limits
at the time of the buildable lands analysis (Year 28A82005) was part of the
Lakeland Hills South Planned Unit Development (PUD). Th;~ ,a„-' .,,as
uiuivna.as a: xr„'o +h° ri*y 1998. The majority the additionat residential
vacant Iand was part of approved preliminary,plats. Therefore,
Eestimates of residential population housing units were based on planned
densities established as part of the PUD approval and a related annexation
agreement with the developer, and also took in account the other av roved ,
rp ojects. Estimates of employment were based on known employment
areas within the PUD.
Based on the Pierce County Buildable Lands analysis, it was determined
that the City of Auburn's population growth to the year 241-7-2022 would
be 2;5-5410,500 people. B°^°a o ° e '~eus°hola s
appr-exifaately ' . , This translates into the need for
approximately -~8"1,789 housing units.
Bo+e The Pierce County Buildable Lands analysis includes a28p
2022 employment target of 403 and an employment capacity of 543
efnpleyees. This estimate was based on the iikely employment generated
~ by the f°-id"••*Ya~con7mercial parcels located within Lakeland
Hills South PLTD at that peiiit in-t-ifne-(B~eemb°--2gp0). and other
vacant commercial lands along A St. SE.
(Specifics regarding the Pierce County Buildable Lands analysis may be found in
the "Pierce County Buildable Land Reports - A Monitoring and Evaluation
analysis of Urban Growth and Development Capacity for Pierce County and its
~ Cities and Towns", Augus~September 1, 20072982.)
~~ng~E=etnty
As paft of the Buildable Lands analysis aiid the assignmen4 of tar-gets,
~.~nin...,«..,,...*~.7 D A A . .,1~„ ',i
waaaavvatlvau~vu a~:c i o i~'viv uiovZ.vrCJlccti+[GR:
Figtir-e 3-.6
~ I I=I,..,s:,... na....,.:t.. $t~,i~k jo b C-tipoQ}ty-lft P-AA-jAb-TkF''ge'E
94-5 m m
Page 3-7
- Land Use
i , ~ Over- tafget. , ,
{
P-ieree-EdttM&
. . . . . ~ . . . ~ ~~f 2003
, . . . . . . . ~
. ~ ~ . : . ~ . . ` ~ . ~ . . . .
. . . . . 7~ .
~ ~ ~ ~ . . .,j . .
'i
4 ' .
i
'
' ,
a
,
ii
i
j
. . . ,,j .
Ur-ban LL~ " •
County.
, ' . .
~
. . . ~ .
. . . . .
. . . . . . ' . . Figufe • .
!
. . . ~ . . . : ~ , •
. . . . . ~ ~ . . Figtir-e 3.7~ . . .
i Clty of Atibur-R
4
y 2000 ron.,,.., 2b22 Poptda 2000 Co„s„s 2022 Pvpul$tifj~2
i Pepulat1$.n. All96&tif3i~ P@pulati@i~ Alleeati9i~
. . ~ . ~ .i .A12'c Ic1LUi'2o7i AHeeatio'} ~ . .
. ~ . ~ ~ . ~ .
q1450 . . . ~ . 221
~ ~ ~ i . . ~ .
. . . . . . . . . . ~ .
. . : . . ~ . . . ~ alleeatio~7. : ~ ~ . . . ~ ~ . ~ ~ . ~ .
~
_ . . .a . . . . .
` Evaluation of Caaacitv Ap
,ainst Proiected Growth -Tarp-ets
~ King County and Pierce County both have allocated housing unit and
employment targets to tocal }urisdictions. The City of Auburn's allocation
; targets are presented below in Figure 3.8.
. ;
~ Page 3-8
Land Use
~ Figure 3.8
~ City of Auburn Housing Unit/Employment/Population
Allocations (King and Pierce counties)
Housing Units Employment Population
~ Kin Count 5;. F x> ~34 6,079 N/A
~ Pierce Count 14 A ' ~1? 71, All of the targets assigned to Auburn in King County are within the
development capacity identified in the Buildable Lands analysis. Based
on the Buildable Lands analysis the City had a surplus residential capacity
of about over its target and a surplus capacity of over
6,04(41 ' a z employees over its target. lr £f; :e Pierce County t1 ~ iti f_s
it3?e~({"It£ k 06 'esId 'whal i4T`1i f1016i slrEa 1 .41 1 ~mll3j{.rat lek"lt
s.: [
III ' ~ ~ ? k . . - 4 a x~ i .
~ x}Ei~?~£
;.3 ll'~ .f
'~LT~iIctt'.1 t It,'~iCC 1I1'~tl e.~1~~,ti;Tt* k'Itllt't 1~'I~, C;~" (1c€l'ts l:Ci I s~i:' '~lta~2~~22
t . _ r.
L'rf?Lt'~t3 r'li3,eC60IT4.
Buildable Lands Analvsis Limitations
It is important to note limitations to the Buildable Lands analysis. The
• Buildable Lands analysis is based on identifying actual densities for a
~ five-year period 0 -9.1) 5-2~-a00} and then applying these densities to
available land. Whether or not the densities achieved for the discrete
five-year period will be a true reflection of future densities is one
consideration. As land becomes increasingly scarce and land values rise,
there will be a tendency for land to be more intensely used over time with
higher densities.
~ Also, how much land could be developed t+ut-is not a predictor of whether
it will be developed. Ultimately the market will dictate how much land
will be developed. Attempting to predict the market was beyond the scope
of the Buildable Lands analysis.
Issues and Background
Auburn's Potential
Annexation Area Auburn's Comprehensive Plan contains policies which designate types and
intensities of land uses that will accomplish the City's long range goals.
Since the Plan depicts a long term perspective of the City's growth, it is
appropriate to also include on the Comprehensive Plan map those areas
' which may not currently be within the City limits, but are.,...pia~t~ieci_ to ~
• I be in the future. Theese areas are within the city's potential annexation
~
I Page 3-9
Land Use
area (PAA). (Map I.1) f-I.owtycr
I --t{ t_ .
C
I iI3 .:1, Sb j:F£IF F
The city provides water and sewer service to many portions of the PAA.
In addition, growth in the PAA can have significant impacts on other City
services. Hence, it is important for City decision makers to consider the
growth in these areas as well as within the city limits when making
decisions concerning capital projects such as water and sewer extensions
and road projects. (For a more thorough discussion of these issues; see
Chapter 13, "Development in the Unincorporated Areas and Annexation.")
GOAL 5. CITY EXPANSION AND ANNEXATION
To ensure the orderly development and annexation of the City's potential
annexation area in a manner that ensures adequate and cost-effective
provision of required urban services and facilities, reduces sprawl,
implements the goals, objectives and policies of the Auburn
Comprehensive Plan, and protects designated rural areas.
Objective 5.1 To designate Auburn's potential annexation area and to include those areas
on the City's Comprehensive Plan Map.
LU-1 Auburn's Potential Annexation Area is desi-a-ted-shown lNL-cm ~
Map 3. L:Vlap 3.1 also depicts Growth Impact Areas. These
Growth Impact Areas are generallv adjacent cities or
unincotporated County lands in which cievelopnlent that occurs
potentialty impacts the citv of Auburn. Ar-eLtsw-~th Rw=al
Af#fltixat}#?ft:9u3£abte-f43r
LU-2 The Auburn City Council may revise the boundaries of the
Potential Annexation Area in the future, in response to:
a. Amendments to the King County Urban Growth Area as
specified in the King County Countywide Policies;
b. Discussions between Auburn and adjacent jurisdictions
regarding Potential Annexation Area boundaries;
c. Discussions with Pierce County concerning the designation
of Potential Annexation Area boundaries; or
~
Page 3-10
I Land Use
• d. Changed circumstances relating to population and
employment growth and projections, urban service
feasibility, or similar factors.
Urban Form Planning deals with the basic geographic form of the city. Auburn's
existing form separates the city into two parts: a concentration of
employment base on the west with sufficient existing and potential jobs to
be of regional significance (region serving area), and residential and
locally oriented business uses to the east (community serving area). This
existing policy of a"split" form has generally been effective in avoiding
gross land use conflicts between residential uses and more intensive (e.g.
industrial) land uses. This Plan's policies maintain this basic split policy.
However, Auburn's downtown area is also treated as a unique (both region
and community-serving) part of the city's form.
Another aspect of a city's form is its development intensity.
V4K,vin^ intensities of development require different configurations of city
services and facilities-, and dift=,rit,g :n*"•,°-f*4es create different community
impacts. The location of different intensities can also assist in establishing
the city's character and identity, and can be instrumental in furthering
~ other important goals (protection of agfieultur-al . ' sicritical areas,
protection against natural hazards, etc.).
• Polic established b the 1969 Com rehensive Plan assumed that the cit
Y Y P Y
would eventually be completely urban in character and the City's approach
to developing its service delivery system was driven by this assumption.
At that iinic nNo City policy or program addressed agricultural
preservation. While extensive areas with rural development wet+ld-require
expensive restructuring of the City service delivery system, strategic long-
~ term protection of some ~und- of tj ' ic>c areas can assist in limiting urban
sprawl, maintaining diversity of living environments, and protecting
important environmental resources, in particular the City's water source at
Coal Creek Springs. This Plan designates a limited amount of nii=~4
IZes.ider.t#~~l R-esefveConservancvarea for this purpose.- T',is ';,,°i*°d
~~~Nvhich should not significantly affect the overall cost of city
services.
GOAL 6. URBAN FORM
To establish an orderly urban form which separates uses on the basis of
their functional relationship to the community, and which reinforces the
identity of the community.
~ Objective 6.1. To physically separate region serving employment centers and other
regionally oriented land uses from areas that are residential or local in
Page 3-11
Land Use
character while ensuring that regional facilities strengthen the community ~
as a whole and enhance downtown Auburn.
Policies:
LU-3 Areas on the valley floor which are suitable to support large
scale economic development projects should be reserved, for
the most part, for uses which support Auburn's role as a
regional employment and commercial center (to be known as
the Region Serving Area See Map 3.2).
LU-4 Areas delineated on the Urban Form Map (Map 3.2) as the
Community Serving Area should be reserved for uses which
are local in character or serve local markets.
LU-5 Link together regionally significant land uses such as the
SuperMall, Green River Community College, Boeing, Emerald
Downs, and commercial uses on Auburn Way in a manner that
enhances the regional stature of Auburn while providing
services, employrnent and tax base for the community.
Linkages should be designed to enhance Downtown Auburn as
the community's focal point. ~
Objective 6.2. Mamtain downtown as an area that uniquely serves both regional and
community needs.
Policies:
LU-6 The downtown urban center shall be the focal point of the
Auburn community. It should include a mix of uses including,
but not limited to, government and civic uses, retail, residential
and services that are appropriate to fill that role.
LU-6A Focus growth and development in the Auburn Downtown
' urban center to support economic development, complement
transit oriented development, direct gowth pressures away
~ from si~_fatjCily_residential neighborhoods, and implement
regional growth management strategies.
Objective 6.3. To protect community identity while promoting diversity and conserving
rural amenities, by designating rural areas along the city's periphery and in
areas with significant environmental values.
Policies: ~
Page 3-12
Land Use
~ LU-8 The City shall-sliould nealimit accessible City utility
systems into the Upper Green Valley, and shall liinit densitv,
thus preserving the character of the area and encouragin~
continued cultivation on pr•eteet--these agpieultur-al eils
1ILgpet-ties f.,:m „ o „ .o ,,..b,,n uses.
LU-9 The City shall protect Coal Creek Springs by: 1) limiting
density to less than one residential unit per four acres within
the area tributary to the Coal Creek Springs Watershed and by
2) designating a Special Planning Area for the Mt. Rainier
Vista site.
LU-10 T'he City shall support low density County zoning adjacent to
the city on the Enumclaw Plateau and will not extend City
sewer and water facilities into the area if it will promote urban
development.
LU-11 The City shall consider the impacts of new development
activities on resources (including agricultural resource lands,
cultural resources, forest resource Iands, and mineral resource
areas (Map 9.4)), the environment and natural resources
. (particularly critical areas, wildlife habitats and water quality)
as part of its environmental review process.
Ob'ective 6.4 Maintain low-densit "urban se arators°' areas which rotect
environrnentallv sensitive areas and create apen space corridors within and
between urban areas, consistent with the King County CountMide
Plannin-g Policies.
LU-12 The City shall maintain urban separators in the Lea Hill area as
desi ang ted bv Kin Cg ounty.
Residential
' Development Within most communities, a range of housing densities is allowed to
provide a variety of housing opportunities. The wider the range, the
greater the opportunity for individuals to find housing relative to their
particular needs, affordability and preference.
While the City's policy provides for a relatively wide range of residential
densities, development over the past decade has been heavily concentrated
toward the middle and upper levels of the range (5ee discussion in Chapter
4, Housing Element).
•
Page 3-13
Land Use
As land costs have escalated in the region, however, Auburn has remained
relativety affordable to the average family. •
i
This Plan provides that the City should seek to restore the traditional
~ character of the community by encouraging preservation and development
of housing that is suitable to the retention and attraction of families witivn
y the community. This would be best accomplished by focusing multi-
~ family development in the urban center, protecting the residential
~ character of existing single farnily neighborhoods and promoting the
~ development of new neighborhoods of single family homes.
Consequently, residential land use policies will emphasize the creation and
~ preservation of single family neighborhoods, while still encouraging the
development of other housing types for those who need or vvant them.
;
GOAL 7. ; RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
{
j To emphasize housing development at single family densities, in order to
; reestablish a mix of housing types appropriate far a farnily oriented
' community, while recognizing the meed and desire for both lower density
~ and. higher density housing appropriately located to meet the housing
; needs of all members of the community.
QbJective 7.1. To estabtish a system of residentiat densities w+tieh-tfiat accommodates a •
' range of housing choices appropriate for the city.
~ Policies:
1; LU-4-213 The City should promote the provision, preservation and
i maintenance of adequate housing for the city's residents by
; encouraging a balanced mix of housing types and values
1 appropriate to the income levels and lifestyles of area residents. .
Auburn has always been willing to accept its "fair shaze" of
~ low and moderate cost housing opportunities. However, this
~ has translated into a great disparity in Puget Sound
; communities with cities such as Auburn receiving more of
these types of housing than other comparable communities.
This has had impacts in terms of the costs of ineeting `human
; service needs as well as some poorly maintained multifamily
properties which have caused a variety of problerns. ` Auburn
; will work to insure that housing units are equitably distributed
across the region in terms of both physical location and cost.
; LU-4-3I4 Residential densities in areas designated "fur-al residential
I~ consei-va.tlcv", which represent areas that have environmental
' constraints and which promote protection of City water
Page 3-IA
Land Use
~ will work to insure that housing units are equitably distributed
across the region in terms of both physical location and cost.
I LU-1-3 Residential densities in areas designated ~~rtt~'ztl__..l_E:S:lCIeIltl~ll.
conservancv", which represent areas that have environmental
constraints and which promote protection of City water
sources, should be no greater than 1 dwelling unit per 4 acres
until such time public facilities are available.
LLT-15 The area dcsibnated "residential conservancv" allows for a
lifestyle similar to that of rural areas sincc the lower density
established protects the critical areas such as the Citv s Coal
Creek Springs watershed A tural lifestvle generally includes ,
allowance of farm animals streets nat urban in chaz•acter (e.;;.
no sidewalks strcet lights), and limited agricultural typc uses.
.isitl~:.ti ttItt~iii c[~.,irriK~fi~;c( ~~t ~1'all ~;eI~~<11i~r~;'`.
_ .c~
L,U -16.........~a~~ltiet~alxl c[
4110LI]d bC r~,~I ~-IreIWt t1U111 I &XC!.~iMJU11it lier ztctc- C.~1U,=wIili
- - -
of a(1<}wt:d cleszsi€y onto a por~l'op_«t a sitE.. ;(it}:ild be ia4orablv
LU-+417 Residential densities in areas designated for single family
~ residential use should be no greater than 6 units per acre. 1. i~
1 liLseareas skm~flc1 1~~,_s~.r~c~~_with good transit availability (1/4
mile or less to a route with at least half hour service).
Accessory dwelling units should be permitted to allow
inereased densities. The bulk of the single family residential
community should be developed at a density of between 4 and
6 dwelling units per acre.
~ LU--t-5,I 8 Residential densities in areas designated for multiple family
development should not exceed 20 units per acre. Multiple
family densities should generally decrease with proximity to
single family areas. Multiple family densities may exceed 20
I units per acre provided they are within walking distance ~(.)tY /4
mile}---f:4_f:;.-oi;ii regional transit facilities or are targeted to
populations not requiring outdoor recreation areas and having
low private automobile usage (e.g. °'de~'y h^u°ingmursing
I haines). These targeted developments should be located in
close proximity to shopping, medical and public transportation
services.
Objective 7.2. To designate land for the development of new single family homes.
~ Policies:
Page 3-15
Land Use
~ LU-i<__; 9 In applying the land use designations of the Comprehensive ~
Plan, first consideration shall be given to designating an area
for single family residential use.
I LU-4-720 Most of the undeveloped areas of the Community Serving Area
of the city (see Map 3.2+) shall be reserved for single family
dwellings. The ability to buffer the area from incompatible
land uses and heavily traveled arterials or highways should be
considered in designating currently undeveloped areas for
future single family use. Such buffering can be accomplished
by taking advantage of topographic variations and other natural
features, requiring expanded setbacks along arterials, by
orienting lots and houses away from arterials, by designating
moderate density multiple family areas as transitional areas,
and by other -means.
L3-28........_.... .....~uplexes----tfi-PIe1,es--'ind--othef snall-seale mtilf • f • t y desigiiated
.
1Etj}fl-j.~re`':7 t', 1 es uo --~-ciezci sii'cci•,•,i =cr~~ •,~t,~ ts
ea~leEteI"-Ar-aAefial +~.i-c.i-rs ,T ~~.s 7 a' ,ecz ~1y ~ ~ r
rc-~ -c~i ~icc-nr-uc~uccrrc -o-irorr
r~idQn+' 1 !sv.~ L.vv. 1s 1ui ..l ,.1,uses „ et.. Tl ef
~ , c~
rt„a„l.i 1 ,a2Si,..,f3E`d--t0 i '1 1'ul:-afid--Scui~ ~-ch£'
~faet@f H~the exjk4' a' t rannry
icci ~ccr.
Objective 7.3. To promote the development of quality single family neighborhoods
which relate the design and types of residential areas to important natural
and manmade features.
Policies:
~ LU- i~Z l Residential development should be related to topography,
circulation, and other amenities, as guided by policies of this
Plan.
~ LU- 10212 Residential development should be discouraged in poorly
drained areas.
~ LU-2023 The development of new neighborhoods should be governed by
development standards which allow some flexibility.
Flexibility should be considered to encourage compact urban
~ development, to provide protection of critical areas; and
resource lands (including, but not limited to, agricultural
- resource lands, cultural resources, forest resource lands,
mineral resource areas (Map 9.4) hillsides or wetlands), and to ~
facilitate non-motorized transportation.
Page 3-16
~ Land Use
i
~ LU-=? 4R4 The development of residential areas should recognize the
importance of community and public facilities in developing a
sense of neighborhood and community.
~ LU-2-22?5 Residential development of shoreline areas shall be in accord '
with the City's Shoreline Management Program and should
provide for the retention of public access to these areas.
Special care should be taken in the design of residential areas
in shoreline areas to reduce the potential conflict between
residential use and public access:
( LU-2KM Emphasis shall be placed upon the manner in which the
recreational needs of the residents shall be met in the approval
of any residential development.
~ LU-24;17 Any change from the rural designation shall be to a single
family designation. Single family residential areas should also
be used to buffer rural areas from other urban uses.
~ LU-1~28 Areas abutting major arterials should be carefully planned to
avoid potential conflict between the development of the arterial
~ and single family uses. Single family uses in such areas should
be platted in a manner which orients the units away from the
arterial... ._WEie~,~c ,«c(~ ~~r~c,_~~t_zti~~zi _1, ii~~t.. ,~?t_si~?3~,.s_ <z..' i =~si_t;~~~t~_
r~1-e:z „S11c~LEld_lic,_ all€}w<1}t n€,~~._tiiti.__ `~~tx~l~~ _zl4 , _~4}ii~.~l
t°educe tt;tal ~~:t•i~~~~e~~ Writlec,~ioli:-s_to_dlic~lgrteriqt..e
non-motorized aecess between the--residential area,
and #-ti-t-arterial5 should be provided.
be
tz~~~~~ U.Tes. In areas with
existing single family deveiopments, substantial flexibility can
be permitted for street front buffering.
~
Objective 7.4. To establish new neighborhoods in a way that will minimize the potential
for intrusion of incompatible uses.
Policies:
I LU-2-6.2.9 Developrnent design should utilize and preserve natural
features, including, but not limited to, topography and- stands
of trees, to separate incompatible land uses and densities.
LU-2-=30 Development design should use open spaces, inctuding parks,
to separate incompatible uses.
Page 3-17
\
; Land Use ~
i ~
~ LU 1 Development codes shall be modified to allow the City to
require that landscaped buffers, natural area preservation or
other measures are utilized to separate new residential
developments from incompatibleuses and major streets. These
. buffers should permit aecess between the residential area and
the major street by pedestrians and bicyclists.,
Multiple Family I
Housing i The escalating gap between the costs of housing and the ability to pay
; rental or mortgage prices has increased the demand for multi-family units.
' Unfortunately, it is clear that the development of multiple family
i dwellings in single family areas has created an adverse reaetion. The level
_ f of conflict between single family neighborhoods and multiple family
j dwellings rnust be reduced. Since much of this reaction is related to the
; design of these structures, design standards could substantially reduce this
problem for new construction.
~
~
,
Objeetive 7.5. ~ To meet the need for multiple family dwellings while avoiding conflict
; with single family residential areas.
' Policies: #
7
LU =.1.2 In considering where future higher density developrnent should
? locate, priority shall be given to designated Special Planning
~ Areas (where such use can be balanced and planned with single
; family areas), the Downtown and areas with high levels of
transit service.
LU-3 W3i3 Unless required for other purposes, the need for new higher
; density developments shall be based on local need for such
units and should not substantially exceed a fair regionai share
of such housing.
~ LU 3-1.34 Multiple-farnily developments should be located functionally
convenient to the necessary supporting facilities including
utilities, arterials, parks, transit service, etc.
LU 3-=-- ; 5_ Design codes and guidelines should be developed for
multifamily housing to ensure high quality design and
compatibility with surrounding development.
LU r.)-3.6 Multiple family dwellings shall not bepermitted as a matter af
right in single family residential districts, but should be ~
' permitted only where necessary to remove potential blight, to
Page 3-18
^ Land Use
~ buffer single family uses from incompatible uses or activities,
or to allow effective use of vacant areas. Standaxds for such
siting should provide for design review to ensure compatibility
and provide that the density of development is consistent with
the density of the adjoining single family uses.
~ LU-.~4-~17 Siting of moderate density units shalt be encouraged as a buffer
between single family areas and more intense uses. Such _
buffering is appropriate along arterials where existing platting
~ prevents effective lot layout for single, family units. -Also,
such buffering is appropriate between single family areas and
commercial and industrial uses. Where there are estabtished
single family areas, the design and siting of moderate density
units shall be controlled to reduce potential conflicts and to en-
sure buffering of uses. Higher density units are nat to be
considered such a buffer.
~ LU-3,-.4538 Higher density developrnents or larger scale multiple family
developments should be limited to residentiai areas where they
can be developed as a unit with the necessary supporting
facilities. Such development shall provide adequate aceess by
developed arterials with minimal potential to generate traffic
~ througli singie family areas. Extensive buffering measures
shall be required where sueh areas adjoin single family
residential areas. Care should be exercised to avoid creating
barriers to pedestrian and bicycte movement: Where feasible,
new multiple family development should be planned in
conjunction with single family and maderate density
development.
Manufactured
Hames Manufactured homes provide affordabie `housing to many Auburn
residents. In many cases, they provide the opportunity of home ownership
to households which cannot afford to purchase more traditional types of
housing. However, poorly designed, high density manufactured home
parks can raise the same issues that multiple family developments pose.
-VA ' _.,re:a , n,;:.-:`-
Ht",efselt. ~'~'.e.f
_ ,
POOF
s-~i-~-~~-F~~~te~: -~3~A€~~-c=1=-~11~-}~~fCareful design
and placement of manufactured housrng in bot4-garks ztrtd-o~i--~n&-vi-dual
44-:-,;-especially with appropriate landscaping, can greatly reduce problems
ed-~-e-associated with such development.
~ T'his Plan's policies continue to recognize the benefits that -manufactured
* homes can have on housing affordability. Improved codes requiring high
Page 3-19
Land Use ~
standards for the design and siting of manufactured home parks and i
on individual lots should be implemented.
Objective 7.6 ' To continue to a11ow manufactured homes as an affordabte forrn of home
; ownership, provided that such developments are carried out in a manner
~ which supports rather than detracts from the quality of the cornmunity and
; adjacent uses.
; Policies:
~
LU ~(?i9 ":1;he sitxrw,: o;` n~e,,a-in-l~ianufactured home parks shall be
r? t4m fA` hE£'.h....den°,At. i`s:'si*`.}t.n{3al .:Jev:3l€)j,'-31;+efi€F: ra.f3d
subject to the satne policies to. li~i-y1i densaty
_ _ . . .
._dc velc:avnic;ti€. Manufactured home park densities
; should not exceed 8 units per acre. N-e_~-~~manufactured
~ hotne park4 shall be bordered or contained by physical features,
~ or ptanned and designed as part of a larger development
i incorporating other housing types in a manner which limits
further manufactured home park expansion into adjacent areas.
~ LU :*-:-40_ Mt -,~--~ifhl-ffiM.anufactured homes permitted on
' single family lots provided that they are sited and constructed
; in a manner which would blend with adjaeent homes. ~
~t Manufactured homes rnust be,_._.iiL~w :.._tiiiits meet minirnum
~ dimensional standards (double wide) and be placed on
permanent foundations, consisten1_~r=tl} 1,aw.
Maderate and Highj
Income Housing I The City wants to increase the amaunt of housing oriented toward those
; with moderate and high incomes. A jurisdiction typically encourages a
; type of development by providing incentives which lower the cost of
; producing that development type, thereby increasing its potential
profitability. With the limited financial resources available to
a i municiPalities it is difficult to justifY financial incentives to increase the
-
profitability of the production of market ra€e housing. Further, since the
, production of housing for moderate and higher income groups is profitable
: without these incentives, it is not clear that incentives will have the desired
eaffect of increasing the number of houses produced.
~
Fatential solutions to this issue need to address the demand side of the
I market rather than the supply. The market will provide these types of
; housing if there is sufficient demand for it within the city. Auburn can
j increase the demand for housing by those with moderate and higher
` incomes by impraving its image within the region and making itself
known as a desirable place to live. -A comprehensive approach to ~
? increasing the dernand for moderate and high income housing is through
Page 3-20
Land Use
i the implementation of this comprehensive plan. By building a community
with parks and open spaces, job opportunities, high environmental quality,
and abundant supportive services including commuter rail, Auburn will
create for itself a more desirable image within the region and therefore a
( wider range of income groups will choose to live in Auburn-fl+ap,,at
pr-esent.
j LU-3z~di Development regulations should ensure that Auburn obtains its
"fair share" of high end single famity housing. This does not
represent a decrease in Auburn's commitment to maintaining
the majority of its housing stock as housing affordable to
middle income households.
Neighborhood
Quality Auburn's existing stable residential neighborhoods form an important
component of the community's character. Maintaining the vitality and
stability of these neighborhoods is a key goal of this Comprehensive Plan.
GOAL 8. NEIGHBURHOOD QUALITY
To maintain and protect all viable and stable residential neighborhoods.
~ Objective 8.1 To maintain and enhance ali viable and stabte residential neighborhoods.
Policies
I LU-Ji92 Regulatory decisions in all residential neighborhoods shall
~~~-r~.~~zit _4~-maintenance or enhancement of the
neighborhood's residential character.
a. The location of uses other than those permitted outright
shall only be allowed as specified in this cornprehensive
~ plan and in the zoning ~c{;~de_.
b. Approval of any non-residential land use shall occur only
~ after #=t~-~ , • . a ~~€~~_di~, hL,~~-i~i,~ ~~r~ue.ss.
I c. The City recognizes the important role that public- facilities
(such as sidewalks, neighborhood parks and -elementary
schools) and limited scale quasi-public uses (such as
~ smaller churches and daycare centers) -play in maintaining
viable residential neighborhoods.
.
Page 3-21
Land Use ~
d. Single family detached residential neighborhoods should be ~
~ protected from intrusion by non-residential or (ar(ge scale
multi-family uses. !i LU 4143 The City shall seek to abate existing incompatible uses in
residential neighborhoods. Mineral extraction operations
within mineral resource areas (Map 9.4) operating in
compliance with the conditions of their permit are not
incompatible uses.
LU-44" Home occupations in residential neighborhoods shall be
permitted only if they comply with perfortnance standards that
;
ensure compatibility with adjacent residential uses.
;
~ i LU-45 ~ Limited commercial uses (such as daycare centers and
,
s professional offices) may be permitted, but only under
; appropriate conditions, by means of conditional use permits
when landscaping and desigri features can be used to minimize
i impacts on surrounding uses and the site is:
;
;i
i a. Along the border of residential neighborhoods; or ~
~ b. In specific areas where site specific e:tieefns-conditiotis
~
i may limit the use of the site for -residential uses; or
c. Along arterials transecting residential neighborhoods.
;
LU-46" Development standards and regulations for residential areas
should avoid unnecessary barriers to the renovation and
~ improvement of homes in established neighborhoods built to
; previous standards.
LU-47-5 The City should give special attention to improving the quality
of low income neighborhoods and seek to implement programs
; which encourage rehabilitation of deteriorating structures and
; facitities in such neighborhoods. (Guidance for this poiicy is
provided by the City's annual Block Grant Program Plan.)
j
`i
(Jbjective 8.2 j To provide for the orderly transition to other uses of older residential areas
; that are no longer viable.
Policies: ~
Page 3-2271
Land Use
LU-4(~8 The management of areas in transition from existing residences
to a planned non-residential use, should balance the needs of
existing residents with the need to accommodate new uses.
} -
fe~tse=>~~~~~I v .1
I+-tlt~=+-~~--s~~-~~- it,--is--~_TTT
. . ! ` € y
5~.._~~[~'f'~._(::"f:)~:~'~'~'#i~C~'ti'~.:~'~;"f.}.~..e._f7.j.a,i. .
~ LU-4-9 Greater flexibility should be provided for home occupations in
transitional areas.
LU-50 Whenever considering a canversion from single family to
I another use, the applicaiit's burden shall be on demonstrating
the unsuitability of an area for conlinued single family use.
Tr-ttftsporttrtiort- Tese olicies tca he placeci in Trans ortatic~n Plarz
: ' A s -~t.)-".- le--- o. : ; . ` ~-c-~tt~;w~~.~~~~~.-=--r~.~~---~€-~--~~---~~~~ffi~~~.~--~~--~~~~
~ ~~t{~~~-~•~~e-i~.~~..~~_~~~--~~~--~~~-~~x~~~_~~-~~~tk£...~~~~~:r~,~~-~~~-e:~t~~-ar~~~
nLedy-.zfrv...{~i:tew.in
_ . e . . _ - >;i--P~a$~ibj
w.~~i'A3 €ic.4....t~fAv
n
. , . 4,
. ~rc . . . .
-W-44e_Ole...('Ry...will-:4f+}-e
ef I IS H F, e-~--ffeR 11- ofl loot, s--ha;=e- adeqa,~t{,~---6~.~t-iow----~[ ~a~--~'--tm=:~--~~-~~~;
-eek . . . . . . . . ~ ; . ,
. . . . . . . . . ,
i-ii-%e.spcii'iic tH-tiic.: ~ - # . .,zi--i ~-~=}~OE#ct~.`---~~=~--~~f~ri.'
cz c . ~ }
E:A J4 .f4 -_new -rc~u€e;; aSs
• ~<~;s~t~~~:-_ I~wfo-re
~ . . ~--oi=-~-k~-~~- tfaAi-e-in
Page 3-23 71
Land Use
~
411e f)s" _ei ~rC`sv?~i~)t~~'?1t§€:AC~
Ehi;-4113JXii:'d4....o:f
s° y ~ .
ft}tk~~4
,
--aft
-nieeg......fltie......x3iE.'d' fkFv
~~?i~~F~~~~: ~£~•..$.'1~~Sca L``s:;^sc~n.~~....§1~,"3a:x~.a.~~Erxi?t~£?i:; ~~zR?!-{£ i~3~~:-;:r.#~3£3t$_~l~i~kl
;
~ ~a4d
f _
; ....NX=hert..._1:1
E~E?f2!=t t3`E~ffit; 1~ttl#~4:¢Y1 a_...,~~t~t3i-fita3t`z
.
adi"tit;e..._Pt21piw+...€:~r3t a. ItstEiE'fifiz4lbi3_..take:fri...ti)
, , . .
~S... _.i4t~erfzd._...is.._.."he>~~ld [-e....p1a~~~~leA, fo.:..~~~-V
an(# ~~louk4 xis.......1.he a rea
~~~pro~ved....-~~ffkages.....-fifi.....fli-c---IA40.5
&ueh r+~.....~1~~-~:~~~~~$~~t~~-~;c~~~~~~~~;t~f~~
~
. :G : . . . - . .
4
Cil-y _shott4d... ~~~~t_ a_...!(.!0~t~~~~~~~~~~r;~.~..~~_~e~=~~t
~
~vlli~;~~ e~e:~~~x~~~t€,~,-~,~~~~~~~~~€~~t3 ~:~~~€~i~#~~-;~:
- ~
_ - . - , . f,
i . -~-~-rrt~--r~,r-C--~,-~--~`~-~-~-~5~4-~-~-tt~--c~C-t.
: ~ $4-----~ . ~-tf ~ --~--Fil~~.-3~'s-gf',+€3.-E) r ~rzs-•.: u '
; €f={t#~f~e 4 fl__-~~~~€~«~~~~~>~~~-; ._.4...-vvil-k il1So- - seek...._ to- 44m
,
k
, . . .
....-~e~~:~~...._M.....__~~~~~~~~-r~~
'
~ Cotntnercial ~
Development ~ Commercial land development provides needed services and jobs to
Auburn and regional residents and visitors. Further, it is a major
i; component of Auburn's tax base through the sales tax and property taxes it
~ generates.
;i
~ There are several different types of cammercial land, each providing
different types of services and jobs ~ id eh A i*h i}° o ° . The ~
i discussion and policies that follow recognize the importance of each of
. Page 3-24
\
. Land Use
-
. these types of commercial development and the important role that they
play.
GOAL 9. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
To maintain and establish a variety of commercial environments which
provide the full range of commercial services to the community and region
in a manner which reduces conflicts between different types of
commercial services and other uses.
Neighborhood Commercial
~ Small commercial centers within or adjacent to residential neighborhoods
serve a useful function in providing convenient access to neighborhood
residents for their "everyday" or "convenience" shopping needs. These
centers can serve to reduce the number of automobile trips or at least
shorten them by providing services near one's residence. Far
neighborhood centers to provide these benefits, attention must be paid to
ensuring adequate access to these centers from the adjacent neighborhood.
However, these commercial areas can also adversely affect a
neighborhaod by generating traffic and land use canflicts.
~ Due largely to the extensive commercialization of Auburn Way and the
north/south orientation of the developed portions o€ Auburn, few
residential neighborhoods within the city lie more than several blocks
from a commercial area. Significant autlying commercial centers have
also been developed, so that the currently developed residential
neighborhoods are adequately served. However, future large scale
residential developments will create a need for new small-scale
commercial centers. This Plan's policy toward neighborhood commercial
centers balances needs for shopping convenience with the protection of
I residential neighborhoods, and seeks to timit the development of new
inappropriate commercial strips.
Objective 9.1. To provide for the convenience commercial needs of residential areas,
while protecting existing and future residential neighborhoods from the
~ disruptive effects af commercial intrusions..:
Policies:
~ LU-.~? 1 Existing neighborhood oriented commercial centers should be
identified and designated. Commercial uses within these
centers should be limited to those having primaxy market areas
~ considerably smaller than the entire community.
Page 3-25
Land Use
LU 40_>? Designated neighborhood commercial centers should be ~
prevented from spreading along the arterials that serve them.
~ LU 61 ~53 A prime consideration in permitting the expansion of existing
neigilborhood commercial areas shall be the ability to
t adequately buffer any nearby residences from disruptive
impacts.
~ LU-4254 In some instances of existing neighborhood cornmercial
' centers, a transition zone of moderate density residential uses
' shouid be designated between the center and single family
i
; residential areas.
;
,
LU-4455 New neighborhood comrnercial centers should be considered
j under the "Special Planning Areas" concept. Such areas should
i be carefully designed and integrated into the overall" area :
; development plan so as to minimize traffic and land use
conflicts. Commercial uses shouid be limited to those having
primary market areas approximately the size of the special
i planning area.
~
~a LU-6456 Consideration should be given to providing adequate access to
~ neighborhood commercial development by non-motorized i
; modes such as walking and biking. Bamers to these modes
i such as walls and fences should be removed when possible and
~ shall be avoided in new development.
j l•1 ~ t rd :'=I c'r t
i
i
~
I ~._'('tl2l"y1e1`cial CG='1tY';; in mili;*f t;<#il S~"~I{>Cit'~P )I'c~?Lf, t1fIX (~f ti~,t : k34_'
I _
„ .a
.
ltlt€..€~.I;~t£t~ l$%lti"1 I'e`stC~i~;IlTts~f ~;a:~il:l?i~)ilel`1t`z. -~.'lIc:s(:; :1111% t,t:~€:: c.:c~tl.~i;i`;+
, t'S~~'t' :1t2
~--W______~.~___ `k7(oVIC~?tl~ i,C1T1 i::[I'+;.1.'t. _S~r11cdi,:`'~. ci.lI1'i€If~ .,ttt"I€"ti1Ei$21c,~d`i... .~13~iC~
~ i f:FfiCIC:tit tl4i. {3fboi11 1c3Tld siS`d It1Ila4ttLtct6iES;.,
t .
~ _
. . . :i . . . . . .
p1,{1t ((te ~4'te~°~ a?~?I'opt iate I121ACd ._LEse ol~e.t}111niei`C1<1l f113d bi sldt'Iltii2l
~ ~ .
I dC,velC)It2C(1~ a~esI€?~1~,~.z . -i~si1T`s. ~°£tTIl~7b~ta~?tflt4 U~~ tf5t z 1tI41t~t ri1s;;
_ _ _
' C;4~lTtitli:.tct il C,£I tti:€ cit`,.~ 1c~i<lL~.tli ~`c~;i£,[t;31~i~il II~:I„.,~1~7f)I'1lc~(}€~4
~ Pt}li%1aS:
tU:.._ 5 'L~~~c~~ i~s€~ ~€~::c~.itg~~it~~,r~t~; ~~::i#ti ~~~>t1i ~;~>r~~~i~er~:lzI ~~~~c~_~~~l~~€:~~'it~:i
e ~-t?k,~~c~i~~w'4i ~.r3. ~._!.t't 1~~~ofi~tl~}trt,..`~~.~l C.e~~l~..r.°i. .
Ci(:~ve,[i};t1IMI~~_SIIOi.El€:~ 1vtiLluile p>InIciI_E~~y_I.i,tati sIL%liti a(id
~ >
E3fCt€~c: s dC 4i~z)~liLi t(? ~~t"C)'+I€~c Ct~tl ~ C,(11~,3IC Srt€317~t~1~ L[~C'~ £~tl1L
- -
4c,1'v[€.cs f{Jt llCil.ihl {C",1&ili',. tITth1mY"rct? i?41c{ }li;c1vv €.otYiIlt,t'Ctaz
_ _
~
,
~I[c.}€t~~.I's,?L:
: Page 3-26
Land Use
~
. _....,....__.C..._.. _ _ . .a .
i
IIIi=?C>li i?t C~?l' t'C'tZtbi Lt
i<Il%1: .i" llic.,C' tls~ifli,E. ILS[lit`z1tIiSE fis".'tiiS
L4`~thlii 11iL 'tll~ "?sZzld1(le oE' t=tl t31c siwt~ .:€.i
tpac.,*, sf1t2Eliti'si+il a(TEI Ii,cc` Efx3Itei1` io
t'CtxfE~ llld 0111CC FI>~:~, QtT ~1wi: tihoCild bC
-
bs:"113[2d i)7 !t? Skh; f?f 11:t<' t?la'(IfItii:'_a, ei1Ji3sc,CI t.ili4illl
lI,it kI tll()A(-4i`~SI~~~i'. ~14i~~,titY''E~it C:{a+ti 'It£ ti1~t yt.€C ~7:it~1~
_
11':tI'it 11C' it) ftii:llll.i?c: timC' i;i ct,WCtSoil", >t Olt;)tl
. . .
~,a€:?s,.°#s`?.l"~CItF 'tif)i1t; ldiLia.eFfl i(?td•, t= uI~$ 311t] i()
.
~•c=;~t.t~z~t~z€1 c~e~ ~~i~~~~a~~ettts.
Highway Commercial
While commercial uses along arterials (often called "strip cornmercial"
development) provide important services to community residents, the
proliferation of commercial uses along arterials raises several land use
planning issues. On the negative side, strip commercial development
creates traffic flow problems and conflict with adjacent land uses. Due to
their "linear" nature, commercial strips result in a maximum area of
contact between commercial uses and other land uses resulting in a high
potential for land use conflicts: Poor visual character due to excessive
• signage and architectural styles designed to attract attention instead of
promoting a sense of community is an additional concern. Pedestrian
shopping is made difficult, resulting in greater generation of automobile
traffic, and large fields of asphalt parking lots are needed to accommodate
single purpose vehicle trips.
Despite the problems associated with commercial devetopment along
arterials, many such Iocations are often quite unsuitable for other uses, due
to the impacts associated with heavy traffic volumes. Also, many
commercial uses thrive at such locations due to high visibility and
accessibility. The Plan seeks to manage existing arterial commercial areas
to take advantage of the accessibility they provide, while minimizing
traffic and land use conflicts and improving their visual appearance
through an enhanced design review process and development standards.
Objective 9.32. ~ To encourage the appropriate use of areas adjacent to -heavily traveled
arterials while minimizing land use and traffic conflicts by:
• Managing the continued commercial development of existing
commercial arterials in a manner which minimizes traffic and land use
conflicts.
~
Page 3-27
Land Use ~
Conserving residential qualities along heavily traveled arterials which ~
are not yet commercialized, by restricting commercial development to
types which provide an appropriate buffer.
;
~
~j • Protecting existing, viable residential areas along lesser--traveled
'i arterials, from commercial development.
i
~
Policies: LU ',8.. The City shall identify those existing commercial arterials that
~ are appropriate for continued general (heavy) commercial
development, and those arterials that are appropriate for
' continued or future limited (i.e. professional office type)
' commercial development.
i
LU-6=-~9 The City shall review its'standards relating to the number, size
~ and location of driveways to ensure consistency with goals and
s policies xelating to arterial commercial develapment.
;
LU-W60 The City shall encourage the grouping of individual
commercial enterprises along commercial arterials to promote
~ the sharing of parking areas, access drives and signs. Such
i grauping can be encouraged through land division regulations, ~
; sign
regulations and develapment standards.
,i
LU 48 61.. Moderate density multiple family residential development shait
be used to buffer general (heavy) commercial arterial
development from single family developrnent. Extensive
; screening and Iandscaping shall be used ta buffer general
i commercial uses from multiple family uses. However, the
placernent of walls and fences and site designs which prevent
easy access by bicyclists and pedestrians should be avoided.
1
LtT-4962 Arterials experiencing strung pressure for commercial
j development, but not yet committed to general (heavy)
commercial uses, shall be designated for mixed light
commercial and moderate density multi-family uses.
; Development regulations should encourage the development of
' professional office and similar uses and small seale multiple
; family housing, with development and design standards
' earefully drawn to ensure preservation of a quatity living
; environment in adjacent neighborhaods. Development
' regulations could also alIow other light commercial and higher
' density multi-family housing, subject to an extensive public
; reuiew, and possibly a design review process. ~
Page 3-28
I Land Us;71
LU o(I Residential arterials having good potential for long term
maintenance of a quality living environment shvuld be
protected from the intrusion of commercial uses. In sorrie
instances, these may be appropriate locations for churches and
other religious institutions, or moderate density muitiple farnily
uses.
~ LU- 1,6" Newly developed arterials shall incorporate design features,
and development of adjacent land shall be managed such that
creation of new commercial strips is avoided. Land division
regulations shall result in single farnily residences being
oriented away from the arterial, with access provided by a non-
arterial street.
~ LU--=-2-65 _ Commercial strip development along Auburn Way South
should be limited to north of the R Street overpass.
( LU-qt~66 The City should develop design standards and guidelines for
developmen# along arterials to improve their visual appearance.
The Regional SuperMall .
~
The development o€ the "SuperMall of the Great Northwest on 155 acres
~ near the junction of SR167 and SRI8 in the 1990's has led to- a
"destination" mall attracting consumers from long distances.
~ During the Mall's devetopment review, a number of issues were raised.
Included in these issues were the impacts of the SuperMali on Auburn
dDowntown and the possibility of commerciat sprawl around' the
I SuperMall that would exacerbate impacts to the dDowntown and traffic
around tke SuperMall:
~ Since that time, several factors have changed. Auburn's dDowntown, as a
designated urban center, has developed a more- specific vision for the
community. Also, it is not expected that the SuperMall will develop to its
~ maximum square footage; and t~~e--pf;"sl~~-7V--c-s-f'-:stfetili-ied--~-i~--~-~-~
~,n,.
~la=Tg~~-=m~~-retail commercial uses }izive leconie a more important
local government revenue source.
The Ciry should continue its commitment to the SuperMall's development
as a regional attraction, and take advantage of the SuperMall's presence to
complement strategies related to downtown preservation and development.
~
Page 3-29
Land Use ~
f
Objective 9.43. ~ To capture the retail market of customers visiting the SuperMall and ~
! strengthen Auburn's role as a major retail commercial center for the
I region.
. . . . . ,.k . . - . .
f
~ Policies:
,
~ LU- ¢Support commercial development around the SuperMall that
i complements its role as a regional shopping center.
,j
,
The City wili oppose the developtnent of -a regional shopping
~ center,in the unincorporated areas in the vicinity of the city.
J; LU44669 The City will seek ways to draw customers from the SuperMalt
' into the downtown and other areas within the city.
1
:i
~f LU ?-~70 The City shali continue to recognize and support the
development af downtown Auburn as a focal point of the
~
' Auburn community.
;
,
Downtawn ;
Auburn Downtowns have historically served as the business, cultural and '
gavernmental focal points of their cammunities. In many communities
tlike Auburn) this role has been challenged by new shopping patterns ~
focused on regional malls and commercial areas outside of the downtown.
:I Maintaining a healthy and vital downtown Auburn continues to be
~ important as it is recognized by residents as a focal point of the corn-
munity and an important element of the City's identity.
~
? In May 2001, the Aubum City Council adopted the Auburn Downtown
; Plan. The Auburn Downtawn Plan is the City's updated strategy to
I continue its downtown revitalization efforts consistent with State, regional
; and local grow#h management planning concepts and strategies. The
' Auburn Downtown Pian, and this Plan, provides that Downtown Auburn
~ should remain the commercial, cultural and governmental focal point for
the community. Efforts to enhance this function fcrr powntown Auburn
`I are strangly supported.
,
~ The Auburn Downtown Plan is based on irnplementing poZicies and
strategies through partnerships and innovative techniques. The City, the
downtown business community and members of the community at-iarge
'i will need to work closely together to maintain and upgrade the quality of
the downtown working, livin~ and shopping environment.
i
i Part of the impetus for developing new strategies to approach downtown
~ revitalization is the development of the Sound Transit Commuter Rail ~
~ Transit Station. The Auburn Downtown Plan seeks to build on the
;
j
~
Page 3-30
Land Use7
i excitement and energy resulting from public investment in the Transit
Station and in other public investments such as the Third Street Grade
Separation project.
~ The Auburn Downtown Plan envisions Attbum°:s downtown -as an urban
center. Designation as an urban center was achieved in 2004. Auburn's
urban center:
• Establishes a 220 acre planning area that is the focus for downtown
redevelopment.
• Provides incentives for downtown development and redevelopment
through policy direction that supports:
t;e!ltes _r4g.=n
-Elimination of transportation impact fees---t{:>i---fi---fi-vle-- ye~ai?
per~i'+d;
-Elimination of stormwater improvements for
redevelopment of existing sites that do not result in an
increase in impervious surface;
~ -Lower level of service for transportation facilities; and,
-Reduction in the off-street parking requirements-4*-t-1+e-€:'
i.~oiie compared to other ~~--aregs in the city=~-~-~
areit- 1t1_1 ~~~nletiliate_-ftr-Fgxfif-N, ef-
• Encourages non-motorized pedestrian and bicycle connections and
linkages to and within the urban center area.
• Encourages protection of historic assets and resources from
redevelopment activities.
• Identifies potential catalyst projects and sites to spur development
activity in the downtown and better focus redevelopment and
mazketing efforts.
• Encourages more residential development downtown and also 24-
hour type uses and nigh:ttime actiyity.
• Seeks to remove undesirable land uses and other blighting
influences in the downtown area.
• Promotes street improvements and enhancements to improve access
and the visual qualities of the streetscape.
ig_
' . -4€+e-G----'-~'H-
t:lle _Pf cneip:les
_~i--ans€-..._.....c~~4efiteu... ......_.:~~~.~.~j
Page 3-31
. . . j . , .
j
I Land Use
~
~ K ~E _.aW, .E`rE?ii
t.itlik ~ .}t}7 [1 s:, v Cs l.itlr11€_'Cl ct i t' ~ /0 !I10'_ti` ?t'I 10 r t~l%`..iil.ti t?.tl.I1
_ . _
the Do,.litowil (;et~ter(f)t.V) "IstrM. Un1=1~e otfier _ . _ _ _
' Ztllc.tiTftIi^+ dfl`ilti,,:.t ~111()t'4s_;tlz. 1:Lneti ctfl_ald: Lse._ Liti~s~, zpi^tltt,xijll'
I)~'C~~3i l3itiCI. t1I 1ti~4.11i~ti. it zs~t:~"LtIC4.:~ r€,% 3Itf~.l1s(Cv t~f
ti~,N ~.lC??[lI;I1C ~)4'
~ _ ~
,zlll~~L~C'~~ 1 z~3{~I" ~~~iE,{z. ~.~..~`~~i3 ~ix`tcl...1'3T'l?~ ~a~~~~ iP~~.i~ESi~t~ ; i€ ~t2l~z~~I'
~ tCllttlstlv t?i L'`s, l [1e De_'( 70I"lt. <II4C? 1C sWt"€,ti tc.I;'Xt,`~~ pqtktli4,~ sE"i TC1liI"ds
ECt)I110t°:dtse f.aL€tlCI }F otf1e7' !oIe ifistEtctS Gltii] bv tf:i<rc.elck', <{di;piC.tl De;.11-I:
S l.ill(.1ardtt? eI14trtt_.1 I?QI3 tju:tlitv ()f CIeIeloni?2ew EII ta?e d()t-i_F1tC)wtt ~lI°e4I.
;
' ?~~~~~a:i~§f31:~_~:~~~.t=~E~~-I~~€x~,:s~-~H--i~--~zke:=~~-1~-`rk?-~;~s-#~-~f3t,~t.~~-._~`k~~{~~4__t•f3~~"~~._i.3t1t~
; estdIl&aa-Cb.:..4o ._..eflstil-e
~ ~~~veen.t.:..sEiwook! -bL ...~lai;~.a{:J......k~~~~in tile
. . .
i r`~~ -'~rt't'k -~r€-r;mrrt:c.:.'-,cz-rc, .
! ~be a€l:..._a~,~~~~~- R.t....:~~- ~?tII~~~~.: an~i -~.~~~=iAe..._t~z~:°tt~el=~~~r~3s..._k* ~~~__these
.
GOAL 10 ; DOWNTOWN ~
~
,
;
To encourage development and redevelopment within Downtown Auburn
; which reflects its unique character as the community's historic center, that
; is consistent with the Auburn Downtown Plan's vision for powntown
` Auburn as an urban center within King County and the Puget Sound
a region.
,
r Objective 10.1 ; To preserve and enhance the role of downtown Auburn as the focal point
of the Auburn community for business, governmental and cultural
= activities.
i Policies:
( i LU- 7971 For the purpose of implementing, the goal and policies for
~ downtown Auburn, "downtown" shall generally be
considered that area bounded on the south by.Highway 18; on
the east by "F" Street; on the north by Park Avenue
(extended); and on the west by the Union Pacific tracks. (See
Map 3.3)
f; LU 78A72 Auburn's urban centerire ig onal growth center boundaries
shall be those established as the planning area for the Auburn
Downtown Ptan adopted May 2001 (See Map 3,4). ~
,
;
Page 3-32
7-1
Land Use
. ~ LU-"='3 Implement the policies and strategies of the Auburn
Downtown Plan to support development of Auburn's urban
center.
~ LU-=",8C74 Encourage the attainment of urban center growth forecasts
through implementation of higher intensity development to
achieve the efficient use of land.
~ LU- t0745 Downtown shall continue to be recognized as the business,
governmental and cultural focal point of the community. A
diversity of uses including multifamily residential should be
encouraged to maintain a vibrant, active and competitive center
for the City of Auburn.
~ LU4076 The City should continue to support the development and
rehabilitation of multiple family housing in the Downtown,
i-nektdi*-g_}.g4~-g-eted.._towa-al-spei;i-al---ntt
6or,-,,as, Wrt_ of rn_ixed use
, pro~ect_s.
~ LU-8,1"7 The City shall maintain an ongoing downtown planning and
action program involving the downtown business community
~ and other interested groups. This activity should be guided by
~ this doettnientPlan and; the Auburn Downtown Plan-an4-4he
~ LU ~-?;'8 The City shall continue to give priority consideration to the
maintenance and irnpmvement of public facilities and seruices
in the downfown area.
Downtown Land Uses
Objective 10.2 To recognize areas within the downtown that have identifiable characters
and uses.
~ LU-8379 The area north of First Street North, west of Auburn Avenue,
south of Fifth Street North and east of the Burlington Northern
tracks should be designated and managed as a medical and
professional services area. New heavy commercial and
industrial uses should be prohibited and existing ones
amortized. Commercial uses supporting medical and
professional uses should receive priority.
( LU-8480 The area lying generally east of "D" Street S.E. and south of
~ Main Street (not ineluding the Main Street frontage) shall be
designated for mixed residential and commercial uses.
Page 3-33
Land Use
~ LU-8531 The area lying generally between Auburn Way North (but not ~
properties abutting AWN) and Auburn High School should be
designated for multiple family residential uses.
i
,
~ LU-5682 Automabile oriented uses within the r°n+fa' Bu
DisttietDowI1C0wn Urban Center shall be developed and
located in accordance with the poticy direction of the Auburn
Downtown Plan and implementing G--3DliC, G°•°+..,,' B..°.;n°~s
Distfirc4Downtowti Urban Center code requirements.
; Downtown Urban Design
{
Objective 10 To ensure that all new develapment and redevelopment in the downtown
i reflect the unique character of the area.
LU-9783 The City shall develop programs and ordinances to preserve
t and protect downtown's historic character. Development codes
should be revised as : needed to recognize the uniqueness of
;
' downtown through appropriate performance standards and
design guidelines. A high level of visual amenity should be
~ pursued, and no heavy outdoor uses or outdoor storage should
; be allowed.
LU-S$-84 T'he downtown area shall be comprised of a mixture of uses
i consistent with the area's role as the focal point of the
~ community. These uses shall be primarily "people-oriented" as
; opposed to "automobile-oriented", and shall include
comrnercial, rnedical, governmental, professional services,
cultural and residential uses.
( LU-99$5 Regulations for the retail core of downtown should encourage
retail uses, but should discourage uses which result in a high
proportion of single use vehiele trips (such as fast food
~ restaurants and drive-through windows).
' Downtown Transportation
Objective 10.34: ~ To emphasize pedestrian traffic and transit usage in the downtown.
~ LU-9886 Emphasis should be given to enhancing pedestrian linkages
between the Hospital area, the Main Street retail core, the
Performing Arts Center, the southwestern portion of
( Downtown, and the parking area adjacent to the--Safeway
Supefstet-e. An important element of this emphasis will be to
reduce the pedestrian barrier effect of Auburn Avenue and i
Auburn Way.
Page 3-34
Land Use
.
~ LU-94-87 The City should build upon past efforts to improve pedestrian
amenities, through public improvements, sign regulations and
development standards. The maintenance of public and private
improvements should be given priarity commensurate with
downtown's role as the focal point of the community.
~ LU-0-2-88 The City shall work with transit providers to increase the
availability and effectiveness of transit in downtown and
between downtown, other commercial and employment areas,
residential areas, and the region at large.
I LU-43.89 As regional transportation programs such as commuter rail are
implemented, the City will strive to ensure that; the downtown
is a beneficiary.
Downtown Parking
Objective 10.4_`a: ~ To develop a parking program for the downtown which recognizes the
~ area's historic pedestrian character, while providing sufficient parking for
( customers of all businesses., resiclents,and comin,uter5.
LU-9490 A strong Downtown shall be encouraged through improved
parking, circulation, and the grouping of business outlets and
governmental services. Parking standards should be developed
which recognize the unique nature of downtown parking
demand. The City should work with the business community
in public/private partnerships to develop a coordinated and
effective approach to providing adequate parking and
circulation.
~ LU-9-591 A strong Downtown shall be encouraged through improved
parking, circulation, and grouping of business outlets and
governmental services. The development of public parking
lots to serve the downtown should be guided by a Downtown
Parking Plan.
~ LU-9692. The City views adequate parking in the downtown area as a
critical step in implementing the downtown policies and the
rehabilitation policies of this Plan. All business in the
downtown area will be hindered if adequate parking is not
available. However, parking needs eoupled with rehabilitation
needs in the downtown area require special policies:
• a. Some flexibility in the general parking requirements of the
City may be necessary to accommodate reuse of existing
Page 3-35
Land Use
buildings and to accommodate new development. Such ~
flexibility should be directed at seeking to pool parking
resources through the formation of a Downtown parking
LID when such parking cannot be provided by the business
or through shared parking agreements.
' b. Since rigid parking requirements will interfere with
redevelopment of downtown, and the pattern of existing
development restricts the amount of parking available,
? public development of parking in the downtown area is
aPPropriate.
c. A comprehensive study af the parking needs of downtown
should be made to determine the most effieient method of
meeting the unique parking demands of the area.
~
d. Parking policy for the downtown needs to balance the
; impact of parking on downtown's pedestrian character,
economic develogment and transit usage. ,
; Downtown Redevelopment
;
Objective 10 .56: To work with all interested groups on revitalizing the Downtown area. ~
LU-97-93 The City of Auburn should strive to rnaintain active working
relatianships with the Aubutn Downtown Assaciation, the
Ghamber of Commerce and other groups whose goal is the
f revitalization of dawntown. The City will seek to become a
partner with these and other groups, where feasible, in
public/private partnerships that further the goal of downtown
~ revitalization.
,
f'LU-i*94 The City shalt continue to support legislation to impruve fiscal
- leverage in urban rehabilitation programs.
s
LU-9995 The City shall continue to support #he redevelopment efforts of
the private sector in the downtown area.
Indastrial '
Development ? Auburn's industrial land and the development that it supports accounts for
a significant percentage of the City's tax base. It also provides a large
; number of jobs to both city and regianat xesidents. Good industrial Iand is
r a limited resource and should be fully utilized to maximize its potential
benefits. Industrial development typically utilizes extensive amounts of
i land and is typically located near major transportation facilities. For these ~
: reasons, industrial activities are often quite visible. For people traveling
Page 3-36
~ Land Use
~ on SR167, industrial development is the primary view they have of
Auburn.
~ Streamlined Sales Tax legislation would;---~c-~ver-,--changes the tax
structure within the state and has specific cansequences for industrial,
warehouse and distribution cities such as Auburn. In response to the
State's consideration of such legislation, the Auburn City Council
approved Resolution No. 3782 in November 2004.
Resolution No. 3782 outlines an approach and actions the City will take
related to land use planning, zoning and other matters in the event a
streamlined sales tax proposal or other similar proposals that change the
tax structure are adopted. Included in this resolution is direction to
consider amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning codes to
reevaluate the existing industrial land use designations and patterns in the
City.
GOAL 11. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
To provide for, establish and maintain a balance of industrial uses that
respond to local and regional needs and enhance the city's image through
~ optimal siting and location, taking into consideration tax policy impacts of
streamlined sales tax and/or other similar legislation.
Type of Industrial Uses
There is a wide variety of possible industrial uses that could be sited in
Auburn. As with the mix of residential uses, the mix of industry also
affects the image of the city. The regional image of the city is that of an
industrial suburb with an emphasis on heavy industry. This image is quite
apparent as one travels along Highway 167 where there is an almost
unending view of high-bay warehouse buildings.
Different types of industrial areas should be separated since some types of
industrial activities conflict with other industrial activities (especially
those of a more desirable character). Such separation should be based
primarily on performance standards.
Location of Industrial Uses
Before the adoption of xhe 1986 Comprehensive Plan, there had been little
separation of various types of industrial uses. At the time, there was no
. well understood policy basis regarding the separation of different types of
industrial uses and some areas very suitable for high quality light
Page 3-37
Land Use
industrial uses were eommitted to heavier uses. High visibiiity corridors ~
' developed with a heavier industrial character and established a heavy
= industry image for the city. The Plan provides etear distinction between
~ different industrial uses. It also reserves areas for light industrial uses.
Qbjeetive 11.1. ' To create a physical image for the city conducive to attracting light
industry.
~ Policies:
;
,
LU-4-8096 Highly visible areas which tend to establish the image of the
city should not be used by heavy industriai uses.
LU-4-04-97 The City shall promote high quality development of ali light
i industrial and warehouse areas.
LU402-98 The City shall aggressiveiy seek to abate ail potentialiy
blighting influences in industrial areas, especially in areas
~ visible to regional traffic tlows and in areas designated for light
~
industrial uses.
'
Objective 11.2. ; To establish performance standards appropriate for developing industrial
; areas. ~
~
j Policies:
;
~
LU-48399 Compatibility among land uses should be enhaneed through
landseaping, building orientation and setbacks, traffic control
and other measures to reduce potential canflicts.
LU-4841 OU Ail industrial development should incorporate aesthetically
pleasing building and site design. The City shall arnend its
j codes and performanee standards which govern industrial
; development to implernent this policy.
,
i
a. Procedures shall be established #o ensure aesthetically
pleasing building and site design in areas designated for
light industrial areas.
~
b. Appropriate landscaping and site development standards
; shall regulate site development in heavy industrial areas.
{ C. Unsightly views, such as heavy machinery, service
entrances, storage areas, rooftop equipment, loading docks,
and parking azeas should be screened from view of adjacent ~
Page 3-38
~Land Use
• retail, commercial, light industrial and residential areas and
from public streets.
( LU-4-051 01 Needed rights-of-way, on-site and off-site road
improvements, and utilities should be assured before
development occurs.
~ LU-4-96102 Individual development projects shall provide the following
minimal improvements in accordance with established City
standards:
a. Full standard streets and sidewalks in compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
b. Adequate off street parking for employees and patrons.
c. Landscaping.
d. Storm drainage.
e. Water.
` f. Sanitary sewers.
g. Controlled and developed access to existing and proposed
streets.
Objective 11.4. To reserve areas appropriate for industrial development.
Policies:
( LU-44)7103 Any significant industrial activity shall be limited to the
designated Region Serving Area of the city (see Map 3.2). The
City recognizes that industrial development's place varying
demands on the community's quality of life and service
capabilities. In addition to demonstrating a developments'
consistency with Plan policies, applicable land use regulations,
and environmental policies, significant industrial development
shall be encouraged to provide a balance between service
demands and impacts placed on the city's quality of life vs. the
local benefits derived from such development. The extent to
which industrial development is promoted shall also take into
consideration tax policy and tax structure impacts upon the
City.
•
Page 3-39
. ~ Land Us~~
LU-4-08104 Residential uses in industrial areas shall be allowed in i
industrial areas that have been established to promote a
business park environment that complernents environmental
: features, and/ar if development standards are developed ta
` promote compatibility between residential and other non-
residential land uses. :
~ i LU-4-99105 The grouping of uses which will mutually benefit each
other or provide needed services will be encouraged.
;
a. Compatible commercial uses may be permitted in
designated industrial areas.
b. Planned developments (such as "office parks") which
pravide a mixture of light industrial with supporting
~ commercial uses are encouraged.
~
; c. Uses which support industrial and warehouse activities
" should be located near those uses.
LU-4-48106 Development of designated industrial sites shall be
consistent with applicable enviranmental standards and
policies. 0
LU--11 OA 107 Land made available for industrial development, and uses
~ allowed in industrial zones, shall take into consideration
impacts of tax policy and tax structure upon the City of
Auburn.
~
4bjective 11.4. To ;reserve and pratect areas which are highly suitable for light industrial
development.
;
; Policies:
LU-444108 Designation of light industrial areas shall have priarity over
,
! heavier industrial uses.
~',LU-44-2109 Highly visible areas (land visible from SR167 or SR18)
which tend to establish the image of the city should not be used
~ by heavy industriat uses. Rather, efforts shoutd be made to
; develop zoning districts that complement industrial
develapment adjacent to environmental features such as the
Auburn Environmental Park.
Objective 11.5. ;To identify areas appropriate for heavy industriai uses. •
,
,
Page 340
Land Use
• Policies:
~ LU444110 Heavy industrial uses shall be separated from lighter
industrial, commercial and residentiat areas.
~ LU-444111 The most appropriate areas for heavy industrial uses are in
the central part of the Region Serving Area adjoining the rail
lines.
~ LU--i.4-SI l? Heavy industrial uses are appropriate in the southern
portion of the Region Serving Area which is now developed in
large scale industrial facilities.
~ LU-444I 13 Heavy industrial uses shall be strictly prohibited from the
Community Serving Area of Auburn (see Map 3.2). The only
exception to this general policy shall be the continued heavy
industrial use of the area east of "A" Street S.E., as shown by
the Comprehensive Pian Map.
~ Redevelopment
and Infill A major goal of the Growth Management Act is to reduce urban sprawl.
One way to minimize sprawl -is to --fully develop areas --already receiving
I urban services -prior to extending these services to additional areas. A
further benefit of redeveloprnent is that it may lead to the removal of
buildings and uses that detract from an area. Redevelopment can serve as
a major catalyst in the stabilization and revitalization of areas throughout
the city.
GOAL 12. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT
'To encourage redevelopment of underutilized areas to reduce sprawl and
take full advantage of the City's investment in existing infrastructure.
Objective: 12.1 To facilitate infill development.
Policy:
I LU-44-7114 Encourage well designed infilt and redevelopment projects
to fully utilize previous investment in existing infrastructure.
~ LU--3-44115 Reduce the consumption of undeveloped land by
facilitating the redevelopment of underutilized land and infill
~ of vacant parcels whenever possible. .
~ '
( o.. ,,..a 311 ~ o ,;t~.•n ..:l: iI'~
+•~ai
~~V[1 1111~.4 1K1»1 lilLiiTil
Page 3-41
~ Land Use
•
~ • ,ntifn e~'1nyo
1F13iIi
~ LU IAA~ 116 Explore innovative mechanisms to encourage the more
efficient use of land including density bonuses and sale of air
rights:
a
~ t..(.--3117 ~:~c~~ti#% <ir< x> ~;~~i~,r~,lG~l o.. , ir~t-tIi development
; _
,
; c:t2d 16'Lis 4tIt,ef FiS1d t111l1t1 dls1CSi (t> i1111111;c;
_
i lllf.ti' C~t; E c,la} ~ITlLili
;
~
;i
}
f
;
, . . . . '~,i. . . ~ ~ ~ ~ .
~
. ~ ~ . !i ~ . . . . . '
~ . ~ ~ . . . ~ . . ~ . . . . . . .
. . ~ . . . . ..."s ~ . . . . .
. ~ . . ` 7 . _ . .
~
. ~ . . . . . . . ~
. . ~ . . . ~ ...i ~ ~ . . . . .
. . . . . ..S . . ~ .
- . . ' ~ . . ~'f . . ~ ~ .
t
. . . . . . . . .f . . . .
. . . . ; . . . . . . •
Page 342
•
CHAPTER 4
HOUSING
Introduction
The Growth Management Act requires a housing element addressing the
availability of affordable housing for all segments of the population.
Housing affordability can be an issue for all income categories. The
primary supplier of housing for more affluent income groups is the market
place, with government playing only a minor role. However, the market
place only marginally meets the housing needs of lower income groups,
and therefore the government plays a more significant role in providing
affordable housing to these income groups.
While the importance of this section should not be underestimated, it is
crucial to note other important factors. The affordability of housing
regards a wide range of issues and related topics; for instance, land use,
• economic development and human services. Each of these topics
influences the development and character of Auburn's housing stock. To
understand this plan's approach to affordable housing requires looking at
the plan as a whole and not solely this section.
This element is prepared with the understanding that regional and national
trends have a considerable impact on housing. Regional and federal
policies, land availability, labor and material cost, financial markets
including interest rates, consumer demands; all exercise influence on
housing development and are beyond the immediate influence of the City
of Auburn .
Even with these limitations, Auburn's Comprehensive Plan contains
reasonable and feasible strategies and policies. By implementing this
Comprehensive Plan, Auburn can sustain and enhance those attributes that
currently make it a desirable place to live.
Background
and Issues Housing Market Analysis
In the year 2000, the median sales price of a single family residence in
Auburn was $161,950 and the median value of a home was $153,400,
• according to the King County Assessor. Compared to the rest of King
Page 4-1
Housing
County, the cost of housing in Auburn is a bargain. In year 2000 the ~
median sales price of a single family residence in King County was
$289,800 and the median value was $236,000. Four years later the
median sales price of a home in Auburn increased to $262,000 and the
median value of homes is $176,000. The cost of housing in Auburn is still
considerably less than the rest of King County, but it is quickly catching
up. The following table represents a snapshot of the housing market on
two separate dates. Several of the homes for sale that are less than
$100,000 are mobile homes in designated manufactured home parks.
Figure 4.1
Homes for Sale in Auburn
5/18/2004 6/2/2002
Total Number of SF Houses 429 474
Median Price: 262,000 $239,950
Number of Units
Over $325,000 98 93
$250,000 to $325,000 146 118
$175,000 to $250,000 115 186
~
$100,000 to $175,000 32 72
Less than $100,000 38 5
Housing Affordabilitv
Affordability concerns all households, regardless of income. It pertains to
a household's attempt to reach a balance between its financial means and
its desire for decent housing and amenities. The accepted definition of
affordability is based on the percentage of household income spent on
dwelling costs. Dwelling costs for an owner occupied unit include
principal and interest payments, taxes, insurance and public utilities. A
housing unit is considered affordable if monthly dwelling costs are less
than 30% of the household's gross income. If a larger share of household
income is spent on dwelling costs, then the household is probably
sacrificing money that would normally be spent for other basic needs such
as food, health care, child care, education, etc.
The term "affordability gap" refers to the difference between the average
price of housing - either rented or owned - and the recommended,
affordable price of housing. A positive gap means the price of housing is
less than the recommended amount that a household could afford to pay.
Households with positive affordability gaps have several choices of .
affordable housing. A negative gap indicates the price of housing exceeds
Page 4-2
F Housing
• the recommended amount for housing. Households with a negative
affordability gap have fewer housing choices.
According to the Year 2000 Census, the median household income in
King County was $53,157 per year or $4,430 per month. For half of the
households in King County, housing costs of less than $1,330 per month
would be affordable { 30°Io of $4,430 per month The Census indicated
the median rent paid by Auburn residents was $639 per month and the
median mortgage payment was $1,061 per month. Subsequently, Auburn
has a number of affordable housing choices relative to King County in
general. Figure 4.2 represents the relative affordability of housing costs
relative to the King County Median Household Income.
Figure 4.2
Housing Affordability by Income Level
Income Group Yr 2000 Monthly Affordable % Auburn
Household Income Housing Costs Households
Very Low Income less than $1,285
(0-29% of KCMI) { less than $8 r hour } $0 to $385 16%
Low Income $1,286 to $2,215
(30-49% of KCMI) {$8 -$13 r hour} $386 to $664 24%
Moderate Income $2,216 to $3,544
(50-79% of KCMI) ($13 -$20 r hour) $665 to $],060 16%
• Low-Median Income $3,545 to $4,430
(80.99% of KCMI) {$20 -$25 r hour} $~.061 to $1,330 l4%
High-Median Income $4,431 to $5,270
(101-] 19% of KCMI) {$25 -$30 er hour} $>>331 to $1,580 9%
Upper Income more than $5,270
$1581 or more 21%
(120% or more of KCMI) (more than $35 r hour)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Cost Burden
Figure 4.3 shows the percentage of total households in Auburn and King
County relative to the amount of their household income spent on housing
costs. In both King County and Auburn approximately one out of three
households pay 35% or more of their household income for housing costs.
Approximately 75°Io of Auburn households who earn less than $20,000 per
year pay more than 30% for their housing costs. For income groups above
$20,000 per year, an even greater percentage of King County households
have unaffordable housing. A larger percentage of households earning
between $35,000 to $50,000 per year can find affordable housing in
Auburn than the rest of King County.
Figure 4.3
Households Paying More Than 30% for
Housing Costs By Income Group
•
Page 4-3
Housing
income Group Auburn King Go. ~ Pierce Co •
$100,000 or more: i
(
$75,000 to $99,999:
$50,000 to $74,999:
i
$35,000 to $49,999:
$20,000 to $34,999:
$10,000 to $19,999:
Less than $10,000:
~
0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
- c\1 m v Ln co N ao rn
% Total Households in income Group
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Assisted Housing
The bulk of the assisted housing is provided by the King County Housing
Authority (KCHA). KCHA administers 11,626 units of housing dispersed •
among 23 suburban cities and unincorporated areas of King County. It
offers housing programs that include:
• Public housing for families, senior citizens and people living
with disabilities;
• Affordable work force housing;
• Emergency and transition facilities for homeless and special
needs populations;
• Homeownership initiatives;
• Section 8 certificate and voucher programs, as well as
• Home repair and weatherization for private dwellings.
As of April 1999 KCHA manages 3,384 public housing units for families,
seniors, and people with special needs in the county outside Seattle and
Renton. The stock of public housing is quite diverse, ranging from single
family to townhouse to multifamily developments. Most family
developments are small, having 30 units or less. The populations served
by the KCHA include families, the elderly, chronically mentally ill,
developmentally disabled, victims of domestic violence, youth, and
persons with AIDS. Eligible families earn no more than 50% ofthe King
County median income. Rents are not more than 30°Io of the tenant's net
income. Approximately 678 units, which is 20% of KCHA total units, are •
located in Auburn.
Page 4-4
Housing
• Figure 4.4
KCHA Rental Units Located in Auburn
Development Name Number Type of
of Units Housing
Green River Homes I 60 F/S/D Green River Homes II 60 F/S/D
Wayland Arms 67 S/D
Burndale 50 F
Firwood Circle 50 F
Plaza Seventeen 70 S/D
Gustaves Manor 35 S/D
Auburn Square 160 F
Tall Cedars Mobile 126 F
Home Park
Totals 678
D: Disabled F: Family S:Senior
King County Housing Authority administers the Section 8 Housing
Assistance Program which subsidizes the rental payments of low income
households. Approximately 8.7% of King County's vouchers and
• certificates are issued to Auburn landlords and tenants. According to
information provided by KCHA, Auburn currently has 1,246 Section 8
assisted housing units. The King County Consolidated Plan states that in
1999 Auburn had 999 housing units funded through Section 8. Apparently
the number of Section 8 units has increased 25% over the past five years.
The need for public housing exceeds the supply of available public
housing and/or Section 8 housing vouchers. As of April 1999,
approximately 2,400 applicants were on the waiting list for public
housing. Among these applicants, 62% qualify for federal preference for
admission. Applicants in the federal preference category are given the
highest priority on the waiting list based on need. Once preference is
assigned, they are given housing according to the date and time of their
qualification. The average waiting time for assisted housing is about two
years.
•
Page 4-5
Housing
Household Proiections •
The City of Auburn's "2020 Population Projection" forecast that Auburn
will experience greater than average growth over the next 20 years.
Housing developments in the Pierce County portion of Auburn, combined
with annexations of Lea Hill and West Hill, will drive Auburn's growth
over the next twenty years. Figure 4.5 represents the projected housing
growth indicated in the City's "Year 2020 Population Estimate".
Approximately 40°Io of Auburn's new housing units will be built in the
Lakeland Hills South PUD located in the Pierce County portion of
Auburn.
Figure 4.5
Housing Growth Projections
1970 to 2020
40000
35000 -
30000 -
25000
20000 - -
i 15000 -
~
' 10000 -
j 5000 -
0
T r
' 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Distribution of Housing Among Income Groups
King County's growth management policies recommend Auburn plan for
37% of its projected new housing units be affordable to low and moderate
income households as follows: 20% for low income and 17°Io for moderate
income households. The King County Planning Policies state that in areas
identified as city expansion areas, King County and the respective cities
should plan cooperatively for affordable housing development and
preservation. Figure 4.6 represents the projected distribution of new
housing units relative to respective income groups to the year 2020. The
distribution between single family and multi-family dwelling units is
consistent with the mix of types of housing units reported in the Year 2000 •
Census.
Page 4-6
F Housing
• Figure 4.6
Auburn's Year 2020 Housing Target
Total SF MF SF MF Total Total HU % Total
2000 2010 2010 2020 2020 New HU Yr2020 Yr2020
ess than 50% 5347 0 777 0 717 1494 6841 20%
0%-80% 4841 100 407 100 368 975 5816 17%
80%-120% 3944 1224 816 1130 754 3924 7868 23%
120%+ 3552 4500 769 4000 863 10132 13684 40%
Total 17,684 5,824 2,769 5,230 2,702 16,525 34,209 100%
Housing Strategy Auburn's Overall Housing Development Strategy
Over the past twenty years, Auburn responded positively to the housing
needs of low and moderate income groups. Over the next twenty years,
Auburn will attempt to economically integrate its community by
diversifying its housing stock to include all income groups. Auburn
currently has a relatively small portion of households consisting of middle
and higher income groups. By striving to bring its number of low and
moderate income households in line with the rest of King County, while
• increasing the growth rate of households with more affluent incomes,
Auburn should achieve a more even distribution and diversity of social-
economic groups.
Residential and community development in Auburn will reflect a
collection of culturally diverse and economically integrated
neighborhoods. Neighborhoods consisting predominantly of single family
residences, joined together by a pedestrian oriented transportation system,
along with complementary public spaces, educational facilities,
recreational and social services sufficient to promote and sustain an
amenable quality of life for a family-oriented community. Development
activities will cultivate a sustainable community whereby:
• Home buyers and renters of all income groups have sufficient
opportunities to procure affordable housing.
• Existing neighborhoods along with properties of special and/or
historic value are preserved for the enjoyment and enhancement of
future generations.
• A balanced mix of affordable housing types exist that are
appropriate for a family-oriented community in order to meet the
• needs of all economic segments of the population.
Page 4-7
F Housing
• Public and private agencies implement policies and offer programs •
or projects that help alleviate physical and economic distress;
conserve energy resources; improve the quality and quantity of
community services; and eliminate conditions that are detrimental
to health, safety and public welfare.
• Residential developments are monitored for the purpose of
reducing the isolation of income groups and groups with special
needs; the determination of existing and future housing needs;
better utilization of land and other resources that enhance the
availability of affordable housing opportunities.
HOUSING
POLICIES GOALS AND POLICIES RELATED TO HOUSING
GOAL 4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER
To maintain and enhance Auburn's character as a family-oriented
community while managing potential economic opportunities in a manner
that provides necessary employment and fiscal support for needed services
and while recognizing the need to provide human services and
opportunities for housing to a wide array of household types and sizes. •
Objective 4.2 Provide services and facilities that serve low income families and prevent
individuals from becoming homeless.
HO-1 Encourage and support human and health service organizations
that offer programs and facilities for people with special needs,
particularly programs that address homelessness and help
people to remain within the community.
HO-2 Special attention shall be given to maintaining and improving
the quality of public services in declining areas of the City.
HO-3 The City shall seek and provide assistance to nonprofit agencies
operating emergency shelters and transitional housing for
homeless people and other groups with special needs.
Objective 4.3 To preserve and promote those community facilities and programs that are
important to the safety, health and social needs of families and children.
HO-4 The City shall recognize the important role of public
improvements, facilities and programs in providing a healthy
family environment within the community.
.
Page 4-8
F Housing
• HO-5 The City of Auburn shall review proposals to site facilities
providing new or expanded human services within the City to
deternune their potential impacts and whether they meet the
needs of the Auburn community. Important caveats in the
City's consideration will include the following:
a. While Auburn will willingly accept its regional share of
facilities which provide residential services, or influence
residential location decisions, Auburn will expect other
communities to accept their share as well.
b. The funding of human service centers sited in Auburn that
serve an area larger than Auburn would rely on an equitable
regional source of funding.
c. The siting of all facilities shall be based on sound land use
planning principles and should establish working
relationships with affected neighborhoods.
Objective 4.4 Explore all available federal, state and local programs and private options
for financing affordable housing, removing or reducing risk factors, and
preserving safe neighborhoods.
HO-6 The City will involve both the public and private sectors in the
• provision of affordable housing.
HO-7 The City of Auburn will support national, state and especially
regional efforts to address the human service needs of the
region and the City.
HO-8 In most cases, the City will favor regional responses to human
service needs. However, such regional efforts must be
consistent with the concepts of fiscal equity. In other words,
these efforts should mutually affect persons or communities of
similar income, on both the revenue (tax) and expenditure
(service) sides of the equation.
HO-9 The City shall evaluate housing codes on an ongoing basis to
determine their effectiveness and appropriate enforcement.
•
Page 4-9
F Housing
GOAL 7 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT •
To emphasize housing development at single family densities in order to
reestablish a mix of housing types appropriate for a family-oriented
community while recognizing the need and desire for both rural density
• and moderate density housing appropriated located to meet the housing
needs of all members of the community.
Objective 7.7 Conserve the existing housing stock because it is the most affordable form
of housing.
HO-10 Any assessment of the need for affordable housing in Auburn
shall be based on the community providing its fair share of
regional need for low and moderate income households.
HO-11 The City will work with all jurisdictions within the region to
develop a regional approval to affordable housing. Each
jurisdiction should be urged to provide for its fair share of the
region's affordable housing needs.
HO-12 The City will involve both the public and private sectors in the
provision of affordable housing.
HO-13 The City shall allow appropriately designed manufactured •
I housing within single family neighborhoods, consistent with
state law.
HO-14 The City shall allow manufactured housing parks and multiple
family development in appropriately zoned but limited areas.
HO-15 The City will assist low-income persons, who are displaced as a
result of redevelopment, find affordable housing in accordance
with state and federal laws and regulations.
HO-16 Information and resources that educate and guide low-income
persons toward affordable housing opportunities will be
prepared and made available.
HO-17 Through its building permit process, the City will inventory and
track affordable housing opportunities within Auburn.
Information about affordable housing units will be distributed to
nonprofit agencies serving the homeless and low-income
persons.
•
Page 4-10
F Housing
• Objective 7.8 To respond to the housing needs of individuals and families that cannot
afford or do not choose to live in traditional detached single-family
housing.
HO-18 Encourage residential development in Downtown, particularly
housing that is integrated with commercial development.
I1I8H0-19 Allow accessory dwelling units as an affordable housing
strategy.
GOAL 8 NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY
To maintain and protect all viable and stable residential neighborhoods.
Objective 8.3 Conserve the livability of viable residential areas through the preservation
of existing housing stock and amenities.
HO-20 The City shall seek available assistance for housing
rehabilitation. Assistance will include the development of
residential infrastructure and the rehabilitation of individual
• properties.
HO-21 The City will work with park owners, managers and park
tenants to develop policies and land-use regulations to preserve
manufactured home parks and the affordable housing they offer.
HO-22 The City will encourage and assist in the renovation of surplus
public and commercial buildings into affordable housing.
HO-23 The City will seek, encourage and assist nonprofit organizations
in acquiring depreciated apartment units for the purpose of
maintaining and ensuring their long-term affordability.
HO-24 The City will work with neighborhood groups to develop
I neighborhood strategic plans for specific areas within the City.
These areas will be determined based upon need, City Council
direction and the availability of staff resources. These plans
will address issues and concerns which include, but are not
I limited to, rand use, projected growth/decline, neighborhood
identity, safety, education, youth and recreational activities.
•
Page 4-11
F Housing
G6a112 URBAN REDEVELOPMENT •
To encourage redevelopment of underutilized areas to reduce sprawl and
take full advantage of the City's investment in existing infrastructure.
Objective 12.1 Provide flexibility in development regulations so that a variety of housing
types and site planning techniques can achieve the maximum housing
potential of a particular site.
HO-25 The City shall identify rehabilitation areas, with priority given
to blighted areas with a relatively large population of low-
income persons, for possible designation with performance
zoning. Criteria for performance zoning shall include
generation of affordable housing, protection of natural features
and open spaces, impact on existing utilities, traffic generation,
neighborhood compatibility, and the policies of this
Comprehensive Plan.
HO-26 The City shall develop incentives to develop underutilized
I parcels waiving development s into new uses that
allow them to function as pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use
neighborhoods. Existing uses which are complementary, •
economical, and physically viable shall integrate into the form
and function of the neighborhood.
HO-27 The City should adopt innovative zoning provisions which ease
the development of vacant parcels within existing
neighborhoods while requiring the new development to fit the
context of the existing buildings in the surrounding area.
Objective 12.2 To develop economically integrated, walkable neighborhoods which
generate a secure atmosphere for both residents and visitors.
HO-28 The City recognizes that the development of safe
neighborhoods requires the cooperation of property owners
and/or their property managers. The City shall organize,
I educate and assist property manMers in the creation and
. preservation of safe neighborhoods.
HO-29 The City shall seek and provide assistance for the reduction of
lead-based paint hazards.
HO-30 The City will continue its program to repair and/or replace
deteriorated sidewalks and remove barriers to pedestrian traffic.
H.U.D. block grant funds may be used to remove pedestrian •
Page 4-12
F Housing
. barriers and pay the tax assessments levied upon low income
households for sidewalk repairs.
HO-31 The City will continue to insure that funding becomes available
to support youth and social services in Auburn.
GOAL 22 URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL QUALITY
To ensure a high quality visual environment through appropriate design
standards and procedures which encourage high quality architectural and
landscape design in all development and through the placement of artwork
in public places. The City recognizes the linkages between transportation,
land use and site design and encourage development which eases access
I by pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users..-
HO-32 Ensure that all affordable housing development is consistent
~ with the fnest urrent housing quality standards.
HO-33 The City will encourage varied and human-scaled building
design that provides a visual interest to pedestrians,
compatibility with historic buildings or other neighborhood
• structures, and enhances the streetscape.
HO-34 Conserve developable land and natural resources through a
variety of housing types, conservation and site planning
techniques that achieve the maximum housing potential and
passive energy use of a particular site.
•
Page 4-13
•
CHAPTER 5
CAPITAL FACILITIES
Introduction .
This chapter provides an overall policy direction for the different capital
facility plans and programs provided by the City. Capital facilities
belonging to privately owned utilities (electricity, natural gas lines, etc.)
are covered in the Private Utilities chapter (Chapter 6). Certain City plans
and programs are further refined in other sections of this plan such as
parks or transportation. Overall, however, this chapter acts as a reference
to all of the various capital facility plans, including the City of Auburn
Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (which is a key component of, and is
adopted with, this plan), comprehensive plans, capital improvement and
investment programs, inventories, and studies that together represent the
planning and financing mechanisms required to serve the capital facility
~ needs of Auburn. For more detail on a particular Capital Facility or the
City's overall Capital Facility Plan, see the most recent adopted version of
the following:
! City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan
• City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan
! City of Auburn Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan
! City of Auburn Comprehensive Drainage Plan
• City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Master Plan
! City of Auburn Comprehensive Transportation Plan
! Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan
: Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan
• Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan
! Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan
Issues and
Background
Growth The provision and sizing of public facilities such as streets or water and
sewer lines can influence the rate or timing of development and is an
important means of managing growth. Timed provision of facilities also
• ensures that new development can be assimilated into the existing
community without serious disruptions or adverse impacts. This Plan
Page 5-1
Chapter 5
establishes policies to allow development only when and where all public ~
facilities are adequate or can be made adequate, and only when and where
such development can be adequately served by public facilities and
services consistent with adopted level of service standards
Concurrency
One af the key provisions of the Growth Management Act is concurrency.
In general, concurrency seeks to ensure that development is permitted
only if adequate public facilities are, or can be guaranteed to be, available
to support new development. Concurrency serves to place the finance
function of local government in a much more prominent role in the land
use development process. While the concept of concurrency is new to
many jurisdictions, it has been used in Auburn since the adoption of its
1986 Comprehensive Plan.
The Act requires concurrency for transportation facilities, though, if a
jurisdiction desires, it can apply to other public facilities as well.
Concurrency requires that facilities needed to maintain a locally adopted
level of service be provided "concurrent" with development. With respect
to transportation facilities, concurrent is defined within the Act as being
provided at the time of or within six years of development (this is done to
coincide with the six year time frame of most capital facilities plans). If
the facility is not available at the time of development, funding must be .
available to construct the facility within the six year capital facilities plan.
Regardless of whether or not a local jurisdiction applies concurrency to
public facilities other than transportation, there is still a need to coordinate
new development with the provision of capital facilities. This ensures that
all relevant public facilities and services are planned and available to serve
the demands of new growth.
GOAL 1. PLANNING APPROACH
To manage growth in a manner which enhances, rather than detracts from
community quality and values by actively coordinating land use type and
intensity with City facility and service development and provision.
Objective 1.4. To ensure that new development does not out-pace the City's ability to
provide and maintain adequate public facilities and services, by allowing new development to occur only when and where adequate facilities exist
or will be provided, and by encouraging development types and locations
which can support the public services they require.
•
Page 5-2
Capital Facilities
• Policies:
CF-1 Lands designated for urban growth by this Plan shall have an urban
level of public facilities (sewer, water, storm drainage, and parks)
prior to or concurrent with development.
CF-2 Development shall be allowed only when and where such
development can be adequately served by public services (police
and fire) without reducing level of service elsewhere.
CF-3 If adequate facilities are currently unavailable and public funds are
not committed to provicle such facilities, developers must provide
such facilities at their own expense in order to develop.
CF-4 The City should continue to assist through direct participation,
LIDs and payback agreements, to the extent permitted by law,
where appropriate and financially feasible. Where funding is
available, the City may participate in developer initiated facility
extensions or improvements, but only to the extent that the
improvements benefit the broader public interest, and are in accord
with the specific policies and recommendations of the appropriate
City public facilities plan. • CF-5 Deleted December, 2001.
CF-6 New connections to the City's sanitary sewer, water and/or storm
drainage systems, shall contribute their fair share toward the
construction and/or financing of future or on-going projects to
increase the capacity of those systems.
CF-7 The City shall encourage and approve development only where
adequate public services including police protection, fire and
emergency medical services, education, parks and other
recreational facilities, solid waste collection, and other
governmental services are available or will be made available at
acceptable levels of service prior to project occupancy or use.
CF-8 Extension of any individual facility, irrespective of mode of
financing, to serve new development should be approved only if it
is determined that adequate fiscal capacity exists to support the
extension of other needed facilities.
CF-9 Extension of any individual facility, irrespective of mode of
financing, to serve new development should be approved only if it
• is determined that adequate fiscal capacity exists to support cost
Page 5-3
Chapter 5
effective service by all on-going public services and maintenance .
of facilities.
Objective 5.4. To ensure that new developments are supported by an adequate level of
public services through an effective system of public facilities.
Policies:
CF-10 Public facilities shall be provided in accord with the guidance of
the Capital Facilities Plan or, as may be appropriate a system
plan for each type of facility designed to serve at an adequate
level of service the locations and intensities of uses specified in
this comprehensive plan.
CF-11 No new development shall be permitted unless the facilities
specified in each facility plan are available or can be provided at
a level adequate to support the development. The adequacy of
facilities shall be determined by the following:
a. An adopted system plan;
b. Policy guidance as provided in the City Capital Facilities
Plan;
c. Appropriate engineering design standards as specified in .
applicable City Plans, Codes, and manuals as adopted by
the City Council;
d. Environmental review standards (adequacy includes the
absence of an unacceptable adverse impact on a public
facility system).
e. Case by case evaluation of the impacts of a proposed
development on the public facility systems: first to
determine the minimum amount of facilities necessary to
support the development and second to determine a
proportionate share of the system to be developed or
financially guaranteed before approving the development.
CF-12 No new development shall be approved which is not supported
by a minimum of facilities to support the development and
which does not provide for a proportionate share of related
system needs.
City Utilities The City of Auburn manages sewer, water and storm drainage utilities as
well as solid waste collection. The sewer and water utilities serve the City
and several areas outside the City limits. As stated above, the efficient
provision of these services can play a significant role in managing the
•
Page 5-4
Capital Facilities
• growth of the City as well as on the quality of life for residents of Auburn
and the surroundmg areas.
GOAL 13. CITY UTILITIES
To protect the public health and safety by providing efficient and cost=
effective water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and sotid waste services to
the community. Ensure that development will only occur if the urban
services necessary to support the development will be available at the time
of development.
Water Service
The City provides water seafe rvice to a total of •11,586r13,038 customers accounts, ll of_w";,.h 44 ,:d,:n . e;« , f whicli only 34 are
oLitS1C{C', C)f thG Clty I1I111tS. uYpiV , ^*e1.. 9,624 ..;tt,;., tt,e rr.ty n..,7 !,o82
eutside-t#e-etfffenE--E~imits, The City's sources of water include the Coal Creek watershed, West Hills Springs watershed and is supplemented
by a system of ten wells. Storage facilities are found on the Enumclaw plateau, Lakeland Hills and Lea Hill. For more background information
see the Capital Facilities Plan or Comprehensive Water Plan.
• Objective 13.1 To ensure safe and adequate water serviee, for both domestic and fire
protection purposes, to meet the needs of the existing community and
provide for its planned growth.
Policies:
CF-13 T'he City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan is incorporated
as an element of this Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive
Water Plan for the City of Auburn shall reflect the planned land
uses and densities of this Comprehensive Plan.
CF-14 The Comprehensive Water Plan shalT provide for the evaluation
of existing and potential future groundwater sources regarding
any threats to the quantity and quality of such sources. The Plan
shall ensure that strategies for the protection of ground water
sources used or likely to be used for public water supplies are
established.
CF-15 Protection of the City's Coal Creek Springs, and West Hill
watersheds, wells, and other sources shall be a high priority in
the designation of appropriate land uses in the vicinity of these
• areas and facilities.
Page 5-5
_ Chapter 5
{ CF-16 The City shall continue its policy of requiring that water system
; extensions needed to serve new development shail be built prior ~
. to or simultaneous with such development, according ta the size
4 and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Water Plan
as necessary to serve future planned developrnent. The location
and design of these facilities shall give full consideration to the
- ease of operation and maintenance af these facilities by the City.
The City shall continue to participate to the extent perrnitted by
- ; law, thraugh direct participation, LiDs and payback agreements
to assist in the financing of such over sized improvements.
Wherever any form of City finance is involved in a water line
; extension, lines that promote a compact development pattern
~ will be favored over lines traversing large undeveloped areas
` where future development plans are uncertain.
j CF-17 Whenever a street is to be suhstantially reconstructed or a new
} street built, the City shall determine whether water facilities in
; that street right ofway shall be constructed or braught up to the
' si2e and configuration indicated by the Water Plan and
i
Comprehensive Plan.
; CF-18 The City shall continue to recognize the overall system impacts
~ of new development upon the Ciry water system through the •
collection and appropriate use of system development charges
or similar fees.
r CF-19 The City sha11 consider the impacts of new development within
~ aquifer recharge areas of potable water sources as part of its
environmental review process and require any appropriate
mitigation measures. Such rnitigation may involve
hydrogeologic studies, testing, and/or monitoring (inciuding
; monitoring wells), spill response planning, spilt containment
' devices, sanitary sewers, and use of best management practices.
; CF-20 The City shall promote water conservation and the wise use of
, water resources.
;
CF 21 The City should work with other water providers to promote
effective water supply management and planning consistent
with the "South King County Coordinated Water System Plan",
; as well as regional !water supply and canservation goals.
•
,
Page 5-6 `
Capital Facilities
• Sanitary Sewers
The City sanitary sewer system serves 9-,74613,186 customers, 4,
, of which only 10 are outside the
cit, l~ imits. The system is primarily a collection system with treatment
provided by Metro. There is a comprehensive network of service lines
outside the city limits on Lea Hill. The City's sewer system is not as
extensive as the water system and there are significant areas within the
City's service area which are on septic systems. For more details, see the
Capital Facilities Plan or the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan.
Objective 13.2 To ensure the efficient transmission of sanitary sewage to the appropriate
treatment and disposal facilities, in order to meet the needs of the existing
community and provide for its planned growth.
Policies:
CF-22 The Comprehensive Sanitary Sewerage Plan is incorporated as
an element of this Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan for the City of Auburn shall reflect the
planned land uses and densities of this Comprehensive Plan.
• CF-23 The City shall continue its policy of requiring that sewer system
extensions needed to serve new development shall be built prior
to or simultaneous with such development, according to the size
and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Sanitary
Sewer Plan and Comprehensive Plan as necessary to serve
future planned development. The location and design of these
facilities shall give full consideration to the ease of operation
and maintenance of these facilities by the City. The City shall
continue to use, to the extent permitted by law, direct
participation, LIDs and payback agreements to assist in the
financing of such oversized improvements. Wherever any fozm
of City finance is involved in a sewer line extension, lines that
promote a compact development pattern will be favored over
lines traversing large undeveloped areas where future
development plans are uncertain.
CF-24 Whenever a street is to be substantially reconstructed or a new
street built, the City Engineer shall determine whether sewer
facilities in that street right of way shall be constructed or
brought up to the size and configuration indicated by the
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan and Compreliensive Plan.
• '
Page 5-7
Chapter 5 ~
CF-25 The City shall continue to recognize the overall system impacts •
of new development upon the City sewer system, through the
collection and appropriate use of system development charges
or similar fees.
CF-26 The City shall continue to require the separation of sanitary and
storm sewer facilities wherever combined sewers may be
discovered, and shall continue to aggressively seek to minimize
any storm water infiltration of the sanitary sewer system.
CF-27 Within those designated urban density areas of the City and
within the sanitary sewer utility's designated service area,
sewerage service should be provided by public sewers. The
City should develop mechanisms to accommodate conversion to
public sewers of all septic systems within the City's service area,
particularly when on site systems fail or when public health and
water quality is threatened.
Solid Waste
The City of Auburn has a contract with Waste Management to handle solid
waste collection within the City of Auburn. Waste Management's
current contract is for a seven-year period and is due to expire in 2008. •
The City may, at its option, extend the agreement for up to two extensions
each of which shall not exceed two years. There are approximately 9-,~AB
r-eSiEl@ntial-C-USt9iH@FS(Sit2gl8---ai}`t „lr; f.,,,..;l.,) „a 1,500 --C-6mfner-eial
^~~~~efs. 15,900 accounts within the citv.
Recycling is handled by Waste Management. Residential customers are
currently recycling curbside approximately 47% of its waste stream.
Objective 13.3. To provide area residents and businesses with a universal and compulsory
system for collection and disposal of all solid waste, including ample
waste reduction and recycling opportunities intended to maximize
diversion of the City's waste stream away from costly landfills,
incineration, or other solid waste disposal facilities, and to conserve
exhaustible resources.
Policies:
CF-28 The King County Solid Waste Management Plan and Solid
Waste Interlocal Forum Resolution No. 89-005, except as
modified by City of Auburn Ordinance 4413 and this Plan shall
form the basis for solid waste management activities within the •
City.
Page 5-8
Capital Facilities
• CF-29 The City shall continue to fund solid waste collection, disposal
and waste reduction and recycling programs and services
through the existing solid waste utility, with supplemental
funding provided through available grants.
CF-30 The City shall implement solid waste management programs
and services which provide ample opportunities and incentives
to maximize the community's participation in local and regional
waste reduction and recycling efforts.
CF-31 The City's solid waste management programs shall be
developed to make waste reduction and recycling efficient,
reliable, cost-effective, and convenient for all residents and
businesses.
CF-32 The City encourages and should promote the use of products
manufactured from recycled materials, and the use of materials
which can be recycled. City Departments and contractors shall
use recycled and recyclable products whenever and wherever
feasible.
• CF-33 The City shall implement solid waste reduction and recycling
programs which have the cumulative effect maintaining the 50
percent waste reduction and recycling goal (recycling tons/total
solid waste stream).
CF-34 The City shall periodically monitor and evaluate the
effectiveness of Auburn's waste reduction and recycling
programs to ensure that local and state goals and policies are
being met.
CF-35 The City shall promote the recycling of solid waste materials by
providing opportunities for convenient recycling and by
developing educational materials on recycling, composting and
other waste reduction methods.
Storm Drainage
The City Storm Drainage System serves over 9,281 customers,
exclusively within the City limits. The System consists of a combination
of open ditches and closed conveyance pipes. For more details, see the
Capital Facilities Plan or the Comprehensive Drainage Plan.
•
Page 5-9
Chapter 5
Objective 13.4. To ensure that collection, conveyance, storage and discharge of storm •
drainage is provided in a sufficient and environmentally responsible
manner, in order to meet the needs of the existing community and provide
for its planned growth.
Policies:
CF-36 The City of Auburn Comprehensive Drainage Plan is
incorporated as an element of this Comprehensive Plan.
CF-37 The City shall require developers to construct storm drainage
improvements directly serving the development, including any
necessary off-site improvements.
CF-38 The City shall require that off-site storm drainage improvements
needed to serve new development shall be built prior to or
simultaneous with such development, according to the size and
configuration identified by the Comprehensive Drainage Plan as
necessary to serve future planned development. The location
and design of these facilities shall give full consideration to the
ease of operation and maintenance of these facilities by the City.
The City should continue to use direct participation, LIDs and
payback agreements to assist in the financing of off-site •
improvements required to serve the development.
CF-39 The City shall recognize the overall system impacts of new
development upon the City's drainage system, through the
collection of system development charges or similar fees to
assist in the financing of new and oversized (e.g. regional
drainage improvements.)
CF-40 The City should continue to fund and provide storm drainage
services through the existing storm drainage utility. The City's
storm drainage utility should be responsible for implementation,
maintenance and operation of the City's comprehensive drainage
system and to seek out sources of storm water pollution and
correct them.
CF-41 Appropriate rates and system development charges shall be
assessed to fund the on-going maintenance, operation, and
capital expenditures of the utility, in accordance with the
Comprehensive Drainage Plan. Periodic cost of service studies
shall be completed to reassess the monthly service and system
development charges.
•
Page 5-10
Capital Facilities
. CF-42 Drainage facilities serving the larger community should be
owned, operated and maintained by the City's storm drainage
utility. Drainage facilities serving individual properties are
discouraged, however if essential, as determined by the City
Engineer, they should be owned, operated and maintained by the
property owner in accordance with a recorded maintenance
agreement approved by the City. The maintenance agreement
shall include provisions that will preserve the City's ability to
ensure the long term use of the drainage facility, and may
include the granting of an easement over the facility to the City.
Maintenance intensive drainage facilities designed to serve as a
multifunctional private resource (e.g. private parks, wetland
mitigation) should not be owned, operated or maintained by the
utility. The utility shall ensure that all private and public storm
drainage improvements are designed, constructed, operated and
maintained in accordance with the Comprehensive Drainage
Plan and Comprehensive Plan.
CF-43 The City shall encourage the use of regional-scale water quality
and quantity control facilities as a means of controlling drainage
and flood waters.
• CF-44 Wherever possible, regional detention facilities should be
utilized as a multi-functional community resource. When
selecting a site and designing a regional storm drainage facility,
the City should consider other public benefits such as
recreational, habitat, cultural, educational, open space and
aesthetic opportunities.
CF-45 The City shall promote policies which seek to maintain the
existing conveyance capacity of natural drainage courses.
CF-46 Whenever a street is to be substantially reconstructed or a new
street built, the City Engineer shall determine whether drainage
facilities in that street right of way shall be constructed to
adequately service the street and whether they should be brought
up to the size and configuration indicated by the Comprehensive
Drainage Plan. If the inclusion of water quality and quantity
control facilities is not feasible, as determined by the City
Engineer, when street reconstruction occurs, off-site mitigation
may be considered regionally as proposed within the
Comprehensive Drainage Plan to meet the City's storm drainage
requirements as determined by the City Engineer.
•
Page 5-11
Chapter 5
CF-47 The City shall require the separation of sanitary and storm sewer •
facilities wherever combined sewers may be discovered.
CF-48 In selecting the preferred Comprehensive Drainage Plan sub-
basin alternative for implementation by the City's storm
drainage utility, the City shall consider the following factors:
1. The most efficient and cost effective means of
serving a subbasin or combination of subbasins.
2. The ability of the alternative to implement source
control best management practices and to avoid or mitigate
environmental impacts, such as impacts to existing
wetlands, and the degree to which the alternative promotes
water quality treatment, and protects aquatic and riparian
habitat.
3. Consistency with Comprehensive Drainage Plan
policies and recommendations and compatibility with
stormwater improvement policies and recommendations
presented in other regional stormwater plans.
4. restrictions or constraints associated with receiving •
waters.
5. The ability to develop a multi-use facility.
6. The degree to which the alternative preserves,
increases, and is compatible with existing open space.
7. Consistency with existing and future planned
development.
8. The advantages and disadvantages of storage versus
conveyance while ensuring adequate treatment for water
quality treatment.
9. The degree to which the alternative preserves and
enhances existing native vegetation and existing drainage
courses.
10. The alternatives ability to reduce flood hazard
impacts resulting from the 25-year design storm event.
•
Page 5-12
Capital Facilities
is CF-49 The City's Storm Drainage Utility shall strive to meet the
environmental protection goals of the Comprehensive Plan
through compliance with and implementation of the policies
contained herein. Environmental issues such as water quality
and fish habitat protection shall be considered in all new
development applications and new storm drainage
improvements.
CF-50 The Storm Drainage Utility shall work with other jurisdictions
and agencies to address regional water quality issues.
CF-51 The City shall seek opportunities where feasible to reintroduce
treated urban runoff back into groundwater system as new and
redevelopment occurs to minimize urbanization impacts to the
hydrology of the natural river systems.
CF-52 The City shall evaluate the feasibility and opportunity to
improve the water quality of its existing discharges to the river
systems to enhance water quality in response to the Endangered
Species Act.
CF -53 The City shall seek to minimize the impacts to the natural river
• system's hydrology by encouraging pre-treatment of surface
flows of new development and re-introduction into the
groundwater where feasible.
CF - 54 While the Ciry is in the process of updating the Storm Drainage
Comprehensive Plan to include technical information for the
recently approved Lea Hill and West Hill annexation areas, new
development and infrastructure improvements will be examined
on a case-by-case basis in conformance with adopted City
policies, development standards, construction standards, and
other applicable regulations.
Communications and Data Infrastructure
Objective 13.4 To enhance the City's communications and data infrastructure through
installation of City-owned conduit throughout the city.
Policies:
CF-55 To allow for expansion of the City's conduit system with
• minimal disruption to streets and at a lower cost to the public,
Page 5-13
Chapter 5~
the City shall require the placement of conduits as part of •
arterial street (as defined in the City of Auburn Transportation
Plan) improvement projects whether private or public
development projects.
CF-56 The City shall explore new technologies that may present
additional opportunities for the City to use its communications
and data infrastructure to enhance its provisions of public
services.
CF-57 To increase system-wide coordinated management of facilities,
the City shall work towards increasing the number of remote
monitoring facilities for utility facilities, traffic control devices,
~ and other equipment located throughout the city.
CF-58 Whenever possible, make remote data access available to the
City's police officers, inspectors, utility staff, and other field
personnel.
GOAL 14. PUBLIC BUILDINGS
To maYimize public access and provide for the appropriate location and •
development of public and quasi-public facilities that serve the cultural,
educational, recreational, religious and public service needs of the
community and the region.
Objective 14.1. To site public buildings in accord with their service function and the needs
of the members of the public served by the facility.
Policies:
CF-59 Downtown shall continue to be the business center of City
government and the City shall seek to site all of its business
functions in the downtown area.
CF-60 All "people oriented" City facilities should be located in high
amenity sites. Les Grove Park and Downtown are particularly
appropriate sites for services such as senior services, community
center, library, museums, etc.
CF-61 City park buildings should be developed in accord with the
Parks and Recreation Element.
•
Page 5-14
Capital Facilities
CP 62 City fir-e stations should be developed in aeoer-d with the CitY
f4re sen4ees study. While the siting of new fir-e stations should
&veid Single F-amily Afeas, fir-o safety and aeeess shall have a
ver-y high pr-ior-ity under- this plan.
CF-62-3 The siting, design construction and improvement of all public
buildings shall be done in full compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA).
CF-634 Public and quasi-public facilities which attract a large number
of visitors (City Hall, museums, libraries, educational, permit or
license offices, and health or similar facilities, etc.) should be
sited in areas which are accessible (within 1/4 mile) by transit.
CF-64-5 The City shall encourage other agencies to follow these siting
principles in considering new sites for public buildings.
CF-656 The location of religious institutions, private schools,
community centers, parks and similar public or quasi-public
facilities shall be related to the size of the facility and the area
served. City-wide facilities should be sited in visible and
accessible locations.
CF-66-7 Small public or quasi-public facilities intended to serve one or
two residential neighborhoods may be located within a
neighborhood. Larger public or quasi-public facilities intended
to ser-ve mainly Aubum residents or businesses shall be located
along major arterial roads within the Community Serving Area
of Auburn, however, elementary schools should be given
flexibility to locate along smaller roads. Buffering from
adjacent land uses may be required.
CF-679 The location of utility facilities is often dependent upon the
physical requirements of the utility system. Sewerage lift
stations, water reservoirs, and other similar facilities should be
sited, designed, and buffered (through extensive screening
and/or landscaping) to fit in with their suffoundings
harmoniously. When sited within or adjacent to residential
areas, special attention should be given to minimizing noise,
light and glare impacts.
CF-689 Public facilities of an industrial or heavy commercial character
should be confined to the Region Serving Area of Auburn,
unless no other reasonable siting opportunity exists in which
case siting still must comply with applicable zoning standards.
I Page 5-15
Chapter 5
Examples of such facilities are the City maintenance and ~
operations facility, state and regional solid waste facilities, and
the Auburn School District bus barn.
I CF-69A The siting and relocation of City maintenance and operation
facilities shall be responsive to growing demands for utility,
transportation and fleet services and shall also take into account
the City's role in emergency preparedness and response.
Essential Public
Facilities According to the GMA (RCW 36.70A.200), as amended, "Essential public
facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to site such as
airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation facilities
as defined in RCW 47.06.140, state and local correctional facilities, solid
waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance
abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure
community transition facilities as defined in RCW 71.09.020." More
generally, essential public facilities are facilities, conveyances, or sites that
meet the following definition: (1) the facility, conveyance or site is used
to provide services to the public; (2) these services are delivered by
government agencies, private or non-profit organizations under contract to •
or with substantial funding from government agencies, or private firms or
organizations subject to public service obligations, and (3) the facility or
use of the site is necessary to adequately provide a public service.
The Growth Management Act requires that every comprehensive plan
include a process for siting essential public facilities. No comprehensive
plan can preclude the siting of essential public facilities within the
community. The Growth Management Act includes these provisions
because siting certain public facilities has become difficult due to the
impacts many of these facilities have on the adjacent community. Many
factors contribute to this problem, including increased demand for
facilities to serve a growing population, increased competition for land as
the state becomes more urbanized, problems with siting processes, and
judicial decisions which compel jurisdictions to provide certain facilities.
By including a process for siting essential facilities in the Comprehensive
Plan, deficiencies in the siting process can be minimized.
This section contains Auburn's process for siting essential public facilities.
This is an interim process as the Growth Management Planning Council,
which is made up of representatives of the cities in King County and the
county, will develop a countywide process for siting essential public
facilities. When that process is developed, Auburn may modify these ~
procedures to reflect the Council's recommendation.
Page 5-16
Capital Facilities
• CF-70 Essential Public Facility Siting Process. '
General:
l. The City will review proposals through the process outlined in
parts (3) through (8) below, if the essential public facility
largely serves a regional, countywide, statewide or national
need and is included in a policy sense within an adopted state
or regional plan which meets the following criteria:
a. The state or regional plan was developed through an
appropriate public process (including at least one local
public hearing) and has undergone a NEPA and/or SEPA
review; and;
b. A clear policy statement supporting the type of facility
proposed must be included. The plan should also include,
in a policy sense, a set of siting guidelines used for such a
facility. Such criteria may include, but not be limited to,
type and sufficiency of transportation access, co-location
requirements, preferred adjacent land uses, on-or off-site
security and/or mitigation, and required public facilities
• and services.
2. If the essential public facility largely serves a regional,
countywide, statewide or national need and is not part of an
adopted state or regional plan, the proponent will be required to
request that the appropriate state or regional plan be amended
to include the proposal meeting the criteria contained in part (1)
above. The proposal will also be reviewed following the
process outlined in parts (3) through (8).
Essential Public Facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide, or national
nature:
3. Essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide
or national nature will be reviewed by the City through the
special area plan process. The boundaries of the Special Area
Plan will be set at a scale directly related to the size and
magnitude of the proposal. For facilities of regional, state, and
national need, an alternative analysis will be performed using,
but not limited to, the guidelines described in part 1(above).
Auburn staff shall participate in the review process of part 1
• (above), and use the data, analysis and environmental
documents prepared in that process to aid in the City's special
7 -17
Chapter 5
area plan review, if Auburn determines that those documents •
are adequate. If the facility requires other development
permits, those approvals also shall be considered within the
review process.
4. Impacts of the proposed essential public facility must be
identified and an appropriate mitigation plan developed.
Unless otherwise governed by State law, the financing strategy
for the mitigation plan shall be structured so that the costs of
the plan shall be allocated proportionally on a benefit basis
using, but not limited to, non-local sources of funding.
5. The special area plan process to be used for essential public
facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide or national nature
shall follow the City's Comprehensive Plan amendment
process which includes multiple opportunities for public
involvement.
6. An analysis of the facility's impact on City finances shall be
undertaken. If the study shows that locating a facility in a
community would result in a disproportionate financial burden
on the City of Auburn, an agreement with the project's
proponents must be executed to mitigate the adverse financial •
impact or the approval shall be denied.
Essential Public Facilities of primarily local nature:
7. If the essential public facility meets largely local needs (for
example, in-patient facilities, including substance abuse
facilities, mental health facilities and group homes), the facility
shall be considered based upon section (8) below.
All Essential Public Facilities:
8. The following criteria shall be used to evaluate all applications
to site essential public facilities:
a. Whether there is a public need for the facility.
b. The impact of the facility on the surrounding uses and
environment, the City and the region.
c. Whether the design of the facility or the operation of the
facility can be conditioned, or the impacts mitigated, in a
similar manner as with a traditional private development,
to make the facility compatible with the affected area and
the environment.
•
Page 5-18
Capital Facilities
• d. Whether a package of mitigating measures can be
developed that would make siting the facility within the
community more acceptable.
e. Whether the factors that make the facility difficult to site
can be modified to increase the range of available sites or
to minimize impacts on affected areas and the
environment.
f. Whether the proposed essential public facility is
consistent with the Auburn Comprehensive Plan.
g. Essential public facilities shall comply with any
applicable state siting and permitting requirements (e.g.,
hazardous waste facilities).
h. Whether the State proves by clear, cogent, and
convincing evidence that 1) a sufficient and reasonable
number of alternative sites have been fully, fairly, and
competently considered; and 2) such sites were found to
be unsuitable for an SCTF for reasons other than the cost
of property.
i. Whether careful analysis has been completed to show that
siting of the facility will have no undue impact on any
one racial, cultural, or socio-economic group, and that
there will not be a resulting concentration of similar
~ facilities in a particular neighborhood, community,
jurisdiction or region.
CF-71 The Planning Director shall make a determination as to
whether a development application will result in a significant
change of use or a significant change in the intensity of use of
an existing essential public facility. If the Planning Director
determines that the proposed changes are significant, the
proposal will be subject to the essential public facility siting
process as defined in Policy CF-65. If the Planning Director
determines that the proposed changes are insignificant, the
application shall be reviewed through the City's standard
development review procedures. The Planning Director's
determination shall be based upon the following:
a. The proposal's impacts on the surrounding area
b. The likelihood that there will be future additions,
expansions, or further activity related to or connected
with the proposal.
One of the difficulties of siting essential public facilities is that they are
not allowed in all appropriate areas. To help address this problem, Auburn
• shall allow essential public facilities in those zones in which they would
Page 5-19
Chapter 5
be compatible. The types of facilities that are compatible will vary with •
the impacts likely from the facility and the zoning district. In the M-2
Zoning District, many essential public facilities will be compatible uses
and broad use categories allowing such uses should be included in the
zone.
CF-72 Essential public facilities shall be allowed in those zoning
districts in which they would be compatible and impacts can be
mitigated. In situations where specific development standards
cannot be met, but there is a determination that the facility can
be made compatible, the City Council can waive those specific
standards with the requirement that appropriate mitigation is
provided. The M-2 Zoning District should include broad use
categories that allow all essential public facilities that are
difficult to site as permitted or conditional uses as appropriate.
CF-73 Essential public facilities should be equitably located
throughout the City, county and state. No jurisdiction should absorb a disproportionate share.
CF-74 Essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide
or national nature should be restricted to the Region Serving
Area of Auburn. Such facilities should be located in •
relationship to transportation facilities in a manner appropriate
to their transportation needs. Extensive buffering from
adjacent uses may be required. Facilities which generate a
significant amount of truck traffic should be located on major
arterial streets.
•
Page 5-20
•
CHAPTER 8
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Introduction
Auburn's economic base drives and shapes the community and region.
Auburn residents and the surrounding region benefit from the jobs and
services Auburn's economic base offers. Through the payment of sales,
property and other taxes, the City of Auburn can fund and provide services
and public facilities which Auburn residents demand and/or require.
It is clearly in the City's best interest to maintain and expand our economic
base in unison with implementing all of the goals of this Comprehensive
Plan. This section of the plan will help to define the City's goals and
policies in this vital area.
•
Issues &
Background Historic Trends
Historically, a variety of factors have shaped Auburn's economy. At the
turn of the 201h century, the City offered services to support agriculture
and the railroads. Downtown offered a full range of services and retail
opportunities. In later years, automotive sales became a significant factor.
As urbanization of the region expanded to include Auburn, the vitality of
Downtown Auburn was impacted by new shopping malls located outside
the community and by changing retail trends. At the same time, Auburn's
importance as the home of large industrial and warehousing operations
increased. This same period saw the growth of retail along commercial
"strips" such as Auburn Way and 15th Street NW. Large retailers such as
Fred Meyer and many major supermarket chains located in the
community.
The development of the SuperMall in the 1990's led to Auburn becoming
a major player in the regional retail market. Auburn shoppers no longer
needed to leave the City to visit retail malls for many of their purchases.
~ During that same decade, Emerald Downs and the Muckleshoot Casino
Page 8-1
F Economic Development
also contributed to commercial recreation facilities in Auburn and •
associated employment growth.
Today, Auburn provides over 38,000 jobs for residents throughout the
region. Auburn has a strong industrial sector that includes Boeing, the
General Service Administration (GSA) and numerous warehouse and
distribution facilities. Auburn Regional Medical Center and the growing
medical office community also provide a significant number of jobs. The
retail and service sectors are expanding as small businesses are created. .
Educational uses such as the Auburn School District and Green River
Community College also add to the area's employment base.
While development has continued throughout the City, Downtown Auburn
remains the heart and soul of the community. With its historical character
and pedestrian oriented development pattern, Downtown Auburn reflects
many of the qualities being sought by other communities. Given its urban
center designation, Auburn Station, and the incentives the Ciry has in
place, Downtown Auburn remains poised for continued revitalization.
EMPLOYMENT
GROWTH •
EMPLOYMENT
As of 2004, Auburn provides over 38,000 jobs for residents throughout the
region. Auburn has a diverse industrial sector that includes Boeing, the
General Services Administration (GSA) and numerous warehouse and
distribution facilities. Auburn Regional Medical Center and the growing
medical office community also provide a significant number of jobs. The
retail and service sectors continue to expand as companies locate in
Auburn and as small businesses are created. Educational uses such as the
Auburn School District add to the employment base.
Between 1995 to 2000, the number of jobs located in Auburn increased
34% compared to an overall increase of 22% throughout the rest of King
County. Manufacturing jobs remain the largest category in Auburn,
despite the loss of nearly 2,000 manufacturing jobs since 1990. The
remaining job categories all experienced job growth. Retail jobs increased
substantially along with jobs in warehousing, transportation, and
communication industries. Figure 8.1 compares the type of jobs located in
Auburn since 1990.
•
Page 8-2
Economic Development
~ Figure 8.1
Jobs Located in Auburn
1990 M1995 ~ 2000
16,000 ~ - -
~
14,000 ~ -
12,000
10,000 -
8,000 - -
i
6,000 '
4,000 -
2,000 -
0
~'c'
~\P G~J o°
~
Source: Puget Sound Regional CounciL
• It is expected that Auburn's employment base will continue to grow into
the future. To the year 2022, the King County Countywide Planning
Policies have assigned Auburn's job base to increase by 6,079 jobs. It
should be noted that this number is not a maximum, but the City's most
recent assigned share of future projected growth in the County.
Retail Sales
Auburn's business community is keeping pace with both Auburn's
population growth and its increase in more affluent households. Between
1995 and 2003, retail sales in Auburn increased 59% or roughly 8% per
year. As shown in Figure 8.2, Auburn is the sixth largest retail center in
Pierce and King counties outside of Tacoma, Seattle and Bellevue.
•
Page 8-3
F Economic Development
Figure 8.2 ~
City Retail Sales (Outside of Seattle/Tacoma/Bellevue)
Yr 1995 Rank '95 Yr 2003 Rank '03
Kent 1,507,693,474 2 2,005,340,826 1
Tukwila 1,572,309,882 1 1,798,012,039 2
. Renton 1,117,803,594 4 1,763,639,632 3
Redmond 1,345,470,014 3 1,640,192,690 4
Puyallup 788,047,838 8 1,474,074,155 5
Auburn 910,528,894 6 1,450,240,653 6
Kirkland 1,032,278,016 5 1,356,322,041 7
Woodinville 276,251,793 12 1,356,322,041 8
Federal Way 885,908,414 7 1,179,841,030 9
Issaquah 473,022,152 10 1,008,655,951 10
Source: State of Washington Department of Revenue
Beginning in 1997, retail sales in Auburn began increasing at a rate faster
than the rest of King County. In the Year 2000, retail sales in King
County fell whereas sales in Auburn remained steady. At the end of 2002,
retail sales continue to remain steady and higher than the rest of King
County. Figure 8.3 illustrates this comparison between Auburn, King
County and Washington State.
Figure 8.3 •
Comparison of Retail Sales
160%
150%
I
~
i 40%
i
i
i
i
~
30% - !
~
I ~
~
.
i
~20% a
- - - - - - -
I ~ I
i
i
110% IF
I ' ~ I
i
!I i ~
o I 'I
0/o
- r -1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 ~ ,
--~Aubum -m-Kin9 CountY - Washington State
Source: Washington State Dept of Revenue
•
Page 8-4
F Economic Development
STREAMLINED SALES TAX
in-r•eEent yeaFs-,4The State of Washingtan has eensidered recentlv adogted
streamlined sales tax (SST) leg~e~
leg,islationprejeet. Prior to SST, Pr-esend sales tax collection in
Washington State was i-s based on the site of origin, rather than on the site
of delivery. Under the SST tax structure,
sales taac is will be-collected at the site of
delivery rather than from those areas from which they were shipped_;ekies
sueh as This change in tax structure will put Auburn at a
disadvantaged and negatively impacted its tax revenue.
~ Specifically, Ri*i°s °ueh a° Auburn and similar cities have historically
, invested in infrastructure to support businesses engaged in warehouse and
distribution activities that ship goods to other destinations. Another 8thef
concerns for Auburn and similar cities that have invested in infrastructure
include how ' the debt that has already been extended
for such infrastructure wili be paid and how the loss of hysaga significant
source of revenue will would affect bond ratings.
I Based on the potential passage of SSTc4n4°'~ ee^°;aeff°fie.n. ef s„e'~
~islatie~t, the Auburn City Council approved Resolution No. 3782 in
~ November 2004. Resolution No. 3782 outlines an approach and actions
the City will take related to land use planning, zoning and vther matters in
the event a streamlined sales tax proposal or other similar proposals that
change the tax structure are adopted.
2005 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
In 2005 the City of Auburn brought together a focus group of diverse
business and community interests that identified several economic
development areas within the City. The focus group's effort is reflected in
an Econorraic Development Strategies document that includes strategies
and actions needed to affect necessary change for specific strategy areas
within the city. Implementation of these strategies is intended to enable the
City to achieve the City's economic development potentiaL
Implementation of actions and strategies in the Economic •Development
Strategies is appropriate and reflected in various elements of the Auburn
Comprehensive Plan.
Goals and
Policies ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
~ To ensure the long-term economic health of the City and the region
through a diversified economic base that supports a wide range of
Page &5
Economic Devetopment
'
; emplayment opportunities for Auburn's residents and those of the region
' and through the promotion of quality industrial and comrnercial ~
= development which matches the aspirarions of the community. .
Objeetive 9.1. ~ Promate a diversified economic base capable of withstanding changes in
( interest rates, inflation, tax structure and market conditions.
J ED-1 City promotion of new industry shall be directed at attraeting
' business that diversifies the City's tax base, offers secure, quality
employment opportunities, is sensitive to community values and
prornotes the development of ariractive facilities.
; ED-2 Emerald Downs, the Muckleshoot Casino, and the SuperMall of
; the Great Northwest offer opportunities for economic
: diversification"that should be optimized by the City.
;
~ ED-3 The importance of Downtown Auburn as a unique retaii
environment and subregianal center of commerce should be
considered in the Ciry's economic plan. '
` ED-4 The widespread endorsement and/or adoption of Streamline
Sales Tax (SST) or other similar legislation shall constitute an
; emergency for the purposes of amending the Comprehensive
Flan :outside af the normal amendment cycle in order to, among ~
> other items, implement the intent of Aubum City Council
; Resolution No. 3782. i
4hjective 9.2. ; Produce commercial and industrial siting policies which are based on the
~ assessrnent of local needs and the availability of transportation and other
infrastructure required to serve it.
- ED-5 bevelopment of industrial areas should be based on performance
standards appropriate for the site and with appropriate flexibility
' within those standards to accommodate changing market
~ conditions.
. . . . t . . . . . .
. . . :7 . .
fi
. = ED-6 Revitalize depreciated and/or obsolete cammercial and industrial
~ sites tlirough innovative regulations that redesign the site in
' accordance with rnodern design standards and
industriaUcommercial uses.
! ED-7 Uses which serve regional needs and purposes (such as major
industrial plants) must be separated from community serving
uses in order to minimize iraffic and other conflicts.
~
Page 8-6
~
Economic Development
• Objective 9.3. Develop effective land use polices and economic development strategies
that provide long-term and stable employment, increase per capita income
and reduce the taY burden of Auburn residents.
ED-8 Auburn should continue to provide an economic base not only
for the Auburn area but also for the south King County and north
Pierce County region.
ED-9 Implementation of economic development programs shall be
consistent with the policies of this Plan.
ED-10 The City should develop a formal economic development
strategy as an element of the Comprehensive Plan to specifically
identify the types of businesses most consistent with community
aspirations and lay out a program to attract those businesses.
a. The City should work cooperatively with other governmental
agencies in its economic development efforts, including the
Muckleshoot Tribe, King County, Pierce County, the Port
and the State.
b. The City should implement its economic development
~ strategy through a partnership with the private sector.
ED-11 Ensure that economic development strategies are reviewed
regularly in order to be flexible and respond to changes in the
market.
ED-12 The City should work with the private sector, school districts and
Green River Community College to develop programs to provide
training. Consideration of special needs of economically
disadvantaged citizens and neighborhoods and people with
physical impairments and developmental disabilities should be
included in these programs.
ED-13 Support continued development of the Sound Transit Commuter
Rail system, as an important means of expanding the City's and
the region's economic base.
ED-14 City infrastructure plans and programs should take into
consideration economic development plans and programs.
ED-15 Implement the recommendations of the City's 2005 Economic
Development Strategies brochure.
~
Page 8-7
F Economic Development
Objective 9.4 Maintain an adequate supply of land to support future economic ~
development and assure the availability of economic opportunities for
future generations.
ED-16 Economic development programs should be viewed as a way to
shape the character of the City's future economy rather than
merely respond to market trends as they occur.
ED-17 Land suitable for large scale development in the Region Serving
Area of the City should be identified and designated for
economic development.
a. The integrity of large, contiguously owned properties suitable
for industrial use should be conserved by use of appropriate
industrial subdivision standards.
b. The City should identify and resolve any environmental
constraints affecting such land by means of the appropriate
environmental review procedures as early as feasible.
c. The need to support such land with the necessary
infrastructure should be considered in the development of the
City's public facility plans. .
•
d. Innovative and flexible development regulations should be
utilized to enable the development of environmentally
constrained sites while protecting those characteristics.
Objective 9.5 Utilize the City's unique environmental opportunities and planned
infrastructure to build on and support economic development efforts.
ED-18 Integrate the Auburn Environmental Park (AEP) into the City's
economic development efforts by encouraging compatible high
tech businesses to locate in its vicinity. Amend regulations to
establish appropriate land uses for that area as well as develop
strategies and incentives to promote the area as a"Green Zone"
for economic development.
ED-19 Utilize the future extension of I Street NE as an economic
development opportunity. Development of I Street NE should
establish it as stand alone corridor and not a"back side" to
Auburn Way North. Conditional use permit applications for
commercial uses and nursing homes along this corridor and
whose impacts can be adequately mitigated should be supported.
~
Page 8-8
F7Economic Development
• ED-20 Use the M Street SE underpass and development of M Street SE
and R Street SE bypass connection as an opportunity to create
and encourage the clustering of complementary business and
services in that area.
~
~
Page 8-9
~
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 fanning 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 designadon and protection of resource lands and critical areas in the
Growth 1Vlanagement Act, the Countywide Palicies and this plan reflect
• the important role that these areas play in maintaining the health, safety
and welfaxe 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 af 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 Gity'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
Page 9-1
Environment ~
~
" environmental resaurces. 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. ; ENVTRONMENT 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 naturai resources. To encourage natural resource industries
' within the city to operate in a manneF which enhances, (rather than
detracts from), the orderly development of the City.
Qbjeetive 18,1. i To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of surface water, ground
; water, and shoreline resources in the City and Region.
;
t Policies:
. . . . ..1 . . . . . .
EN-1 The City shall seek to ensure adequate and healthful supplies of
domestic water by proteeting 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
~ disturbanee of water-bearing gealogical formations.
. . . . . . . : . . :i . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . .
'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 af Eco,iogy's
Stormwater Managernent 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 incarporate 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 Managernent Practices for control
~ of stormwater and nonpoint runoff.
;
~ •
Page 9-2
;
Environment~
• 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-S The City Shoreline Master Program, shall govern the development
of al1 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, reereational, 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 wili 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
environxnent, 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 T'he 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. Tliis will be
accomplished by emphasizing prevention of pollution to surface
and ground waters through education programs and
• irnplementation and enfarcement of Best Management Practices.
Page 9-3
Environment
~ -
i 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 envirorimental review pracess and require
~ any appropriate rnitigaOng measures. Impacts on* fish resources
j shall be a priority concern in sueh reviews.
~
EN-14 The City shall require the use af 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 Managernent Manual for
the Puget Sound Basin. In all new development, approved water
i quality treatment measures that are applicable and represeni the
~
best available science or technology shall be required prior to
~ discharging storm waters into the City storm drainage system or
~ into environmentally sensitive azeas (e.g. wettands, 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 quatity planning
and flood hazazd reducrion efforts within the Gre,en River, Mill
' Creek and White River clrainage basins. The findings and
3 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 F1ood 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-lb The City recognizes the vaiue and efficieney o€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 uncontroiled release of
contaminated starm 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
;
. ' drainage storage or conveyance, unless it can be demonstrated
. •
Page 9-4
. i
Environment ~
• 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
designect.
EN-17A Encourage the use of low impact development .techniques in
public and private development proposals in order to minimize
ixnpervious 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
eneourage landscaping in order to proyide 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.
•
Page 9-5
Environment ~
;
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
i groundcaver; by promoting the design and develvpment of
landscaped areas which provide food and cover for wiidtife; and
t by protecting and enhancing the quality of aquatic habitat.
' EN-24 The City shall consider the impacts of new develapment on the
quality of land, known or suspected fish and wildlife habitats
(Map 9.2) and vegetative resources as a part of its enviranmental
review process and rec}uire any appropriate mitigating rneasures.
; Such mitigation may involve the reterttion of signifieant habitats
and the use of native landscape vegetation.
; EN-25 The preferred method of crossing a watercourse that has habitat
j 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
,
{ watereourses. Culvert systems may be considered if streambeds
simiiar 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 shalt work in collaboration with other agencies, the
development communiry and other affectai or interested parties
` to protect identified wildlife corridors and encourage the
clustering of significant or adjacent resources to maintain
~ connecrivity of these systems.
4lajective 18.4. ~ To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of important wetland
; resources in the City and region.
' EN-27 The City recognizes the important biological and hydrologieal
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, apen spaee, educational and cultural
opportunities. The City will consider these roles and functions in
' all new development and will also pursue opportunities to
enhanee the existing wetland system when these multiple benefits
{ can be achieved.
' EN-28 The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying dEgrees of
~ bialogical and hydralogical functions and values to the .
; community depending on the size, complexity and location of the
~
;
Page 4-b
,
Environment ]
• 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 hydraulieally
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 lirnited 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 1Vlanagement 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 wetiands 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
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
Page 9-7
Environment
intended to ensure a balance of the City's cominitment between
environmental and econamic development interests. The City •
shall strive to streamline the permitting process far development
in the areas covered by the SAMP.
;
i
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 Fetieral Manuat For ldentifying 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 eontract in conjunction with
; changing climatic, natural and artificial conditions.
The map does not imply that a parcet covered by a wetland designation is
; fully occupied by wetlands. It is an indicator, however, that an in depth
' wetland delineation is required. T'herefore, future site specitic wetland
; studies conducted by the property owner will identify the precise location,
~ delineation and functional characteristics af known wetland areas, and
I additional wetland areas not previously inventoried. The Auburn Planning ,
; Department has wetland reports that can provide information regarding .
; soils, hydrology, vegetation and wildli€e for these wetlands. ~
;
i
. . . . . . . . . Objective 18.5. $ To reeognize the aesthetic, environmental and use benefits of vegetation
; and to promote its retention and propagation. Consideration sha11 be given
' to promoting the use of native vegetation:
,
` Policies:
~ EN-33 The City recggnizes 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 integrai part of public and private development '
; plans through strategies that include, but are not limited to, the
following:
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.
s ;
Page 9-8
Environment ~
• o Pursuing opportunities to educate tfie 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 cl'unatic hydrological
characteristics of the region. Regulations should provide
specificity as to native plant types in order to facilitate their use.
EN-34 T'he 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 T'he 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.
EN-41 The City encourages site design practices that maximize winter exposure to solar radiation. .
•
Page 9-9
Envirnnment~
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 azea inhabitants
to the harmful effects of excess naise. Performance measures for
` noise impact on surrounding development should be adopted and
f
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 glaze exposure to surrounding development should be
' adopted and enforced.
; EN-44 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants
a from noxious plant species.
Objective 18.8. ; To establish managernent policies which effectively control the operation
i 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
need+ed to support the develogment 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 duratian of, and in accord with, their existing permits.
} EN-47 Minerai extraction operations shall not be considerect a permitted
use in any zoning district. 1'hey are to be reviewed as special
i uses and shall be conducted only in accord with the measures
~
needed to mitigate any adverse irnpact. Perrnits for the operation
shall be denied whenever any impact is deemed by 'the City
Councit to be unacceptable or cannot be acceptably mitigated.
. . . . . . .3 . . . . . . . . .
. . . 1 . . . . .
! EN48 A final grading, drainage and erosion control plan shail be
submitted with every application. Conditions of operation shall
be spelled out in detail with performance bonds required to •
Page 9-10
,
~Environment
• ensure compliance. Failure to complywith the provisions will be
adequate grounds for suspension and subsequent termination of
the permit.
EN49 T'he 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 T'he 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
or long term adverse effect. Impacts of the operations must be
studied thoroughly under the provisions of SEPA, and tlie City
~ shall require implementation of all reasonable mitigating
measures identified in those studies. Permits for the operation
Page 9-1 1
Environment .
,
and renewal of permits for existing opera.tions 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 int 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 azeas outside of mineral resource
areas, same flexibility may be appropriate within minezal
resource areas.
€ EN-56 Aesthedc qualities, erosion control, the effect on comrnunity 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 ageration
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. i 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.,
{
~
i
~
y
. . . . ..4 . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .h . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . t . . . . ~ . I . . . . .
. . . . . . . . j . . . . . . .
Fage 9-12
Environment
~
. ~ 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.
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 dischazge
of storm water from new development. At a minimum the peak
discharge rate after development shall not exceed the pealc
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 develapment 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
Page 9-13
Environment
have been mcadeled 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, schoots, nursing homes, and police and fire stations,
should not be constructed in designated frequentty flooded areas
i unless no reasonable altemative is available. If these facilities
~ are located in designated frequently flooded areas, these facilities
i and the access routes needed for their operation, should be built
! in a rnanner that protects public health and safety during at least
' the 100 year flood. In addition; special measures should be taken
' to ensure that hazazdous or toxic substances are not released into
flood waters.
~ EN-67 Developers in floodprone areas sha11 provide geotechnical
information which identifies seasonal high groundwater
elevations far a basis to design stormwater faeilities in
i eonformance with City design criteria. -
t _
,
; .
EN-68 The Mill Creek Basin Flood Control Plan, when completed, shall
' be the basis for the establishment of downstream drainage
conditions for deuelopment 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.
Polieies: .
~
? 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 patential for slope slippage, landslide,
' subsidence or substantial soil erasion. 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 bs 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 far
' ctearing and grading activity.
,
i EN-71 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on
hazards associated with soils and subsurface drainage as a part of
~ .
~
Page 9-19
,
~Environment
• its environmental review process and require any appropriate
mitigating measures.
EN-72 Large scale speculative filling and grading activiries not
associated with a development proposal shall be discouraged as it
reduces a vegetated site's . naturaT 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 rneasures to control erosion and
sedimentation until the site is developed shall be required.
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 mappable 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 guidetines 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
disturhance 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.
~
Page 9-IS
Envlronment
;
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 proteet 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.
!
; EN-79 New commercial (other than retait commercial) or industrial uses
f which involve the transport or storage of hazardous materials,
° substances or wastes shall only be located in that portion af the
' desigtated 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 c4nsidered a non-eonforming 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.
a 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 environxnental review process and require
i anY aPpropriate mitigating measures.
: EN-83 The Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan for SeattleiKing
County, and the King Caunty Solid Waste Interlocal Resolution
No. 90-001, are her+eby 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 contaminatian by
hazardous materials or other contaminants. ~
. . . . . . k . . . . .
Page 9-16
Environme7n7t]
• 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
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 degradarion 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.
~
Page 9-17
. . .f. . ' .
. . - t . . . .
' Environment
~
G4ALeW 22 ~ GENERALP4LICIES AND REGL.ILATIONS VVITHIN AUBI3RN'S
SHORELINES '
b#refeli-tws
The following eg neral 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.
Ub`ective 21.1 ~ Ensare conservatian and restoration within Auburn's shorelines.
, f
i Polices:
~ EN-90 Prioritize enhancement and restoration efforts at public parks and
public o,pen space lands.
}
;
; EN=91 Work with owners of other publiciv-owned land to encourage
restoratian and enhancement projects.
i _ •
;
~ EN-92 Work with the public and other interested parties to prioritize
restoration opnortunities identified in the Shoreline Inventory
' and Characterizatinn Report.
{
i
; EN-93 Promote vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds
; and nonnative species to avoid adverse impacts to h d~gy,
and reduce the hazard of siope failures or aecelerated erosion.
1
{ EN-94 Intep-rate bioen ineering andlor soft en 'n~ eering gpproaches into
` local and rep-ional flood control measures, infrastructure, and
~ related capital impmvemertt projects.
i
;
i EN-95 Develop a program ta implement restoration projects, including
,
` fundin sg trategies.
.;j
EN-96 Monitor and adaptivelv manage restoration ~roiects.
i ~
Page 9-18
;
Environment
~ EN-97 Continue to work with the State Kin County Pierce County,
Watershed Resource Inventorv 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 ureserving
ecolo i~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-Countv .
River Improvement Agencv to identify and implement flood
management strategies that protect existin dg^evelopment 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 sup,port listed
endangered and threatened species, as well as other anadromous
fisheries.
EN-100 CGreate incentives that will make it economicallv or otherwise
attractive to integrate shoreline ecoloizical restoration into
• development projects.
EN-101 Encourage restoration or enhancement of native riparian
vegetation through incentives and non-regulatary.programs.
EN-102 Establish public education materials to provide shoreline
landowners technical assistance about the benefits of native
ve etation. EN-103 Explore Mortunities with other educational organizations and
agencies to develo an on-going program of shoreline education
for all citizens.
EN-104 Identify areas where kiosks and interpretive sigals can enhance
the educational experiences of users of shoreline areas.
EN-105 Develop strategies to fund shoreline-related educational and
~ interpretive projects.
Page 9-19
r Environment
Ob'ective 2.2 ' Shoreline Ve etation Conservation
~
Polices:
l
~ EN-106 -Developments and aciivities in the City's shoreline should be
~ planned and designed ta retain native vegetation or replace
~ shoreline veizetation with native species to achieve no net loss of
the ecological functions and ecosvstern-wide processes
performed by vegetation.
; ? EN-107 Wood dy ebris should be le$ in river corridors to enhance wildlife
. habitat and shoreline ecological functions,'except where it poses` ,
. 1 a threat to personal safetv or critical infrastntcture, such as brid,ge
i pilings. In cases where debris poses a threat, it should be
dislodg,ed, but should not be removed from the river.
;
~
t}b ective 21.3 ' Shoreline Im act Miti ation
__--__.._Polices:
;i
; EN-108 To assure no neY loss of shoreline ecological functions, proposed
uses and developments in the shoreline should analyze •
environmental irnpacts af the proposal and include measures to
miti ate_possible significant adverse environmental impacts not
~ otherwise avoided or miti at~ ed by compliance with the master
;
~ prog,ram and other applicable regulations.
Ob'ective 21.4 Protection of 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
critieal areas replations adopted pursuant ta the Growth
Management Act and the City's Comprehensive Plan.
EN-110 Allow activities in critical areas'that protect and, where,.,possible,
. restore the ecologacal functians and ecosystem-wide processes of
the City's shoreline.
;
Page 9-20
Environment
~ EN-111 Preserve, protect, restore and/or mitigate wetlands within and
associated with the Citv's shorelines to achieve no net loss of
wetland area and wetland functions.
EN-112 -Developments in shoreline areas that are identified as
geolo ig, cally hazardous or pose a foreseeable risk to people and
improvements during the life of the development should not be
allowed.
Ob'ective 21.5 Allowin for ublic access to shorelines
. Policies:
EN-113 Public access improvements should not result in adverse impacts
to the natural character and qualitv of the shoreline and
associated wetlands or result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions. Developments and activities within the shorelirie
should not itnpair or detract from the public's visual or physical
access to the water.
. `
EN-l 14 Protection and enliancement of the public's nhysical and visual
access to shorelines should be encouraged.
EN-115 The amount and diversity of vublic access to shorelines should be
increased in a manner consistent with the natural shoreline
character, property ri ts, and public safety.
EN-116 Publiclv 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 desi egn d to provide for public safety.
Public access facilities should nrovide auxiliary facilities, such as
narking and sanitation facilities, when apl2ropriate, and should be
ADA accessible.
• Ob'ective 21.6 Flood Hazard Reduction
Page 9-21
~ Environment
. . . .9 . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . " . . .
. . . . . . .1 . . . . .
; Policies:
;
; EN-118 -The City should manaa flood protection throu the Citv's
~ Comprehensive Drainage Plan. Comprehensive Plan, stormwater
' regulations, and flood hazard area regulations.
' EN-i 19 Discourage development within the flood.plains associated with
the Citv's shorelines that wauld individuallv or curnulatively
result in an increase to the risk of flood damage.
:
EN-120 Non-structural flood hazard reduction measures should be '~ven -
~ nreference over structural measures. Structural flood hazard
' reduction measures sbould be avoided. When necess#rv, thev
;
should be accomplished in a manner that assures no net loss of
ecalop-ical function and ecosXstem-wide processes. Non-
,
structural measures include setbacks land use contraTs
prohibiting or limiting development in areas that have
historicallv flooded, stormwater management plans, or
, bioen 'neering measures.
. ; EN-12l Where possible, public access should be integrated into pu`b2icly •
; financed flood control and management facilities.
;
Ob'ective 21.7 { Water Ouality, Water and Non-Foint Pollution '
,
! Policies:
;
! EN-122 The Citv should prevent impacts to water quality and storm water
i quantity that would result in a net toss of shoreline ecolo 'cal
r
function, a significant impact to aesthetic qualities, or
; recreationai opportunities.
t EN-123 -Storm water management treatment, conveyance, or discharge
~ facilities should be discoaraged in the shoreline j,urisdiction,
unless no other feasible alternative is available.
y
; EN-124 -Low impact development techniques that allow for greater
amount of storm water to infiltrate into the soil should be
encouraged.
` •
;
Page 9-22
;
;
Environment ~
• Ob'ective 21.8 Educationat and Archeolo 'cal Areas and Historic Sites
Policies:
EN-125 -Where possible, Educational and Archeological Areas and
Historic sites in the shoreline should be nermanently vreserved
for scientific study,.education, and public observation.
EN-126 --Consideration should be given to the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and Chanter 43.51 RCW to provide for
the protection, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of
. districts, sites, buildings, structures and ob,jects located or
associated with the shoreline that are significant in American,
WashinQtan and local hist4rv, architecture, archeology or
culture.
EN-127 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.
.
Ob'ective 21.9 Nonconformin Use and Develo ment Standards
Policies:
EN-128 Legally established uses and developments that nredate
--the City's Shoreline Master ProgEam (1973, as amended)
should be --allowed to continue as leg;al nonconforming uses
provided that _ future develonment or redevelopment does
not increase the degree of nonconformity with this program.
GOALeM 22 SHORELINChoreline MODIFICATIONaMeatie~
~oh6es--.
Shoreline modifications are eg nerallv 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,
fillin or vegetation clearing. Modifications are usually undertaken in
sunnort of or in preparation for an allowed shoreline use or development.
•
Page 9-23
Environment
,
Ob ective 22.2 . Dred ' and Material Dis sal '
.
Policies:
' EN-129 Dredging and dredge material diMosal should be done in manner
which avoids or minirnizes significant ecolo cg;ial impacts. Where
impacts cannat be avoided, mitigation measures are required that
~ result in no net loss of shoreline ecolowcal functions. ,
~ .
~ EN-130 Dredge spoil disposal in water bodies, on shorelands, or wetlands
~ within a river's channel migration zone should be discauraged,
except as needed for habitat improvement.
;
; EN-131 New develovment shall be sited and designed to avoid or, if that
is not possible, to minimize the need for new and maintenance
i dred ing. '
, .
,a
~
4b'ective 22.2 - ' Piers and Docks
;
F
; Policies: •
,
~
; EN-132- The City should discouraize the construction of new niers docks
~ or floats in the shoreline jurisdiction along the Green and White
'vers.
. . . . ,f - . . . . . .
. . . . , . . . . . ;.t . . . . . . . .
. . . 7 . . . . Qb'ective 22.3 ~A, Shoreline Stabilization bulkheads and revetments
Policies:
;
; EN-133- -Shoreline stabilization activiries that mav necessitate new or
increased shoreline stabilization on the same ar other affected
properties where there has been no previous need for
stabilization should be discouraged,
,
{
; EN-134- New uses and development should be located away from the
~ shoreiine in order to preclude the need for new stabilization
; structures. :
EN-135- -Structural or "hard" shoreline stabilization techniques and •
structures should be allowed anly after it is demonstrated that
. Page 9-24
77
,
Environment
. non-structural or "soft" shoreline protection measures are not
feasible.
EN-136- The curnulative effect of allowiniz 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 orprocesses, then ep rmitS
for them should not be r~anted.
EN-137- Bulkheads should not be permitted as a solution to geo-ph, s ical
problems such as mass slope failure, slou iing, or land slides.
Bulkheads and revetments should onlv be approved for the
purposes of protecting e xisting developments by prevenring bank
. erosion.
Ob'ective 22.4 Clearin and Gradin
Poticies:
• EN-138- -Clearing and p-rading activities should only be allowed in
association with a permitted shoreline development.
EN-139- Clearing and grading activities should be limited to the
minimum necessary for the intended development, including
residential development.
Ob'ective 22.5 Fillin within the Shoreiine Environznent
Policies:
EN-140- Placement of fill waterward of the OHWM should beprohibited
and onlv allowed to facilitate water-dependant uses. .
EN-141- Where permitted, the amount of fill should be the minimum
necessary to provide for the proposed use and should be allowed
only when tied to a specific development proposal that is
permitted bv the Shoreline Master Projzram.
~
Page 9-25
Environment .
~ EN-142- The perimeter of fill activities should be designed to avoid or
: eliminate erosion and seiimentation impacts, both durin sg, hort
•
; term initial fill activities and over the lon tg erm•
Ob'ective 22.6 ~ Shoreline Habitat and Natural S stems Enhancement Pro'ects
f
~ Policies:
E EN-143- 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 imnlementation of the Restoration Plan developed with
" this Shoreline Master Program puzsuant to WAC 173-26-
201 2
i
GQAI.eW 23 SI3URELTNE USE#erelifte-Use
,
i Shoretine use activities are developments or activities that exist or are
I anticinated to occupv shoreline Iocations.
;
_ Qb'ective 23.1 ' J Prohibited Uses within the Shoretine Environment •
i .
` Policies:
~
EN-144- The foltowing,uses should be prohibited in all shoreline
r environments unless addressed separately in this shoreline maste'r
' program under another use:
{ 1. Comrnercial aquaculture:
2. Boat houses;
3. New or expanded mining; and
; 4. Perrnanent solid waste stora e or transfer
~ facilities.
~
Ob'ective 23.2 Boat Launchin Ram s
~ Policies:
. ~
i EN-145- Public and communitv bQating facilities are preferred over
individual private facilities.
•
; Page 9-26
;
~
Environment
~ EN-146- New boat launching ramns should be allowed onlv where they
are located at sites with suitable environmental conditions
shoreline configurations, access and nei boring uses.
EN-147 Development of new or modifieations to existing boat ramns and
associated uses should not result in a netloss of shoreline
ecolog,ical function or other significant adverse impacts.
Ob'ective 23.3 Fishe Resources
- Policies:
EN-148- Develonment of fisherY resource facilities and associated
activities, such as hatcheries and fish counting stations should
assure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes.
Ob'ective 23.4 In-Stream Structural Use
Policies:
•
EN-149- Approval of permits for in-stream structures should recuire
inclusion of provisions for the proteetion and nreservation of
ecosvstem-wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural .
resources, ineluding, but not limited to, fish passage, wildlife and '
water resources, shoreline critical areas, hydro g;eological
processes, and natural scenic vistas.
EN-150- The location and planning of in-stream structures should give
consideration to the full range of public interests, watershed
` funetions and processes, and environmental concerns, with
special emphasis on protection and restoration of priority habitats
and s ep cies•
EN-151- Non-structural and non-regulatory rnethods 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.
. Ob'ective 23.5 Minin
Page 9-27
Environment '
Policies: •
! EN152- Limit mining activities near the shoreline
{ to existing minin uses. '
„
Ob'ective 23.6 Recreation
,
E Policies:
;
!
+
s EN-153- 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. `
. - . . .k. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
; EN-154- Shoreiine areas with the potential for,providing recreation ar
public access opportunities shauld be identified for thzs use and,
wherever possible., acquired and incarporated into the Public
Park and open space s s„
EN-155- Public recreational facilities should be located, desied and
operated in a manner consistent with the purpase of the .
environment designation in which thev are lacated and such that
; no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or ecosvstem-wide
processes result. .
,
; EN-I56- The coordination of local, state, and federal recreation ulanning
. ~ should be encouraged so as to mutually satisfy needs. Shoreline
~ recreationat developments should be consistent with the City's
a Comprehensive Plan and Parks. Recreation and Open Space '
. ~
Plan.
;
;i
,EN-157- Recreational developmen# shauld not interfere with public use
f of navigable waters.
,
Ob'ective 23.7 i Residential Develo ment :
-----Policies:
! EN-158- New over-water residences, including floating homes, are not a
; preferred use and should beprohibited. •
,
,
; Page 9-28
Environment~
~ EN-159- New multiunit residential development and land subdivisions
for more than four parcels should provide community and/or
public access in conformance to the Citv's public access
planniniz and this Shoreline Master Propram. Adjoinin access
sha11 be considered in making this determination.
EN-160- Accessory structures should be designed and located to blend
into the site as much as possible.
EN-162- 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 un blic
improvements or a net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
Ob'ective 23.8 Si ns
Policies:
EN-163- Sims should be designed, constructed and placed so that the
are compatible with the natural quality of the shoreline
• environment and adjacent land and water uses.
Ob'ective 23.9 Trans ortation
Policies:
EN-164- Plan locate design and where apvropriate construct pronosed
roads, non-motorized svstems and narking 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 adverselv imnact 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-165- The number of river crossings should be --nninimized.
EN-166- Parking facilities in shorelines are notpreferred and shall be
allowed only as necessarv to Mport an authorized use and then
. as remote from the shoreline as possible.
Page 9-29
Environment
EN-167- Trail and bicycle svstems should be encouraged along the White
and Green Rivers wherever possible. ~
{
; EN-168- Joint use af transportation corridors within the shoreline
jurisdiction for roads, utilities, and non-motorized transportation
should be encouraged.
,
;
' EN-169- New railroad corridors within the shoreline should be
prohibited. '
Ob' etive 23.10 ' Utilities
~
: Policies;
: EN-170- Utility facilities should be designed and located to asstre na net
; loss of shoreline ecological functions, preserve the natttral
~ landscape and vistas, preserve and pratect fish and wildlife
; habitat, and minimize conflicts with present and planned land
and shoreline uses.
i ~
: EN-171- PrimarYutilitYproduction and processing facilities, such as
power plants, sewage treatment plants, water reclamation nlants,
or parts of those faeilities that are non-water-oriented should not
be allowed in shoreline areas.
~ EN-172- Utilities should utilize existing transportation and utilities sites,
; ri ts-of-way and corridors, whenever possible. Joint use of '
rits-of-way and comdors should be encouraged:
` EN-173- 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,
utiiities shauld be ulaced underground or alongside or under
bn•dges•
~
C
; EN-174- New utilities facilities should be located so as not to r uire
j extensive shoreline protection struchtres:
~
Page 9-30
i
Environment
• EN-175- 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 ma.nner that avoids, or mitigates
adverse effects to the physical, hydrologic, or ecological
functions.
EN-176- Stormwater conveyance facilities should utilize existing
transportation and utilitv sites, rits-of-way and corridors
whenever possible. Joint use of right-of-way and corridors
should be encouraged.
~
•
Page 9-31
~
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 af agricultural goods
for the region and farming remains in some parts of the valley. Thick
forests, wetlands, and wildlife habitats are found throughout the azea. 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 Ivlanagement 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 sliould 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. PoIicies 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
Page 9-1
~Environment
~ 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
i and protection of the natural environment. It also provides a set of general
- a policies which will be used to require the mitigation of significant adverse
impacts.
a
;
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
i 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:
i
~ 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 unintendei 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 resuit 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.
~
;
; Page 9-2
Environment ~
~ 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-S 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 riverbanks 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
predevelapment 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
and graund waters through education programs and
. implementation and enforcement of Best Management Practices.
Page 9-3
Environment
; 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 mitigaUng measures. Impacts an'fish resources
t shall be a priority concern in sueh reviews.
. . ' . . . . . 5 . . . . . . .
' 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
s and Construction Standards and the Washington State
s Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management IVlanual for
the Puget Sound Basin. In all new development, approved water
; quality treatment measures that are applicabte and represent the
~ best available science or technology shall be required prior to
discharging stonn 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 quatity planning
and flaod hazard reduction efforts within the Green River, Mill
Creek and VVhite 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 Pian, shall be
; considered by the City as City programs and plans are developed
' and updated
: j
;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 stonn waters. Prior to utilizing natural systems for
# stonn drainage purposes, the City shatl carefully consider the
i potential for adverse impacts through the environmentai review
process. Important natural systems shall not be used for stonn
drainage storage or conveyance, unless it ean be demonstrated
•
Page 94
~ Environment
• 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.
Palicies:
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.
•
Page 9-5
Environment
Polieies:
~
` 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 resvurces 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.
~ i
' 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.. 'Ihe use of
; culverts shall be discouraged as a crossing method for such
watereourses. Culvert systems may be considered if streambeds
similar to natural ehannels can be provided, no toss of
anadromous fish habitat wili 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 signifieant or adjacent resources to maintain
! connectivity of these systems.
,
Objective 18.4. i To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of important wetland
;
~ resources in the City and region.
i EN-27 The City recognizes the important biological and hydrological
roles that wetlands play in providing plant and anirnal 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
oppartunities. The City will consider these roles and functions in
! all new development and will aiso pursue opportunities to
~ enhanee the existing wetiand system when these multiple benefits
can be achieved.
' EN-28 The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying degrees of
~ biological and hydrological functions and values to the •
community depending on the size, comptexity and location of the
j
Page 9-6
;
Environment
• 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 pmmote 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 o€ 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 sha.tl 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 Gity as the most important wetland systerns, 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
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
Page 9-7
Environment
~
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 develapmenC
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 ldentifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands field methodoiogy. It is impartant 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
i changing clirnatic, natwal and artificial conditions.
;
. . . . . . E . . . .
The map does not imply that a parcel covered by a wetland designadon is
; fully occupied by wetlands. It is an indicator, however, that an in depth
'i wetland delineation is required. Therefore, future site specific wetland
~ studies conducted by the property owner will identify the precise location,
i delineation and functional characteristics of known wetland areas, and
' additional wetland areas not previausly 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 recagnizes 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 Narthwest region. Native vegetarion can also reduce
the use of pesticides (thereby reducing the amaunt of
contaminants that may enter nearby water systems) and reduce
watering required af 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:
' o Encouraging the use of native plants in street lanctscapes
and in public faeilities.
; o Providing greater clarity in development regutations in
how native plants can be used in private development ~
proposals.
7 $
_ Environment
• o Pursuing opportunities to educate tfie 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 shoutd be placed on higher quality and
quantity of landscaping.
EN-37 The City shall strengthen the tree protection ordinance tazgeted 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.
EN41 The City encourages site design practices that maximize winter
exposure to solar radiation.
~
Page 9-9
~ Environment
Objective 18,7. ; Enhance and maintain ttie quality of life for the City's inhabitants by
: pramoting a healthy environment and reducing the adverse 'impact of •
i environmental nuisances.
Policies:
;
; EN-42 The Ciry shall seek to minimize the exposure of azea inhabitants
to the harmful effects af excess noise. Performance measures for
~ noise irnpact on surrounding development should be adopted and
enforced.
,
' EN-43 The City shall seek ta minimize the exposure of area inhabitants
to excessive levets of light and glare. Perfarmance measures far
light and glare exposure to surrounding developrnent 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 operarion
and location of mineral extraction in the City, in order to reduce the
; inherent adverse impacts that such activiries produce in an urban
environment. ~
` Poticies:
~ EN-45 The cost effective availability of sand and gravel materials is
needed to support the development of freeways, roads, puhlic
works, and private construetion. 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 allawed 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 mitigate,tl.
; 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 bands required to ~
Page 9-1:0
Environment~
• ensure compliance. Failure to complywith 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 rnineral 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 sha11 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 rnitigating 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 gowth
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
axe 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
resowce 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
or long term adverse effect. Impacts of the operations inust 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
Page 9-11
Environment
~
~ and renewat of permits for existing operations shall be denied
whenever any impact cannot be acceptably mitigated. ~
~
` EN-54 New mineral extraction operations and expansion of exisring
mineral extraction operatians 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 j
developed areas and to all azeas autside of mineral resource
; areas, sorne flexibility may be appropriate within mineral
; resource areas.
EN-56 Aesthetic qualities, erosion control, t12e effect on community and
the creation of usable land which is consistent witli approvei
Washington State Department of Natural Resources and City
i Reclarnation 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 extractian operation
outside designated mineral resource areas. GOAL 19. ~ HAZARDS
•
Ta minimize the risk from environmental and manmade hazards to present
; and future residents of the eommunity.
Objective 19.1. To reduce potential hazards associated with flood plains without unduly
; restrieting the benefits associated with the continued development of the
: Lower Green River Valley floor. ,
.
i
,
•
Page 9-12
_ _Environmenf
` POI1C1eS:
~
EN-57 The City shall seek to protect human health and safety and to
minimize damage to the property of area inhabitants by
rninimizing 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 rrieet the
standards set forth in the Federal flood insurance program.
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 mirigating 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 desigriated as frequently flooded areas should include 100
year future condition floodplains wherever future condition flows
~
Page 9-13
Environment
~
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 frequentty 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 far their operation, should be built
in a manner that protects public health and safety during at least
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
eievations for a basis to design stormwater facilities in
; conforinance with City design criteria.
; EN-68 The Mill Creek Basin Flood Control Plan, when completed, shall
be the basis for the estabtishment of downstream drainage
conditions for development in that azea.
c ~
~
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 ar
f significantly increase the potential for slope slippage, Iandslide,
` subsidence or substantial soil erosion. T'he City's development
standards shall dictate the use of Best Management Practices to
;
` minirnize the potential for these prablems.
;
~ EN 70 Where there is a high probability of erosion (see Map 9.6),
~ grading should be kept to a minimum and disturbed vegetation
i 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.
t
i EN-71 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on
hazards associated with sails and subsurface drainage as a part of
; •
a
Page 9-14
. Environment ~
• 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.
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 wili 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 mappable landslide potential identified by a geotechnical
study shall be protected from alteration.
EN-75 The City will' require that a geotechnical report prepazed 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 geotechnicat 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.
~
Page 9-15
. Envicontnent
Objec#ive 19.3. ` To reduce risks associated with the transportation and storage of ~
hazardous materials.
s
~ 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 af 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 tnaterials, substances and wastes shall be
incorporated into the City's emergency management prograrns.
~
; EN-79 New commercial (other than retail commercial) or industriai 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 Hi,ghway.
,
` EN-80 Any existing wholesale storage or manufacturing of hazazdous
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 iocal, state ar federai
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.
i
i EN-$3 The Local Hazardous Waste Management Planfor Seattle/King
County, and the King County Solid Waste Interlocal Resolution
No. 90-001, aze hereby adopted and incorporated as an elemeut
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
s hazardous materials or other contaminants. •
: Page 9-16
~
Environment
~ 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
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 T'he 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 aquadc
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.
~
Page 9-17
Environment
. ~
' GOALeW 21 ° GENERAL PflLIGIES AND REGULATIQNS WITHIN AUBURN'S
; SHO:RELINES . . . • , etteral oas 4
~ The followinggeneral policies and regulations Mlv to all shorelines of
i the stata that are located in Auburn, regardless of the specific shoreline
~ environment desi~nation in any one location.
i
O'ective 2.1 ~ Ensure conservation and restoration within Auburn's shoreliuzes.
~ Polices:
,
~ EN-90 Prioritize enhancement and.restoration efforts at public parks and
public open space lands.
; EN=91 Work with owners af 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 hy.,,draloRv,
= and reduce the hazard of slope failures or aecelerated erasion.
i
E EN-94 Inteprate bioen inng and/or soft en 'ni~ eering agpproaches into
? local and re oginal flood controi measures, infrastructure, and
. . . . . . ,I. .
related capital impravement projects.
? EN-95 Develop a program to imptement restoration projects, including
:I funding strategies.
~ EN-96 Monitor and adaptively manage restoration ----projects.
~
,
Page 9-18
Epvironment
~ EN-97 Continue to work with the State. Kin Countv Pierce County,
Watershed Resource Inventorv Area (WRIA) 9 and 10 Fonuns
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
ecolo 'cal processes and shoreline functions.
EN-98 Continue to work with the State. Kin County Pierce Countv
Green River Flood Control Zone District, and the Inter-Countv .
River Imnrovement Agency to identify and implement flood
management strategies that protect existin develonment 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.
EN-100 CGreate incentives that will make it economicall,y or otherwise
attractive to integate shoreline ecological restoration into
• develovment projects.
EN-101 Encourage restoration or enhancement of native riparian
vegetation through incentives and non-re u~ latory projzrams.
EN-102 Establish public education materials to provide shoreline
landowners technical assistance about the benefits of native
ve etation. EN-103 Explore ap,portunities with other educational organizarions and
agencies to develo an on-going.prograrn of shoreline education
for all citizens.
EN-104 Identify areas where kiosks and interpretive sig,ns can enhance
the educational experiences of users of shoreline areas.
EN-145 Develop strategies to fund shoreline-related educational and
~ inte retive projects.
Page 9-19
Environment
O'ective 21.2 ~ Shoreline Ve etation Conservation
Polices:
- ; EN-106 -Develppments and activities in the City's shoreline should be
~ planned and designed ta retain native vegetation or replace
shoreline vegetation with native species to achieve no net loss of
the ecolvgical functions and ecasvstem-wide processes
; performed by vegetation.
EN-107 Woodv debris should be left in river corridors to enhance wildlife
habitat anc1 shoreline ecological funetians, except where it poses ,
: a threat to personal safety or critical infrastructure, such as bridge
' nilings. In cases where debris poses a-threat, it should be
' dislodged, but should not be removed from the river.
4b'ective 21.3 1 Shoreline Im act Miti ation
f
; -._._Polices:
;
~ EN-1 Q8 To assure no net lvss of shoreline ecological functions, ;praposed
uses and developments in the shoreline should anal zy~e ~
environmental impacts of the proposal and include rneasures to
' mitigate possible signif cant adverse environrnental impacts not
otherwise avoided or mitigated by compliance with the master
program and other applicable regglations.
Ob'ecdve 21.4 ' Protection of critical areas
` Policies:
EN-109 Provide a level of protection to criticai areas within the shoreline
that is at least equat to that which is provided by the City's .
critieal areas reg,ulations adopted pursuant to the Growth
~ Management Act and the City's Comprehensive Plan.
~
~ ; EN-110 Atlow activities in critical areas that protect and, where possible,
restore the ecological functions and eeosystem-wide nrocesses of
t the City's shareline.
. . . . . . . . .j .
. . . . . . . . . . . . •
. . . S. .
Page 9-20
Environment
. EN-111 Preserve, protect, restore andlor mitijzate 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
p-eologically hazardous or nose a foreseeable risk to peo ln e and
imnrovements during the life o€ the development should not be
allowed. Ob'ective 21.5 Allawin for ublic access to shorelines
. Policies:
EN-113 Public access improvements should not result in adverse impacts
to the natural character and guality of the shoreline and
associated wetlands or result in a net loss of shoreiine ecological
functions. Developments and activities within the shoreline
should not imnair or detract from the nublic's visual or physical
access to the water.
• '
EN-l 14 Protection and enhancement of the public,s nhvsical and visual
access to shorelines shoutd be encoura ed.
EN-115 The amount and diversity ofpublic access to shorelines should be
increased in a manner consistent with the natural shoreline
character, property rits, 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
ADA accessible.
Ob'ective 21.6 Flood Hazard Reduction
~
Page 9-21
;
Environment
~ Policies:
•
EN-118 -The Citv snould manage flood protection through the Citv's
ComPrehensive Drainap-e 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 individuallv or cumulatively
; result in an increase to the risk of flood damage.
4
; . ,
; EN-120 Nan-structural flood hazard reduetion measures should be given
. ; preference over structural measures. Structural flood hazard
reduction measures should be avoided. When necessary, they
should be aceom,plished in a manner that asswres no net loss of
ecological function and ecosvstem-wide processes. Non-
structural measures include setbacks land use controls
= prohibiting; or limiting develvpment in areas that have
historicallv flooded, stormwater management plans, or
bioengineeriniz measures.
~ EN-121 Where possible, public access should be integ,rated into publicly •
i financed flood contral and management facilities.
;i
Ub'ective 21.7 :i Water Onality, 5torm Water aad Nan-Point Pollution '
; .
~
Policies:
;
; EN-122 The City should prevent impacts to water quaiity and starnn water
quantity that would result in a net loss of shareline ecoloi6cal
' function, a significant impact ta aesthetic qualities, or
; recreational opportunities.
~
;
; EN-123 -Storm water management treatment, conveyance, or discharp-e
~ facilities should be discouraged in the shoreline jurisdiction,
; unless no other feasible alternative is available.
,i -
; EN-124 -Low impact development techni,gues that ;allow for greater
amount of storm water to infttrate into the soil should be
encouraged.
i ~
,
. . . . . :f . . .
. . . . . . , i! . .
. . . . . . . .
Page 9-22
;
Environment
• Ob'ective 21.8 Educational and Archeolo 'cal Areas and Historic Sites
Policies:
EN-125 -Where possible. Educational and Archeological Areas and
Historic sites in the shoreline should be permanentlypreserved
for scientific study,.education, and public observation.
EN-126 -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 historv, arehitecture, archeolog.v or
culture.
EN-127 Where feasible and appropriate, access trails to shorelines should
incorporate access to educational si ng~age acknowledging
protected, historical, cultural and archeological sites or areas in
the shoreline.
•
Ob'ective 21.9 Nonconformin Use and Develo ment Standards
Policies:
EN-128 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 develonment or redevelonment does
not increase the degree of nonconformitv with this program.
GOAi.eW 22 S:i30REI.,I1\C#or+tme M(}DIFf.CATIONodifigatien
Rel
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=
fillin , or vegetation clearing: Modifications are usuallv undertaken in
sLipport of or in preparation for an atlowed shoreline use or development.
•
Page 9-23
EnvFronment
Ub`ective 22.1 ~ Dred 'n and Material Dis osal '
, .
Policies:
; EN-129 DredizinQ and dredge material disposal shauld be done in manner
which avoids or minimizes sijznificant ecological impacts. Where
' impacts cannot be avoided, miti a~ txon measures are require~i that
result in no net loss of shoreiine ecological functions. '
;
f EN-130 Dredize spoil disposal in water bodies, an shorelands, or wetlands
' within a river's channel mioration zone should be discouraged,
~ except as needed for habitat improvement.
;
,
; EN-131 New development shall be sited and designed to avoid or, if that
is not possible, to minimize the need for new and maintenance
dred ing.
,
Ub`ecrive 22.2 ; Piers and Docks ; Policies: •
~
i EN-132- The Citv should discourage the construction of new piers, dacks,
or floats in the shoreline iurisdiction along the Green and White
Rivers.
Ob ective 22.3 Shoreline Stabilization bulkheads and revetments
; Policies:
` EN-133- -Shoreline stabilization activiries that may necessitate new or
increased shareline stabilization on the same or other affected
properties where there has been no previous need for
stabilization should be discouraged.
i EN-134- New uses and development should be located away fram the
shoreline in order to preclude the need for new stabilization
} struciures.
; EN-135- --Structural or "hard" shoreline stabilization techniques and •
structures should be allowed onlv after it is demonstrated that
Page 9-24
;
~Environment
. non-structural or "soft" shoreline nrotection measures are not
feasibie.
EN-136- The cumulative effect of allowing bulkheads or rcvetments
along river segrnents should be evaluated. If it is determined that
the cumulative effects of bulkheads or revetments would have an
adverse effect on shoreline functions or groc,esses, then permits
for them should not be granted.
EN-137- Bulkheads should not be permitted as a solution to geo-phvsical
problems such as mass slope failwe, sloug iing,_or land slides.
Bulkheads and revetments should only be anuroved for the
nurposes of protecting existing develovments by nreventing bank
erosion.
Ob'ective 22.4 Clearin and Gradin
Policies:
EN-138- -Clearing and grading activities should onlv be allowed in
• association with a permitted shoreline development.
EN-139- Ciearing and r~ading activities should be limited to the
minimum necessarv for the intended development, including
residential development.
Ob'ective 22.5 Fillin within the Shoreline Environment
Policies:
EN-140- Placement of fill waterward o€the OHWM should be prohibited
and onlv allowed to facilitate water-dependant uses.
EN-141- Where permitted, the amount of fill should be the minimum
necessarY ta nrovide for the proposed use and should be allowed
only when tied to a specific developmentproposal that is
permitted bv the Shoreline Master Progxam•
•
Page 9-25
Environment
;
:
t EN-142- The perimeter of fill activities should be designed to avoid or
eliminate erosion and sedimentation impacts, both durin short
•
~ term initial fill activities and over the lon tg erm.
;
~
;
Ob'ective 22.6 ' Shoreline Habitat and Natural S stems Enhancement Pro'ects
;
,
Policies:
i
; EIV-143- All proposed shoreline habitat and naturai sYstems enhancement
f projects should assure that the activities assoeiated with each
~ project address legitimate restoration needs and priorities and
, facilitate implementation af the Restoration Plan develo
with
Rgd
this Shoreline Master Program ntzrsuant to WAC 173-26- -
` 201 2
'i
.
gt3 i,.ea# 23 i SHQ[tELINE LTSE#er-eline-Use :
' Shoreline use activities are developrnents or activities that exist or are
} anticipated to occupv shoreline tocations.
Ob'ective 23.1 ' Prohibited Uses wi#hin the Shoreline Environment •
' Policies:
; .
EN-144 'Fhe following uses should be,prohibited in all shoreline
environments unless addressed se}aarately in this shoreline master
pro~xam under another use: .
; 1. Commercial aquacu.lture:
- 2. Boat houses;
3. New or expanded mining; and
4. Permanent solid waste storage or transfer
' facilities.
Qb' ctive 23.2 11 Boat Launchin Ram s
; Policies:
,
~ EN-145- Public and communit boating facilities are preferred over
individual private facilities.
•
Page 4-26
Environment
• EN-146- 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-147 Development of new or modifieations to existing boat ramps and
associated uses should not result in a net loss of shoreline
eco}ogical function or other significant adverse impacts•
Ob'ective 23.3 Fishe Resources
~ _.__--._.Policies:
EN-148- Develonment of fishery resource facilities and associated
activities, such as hatcheries and fish counting stations should
assure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes.
Ob'ective 23.4 In-Stream Structural Use
Policies:
• EN-149- A roval of ermits for in-strearn structures should re uire
inclusion of provisions for the protection and nreservation of
ecosvstem-wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural ,
resources, ineluding, but not limited to, fish passage, wildlife and
water resources, shoreline critical areas, hvdro geologLcal
nrocesses, and natural scenic vistas.
EN-154-_ 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 protection and restoration ofprioritv habitats
and s cies.
EN-151- Non-structural a.nd non-regulatory methods to protect enhance
and restore shoreline ecological functions and nrocesses and
other shoreline resources should be encouraged as an alternative
to structural in-stream structures.
Ob'ective 23.5 Minin
~
Page 9-27
~
Environment Policies: .
- ~
EN152- Limit mining activities near the shoreline
to existing mining uses.
. Ob'ective 23.6 ~ Recreation
Policies:
EN-153- Prioritize shoreline recreational development thatprovides
public access, eniovment and use of the water and shorelines of
the State over other non water-oriented recreational uses.
,
,
~
~ EN-154 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 s sv tem.
~
iEN-155- Pubiic recreational facilities should be located, designed and
operated in a manner consistent with the purpose of the .
r environrnent designation in which theY are located and such that
~ no net loss of sfioreline ecological functions or ecosystem-wide
' processes result.
;
? EN-156- The caordination 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-157- Recreational development should not interfere with public use
of navigable waters.
;
O`ective 23.7 ~ Residential Develo ment
,
- - -----Policies:
;
i EN-15$- New over-water residences, including floating homes, are not a
preferred use and should be prahibited.
•
;
Page 9-28
~
Environment~
~ EN-159- 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 Pro agr m. Adjoinin access
shall be considered in making this determination.
EN-160-- Accessory structures should be desig.ned and located to blend
into the site as much as possible. :
EN-162- 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.
Ob'ective 23.8 Si ns
Policies:
EN-163- SigLns should be designed constructed and placed so that they
are compatible with the natural qualitv of the shoreline
~ environment and adjacent land and water uses.
Ob'ective 23.9 Trans ortation
Policies:
EN-164- Pian, locate, design and where appropriate construct proposed
roads, non-motorized systems and arking 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 exnansions should not be built within
shoreline jurisdiction.
EN-165- The number of river crossings should be -minimized.
EN-166- 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.
Page 9-29
Environment
: EN-167- Trail and bicycle systems should be encoura ed along;the White
; and Green Rivers wherever possible. ~
~
;
; EN-168- Joint use of transportation corridors within the shoreline
i jurisdiction for roads, utilities, and non-motorized transportation
; should be encouraged.
`I EN-169- New railroad corridors within the shoreline should be
M
prohibited. 's
Ub ectiwe 23.10 ' Utilities
Policies:
EN-170- U#ilitv facilities should be designed and located to assure np net
loss of shoreline ecological functions, preserve the natural
i landscape and vistas; preserve and_protect fish and wildlife
habitat, and minimize conflicts with present andplanned land
and shoreline uses.
~
u EN-171- Primary utility production and processing facilities,such as
op wEr plants, sewage treatment nlants, water rectamation plants,
or parts of those facilities that aze non-water-oriented should not
; be allowed in shoreline areas.
i ;
~
; EN-172- Utilities should utilize existin tg`ransportation and utilities sites,
ri ts-of-way and carridors, whenever possible. Joint use of
; rits-of-wav and corridors should be encouraized.
't
. . . . . . . . . .
: EN-173- Transmission facilities for the conveyance of services, such as
power lines, cables, and pipelines, shall be located outside of the
shoreline area vuhere feasible: Where no other option exists,
; utilities should be placed underground or alongside or under
s bridizes.
{
± EN-174- New utilities facilities should be lacated so as not to require
r
; extensive shoreline protection structures.
. - -IY. . . . . .
~
Page 9-30
f
Environment -l
~ EN-175- Where storm water management, conveyance and discharge
facilities are permitted in the shoreline, they should be limited ta
the minimum size needed to accomplish their ~urpose and should
be sited and designed in a manner that avoids, or mitigates
adverse effects to the physical, h dv rologic, or ecological
functions.
EN-176- Stormwater conveyance facilities should utilize existing
trallSportation and utility sites, rits-of-wav and corridors,
whenever possible. Joint use of rit-of-way and corridors
should be encouraged.
~
Page 9-31
•
CHAPTER 13
DEVELOPMENT IN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREAS
AND ANNEXATION
Introduction Over the years, extensive development has occurred in the unincorporated
areas surrounding Auburn. This trend is likely to continue in the future.
Ultimately, most if not all of these areas will be incorporated into the
Cities of Auburn, Kent or Federal Way in King County, and Sumner in
Pierce County. Discussions between these cities have resulted in the
designation of potential annexation areas (PAAs) or urban services areas
• (USAs) for each jurisdiction. PAA's is the term used in King County for
urban growth areas while Urban Services Areas is the term used in Pierce
County. Throughout this document, the terms PAA, USA and UGA
(Urban Growth Area) are used interchangeably. It is anticipated that areas
within each City's PAA/USA will annex to the city at the appropriate time.
After a significant amount of annexation bv the City since 2000, the size
of the City's PAA has decreased significantly and the amount of
unincorporated lands within the City's remaining PAA is relativel sall.
Issues and ,
Background
Annexation and Utility
Service in
Unincorporated
Areas
Annexation is the inclusion of previously unincorporated lands within the
City limits. While development in the unincorporated areas surrounding
the City may have significant impacts on the city itself, including, but not
limited to, traffic, parks, and city utilities, the City has limited control over
• the development that takes place in these areas. For these reasons, the
Page 13-1
Annexation
City and its citizens have a vested interest in seeing that the City increases •
its ability to control development in these areas through annexation.
When property owners and residents of these unincorporated areas annex
to the City they gain access to the urban services provided by Auburn such
as increased police and fire protection, building and land use controls and
storm and surface water control. Further, they are fully represented in the
local government that has a direct impact on their daily lives.
The City of Auburn's has a°s;R„a*°d a potential annexation area was
designated after a4ff discussions with Federal Way, Kent, Pacific, Sumner
and King and Pierce Counties. The City's remaining PAA afeis-as shown
in Map 3.1. These boundaries were established taking into consideration a
range of issues related to community identification, logical service area
and physical features.
GOAL 5. CITY EXPANSION AND ANNEXATION
To ensure the orderly development of the City's potential annexation area,
in a manner that ensures adequate and cost-effective provision of required
urban services and facilities,' ensures that development is built to City
standards, reduces sprawl, implements the goals, objectives and policies of
the Auburn Comprehensive Plan, and protects designated rural areas. •
Objective 5.2: To ensure that all development that occurs within Auburn's Potential
Annexation Area is built in compliance with City codes and standards.
CE-1 The City shall actively pursue intergovernmental agreements with
King and Pierce Counties to ensure that all development within
Auburn's potential annexation area be built to mutually agreed
upon standards. These agreements should cover a wide range of
areas, including, but not limited to, development standards,
collection of impact fees, annexations, urban service provision and
land use, transportation, parks and capital facilities planning.
CE-2 The City of Auburn shall encourage the annexation of areas ready
for development due to: location within the Auburn Urban Growth
Area; proximity to the City; existing urban development patterns;
and the City's ability to provide adequate and cost-effective urban
services.
CE-3 Until such time a joint planning agreement between the City and
respective county is in effect that provides far development in the
unincorporated Potential Annexation Areas (PAA) to meet City
standards, annexation shall be required as a condition of the City's •
Page 13-2
Annexation
• provision of sewer and/or water utility service to properties within
the Potential Annexation Area. Exceptions to this involve
requests for water and/or sewer service for the following:
a. Single family residences on pre-existing lots;
b. To address a documented imminent health or safety
consideration; or,
c. To development where a water/sewer availability
development agreement has previously been approved with
the city and is still valid; or
d. Public facilities, provided that development of
the public facility is otherwise consistent with an
applicable adopted capital facilities plan.
In situations where an exception applies, the City of Auburn shall
require the property owner to enter into a legally binding, non-
remonstrance pre-annexation agreement with the City. The
agreement shall provide for the property owners support for
annexation to the City at such time as the City deems annexation
appropriate. In these instances, the following conditions shall
also apply:
• a. The property owner/developer shall agree to comply with
appropriate City development standards and public facility
specifications where such requirements are not superseded by
applicable County requirements (in the event of significant
conflict between City and County requirements, the City may
choose to not extend utility service). Any facilities to be
dedicated to the City of Auburn upon completion (e.g. sewer and
water lines and appurtenances) shall be built in accordance with
City design and construction standards; and
b. The property owner/developer shall allow City plan review
prior to construction, and inspection during construction of all
public improvements as they are built, regardless of the ownership
of such improvements, and shall reimburse the City for any
reasonable costs incurred in such plan review and inspection.
This policy shall go into effect January 1, 2005, provided that, the
City will process those water/sewer availability certificate
applications received by December 31, 2004 under the prior policy
that requires a development and pre-annexation agreement.
CE-3A The City shall seek interlocal agreements with the adjacent sewer
• purveyors that provide sewer service to developers inside of
Page 13-3
Annexation
Auburn's PAA to obtain an Auburn Pre-Annexation Agreement •
prior to issuing a Sewer Certificate of Availability.
Objective 5.3: To ensure that any urban service extension is in full compliance with the
City's facility plans, this comprehensive plan and the Countywide
Planning Policies.
CE-4 The City of Auburn shall not extend or allow the extension or
upsizing of City sanitary sewer or water utility service beyond its
respective approved utility service areas, except through interlocal
agreements with adjacent recognized service providers.
CE-5 City services other than City utilities may be provided beyond the
Potential Annexation Area, by contract, interlocal agreement, or
otherwise, only under the following circumstances:
a. Such services will not be provided at a level or to a
standard that will encourage urban growth beyond the
approved urban growth boundary; or
b. The extension is into an adjacent jurisdiction's officially
designated Potential Annexation Area recognized by the
City as an area appropriate for urban growth. •
CE-6 The availability of urban services at levels beyond those which are
minimally required to meet the needs of an area will not presume
or justify approval of a development that is inconsistent with this
plan or other adopted land use plans.
CE-7 The City of Auburn shall not extend or allow the extension of City
sewer or water utility service within areas designated as Rural on
the City's Comprehensive Plan Map, or within designated
Agricultural or Forest Resource Lands, except when the extension
is necessary to alleviate an imminent threat to public health, in
which case such extension shall be designed or conditioned to
ensure that it does not promote additional urban development.
Objective 5.4: To ensure coordination and cooperation between the City of Auburn and
adjacent jurisdictions in implementing mutual goals, objectives and
policies regarding urban growth.
CE-8 The City shall continue to actively participate in and influence the
planning and development activities of adjacent jurisdictions, in
order to promote the interests of the City and its residents.
•
Page 13-4
Annexation
.
CE-9 Auburn's Growth Impact Area is designated by Map 3.1. Growth
and development within these areas has a high potential for
impacting the City and its residents. The City shall seek interlocal
agreements with King County, Pierce County and other
appropriate jurisdictions, to provide a meaningful role for the City
in the development of land use and development policy, and in the
review of significant development proposals, within these areas.
CE-10 The City shall oppose, and shall seek adjoining jurisdictions
agreement to prohibit, additional urban development within
Auburn's Potential Annexation Area, unless adequate urban
governmental services (including but not limited to storm and
sanitary sewer systems, water utility systems, adequate streets and
arterials, parks and open spaces, fire and police protection services,
emergency medical services, public schools and public transit
services) are provided concurrent with development. Exceptions
' to the requirement for urban sanitary sewer and water utility
service may be permitted pursuant to a Non-remonstrance
Agreement between the City and the property owner and satisfying
the requirements of the King County Board of Health for property
~ situated in King County or the Pierce County Board of Health for
Property situated in Pierce County
CE-11 Whenever on site sewage facilities are allowed, they shall be sited,
designed, built and maintained according to guidelines of the King
County Department of Health for property situated in King County
and the Pierce County Department of Health for property situated
in Pierce County. If built in an area contributory to any beneficial
groundwater use, including but not limited to planned or existing
potable water sources or existing fisheries, such facilities shall
demonstrate compliance with the Washington State Anti-
Degradation Policy (WAC 173-200-030) and implement all
known, available and reasonable methods of control and treatment
for the reduction or elimination of pollutants.
CE-12 The City of Auburn shall pursue processes to include areas around
North Lake Tapps within the City's Potential Annexation (Urban
Services) Area. This will also include seeking an amendment to the
Pierce County Comprehensive Plan to include areas presently
designated "Rural" into the County Urban Growth Area (CUGA).
City comprehensive plan designations and zoning applied to these
areas shall provide for appropriate lower and moderate density
transitions adjacent to the City's existing "Rural" and R1 (Single
~ Family Residential) zones.
Page13-5
•
CHAPTER 14
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP
Introduction
The previous chapters presented the goals, objectives and policies intended
to guide Auburn's future physical development. The Comprehensive Plan
Map presented in this chapter (Map 14.1) applies those policies to the
various areas of the City, by indicating the appropriate locations for
various categories of land use. The Plan Map should be consulted together
with the written policies of this Plan when decisions about land use and
public facility development are considered.
. This chapter also explains the reasoning and intention behind the Plan
Map's land use designations. This should be useful in developing and
applying implementing tools (such as zoning provisions); for interpreting
the Plan Map as it applies to specific regulatory decisions or development
proposals; and in adjusting or amending the Plan Map when changing
conditions or land use markets warrant.
Finally, this chapter sets forth some special policies intended to deal with
the unique problems or opportunities that exist in certain specific locations
within Auburn. These specific policies supplement the general goals,
objectives and policies of earlier chapters.
Land Use
Designations:
Plan Map
Residential Categories
R*r-alResidential Coraser-vancv
Purpose: To protect and preserve natural areas with significant
environmental constraints or values from urban levels of development and
~ to protect the City's water sources.
Page 14-1
Chapter 14
Description: This category should consist primarily of low density .
I residential uses (with densities not exceeding one unit €er-per four acres)
in areas with environmental constraints and/or areas requiring special
protection such as the City's watershed which is a si~7nificant water
resource. ti,,,~R~t ,not- i,.,va ,..,bl:r. +,,,.;l,t;es .,d:l_. . ,,;lExamples
include the Coal Creek Springs watershed area and low-lvinu areas along
the Green River that are isolated from urban services. From a practical
standpoint, this watershed area cannot be readily served by public facilities
due to its physical separation from public facilities by an existing gravel
mine operation that is expected to continue operation years into the future.
The designation will serve to both protect environmental features and hold
areas for higher density development until such time public facilities
~ become available.
Ttie area desi~nated resicic,ntiai_con5c:rvancy allow5 tor a lifc,styl_e yimilar
to that of rural areas since the lower density established pratects the
critical areas such as the Citv's Coal C'reek ~prin~s_~~vatcrshed. _A naral
- - _ -
lifestyle generally includes allowance of far-m allimals, streets not urban in
character (e.a. no_sidewalks, _strec,t _Iigtits), and limitcd_ a~riculturat type
uses.
Compatible Uses: Low density residential uses consistent with protecting ~
the City's water resources and environmental constraints are appropriate.
Low intensity cottage industry appropriate for rural areas may be allowed,
subject to review. Various public and quasi-public uses which are
consistent with a rural character may be permitted as conditional uses.
Resource extractive uses can only be allowed if the basic environmental
character of the area is preserved.
Those areas with critical areas shalt be appropriate fot• Iow densitv
resideiltial, with the intent to pratect envirorunentatlv critical areas fram
impacts associated with more intensive development. Thcse
envirorunentaliv critical areas area valued as a communitv resource both
for conservatioii. puWoses and public enjovment• provided that the
environmentally critical areas area protecteci low densi single family
resiciential use may be Ippropriate.
Criteria for Designation: This designation should be applied to areas
with either significant environmental values worthy of protection or to
those areas which may pose environmental hazards if developed, such as
areas tributary to public water sources. It may also be appropriate, to a
limited extent, as a means of delimiting the edge of the City or to areas
that are impractical to develop to urban levels until a later time period due ~
~ to pre=existing development patterns and the absence of public facilities.
Page 14-2
Comp. Plan
Map
• Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Due to the costs of
providing City services to these areas, this designation should be applied
sparingly. It should be applied as a means of conserving significant
environmental resources, to achieve watershed protection and/or to areas
where development served by public facilities has been made impractical
due to pre-existing use patterns.
Appropriate Implementation: The RRC (ftifal-residential coiiservancv) I
district will implement this designation.
Single Family
Purpose: To designate and protect areas for predominantly single family
dwellings.
Description: This category includes those areas reserved primarily for
single family dwellings. Implementing regulations should provide for an
appropriate range of lot sizes, clustered and mixed housing tvpes as part of
a planned development, z nd it«he, zighe:t;ff--_aensitN,-o
ci~°e,_,1°•,.,,-••t;•,•t zoiiesz-alloF'b;-ii-;s--ceri•,dri=rerrcr `a'-ZCsE,'
''",~cupl@-ces-~erc i
•
Compatible Uses: Single family residences and uses that serve or support
residential development, such as schools, daycare centers, churches and
parks shall be considered appropriate and may be permitted on a
conditional basis. Other public buildings and semi-public uses may be
pertnitted if designed and laid out in a manner which enhances rather than
detracts from the residential character of the area. In siting such uses,
however, special care shall be given to ensuring adequate parking,
landscaping, and traffic circulation with a minimum of conflict with
residential uses. Uses which generate significant traffic (such as large
churches) should only locate on developed arterials in areas zoned for I
institutional uses.
Intrusion of industrial uses into any of these single family areas shall be
prohibited. Only very limited commercial uses such as home occupations
or strictly limited appropriate conditional uses can be allowed.
Planned unit-developments should be °fieeuraa°d favorably considered in
these designations in order to allow optimal flexibility. In providing such
flexibility1 the emphasis should be on small allev-loaded lot single familX
development, limited low density multifamily housing and a
~ mixture of types, and design diversity should be sought. Except where
conditional use permits have been previously granted, alternate structure
types shall--should not exceed more than 40 percent of the units, and I
Page 14-3
Chapter 14
alternative structures should in most cases contain no more than four •
dwelling units each. However, where substantial offsetting community
benefits can be identified, such alternative structures may be allowed to
contain more than three units each.
Criteria for Designation: Areas suitable for this designation include
those areas designated in goals and policies of this Plan as single family
areas. Consistent with those policies, areas within the Community Serving
Area of the City suitable for this category should be reserved for these
uses. This designation should also be applied to areas adjacent to lower
density residential plan designations.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: This designation
would not be generally appropriate (although exceptions may exist) in the
following areas:
1. Areas with high volumes of through traffic.
2. Areas developed in or more appropriate under the Plan
policies for another use.
3. Areas within the Region Serving Area of the City. •
I Appropriate Implementation: Three zones mav be used to implement
this category:
1) R-1 - Single Family Residential District permits 8,000 square foot
~ lots. This zone is intended to provide for moderate lot sized le4
single family development. It is intended to be applied to the
relatively undeveloped portions of the City, areas wliere existin~
devetopment patterns are consistent with the density and upland
areas where greater densities would strain the transportation
svstem. e~eoufage ,~.a ae ol„ o„* ,.f „ .,l:+.. sitigle
~ ,...:i~~. ,,,,.s;.,,~ s+,.,.~.
auuu ,
2) R-2 - Single Family Residential District permits 6,000 square foot
lots. This zone provides for relatively small lot sizes-aiid--aI~ws
It mav be applieds to the older neighborhoods of the City and
reflects the typically smaller lot sizes found there. i€s-pr-ovisiet~
fedeve~pment-e€=these-ol-der- afeas-poss;by be
def- ` "i ' ' i' --~~r`c`)i-ii=ai-ii-di -~r~ii?-1£`2i~" ~
Application of this zone should be considered for areas considered
Page 14-4
Comp. Plan
Map
~ aPPropriate for a mix of housing tYl>es> ParticularlY in some of the
Special Planning Areas as discussed below.
3) RS - Single Family Residential District permits 35,000 square foot
lots. This zone is intended to provide for high quality large lot
single family development and is primarily applied to areas
designated as urban separators under the King County Countywide
Planning Policies where rezones from existing densities (typically
one unit per acre) are not allowed for a 20 year period and/or to
areas with significant environmental constraints. It may also be
applied in limited instances to areas where jaeater densities are
limited by environmental constraints.
Moderate Densiry
Purpose: To provide a transition between single family residential areas
and other more intensive designations, as well as other activities which
reduce the suitability of potential residential areas for single family uses
(such as high traffic volumes). In so doing, this designation will offer ~
opportunities for housing types which balance residential amenities with
• the need to provide economical housing choice, in a manner consistent
with conserving the character of adjacent single family areas.
Description: Moderate density residential areas are planned to
accommodate moderate densities of varying residential dwelling types.
Appropriate densities in these areas shall range from 6 to 10 units per acre.
Dwelling types would generally range from single family units to fourplex
units, with larger structures allowed (at the same overall density) where
offsetting community benefits can be identified. Structures designed to be
occupied by owner-managers shall be encouraged within this designation.
Compatible Uses: Public and quasi-public uses that have land use
impacts similar to moderate to high density residential uses are appropriate
within this category. Also, uses which require access to traffic (such as
schools and churches) are appropriate for these areas. Carefully developed
low intensity office, or residentially related commercial uses (such as day
care centers) can be compatible if developed properly. This designation
can include manufactured home parks.
Criteria for Designation: Areas particularly appropriate for such
designation are:
. 1. Areas between single family residential uses and all other uses.
I Page 14-5
~Chapter 14
2. Areas adjacent to, or close to major arterials designated in the ~
transportation element.
3. Existing manufactured home parks.
4. Areas sandwiched between higher intensity uses, but not directly
served by an arterial.
5. Urban infill areas not appropriate for single family uses but also
not capable of supporting higher density uses.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Areas to generally
be avoided by moderate density residential designations include:
1. Areas surrounded by lower density uses.
2. Areas more appropriate for commercial or higher density uses due
to traffic or extensively developed public facilities.
3. Areas within the Region Serving Area designated by this Plan
(except as otherwise provided by the Plan).
4. Any areas not planned to be served by water and sewer systems. •
Appropriate Implementation: This designation can be implemented by
two zones:
1) The R-3 - Two-Family (Duplex) Residential District allows single
family dwellings and duplexes as permitted uses. Fourplexes,
some residential supporting uses, and professional offices are
permitted as conditional uses.
~ 2) R-MHP Residential Manufactured Home Park District permits the
development of manufactured home parks on property that is at
least 5 acres in size. The maximum density per unit should be
5,200 square feet.
High Density
Purpose: To provide an opportunity for the location of the most
economical forms of housing in areas appropriately situated for such uses
under the policies of this Plan.
Description: This category shall be applied to those areas which are ~
either now developed or are reserved for multiple family dwellings.
Page 14-6
Comp. Plan
Map
~ Densities may range from 10 to 20 units per acre. Dwelling types may
range from single family units to apartment complexes, and wauW-inav
include manufactured home parks when located adjacent to major arterial
streets. Adequate recreation areas shall should be provided by t}e
develepef for any development involving more than 10 units. Highe~
density--Densities exceeding 20 units per acre developff3ertts-and special
development standards may be authorized for senior housing projects,
within the Downtown area and within 1/4 mile of regional transit service. ~
Compatible Uses: Compatible uses are similar to those identified under
the other residential categories, except higher intensities of use may be
appropriate. Public uses and open spaces which tend to visually relieve
the high density character of these areas should be encouraged. T4iis (
.,.egv „ • iuu a° izuixuz ~ui+,,,.oa i,,,.,.,o ..i,s
vu
i~' vuii iiiviz .
Criteria for Designation: In addition to areas already developed to this
density, this designation should be applied only to areas which have or
may be most efficiently served with high capacity and high quality public
services and facilities. Of particular concern is the provision of adequate
traffic circulation, and this category shall only be applied to areas with
~ developed arterial access. Other siting concerns may include access to
commercial services and open space amenities. This category may also be
applied to areas which are threatened with deterioration and multiple
family dwellings offer the potential for rehabilitation. ^f°~~ sui+°a ~ r(
iiaiiufuvti +iiic°. ,a heffle ..>>s tnay „is„ i.e ao „+oa b.. *t,;s eategei=y „f , o
.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Areas not
appropriate for this zone include areas surrounded, without physical
separation, by lower intensity uses.
Appropriate Implementation: This designation can be implemented by
two zones:
1) R-4 Multiple Family Residential District permits a full range of
residential uses. Residential supporting uses and some
professional offices are permitted as conditional uses.
2) R_MHP Residential Manufactured Home Park District permits the ~
development of manufactured home parks on property that is at
least 5 acres in size. The maximum density per unit should be
5,200 square feet.
~ In no case should these uses be authorized for construction until all
appropriate public facilities are available to full standard.
Page 14-7
Chapter 14
0
Publicly or Quasi-
Publicly Owned or
Public Access
Categories
Open Space
Purpose: To ensure adequate open space amenities for present and future
residents by reserving and protecting important open space resources and
to identify lands useful for public purposes (RCW 36.70A.150) as well as
open space corridors (RCW 36.70A.160) as required by the GMA.
Description: This category shall be applied to areas which are to be
managed in a largely open space character. It includes parks, watersheds,
shoreline areas, significant wildlife habitats, large storm drainage ponds,
utility corridors with public access and areas with significant development
restrictions, such as steep slope and flood hazard areas.
Compatible Uses: Appropriate uses include low intensity recreational
uses, low density residential uses and associated open areas, wildlife
habitat, stormwater detention, watershed and similar low intensity uses.
Criteria for Designation: This designation should be applied to any site ~
in which exists a significant developmental hazard or open space value
suitable for public protection without unduly encroaching on private
property rights.
Appropriate Implementation: Where land in this category is owned
~ publicly it shall be implemented by the P-1 Public Use District,; Land in
this category which is privately owned will generally be zoned for low
density residential use. Where the open space is linear it may be
appropriately managed by means other than zoning, such as public
ownership or easements, particularly as development takes place on
adjacent land. The Shoreline Management Program shall regulate the
open spaces designated adjacent to the rivers. Subdivisions of property
involving steep slope or shoreline areas shall consider these development
limitations and avoid creating inappropriate, or unbuildable lots.
Public and Quasi-Public
Purpose: To designate areas of significant size needed to provide public
and quasi-public services to the community. ~
Page 14-8
Comp. Plan
Map
~ Description: This category includes those areas which are reserved for
public or quasi-public uses of a developed character. It is intended to
include those of a significant extent, and not those smaller public uses
which are consistent with and may be included in another designation.
Public uses of an industrial character, such as the General Services
Administration, are included in the industrial designation. Streets, utilities
and other public activities supporting other uses are not considered
separate uses and are not so mapped. This designation includes large
churches, private schools and similar uses of a quasi-public character.
Developed parks are also designated under this category.
Compatible Uses: Uses more appropriately designated under another
category should not be designated under this category, irrespective of
ownership. Industrial and commercial uses which are affiliated with and
managed by educational institutions for vocational educational purposes
may be classified as a public use and permitted on a conditional basis.
Criteria for Designation: Designation of these areas should be consistent
with the character of adjacent uses.
Appropriate Implementation: This designation will generally be
~ implemented by three zones:
1) P-1 (Public Use) District provides for the location and
development of public uses that serve the cultural, educational,
recreational and public service needs of the community.
2) I(Institutional Use) District provides for similar uses, but includes
schools and typically allows a much more broad list of uses.
3) LF (Landing Field) District provides for the operation and
management of the Auburn Municipal Airport.
The designation can also be implemented as a conditional use under
various zones. Approval of these types of uses (and open space uses), not
individually designated on the Plan Map, under a conditional use permit or
rezone consistent with or related to adjacent zoning, shall not be
considered inconsistent with the designations under this Plan.
Commercial Categories
• Light Commercial
Page 14-9
Chapter 14 ~
Purpose: To create people oriented commercial areas to supply a wide `
range of general commercial services to area residents.
Description: This category represents the prime commercial designation
for small to moderate scale commercial activities. These commercial
areas should be developed in a manner which is consistent with and
attracts pedestrian oriented activities. The ambiance of such areas should
encourage leisure shopping and should provide amenities conducive to
attracting shoppers.
Compatible Uses: A wide range of consumer oriented goods and services
are compatible within this designation since the emphasis would be on
performance criteria which create an attractive shopping environment.
However, uses which rely on direct access by vehicles or involve heavy
truck traffic (other than for merchandise delivery) are not appropriate in
this category. Unsightly outdoor storage and similar activities should be
prohibited. Permitted uses would consist of retail trade, offices, personal
services, indoor eating establishments, financial institutions, governmental
offices, and similar uses. Multiple family dwellings should be encouraged
on a conditional basis where they do not interfere with the shopping
character of the area, such as within the upper stories of buildings. Since
taverns can break up the continuity of people oriented areas, taverns would ~
be permitted generally only as a conditional use. Drive in windows should
only be allowed as ancillary to a permitted use, and only when carefully
sited under the conditional use permit process in order to ensure that an
area's pedestrian environment is not seriously affected.
Criteria for Designation: This designation should include moderate
sized shopping centers, and centrally located shopping areas. This
designation should be preferred for commercial sites where visual and
pedestrian amenities are an important concern outside of the downtown.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Commercial areas
which can not be readily separated from high traffic volumes (such as
shallow lots along busy arterials) should not be included in this
designation. Areas not large enough for separation from any adjacent
heavier commercial or industrial area should not be designated as light
commercial.
Appropriate Implementation: This designation is implemented by the
C-1 Light Commercial District. This district provides for a wide range of
small and moderate scale commercial oriented towards the leisure shopper
and pedestrian oriented activities. ~
Downtown
Page 14-10
Comp. Plan
Map
•
Purpose: To create a vibrant people oriented downtown which serves as
the business, governmental and cultural focal point of the Community that
includes multifamily residential development.
Description: This category is intended to be applied only in Downtown
Auburn. The area should be developed in a manner which is consistent
with and attracts pedestrian oriented activities. The ambiance of the
downtown should encourage leisure shopping, should provide services to
local residents, area employees and should provide amenities conducive to
attracting visitors and shoppers.
Compatible Uses: A broad mix of uses is appropriate and encouraged
within the Downtown. A wide range of consumer oriented goods and
services are compatible within this designation since the emphasis would
be on performance criteria which create an attractive pedestrian oriented
shopping environment. However, uses which rely on direct access by
vehicles or involve heavy truck traffic (other than for merchandise
delivery) are not appropriate in this category. Unsightly outdoor storage
and similar activities should be prohibited. Permitted uses would consist
~ of retail trade, offices, personal services, indoor eating establishments,
financial institutions, governmental offices, and similar uses. Multiple
family dwellings should be encouraged wi*h sofM° f°s+~e+;ons, particularly ~
within the upper stories of buildings which include retail and commercial
uses. Since taverns can break up the continuity of people oriented areas,
they should be prohibited. Drive in windows should not be permitted to
maintain the area's pedestrian environment. Parking standards within the
downtown should reflect the pedestrian orientation of the area, but also
consider parking's impact for economic development.
Criteria for Designation: This designation should apply only in
Downtown Auburn.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: This designation
should not be used other than for the Downtown area.
Appropriate Implementation: This designation can be implemented by
€N,e-the following pessible-zoning districts_, I
,ufue~ ~ef V~ ~~~.,ut . ,.f *~,o a,. ft+,.
.
1) The-M-ain-Stfeet f!etail -eer-eskmp, emexted b),- the C
'-'ew~+e•-,~ i T~ban r°n+°r T':s+wc4.The primary core of downtown
~ should be implemented by the Downtown Urban Center zone,
which allows for a broad range of uses with no residential densitv
limitations.
Page 14-11
Chapter 14
2) The--afea-ar-otiiid Atibum-Regie~~~Medic-al-Eeiiter-shaald--be ~
Distr-iet.Other commercial areas within the downtown may be
implemented by the C-2 Central Business District
~pfepr-iate.
Heavy Commercial
Purpose: To provide automobile oriented commercial areas to meet both
the local and regional need for such services.
Description: This category is intended to accommodate uses which are
oriented to automobiles either as the mode or target of providing the
commercial service. The category would also accommodate a wide range
of heavier commercial uses involving extensive storage or heavy vehicular
movement.
Compatible Uses: A wide variety of commercial services oriented to ~
automobiles are appropriate within this category. This includes
automobile sales and service, drive in restaurant or other drive in
commercial business, convenience stores, etc. Since these uses are also
compatible with heavier commercial uses, lumber yards, small scale
warehousing, contractor yards and similar heavy commercial uses are
appropriate in this designation.
~ Criteria for Designation: This designation should only be applied to
areas which are highly accessible to automobiles along major arterials.
Generally this category would characterize commercial strips. This zone
is appropriate for the intersections of heavily traveled arterials, even if
adjacent sites are best suited for another commercial designation.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Areas which
conflict with single family residential areas or areas more suited for other
uses. Whenever possible this category should be separated from all uses
by extensive buffering.
Appropriate Implementation: This category is implemented by the C-3
Heavy Commercial District. ~
Page 14-12
Comp. Plan
Map
~ Neighborhood Commercial
Purpose: To provide accessible commercial services frequently needed in
residential areas without creating land use conflicts between those
commercial uses and the residential areas they serve.
Description: Residential areas require commercial services almost on a
daily basis. Such services, while necessary, can also conflict with the
quality of residential areas. Consequently, commercial areas need to be
reserved that are either carefully restricted (if located within residential
areas) or are accessible to, but buffered from, residential areas.
Compatible Uses: In restricted areas (those within neighborhoods), uses
must be carefully controlled both in the kind of uses permitted and in
terms of design and other performance criteria. A much less restricted
type of neighborhood commercial use can be designated near intersections
of a major arterial and a residential arterial. A much wider range of
commercial activities are appropriate in such an area, including grocery
stores, convenience stores, service stations, hardware stores, small
restaurants and drinking establishments. However, activities (such as
~ outdoor storage) which can alter the character of these areas into heavier
commercial areas should only be permitted on a conditional basis in order
to control potential adverse impacts.
Criteria for Designation: In all cases, neighborhood commercial areas
should be at the intersections of major streets. In the case of restricted
types, such streets may be residential arterials, while in the case of the less
restricted type at least one of the streets should be a major arterial.
Adequate buffering should be planned in the process of designating any
new areas as neighborhood commercial.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: This designation
should be avoided whenever it is not possible to adequately buffer the
commercial uses from adjacent residential uses.
Appropriate Implementation: This category is implemented by the C-N
Neighborhood Commercial District.
Office-Residential '
Purpose: To reserve areas to accommodate professional offices for
expanding medical and business services, while providing a transition
between residential uses and more intensive uses and activities.
Page 14-13
Chapter 14
Description: This category is a restricted commercial designation ~
reserved only for certain types of activities. As a growing medical center,
areas need to be reserved to accommodate growth in this sector, which is
largely expressed in the form of professional offices. This category also
assures space to accommodate the rapid growth that is occurring in
business services and other service oriented activities. Such uses also
provide a means for an appropriate transition for areas originally
developed as a residential area but now not appropriate for that type of
use.
Compatible Uses: To be fully effective as a transition or a buffer, resi-
dential uses should be permitted on a conditional basis.
Criteria for Designation: As a transition this designation can serve as an
appropriate buffer between heavily traveled arterials and established
single family areas. It would be particularly appropriate in areas where
large traffic volumes have affected an established residential area. It can
be applied where amenity values mitigate against heavy commercial uses
along major arterials. This designation should also be used to
accommodate the expansion of inedical services in the area around Auburn
Regional Medical Center.
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: This zone is ~
intended for particular applications as described. It generally should not
be applied on a large scale basis.
Appropriate Implementation: This category is implemented by two
zones:
1) RO - Residential Office District which is intended to primarily
accommodate business and professional offices where they are
compatible with residential uses.
2) RO-H Residential Office-Hospital District is to be used exclusively
for the area around Auburn Regional Medical Center.
Industrial Categories
Light Industrial
Purpose: To reserve quality industrial lands for activities that implement
the City's economic development policy. ~
Page 14-14
Comp. Plan
Map
• Description: This category is intended to accommodate a wide range of
industrial and commercial uses. It is distinguished from heavier industrial
uses by means of performance criteria. All significant activities shall take
place inside buildings, and the processing or storage of hazardous
materials shall be strictly controlled and permitted only as an incidental
part of another use. The siting and design of industrial buildings shall be
of an "industrial or business park" character. Certain residential uses may
be permitted, especially in industrial areas that have been established to
promote a business park environment that complements environmental
features, and/or if development standards are developed to promote
compatibility between residential and other non-residential land uses.
Compatible Uses: A wide range of industrial and heavy commercial uses
may be permitted, subject to performance standards. These uses include
warehousing and indoor processing of materials. Certain residential uses
may be permitted if development standards are developed to promote
compatibility between residential and other non-residential land uses
Outside storage shall be permitted only subject to performance criteria
addressing its quantity and location to ensure it is compatible with
adjacent uses and so that such storage would not detract from the potential
. use of the area for light industry. In all cases such storage shall be
extensively screened. In the Environmental Park District that implements
the "Light Industrial" plan map designation, outdoor storage will be
strictly limited to promote compatibility with adjacent environmental land
uses. Uses involving substantial storage or processing of hazardous
materials as well as substantial emissions should not be permitted in these
areas. A wide range of commercial activities may be allowed provided
that such uses support rather than detract from the industrial character of
the area.
The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Auburn Yard located within
the Railroad Special Plan Area is considered a compatible use at its current
level of usage (as of August 14, 1996). It is not bound by the policies
concerning outside storage under the existing light industrial designation
as it was an existing use prior to the development of this policy. Should
BNSF decide to reactivate its applications to upgrade the yard to an
intermodal facility, the proposal will be subject to the essential public
facility siting process as defined in the Capital Facilities Element (Chapter
5).
Criteria for Designation: This designation should be applied to a
~ majority of the Region Serving Area designated under this Plan. It is
particularly appropriate for industrial land within high visibility corridors.
This category should separate heavy industrial areas from other uses.
Page 14-15
Chapter 14
~
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Within the
Community Serving Area, this designation should only be applied to sites
now developed as light industrial sites. Industrial sites along rail corridors
are generally more appropriate for heavier industrial uses, unless in high
visibility corridors.
Appropriate Implementation: This designation is implemented by the
M-1, Environmental Park (EP) or Business Park (BP) zone.
Heavy Industrial
Purpose: To provide a place for needed heavy industrial uses in areas
appropriately sited for such uses.
Description: This designation allows the full range of industrial uses as
well as certain commercial uses. Certain residential uses may be permitted
if development standards are developed to promote compatibility between
residential and other non-residential land uses.
Compatible Uses: While this zone should be reserved primarily for the
heavier forms of industrial activities, a wide range of industrial and ~
commercial activities may be permitted, along with residential uses with
appropriate compatibility protections.
Criteria for Designation: The most appropriate area for this designation
is in the central part of the Region Serving Area adjoining the rail lines.
This designation is also appropriate in the southern portion of the area
which is now developed in large scale industrial facilities (the Boeing and
the General Services Administration facilities).
Considerations Against Applying this Designation: This designation
can only be applied in the Community Serving Area to sites now
developed in this character along A Street S.E. These areas should not
abut commercial or residential areas; heavy industry should be buffered by
light industrial uses. It is not an appropriate designation for highly visible
areas.
Appropriate Implementation: This designation is implemented by the
M-2 zone.
Planned Areas ~
Special Plan Areas (See Map 14.2)
Page 14-16
Comp. Ptan
Map
~
Purpose: To allow large areas within the City, under a single or a
coordinated management, to be developed as a planned unit. This
designation can also be used to provide flexibility when there is
uncertainty regarding how an area may be most appropriately developed in
the future.
Description: This designation applies to specific areas identified as being
appropriate for mixed, urban level development on a planned basis. It is
intended that the future development of these areas will be guided by
individual "elements" or "sub-area plans" of the Comprehensive Plan, to I
be developed and adopted at a later date. The Plan elements should be
consistent with the following.
Compatible Uses: Uses and intensities within Special Planning Areas
shall be determined for each area through individual planning processes.
Each individual planning process will result in the adoption of a
Comprehensive Plan element (sub-area plan) for that particular Special ~
Planning Area. Each Plan element shall be consistent with the general
goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Development
of the individual Plan elements shall also be based upon the following
• guidelines:
Academy Special Planning Area: The Auburn Adventist Academy Plan
was adopted by resolution No. 2254 in November 1991 and is considered
to be an element of the Comnrehensive Plan. T'he Plan applies to the area I
within the property owned by the Academy and allows for a diversity of
uses on the site, primarily those related to the mission and objectives of the
Academy. As part of the adoption of the Plan, the area was zoned under
the I-Institutional Use District which permits uses such as schools,
daycare, churches, nursing homes, recreation and single family uses.
Auburn North Business Area Planning Area: The Auburn North Business
Area Plan was adopted by resolution No. 2283 in March 1992 and is
considered to be an element of the Comprehensive Plan..- The Plan covers
an approximately 200 acre area located directly north of the Auburn
Central Business District. The Plan calls for development to be pedestrian
oriented with high density residential and light commercial components.
Downtown Special Planning Area: Downtown Auburn is a unique area in
the City which has received significant attention in the past and there will
be continued emphasis in the future. This Comprehensive Plan recognizes
~ Downtown as the business, governmental and cultural focal point of
Auburn with a renewed emphasis on providing housing in the Downtown.
Page 14-17
Chapter 14
Development of the DowntownAr Plan ~
(iiitegr- should be consistent with the 2001 Auburn Downtown Plan.
t . a ai a.,rv TL.~. e Tl,~..,.-.s.,...,~. A„4.,,.-.. Tles:,... TR..sto« Dl.,.~.
. ,
7. Tl... o ..,vicuicuc...i« D..:t C'r.,+;..., C:r:,-,.. De.,....-f
.
Tl,o A„I..,..... Tlewn+,.v % Dl..« (200 1)
3. . i... < i
Lakeland Hills Special Planning Area: The Lakeland Hills Plan was
adopted by resolution No. 1851 in April 1988- and is considered to be an
element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan covers the approximately
458 acres of the Lakeland Hills development which falls within the King
County portion of the city. ~~ty-o~~. The Plan calls for a mix of
residential uses including single and multi-family housing as well as
supporting recreational, commercial, public and quasi-public uses. The
plan calls for phasing of development in coordination with the provision of
necessary urban services.
Lakeland Hills South Special Planning Area: The Lakeland Hills South
Plan initially covered approximately 685 acres owned by The Lakeland
Company within Pierce County and contained within the City of Auburn
potential annexation area (urban growth area). The Plan is intended to be
consistent with the conditions of approval of the Lakeland Hills South
PDD (Pierce County Hearings Examiner Case No. Z15-90/UP9-70) as ~
amended.
The City of Auburn has accepted the Lakeland Hills South PUD as an
approved PUD. This acceptance is implemented in part through an
annexation and utilities agreement between the City and the developer of
Lakeland Hills South PUD. The Lakeland Hills South PUD is further
implemented by the City's zoning code, including ACC Chapter 18.76
entitled "Planned Unit Development District-Lakeland Hills South Special
Plan Area".
Residential development within the PUD is primarily single family and
moderate density dwellings with a wide range of lot sizes, including lots
smaller than those typically allowed by the City's zoning ordinance for
non-PUD's. The maximum allowable number of residential units
provided for originally was 3,408 based upon an overall gross density of 5
units per acre. High density multifamily units are limited to one area of
the PUD to approximately 669 units. Twenty acres are to be used for light
commercial development and significant area has been set aside as open
space. In 2007, the developer of Lakeland Hills South PUD was granted
an expansion to the Lakeland Hills South PUD to add an additional 4 acres
I of commercial land, raising the total area of light commercial land to 24 0
acres..- The development includes a developed 15-acre park, an
undeveloped 15-acre park, two 5-acre parks and a linear park along
Page 14-18
Comp. Plan
Map
• Lakeland Hills Way. The locations of the parks are shown on the
comprehensive plan map. Changing the location of any or all of the parks
does not constitute a comprehensive plan amendment provided that the
total park acreage does not change and the location is agreed upon by the
City.
Within the Lakeland Hills South Special Plan area only, the permitted
density ranges for the comprehensive plan designations are as follows:
Single Family Residential: 1-6 units per acre; Moderate Density
Residential: 2-14 units per acre; and High Density Residential: 12-19 units
per acre. The development is-has occurred iffg in phases in coordination
with the provision of required urban services and in 2008, the
developtnent is nearin'-~ completion.
In 2004, the developer of Lakeland Hills South PUD requested an
expansion to the Lakeland Hills South PUD involving several parcels
totaling approximately 77 acres - bringing the total PUD acreage to
approximately 762 acres. The proposal designated these additional parcels
as "Moderate Density Residential" (from "Single Family Residential")
with the objective of increasing the total number of units allowed in the
~ PUD from 3,408 to approximately 3,658. Subsequently, in 2005, it was
determined and agreed that the total number of units within even the
expanded boundaries of the PUD would be no greater than 3,408.
I., s;.]o.-:
.
~ tl~o DT TTltl,a ('':t~, o.,t.,L.l;sl,0.7 ,.a
z ~
t.so,.,,o.,+ ° ° Af 1,,... , ° ..*;e„ts
vv~~zro'. -ef the-~°'~d-nill-s ~
--uth-PUTa-and-*,
~z ~P~
amer2dmer~~~e a "Meder~te Densit~, Residep-tial-
Residefitial")
ReSid2iitialr? comprc i° e Dt„ des;gnuciv^ir=rizne-upplie
~za,''s-te Eemplete--a fezene as Teqttir-ed--by, AGG SeEtie~
~ Q ~ ~ni\ T TTl
-rv ~-v.z~-vt~t6 23Cten eXt2Ff D
irvg
, 2005.
.,.a f ;tl. eFf ,-t to e „to +L,o ..rl „ .701,,., ; atod
,;r1, oto,..o.,ts „+l,o,- +L..,., tl,o ..1:,..,.,+'s rlola<. f1;n« f r
• 7 TL.o ..oze.,o .,«.,a .-el.,te,i .,««1:,..,t;e..., s1.,,11 do,Y..,.,st,-.,+e t1,
the-~neftheffhffiest---appr-exifnatel-y-28-aer-es--adtaeent--te--a~
Page 14-19
Chapter 14
~ * • .o ~.,,uii ~
6~x-~zii -inid ~is-:st~3-6iizcc-3rrn-ir0t--be a acti'E'l6pi:a a--cra-zvr
r "~crr ~~~sem1- deta'Ehed"' 6f "mtaeha,a" hottsing ,,,1„ETS$v tiR
rh.. st:,, ,~i famii i t, * o '-i-csicrczzlTUr riurccc+ ccr--cun-aurrsrcivz-c - +
co
and be exteiided inte-the-stibjeetpafseks.--Developffi
this--ne#hefly 29-aefes shall rostW,.toa „t;i;.,;.,g t~.~
develepffi°„dafds--~a-~e.-e-iniense-thEift =S-ing' e Faffi4y
no~.,,.~,oaii~.u ic~r~ c)~~ pfevisions ,.f n rr rt,.,pto.. 18.76.
~vi ,
Lakeview Special Planning Area: The Lakeview Special Planning Area is
currently the site of two independent sand and gravel mining operations.
While mining activity continues in the eastern operation, indications in
1995 are that the western operation has ceased. Activity in the western
portion is now limited to a concrete batch plant and future site
reclamation. Following reclamation, the area should be developed as a
primarily single family residential neighborhood of low to moderate urban
~ density. A planned ttnit-development would be particularly appropriate for
this approximately 235 acre site. The permitted development density of
the site will depend heavily upon the ability of the transportation system
near the site to handle the new uses. Consideration shall be given to the
environmental, recreational and amenity value of White Lake, as well as
the historical and cultural significance to the Muckleshoot Tribe, in the
development of the Lakeview Plan element. Permit applications have ~
been accepted and are currently being processed by the City with respect to
the mining activity on the eastern portion of the area. The permit process
should continue, however, any permit for continued mining in this portion
of the area should be limited to 10 years to encourage completion of the
mining, and subsequent reclamation by the property owner in preparation
for development. The Lakeview Plan element should be adopted prior to
the City's acceptance or processing of any other permit applications for the
mining operation in the Lakeview Special Planning Area. The
environmental information and analysis included in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement for Lakeview (November 1980), shall be
considered in the development of the Lakeview Plan element. While
heavy commercial or industrial uses would not be appropriate as
permanent uses of this area, conversion of the area now zoned for heavy
industry to office commercial (or similar) uses would be appropriate.
Rail Yard Special Planning Area: This approximately 150 acre Special
Planning Area is located in the south-central portion of the City and
surrounded by SR-18 to the North, Ellingson Road to the South, C Street
SW to the west and A Street SE to the East. The Special Planning Area
should consider both sides of C Street and A Street. Consideration should
be given to: .
1. The needs of Burlington Northern.
Page 14-20
Comp. Plan
Map
~
2. Providing pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular access across the site to
connect the southeast and southwest sides of the city.
3. Providing a more visually appealing "entry corridor" into the City
from the south along A and C Streets.
4. Allowing for a mix of uses including single and multifamily
development and commercial and industrial uses where
appropriate.
Mt. Rainier Vista Special Planning AYea: This 145 acre Special Planning
Area is located south of Coal Creek Springs Watershed. Overall
development of the Mt. Rainier Vista element shall be consistent with the
following conditions:
1. Primary consideration in use and development of the property shall
be given to protection of Coal Creek Springs' water quality.
Development types, patterns and standards determined to pose a
substantial risk to the public water source shall not be allowed.
~ 2. The maximum number of dwelling units allowed should be
approximately 145. Dwelling units shall be located within portions
of the property where development poses the least risk of
contamination for Coal Creek Springs. Lands upon which any
level of development would have a high risk for contaminating the
water supply shall not be developed, but would be retained as open
space. The development pattern shall provide for a logical
transition between areas designated for rural uses and those
designated for single family residential use.
3. All dwelling units shall be served by municipal water and sanitary
sewer service, and urban roads. If 53rd Street S.E. is the major
access to serve the Special Planning Area, the developer will be
responsible for developing the street to urban standards, from the
property owners eastern property line that abuts 53rd Street, west
to the intersection of 53rd and Kersey Way.
4. Percolation type storm sewer disposal systems shall not be
permitted. All surface water drainage shall be conveyed to the
Stuck River via Bowman Creek or municipal stormwater facilities.
Treatment of stormwater shall occur prior to its discharge to any
~ surface water body, consistent with standard public works or other
requirements in general effect at the time of development.
Page 14-21
Chapter 14
5. The site shall be zoned temporarily, at one unit per four acres, until ~
the Special Planning Area element is completed and the long-term
urban zoning determined.
Stuck River Road Special Planning Area: A portion of the Stuck River
Road Special Planning Area is currently the site of a large sand and gravel
mining operation. This area and other adjacent land comprising a total of
approximately 661 acres has been designated as a long term resource area
(mineral resource area), so development of the Special Area Plan for this
area should be a low priority as mining is expected to continue on this site
for as long as 30 years. The Stuck River Road Special Planning Area is
intended to ultimately be developed as a residential area, to include
supporting recreational and possibly limited commercial facilities as well.
This approximately 560 acre area shall ultimately have approximately
2675 dwelling units, including a moderate amount of multiple family
units. The Plan element should be adopted taking into consideration the
period during which mining is expected and the intent of the ultimate
development of the area. A permit application has been accepted and is
currently being processed by the City with respect to the mining activity on
a portion (approximately 285 acres) of the mineral extraction operation.
The permit process should continue, however, any permit for mining in the
mineral resource area should be granted for the life of the resource, with .
reviews conducted periodically (ever five years) to determine whether
changes in the originally proposed mineral extraction operation have
arisen and give rise to the need for additional or revised permit conditions
to address the new impacts (if any) of any such changes. Any permit
applications for additional acreage within the mineral resource area shall
be processed by the City. Development of this area should not occur until
adequate public facilities are available to support the development
consistent with City concurrency policy.
The City recognizes the potential for expanding the Stuck River Road
Special Planning Area to include additional land east of Kersey Way and
north of the Covington-Chehalis power line easement, and will consider a
proposal by all affected property owners. If the area is expanded, the
number of non-multiple family, non-manufactured home park dwellings
units may be increased proportionate to the increase in acreage. Any such
proposal shall specifically apportion the types and quantities of
development to occur within each separate ownership.
Northeast Auburn Special Plan Area: This special plan area covers the
property east of Auburn Way North, west of the Green River, south of
277th (52nd Street) and north of approximately 37th Street NE. Several ~
property owners in this area are interested in developing a master plan
which will address, among other things, the following issues:
Page 14-22
Comp. Plan
Map
~
1. I Street alignment and design
2. Storm drainage and other utility issues
3. Land use types and density
4. Financing necessary infrastructure improvements
5. The Port of Seattle's wetland mitigation proposal
Criteria for Designation: Additional Special Planning Areas shetild-mav I
onlv be designated effl~-through amendments of the Comprehensive Plan.
Appropriate Implementation: Plan elements establishing City policy
regarding the development of the Special Planning Areas shall be adopted
by amendment of the Comprehensive Plan, or shall be adopted concurrent
with adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Special Planning Area elements
shall be implemented in the same manner as other elements of the
Comprehensive Plan; that is, under the City's zoning and subdivision
ordinances, development standards and public facilities programs.
Plan Map
~ Policies
In some cases the general policies established by this Plan need further
articulation or clarification due to particular geographic concerns
associated with specific areas. In other cases, the application of the Plan's
general policies may be inappropriate for a specific area due to unique
circumstances, requiring that specific "exceptions" to these general
policies be established. This section identifies these specific areas and
establishes either supplemental policies or exceptions to the general
policy, as appropriate.
Urban Separators Urban separators are areas designated for low-density uses in the King
County Countywide Planning Policies. They are intended to be
"permanent low-density lands which protect adjacent resource lands, Rural
Areas, and environmentally sensitive areas and create open space corridors
within and between Urban Areas which _provide environmental, visual,
recreational and wildlife benefits." There are two primary areas of urban
separators within the Lea Hill portion of the City of Auburn, which the
City is obligated to maintain (and not redesi gnate) until at least the year
2022, pursuant to the Countywide Planning Policies and an annexation
agreement with King~County. Urban separators are deeined to be both a
• regional as well as local concern and no modifications to development
regulations governing their use may be made without King County review
and concurrence. Therefore, the areas designated as "urban separator" on
the Comprehensive Land Use map, will be zoned for densities not to
Page 14-23
Chapter 1471
exceed one dwellin unit per acre, with lot clusterin_ being required if a 16
subdivision of land is proposed.
Infrastructure
Related
Policies
Pike Street
Area: North of 8th N.E., east of Harvey Road, and south of 22nd N.E.
Problem: This area is inadequately served by residential arterials. Further
intensification of use in this area would compound this problem.
Policy III.A. No increase in density or other development which would
increase traffic demand in this area should be approved.
8th Street N.E.
Area: 8th Street N.E. between Auburn Way and M Street.
Problem: The Comprehensive Plan Map designates multiple family use
as the ultimate use in accord with the Comprehensive Plan policies. While
8th Street is designated as a major arterial, it is not currently constructed to ~
that standard and is not able to support current traffic demand adequately.
The Plan designation would greatly increase traffic volumes. Water
service is also not sufficient to support multiple family density at the
present time.
Policy III.B. Implementation of the Plan designations should not occur
until 8th Street is constructed to the adequate arterial standard and water
service is upgraded. Up zones should not be granted from current zoning
until these systems are upgraded or guaranteed.
Auburn Way South, Auburn Black Diamond Road
Area: Auburn Way South in the vicinity of the Enumclaw Plateau; Area
between Auburn-Black Diamond Road and the Burlington Northern
Railroad.
Problem: This Plan does not fully represent the intensity of uses that
could ultimately be supported in these areas (in part due to the current
weakness of the City's infrastructure to support future growth). In spite of
this fact, the development intensity now planned will still need to be
coordinated with the necessary infrastructure to support that growth. ~
Particularly significant is the need to assess the ability of both Auburn
Page 14-24
Comp. Plan
Map
~
Way and Auburn-Black Diamond Road to support continued increases in
traffic volumes.
Policy III.C. The area between Auburn-Black Diamond Road and the
Burlington Northern Railroad tracks is designated as Rural by the Plan
Map. The primary reason for this Rural designation is the current lack of
urban facilities necessary to support urban development. Major
development proposals shall be carefully assessed under SEPA to ensure
that the development can be supported by the available facilities. Once
property owners are able to demonstrate to the City that they can provide
urban services (municipal water and sewer service, urban roads and storm
water management) necessary to support the intensity of development
proposed within the entire area, the Plan designation and zoning for this
area should be changed to an urban residential or commercial
classification. The appropriate classification(s) shall be determined after a
review of the development proposal and the pertinent Comprehensive Plan
policies.
Transition Areas
. I Sth Street Commercial Area
Area: Area served by 15th Street N.E. and N.W. between D Street N.E.
and B Street N.W.
Problem: The Plan Map designates the area immediately served by 15th
Street as commercial. Most of the rest of the area retains the industrial
designation of the previous Plan. Actual development of this area will
depend on market trends, and commercial use is as appropriate as light
industrial. Expansion of the area designated as heavy industrial would
conflict with the westward expansion of the commercial area from Auburn
Way.
Policy III.D. Additional appropriate commercial zoning in this area would
not be in conflict with this Plan. Further heavy industrial zoning beyond
the area now designated would conflict with this Plan.
A,,.e„ AT ufG .,r AT A.f,.;.,.
De}}.... TiT E Tlolot0,7
~ East Main Street
Area: East Main Street between Auburn Way and M Street.
Page 14-25
Chapter 14
Problem: A full range of commercial uses will seek to locate in this area.
Such uses could adversely affect adjacent residential amenities. Heavy
commercial strip zoning would be particularly detrimental, not only to
adjacent areas but also to the capacity of Main Street. Existing
commercial uses have nonetheless been accommodated.
~ Policy III.E-F. Land use decisions shall seek to minimize any adverse
impact on adjacent residential uses. Existing commercial uses should be
allowed to continue as permitted uses. New development should be
consistent with the office/residential use designation.
M Street Residential
Area: Area along "M" Street S.E., south of East Main and north of
Highway 18.
Problem: This is a high quality viable residential area. Pressure will
continue for conversion to commercial uses. Once some conversion
occurs, the area will no longer be viable as a residential area.
I Policy III.FF. The City will resist conversion in this area from single
family.
Golden Triangle ~
Area: Bordered on the north by Highway 18, on the south and west by
Auburn Way South, and on the east by Dogwood Street.
Problem: Auburn Way South provides a thoroughfare for thousands of
commuters each day. The "pass through" traffic represents thousands of
potential customers for the businesses in this area. The challenge is to
create an area that encourages potential consumers to take the time to
patronize the businesses in this area, either through stopping during their
commute or returning during leisure time hours.
~ Policy III. G4. Support opportunities for the development of commercial
clusters at 12`h Street SE and Auburn Way South, Auburn Way South to M
Street SE south of 12 Street SE, and on the east side of 12`h and M Street
SE. Capitalize on possible relocations of existing uses to develop
coordinated commercial cluster opportunities and on the development of
Les Gove Park to support adjacent commercial and high end residential
development.
A Street SE
•
Page 14-26
Comp. Plan
. Map
~ Area: A Street SE corridor, extending from Highway 18 to the north to
the city limits to the south, the BNSF rail lines/rail yard to the west and D
Street SE (extended to the south) to the east.
Problem: A Street SE provides for a significant level of traffic that offers
the potential to attract customers to support existing and future business
along this corridor. Challenges include better definition of the transition
between residential neighborhoods and future commercial development to
provide predictability for both neighborhood residents and commercial
uses, as well as how to address historical uses such as mobile home parks
and industrial development along this corridor that occupy property that is
better suited for other uses.
Policy III. G.2H.. Define appropriate transition boundaries between I
commercial and residential development in a manner that protects
residential uses while providing for economic development opportunities
along the corridor.
Policy III. G.3-1 To ensure protection the of adjacent residential
neighborhood and residential uses located east of B Street SE between g`n
and 17th Streets SE from commercial development on the west side of B
~ Street SE, , special development standards shall be adopted. The special
development standards could include requirements for increased building
and parking setbacks and/or landscape buffer treatment. The standards
may_also include the implementation of traffic claming measures as
appropriate to reduce traffic impacts on the adjacent residential
neighborhood located east of B Street SE between 81" and 17th Streets SE.
Problems Related
to Existing Uses
West Auburn
Area: South of West Main between the rail lines.
Problem: This is an older part of town developed in a pattern of
commercial uses along Main Street and residential uses south to Highway
18. This area is in the Region Serving Area as designated in this Plan.
The homes in this area are typically older singer family homes that have
been converted to multi-family housing. Some may have historic
significance. Preservation and restoration of the existing housing in this
area is a priority.
* Policy III.#J. This area should be planned for local serving multiple I
family uses even though it is in the Region Serving Area.
Page 14-27
Chapter 14
~
«~~~~o,-., a ri.,., c*,.oo*~
VJLliill CL1Ili ii~T 1TebleIII.YYeTe aJ all GT+CZLAi1TIICd fesiIY'eiitial afea iII-the 111lULLlV 41~
desigfiate~dustr-ial ar-ea. -Heweve.,ee .~~~e desir e-te
pr-em@te`a "Gfeen 7?6n'e" w i.,,mp1e.n0,it tl,o A„1, R t 1 B 1
,
,,,.,tro.~..s . .;11 , t+; t 1 L.'
rnml.:,,0,7u . ,;+1. (.L.1;,,..o,-,~uVVlll ,7 UV Y V1 1V~J11ZVI
vviaav~iiv r~ ilia UJ
n t/i r~t-he
Pnlirv Tii.. i. n.~ a 1vaab uN,' 1-,l0 °s:,7e,.+:..1
.......J ..i..~ ~iii..~ ui vu ivi.ii
1;..j' wri ;17 t.-.rT, t9 pf6tcct tL,.,u+ tc3v o .Y tl,o ,.t ,.f' ' .a ' t
t;..
r-- anr
~ . °,~t
:i:J`v ~..v j:,, c~," ,..f' ° .
Airport Area
Area: Industrially designated area east of the Airport.
Problem: This area is highly suited for air related activities. Other
industrial type uses are now located here.
Policy III.J. The City will encourage use in this area to take advantage of ~
its proximity to the Airport.
Lea Hill At-ea
Area: Area annexed on January 1, 2008.
Problem; The C!ity has been concemcd for years that the rapid growth
taking place within the Lea Hill PAA cvill aveiwllelm city streets. Tliraugh
annexation the City can bctter manage the amouiit 3nd type of gmwth in
this area and hel,p ensure that approUriate infrastructure to support
devclopmeilt is provide.d concurrent with that develapinent.
T'he Auburn C;ity Coulicil envisions re;taining, the prednminantly sin~7le-
familv character of the Lea Hili area rat:her than allaw the trend of rapidl
dc;veloping niulti-fainily projects to cczntinue. The Citv's cvdes will heln
ensure that the neighborhaod cliaracter, traffic and eirvironmentallX
sensitive features are protected andiar managed.
~
~
Page 14-28