HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-08-2019 Agenda (2)Planning Commission Meeting
October 8, 2019 - 7:00 P M
City Hall
A GE NDA
I .C AL L T O O RD E R
A .RO L L C AL L/E S TAB L I S HM E NT O F Q UO RUM
B .P L E D G E O F AL L E G I ANC E
I I .AP P RO VAL O F M INUT E S
A .A ugust 7, 2019 Draft minutes from the P lanning Commission Regular Meeting
B .S eptember 4, 2019 Draft minutes from the P lanning Commission Regular Meeting
I I I .P UB L I C HE ARI NG S
A .2019 A nnual Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Conduct public hearing on the first set of 2019 Annual Comprehensive P lan
A mendments. The docket was previously discussed on September 4, 2019.
C PA19-0001 & R E Z 19-0001, Auburn School District, Pioneer Elementary
Comprehensive P lan A mendment & Re-zone.
C PA19-0002, 2019 Annual Comprehensive P lan A mendments – Specifically,
City I nitiated P lan Policy/Text & Map A mendments
B .S horeline Master Program (S MP ) Periodic Update and Associated Updates to the
Critical A reas Ordinance (C A O)
Updates to the City's S MP for consistency with current laws and rules. Updates to the
City's C A O for regulations relating to wetlands, streams, their buffers, aquifer recharge
areas, and other associated updates.
I V.O T HE R B US I NE S S
V.C O M M UNIT Y D E V E L O P M E NT RE P O RT
Update on Community Development Services activities.
V I .AD J O URNM E NT
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is a seven member advisory body that provides
recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land
use plans and related codes such as zoning. Planning Commissioners are appointed by the
Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Page 1 of 215
Actions taken by the Planning Commission, other than approvals or amendments to the
Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, are not final decisions; they are in the form of
recommendations to the city council which must ultimately make the final decision.
Page 2 of 215
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
August 7, 2019 Draft minutes from the Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Date:
September 23, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
Draft Minutes August 7, 2019
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Planning Commission review and approve the August 7, 2019 regular meeting minutes.
Background Summary:
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:
Meeting Date:October 8, 2019 Item Number:
Page 3 of 215
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 7, 2019
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Lee called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located
on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
a.) ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Vice-Chair Lee, Commissioner
Stephens, Commissioner Khanal, and Commissioner Moutzouris. Chair Roland
and Commissioner Mason were excused.
Staff present included: Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon, Senior Planner
Dustin Lawrence, Senior Planner Anthony Avery, Water Utility Engineer Susan
Fenhaus and Community Development Administrative Assistant Jennifer Oliver.
Members of the public present: There were no members of the public present.
b.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGENCE
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. July 16, 2019
Commissioner Moutzouris moved and Commissioner Khanal seconded to approve
the minutes from the July 16, 2019 meeting as written.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (4-0)
The Commission and Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon discussed the order of
the Agenda and Dixon asked if Item III. B could go before III. A.
Vice-Chair Lee agreed to change the order of the Agenda.
III. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Introductory Discussion of Docket of 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
Each year the City amends the Comprehensive Plan or Comp Plan. These are the
“annual amendments” that the City considers each year as distinguished from the
periodic “major update” of the Comp Plan as required by the Growth Management
Act (GMA) that was adopted at the end of 2015.
The two types of amendments are map and text amendments.
Page 4 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 7, 2019
Page 2
There are also two sources for these annual amendments:
City-initiated amendments which are usually items that Staff, Planning
Commission or the City Council have identified as items or issued that should be
addressed in the next Comp Plan Amendment cycle.
Private-initiated amendments, which are in response to applications that are
submitted. For the 2019 Comp Plan Amendment cycle, two private map
amendments applications were submitted.
The Comp Plan amendments are proposed to consist of the following:
Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments
P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan
P/T #2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan
P/T #3 Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan
P/T #4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan
P/T #5 City of Auburn (COA) Capital Facilities Plan
P/T #6 Transportation Element (Plan) Volume 5, (incorporated by reference). The
changes to the Transportation element consist of the following:
Incorporate new language required by state and federal law;
Update the current transit service information;
Incorporate recent private development;
Update to include capital projects completed since 2015;
Update TIP information/project list;
Update maps as needed to reflect current data and conditions;
Remove the policies / goals related to provision of equestrian facilities.
Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, etc.
P/T #7 Changing the title of the “M ST SE” boundary from M ST SE to M ST SE/NE
related to Map 1.3 “Designated Areas” of the Land Use Element, and change the
corresponding references in the text to agree. The text changes affect the listing of
economic development strategy areas and in Policy LU-133 to change M ST SE to M
ST SE/NE.
Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments
Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon displayed a map depicting the location of the
Comp Plan Map Amendments.
City Initiated Map Amendments:
CPM #1 - City-initiated request for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map 1.3
“Designated Areas” of the Land Use Element 1, t to change the title of the M St SE
boundary needs from M ST SE to M ST SE/NE. This needs to be updated to reflect
that the boundary of the M ST SE designated area extends from M St SE to M St NE
(into the NE addressing suffix quadrant of the City). This is a minor change.
Page 5 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 7, 2019
Page 3
CPM #2 - City-initiated request for a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map No. 1.1 in
the Land Use Element 1, Volume 1, to change the designation of Parcel No.
2721059012. This parcel is divided by two public roadways and features a split land
use destination between “Institutional” and “Single Family”). The majority (eastern) of
the parcel is designated “Institutional”. Similarly, the parcel is also split zoned
between “I, Institutional” and “R-5, Residential 5 dwelling units per acre” with the
majority of the parcel zoned “I, Institutional”. As part of the annual amendment cycle,
it is proposed to change the land use designation and the zoning of the portion of the
parcel designated “Single Family Residential” (western and colored yellow) and
zoned R-5 to being designated “Institutional”(blue) and zoned “I, Institutional” (grey).
Private-Initiated Amendments:
CPM #3 - Request by Auburn School District to change the designation of four
parcels totaling approximately 10.55 acres and located north of SE 304th St and west
of 132nd Ave SE from "Single Family Residential" to "Institutional" and an associated
rezone from “R-5, Residential 5 dwelling units per acre” to “I, Institutional” for
development as a future elementary school site.
CPM #4 - Request by Oakpointe Communities to change the designation of multiple
parcels comprising the approximately 155-acre Bridges Project (formerly Verdana)
as Potential Annexation Area (PAA). This would require change to Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Map No. 1.1 in Volume 1, Land Use Element. Once annexed to the
City of Auburn, the Applicant proposes a Comprehensive Plan Map Designation of
“Single Family” with an implementing zoning designation of “R-5, Residential five
dwelling units per acre” for the existing single family developed portion of the site and
Comprehensive Plan Map Designation of “Moderate Density Residential” with an
implementing zoning designation of “R-16 Residential sixteen dwelling units per
acre” for the following four parcels: 108562-3990, 108562-3960, 108562-3970, and
108562-3980 making up the vacant 13.21-acre southeastern corner of the property.
Vice Chair Lee asked if there was a functioning Home Owner’s Association (HOA) in
the Oakpointe/The Bridges neighborhood and if so, are they aware of the changes?
Staff responded that yes, they do have an HOA and there is lik elihood the HOA has
been made aware of the changes based on the developer’s participating
membership in the HOA. Exactly how much the HOA understands, staff cannot be
certain. Staff added that at the National Night Out, event held last night, this
particular HOA was scheduled to host both the Mayor of Kent and the Mayor of
Auburn to attend the function in hopes of answering any questions.
The Commission asked if it is a builder-controlled HOA. Commissioner Stephens
requested information on this from staff. Staff offered to find out and will provide the
information to the Planning Commission.
Staff stated that in order to annex this particular area and to become part of the City
of Auburn, the residents would have a say in the voting on annexation.
Page 6 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 7, 2019
Page 4
Staff reaffirmed that the discussion topic with the Commission was for the purpose of
an introductory overview of the items under consideration for annual amendments
this year, including the private applications that have been received and that could
be part of the “docket” of 2019 annual Comp Plan amendments.
B. Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Update – Aquifer Recharge Areas
Minutes
Senior Planner Dustin Lawrence reiterated the current status of review by the
Planning Commission by saying the City is in the process of updating its Shoreline
Master Program (SMP) and as part of the updates to the SMP, the City has
proposed making amendments to its Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) to be in-line
with other local, state, and federal requirements. Such requirements include those
that protect wetlands, streams, steep slopes, flood hazard areas, and aquifer
recharge areas.
The draft of code changes provided in the Planning Commission’s packet are related
to a certain type of critical areas--which in this case is aquifer recharge areas.
Aquifer Recharge Areas means areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers
used for potable water, including areas where an aquifer that is a source of drinking
water is vulnerable to contamination that would affect the potability of the water or is
susceptible to reduced recharge.
This will be the final remaining portion of the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) update
that is being reviewed by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the required
periodic update to the City’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP). This portion of the
CAO update is in response to comments received from the WA State Dept. of Health
(DOH) in regards to the City’s protection of aquifer recharge areas.
This is contrasted with the City codes current terminology that uses: “groundwater
protection areas”), which are defined as:
“…areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water,
including areas where an aquifer that is a source of drinking water is vulnerable to
contamination that would affect the potability of the water, or is susceptible to
reduced recharge.”
The current CAO affords protection to only to the City’s potable water
sources (i.e. wells, springs) and not to other “Group A” public water
systems. Group A public water systems include not only City systems but
also numerous other types of water system purveyors, which may include
“…any agency or subdivision of the state or any municipal corporation, firm,
company, mutual or cooperative association, institution, partnership, or
person or any other entity, that owns or operates a public water system…”.
In the City of Auburn these other entities include the following 16, Group A
water purveyors:
Auburn Park Community
Braunwood Estates
City of Bonney Lake
Page 7 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 7, 2019
Page 5
City of Pacific
City of Sumner
Crestview Tracts #3
Crestview West Water System
Derbyshire Scenic Acres
Hazelwood Heights
Lake Meridian Water District
Lakehaven Water & Sewer District
Logandale Water Association
Rocky Acres Water System
South Auburn Water Association
Wells Water Association
Winchester Heights
Exhibit 1 (Map provided to the Commission titled: “Aquifer Recharge Areas”) shows
the location of these (non-City) shared well sites along with their associated aquifer
recharge areas (map data from the Dept. of Health’s “SWAP” mapping system,
available to view here: https://fortress.wa.gov/doh/swap/index.html). In looking at the
proposed CAO code updates (Exhibit 3- Text changes)) the colored areas on this
map would be the “Type I Aquifer Recharge Areas” (This includes the various
categories of travel time to the well and is more restrictive) and the remainder of the
City that has no color represents the “Type II Aquifer Recharge Areas” (less
restrictive);
For reference, Exhibit 2 (map provided to the Commission and titled
“Groundwater Protection Areas”) shows the existing “Groundwater
Protection Areas” (for consistency purposes with State rules/laws, the
correct terminology that will be used in the code section is “aquifer
recharge areas”). Essentially, the current Zones 1-3 on this map would
represent the new “Type I” areas and the current Zone 4 would represent
the new “Type II” areas. As can be seen when comparing the two maps,
Exhibit 1 adds several locations in the City to the more restrictive “Type I”
aquifer recharge areas.
The restrictions that are placed on Zones 1-3 as the new Type I are
essentially the same, the main difference is that these protections would
now apply to other (non-City) water purveyors (those listed above).
In conclusion, staff proposes to hold a public hearing on the updates to the
SMP and CAO in October and then a presentation and eventual adoption by
the City Council.
Vice Chair Lee asked if staff could clarify how the septic versus sewer service for
future development is affected by the proposed regulations. Which would be
preferred or not preferred? Staff responded that sewer is always going to be
preferred when it is located within a reasonable distance. However, some properties
Page 8 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 7, 2019
Page 6
could be located too far away for sewer or not capable of being served so septic
could have to be considered as an option.
The Commission questioned what the impact would be if a homeowner, for example,
on West Hill or Lea Hill had to do repairs to an existing septic system or drain field?
Would the changes cause it to be more costly or prohibit them from doing repairs or
replacement? Staff responded that the big impact would be on new development that
occurs on vacant land. If the developer wanted to develop a septic system in one of
the critical aquifer recharge areas and if the property is encumbered by the recharge
area, they would have to go through a critical areas variance process to prove to the
city that they could design septic system that will not be detrimental to the aquifer
recharge area. Senior Planner Dustin Lawrence clarified that greater flexibility is
generally extended to existing septic systems and thus the impact is anticipated to
be less on current septic systems.
Commissioner Stephens commented that he would like to see more data to see what
specific properties may be impacted to understand how many total lots are affected.
Staff responded that based on a rough calculation, there are 48 residential lots with
no sewer near the properties and that are shown within the aquifer recharge areas.
The Commission asked what the regulatory approach that applies in other
jurisdictions to their aquifer recharge areas. Are septic systems precluded?
Senior Planner Lawrence mentioned that he would have to follow up with other cities
such as Sumner and Kent to understand their process.
Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon introduced City of Auburn Water Utilities
Engineer, Susan Fenhaus. If the Commission had any questions, she may also be
able to assist.
The Planning Commission did confirm that more data would help understand as well
as information on what other jurisdictions are doing. Senior Planner Lawrence
pointed out that the Planning Commission’s September meeting provides an
opportunity where these questions and concerns can be addressed.
Staff agreed to provide additional data, a map with lot sizes and sewer lines, as well
as looking into the surrounding jurisdictions and what their process for the Aquifer
Recharge Areas.
Planning Services Manager Dixon called the Commission’s attention to a copy of the
City’s web page for the Shoreline master program update. The web page has
recently been updated to announce the beginning of a 30-day public comment period
and informing the public that a public hearing is scheduled for October 8th. The
Webpage gives the public access to review related materials that have been
prepared.
Page 9 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 7, 2019
Page 7
IV. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Planning Services Manager, Jeff Dixon reported that progress is being made on the
location of the site formally known as the Heritage Building that was consumed by a fire
two years ago. There is a “clock ticking” as it was a much older building that did not have
parking when it was developed years ago. The owner has been requested to proceed
quickly in order to have the parking grandfathered in.
The Commission asked for an update on the Metro Bus Barn reported last month and if
a site has been selected. Staff responded that at this time, there was no update but this
could be due to evaluation of the sites is being conducted.
Recalling that the Planning Commission made a recommendation in the past,
Commissioner Stephens had a follow up question on the Lakeridge Paving Site on “A “
Street SE. He noted that there are no buildings on site, which is what was previously
presented to the Commission by the artistic perspective drawings. Now he has noticed
that heavy equipment was placed on site but no buildings. Staff responded that there are
some site restrictions such as wetlands that prevent full development. Staff is working
with Lakeridge representatives on those issues and the pre-conditions to equipment
placement on-site. Staff has also been working with Lakeridge as a follow up with the
nature of further development of the site and specifically there is a pre-application
meeting scheduled to discuss.
The Commission confirmed that the next meeting is Wednesday, September 4, 2019.
The Planning Commission Meeting was bumped to Wednesday due to the Labor Day
holiday on Monday September 2, 2019 and the City council meeting also being shifted.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Vice Chair
Lee adjourned the meeting at 8:06 P.M.
Page 10 of 215
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
September 4, 2019 Draft minutes from the Planning
Commission Regular Meeting
Date:
September 23, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
Draft minutes September 4, 2019
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Planning Commission review and approve the September 4, 2019 regular meeting minutes.
Background Summary:
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:
Meeting Date:October 8, 2019 Item Number:
Page 11 of 215
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 4, 2019
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Rolland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
a.) ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Chair Roland, Commissioner
Stephens, Commissioner Khanal, and Commissioner Moutzouris, Commissioner
Mason. Vice Chair Lee was excused.
Staff present included: Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon, Senior Planner
Dustin Lawrence; Senior Planner Anthony Avery, Business License Coordinator
Tina Kriss, and Office Assistant Tammy Gallier.
Members of the public present: None
b.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGENCE
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. July 16, 2019
Chair Roland asked that we postpone the approval of minutes, Item III. A. August 7,
2019.
Commissioner Stephens moved and Commissioner Moutzouris seconded to
postpone the approval of minutes for August 7, 2019 to the next meeting, October 8,
2019.
Motion Carried 5-0
III. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Critical Areas Code Update- Aquifer Recharge Areas
Senior Planner Dustin Lawrence provided a PowerPoint presentation to provide an
overview of the proposed regulations for aquifer recharge areas as part of the critical
areas code (CAO) update and part of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) update.
Senior Planner Lawrence reiterated that the reason for the proposed code changes
is a result of guidance from the Washington State Department of Health. The
changes to address Dept. of Health, would provide equal protections within aquifer
recharge areas associated with private well sites as currently contained in City code
Page 12 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 4, 2019
Page 2
for the aquifer recharge areas associated with municipally-owned well sites.
Staff indicated that at the last meeting the Commission requested additional
information in a few subject areas. In response, staff showed a slide and provided
information from neighboring jurisdictions to show how they regulate the installation
of new septic systems when located within aquifer recharge areas.
At the last meeting, the Commission also asked about how many properties could be
affected by the prohibition on septic systems within aquifer recharge areas. Staff
indicated that they had assembled some rough information to answer. To begin staff
reviewed all vacant properties, per King County records, located within the 10-year,
5-year, 1-year, and 6-month time of travel areas for community owned well sites.
Eighty-two properties were found within these areas, 57 of which are estimated to
unlikely obtain sewer. Of these 57 sites, only 2 are located within the 6-month time
of travel area and 13 are located within the 1-year time of travel area.
Staff showed a map of the location of the identified properties. After reviewing the
map showing that most of the sites were located in NE and SE Auburn staff
explained that the code had been re-drafted since the last meeting to follow a similar
regulatory approach by prohibiting new septic systems within 6-month and 1-year
time of travel areas similar to the regulations of the cities of Federal Way and
Sumner. The 6-month and the 1-year are the two travel time areas closest to the
well sites. This redrafted code was provided in the Commission’s packet. This
would treat properties that are served from community well sites different than
properties served by Auburn well sites. ; however it would be comparable to
regulations of some nearby jurisdictions.
Staff explained; in the event that there is a property that would be affected by the
proposed prohibition on new septic systems located within the 6-month and 1-year
time of travel aquifer recharge area regulations, such proposals would still have the
opportunity to seek a critical areas variance in accordance with the existing
provisions in ACC 16.10.160 so that a septic system could be allowed.
The Commission and staff discussed the public hearing process that would be
necessary for the applicant submitting a critical areas variance in order to review
requests for septic systems. The Commission also asked about a potential
alternative to the variance process by demonstrating implementation of alternative
technologies for septic systems to demonstrate that the septic system does not have
the potential to pollute the aquifer recharge area, similar in part, to the regulations of
unincorporated king county.
The Commission generally indicated that they would like to include both approaches
within the redrafting of the code. They requested that the critical areas variance
option be cross-referenced within this section.
Staff explained that because the public hearing on the updates to the SMP and COA
are scheduled for October 8, 2019, staff is seeking guidance from the Commission to
move forward with the current Aquifer Recharge COA code changes as long as staff
provides modifications to the proposed amendments as requested tonight.
Page 13 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 4, 2019
Page 3
The Commission expressed they are generally comfortable for staff to schedule the
public hearing to bring forward the proposed amendments with the changes as
requested by the Commission.
B. Discussion of schedule for Items docketed for consideration as
Comprehensive Plan 2019 Annual Amendments
Senior Planner Anthony Avery provided the staff report on item IV. B. Discussion of
Comprehensive Plan 2019 Annual Amendments. Referring to the document titled
“docket” he provided a brief overview to the Commission on the elements that had
previously been brought forward for review and discussion with the Commission.
Staff reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments, P/T #1 to P/T #5
consisting of the capital facilities plans for the school districts and for the City. P/T
#6 consists of updating the City’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan, which is
incorporated by reference. P/T #7 would change the title of the “M ST SE” boundary
from M ST SE to M ST SE/NE related to Map 1.3 “Designated Areas” of the Land
Use Element, and change the corresponding references in the text to agree. These
text changes affect the listing of economic development strategy areas and in Policy
LU-133 to change M ST SE to M ST SE/NE.
Senior Planner Avery referred to the draft schedule document provided to the
Commission and reviewed the timeline staff would like to bring forward the 2019
annual amendments for review and public hearing.
Senior Planner Avery pointed out that the docket no longer lists the potential map
amendment of the potential annexation area (PAA) related to the Bridges
development located in the City of Kent. There are some technical difficulties with
the application that was submitted City of Kent and Auburn attorneys as well as
applicant’s attorney are involved with ongoing discussions on how to proceed with
the processing. Staff and the Commission discussed how to update the Comp Plan
in relation to the timing of annexing the Oakpointe Community. As best as staff can
determine at this time, the Oakpointe amendment is not going to be part of the Comp
Plan Amendments. A Commissioner offered that if it returns as an amendment, a
separate hearing from the other subjects may be appropriate.
IV. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon provided an update of the Legacy Apartments
(senior housing) development in the downtown area.
He indicated that a temporary construction fence has been installed around the site but
that this may be for some grading associated with some site soil clean up to start.
Building permits for the ultimate development are still being reviewed. City staff have
approved the architectural & Site design review for consistency with the Downtown
standards but the Applicant is continuing to refine their concept for the proposal.
Also in the downtown, staff pointed out the development of the Divine Court project (the
former Heritage Building site that was destroyed by fire) is ongoing. The applicant has
Page 14 of 215
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 4, 2019
Page 4
recently proposed to add an additional story and dwelling units. Currently, the applicant
is working with the City to submit their revised building permit proposal for the site next
week.
Staff reported that City Council acted last night to lease property on Auburn Way North,
at one of the retail center properties and specifically the space formally occupied by the
‘Sports Page’ Bar. This is going to a “one stop center” for social services shared by the
city and other service providers. It is a possibly location for the Food Bank and other
non-profits. This location could potentially provide a day-shelter as well as a nighttime
shelter for the homeless. The goal is to create a resource for community members that
have multiple needs where they can have access to a one-stop location to have those
multiple needs met. The city is still working out the fine details of changes to the building
and the allocation of the space and more information will come.
The Commission inquired about any updates on the King County Metro Bus Barn and
the two locations in Auburn that are being looked at for a new facility. Staff reported that
there has not been an update on it at this time. However, more than likely the County is
taking this time to conduct their research and due diligence on the site locations in
Auburn and in Kent.
V. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 8:02 p.m.
Page 15 of 215
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Date:
September 26, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
CPA19-0001 Staff Report
CPA19-0002 Staff Report
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of
the 2019 City-Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Policy/Text & Map Amendments).
Background Summary:
See Attachment
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Avery
Meeting Date:October 8, 2019 Item Number:PH.1
Page 16 of 215
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
PLANNING COMMISSION
Agenda Subject/Title:
CPA19-0001 & REZ19-0001, Auburn School
District, Pioneer Elementary Comprehensive
Plan Amendment & Re-zone
Date:
October 8, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and
recommend to City Council approval of the Auburn School District Elementary 16 Plan Map
Amendment and Re-zone.
APPLICANTS/OWNERS: Auburn School District No. 408
Attn: Jeff Grose, Executive Director of Capital Projects
915 Fourth St NE
Auburn, WA 98002
AGENT: Shockey Planning Group, Inc.
Attn: Camie Anderson, Senior Associate
2716 Colby Ave
Everett, WA 98201
REQUEST: File No. CPA19-0001 & REZ19-0001:
Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan map designation of four parcels,
totaling approximately 10.55 acres from the current designation of “Single-
Family” to “Institutional” and to re-zone the site from “R-5 Residential – Five
Dwelling Units per Acre” to “I - Institutional”. The Applicant identifies that this
is a non-project action.
LOCATION: The proposal consists of four parcels (King County parcel numbers
8946700210, 0421059053, 0421059063, and 0421059015) on the north side
of SE 304th St and west of 132nd Ave SE, addressed as 12921 SE 302nd
Place, 12922 SE 304th Street, and 13106 SE 304th Street.
EXISTING ZONING: The zoning classification of the four parcels is R-5, Residential – Five
Dwelling Units per Acre.
EXISTING
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DESIGNATION: The Comprehensive Plan designation of the site is “Single-Family
Residential”.
SEPA STATUS: A SEPA Determination application was received on September 19, 2019.
The staff review is due October 3, 2019. Following a determination, the
city will open a public comment period of 15 days, and a subsequent
appeal period of 14 days.
Page 17 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 2 of 13
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Applicant, Camie Anderson of Shockey Planning Group, representing Jeff Grose of the
Auburn School District, submitted applications for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment
(File No. CPA19-0001) and a related re-zone (File No. REZ19-0001). More specifically, the
applications request a change in the designation of the four parcels, totaling approximately
10.55 acres from the current designation of “Single-Family” to “Institutional” and a re-zone
from “R-5 Residential – Five Dwelling Units per Acre” to “I – Institutional Use District”. The
Applicant identifies that this is a non-project action.
2. The Site, comprised of the four parcels, is located on the north side of SE 304th St and west
of 132nd Ave SE, addressed as 12921 SE 302nd Place, 12922 SE 304th Street, and 13106
SE 304th Street. The four parcels are identified as King County parcel numbers
8946700210, 0421059053, 0421059063, and 0421059015.
3. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), the environmental review decision required
under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), for the application by Auburn School
District for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Re-zone was applied for under City
File No. SEP19-0029 on September 19, 2019. The staff review is due October 3, 2019.
Following a determination, the city will open a public comment period of 15 days, and a
subsequent appeal period of 14 days.
4. The public hearing notice was published on September 23, 2019 in the Seattle Times at
least 10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for October 8,
2019. Public notice was also mailed to property owners of record within 300 feet, posting on-
site and on the city’s webpage.
5. The following report identifies a comprehensive plan map amendment and re-zone
requested by Auburn School District scheduled for the Planning Commission’s October 8,
2019 public hearing with a staff recommendation.
Comprehensive Plan Related Findings
6. The City of Auburn first-adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in compliance with
the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended in 1995.
The Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually each year since generally for
housekeeping items and for capital facilities plan coordination.
7. The City of Auburn adopted a substantially revised Comprehensive Plan (including map
amendments) in response to periodic updates required by the Growth Management Act
(GMA) by Ordinance No. 6584 on December 14, 2015.
8. City Code Section 14.22, “Comprehensive Plan” provides the city’s laws for amending the
Comprehensive Plan. Amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated) and
by private citizens (privately-initiated).
9. RCW 36.70A.130 (The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for
annual amendments to locally adopted comprehensive plans. Except in limited
Page 18 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 3 of 13
circumstances as provided for in State law, Comprehensive Plan amendments shall be
considered by the city or county legislative body no more frequently than once per year. The
annual limitation and exceptions are also restated in city code at ACC 14.22.060.
10. The City of Auburn established a June 7, 2019 submittal deadline for comprehensive plan
amendments for the year 2019 (map or policy/text amendments). Notice to the public of the
application filing deadline was provided on the City’s website, publication of a legal notice
the Seattle Times Newspaper, and sent to a notification list of potentially interested parties.
11. Auburn City Code Chapter 14.22, “Comprehensive Plan”, outlines the process for submittal
of private initiated amendments and the processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments as
follows:
“Section 14.22.100
A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed
amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given
pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following:
1. For site-specific plan map amendments:
a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not
less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing;
b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record
within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not
less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing;
2. For area-wide plan map amendments:
a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not
less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing;
b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record
within the area subject to the proposed amendment;
c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area
subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior
to the date of the public hearing.
B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions
noted above as deemed necessary.
C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a
public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and
forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission
shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those
findings to the city council.
D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written
findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance.
E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning
commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW
36.70A.106.
F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in
accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)”
12. Per Chapter 14.22 Auburn City Code (“ACC”), privately-initiated amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan shall have at least one public hearing before the Planning Commission
Page 19 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 4 of 13
who then forward on a recommendation to the City Council. City Council consideration and
action on the amendments generally occurs, but is not required, prior to the end of the year.
13. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in
this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Office of Commerce and other state
agencies as required for the 60-day state review. No comments have been received from
the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of
this report.
14. Due to the scope and limited number of privately initiated policy/text changes, the optional
process as provided in the city code for a public open house was not conducted.
Zoning Code Related Findings
1. In June 2018 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6655 which allows the Planning
Commission and City Council to consider associated map changes (for Comp. Plan and
Zoning map amendments), concurrently. This eliminates the need for the Hearing Examiner
to subsequently consider a zoning map amendment public hearing when it is related to a
Comprehensive Plan map amendment.
2. Chapter 18.68 ACC (Zoning) Amendments outlines the process for submittal of privately-
initiated zoning amendments and the general processing. Per ACC 18.68.030(B)(1)(b),
when the Planning Commission is considering a re-zone (zoning map amendment) which
requires a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment, the public hearings shall be
conducted concurrently and a recommendation on both shall be forwarded to the City
Council.
3. The intent of the I – Institutional Zone is “…intended to provide an area wherein educational,
governmental, theological, recreational, cultural and other public and quasi-public uses may
be allowed to develop.” While not explicitly called out in the current Comprehensive Plan,
the I - Institutional Zone is most consistent with the “Institutional” Comprehensive Plan
designation.
Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment – Staff Analysis
1. The Applicant submitted a Comprehensive Plan map amendment application on May 23,
2019, before the year 2019 application submittal deadline for comprehensive plan
amendments (June 7, 2018).
2. The property owner is Auburn School District No. 408, represented by Jeff Grose, Executive
Director of Capital Projects. The applicant is Camie Anderson, Senior Associate of Shockey
Planning Group Inc.
3. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Application and re-zone application
(File No. REZ19-0001), the Applicant also submitted an environmental checklist application
(File No. SEP19-0027).
Page 20 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 5 of 13
4. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application seeks to change the comprehensive
plan map designation of King County parcel numbers 8946700210, 0421059053,
0421059063, and 0421059015 from the current designation of “Single-Family” to
“Institutional”.
5. The Applicant also seeks to change the zoning classification of King County parcel numbers
8946700210, 0421059053, 0421059063, and 0421059015 from “R-5 Residential, Five
Dwelling Units per Acre” to “I, Institutional District”. The Applicant identifies in the
environmental checklist application that this is a non-project action.
6. As indicated by the Applicant’s narrative statement submitted with the application, the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and related rezoning have been requested for the
purpose of construction of a new public elementary school to meet demand.
7. The current Comprehensive Plan designation, zoning classification and current land
uses of the sites and surrounding properties are as follows:
Comprehensive Plan
Designation
Zoning Classification
Existing Land Use
On-
Site
Single-Family
Residential
R-5 Residential Five
Dwelling Units per Acre
Single-Family
Dwellings / Vacant
North “Single-Family
Residential”
R-5 Residential Five
Dwelling Units per Acre Single-Family
Dwellings
South “Single-Family
Residential”
R-5 Residential Five
Dwelling Units per Acre Single-Family
Dwellings
East “Light Commercial” Light Commercial Vacant
West “Single-Family
Residential”
R-5 Residential, Five
Dwelling Units per Acre Single-Family
Dwellings
Page 21 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 6 of 13
Vicinity Map with Site outlined.
N
Subject
SiSE 304th St
Page 22 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 7 of 13
Process and Criteria for Requested Amendment
8. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application seeks to change the designation of
four adjacent parcels. The northwesternmost parcel, Parcel #8946700210 consists of
approximately 0.82 acres. The southwesternmost parcel, Parcel #0421059053 consists of
approximately 0.71 acres, while the abutting parcel, Parcel #0421059063, is approximately
.55 acres in size. The final parcel, Parcel #0421059015, encompasses the eastern portion of
the assemblage, and consists of approximately 8.19 acres.
The four properties considered together are generally rectilangular, with the eastern two-
thirds of the site consisting of a depth of 650 feet, and the western third of the site is
approximately 420 feet deep.
The northwesternmost parcel, Parcel #8946700210 is currently occupied by a single family
home and barn. The southwesternmost parcel, Parcel #0421059053 is occupied by a single
family home, while the abutting parcel, Parcel #0421059063, is vacant of any structures.
The final parcel, Parcel #0421059015, currently hosts a single family home and a large work
shed.
9. The site is bordered to the south by SE 304th St, which is classified by the City as a “Minor
Arterial” street. The adjacent street is not currently fully developed to the “Minor Arterial”
street standards, as there is not sidewalk or vertical curb abutting the property.
10. The property is located within the King County portion of the City of Auburn. Ordinance No.
6121 annexed it to the City in 2007.
11. Based on historic zoning maps, the subject properties were zoned “LHR – Lea Hill
Residential”, at the time of annexation up until 2009 when it was part of an area wide re-
zone to “R-5 Residential Zone – Five Dwelling Units per Acre”. The site is located within the
Lea Hill Overlay District.
12. The City’s Comprehensive Plan contains the following objectives and policy guidance, as it
relates to this application:
Volume 1 – Land Use Element
“Public and Institutional Land Use Designations”
“Character Sketch”
“Public and institutional uses will occur in both low and high-density environments. For
passive uses, land and views will be protected; limited access to these areas will be
typical. For more active uses, usability and accessibility will be key features and new
development will be subject to standards reflecting programmed space and
interconnectivity. These spaces will be varied in type, providing service to areas large
and small, urban and more rural in character. Sustainable solutions and innovations that
are responsive to the native ecology will be typical of public and institutional uses.”
“General Policies”
Page 23 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 8 of 13
A general policy appropriate to this request is:
“Policy LU-89. The primary purpose of this designation is to address public needs while
taking advantage of synergies with the adjacent areas where they are sited.”
“Institutional Designation”
“Description”
“The I zone is intended to provide an area wherein educational, governmental,
theological, recreational, cultural and other public and quasi-public uses may be allowed
to develop. It is further intended these areas be significant in scope which will allow a
combination of uses which may not be permitted outright within other zones. This district
is not intended to include those smaller or singular public uses which are consistent with
and permitted in other zones.”
“Designation Criteria1. Previously developed institutional uses; or
2. Located along major arterial streets;
3. Properties that are buffered from the single-family designation by landscaping,
environmental features, or the Residential Transition designation and buffered from all
other Residential designations; and
4. Meets the development parameters of the Institutional designation.
5. Properties identified in the Airport Master Plan as Landing Field.”
An Institutional-related policy appropriate to this request is:
“Policy LU-102 Appropriate uses for this designation include facilities that serve the
needs of the larger community such as public schools, active parks; city operated
municipal facilities, large churches, and fire stations.”
The Capital Facilities Element also contains objectives and policies relevant to the request,
as follows:
Volume 3 – Capital Facilities Element
“Planning Approach”
“The Capital Facilities planning approach is to manage growth in a manner that
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.”
“Objectives and Policies”
“Objective 1.1. Ensure that new development does not outpace 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 that can support the public
services they require.”
Page 24 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 9 of 13
“Policy CF-3. Development shall be allowed only when and where such development
can be adequately served by public services (police and fire) without reducing the level
of service elsewhere.”
“Objective 1.2. To ensure that new developments are supported by an adequate level of
public services through an effective system of public facilities.”
“Policy 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.”
“Objective 1.8. To site public and institutional buildings in accord with their service
function and the needs of the members of the public served by the facility.”
“Policy CF-63. Public and institutional facilities that attract a large number of visitors (City
Hall, museums, libraries, educational facilities, permit and license offices, health and
similar facilities, etc.) should be sited in areas that are accessible (within ¼ mile) by
transit.”
13. The purpose of the City’s Comprehensive Plan document is to provide a policy basis for the
zoning changes to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance are
consistent as required by the following city code provision:
“ACC 14.22.050 Conformance and consistency.
The zoning, land division and other development codes contained or referenced within
Auburn City Code shall be consistent with and implement the intent of the
comprehensive plan. Capital budget decisions shall be made in conformity with the
comprehensive plan. “
14. The City code provides certain criteria for decision-making for comprehensive plan
amendments as follows:
“ACC 14.22.110 Decision criteria for plan amendments.
A. The comprehensive plan was developed and adopted after significant study and
public participation. The principles, goals, objectives and policies contained
therein shall be granted substantial weight when considering a proposed
amendment. Therefore, the burden of proof for justifying a proposed amendment
rests with the applicant, who must demonstrate that the request complies with
and/or relates to the following decision criteria:
1. The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives
of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent;
2. Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased;
3. Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be
invalid;
Page 25 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 10 of 13
4. A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has
occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the
comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment;
5. If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the
comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies
for either King and/or Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth
and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region.”
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATED – CONCLUSIONS:
The City Code provides certain criteria for decisions on amending the Comprehensive Plan
under ACC 18.14.22.110. These criteria are listed below in bold, followed by a Staff Analysis.
1. The first criterion is that the change must further and be consistent with the goals
and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent.
Staff analysis: As discussed above, the subject properties are adjacent to existing single
family housing. The property has been acquired for the purpose of constructing a new
elementary school, with the intent of reducing class sizes and accommodating enrollment
growth in the school district. The site is served by public infrastructure, including a “minor
arterial” street to the south with secondary access via 132nd Ave SE to the east. The
proposal to change the mapped land use designation of the site from “Single-Family” to
“Institutional” is supported by numerous Comprehensive Plan policies within both the Land
Use Element and the Capital Facilities Element, as noted above. The proposal to change
the land use designation on the site to institutional will not be in conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan. Since it allows for a public facility to meet the needs of the community,
adequate public facilities will be provided concurrent with the development to serve the
future redevelopment of the site. Public transit is available within ½ mile of the site.
2. The second decision criterion is that the comprehensive plan amendment must not
diminish or increase the ability to provide adequate services.
Staff analysis: The applications for a change in Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning
have been reviewed by Valley Regional Fire Agency and the City Utilities and Traffic
divisions. Based on these reviews, the changes would not adversely affect the provision of
services. The proposed Comprehensive Plan map change by itself, if approved will not
affect the ability to provide adequate services. As typical with development in the city, the
infrastructure improvements needed to support the development would be the responsibility
of the future development. At the time of development, adequate services would be required
to be provided concurrent with the development in order for the project to be authorized.
Therefore, it is not anticipated that approval of the request negatively affects provision of
services. Utility and street frontage improvements would be required to support the
development
Existing services either exists or can be provided to support the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to change the site’s map designation from “Single-Family Residential” to
“Institutional”.
Page 26 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 11 of 13
3. The third decision criterion is that the assumptions on which the comprehensive plan
is based are found to be invalid.
Staff analysis: While the policies of the Comprehensive Plan are not invalid, the zoning
designation of R-5 does not permit educational facilities. Amending the site’s land use
classification to Institutional provides the opportunity to re-zone the site and allow the
construction of a new public elementary school. Policy number LU-4 in Volume 1 of the city’s
comprehensive plan states that “Public and institutional uses may be permitted as a
conditional use if designed in a manner that enhances the residential character of the area.”
The land use designation change and re-zone support the comprehensive plan’s intent to
allow compatible services in and adjacent to residential zones.
4. The fourth decision criterion is that there has been a change or lack of change in
conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest
amendment to the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed
amendment.
Staff analysis: There has been a change in conditions that generates the need for the map
change. At the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan, the school district had not
identified nor purchased the land necessary to meet state and district goals for attendance
and facility needs. With the continued population growth and a shortage of suitable sites for
the construction of new facilities, the public benefit of the proposal supports the proposed
change.
5. The fifth decision criterion is that the change must be determined to be consistent
with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of
the relevant county and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the
Puget Sound Region”.
Staff analysis: The change if approved would continue to be consistent with the Growth
Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of King County and
“Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. The
proposal is consistent because it provides land suitable for institutional development, which
will directly provide services (educational) to the immediate community within an urban area.
6. The sixth decision criterion, applies only to changes of the mapped land use
designation of a specific property, the applicant must demonstrate one of the
following:
a. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight;
b. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having a similar or
compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility
with surrounding properties;
c. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation
came into effect.
Staff analysis: The proposed land use designation is compatible with surrounding land uses
per policy LU-4 meeting criteria B, and the residential growth and demand for educational
facilities and availability of land has caused a change in condition that meets criteria C.
Page 27 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 12 of 13
RE-ZONE RELATED – CONCLUSIONS:
While the City of Auburn does not have re-zone criteria adopted, the following criteria are
analyzed to ensure that the proposed re-zone is consistent with Washington State case law.
1. The intent of the zoning code and the comprehensive plan of the City. Is the re-zone
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan?
Staff analysis: As provided at ACC 18.35.020, “Intent of Special Purpose Zones”, the intent of
the “I - Institutional Zone” is: “The I zone is intended to provide an area wherein educational,
governmental, theological, recreational, cultural and other public and quasi-public uses may be
allowed to develop. It is further intended these areas be significant in scope which will allow a
combination of uses which may not be permitted outright within other zones. This district is not
intended to include those smaller or singular public uses which are consistent with and
permitted in other zones.” The I - Institutional Zone is most consistent with the “Institutional”
Comprehensive Plan designation.
Provided that the concurrent Comprehensive Plan map amendment is granted, changing the
site’s current “Single-Family Residential” designation to “Institutional”, the proposed re-zone
from “R-5” to “I” will be consistent with and implement the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed
use of the site as a public school is consistent with the “I” Institutional Zone intent statement.
2. The availability of municipal services such as water, sewer, roads, fire and police
protection, which might be required by reason of the proposed re-zone.
Staff analysis: As previously noted in the Comprehensive Plan map amendment analysis,
adequate services will be provided to the site, including water, sewer, roads, and fire and police
protection.
3. The conditions of the area have substantially changed.
Staff analysis: As previously noted in the Comprehensive Plan map amendment analysis, the
conditions of the area have substantially changed since development of the site. Through the
continued urbanization of the surrounding area and a reduction in maximum class size
requirements for elementary schools statewide, it is evident that the conditions of the area have
substantially changed.
4. The proposed re-zone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,
morals, and welfare.
Staff analysis: The proposed re-zone from “R-5” to “P-1” bears a substantial relationship to the
public health, safety, morals, and welfare in that it will allow a site to be included with the
existing Pioneer Elementary School site, a necessary public facility in need of being
redeveloped to meet current community needs. During the development of the site, the project
will be required to meet all local zoning, building, and other requirements currently established
Page 28 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 13 of 13
by the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council approval of the Auburn School District
No. 408 (CPA19-0001) request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the map
designation of four parcels, Parcel Nos. 8946700210, 0421059053, 0421059063, and
0421059015 from “Single-Family” to “Institutional” and to re-zone all parcels from “R-5,
Residential Zone - Five Dwelling Units per Acre” to “I, Institutional” zoning district.
EXHIBIT LIST
(For exhibits, please see behind the “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab in the ‘working
binder’.)
Exhibit 1 Staff Report CPA19-0001 & REZ19-0001
Exhibit 2 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment – Proposed Change
Exhibit 3 Zoning Map Amendment – Proposed Change
Exhibit 4 Completed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Re-zone Application forms and
materials including Applicant’s Narrative Statement
Exhibit 5 Completed SEPA Environmental Checklist Application SEP19-0027
Exhibit 6 Combined Notice of Application and Determination of Non-Significance SEP19-0027
Exhibit 7 Dept. of Commerce 60-Day Acknowledgement Letter
Exhibit 8 Notice of Public Hearing
Exhibit 9 Affidavits of Publication, Mailing, and Posting
Page 29 of 215
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
PLANNING COMMISSION
Agenda Subject/Title:
CPA19-0002, 2019 Annual Comprehensive
Plan Amendments – Specifically, City
Initiated Plan Policy/Text & Map
Amendments
Date:
October 8, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and
recommend to City Council approval of the 2019 City-Initiated Comprehensive Plan
Amendments (Policy/Text & Map Amendments).
Background Summary: The City of Auburn adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan
in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as
amended. Since then the Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually. At the
end of 2015, the City adopted a substantially updated Comprehensive Plan in compliance with
state-required periodic updates.
Annual Comprehensive plan amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated)
and by private parties (private-initiated).
This year the city is initiating:
• Seven policy/text amendments
• Two map amendments
Also, the city received one (1) private-initiated plan map amendment by the submittal deadline
which will be presented in separate staff reports for the hearing.
This staff report and recommendation addresses the City initiated amendments and specifically:
• Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments P/T # 1 through # 7 and
• Map (CPM) Amendments # 1 and # 2.
The remaining two private applications for amendments will be addressed in separately
provided staff reports for the Planning Commission.
In terms of process, the Comprehensive plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public
hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a
recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on
the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year.
Page 30 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 2 of 10
A. Findings
1. RCW 36.70A.130 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for
amendments to locally adopted GMA comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances
as provided for in State law and City Code, comprehensive plan amendments shall be
considered by the city legislative body no more frequently than once per year.
2. The City of Auburn established a June 7, 2019 deadline for the submittal of private initiated
comprehensive plan applications (map or policy/text). Notice to the public of the application
submittal deadline was provided on the City’s website, posted, advertised in the Seattle
Times Newspaper, and sent to a compiled notification list on May 20, 2019. The City
received three (3) private initiated map amendment by the submittal deadline.
3. The City of Auburn received annual updates to the four (4) school district Capital Facilities
Plans whose districts occur within the City of Auburn. These Capital Facilities Plans, as well
as the City’s Capital Facilities Plan are proposed to be incorporated by reference in the
current Capital Facilities Element (Volume 3), of the 2015 Auburn Comprehensive Plan and
are processed as Policy/Text (P/T) amendments.
4. The environmental review decision under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the
school district capital facilities plans were prepared separately by each school district acting
as their own lead agency, as allowed by State law (State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)).
5. The environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the
remaining city initiated amendments, the City Capital Facilities Plan, and the remaining
policy/text and map amendments resulted in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)
issued for the City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments on September 23, 2019 (City
File # SEP19-0028). The comment period will end at 5:00 p.m. October 8, 2019 and the
appeal period ended October 22, 2018. A copy of the DNS and environmental checklist
application is provided in the working binder behind the “Environmental Review” tab.
6. Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately-
initiated amendments and the general processing of comprehensive plan amendments as
follows:
“Section 14.22.100
A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed
amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given
pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following:
1. For site-specific plan map amendments:
a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not
less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing;
b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record
within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not
less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing;
2. For area-wide plan map amendments:
a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not
less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing;
Page 31 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 3 of 10
b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record
within the area subject to the proposed amendment;
c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area
subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior
to the date of the public hearing.
B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions
noted above as deemed necessary.
C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a
public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and
forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission
shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those
findings to the city council.
D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written
findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance.
E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning
commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW
36.70A.106.
F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in
accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)”
7. As provided in the City code, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed
during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then
provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action which generally occurs, but is
not required to, prior to the end of the year.
8. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in
this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other
state agencies for the required state review. The Washington State Department of
Commerce acknowledged receipt on October 22, 2018 by letter and Material ID # 25425.
No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or
other state agencies as of the writing of this report. A copy of the transmittal and
acknowledgement is provided in the working binder behind the “General Information &
Correspondence” tab.
9. Due to the nature of policy/text changes, and the minimal amount of private-initiated map
amendments, the optional process for holding a public open house as provided for in the
city code, was not conducted.
10. The notice of public hearing was published on September 23, 2019 in the Seattle Times
Newspaper and on the city website which is at least 10 days prior to the Planning
Commission public hearing scheduled for October 8, 2018. A copy of the request to publish
is provided in the working binder behind the “General Information & Correspondence” tab.
Since, there are no city initiated site-specific map changes, only city-wide map changes, the
site-specific noticing by mailing by first class mail to all property owners of record within a
radius of 300 feet was not conducted.
Page 32 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 4 of 10
11. The following report identifies Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text (P/T) and Map (CPM)
amendments scheduled for the Planning Commission’s October 8, 2019 public hearing with
a staff recommendation.
Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments (File No. CPA19-0002, City initiated)
P/T #1
Incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2019 through 2025 into the
City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the
“Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
The Auburn School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP) covering from 2019-2025. The CFP was prepared by the District
staff and adopted by the Auburn School District School Board of Directors on June 24,
2019 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a Determination of Non-
Significance (DNS) prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District
CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the
school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the Auburn School
District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• six–year enrollment projections
• Auburn school district level of service standards
• An inventory of existing facilities
• The district’s overall capacity of the 6-year period
• District capital construction Plan
• Impact fee calculations
A review of the Auburn School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the
District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for
single-family dwellings is proposed to be $6,905.31, an increase of $1,189.63 and
the requested fee for multiple-family dwellings is $14,667.45, an increase of
$10,179.02. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through
subsequent City Council action.
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Auburn School District Capital
Facilities Plan 2019 through 2025 to the City Council.
P/T#2
Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2019-2024 into the City of
Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp.
Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
The Dieringer School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital
Page 33 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 5 of 10
Facilities Plan 2020 - 2025. The CFP was adopted by the Dieringer School District
Board of Directors on May 28, 2019. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA
review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District
CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the
school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District
Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• Overview
• An inventory of existing facilities
• six–year enrollment projections
• standard of service
• Capacity projects
• Finance plan
• Impact fee calculations
A review of the Dieringer School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates
the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for
single-family dwellings is proposed to be $7,729, an increase of $4,513.00 and the
requested fee for multiple family dwellings is $3,514.00; an increase of $3,064.00.
The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City
Council action.
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Dieringer School District Capital
Facilities Plan 2020-2025 to the City Council.
P/T #3
Incorporate the Federal Way School District 2020 Capital Facilities Plan into the City of
Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp.
Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
The Federal Way School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital
Facilities Plan 2020. The CFP was adopted by the Federal Way School District School
Board July 23, 2019 by Resolution No. 2019-27. The CFP has been subject to separate
SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School
District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf
of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School
District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• Introduction
• Inventory of educational facilities & non-instructional facilities
• Needs forecast, existing & new facilities
• Six–year finance plan
• Maps of district boundaries
Page 34 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 6 of 10
• Building capacities & portable locations
• Student forecast
• Capacity summaries
• Impact fee calculations
• Summary of changes from the year 2018 plan
A review of the Federal Way School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan
indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee
obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $5,035.00, representing a
decrease of $2,186.00 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is
$20,768.00, an increase of $1,314.00. The actual impact fees are established by
ordinance through subsequent City Council action.
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Federal Way School District’s
2020 Capital Facilities Plan to the City Council
P/T #4
Incorporate the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2018-2019 to 2024-2025 into the
City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the
“Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
The Kent School District has provided its annually updated 2018-2019 to 2024-2025
Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School District School Board
on June 12, 2019 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared
by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for
the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning
Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the
City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• Executive Summary
• Six-year enrollment projection & history
• District standard of service
• Inventory, capacity & maps of existing schools
• Six-year planning & construction plan
• Portable classrooms
• Projected classroom capacity
• Finance Plan, cost basis and impact fee schedules
• Summary of changes to previous plan
A review of the Kent School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the
District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for
single-family dwellings is proposed to be $5,554.00, representing an increase of
$157.00 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $2,345.00, an increase of
$66.00. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent
Page 35 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 7 of 10
City Council action.
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Kent School District Capital
Facilities Plan 2018-2019 to 2024-2025 to the City Council.
P/T #5
Incorporate the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2025, into the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan
Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
A Capital Facilities Plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by the
Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A). The GMA requires that
a capital facilities plan include an inventory of existing capital facilities (showing locations
and capacities), a forecast of future needs for such capital facilities, proposed locations and
capacities of new or expanded capital facilities, and a minimum of a six-year plan to finance
capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The proposed City of Auburn 6-year
Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2025 satisfies the GMA requirements for a capital facilities
element as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
Each comprehensive plan prepared under the GMA must include a capital facilities plan
element. More specifically, RCW 36.70A.070(3) of the GMA requires the following:
“A capital facilities plan element consisting of:
(a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing
the locations and capacities of the capital facilities;
(b) a forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities;
(c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital
facilities;
(d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within
projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for
such purposes; and
(e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls
short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element,
capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities
plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities
shall be included in the capital facilities plan element.”
A capital facility is defined as a structure, street or utility system improvement, or other long-
lasting major asset, including land. Capital facilities are provided for public purposes.
Capital facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: streets, roads, highways,
sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm
and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire protection
facilities. These capital facilities include necessary ancillary and support facilities.
The City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2025 is proposed to be incorporated
by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Element (Volume No. 3).
Page 36 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 8 of 10
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital
Facilities Plan 2002-2025 to the City Council.
P/T #6
Amend text of Volume 5, Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan. The changes are
shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan
Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
• Since the last major comprehensive plan update in 2015, the City of Auburn has
completed multiple projects related to active mobility, traffic safety, and
transportation network maintenance. This proposed text amendment will update
dates, projects completed in the previous four years, and funding sources for
programs that have been changed since 2015.
• Equestrian facilities have been identified as a recreational use, and planning for
such facilities will be transferred from Public Works to Parks, Recreation, and
Open Space.
Key Changes/Points:
As part of the 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the city seeks to change the
Comprehensive Plan to update the Transportation Element. The main changes to the
Comprehensive Plan document include:
• Incorporate new language required by state and federal law;
• Update the current transit service information;
• Incorporate recent private development;
• Update to include capital projects completed since 2015;
• Update TIP information/project list;
• Update maps as needed to reflect current data and conditions;
• Remove the policies/goals related to provision of equestrian facilities; and
• Additional minor changes related to grammar, punctuation, word choice, etc.
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of policy text amendments to Volume 5,
Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan.
P/T #7
Modify text in Volume 1, “Land Use Element,” item number LU-133, to change the title of the
“M St SE” boundary from M St E to M St SE/NE. The same change is being made as a map
amendment to Map 1.3 “Designated Areas.” The changes are shown in strike through and
underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab.
Discussion
The Land Use Element (Volume No. 1) of the Comprehensive Plan at Page LU-133
discusses “Designated Areas.” The boundary of the designated boundary along M Street
traverses Main Street, meaning the boundary of the designated area exists along both M
Page 37 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 9 of 10
Street SE and M Street NE. The proposed text change reflects this distinction. This can
be identified as a minor text change.
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of policy text amendments to Volume 1,
“Land Use Element” to update the text related to the “Designated Area” bounded by M St SE
to read “M St SE/NE.”
Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments (File No. CPA18-0002, City initiated map
changes)
CPM #1
Change the Comprehensive Plan Map, "Designated Areas, and Map #1.3" to change the
text of the boundary identified as “M St SE” to “M St SE/NE” to reference both directional
locations of the boundary. This is consistent and in conjunction with P/T #7. The changes
are shown in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab.
Discussion
(This is the same topic as text amendment P/T #7, but is repeated as a map
amendment since it requires revision to both the text and map of the comprehensive
plan document. See discussion and analysis under text amendment P/T #7.)
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of a map amendment to change the
Comprehensive Plan Map, "Designated Areas Map #1.3" to change the text of the boundary
identified as “M St SE” to “M St SE/NE” to reference both directional locations of the
boundary.
CPM #2
Within the city’s comprehensive plan, Land Use Element, Map No. 1.1, change the
designation of Parcel No. 2721059012 from split zoned to a single, consistent zoning and
land use designation, to “I,” Industrial. The changes are shown in the working binder behind
the “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab.
Discussion
Approval for the construction of a communications tower was authorized by
administrative decision on December 5, 2018, subjecting the parcel to the requirements
of the majority segment's zoning, I, Institutional. A corresponding Zoning Code Text
Amendment (ZOA18-0001) (Ord No. 6716) amended the ACC to address the use of
emergency communications devices as a land use.
The proposed action changes the land use designation of the western portion of Parcel
No. 2721059012 from “Single Family” to Institutional,” and the zoning from "R-5,
Residential" to "I, Institutional" to reflect the zoning and land use of the larger portion of
the parcel. The re-zone has been assigned case number REZ19-0003. This action
serves to reflect on the city’s land use and zoning maps the approved use of a
communcations device.
Page 38 of 215
Staff Member: Avery
Date: October 8, 2019
Page 10 of 10
Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval of a map amendment to change the western
portion of Parcel No. 2721059012 from “Single Family” to “Institutional,” and subsequently
re-zone the same from “R-5 Residential” to “I-Institutional.”
Page 39 of 215
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Periodic Update and
Associated Updates to the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO)
Date:
September 23, 2019
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
Exhibit 1 - Final Gap Analys is
Exhibit 2 - SMP Updates Final Sept 2019
Exhibit 3 - Ch 16.10 ACC Final Sept 2019
Exhibit 4 - CARAs Maps
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend the City Council to review
and adopt the proposed periodic updates to the Citys Shoreline Master Program and
associated updates to the Critical Areas Ordinance (Auburn City Code Chapter 16.10) as
shown on the attached exhibits.
Background Summary:
The City’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP) was last updated in 2009 and initially adopted in
1974. Per RCW 90.58.080, the City is required to periodically update its SMP every eight
years in response to changes in State laws and rules since 2009 (see Exhibit 1, SMP Gap
Analysis, for reference). The SMP governs development that is within 200 ft. of the “ordinary
high water mark” of the Green and White Rivers (termed “Shorelines of the State”) along with
other contiguous areas. Regulation and administration of the SMP is a shared jurisdictional
responsibility between the City and the WA State Department of Ecology (Ecology).
In summary, the proposed amendments to the SMP include updates to the following:
Definitions,
Removal of the critical areas regulations from the SMP (referencing Chapter 16.10 ACC
instead),
Regulations for nonconforming structures/uses/lots,
Adding a modest home provision for nonconforming lots, and
Removing the duplicative administrative and permitting procedures from City Code
(Chapter 16.08 ACC) and retaining them within the SMP.
Exhibit 2 includes the complete strikeout-underline version of the proposed changes to
the SMP.
In addition to the updates to the SMP, associated updates are also required for the
City’s Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) which were identified by Ecology (ECY) as well
as the WA State Dept. of Health (DOH).
Page 40 of 215
In summary, the proposed CAO amendments include updating the following:
Methodology used for wetland ratings/classifications,
Stream classification system,
Wetland and stream buffer width standards,
Wetland replacement ratios, and
Regulations pertaining to Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas.
Exhibit 3 includes the complete strikeout-underline version of the proposed changes to
the CAO.
Exhibit 4 includes the maps of the proposed updates to the City’s Critical Aquifer
Recharge Areas. This map would replace the current version utilized by Planning.
Planning Commission Review:
Beginning in July of 2018, the Planning Commission (PC) has participated in
discussions with City Staff on these updates on nine separate occasions. The
documentation from these meetings have been available on the City’s dedicated SMP
update webpage at www.auburnwa.gov/smp as well as within the PC agenda packets.
At the July 3, 2019 meeting, the PC requested Staff to proceed with holding a public
hearing on the proposed updates. Summaries of these meetings are as follows:
July 17, 2018 – Initial discussion of the proposed timeline for review of the SMP
updates
September 5, 2018 – Introduction to the SMP and the required updates
October 2, 2018 – Introduction to the SMP Environment Designations maps
October 16, 2018 – Discussion on Ecology Update Checklist items and Public
Participation Plan
April 2, 2019 – Discussion of required updates to the CAO that were identified by ECY
and DOH
May 7, 2019 – Review of Chapters 1-3 of the SMP, continued discussion of CAO
updates, and a presentation on wetlands and buffers by ECY
June 4, 2019 – Review of the first half of Chapter 4 of the SMP and CAO updates to
wetland and streams
July 16, 2019 – Review of the second half of Chapter 4 and Chapters 5 & 6 of the SMP
and continued discussion of CAO updates
August 7, 2019 – Review of CAO changes to Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARA’s)
September 4, 2019 – Continued discussion of CAO changes to CARA’s
Public Participation:
An early notice of updates to the SMP was distributed to stakeholders as identified in
the Public Participation Plan (dated 10/10/2018), no comments were received. A
combined SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), joint State (Ecology) and
local request for public comments, and notice of public hearing was distributed on
Page 41 of 215
August 13, 2019 (City File No. SEP18-0026), with no comments received. In addition,
the public notice was posted on the City’s website as well as on the City’s Facebook
page.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Gouk
Meeting Date:October 8, 2019 Item Number:PH.2
Page 42 of 215
Gap Analysis Report
Shoreline Master Program Periodic Update
City of Auburn
Revised April 2019
Prepared on behalf of:
Community Development
25 W Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
Exhibit 3
Page 43 of 215
Page 44 of 215
i
Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1
2. Consistency with Legislative Amendments ...................................................... 3
3. Consistency with Critical Areas Ordinance .................................................... 14
4. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan and Other Development
Regulations. .......................................................................................................... 26
5. Staff Recommendations & Other Issues for Consideration ............................ 28
L i st o f Ta b l e s
Table 1. Abbreviations used in this document. ..................................................................2
Table 2. Summary of gaps in consistency with legislative amendments sorted by year,
and associated mandatory and recommended SMP revisions.............................3
Table 3. Issues to be resolved to integrate the City’s CAO into the updated SMP ............14
Table 4. Number of sampled wetlands in each category based on their score for
functions. ...............................................................................................................22
Table 5. Wetland buffer widths (in feet) under Chapter 16 ACC/SMP Appendix A and
Ecology’s most recent guidance ............................................................................24
Table 6. Wetland buffer impact minimization measures, per Ecology’s most recent
guidance ................................................................................................................24
24
Table 7. Stream buffer provisions under Chapter 16 ACC/SMP Appendix A, SMP, and
BAS, including an updated water typing system ..................................................25
Table 8. Summary of recommended SMP, ACC, and Comprehensive Plan revisions to
improve consistency. ............................................................................................26
Table 9. Staff recommended changes to SMP ....................................................................28
Page 45 of 215
1
1. Introduction
In accordance with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA), local jurisdictions
with shorelines of the state are required to conduct a periodic review of their Shoreline Master
Programs (SMPs) (WAC 173-26-090). This review is intended to keep SMPs current with
amendments to state laws or rules, changes to local plans and regulations, changes in local
circumstances, and new or improved data and information.
The City of Auburn (City) adopted its current SMP in 2009 (Ordinance No. 6235). In Auburn,
the Green River and the White River are the only Shorelines of the State, and both are also
designated Shorelines of Statewide Significance. The City’s SMP includes goals and policies,
shoreline environment designations, and development regulations that guide the development
and protection of these shorelines.
As a first step in the periodic review process, The Watershed Company (Watershed) reviewed
the current SMP for consistency with legislative amendments made since its adoption.
Watershed staff also reviewed the current SMP for consistency with the policies in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan, adopted in December 2015 (Ordinance No. 6584), and with the
implementing development regulations in the Auburn Municipal Code (ACC). Finally, as the
periodic review process represents an opportunity to revise and improve the SMP, both City
and Watershed staff reviewed the current SMP for overall usability.
The purpose of this gap analysis report is to provide a summary of the review and inform
updates to the SMP. The report is organized into the following sections according to the content
of the review:
Section 2 identifies gaps in the SMP’s consistency with legislative amendments. This
analysis is based on a list of amendments between 2007 and 2017, as summarized by the
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and provided to the City as a
Periodic Review Checklist.
Section 3 identifies gaps in consistency of the SMP with the City’s Critical Areas
Ordinance (CAO) (ACC Chapter 16.10). The CAO was most recently updated in 2010,
and applies to critical areas outside of shoreline jurisdiction.
Section 4 identifies gaps in consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and with
implementing sections of the City’s development regulations other than the CAO.
Section 5 identifies issues of usability noted by both City staff and residents.
Page 46 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
2
For each section, the report presents the topic, relevant section(s) in the SMP, a summary of the
analysis (consistency or usability), and a recommendation for revisions to the SMP.
This report includes several tables that identify potential revision actions. Where potential
revision actions are identified, they are classified as follows:
“Mandatory” indicates revisions that are required for consistency with state laws.
“Recommended” indicates revisions that would improve consistency with state laws,
but are not strictly required.
“Optional” indicates revisions that represent ways in which the City could elect to
amend its SMP in accordance with state laws, but that are not required or recommended
for consistency with state laws.
This document attempts to minimize the use of abbreviations; however, a select few are used to
keep the document concise. These abbreviations are compiled below in Table 1.
Table 1. Abbreviations used in this document.
Abbreviation Meaning
BAS Best available science
CARs Critical areas regulations
City City of Auburn
Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
RCW Revised Code of Washington
SMP Shoreline Master Program
SMA Shoreline Management Act
WAC Washington Administrative Code
ACC Auburn City/Municipal Code
Page 47 of 215
3
2. Consistency with Legislative Amendments
Table 2 summarizes mandatory and recommended revisions to the Auburn SMP based on the
review of consistency with legislative amendments made since SMP adoption. Topics are
organized in reverse chronological order of legislative amendments addressed. In general,
mandatory changes to the SMP are minor in nature. The majority of them address revised rules
with regard to SMP applicability, including updated exemption thresholds and definitions.
Ecology has also developed new guidance on regulating nonconforming uses, structures, and
development that could be of use to the City in clarifying the nonconformance regulations in its
SMP.
Table 2. Summary of gaps in consistency with legislative amendments sorted by year, and associated
mandatory and recommended SMP revisions.
Row Summary of change Review Action
2017
a. The Washington State Office
of Financial Management
(OFM) adjusted the cost
threshold for substantial
development to $7,047.
SMP Section 4.1 and
definition for “Substantial
Development” (Section 1.2)
cite a cost threshold of
$5,718.
Relevant Sections:
Definition of “Substantial
Development” (Section 1.2,
Page 1-13) & Section 4.1
(Page 4-1)
Mandatory: The cost
threshold should be
updated to reflect the
current cost threshold of
$7,047 for substantial
development.
b. Ecology amended rules to
clarify that the definition of
“development” does not
include dismantling or
removing structures.
The SMP does not clarify
that removing structures
does not constitute
development.
Relevant Section:
Definition for
“Development” (Section
1.2).
Mandatory: Revise
definition of
“development” to include
Ecology’s suggested
language: “Development”
does not include dismantling
or removing structures if there
is no other associated
Page 48 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
4
Row Summary of change Review Action
development or re-
development.
c. Ecology adopted rules that
clarify exceptions to local
review under the SMA.
The SMP (Chapter 6,
Section 16.08.015) adopts
exemptions under WAC
173-27-040 by reference, but
does not refer to exceptions
under WAC 173-27-044 or -
045.
Relevant Sections: Chapter
6, Section 16.08 & Section
4.1.
Mandatory: Add reference
to statutory exceptions via
reference to WAC 173-27-
044 and -045.
d. Ecology amended rules that
clarify permit filing
procedures consistent with a
2011 statute.
The SMP (Chapter 6,
Section 16.08.015) adopts
provisions of WAC 173-27-
130 by reference. Chapter 6,
Section 16.08.190 references
RCW 90.58.140.
Relevant Sections: SMP
Chapter 6, Sections
16.08.015 & 16.08.190
No change needed.
e.
Ecology amended forestry use
regulations to clarify that
forest practices that only
involves timber cutting are not
SMA “developments” and do
not require Substantial
Development Permits.
Forest practices are
prohibited in Auburn’s
SMP for all Shoreline
Environment Designations
(Section 4.7.1) although the
definition for “Forest
Practices” (Section 1.2) does
not clarify that timber
cutting practices are not
SMA developments and
Recommended: Consider
updating definition of
“Forest Practices” for
consistency with Ecology’s
recommended language: A
forest practice that only
involves timber cutting is not
a development under the act
and does not require a
shoreline substantial
development permit or a
Page 49 of 215
5
Row Summary of change Review Action
could potentially be
allowed.
Relevant Section:
Definition of “Forest
Practices” (Section 1.2)
shoreline exemption. A forest
practice that includes activities
other than timber cutting may
be a development under the act
and may require a substantial
development permit, as
required by WAC 222-50-020.
f. Ecology clarified the SMA
does not apply to lands under
exclusive federal jurisdiction
Auburn has no lands under
exclusive federal
jurisdiction (ie, National
Parks, permanent military
installations, etc) within
shoreline jurisdiction.
No change needed.
g.
Ecology clarified “default”
provisions for nonconforming
uses and development.
The SMP establishes its
own standards for
nonconforming use and
development in Section
4.4.10, Appendix B, and
ACC 18.54.
Relevant Sections: Section
4.4.10, SMP Appendix B
(ACC 18.54), and definition
for “Nonconforming Use
and Development” (Section
1.2).
Recommended: Update
definitions to define
nonconforming structures,
uses, and lots for
consistency with the
defintions in WAC 173-27-
080(1).
h. Ecology adopted rule
amendments to clarify the
scope and process for
conducting periodic reviews.
The SMP does not include a
discussion of periodic
reviews.
No change needed.
Page 50 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
6
Row Summary of change Review Action
i. Ecology adopted a new rule
creating an optional SMP
amendment process that
allows for a shared local/state
public comment period.
Section 5 of the SMP
establishes amendment
procedure, and includes
reference WAC 173-26.
Relevant Section: SMP
Section 5
No changed needed.
j. Submittal to Ecology of
proposed SMP amendments.
SMP Section 5.1.10
discusses transmittal of
SMP amendments to
Ecology.
Relevant Section: Section
5.1.10
Recommended: Consider
updating language in
Section 5.1.10 to clarify that
SMP amendments take
effect 14 days after Ecology
approval, or directly
reference WAC 173-26-110.
2016
a.
The Legislature created a new
shoreline permit exemption
for retrofitting existing
structures to comply with the
Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Chapter 6, Section 16.08.015
adopts exemptions by
reference to WAC 173-27-
040.
Relevant Section: Chapter
6, Section 16.08.015.
No change needed.
b. Ecology updated wetlands
critical areas guidance
including implementation
guidance for the 2014
wetlands rating system.
Chapter 16 ACC & SMP
Appendix A both reference
the 2004 wetlands rating
system.
Relevant Section: Chapter
16.10.080(C), 16.10.090(E)(1)
ACC & Appendix A
8.1.6(C), 8.1.7(E)(1)
Mandatory: Revise
shoreline critical areas
regulations to reference
2014 wetlands rating
system. This includes
updating the referenced
manual for wetland rating
to the 2014 publication, as
well as updating the scoring
system in accordance with
the 2014 system. See
Page 51 of 215
7
Row Summary of change Review Action
section 3 for further
discussion on integration of
critical areas regulations.
2015
a. The Legislature adopted a 90-
day target for local review of
Washington State Department
of Transportation (WSDOT)
projects.
The SMP does not address
this.
Optional: Consider
amending SMP to define
special procedures for
WSDOT projects per WAC
173-27-125.
2014
a. The Legislature raised the cost
threshold for requiring a
Substantial Development
Permit (SDP) for replacement
docks on lakes and rivers to
$20,000 (from $10,000).
Piers and docks are
prohibited in Auburn’s
SMP for all Shoreline
Environment Designations
(Section 4.5 & 4.6.1),
although the definition of
“Substantial Development”
does reference the $10,000
threshold for exemption.
Chapter 16.08.015 adopts
exemptions by reference to
WAC 173-27-040.
Relevant Sections: Section
4.5, Section 4.6.1, and the
definition for “Substantial
Development” (Section 1.2).
Recommended: Amend
definition of “Substantial
Development” to remove
discussion of exemptions
for docks, as it is not
relevant in Auburn.
b. The Legislature created a new
definition and policy for
floating on-water residences
legally established before
7/1/2014.
SMP Section 4.7.8(1)
prohibits new floating on-
water residences.
Relevant Section: Section
4.7.8(1)
No change needed. There
are no existing FOWRs in
Auburn that were legally
established before 7/1/2014.
Page 52 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
8
Row Summary of change Review Action
2012
a. The Legislature amended the
SMA to clarify SMP appeal
procedures.
Auburn’s SMP does not
outline the SMP appeal
process.
No change needed.
2011
a. Ecology adopted a rule
requiring that wetlands be
delineated in accordance with
the approved federal wetland
delineation manual.
The current SMP CARs and
Chapter 16 ACC reference
the Washington state
wetland delineation
manual, rather than the
approved federal
delineation manual.
Relevant Sections: Chapter
6, Sections 16.10.020,
16.10.090 ACC & Appendix
A 8.1.2, 8.1.7(C)(1)
Mandatory: Amend
language of shoreline
critical areas regulations to
reference the approved
federal wetland delineation
manual. Use Ecology’s
suggested language:
Identification of wetlands and
delineation of their boundaries
shall be done in accordance
with the approved federal
wetland delineation manual
and applicable regional
supplements. See section 3
for further discussion on
integration of critical areas
regulations.
b. Ecology adopted rules for new
commercial geoduck
aquaculture.
Not applicable: Auburn has
no saltwater shorelines.
Not applicable.
c. The Legislature created a new
definition and policy for
floating homes permitted or
legally established prior to
January 1, 2011.
SMP Section 4.7.8(1)
prohibits new floating on-
water residences.
Relevant Section: Section
4.7.8(1)
No change needed. There
are no existing FOWRs in
Auburn that were legally
established before 1/1/2011.
Page 53 of 215
9
Row Summary of change Review Action
d. The Legislature authorized a
new option to classify
existing structures as
conforming.
Section 4.4.10 of the SMP
establishes that existing
structures may be
maintained and repaired
and may be enlarged or
expanded.
Relevant Section: Section
4.4.10 – Regulations (1).
Recommended: Consider
updating language to
clearly identify legally
established existing
residential structures as
conforming. If done,
consider updating
definition of
“Nonconforming Use and
Development” to clarify
that existing residential
structures may be classified
as conforming.
See further discussion
regarding non-conforming
lots and structures in
Section 5 of this report.
2010
a. The Legislature adopted
Growth Management Act –
Shoreline Management Act
clarifications.
The City has already
previously updated its
CAO and the SMP and
therefore addressed the
issue of overlapping critical
area regulations. Shoreline
critical areas are addressed
in Appendix A. The City’s
SMP also includes no net
loss provisions.
However, the SMP does not
indicate the 14-day rule for
Ecology approval.
Recommended Action:
Update SMP to indicate that
it is effective 14 days after
Ecology’s approval letter.
Page 54 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
10
Row Summary of change Review Action
Relevant Sections: SMP
Appendix A.
2009
a.
The Legislature created new
“relief” procedures for
instances in which a shoreline
restoration project within a
UGA creates a shift in
Ordinary High Water Mark.
The SMP does not address
this.
Recommended: Reference
relief procedure for
shoreline restoration project
within a UGA (WAC 173-
27-215) in Section 4.6.7,
Shoreline Habitat and
Natural Systems
Enhancement Projects.
b. Ecology adopted a rule for
certifying wetland mitigation
banks.
The current SMP CARs
allow for off-site mitigation
only when on-site
mitigation is not
scientifically feasible or
practical. Chapter 16 ACC
is more amenable to off-site
mitigation, if it is the
ecologically preferable
alternative, and references
potential use of mitigation
banks or in-lieu fee
mitigation programs. SMP
Appendix A is more limited
in regards to off-site
mitigation options than
Chapter 16 ACC.
Relevant Section: Chapter
16.10.110 ACC & Appendix
A 8.1.9
Recommended: Per City
preference, remove
Appendix A from the SMP
and rely solely on reference
to ACC 16.10 for critical
areas regulations in
shoreline jurisdiction. This
would make the wetland
mitigation bank allowances
in ACC 16.10 applicable in
shoreline jurisdiction. See
section 3 for further
discussion on integration of
critical areas regulations.
Page 55 of 215
11
Row Summary of change Review Action
c. The Legislature added
moratoria authority and
procedures to the SMA.
The SMP does not address
this.
Optional: Consider
addressing moratoria
authority. See below for
Ecology’s suggested code
language.
2007
a.
The Legislature clarified
options for defining
"floodway" as either the area
that has been established in
FEMA maps, or the floodway
criteria set in the SMA.
The SMP definition of
“Floodway” (Section 1.2)
appears to be a combination
of the FEMA mapped
definition of floodway and
the SMA floodway
definition. Both
components are consistent
with the two options
provided by Ecology.
Relevant Section:
Definition of “Floodway”
(Section 1.2)
Optional: Consider
updating definition of
“Floodway” to be wholly
consistent with one of
Ecology’s options for
definition. See below for
Ecology’s suggested
language.
b. Ecology amended rules to
clarify that comprehensively
updated SMPs shall include a
list and map of streams and
lakes that are in shoreline
jurisdiction.
Section 3.5 addresses
jurisdictional waterbodies
and mapping.
No change needed. Update
maps as necessary.
c. Ecology’s rule listing statutory
exemptions from the
requirement for an SDP was
amended to include fish
habitat enhancement projects
that conform to the provisions
of RCW 77.55.181.
Chapter 6, Section 16.08.015
of the SMP references WAC
173-27-040 for exemptions.
Relevant Section: Chapter
6, Section 16.08.015
No change needed.
Page 56 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
12
Example Code Language
2009.c – Moratoria Authorit y
(X) Moratoria authority and requirements
(1) The City has authority to adopting a moratorium control or other interim control on
development under RCW 90.58.590.
(2) Before adopting the moratorium must:
(i) Hold a public hearing on the moratorium or control;
(ii) Adopt detailed findings of fact that include, but are not limited to justifications for
the proposed or adopted actions and explanations of the desired and likely outcomes;
(iii) Notify the department of Ecology of the moratorium or control immediately after its
adoption. The notification must specify the time, place, and date of any public hearing.
(b) The public hearing must be held within sixty days of the adoption of the
moratorium or control.
(3) A moratorium or control adopted under this section may be effective for up to six months if a
detailed work plan for remedying the issues and circumstances necessitating the moratorium or
control is developed and made available for public review.
(4) A moratorium or control may be renewed for one or more six-month period if the City
complies with the requirements in subsection (2) above before each renewal.
2007.a – Options for Defining Floodway
Option 1. If a local government elects to use FEMA maps to define the floodway,
Ecology recommends the SMP include the following definition:
"Floodway" means the area that has been established in effective federal emergency management
agency flood insurance rate maps or floodway maps. The floodway does not include lands that can
reasonably be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or
maintained under license from the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the
state.
Option 2. If the SMA floodway is used, the definition in the SMP should be consistent
with RCW 90.58.030(2)(b)(ii).
Page 57 of 215
13
The SMA floodway “…consists of those portions of a river valley lying streamward from the
outer limits of a watercourse upon which flood waters are carried during periods of flooding that
occur with reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually, said floodway being
identified, under normal condition, by changes in surface soil conditions or changes in types or
quality of vegetative ground cover condition, topography, or other indicators of flooding that
occurs with reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually.”
Page 58 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
14
3. Consistency with Critical Areas Ordinance
The City’s SMP alone provides protection for critical areas within shoreline jurisdiction, and the
current SMP regulates critical areas in shoreline jurisdiction through a blanket reference to ACC
16.10 and the adoption of shoreline critical areas regulations in Appendix A. Elsewhere
throughout the City, critical areas are regulated solely by the City’s Critical Areas Ordinance
(CAO), codified in Chapter 16 ACC in 2005 and last updated in 2010. The critical areas
regulations in Appendix A are a subset of the applicable sections from Chapter 16 ACC that
were in place at the time of SMP adoption in 2009. The minimal time between when both sets of
critical areas regulations were last updated has resulted in little inconsistency between the way
critical areas are regulated inside and outside of shoreline jurisdiction.
The City has decided to remove Appendix A from the SMP and rely solely on a reference to
ACC 16.10 to regulate critical areas in shoreline jurisdiction. This entails updating the reference
in the SMP to cite a specific, dated CAO, as well as clarifying exclusions for sections of the CAO
that are inconsistent with the SMA or out-of-date with respect to current SMA requirements
and shall not apply in shoreline jurisdiction. However, both sets of regulations are currently
outdated in several areas relative to the best available science and current guidance.
Inconsistencies between critical areas regulations in Appendix A of the SMP, Chapter 16 ACC,
and current guidance include wetland rating systems, wetland delineation methods, stream
typing, and wetland buffers.
Table 3 below summarizes issues to be resolved in order to incorporate the City’s CAO into the
updated SMP. The table is organized by critical areas regulations subject area. A more detailed
discussion follows Table 3.
Table 3. Issues to be resolved to integrate the City’s CAO into the updated SMP
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Action
Applicability
1 Incorporating ACC 16.10
(CAO) by Reference
Review:
Section 4.4.4 Critical Areas adopts the
provisions of ACC 16.10 by reference
as shoreline critical areas regulations.
The current reference to ACC 16.10
does not cite a specific, dated Critical
Areas Ordinance, but rather includes
a blanket reference. The SMP also
establishes that “Provisions of the
Critical Areas standards that are not
consistent with the Shoreline
Recommended: In the updated
SMP, reference a specific,
dated Critical Areas Ordinance.
Ensure its clear which sections
of the CAO shall not apply in
shoreline jurisdiction. See
additional discussion below for
examples on effectively
incorporating a CAO into an
SMP.
Page 59 of 215
15
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Action
Management Act Chapter, 90.58
RCW, and supporting Washington
Administrative Code chapters shall
not apply in shoreline jurisdiction.”
The City has expressed an interest in
removing Appendix A from the SMP
and relying solely on reference to ACC
16.10 for shoreline CARs. The
Shoreline CARs in Appendix A do not
include sections from Chapter 16 ACC
on applicability, reasonable use
provisions, variances, and special
exemptions for public agencies and
utilities. In removing Appendix A, the
language in the SMP could more
explicitly define what sections of the
CARs are not applicable in shoreline
jurisdiction.
Current SMP:
Section 4.4.4(page 4-9)
Appendix A
Auburn Municipal Code:
16.10
2 Amendments to the Growth
Management Act and
Shoreline Management Act
clarified that critical areas in
shorelines must be regulated
to “assure no net loss of
shoreline ecological function”
as provided in
Ecology’s SMP Guidelines.
Review:
In the context of critical areas, Section
4.4.3 Environmental Impacts
Mitigation states that “All shoreline
use and development should be
carried out in a manner that avoids
and minimizes adverse impacts so
that the resulting ecological condition
does not become worse than the
current condition. This means
assuring no net loss of ecological
functions and processes and
protecting critical areas designated in
Appendix A, Chapter 16.10 ‘Critical
Areas’ that are located in the
shoreline.” Section 4.4.4. Critical
Areas establishes a policy of no net
loss of wetland area and functions,
but this could be broadened to state
that the critical areas policy is to
Optional: Revise language in
Section 4.4.4 to clarify that
critical areas in shorelines are
regulated to assure no net loss
of “shoreline ecological
functions” rather than
“wetland area and functions.”
Replace policy 3 with the
following language: Preserve,
protect, restore, and/or
mitigate critical areas within
and associated with the City’s
shorelines to achieve no net
loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
Page 60 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
16
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Action
assure no net loss of any shoreline
ecological function.
Current SMP:
Section 4.4.3 (page 4-7) and 4.4.4
(page 4-8)
Wetlands
3 Ecology modified its wetland
buffer guidance in 2014 and
again in 2018.
Review:
The current SMP CARs specify
minimum and maximum wetland
buffers based on wetland category as
determined by the 2004 Ecology
wetland rating system. The resulting
buffer widths identified in the current
SMP are not consistent with recent
Ecology guidance published in 2018.
See discussion and Table 4 below for
additional details.
Current SMP:
Section 4.4.5
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.6(C) &
8.1.7(E)(1)
ACC 16.10.080(C) & 16.10.090(E)(1)
Mandatory: Revise SMP
Appendix A to reference 2014
wetland rating system.
Recommended: Revise wetland
buffer provisions in the SMP
CARs to be consistent with
current Ecology guidance
related to habitat scores and
wetland buffers. Update SMP
Section 4.4.5 to reflect updated
buffer widths.
4 Approved wetland
delineation method.
Review:
The current SMP CARs and Chapter 16
ACC reference the Washington state
wetland delineation manual, rather
than the approved federal delineation
manual.
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.2 & 8.1.7(C)(1)
ACC 16.10.020 & 16.10.090(C)(1)
Mandatory: Update shoreline
critical areas regulations to
reference the approved federal
delineation manual and
applicable regional
supplement.
5 Variation of wetland buffer
widths
Review:
The current SMP CARs include allow
for reduction of wetland buffer
widths up to 35% if the applicant
proposes to enhance a degraded
buffer. However, per Ecology
guidance, the BAS-based buffer
Recommended: To align with
BAS and Ecology guidance,
revise SMP Appendix A, Section
16.10.090(E)(1)(b), to allow
buffer averaging rather than
buffer reduction, and limit that
averaging to 75% of the
Page 61 of 215
17
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Action
widths proposed in this report
assume that the buffer is vegetated
with native plants, and if not, the
buffer should either be planted or
widened to ensure that adequate
buffer function is provided. That is,
the buffer widths proposed in this
report represent the minimum
necessary, per BAS, to protect
wetland functions. As a result,
Ecology guidance recommends buffer
averaging, with up to a 25% reduction
of buffer width and no reduction of
total buffer area, rather than buffer
reduction to provide flexibility and
accommodate site constraints. The
current SMP CARs allow for buffer
averaging including up to a 35%
reduction in buffer width.
Current SMP:
Section 4.4.5
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.7(E)(1)(b)
ACC 16.10.080(E)(1)(b)
standard buffer width. Update
SMP Section 4.4.5 to reflect
updated buffer variation
provisions.
Water Typing and Stream Buffers
6 Updated water typing
system.
Review:
SMP Appendix A and Chapter 16 ACC
both establish a stream classification
system to rate streams from Class I to
Class IV.
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.6(D)
ACC 16.10.080(D)
Recommended: Update SMP
Appendix A to reflect updated
water typing system as defined
in WAC 222-16-030.
Future recommendation:
Update Chapter 16 ACC to
reflect updated water typing
system as defined in WAC 222-
16-030.
7 Stream buffers Review:
The SMP, Appendix A, and Chapter 16
ACC are all consistent with each other
in regards to stream buffer provisions.
The CARs in Appendix A and Chapter
16 ACC establish a buffer width of 100
feet for shorelines of the state, while
the SMP establishes a 100 foot buffer
in the Shoreline Residential and
Recommended: Update stream
buffer provisions in the SMP
and Appendix A for consistency
with current best available
science. A wide range of
stream buffer widths are
recommended by BAS,
depending on the target
functions and buffer condition.
Page 62 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
18
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Action
Urban Conservancy environments,
but a 200 foot buffer in the Natural
environment. However, SMP
Appendix A, Section establishes that
either the SMP buffer or the CAR
buffer, whichever is larger, shall
apply, eliminating potential
inconsistencies between the two
provisions. While stream buffer
provisions are consistent across these
documents, they are outdated in
regards to the best available science.
Current buffer provisions can be
found in Table 7 below, alongside a
range of sample buffer widths based
on BAS and provisions from other
jurisdictions.
Current SMP:
Section 4.4.2 & 4.4.5
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.7(E)(2)
ACC 16.10.090(E)(2)
A range of buffer widths based
on BAS and the provisions in
place in other jurisdictions is
shown in Table 7.
Future recommendation:
Update stream buffer
provisions in Chapter 16 ACC
for consistency with current
best available science.
8 Variation of stream buffer
widths
Review:
The current SMP CARs include allow
for reduction of wetland buffer
widths up to 35% if the applicant
proposes to enhance a degraded
buffer. Based on the functions that
different widths of buffers provide,
fish bearing streams should remain as
close to 100 feet as possible.
Reductions of up to 25% are likely to
provide adequate protection for most
small stream channels.
Current SMP:
Section 4.4.5
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.7(E)(2)(e)
ACC 16.10.080(E)(2)(e)
Recommended: To align with
BAS and Ecology guidance,
revise SMP Appendix A, Section
16.10.090(E)(2)(e), to allow
buffer averaging limited to a
25% reduction of the standard
buffer width, in conjunction
with adoption of updated
stream buffer widths per the
recommendations in this
report. Update SMP Section
4.4.5 to reflect updated buffer
variation provisions.
Page 63 of 215
19
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Action
Flood Hazard Areas
9 Reference to Chapter 15 ACC
on Flood Hazard Areas
Review:
SMP Appendix A 8.1.1(B)(6)
references the “Draft Mill Creek Flood
Control Plan” while Chapter 16 ACC
references Chapter 15 ACC for
policies related to Flood Hazard
Areas.
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.1(B)(6)
ACC 16.10.010(B)(6)
Recommended: Remove
Appendix A from the SMP and
adopt ACC 16.10 by reference.
See discussion below for
additional information.
Definitions
10
Updates to definitions in
Critical Areas Regulations.
Review:
The definitions in both Chapter 16
ACC and SMP Appendix A have out-of-
date definitions, or are lacking
definitions, for the following terms:
Wetland
Geologic Hazard Areas/Geologically
Hazardous Areas
Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation
Areas
Delineation Manual
Current SMP CARs (SMP Appendix A
& Chapter 16.10 ACC):
SMP Appendix A 8.1.2
ACC 16.10.020
Recommended: Revise the
definition for “Delineation
Manual” to reference the
approved federal delineation
manual. Revise the definitions
for “Wetland”, “Geologic
Hazard Areas”, and “Fish and
Wildlife Habitat Conservation
Areas” for consistency with
definitions in RCW 36.70A.030.
1 This column attempts to capture the primary relevant location(s) of content related to the item described in
the Summary of Change column; however, due to length of the SMP, all relevant locations may not be listed.
2 Locations in italics indicate that the location does not actually address the specific content described in the
Summary of Change column; these locations are listed to indicate where generally related content is found.
Adopting the City ’s C ritical Areas Ordinance (ACC 16.10 ) by Reference
The current SMP both references ACC 16.10 for Critical Areas Regulations and includes
portions of ACC 16.10 as Appendix A in the SMP. The City has expressed an interest in
removing Appendix A from the SMP and relying solely on reference to ACC 16.10 to regulate
critical areas within shoreline jurisdiction. However, CAOs typically include regulations that
are inconsistent with the Shoreline Management Act, including reasonable use exceptions,
Page 64 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
20
administrative exemptions, and waivers. Other administrative provisions which are authorized
by the Growth Management Act, including appeals, permits, penalties, and enforcement, are
also not applicable in shoreline jurisdiction. As a result, the City does not have the option of
referencing its entire CAO in the SMP.
In order for the City to adopt ACC 16.10 by reference in the SMP, the reference must be to a
specific, dated version of the CAO and must exclude sections of the CAO that do not apply in
shoreline jurisdiction. The SMP currently includes a blanket reference to ACC 16.10 and does
not cite a specific, dated CAO. Additionally, the current SMP includes general exclusionary
statements in regards to ACC 16.10. The City may wish to more explicitly cite exclusions from
the referenced CAO to improve clarity and usability in shoreline jurisdiction.
Below are examples of how other the City of Marysville, Whatcom County, and the City of
Redmond have effectively incorporated a CAO into their SMPs.
City of Marysville
The Marysville Critical Areas Regulations, as codified in Chapter 19.24 MMC (dated May 2nd,
2005, Ordinance #2571), are herein incorporated into this master program, except as noted
below.
Exceptions to the applicability of Marysville Critical Areas Regulations in Shoreline Jurisdiction
in the instances specified below.
1. If provisions of the Critical Areas Regulations and other parts of the master program conflict,
the provisions most protective of the ecological resource shall apply, as determined by the City.
2. Provisions of the Critical Areas Regulations that are not consistent with the Shoreline
Management Act Chapter, 90.85 RCW, and supporting Washington Administrative Code
chapters shall not apply in Shoreline jurisdiction.
3. The provisions of Marysville Critical Areas Regulations do not extend Shoreline Jurisdiction
beyond the limits specified in this SMP. For regulations addressing critical area buffer areas that
are outside Shoreline Jurisdiction, see Marysville Critical Areas Regulations.
4. Provisions of Marysville Critical Area Regulations that include a “reasonable use
determination” shall not apply within Shoreline Jurisdiction. Specifically,
• The sentence in MMC 19.24.020 referring to reasonable use determination does not
apply.
Page 65 of 215
21
• MMC Section 19.24.420 does not apply.
5. Provisions of Marysville Critical Areas Regulations relating to variance procedures and
criteria do not apply in Shoreline Jurisdiction. Within Shoreline Jurisdiction, the purpose of a
variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional or
performance standards set forth in the applicable master program where there are extraordinary
circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict
implementation of the master program will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or
thwart the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020. Specifically,
• MMC section 19.24.320(2) shall not apply.
Variance procedures and criteria shall be established in this SMP, Chapter 8 Section B and in
Washington Administrative Code WAC 173-27-170.4. Environmental Impacts.
6. Criteria (b) and (c) describing exceptions for approved plats and legally created lots in MMC
section 19.24.330(7) shall not apply, except where adjacent to the QWULOOLT Restoration
Project.
Whatcom County
A. The Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance, WCC 16.16 (Ordinance No. 2005- 00068,
dated Sept 30, 2005, and as amended on February 27, 2007) is hereby adopted in whole as a part
of this Program, except that the permit, non-conforming use, appeal and enforcement provisions
of the Critical Areas Ordinance (WCC 16.16.270-285) shall not apply within shoreline
jurisdiction. All references to the Critical Area Ordinance WCC 16.16 (CAO) are for this specific
version
City of Redmond
(1) Shoreline Master Program Regulations. The following regulations shall constitute the
Redmond Shoreline Master Program development regulations
(a) RCDG 20D.150, Shoreline Regulations
(b) RCDG 20D.140, Critical Areas (Ord. 2259, dated May 28, 2005), with the exception
of the following subsections:
(i) 20D.140.10-030, Exemptions
(ii) 20D.140.10-060, Permit Process and Application Requirements
(iii) 20D.140.10-170, Buffer Width Variances
(iv) 20D.140.10-190, Reasonable Use Provision
(v) 20D.140.10-200, Public Project Reasonable Use Provision
(vi) 20D.140.20-020(6), (7), Stream Buffer Width Averaging
Page 66 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
22
(vii) 20D.140.20-020(8), Clearing and Grading in Outer Buffer
(viii) 20D.140.20-020(10), Expansion of Nonconformity in Stream Buffer
(ix) 20D.140.20-030, Alteration of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
(x) 20D.140.60-030, Alteration of Geologically Hazardous Areas – Generally
(xi) 20D.140.60-040, Alteration of Geologically Hazardous Areas
(xii) 20D.140.70, Procedures
(2) In the event of any conflict between these regulations and any other regulations of the City,
the regulations that provide greater protection of the shoreline natural environment and aquatic
habitat shall prevail.
In order to adopt ACC 16.10 by reference, the City will also need to ensure that required
updates shoreline crticial areas regulations, in particular adopting the 2014 wetlands rating
system and the approved federal wetland delineation manual, are applied to the updated SMP.
This would be most simply and efficiently accomplished by excluding those out-of-date sections
of the CAO in the SMP, and then including updated regulations to apply only in shoreline
jurisdiction within the body of the SMP itself.
Wetlands
SMP Appendix A and Chapter 16.10 ACC both refer to the “Washington State Wetlands Rating
System for Western Washington, (Washington State Department of Ecology, August 2004,
Publication #04-06-025).” Ecology updated this rating system in June of 2014. The current BAS-
based wetland rating system is the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington (Hruby 2014, Ecology publication No. 14-06-029). Using reference wetlands, Ecology
calibrated the updated 2014 wetland rating system to maintain roughly the same distribution of
wetland categories that were present under the prior 2004 rating system. A comparison sample
of the distribution of wetland categories under the old and new rating systems is provided in
Table 4 below (Hruby 2014).
Table 4. Number of sampled wetlands in each category based on their score for functions.
Category 2004 Rating System 2014 Rating System
I 13 11
II 52 44
III 39 49
Page 67 of 215
23
IV 7 7
The substantive changes to the wetland rating system are: 1) a High, Medium, or Low ranking
for each function instead of numeric scores; and 2) the opportunity section was replaced with
two new sections: landscape potential and value. The shift to a High, Medium, Low ranking
scheme was prompted by a statistical analysis of wetland rating data, which indicated that the
rapid-assessment wetland rating tool is not scientifically accurate beyond a qualitative ranking.
As a result of this change, the total point range changed from 0-100 to 9-27 (Hruby 2014), with
nine possible points each for water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions.
In July 2018, Ecology again updated its guidance for wetland buffers. The change in guidance is
the result of Ecology’s continued evaluation of the 2014 wetland rating system as it relates to the
2004 wetland rating system. The wetland buffers referenced in the SMP and in Chapter 16 ACC
are consistent with each other, but both are outdated related to the best available science and
Ecology’s most recent guidance.
The updated guidance provides alternatives to buffer tables based solely on wetland category to
provide a balance of predictability and flexibility while being easy to use and protecting
wetland functions and values. The preferred alternative includes variable buffer widths based
on wetland category and habitat score, according to the updated rating system, as shown in
Table 5 below. While the updated guidance does allow for continuing the practice of applying
wetland buffers based solely on wetland category, this option provides the least flexibility, as
buffers must be large enough for each category to protect the most sensitive wetlands from the
most damaging impacts. Likewise, the updated guidance includes alternatives for variable
buffer widths based on the intensity of adjacent land use, although this is not widely
recommended for cities as most urban land uses are likely to be moderate or high intensity.
Under the preferred alternative of variable buffer widths based on wetland category and habitat
score, projects that can mitigate the impacts and disturbances associated with surrounding land
use may be eligible for reductions in required buffer widths. Table 6 lists impact-minimization
measures which, when implemented in combination with a wildlife corridor to adjacent priority
habitats where applicable, allow an applicant to reduce the standard buffer widths by up to 25
percent (Ecology 2016). The resulting standard buffer widths range according to habitat score
from 75 to 225 feet for Category I and II wetlands and from 60 to 225 feet for Category III
wetlands, and are 40 feet for Category IV wetlands.
To align the SMP guidance with the updated guidance, we recommend updating the Shoreline
Critical Areas Regulations to reference the 2014 wetland rating system and to follow Ecology’s
new guidance for wetland buffer widths. There are several discrepancies between the buffer
widths currently in SMP Appendix A and the updated guidance. This comparison is shown in
Page 68 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
24
Table 5 below. The City should also consider updating Chapter 16 ACC at the next CAO update
to avoid buffers being applied inconsistently throughout Auburn based on project location.
Table 5 shows the different buffer widths under SMP Appendix A, Chapter 16 ACC, and
Ecology’s most recent guidance.
Table 5. Wetland buffer widths (in feet) under Chapter 16 ACC/SMP Appendix A and Ecology’s most
recent guidance
Table 6. Wetland buffer impact minimization measures, per Ecology’s most recent guidance
High Moderate Low High Moderate Low
1 100 200 300 150 100 225 110 75
2 50 100 300 150 100 225 110 75
3 25 50 300 150 80 225 110 60
4 25 30 50 40
Without minimization measures With minimization measures
Category Min Max
Chapter 16 ACC & SMP Appendix A
Habitat Score Habitat Score
Proposed Per 2018 Ecology Guidance
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights *Direct lights aways from wetland
*Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland
*If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source
*For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy
industry or mining, establish an additional 10' heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the
outer wetland buffer*Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered
*Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 ft of wetland
*Apply integrated pest management
*Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development
*Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer
*Use Low Intensity Development techniques (for more information refer to the drainage ordinance and
manual)Change in
water regime
*Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
*Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance
using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion
*Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement
Dust *Use best management practices to control dust
Stormwater
runoff
Noise
Toxic runoff
Pets and
human
disturbance
Page 69 of 215
25
Streams
SMP Appendix A and Chapter 16 ACC both establish a water typing system that classifies
stream from Class I to Class 4. This classification system and criteria are inconsistent with
current BAS, and we recommend that the City adopt the Washington State Department of
Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practices water typing system, as established in WAC 222-
16-030. The WDNR system is widely accepted across most jurisdictions in Washington.
A wide range of stream buffer widths are recommended by BAS, depending on the target
functions and buffer conditions. Buffer continuity and vegetative quality are important factors
in determining buffer widths. Current stream buffer requirements under SMP Appendix A and
Chapter 16 ACC are consistently below the ranges recommended by BAS. Based on the
functions that different widths of buffers provide, fish bearing stream buffers should be a
minimum of 100 feet, although buffer averaging may be allowed to reduce these buffers to as
low as 75 feet.
Table 7 below provides a comparison of current water typing and buffer widths alongside the
proposed WDNR water typing system and a summary of buffer width ranges derived from
BAS and other local jurisdictions.
Table 7. Stream buffer provisions under Chapter 16 ACC/SMP Appendix A, SMP, and BAS,
including an updated water typing system
1 (Shorelines)100*Type S 115-165
2 (Fish bearing)75 Type F 100-165
3 (Non-fish bearing)25 Type Np 50-65
4 (Swales and small channels)25 Type Ns 50-65
*Buffers are 200 feet under the Natural Shoreline Environment Designation
Chapter 16 ACC & SMP Appendix A
Stream Class Buffer
Width Stream Type Buffer
Width
Sample Buffer Ranges and Updated Water
Typing
Page 70 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
26
4. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan and Other
Development Regulations.
Table 4 summarizes recommended revisions to the Auburn SMP, Auburn Municipal Code, and
the Auburn Comprehensive Plan based on a review of consistency between the three
documents. The Auburn Comprehensive Plan does not contain a specific Shoreline Element and
does not establish policies related to shorelines. There are very few references to shorelines or
the SMP, with the only references of note occurring in Appendix H, the Auburn Community
Vision document. The lack of reference to shoreline policies, the SMP, and critical areas policies
in the Comprehensive Plan results in very little opportunity for inconsistency between the
documents, and no changes to the SMP are recommended to ensure consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan at this time.
Important sections of the Auburn Municipal Code, particularly those pertaining to Land
Clearing, Filling, and Grading, and Environmental Review, directly reference shoreline
management jurisdiction or adopt provisions of the SMP by reference, which is a useful
measure to strengthen application of the SMP and improve clarity in regards to the applicability
of shoreline regulations. Title 18 of ACC, the Auburn Zoning Code, may be a section that could
benefit from a direct reference to the SMP. While the SMP clearly states that in the case of any
discrepancies between the City’s zoning code and the SMP, the provisions of the SMP and SMA
shall prevail, there is no such language in Title 18 of the ACC.
Table 8. Summary of recommended SMP, ACC, and Comprehensive Plan revisions to improve
consistency.
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Recommended Action
1 Consistency between Auburn
Zoning Code and the SMP
Section 4.7.8 of the SMP states that
“In the case of discrepancy between
the requirements of this Master
Program and the City’s Zoning Code,
or other regulations, consistency with
the SMP, the SMA, and its provisions
shall prevail.” Title 18 of the ACC does
not contain similar language. In the
north end of the City, along the Green
River, there are some instances of
land zoned R-1, R-5, and R-7 lying
within the Urban Conservancy
shoreline jurisdiction, rather than the
Shoreline Residential shoreline
jurisdiction.
Consider incorporating
reference to the SMP or the
SMA into Title 18 during the
next CAO update to further
clarify the applicability of SMP
regulations in cases of
inconsistency between the
SMP and the City’s zoning
code.
Additional discussion and
collaboration with City of
Auburn staff is necessary to
identify options for addressing
issues of residential zoning in
the Urban Conservancy
shoreline jurisdiction. This can
Page 71 of 215
27
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s)1, 2 Recommended Action
Current SMP
Section 4.7.8
Auburn Municipal Code
Title 18
include possible text
amendments to avoid a
complete re-designation
process.
1 This column attempts to capture the primary relevant location(s) of content related to the item described in
the Summary of Change column; however, due to length of the SMP, all relevant locations may not be listed.
2 Locations in italics indicate that the location does not actually address the specific content described in the
Summary of Change column; these locations are listed to indicate where generally related content is found.
Page 72 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
28
5. Staff Recommendations & Other Issues for
Conside ration
City of Auburn Planning staff have also proposed modifications to the SMP, Appendix A, and
Chapter 16 ACC. The proposed changes, rationale, and input from The Watershed Company
are included in Table 5.
Table 9. Staff recommended changes to SMP
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s) Action
1 Fences in the Floodway in
Shoreline Jurisdiction
Review:
City planning staff expressed
interest in addressing the issue of
fencing proposals within the
floodway. The current SMP
establishes that no fence shall
extend waterward of the OHWM
and that fences waterward of
houses shall be limited to four feet
in height or less, but does not
address issues of fence building
within the floodway.
Current SMP:
Section 4.7.8(10)
Recommended: Consider updating
language such that newly
proposed fences shall be
prohibited in the floodway.
Additionally, for instances where
floodway boundaries change,
legally permitted fence structures
can be maintained and repaired in
place, while replacement fences
should be required to conform to
the provisions of the SMP and be
relocated outside of the floodway.
2 Nonconforming provisions of
the SMP
Review:
City planning staff have identified
nonconforming residential lots,
including 8 vacant lots, which are
currently very difficult to build
upon based on the current
nonconforming provisions of the
SMP. The SMP does currently
allow for some expansion of
single-family residential structures
and appurtenances, but
nonconforming undeveloped lots
may only be developed if they
conform to current SMP
provisions. No provisions for
‘breaking’ the shoreline buffer at a
road or levee exist in the SMP. As
discussed in the legislative
amendments in Section 2 above,
there is an option to legally classify
Additional coordination with City
of Auburn staff and Ecology is
required to further develop
recommendations for easing the
burden of the nonconforming
provisions of the SMP on the
parcels in question. See the
Technical Memo regarding
Potential Amendments to
Nonconforming Lot and Structure
Provisions (January 2019) for
additional information.
Page 73 of 215
29
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s) Action
existing residential structures as
conforming.
Current SMP
Section 4.4.10
Auburn Municipal Code
ACC 18.54
Outdated References Review:
City staff have noted several
outdated references throughtout
the SMP document. These include
references to the following:
ACC 18.50.030
RCW 43.51
RCW 15.57
WAC 232-12-297
RCW 75.20
Current SMP:
1.2 (Definitions)
4.4.2
4.4.8
4.4.9
Recommended: Update references
as shown below:
ACC 18.50.030: Update to
reference ACC 18.50.045
RCW 43.51: Remove reference
RCW 15.57: Update to
reference RCW 15.58
WAC 232-12-297: Update to
reference WAC 173-26-
221(2)(iv)
RCW 75.20: Update to
reference RCW 77.55
Removal of Chapter 6 –
Shoreline Management
Administrative and
Permitting Procedures
Review:
City staff have expressed an
interest in removing the text from
Chapter 6, and relying solely on a
reference to ACC 16.08 for
Shoreline Management
Administrative and Permitting
Procedures.
Current SMP:
Chapter 6
Auburn Municipal Code:
16.08
Recommended: Per City
preference, remove text from
Chapter 6 and include only a
reference to ACC 16.08 for
Shoreline Management
Administrative Permitting
Procedures.
Removal of Appendix B – ACC
18.54 Nonconforming
Structures, Land, and Use
Review:
The SMP both references ACC
18.54 for regulations related to
nonconforming structures, land,
and use, and contains the text of
ACC 18.54 in Appendix B. The SMP
also contains some shoreline
Recommended: Per City
preference, remove Appendix B
and rely only on Section 4.4.10
and reference to ACC 18.54 for
policies and regulations related to
nonconforming structures, land,
and use in shoreline jurisdiction.
Page 74 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
30
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s) Action
specific policies and regulations
related to nonconformity in
Section 4.4.10. The City has
expressed an interest in removing
Appendix B from the SMP and
relying solely on a reference to
ACC 18.54 and the provisions in
Section 4.4.10 to provide policies
and regulations related to
nonconforming structures, land,
and use in shoreline jurisdiction.
Current SMP:
4.4.10
Appendix B
Removal of Appendix C –
Geologic Hazard Report
Submittal Requirements
Review:
The current SMP includes Geologic
Hazard Report Submittals
Requirements as Appendix C. City
have expressed an interest in
removing this as an Appendix and
instead referencing the
appropriate sections of the Public
Works Engineering Design
Standards to satisfy submittal
requirements.
Current SMP:
4.4.4
Appendix C
Recommended: Per City
preference, remove Appendix C
from the SMP. Modify language in
Section 4.4.4 to reference the
Public Works Engineering Design
Standards rather than Appendix C.
Removal of Appendix D –
Permit Data Sheet
Review:
The SMP currently includes a
Permit Data Sheet as Appendix D.
ACC 16.08 also references the
Shoreline Management Act –
Permit Data Sheet and Transmittal
Letter in WAC 173-27-990. City
staff have expressed an interest in
removing the Permit Data Sheet
from Appendix D and relying solely
on the reference to the WAC.
Current SMP:
Appendix D
Recommended: Per City
preference, remove Appendix D
from the SMP.
Page 75 of 215
31
# Issue Review & Relevant Location(s) Action
Auburn Municipal Code:
16.08.040(B)
Page 76 of 215
The Watershed Company
Revised April 2019
City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program Gap Analysis
32
Re fe r e n c e s
Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014
Update. Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029. Washington State Department of Ecology,
Olympia, WA.
Washington Administrative Code. 2018. Washington State Legislature. Available online:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx.
Page 77 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Notice: The Auburn City Council adopted the updated Auburn Shoreline Master Program (SMP) on June
2, 2008, Ordinance number 6095. The SMP update was completed with the assistance of SMA Grant No.
G060103. In accordance with RCW 90.58, the State Shoreline Management Act, the City Council
adopted SMP must be forwarded to the Washington State Department of Ecology for final review and
approval prior to becoming effective. The 1974 City of Auburn Shoreline Management Master Program
remains in effect until such time that Department of Ecology approval of the Auburn SMP update is
issued.
Page 78 of 215
Page 79 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
i Draft August 5, 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................... P-1
CHAPTER 1.0 DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Interpretation. ........................................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Definitions. ............................................................................................................. 1-1
CHAPTER 2.0 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM ELEMENTS: ....................................................... 2-1
2.1 Economic Development Element ............................................................................. 2-1
2.1.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Public Access Element ............................................................................................. 2-1
2.2.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Circulation Element ................................................................................................. 2-1
2.3.1 Goal: ................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.4 Recreation Element ................................................................................................. 2-1
2.4.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.5 Shoreline Use Element ............................................................................................ 2-2
2.5.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.6 Conservation Element ............................................................................................. 2-2
2.6.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.7 Historical/Cultural Element ..................................................................................... 2-3
2.7.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-3
2.8 Flood Prevention/Critical Areas Element: ................................................................ 2-3
2.8.1 Goals: ............................................................................................................................... 2-3
CHAPTER 3.0 SHORELINE ENVIRONMENTS ............................................................................. 3-1
3.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Shoreline Residential .............................................................................................. 3-1
3.2.1 Purpose: ........................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.2 Designation Criteria: ........................................................................................................ 3-1
3.2.3 Management Policies: ..................................................................................................... 3-2
3.3 Urban Conservancy ................................................................................................. 3-2
3.3.1 Purpose: ........................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.3.2 Designation Criteria: ........................................................................................................ 3-2
3.3.3 Management Policies: ..................................................................................................... 3-2
3.4 Natural ................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.4.1 Purpose: ........................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.4.2 Designation Criteria: ........................................................................................................ 3-3
3.4.3 Management Policies: ..................................................................................................... 3-3
3.5 Shoreline environment descriptions, map, and boundaries. ..................................... 3-4
CHAPTER 4.0 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM POLICIES, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND USE
REGULATIONS ................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Scope. .................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Applicability. ........................................................................................................... 4-1
Page 80 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 ii
4.3 Interpretation. ........................................................................................................ 4-2
4.3.1 Adoption of additional regulations. ................................................................................. 4-3
4.4 General Policies and Regulations ............................................................................. 4-3
4.4.1 Conservation and Restoration ......................................................................................... 4-3
4.4.2 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation ................................................................................. 4-4
4.4.3 Environmental Impact Mitigation .................................................................................... 4-7
4.4.4 Critical Areas .................................................................................................................... 4-8
4.4.5 Critical Area Regulations Table ...................................................................................... 4-10
4.4.6 Public Access (including views) ...................................................................................... 4-16
4.4.7 Flood Hazard Reduction ................................................................................................. 4-17
4.4.8 Water Quality, Storm water and Non-Point Pollution ................................................... 4-18
4.4.9 Educational and Archeological Areas and Historic Sites ................................................ 4-19
4.4.10 Nonconforming Use and Development Standards ........................................................ 4-21
4.5 Permitted Use Table ............................................................................................. 4-24
4.6 Shoreline Modification .......................................................................................... 4-31
4.6.1 Prohibited Modifications ............................................................................................... 4-31
4.6.2 Dredging and Dredge Material Disposal ........................................................................ 4-31
4.6.3 Piers and Docks .............................................................................................................. 4-32
4.6.4 Shoreline Stabilization (bulkheads and revetments) ..................................................... 4-32
4.6.5 Clearing and Grading ..................................................................................................... 4-34
4.6.6 Fill ................................................................................................................................... 4-35
4.6.7 Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects .................................... 4-36
4.7 Shoreline Uses ...................................................................................................... 4-36
4.7.1 Prohibited Uses .............................................................................................................. 4-36
4.7.2 Agriculture ..................................................................................................................... 4-37
4.7.3 Aquaculture ................................................................................................................... 4-38
4.7.4 Boating Facilities ............................................................................................................ 4-39
4.7.5 In-Stream Structural Uses .............................................................................................. 4-39
4.7.6 Mining ............................................................................................................................ 4-40
4.7.7 Recreation ...................................................................................................................... 4-40
4.7.8 Residential Development ............................................................................................... 4-42
4.7.9 Signs ............................................................................................................................... 4-44
4.7.10 Transportation ............................................................................................................... 4-45
4.7.11 Utilities ........................................................................................................................... 4-47
CHAPTER 5.0 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AMENDMENTS ................................................. 5-1
5.1.1 Purpose. ........................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.2 Amendments authorized. ................................................................................................ 5-1
5.1.3 Adoption required by the council. ................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.4 Initiation of amendments. ............................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.5 Applications required. ...................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.6 Public hearing required by planning commissionPlanning Commission. ........................ 5-1
5.1.7 Burden of proof. .............................................................................................................. 5-1
5.1.8 Public notice. .................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.1.9 City council. ...................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.1.10 Transmittal to the Department of Ecology. ..................................................................... 5-2
CHAPTER 6.0 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE AND PERMITTING PROCEDURES .. 6-1
Page 81 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
iii Draft August 5, 2019
16.08.010 Chapter purpose and intent............................................................................................. 6-1
16.08.015 Adoption of shoreline management procedures. ........................................................... 6-2
16.08.020 Definitions. ....................................................................................................................... 6-2
16.08.030 Administration and enforcement. ................................................................................... 6-2
16.08.040 Application – Generally. ................................................................................................... 6-3
16.08.050 Application – Notices. ...................................................................................................... 6-4
16.08.052 Statement of Exemption. ................................................................................................. 6-4
16.08.054 Application – Shoreline sSubstantial dDevelopment pPermit – Review criteria. ............ 6-5
16.08.056 Application – Shoreline cConditional uUse pPermit – Review criteria. .......................... 6-5
16.08.058 Application – Shoreline vVariance – Review criteria. ...................................................... 6-5
16.08.060 Application – Review criteria – Additional information. ................................................. 6-6
16.08.070 Development conformance burden of proof. ................................................................. 6-7
16.08.080 Application – Hearing – Required. ................................................................................... 6-7
16.08.090 Application – Hearing – Official conducting. ................................................................... 6-7
16.08.100 Application – Hearing – Continuance. ............................................................................. 6-7
16.08.110 Application – Hearing – Decision. .................................................................................... 6-7
16.08.120 Application – Hearing – Rules of conduct. ....................................................................... 6-7
16.08.130 Application – Decision final.............................................................................................. 6-7
16.08.140 Grant or denial decision – Notifications. ......................................................................... 6-8
16.08.150 Development commencement time. ............................................................................... 6-8
16.08.160 Termination or review and extension for nondevelopment. .......................................... 6-8
16.08.170 Conditions or restrictions authorized. ............................................................................. 6-8
16.08.180 Issuance limitations. ........................................................................................................ 6-8
16.08.190 Decision appeals. ............................................................................................................. 6-9
16.08.200 Rescission or modification. .............................................................................................. 6-9
16.08.210 Violation – Penalty. .......................................................................................................... 6-9
16.08.220 Administration rules promulgation. ................................................................................ 6-9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Common-Line Setback . ................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Critical Area Regulations ........................................................................................................... 4-11
Table 21. Permitted Use .......................................................................................................................... 4-26
EXHIBIT A
Shoreline Environment Designation Maps
1. Overview Map (cityCity-wide)
2. Green River 1
3. Green River 2
4. Green River 3
5. Green River 4
Page 82 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 iv
6. White River 1
7. White River 2
8. White River 3
9. White River 4
10. White River 5
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A. Critical Area Provisions in Shoreline Jurisdiction (Applicable Sections of ACC Chapter )
Appendix B. ACC Chapter Nonconforming Structures, Land and Uses
Appendix C. Geologic Hazard Report Submittal Requirements
Appendix D. Permit Data Sheet
Page 83 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
P-1 Draft August 5, 2019
Preface
Washington’s Shoreline Management Act (SMA) was passed by the State Legislature in 1971 and
adopted by the public in a referendum. The SMA was created in response to a growing concern among
residents of the state that serious and permanent damage was being done to shorelines by unplanned
and uncoordinated development. The goal of the SMA was “to prevent the inherent harm in an
uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state’s shorelines.” While protecting shoreline
resources by regulating development, the SMA is also intended to provide for appropriate shoreline use
by encouraging land uses that enhance and conserve shoreline functions and values.
The SMA has three broad policies:
1. Encourage water-dependent and water-oriented uses: "…uses shall be preferred which are
consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment, or
are unique to or dependent upon use of the states' shorelines....”
2. Promote public access: “…the public’s opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities
of natural sShorelines of the sState shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible consistent
with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally."
3. Protect shoreline natural resources, including "...the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the
water of the state and their aquatic life...."
Under the SMA, the shoreline jurisdiction includes areas that are 200 feet landward of the ordinary high
water mark (OHWM) of waters that have been designated as “sShorelines of sStatewide sSignificance”
or “sShorelines of the sState” and their adjacent shorelands, defined as the upland area within 200 feet
of the OHWM, as well as any associated wetlands (RCW 90.58.030). Two waterbodies in Auburn, the
Green River and White River, are regulated under the SMA and the City’s Shoreline Master Program
(SMP). The Green and White Rivers are both designated as “sShorelines of sStatewide sSignificance.”
The primary responsibility for administering the SMA is assigned to local governments through the
mechanism of local shoreline master programs, adopted under guidelines established by Ecology. The
guidelines (WAC 173-26) establish goals and policies that provide a framework for development
standards and use regulations in the shoreline. The SMP is based on state guidelines but tailored to the
specific conditions and needs of individual communities. The SMP is also meant to be a comprehensive
vision of how the shoreline area will be managed over time.
The City of Auburn adopted its first Shoreline Management Master Program on January 21, 1974. The
SMP provides both policies and regulations to govern development and other activities in the City’s
shorelines. The City’s municipal cCode also regulates shoreline development by requiring shoreline
substantial development permits. Chapter 16.08 of the city codeCity Code provides guidelines for
issuance of shoreline permits that implement the sState SMA.
In 2003, the sState lLegislature established funding, timelines, and guidelines requiring all cities and
counties to update their SMP. The City of Auburn has conducted a comprehensive SMP update with the
assistance of a grant administered by the Washington State Department of Ecology (SMA Grant No.
G0600103). The update hwas been prepared consistent with the SMA and its implementing guidelines.
The City’s SMP provides goals, policies, development regulations, and permitting procedures for
“sShorelines of the sState” in the cityCity of Auburn.
Page 84 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 P-2
Consistent with state guidelines (WAC 173-26-201, Comprehensive Process to Prepare or Amend
Shoreline Master Programs) athe first step in the comprehensive Master Program update process iwas
development of a shoreline inventory and characterization. The inventory and characterization
documentsed current shoreline conditions and providesd a basis for updating the City’s Master Program
goals, policies, and regulations. The characterization identifiesd existing conditions, evaluatesd existing
functions and values of shoreline resources, and exploresd opportunities for conservation and
restoration of ecological functions.
State guidelines also required that local governments develop Master Program policies that promote
“restoration” of damaged shoreline ecological functions and develop a “real and meaningful” strategy to
implement restoration objectives. Planning for shoreline restoration includes identifying opportunities
(both programmatic and site-specific), establishing goals and policies, working cooperatively with other
regional entities, and supporting restoration through other regulatory and non-regulatory programs.
During the development of the SMP update, which was adopted by the City Council on April 20, 2009
(Ordinance No. 6235), the City worked with a Citizen’s Advisory Committee for several months. Special
thanks gowent out to Committee members Don Payne, Terry Bonini, Planning Commissioner Judy
Roland, Mark Hancock, Ex-Councilmember Fred Poe, Sandra Lange, and Julie Herren.
RCW 90.58.080 and WAC 173-26-090 require the City to do a periodic update of the SMP every eight
years with the first update due in 2019 and then every eight years thereafter. The update directs the
City to review, and, if necessary, revise the SMP based on changes in local circumstances, new
information or improved data.
The City received a grant administered by the Washington State Department of Ecology (SMA Grant No.
SEASMP-1719-ACDPWD-00027) for up to $25,000 to assist with this update. The City used those funds
to hire The Watershed Company to assist with this update. City Staff worked with the Planning
Commission beginning in July of 2018 until a recommendation was made to the City Council on xxx, xx,
2019. The City Council adopted the SMP on xxx, xx, 2019 (Ordinance No. xxxx) and final approval from
the Department of Ecology was received on xxx, xx, 2019.
A special thanks goes out to those who helped and participated in the 2019 periodic update of the SMP:
Mayor: Nancy Backus
City Council: Largo Wales Planning Commission: Judy Roland
Claude DaCorsi Joan Mason
Bill Peloza Roger Lee
Yolanda Trout-Manuel Dimitri Moutzouris
John Holman Phillip Stephens
Larry Brown Sunil Khanal
Bob Baggett Daniel Shin
City Staff: Jeff Tate, Director of Community Development
Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager
Thaniel Gouk, Senior Planner
Dustin Lawrence, Senior Planner
Alexandria Teague, Planner II
Consultant: The Watershed Company
Page 85 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-1 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
CHAPTER 1.0 Definitions
1.1 Interpretation.
Unless the context in which a word is used clearly implies to the contrary, the following definitions shall
apply to the City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program. Footnote numbers for each definition refer to
the source of the definition according to the following key: 1. Washington Administrative Code (WAC -
sections applicable to the Shoreline Management Act); 2. Revised Code of Washington (RCW , Shoreline
Management Act); 3. Auburn City Code (definition appears elsewhere in ACC); 4. Auburn’s 1973 SMP;
and 5. Definition included as part of 2006-2009 SMP Update.
1.2 Definitions.
“Accessory Structure5” means a structure, either attached or detached, from a principal or main building
and located on the same lot and which is customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal building
or use.
“Agriculture1”
A. "Agricultural aActivities1" means agricultural uses and practices including, but not limited to:
producing, breeding, or increasing agricultural products; rotating and changing agricultural crops;
allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie fallow in which it is plowed and tilled but left
unseeded; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie dormant as a result of adverse
agricultural market conditions; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie dormant because
the land is enrolled in a local, state, or federal conservation program, or the land is subject to a
conservation easement; conducting agricultural operations; maintaining, repairing, and replacing
agricultural equipment; maintaining, repairing, and replacing agricultural facilities, provided that the
replacement facility is no closer to the shoreline than the original facility; and maintaining
agricultural lands under production or cultivation;
B. "Agricultural pProducts1" includes, but is not limited to, horticultural, viticultural, floricultural,
vegetable, fruit, berry, grain, hops, hay, straw, turf, sod, seed, and apiary products; feed or forage
for livestock; Christmas holiday trees; hybrid cottonwood and similar hardwood trees grown as
crops and harvested within twenty years of planting; and livestock including both the animals
themselves and animal products including, but not limited to, meat, upland finfish, poultry and
poultry products, and dairy products;
C. "Agricultural eEquipment1" and "aAgricultural fFacilities1" includes, but is not limited to:
1. The following used in agricultural operations: Eequipment; machinery; constructed shelters,
buildings, and ponds; fences; upland finfish rearing facilities; water diversion, withdrawal,
conveyance, and use equipment and facilities including, but not limited to, pumps, pipes, tapes,
canals, ditches, and drains;
2. Corridors and facilities for transporting personnel, livestock, and equipment to, from, and within
agricultural lands;
3. Farm residences and associated equipment, lands, and facilities; and
4. Roadside stands and on-farm markets for marketing fruit or vegetables; and
Page 86 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-2
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
D. "Agricultural lLand1, 5" means those specific land areas on which agricultural activities have been in
existence as of July 1, 1990 (the effective date of the Growth Management Act) as evidenced by
aerial photography or other documentation.
“Agricultural aActivities, eExisting and oOngoing5” means those activities conducted on agricultural
lands, and those activities involved in the production of crops and livestock. Such activity must have
been in existence as of July 1, 1990 (the effective date of the Growth Management Act). The definition
includes, but is not limited to, operation and maintenance of farm and stock ponds or drainage ditches,
irrigation systems, changes between agricultural activities or crops, and normal operation, maintenance
or repair of existing serviceable structures, facilities, or improved areas. Activities, which bring an area
into agricultural use from a previous nonagricultural use, are not considered part of an ongoing activity.
An operation ceases to be ongoing when the area on which it was conducted is proposed for conversion
to a nonagricultural use or has lain idle for a period of longer than five years, unless the idle land is
registered in a federal or state soils conservation program. Forest practices are not included in this
definition.
“Aquaculture5” is the farming or culturing of fishery resources in freshwater areas which may require
development of fish hatcheries, rearing pens, and structures, as well as use of natural spawning and
rearing areas. Activities include the hatching, cultivating, feeding, and raising of fisheries and the
maintenance and construction of necessary equipment, buildings and growing areas.
“Associated Wetlands1” means those wetlands which are in proximity to and either influence or are
influenced by tidal waters or a lake or stream subject to the Shoreline Management Act.
"Best Management Practices5" means conservation practices or systems of practices and management
measures that:
1. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal waste, toxins,
and sediment;
2. Minimize adverse impacts to surface water and ground water flow, circulation patterns, and to
the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of waters, wetlands, and other fish and
wildlife habitats;
3. Control site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or water disposal, or drainage from raw material.
"Bioengineering1" means project designs or construction methods which use live woody vegetation or a
combination of live woody vegetation and specially developed natural or synthetic materials to establish
a complex root grid within the existing bank which is resistant to erosion, provides bank stability, and
maintains a healthy riparian environment with habitat features important to fish life. Use of wood
structures or limited use of clean angular rock may be allowable to provide stability for establishment of
the vegetation.
“Boat Launching Ramps5” are areas developed for boating ingress and egress.
“Boat hHouse5” means a covered or enclosed moorage space. For the purpose of this section,
boathouses are accessory to a residential use and may be located on water or on land.
“Breakwater5” means an offshore structure that is generally built parallel to shore that may or may not
be connected to land, and may be floating or stationary. Their primary purpose is to protect harbors,
Page 87 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-3 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
moorages and navigation activity from wave and wind action by creating stillwater areas along shore. A
secondary purpose is to protect shorelines from wave caused erosion.
“Buffer Strip5” means an area of land which: (A) serves to reduce the adverse impacts between land uses
of different intensities or (B) serves to separate or identify transitions between land uses of the same
intensity.
“Bulkhead5” means vertical structures erected parallel to and near the ordinary high water markOHWM
for the purpose of protecting adjacent uplands from erosion, other than newly created residential land,
from the action of waves or currents.
"Channel mMigration zZone (CMZ) 1" means the area along a river within which the channel(s) can be
reasonably predicted to migrate over time as a result of natural and normally occurring hydrological and
related processes when considered with the characteristics of the river and its surroundings.
“Channelization5” means the straightening, deepening, or widening of a stream channel for the purpose
of increasing the stream’s carrying capacity.
“City5” means the City of Auburn.
“Commercial dDevelopments5” are means those uses involved in wholesale, and retail, service, trade or
business activities, including professional officestrade.
“Community Pier or Dock5" means a pier or dock including a gangway and/or float which is intended for
use in common by lot owners or residents of a subdivision or residential planned development district.
“Conditional Use, Shoreline1” means a use, development, or substantial development which is classified
as a conditional use or is not classified within the mMaster pProgram.
“Critical Areas5" means wetlands, streams, flood hazard areas, fish and wildlife areas, aquifer recharge
areas, and geologically hazardous areas as defined and designated by the Critical Areas Ordinance (ACC
Chapter 16.10 ACC, Ordinance No.5894).
“Critical Freshwater Habitats5” mean habitat areas associated with sShorelines of the sState and
associated with threatened, endangered, or sensitive species of plants or wildlife (pursuant to WAC 232-
12-297 Sections 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6) and which, if altered, could reduce the likelihood that the species will
maintain and reproduce over the long term.
“Dedication5” means the designation of land by its owner for any general and public uses, reserving to
the owner no other rights than such as are compatible with the full exercise and enjoyment of the public
uses to which the property has been devoted.
“Department1” means the Washington State Department of Ecology.
“Development1” means a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures;
dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; driving of piling; placing of
obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal
public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to this chapter at any state of water level.
Page 88 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-4
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
“Development” does not include dismantling or removing structures if there is no other associated
development or redevelopment.
“Director5” means the Community Development Director of Planning, Building, and Community
Department for the City of Auburn or his/her assigned designee.
“Dock1, 5” means a structure that abuts the shoreline and floats upon the water and is used as a landing
or moorage place for recreational purposes.
“Dredging5” is the removal of material from the bottom of a stream, river or other water body.
“Dry Well5” means a pit filled with coarse rock or lined with crushed rock or gravel for use as a storm
disposal method.
“Dune mModification1” means the removal or addition of material to a dune, the reforming or
reconfiguration of a dune, or the removal or addition of vegetation that will alter the dune’s shape or
sediment migration.
“Educational and aArcheological sSites and hHistorical aAreas5” include significant archeological sites or
excavations, old settler homes, historic trails, non-commercial interpretive centers (i.e., public or
nonprofit), or any other educationally significant site, facility, or structures.
“Environmental rRemediation5" consists of actions taken to identify, eliminate or minimize any threat
posed by hazardous substances to human health or the environment. Such actions include any
investigative, site remediation, and monitoring activities undertaken with respect to any release or
threatened release of a hazardous substance.
"Fill1" means the addition of soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, earth retaining structure, or other
material to an area waterward of the OHWM, in wetlands, or on shorelands in a manner that raises the
elevation or creates dry land.
“Float5” means a structure comprised of a number of logs, boards, barrels, etc., fastened together into a
platform capable of floating on water, used as a landing or moorage structure for swimming purposes.
Floats are either attached to a pier or are anchored to the bed lands so as to allow free movement up or
down with the rising or falling water levels.
“Flood hHazard rReduction1” activities include actions taken to reduce flood damage or hazards. Flood
hazard reduction measures may consist of nonstructural or indirect measures, such as setbacks, land use
controls, wetland restoration, dike removal, use relocation, bioengineering measures, and storm water
management programs; and of structural measures, such as dikes, levees, and floodwalls intended to
contain flow within the channel, channel realignment, and elevation of structures consistent with the
National Flood Insurance Program.
“Flood Hazard Zone5” means an area inundated by the 100-year flood.
"Floodplain1" is synonymous with one hundred-year flood plain and means that land area susceptible to
inundation with a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The limit of this
Page 89 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-5 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
area shall be based upon flood ordinance regulation maps or a reasonable method which meets the
objectives of the act.
“Floodway Fringe5” means the area outside the floodway but still in the flood hazard zone.
“Floodway5” means those portions of the area of a river valley lying streamward from the outer limits of
a watercourse upon which flood waters are carried during periods of flooding that occur with
reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually, said floodway being identified, under normal
condition, by changes in surface soil conditions or changes in types or quality of vegetative ground cover
conditionthat has been established in effective Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) or floodway maps. The floodway shall does not include those lands that can
reasonably be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or
maintained under license from the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state.
“Forest Land1, 5” means all land that is capable of supporting a merchantable stand of timber and is not
being actively used, developed, or converted in a manner that is incompatible with timber production.
“Forest Practices1, 5” means any activity conducted on or directly pertaining to forest land and relating to
growing, harvesting, or processing of timber; including, but not limited to: (1) road and trail
construction, (2) fertilization, (3) prevention and suppression of diseases and insects; or other activities
that qualify as a use or development subject to the Act. A forest practice that only involves timber
cutting is not a development under the act and does not require a shoreline substantial development
permit or a shoreline exemption. A forest practice that includes activities other than timber cutting may
be a development under the act and may require a substantial development permit, as required by WAC
222-50-020.
Excluded from this definition is preparatory work such as tree marking, surveying and removal of
incidental vegetation such as berries, greenery, or other natural products whose removal cannot
normally be expected to result in damage to shoreline natural features. Also excluded from this
definition is preparatory work associated with the conversion of land for non-forestry uses and
developments. Log storage away from forest land is considered Industrial.
“Gangway5” means a sloping structure that provides access from a pier to a float.
"Grading1" means the movement or redistribution of the soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, or other
material on a site in a manner that alters the natural contour of the land.
“Groin5” means a barrier type structure extending from back shore into the water, the purpose of which
is to interrupt sediment movement along the shore.
“Guidelines5” means those guidelines adopted pursuant to the Shorelines Management Act of 1971.
“Habitat iImprovement5” means any actions taken to intentionally improve the overall processes,
functions and values of critical habitats, including wetland, stream and aquatic habitats. Such actions
may or may not be in conjunction with a specific development proposal and include, but are not limited
to, restoration, creation, enhancement, preservation, acquisition, maintenance and monitoring.
Page 90 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-6
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
“Hazardous Substances1” means those wastes designated by WAC 173-340-200, and regulated as
hazardous substances by the Department of Ecology.
“Hearing Examiner5” means the officer appointed by the City of Auburn City Council to review and
approve or deny applications for substantial development, conditional use, variance and expansion of
nonconforming use permits.
“Hearings Board2” means the shorelines hearings board established by the Shoreline Management Act
of 1971.
"Height1" means a measurement from average grade level to the highest point of a structure: provided,
that television antennas, chimneys, and similar appurtenances shall not be used in calculating height,
except where such appurtenances obstruct the view of the shoreline of a substantial number of
residences on areas adjoining such shorelines, or the mMaster pProgram specifically requires that such
appurtenances be included: provided further, that temporary construction equipment is excluded in this
calculation.
“Home- bBased dDaycare3 “ means a licensed daycare that regularly provides daycare for not more than
12 children or adults in the provider’s home in the family living quarters, for periods of less than 24
hours.
“Impervious Surface5” means those surfaces that do not allow the downward passage of water.
“Industrial dDevelopment3, 5” means facilities for manufacturing, assembling, fabricating, processing,
and storage of finished or semi-finished goods, including but not limited to basic wood processing,
enameling, galvanizing and electroplating, heavy equipment and truck repair, lumber yards, motor
freight terminals and transportation, warehousing and distribution facilities, construction contractors
services and material/equipment storage yards, wholesale trade, and log storage, together with
necessary accessory uses such as parking and loading. Excluded from this definition are mining, including
on-site processing of raw materials, solid waste storage and transfer facilities, primary utilities, and road
or railway development.
“In-sStream Structural Uses1” means a structure placed by humans within a stream or river waterward
of the ordinary high-water mark that either causes or has the potential to cause water impoundment or
the diversion, obstruction, or modification of water flow. In-stream structures may include those for
hydroelectric generation, irrigation, water supply, flood control, transportation, utility service
transmission, fish habitat enhancement, or other purpose.
“Interpretive Center5” means a facility containing artifacts, history and information about a site in the
immediate area.
“Jetties5” means structures that are generally perpendicular to shore extending through or past the
intertidal zone. They are built singly or in pairs at harbor entrances or river mouths mainly to prevent
shoaling or accretion from littoral drift in entrance channels, which may or may not be dredged. Jetties
also serve to protect channels from storm waves or cross currents, and stabilize inlets through barrier
beaches.
Page 91 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-7 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
“Joint Use Pier or Dock5" means a pier or dock including a gangway and/or float which is intended for
the private, noncommercial use of not more than four waterfront building lot owners. Properties using a
joint use pier or dock must be within 1,000 feet of the boundary of the lot on which the joint use pier or
dock is to be constructed.
“Landfill1, 5” is the creation of dry upland area by filling or depositing of sand, soil or gravel into a
shoreland/shoreline area.
“Launching Ramps5” means areas solely developed for boating ingress and egress.
“Levee, Dike5” means a broad embankment of earth built parallel with the river channel to contain flow
within the channel.
“Linear Access5” means a trail, path, road, or launching ramp by which the public can travel to and along
publicly owned water. Recreational activities such as swimming, hiking, shore fishing, hunting and
picnicking are typical activities requiring linear access.
“Maintenance Dredging1, 5” means dredging for the purpose of maintaining a prescribed minimum depth
of any specific waterway project.
“Master Program4” means the comprehensive sShoreline mMaster pProgram for the City of Auburn,
including the use regulations together with maps, diagrams, charts or other descriptive material and
text.
“May1” means the action is acceptable, provided it conforms to the provisions of WAC 173-26 and this
SMP.
“Mineral Resource Lands1” means lands primarily devoted to the extraction of minerals or that have
known or potential long-term commercial significance for the extraction of minerals.
“Mining5” means the removal of naturally occurring materials from the earth for economic uses
pursuant to Chapter 78.44 RCW and Chapter 332-18 RCW.
“No Net Loss5” means a standard intended to ensure that shoreline development or uses, whether
permitted or exempt, are located and designed to avoid loss or degradation of shoreline ecological
functions that are necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. The standard is met when proposed
uses or developments are in compliance with the provisions of this mMaster pProgram. In cases where
unavoidable loss results from allowed uses or developments, the standard is met through appropriate
mitigation, consistent with the provisions of this mMaster pProgram.
“Nonconforming Use and Development1” means an existing shoreline use or development which that
was lawfully constructed or established prior to the effective date of the act or the applicable master
program or amendments thereto, but which does not confiorm to present use regulations or standards
due to subsequent changes toof the master program.
“Nonconforming Development” or “Nonconforming Structure” means an existing structure that was
lawfully constructed at the time it was built but is no longer fully consistent with present regulations
such as setbacks, buffers or yards; area; bulk; height or density standards due to subsequent changes to
the master program.
Page 92 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-8
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
“Nonconforming Lot” means a lot that met dimensional requirements of the applicable master program
at the time of its establishment but now contains less than the required width, depth or area due to
subsequent changes to the master program.
“Non-water Related Uses5” means those uses which do not need a waterfront location to operate
though easements or utility corridors for access to the water may be desired.
“Normal Maintenance1” means those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully
established condition. (See also, “Normal repair”.)
“Normal Repair1, 5” means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition
within a reasonable period of decay or partial destruction, except where repair involves total
replacement which is not common practice or causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline
resource or environment. (See also, Normal maintenance”.)
“One Hundred Year Flood Plain5” means lowlands adjoining the channel of a water body that would be
covered by floodwaters of a flood having an average frequency of occurrence in the order of once in 100
years although the flood may occur in any year.
“One Hundred Year Flood5” means a flood that has a magnitude that may be equaled or exceeded once
every one hundred years on the average.
“Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM)2” on all lakes, streams, and river water is that mark found by
examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common
and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from
that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on the effective date of this
Chapter or as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with
permits issued by the City or the Department of Ecology. Provided, that in any area where the ordinary
high water markOHWM cannot be found, the ordinary high water markOHWM adjoining fresh water
shall be the line of mean high water.
“Outfall5” means the outlet or place of discharge of a stormwater collection or sanitary sewer system.
“Permit1” means a Substantial Development Permit, sShoreline cConditional uUse pPermit, or sShoreline
vVariance issued in compliance with the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and the Shoreline Master
Program for City of Auburn.
“Person5” means an individual, partnership, corporation, association, organization, cooperative, public
or Municipal Corporation, or agency of the state or local governmental unit however designated.
“Pier5” means a structure that abuts the shoreline and is built over the water on pilings and is used as a
landing or moorage place for recreational purposes.
“Point Access5” means a trail, path, road, or launching ramp by which the general public can travel from
a public road to a point of view or to a place suitable for launching a boat. Recreational activities such as
motor boat launching, canoeing, kayaking, rafting and viewing of scenic vistas are typical recreational
activities requiring point access.
Page 93 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-9 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
“Private Recreational Pier or Dock5" shall mean a pier or dock including a gangway and/or float which is
owned and maintained by a private group, club, association or other organization and is intended for
use by its members.
"Priority Habitat1" means a habitat type with unique or significant value to one or more species. An area
classified and mapped as priority habitat must have one or more of the following attributes:
comparatively high fish or wildlife density; comparatively high fish or wildlife species diversity; fish
spawning habitat; important wildlife habitat; important fish or wildlife seasonal range; important fish or
wildlife movement corridor; rearing and foraging habitat; important marine mammal haul-out; refugia
habitat; limited availability; high vulnerability to habitat alteration; unique or dependent species; or
shellfish bed. A priority habitat may be described by a unique vegetation type or by a dominant plant
species that is of primary importance to fish and wildlife (such as oak woodlands or eelgrass meadows).
A priority habitat may also be described by a successional stage (such as, old growth and mature
forests). Alternatively, a priority habitat may consist of a specific habitat element (such as a consolidated
marine/estuarine shoreline, talus slopes, caves, snags) of key value to fish and wildlife. A priority habitat
may contain priority and/or nonpriority fish and wildlife.
"Priority Species1" means species requiring protective measures and/or management guidelines to
ensure their persistence at genetically viable population levels. Priority species are those that meet any
of the criteria listed below.
“Priority uUse5” means those shoreline uses given priority over other uses by the policies in the
Shoreline Management Ace, such as water-dependent uses and uses providing public access to the
state’s shorelines.
“Public aAccess5” means the protection of the public’s right to use navigable waters and the provision of
both physical and visual access to and from the water.
“Public Recreational Pier or Dock5" means a pier or dock including a gangway and/or float either publicly
or privately owned and maintained, intended for use by the general public for recreational purposes, but
not to include docks constructed as part of a marina.
“Qualified consultant,” for purposes of these regulations, shall mean a person who has attained a
degree from an accredited college or university in the subject matter necessary to evaluate the critical
area in question (e.g., biology, ecology, or horticulture/arboriculture for wetlands, streams, wildlife
habitat, and geology and/or civil engineering for geologic hazards, and hydrogeologist for ground water
protection areas), and/or who is professionally trained and/or certified or licensed by the state of
Washington to practice in the scientific disciplines necessary to identify, evaluate, manage, and mitigate
impacts to the critical area in question. In addition, a qualified consultant for wetlands and streams must
be a professional wetland scientist with at least two years of full-time work experience as a wetlands
professional, including delineating wetlands using the federal manual and supplements, preparing
wetland reports, conducting function assessments, and development and implementing mitigation
plans.
“Railroad5” means a linear passageway for the movement of train passengers or freight.
“Recreation5” means the refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or
relaxation. This section applies to publicly and privately owned recreational facilities intended for use
Page 94 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-10
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
either by the public or a private club, group, or association. NOTE: (Certain water dependent uses such
as Piers, Docks and Floats, and Boat Launch Facilities addressed separately in the shoreline use
regulations under those titles.)
“Residential3, 5” development shall mean one or more buildings or structures or portions thereof which
are designed for and used to provide a place of abode for human beings, including one and two family
detached dwellings, multifamily residences, row houses, townhouses, mobile home parks and other
similar group housing, together with accessory uses and structures normally common to residential uses
including but not limited to garages, sheds, upland boat storage facilities, tennis courts, and swimming
pools. Residential development includes the creation of new residential lots through land division.
Residential development shall not include hotels, motels, or other transient housing or camping
facilities.
"Restoration1" means the reestablishment or upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes or
functions. This may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to, revegetation,
removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does
not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre-European settlement
conditions.
“Revetments5” means sloping structures built to increase bank strength and protect a scarp,
embankment, or shore against erosion by waves or currents. A revetment is usually built of rock rip-rap,
wood, or poured concrete. One or more filter layers of smaller rock or filter cloth and “toe” protection.
A revetment typically slopes waterward and has rough or jagged facing. The slope differentiates it from
a bulkhead, which is a vertical structure.
“Riprap5” means broken stone placed on shoulders, banks, slopes, or other such places to protect them
from erosion.
“Road5” means a linear passageway, usually for motor vehicles. Bridges are roads which cross over
water.
“Shall1” means a mandate; the action must be done.
“Shorelands" or "Shoreland Areas2" means those lands extending landward for two hundred feet in all
directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high water markOHWM; floodways and
contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river
deltas associated with the streams, lakes, and river waters which are subject to the provisions of this
chapter; the same to be designated as to location by the Department of Ecology. Any county or cityCity
may determine that portion of a one-hundred-year-flood plain to be included in its master program as
long as such portion includes, as a minimum, the floodway and the adjacent land extending landward
two hundred feet there from;
"Shoreline Areas" and "Shoreline Jurisdiction1" means all "sShorelines of the sState" and "shorelands" as
defined in this mMaster pProgram and RCW 90.58.030.
“Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects1” means projects which include those
activities proposed and conducted specifically for the purpose of establishing, restoring, or enhancing
habitat for priority species in shorelines.
Page 95 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-11 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
"Shoreline Modifications1" means those actions that modify the physical configuration or qualities of the
shoreline area, usually through the construction of a physical element such as a dike, breakwater, pier,
weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline structure. They can include other actions, such as
clearing, grading, or application of chemicals.
“Shorelines of Statewide Significance2” means those shorelines described in RCW 90.58.030(2)(f).
“Shorelines2" means all of the water areas of the state, including reservoirs, and their associated
shorelands, together with the lands underlying them; except (i) shorelines of state-wide significance; (ii)
shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual flow is twenty cubic feet
per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream segments; and (iii) shorelines on
lakes less than twenty acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes.
“Shoreline Stabilization5” means actions taken to protect riverbanks or adjacent uplands from erosion
resulting from the action of waves or river currents. “Hard” structural stabilization includes bulkheads
and revetments. “Soft” shoreline stabilization includes use of bioengineering measures where
vegetation, logs, and/or rock is used to address erosion control and/or slope stability.
“Shoreline Stabilization, new1, 5” means the construction of hard or soft shoreline stabilization measures
along a property abutting the shoreline that does not have an existing shoreline stabilization measure.
Adding to an existing shoreline stabilization structure or increasing the size of an existing shoreline
stabilization structure are also considered new shoreline stabilization structures.
“Shoreline Stabilization, replacement1” means the construction of a new structure to perform a
shoreline stabilization function of an existing structure which can no longer adequately serve its
purpose. Additions to or increases in size of existing shoreline stabilization measures shall be considered
new structures.
“Should1” means that the particular action is required unless there is a demonstrated, compelling
reason, based on policy of the Shoreline Management Act and this chapter, against taking the action.
“Sign, Informational5” means a sign designed to guide or direct pedestrians or vehicles.
“Sign, Warning5” means a sign designed to warn pedestrians or vehicles of some imminent danger.
“Sign3, 5” means any device, structure, fixture or placard that is visible from any public right-of-way or
surrounding properties and uses graphics, symbols or written copy for the purpose of advertising or
identifying any establishment, product, goods, or service.
“Signs5” are public displays whose purpose is to provide information, direction, or advertising.
“Single Use Pier or Dock5" means a dock or pier including a gangway and/or float intended for the
private noncommercial use of one individual or family.
“Single-family Residence1" means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family
including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal
appurtenance. An "appurtenance" is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single-family
residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water markOHWM and the perimeter of a
wetland. On a state-wide basis, normal appurtenances include a garage; deck; driveway; utilities; fences;
Page 96 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-12
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
installation of a septic tank and drainfield and grading which does not exceed two hundred fifty cubic
yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the ordinary high
water markOHWM. Local circumstances may dictate additional interpretations of normal appurtenances
which shall be set forth and regulated within the applicable master program. Construction authorized
under this exemption shall be located landward of the ordinary high water markOHWM.
“Solid wWaste dDisposal5” is the disposal of garbage, refuse and solid waste materials resulting from
domestic, agricultural and industrial activities, construction and demolition debris.
“Streamway5” means the corridor of a single or multiple channel or channels, within which the usual
seasonal or storm water runoff peaks are contained where the flora, fauna, soil, and topography is
dependent on or influenced by the height and velocity of the fluctuating river currents.
"Substantial Development2" shall mean any development of which the total cost or fair market value
exceeds five seven thousand seven hundred and eighteen forty-seven dollars ($7,047) (or the value as
amended or adjusted for inflation per WAC 173-27-040(2)(a) / RCW 90.58.030 (3) (e)) or any
development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or sShorelines of the
sState; except that the following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of
this chapter:
A. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by
accident, fire, or elements;
B. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements;
C. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities,
including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and
maintenance of irrigation structures including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and
irrigation channels. A feed lot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial
nature, alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results
from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities.
A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay,
grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for
livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations;
D. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single family residence
for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five
feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local
government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter;
E. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private
noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multiple family
residences. This exception applies if: in fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not
exceed ten thousand dollars, but if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding
five thousand dollars occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the
subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the purpose of this
chapter;
F.E. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities
that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary
Page 97 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-13 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored ground water
for the irrigation of lands;
G.F. The marking of property lines or corners on state owned lands, when such marking does not
significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water;
H.G. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on
September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural
drainage or diking system;
I.H. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for
development authorization under this chapter, if:
1. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters;
2. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not
limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values;
3. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity
the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the
activity;
4. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance
bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that
the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and
5. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550.
J.I. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW 17.26.020,
through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are
recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the department of
agriculture or the department jointly with other state agencies under Chapter 43.21C RCW.
K.J. Watershed restoration projects as defined herein. The City shall review the projects for consistency
with the sShoreline mMaster pProgram in an expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along
with any conditions within forty-five days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request
for exemption from the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for
exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this section.
“Supportive hHousing3 “ means a multiple-family dwelling owned or sponsored by a nonprofit
corporation or government entity, designed for occupancy by individual adults that are either (A)
homeless or at risk of homelessness; (B) are experiencing a disability that presents barriers to
employment and housing stability; or (C) generally require structured supportive services to be
successful living in the community; is permitted at a greater unit density than otherwise allowed within
a particular zone; and is intended to provide long-term, rather than transitional, housing. Long-term
housing is approximately longer than two years, whereas transitional housing is no more than 18
months.
“Utilities, Primary5” are facilities which produce, store, collect, treat, carry, discharge, or transmit
electric power, water, storm drainage, gas, sewage, reclaimed water, communications, or other public
Page 98 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-14
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
services. Accessory utility facilities are those associated with delivery of such public services to support
individual uses and developments, such as distribution or service lines.
“Variance, Shoreline1” means a grant of relief from the specific bulk, dimensional, or performance
standards set forth in the applicable master program and not a means to vary a use of the shoreline.
“Vegetation cConservation1” includes activities to protect and restore vegetation along or near
shorelines that minimize habitat loss and the impact of invasive plants, erosion and flooding and
contribute to the ecological functions of shoreline areas. Vegetation conservation provisions include the
prevention or restriction of plant clearing and earth grading, vegetation restoration, and the control of
invasive weeds and nonnative species. Vegetation management provisions apply even to those
shorelines and uses that are exempt from a permit requirement.
“Water Dependent Uses1, 5” means a use or portion of a use which requires direct contact with the water
and which cannot exist in any other location and are dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic
nature of the operation. Some examples of water dependent uses include fishing piers and reserves
which allow biological systems to continue in a natural undisturbed manner, environmental
remediation, and habitat improvement projects.
“Water Enjoyment Use1” means those uses which provide for recreation involving the water or
facilitates public access to the shoreline as the primary characteristic of the use, or a use which provides
for aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for a substantial number of people as a general characteristic of
the use and, through location, design and operation assures the public’s ability to enjoy the physical and
aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. To qualify as water enjoyment, a use must be open to the general
public and the waterward side of the project must be devoted to provisions that accommodate public
enjoyment, and the project must meet the Shoreline Master Program public access requirements. Some
examples of water-enjoyment uses include viewing towers, parks, and educational/scientific reserves.
“Water Oriented Uses1” means any water dependent, water-related, or water enjoyment use.
“Water Related Uses1” means those uses which are not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location
to continue their operation, but whose operation cannot occur economically at this time, without a
shoreline location. Examples include a seafood processing plant and warehouses for goods transported
by water.
"Watershed rRestoration pPlan1" means a plan, developed or sponsored by the department of fish and
wildlife, the department of ecology, the department of natural resources, the department of
transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a cityCity,
a county, or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or
actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources,
character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area, or watershed for which agency and
public review has been conducted pursuant to cChapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy
Act;
A. A public or private project, the primary purpose of which is to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish
passage, when all of the following apply:
Page 99 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
1-15 Draft August 5, 2019
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
1. The project has been approved in writing by the department of fish and wildlife as necessary for
the improvement of the habitat or passage and appropriately designed and sited to accomplish
the intended purpose;
2. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the department of fish and wildlife
pursuant to cChapter 757.2055 RCW; and
3. The local government has determined that the project is consistent with the local shoreline
master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely manner and
provide it by letter to the project proponent.
B. Hazardous substance remedial actions. The procedural requirements of Chapter 90.58 RCW shall not
apply to a project for which a consent decree, order or agreed order has been issued pursuant to
cChapter 70.105D RCW or to the dDepartment of eEcology when it conducts a remedial action
under cChapter 70.105D RCW. The department shall, in consultation with the appropriate local
government, assure that such projects comply with the substantive requirements of cChapter 90.58
RCW, cChapter 173-26 WAC and the local master program.
“Watershed rRestoration pProject1" means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a
watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of
the following activities:
A. A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which less than twenty-five cubic yards
of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing
vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings;
B. A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of
bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with
primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or
C. A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to
migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state,
provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or in-stream habitat enhancement
structure associated with the project, is less than two hundred square feet in floor area and is
located above the ordinary high water markOHWM of the stream.
“Weirs5” means a structure in a stream or river for measuring or regulating stream flow.
“Wetlands1” means, for the purposes of this SMP, areas that are inundated or saturated by surface
water or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not
include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited
to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment
facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were
unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may
include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas created to mitigate the
conversion of wetlands.
Page 100 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 1-16
1 = WAC; 2 = RCW; 3 = ACC; 4 = 1973 SMP; 5 = 2009 SMP
“Width5” means the width of a pier or dock at its widest point measured parallel to the shoreline or the
combined width of a pier, dock, and any attached structures such as a float at the widest point.
Unlisted words and phrases.
The definition of any word or phrase not listed in this SMP which is in question when administering this
regulation shall be defined from one of the following sources which are incorporated herein by
reference. Said sources shall be utilized by finding the desired definition from source number one, but if
it is not available there, then source number two may be used and so on. The sources are as follows:
A. City development regulations;
B. Any cityCity resolution, ordinance, code or regulations;
C. Any statute or regulation of the state of Washington (i.e., the most applicable);
D. Legal definitions from case law or a law dictionary;
E. The common dictionary.
Page 101 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
2-1 Draft August 5, 2019
CHAPTER 2.0 Shoreline Master Program Elements:
2.1 Economic Development Element
The Economic Development element addresses the location and design of industries, tourist facilities
and commercial and other developments that are particularly dependent on shoreline locations.
2.1.1 Goals:
1. Proposed shoreline uses shall be located and developed in a manner that will maintain or
improve the health, safety and welfare of the public.
2. Develop, as an economic asset, recreation opportunities and amenities in a manner that will
promote and enhance the public enjoyment of the shorelines.
3. Economic activity along the shorelines shall protect the quality of the site’s environment or
adjacent shorelines.
2.2 Public Access Element
The Public Access element addresses the need for providing public access to shoreline areas.
2.2.1 Goals:
1. Provide new and enhance existing public access to the shoreline environment.
2. Create public access to the rivers through the park and trail system that will not endanger life or
property, nor impair the rights of private property owners on the shorelines.
3. Create public access to the rivers in a manner that will not impair the natural and ecological
systems of the shorelines.
2.3 Circulation Element
The Circulation element addresses the location and extent of existing and proposed major
thoroughfares, transportation routes and other public transportation-related facilities and correlates
those facilities with shoreline uses.
2.3.1 Goal:
1. Achieve safe, convenient and diversified circulation systems to provide public access to the
shoreline, efficient movement of people and goods, with minimum disruption to the shoreline
environment and minimum conflict among shoreline uses.
2.4 Recreation Element
The Recreation element addresses the preservation and expansion of recreational opportunities by
means of acquisition, development and by other means.
Page 102 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 2-2
2.4.1 Goals:
1. Continue to provide a broad and comprehensive public and private recreation system meeting
the needs of all age and income groups.
2. Preserve open spaces for passive recreation where more active recreational development and
use would be harmful to the shoreline ecology.
3. Encourage the advantageous use of existing natural features and historic resources as a part of
the recreation program and facilities.
4. Foster the preservation or enhancement of recreation and open space areas as significant
elements of the landscape.
5. Continue to work with King County, Pierce County and other adjacent jurisdictions to encourage
preservation and expansion or diversified recreational opportunities for the public on the Green
and White Rivers.
2.5 Shoreline Use Element
The Shoreline Use Element addresses the derived patterns of land use in the shoreline area.
2.5.1 Goals:
1. Promote the best possible pattern of land and water uses that will be most beneficial to the
natural and human environments.
2. Designated Shorelines of Statewide Significance are of value to the entire State and shall be
managed consistent with this recognition. In order of preference the priorities are to:
a. Recognize and protect the sStatewide interest over local interest;
b. Preserve the natural character of the shoreline;
c. Result in long term over short term benefit;
d. Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; and,
e. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines.
2.6 Conservation Element
The Conservation element addresses the preservation of the natural shoreline resources, considering
such characteristics as scenic vistas, open space riparian corridors, and other valuable natural or
aesthetic features. This element promotes the restoration of shoreline functions and ecological
processes along Auburn's shorelines.
2.6.1 Goals:
1. Restore and enhance shoreline habitats and processes on publicly owned lands.
2. Develop regional solutions with other jurisdictions, tribes and interested parties to resolve the
challenge of protecting shoreline ecological functions while also protecting shoreline
development.
Page 103 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
2-3 Draft August 5, 2019
3. Encourage voluntary restoration projects in degraded shoreline environments.
4. Provide ample opportunity for the public to learn about the ecological aspects and community
values of the City’s shorelines.
2.7 Historical/Cultural Element
The Historical/Cultural Element addresses the protection and restoration of buildings, sites and areas
having historic, cultural, educational or scientific value.
2.7.1 Goals:
1. Protect, manage and enhance those characteristics of the shoreline that are unique or have
historic significance or aesthetic quality, for the benefit and enjoyment of the public.
2. Protect archaeological, historic and cultural sites and buildings identified on national, state or
local historic registers from destruction or alteration, and from encroachment by incompatible
uses.
3. Identify such resources during review of proposed development in or near the Green and White
Rivers.
2.8 Flood Prevention/Critical Areas Element:
The Flood Protection/Critical Areas Element addresses reducing potential flood hazards and flood
damages in the City of Auburn and the protection of critical areas in Auburn’s shoreline area.
2.8.1 Goals:
1. Continue to participate in a regional approach to flood protection issues, coordinating with the
State of Washington, King County, Pierce County and other entities interested in reducing flood
hazards on both the White and Green Rivers.
2. Continue to protect wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, and groundwater and minimize geologic
hazards in the shoreline environment in accordance with the cCritical aAreas oOrdinance.
Page 104 of 215
Page 105 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
3-1 Draft August 5, 2019
CHAPTER 3.0 Shoreline Environments
3.1 Purpose
To more effectively plan and manage shoreline resources through the development of a Shoreline
Master Program, a system of categorizing shoreline areas through a classification called “Environments”
has been used. This system applies appropriate policies and regulations to distinctively different
shoreline areas.
The purpose of shoreline environment designations is to differentiate between areas whose
geographical, hydrological, topographical, or other features imply differing objectives for the use and
future development of the cityCity’s shorelines.
The determination as to which designation should be given to any specific shoreline area has been
based on, and is reflective of, the existing use pattern; the biological and physical character of the
shoreline; the goals and aspirations of the local citizenry; and the criteria in the Shoreline Management
Act guidelines (WAC 173-26-211).
Each environment designation represents a particular emphasis in the type of uses and development
that should be allowed. The environment designation system is designed to encourage uses in each
environment that enhance or are compatible with the character of the environment, while at the same
time requiring reasonable standards and restrictions on development so that the character of the
environment is not adversely impacted.
Each environment designation category includes: (1) a purpose statement which clarifies the meaning
and intent of the designation; (2) criteria to be used as a basis for classifying a specific shoreline area
with that environment designation; and (3) general management policies designed to guide
management decisions and development consistent with the character of the environment. To
accomplish the purpose of this chapter the following shoreline environment designations have been
established:
1. Shoreline Residential
2. Urban Conservancy
3. Natural
3.2 Shoreline Residential
3.2.1 Purpose:
The purpose of the “Shoreline Residential” environment is to accommodate residential development
and appurtenant structures that are consistent with this chapter. An additional purpose is to provide
appropriate public access and recreational uses.
3.2.2 Designation Criteria:
The Shoreline Residential environment designation is appropriate for those areas of the City’s shorelines
that are characterized predominantly by single-family or multifamily residential development or are
planned and platted for residential development.
Page 106 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 3-2
3.2.3 Management Policies:
The following management policies should apply to all shorelines in the Shoreline Residential
Environment:
Standards for density or minimum frontage width, setbacks, lot coverage limitations, buffers,
shoreline stabilization, vegetation conservation, critical area protection, and water quality shall be
set to maintain no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Proposed projects should be reviewed
for consistency with the no net loss policy, taking into account 1) the environmental limitations and
sensitivity of the shoreline area, 2) proposed mitigation for anticipated impacts, 3) the level of
infrastructure and services available, and 4) other comprehensive planning considerations.
Multifamily and multi-lot residential and recreational developments should provide public access
and joint use for community recreational facilities where appropriate.
Access, utilities, and public services should be available and adequate to serve existing needs and/or
planned future development.
3.3 Urban Conservancy
3.3.1 Purpose:
The purpose of the “Urban Conservancy” environment is to protect and restore ecological functions of
open space, floodplain and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while
allowing a variety of compatible uses consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3.3.2 Designation Criteria:
The Urban Conservancy environment designation is appropriate for those areas planned for
development that is compatible with maintaining or restoring of the ecological functions of the area,
and that are not generally suitable for intensive water-dependent uses.
3.3.3 Management Policies:
The following management policies should apply to all shorelines in the Urban Conservancy
Environment:
1. Primary allowed uses and their associated development standards should preserve the natural
character of the area or promote preservation of open space, floodplain or sensitive lands
where they exist in urban and developed settings, either directly or over the long term. Uses
that result in restoration of ecological functions should be allowed if the use is otherwise
compatible with the purpose of the environment and the setting.
2. Standards should be established for shoreline stabilization measures, vegetation conservation,
water quality, and shoreline modifications within the "urban conservancy" designation. These
standards should ensure that new development does not result in a net loss of shoreline
ecological functions or further degrade other shoreline values.
3. Public access and public recreation objectives should be implemented whenever feasible and
significant ecological impacts can be mitigated.
4. Water-oriented uses should be given priority over nonwater-oriented uses. For shoreline areas
with commercial development or adjacent to commercially navigable waters, water-dependent
uses should be given highest priority.
Page 107 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
3-3 Draft August 5, 2019
5. Existing mining and related activities may be an appropriate use within the urban conservancy
environment when conducted in a manner consistent with the environment policies and the
provisions of WAC 173-26-241 (3)(h) and when located consistent with mineral resource lands
designation criteria pursuant to RCW 36.70A.170 and WAC 365-190-070. No new mining uses or
expansion of existing mines should be permitted within the shoreline jurisdiction.
3.4 Natural
3.4.1 Purpose:
The purpose of the "Natural" environment is to protect those shoreline areas that are relatively free of
human influence or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline functions that would become
irreversibly impaired as a result of human development and activity. These systems require that only
very low intensity uses be allowed in order to maintain ecological functions and ecosystem-wide
processes. Consistent with the policies of the designation, the City of Auburn should include planning
for restoration of degraded shorelines within this environment.
3.4.2 Designation Criteria:
The “Natural” environment designation should be assigned to shoreline areas if any of the following
characteristics apply: (A) The shoreline is ecologically intact (as described in WAC 173-26-211(5)(a)(iii))
and therefore currently performing an important, irreplaceable function or ecosystem-wide process that
would be damaged by human activity; (B) The shoreline is considered to represent ecosystems and
geologic types that are of particular scientific and educational interest; or (C) The shoreline is unable to
support new development or uses without significant adverse impacts to ecological functions or risk to
human safety.
3.4.3 Management Policies:
The following management policies should apply to all shoreline areas classified as Natural
Environments:
1. Any use that would substantially degrade the ecological functions or natural character of the
shoreline area should not be allowed.
2. The following new uses should not be allowed in the "Natural" environment:
a. Commercial uses.
b. Industrial uses.
c. Non-water-oriented recreation.
d. Roads, utility corridors, and parking areas that can be reasonably located outside of
"Natural" designated shorelines.
3. Single-family residential use may be allowed on properties designated as "Natural" if the density
and lot configuration can accommodate such use by maintaining portions of the property in
shoreline jurisdiction in a natural condition, consistent with the purpose of the environment.
4. Scientific, historical, cultural, educational research uses, and low-intensity water-oriented
recreational access uses may be allowed provided that no significant ecological impact on the
area will result.
Page 108 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 3-4
5. New development or significant vegetation removal that would reduce the capability of
vegetation to perform normal ecological functions should not be allowed. Do not allow the
subdivision of property in a configuration that, to achieve its intended purpose, will require
significant vegetation removal or shoreline modification that adversely impacts ecological
functions. That is, each new parcel must be able to support its intended development without
significant ecological impacts to the shoreline ecological functions.
3.5 Shoreline eEnvironment dDescriptions, mMap, and bBoundaries.
A. The following “Shoreline Environment Descriptions” shall constitute the official descriptions of the
limits of all cityCity shorelands as defined by RCW 90.58.030. Official maps prepared pursuant to
Chapter 173-26 WAC are on file with the City and included as Exhibit A to the Master Program.
B. Shoreline Environment Descriptions. Descriptions for each river are described generally from
upstream to downstream limits within the cityCity. The use of “left bank” and “right bank” refers
to facing downstream. Uses or activities (i.e. utility lines, boating facilities, aquaculture, in-stream
structures, and transportation facilities) that extend waterward of the OHWM would be governed
by the associated upland shoreline environment designation. The Shoreline Environment
Designations maps in Exhibit A indicate the shoreline environment designation for the White and
Green Rivers.
Green River
1. Natural.
a. Left bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction within the cityCity limits in the NW and NE
quarters, Section 27, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette Meridian.
b. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction within the cityCity limits in the SE quarter, Section
17, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette Meridian.
2. Urban Conservancy.
a. Left bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction within the cityCity limits, from the boundary
between the SE and SW quarters, Section 17, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette
Meridian to 2nd Street SE.
b. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction within the cityCity limits in the NW quarter,
Section 17, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette Meridian to the northern cityCity limits.
c. Left bank, from 26th Street NE to the northern cityCity limits.
3. Shoreline Residential.
a. Left bank, from 2nd Street SE to 26th Street NE.
White River
1. Natural.
Page 109 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
3-5 Draft August 5, 2019
a. Left bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from southern cityCity limits to the boundary
between Sections 28 and 29, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette Meridian.
b. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from southern cityCity limits to the boundary
between the NE and NW quarters of Section 28, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette
Meridian.
2. Urban Conservancy.
a. Left bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction within Game Farm Wilderness Park.
b. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from the boundary between the NE and NW
quarters of Section 28, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette Meridian, to the west
property boundary of Auburn Game Farm Park.
c. Left bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from R Street SE/Kersey Way SE to the western
cityCity limits.
d. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from the east property boundary of Mount Baker
Middle School to the boundary between Sections 30 and 31, Township 21 N, Range 5 E,
Willamette Meridian.
3. Shoreline Residential.
a. Left bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction in the Stuck River Road Special Plan Area, including
portions of the NE and SW quarters, Section 29, Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette
Meridian.
b. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from the west property boundary of Auburn
Game Farm Park to the east property boundary of Mount Baker Middle School.
c. Right bank, limits of shoreline jurisdiction from the boundary between Sections 30 and 31,
Township 21 N, Range 5 E, Willamette Meridian to the western cityCity limits.
C. The department may, from time to time as new or improved information becomes available,
modify the official maps described in subsection (A) of this section consistent with state guidelines
to more accurately represent, clarify, or interpret the true limits of the shorelines defined herein.
D. Areas found to be within shoreline jurisdiction that are not mapped and/or designated are
automatically assigned the “Urban Conservancy” designation until re-designated through a master
program amendment process.
E. Location of Boundaries.
1. Boundaries indicated as following streets, highways, roads, and bridges shall be deemed to
follow the centerline of such facilities unless otherwise specified.
2. Boundaries indicated as following railroad lines and transmission lines shall be deemed to follow
the centerline of such rights-of-way or easements unless otherwise specified.
Page 110 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 3-6
Page 111 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-1 Draft August 5, 2019
CHAPTER 4.0 Shoreline Master Program Policies, Development Standards and Use
Regulations
The purpose of this chapter is to:
A. Implement the goals of the Shoreline Master Program Elements and establish policies to be
integrated with the Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and
B. Allow for all reasonable and appropriate uses of the City of Auburn’s shorelines without
degradation of environmental quality or risk to public health or safety; and
C. Provide standards that will regulate and promote intensities and qualities of development
consistent with the protection of the shoreline environment and its related resources and the
Shoreline Management Act of 1971.
4.1 Scope.
No development, as defined in RCW 90.58.030 (3) (d) as a use which consists of construction or exterior
alteration of structures, dredging, drilling, dumping, filling, removal of any sand, gravel or minerals,
driving of piling, placing of obstructions, or any project of a permanent or temporary nature which
interferes with the normal public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to the
Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and this SMP, shall be undertaken except in compliance with the
provisions of this chapter and then only after securing all required permits.
A substantial development permit shall be required for any development of which the total cost or fair
market value exceeds five seven thousand seven hundred and eighteen forty-seven dollars
($57,718047), or the value as amended or adjusted for inflation per WAC 173-27-040(2)(a) / RCW
90.58.030 (3) (e), or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the
water of the sShorelines of the sState unless exempt under the Act.
4.2 Applicability.
A. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all shorelines, shorelands and associated wetland
areas covered by the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 as follows:
1. All rivers and streams and their associated wetlands downstream from a point where the mean
annual flow is 20 cubic feet per second or greater.
2. All lakes and their associated wetlands which are 20 surface acres in size or larger.
3. Shorelands and associated uplands extending 200 feet in all directions as measured on a
horizontal plane from the ordinary high water markOHWM; floodways and contiguous
floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river
deltas associated with their streams, lakes, and tidal waters subject to the provisions of Chapter
90.58 RCW.
B. All new development and uses occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to Chapter
90.58 RCW, The Shoreline Management Act, Chapters 173-26 and 173-27 of the Washington
Administrative Code, and this sShoreline mMaster pProgram.
C. Developments not required to obtain shoreline permits or local reviews.
Page 112 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-2
Requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter
of exemption, or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the
following:
1. Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a
facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to Chapter 70.105D
RCW, or to the Ddepartment of Eecology when it conducts a remedial action under Chapter
70.105D RCW.
2. Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any
person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to
meet requirements of a Nnational Ppollutant Ddischarge Eelimination Ssystem storm water
general permit.
3. WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.356, Washington
State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW
90.58.356 are not required to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit,
variance, letter of exemption, or other local review.
4. Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW
90.58.045.
5. Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to
Chapter 80.50 RCW.
4.3 Interpretation.
A. General.
1. In interpreting and applying the provisions of this chapter, the provisions shall be held to be
minimum requirements, adopted for the promotion of the public health, safety, and general
welfare.
2. When the provisions of this chapter impose greater restrictions than are imposed by other
applicable cityCity, county, regional, state, and federal regulations, the provisions of this chapter
shall control.
3. When a provision of this chapter conflicts with another provision in this chapter, the more
restrictive provision shall apply.
4. Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, words in the present tense can include the future
tense, and words in the singular can include the plural, or vice versa.
5. The word “shall” is always mandatory. The word “should” means that the particular action is
required unless there is a demonstrated, compelling reason, based on policy of the Shoreline
Management Act, WAC 173-26, and this SMP, against taking the action. The word “may” means
the action is acceptable; provided it conforms to the provisions of WAC 173-26 and this SMP.
B. Interpretation by the Director.
The authority to administer the provisions of this chapter shall rest with the Director of Planning,
Building and Community or successor department or designee. The Director shall have the authority to
Page 113 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-3 Draft August 5, 2019
determine that a proposed use is unclassified per the Master Program (neither prohibited nor included
in a particular shoreline environment). The Director’s determination in these instances may be appealed
according to ACC 18.70.050. Such unclassified uses would be treated as conditional uses and may be
allowed through the cConditional uUse pPermit (CUP) process described in WAC 173-27-160.
4.3.1 Adoption Incorporation of additional regulations.
A. Applicable provisions of ACC Chapter 16.10 ACC (per Ordinance No. xxxx – 2019 adoption), Critical
Areas are herein incorporated into this mMaster pProgram and included in Appendix A.
B. The regulations of ACC Chapter 18.54 ACC, Nonconforming Structures, Land and Uses are herein
incorporated into this mMaster pProgram and included in Appendix B.
4.4 General Policies and Regulations
The following general policies and regulations apply to all sShorelines of the sState that are located in
Auburn, regardless of the specific shoreline environment designation in any one location.
4.4.1 Conservation and Restoration
Policies
1. Prioritize enhancement and restoration efforts at public parks and public open space lands
2. Work with owners of other publicly-owned land to encourage restoration and enhancement
projects.
3. Work with the public and other interested parties to prioritize restoration opportunities
identified in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report.
4. Promote vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds and nonnative species to
avoid adverse impacts to hydrology, and to reduce the hazard of slope failures or accelerated
erosion.
5. Integrate bioengineering and/or soft engineering approaches into local and regional flood
control measures, infrastructure, and related capital improvement projects.
6. Develop a program to implement restoration projects, including funding strategies.
7. Monitor and adaptively manage restoration projects.
8. Continue to work with the State, King County, Pierce County, Watershed Resource Inventory
Area (WRIA) 9 and 10 Forums, the Muckleshoot Tribe, and other governmental and non-
governmental organizations to explore how local governments (with their assistance) can best
address the needs of preserving ecological processes and shoreline functions.
9. Continue to work with the State, King County, Pierce County, Green River King County Flood
Control Zone District, , Pierce County Flood Control Zone District, and the Inter-County River
Improvement Agency to identify and implement flood management strategies that protect
existing development and restores floodplain and channel migration functions.
10. 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.
Page 114 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-4
11. Create incentives that will make it economically or otherwise attractive to integrate shoreline
ecological restoration into development projects.
12. Encourage restoration or enhancement of native riparian vegetation through incentives and
non-regulatory programs.
13. Establish public education materials to provide shoreline landowners technical assistance about
the benefits of native vegetation plantings.
14. Explore opportunities with other educational organizations and agencies to develop an on-going
program of shoreline education for all ages.
15. Identify areas where kiosks and interpretive signs can enhance the educational experiences of
users of the shoreline.
16. Develop strategies to fund shoreline-related educational and interpretative projects.
4.4.2 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation
Policies
1. Developments and activities in the City’s shoreline should be planned and designed to retain
native vegetation or replace shoreline vegetation with native species to achieve no net loss of
the ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes performed by vegetation.
2. Woody debris should be left in the river corridors to enhance wildlife habitat and shoreline
ecological functions, except where it threatens personal safety or critical infrastructure, such as
bridge pilings. In such cases where debris poses a threat, it should be dislodged, but should not
be removed from the river.
Regulations
1. During any development activity within the shoreline jurisdiction, native plant communities
located within the shoreline buffer (minimum of 100-feet from OHWM for Shoreline Residential
and Urban Conservancy environments; 200-feet for Natural environment) shall be protected,
maintained, or enhanced per the regulations established in the Critical Areas Ordinance and the
Master Program. Pursuant to ACC 16.10.090, “Buffer Areas and Setbacks”, buffers that have
been previously disturbed shall be re-vegetated pursuant to an approved enhancement plan.
2. The following uses are allowed within the shoreline buffer only when also allowed within the
applicable shoreline environment designation:
a. Improvements that are part of an approved enhancement, restoration or mitigation plan
b. New public roads and bridges, where no feasible alternative location exists
c. Utilities and accessory structures, where no feasible alternative location exists
d. Foot trails constructed according to the following criteria:
i. Designed to minimize impact of permeable materials;
ii. Designed to minimize impact on the shoreline system;
iii. Of a maximum width of twelve (12) feet; and
Page 115 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-5 Draft August 5, 2019
iv. Located within the outer half of the shoreline buffer, i.e. the portion of the
buffer that is farther away from the stream.
e. Footbridges
f. Education facilities, such as viewing platforms and informational signs
g. Water-oriented uses
h. Replacement or rehabilitation of existing levees
i. Under residential development regulations, approved docks, floats, buoys, bulkheads,
launching ramps and similar structures are exempt from the setback.
3. Pursuant to ACC 18.50.06045, “General landscape requirementsPreservation of significant
trees”, all significant trees shall be retained and made part of the landscape plan, as applicable.
Pursuant to ACC 18.50.03045, “Definitions”, significant trees are defined as a healthy evergreen
tree, six inches or more in diameter measured four feet above grade; or a healthy deciduous
tree four inches or more in diameter measured four feet above grade. The Director may
authorize the exclusion of any significant tree which for the reason of public health, safety or
reasonable site development is not desirable to maintain.
4. Any pruning of trees or shrubs shall be for the purpose of maintaining the tree or shrub in a
healthy growing condition and/or to enhance its natural growing form. Excessive pruning of
trees or shrubs that adversely affects the healthy living condition of the plant or excessively
damages the natural growing form of the plant shall be prohibited; unless such pruning is done
to alleviate documented public health and safety concerns.
5. A critical areas study shall be submitted for review for all proposed development activity within
the shoreline jurisdiction. The purpose of the report is to determine the extent, characteristics
and functions of critical areas located on or potentially affected by proposed activities on site.
See ACC Section 16.10.070 “Critical Area Review Process and Application Requirements” for
required report contents.
6. Shoreline buffers shall be protected during construction by placement of a temporary barricade,
notice of the presence of the critical area and implementation of appropriate erosion and
sedimentation controls as described in ACC 16.10.090, “Buffer Areas and Setbacks”.
7. As part of a development proposal, the Director may require the shoreline buffer to be placed in
a separate tract on which development is prohibited; protected by execution of an easement
dedicated to the City, a conservation organization, or land trust; or similarly preserved through a
permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City as described in ACC Section 16.10.090,
“Buffer Areas and Setbacks.”
8. Proposed development in the shoreline jurisdiction shall include provision of landscape
information appropriate to identify and remove nonnative and invasive species and replace with
native vegetation to maintain or enhance shoreline ecological functions on the property. When
required by the Director, landscape plans shall establish a staged vegetation removal and
replacement program that keeps the amount of exposed soil during and after clearing and
grading activities to a minimum. In drier months, temporary surface irrigation or temporary
installation of intermediate plantings may be required until weather or seasonal conditions
permit installation of the permanent plantings.
9. If the area of clearing or grading necessary to remove nonnative or invasive vegetation totals
one-acre or greater (43,560 square feet), located on site, in or outside of shoreline jurisdiction,
Page 116 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-6
then water quality and erosion control measures shall be established through the NPDES
Construction Stormwater General Permit and associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). If the area of clearing or grading is less than one-acre, but includes disturbance of
land in shoreline jurisdiction, a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan shall be
required. The TESC Plan shall employ best management practices (BMPs) consistent with
cityCity engineering design and construction standards.
10. Should a development create unavoidable impacts adverse to shoreline vegetation located
within the shoreline jurisdiction, mitigation shall be required. Mitigation shall ensure that there
will be no net loss in the amount of vegetated area or the ecological functions performed by the
disturbed vegetation. The Director shall rely on the critical areas study required under
regulation #45 of this section to provide a site specific description of the ecological functions
while also relying on the Auburn Inventory and Characterization report as a general guide.
Pursuant to Section 4.4.3., “Environmental Impact Mitigation” of the Master Program and ACC
16.10.120, “Mitigation Standards, Criteria and Plan Requirements”, on-site and in-kind
mitigation is preferred. Mitigation plans shall be completed before initiation of other permitted
activities, unless a phased or concurrent schedule that assures completion prior to occupancy
has been approved by the Director.
11. Restoration of any shoreline that has been disturbed or degraded shall use native plant
materials with a diversity and type appropriate for the site. As described in ACC Section
16.10.120, “Performance Standards for Mitigation Planning”, plants native to the Puget
Lowlands or Pacific Northwest ecoregion should be used as well as plants that are adapted and
appropriate for the proposed habitats. Significant areas of the site should not be planted with
species that have questionable potential for successful establishment. The use of perennial
plants is preferred over annual species. Plant species high in food and cover value for native fish
and wildlife species that are known or likely to use the mitigation site should be used. Emulate
the plant species heterogeneity and structural diversity found in native plant communities, as
described in regionally recognized publications on native landscapes.
12. Aquatic weed control shall only occur when native plant communities and associated habitats
are threatened or when an existing water-dependent use is restricted by the presence of weeds.
13. For lawns and other vegetation maintained within shoreline jurisdiction, the use of chemical
fertilizers, pesticides or other similar chemical treatments shall be discouraged and alternative
practices shall be employed. Where chemical fertilizer, herbicide, or pesticide use is necessary
for protecting existing natural vegetation or establishing new vegetation in shoreline areas as
part of an erosion control or mitigation plan, the use of time release fertilizer and herbicides
shall be preferred over liquid or concentrate application. As described in ACC 16.10.120,
“Performance Standards for Mitigation Planning”, fertilizers must be applied per manufacturer
specifications to planting holes in organic or controlled release forms, and never broadcast on
the ground surface. If herbicides are used, only those approved for use in aquatic ecosystems by
the Washington Department of Ecology shall be used. Herbicides shall only be used in
conformance with all applicable laws and regulations and be applied per manufacturer
specifications by an applicator licensed in the state of Washington.
Page 117 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-7 Draft August 5, 2019
4.4.3 Environmental Impact Mitigation
Policies
1. All shoreline use and development should be carried out in a manner that avoids and minimizes
adverse impacts so that the resulting ecological condition does not become worse than the
current condition. This means assuring no net loss of ecological functions and processes and
protecting critical areas designated in Auburn City Code Chapter 16.10 ACC that are located in
the shoreline. Should a proposed use and development potentially create significant adverse
environmental impacts not otherwise avoided or mitigated by compliance with the master
program, the Director should require mitigation measures to ensure no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions.
Regulations
1. To the extent Washington's State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA), cChapter 43.21C
RCW, is applicable, the analysis of environmental impacts from proposed shoreline uses or
developments shall be conducted consistent with the rules implementing SEPA (ACC Chapter
16.06 ACC and WAC 197-11).
2. Where required, mitigation measures shall be applied in the following sequence of steps listed
in order of priority.
a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or
reduce impacts;
c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;
d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations;
e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or
environments; and
f. Monitoring the impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate corrective
measures.
3. In determining appropriate mitigation measures applicable to shoreline development, lower
priority measures shall be applied only where higher priority measures are determined to be
infeasible or inapplicable.
4. Required mitigation shall not be in excess of that necessary to assure that proposed uses or
development will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
5. Mitigation actions shall not have a significant adverse impact on other shoreline functions
fostered by the policies of the Shoreline Management Act.
6. When compensatory measures are appropriate pursuant to the priority of mitigation
sequencing above, preferential consideration shall be given to measures that replace the
impacted functions directly and in the immediate vicinity of the impact. However, alternative
compensatory mitigation within the watershed that addresses limiting factors or identified
critical needs for shoreline resource conservation based on watershed or comprehensive
Page 118 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-8
resource management plans applicable to the area of impact may be authorized. Authorization
of compensatory mitigation measures may require appropriate safeguards, terms or conditions
as necessary to ensure no net loss of ecological functions. ACC Section 16.10.110, “Mitigation
Standards, Criteria And Plan Requirements,” establishes regulations on location and timing of
mitigation. On-site and in-kind mitigation are preferred.
7. A monitoring program shall be prepared and implemented by the applicant for mitigation
projects. The monitoring program shall include a contingency plan in the event that
implementation of the mitigation plan is inadequate or fails. A performance and maintenance
security is required in the amount of one hundred and twenty-five percent of the cost of the
mitigation project for the length of the monitoring period. This is to ensure the applicant
complies with the terms of the approved mitigation plan. See ACC 16.10.130, “Monitoring
Program and Contingency Plan”, for specific elements that need to be incorporated into the
monitoring program.
4.4.4 Critical Areas
Policies
1. Provide a level of protection to critical areas within the shoreline that is at least equal to that
which is provided by the City’s critical areas regulations adopted pursuant to the Growth
Management Act and the City’s Comprehensive Plan. If conflicts between the SMP and the
critical area regulations arise, the regulations that are most consistent with the SMA or its WAC
provisions will govern.
2. Allow activities in critical areas that protect and, where possible, restore the ecological functions
and ecosystem-wide processes of the City’s shorelines.
3. Preserve, protect, restore and/or mitigate wetlands critical areas within and associated with the
City’s shorelines to achieve no net loss of wetland area and wetlandshoreline ecological
functions.
4. Developments in shoreline areas that are identified as geologically hazardous areas, or pose a
foreseeable risk to people and improvements during the life of the development, should not be
allowed.
Regulations
1. Provisions of the City of Auburn Critical Areas Ordinance, as codified in Chapter 16.10 ACC (per
Ordinance No. xxxx) are herein incorporated into this master program except as noted below:
a. If there are any conflicts or unclear distinctions between the Shoreline Master Program and
the Critical Areas standards as part of the Master Program, the requirements that are the
most consistent with the SMA or its WAC provisions shall apply, as determined by the
DirectorCity and Section 4.3 of this SMP.
b. Provisions of the Critical Areas standards that are not consistent with the Shoreline
Management Act (Chapter, 90.858 RCW), and supporting Washington Administrative Code
chapters shall not apply in shoreline jurisdiction.
c. The provisions of Auburn’s Critical Areas standards do not extend shoreline jurisdiction
beyond the limits specified in this SMP. For regulations addressing critical area buffer areas
Page 119 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-9 Draft August 5, 2019
that are outside shoreline jurisdiction, see Auburn’s Critical Areas OrdinanceChapter 16.10
ACC.
d. When definitions per ACC 16.10.020 “Definitions” conflict with SMP definitions per Chapter
1, SMP definitions shall apply.
e. ACC 16.10.030 “Applicability – Regulated activities” shall not apply within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Determining which activities are regulated shall be governed by this Master
Program.
f. Activities that are exempt from the provisions of Auburn’s Critical Areas Ordinance per ACC
16.10.040 “Exemptions and nonconforming uses” shall not apply within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Determining which activities are exempt shall be be governed by this Master
Program and WAC 173-27-040.
g. Provisions of Auburn’s Critical Area Ordinance that include a “reasonable use
determination” shall not apply within shoreline jurisdiction. Specifically,
i. References to reasonable use in Section ACC 16.10.100 “Alteration or
development of critical areas – Standards and criteria” shall not apply; and
ii. Section ACC 16.10.150 “Reasonable use provision” shall not apply.
In the event an applicant wishes to adjust standards and provisions for designated critical
areas per the Reasonable Use Exception under ACC 16.10.150, such application shall be
processed as a Shoreline Variance Permit process, per the provisions of this SMP and WAC
173-27, Shoreline Management Permit and Enforcement Procedures.
h. Provisions of Auburn’s Critical Areas Ordinance relating to variance procedures and criteria
do not apply within the shoreline jurisdiction. Within the shoreline jurisdiction, the purpose
of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional or
performance standards set forth in the applicable Shoreline mMaster pProgram where
there are extraordinary circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of
property such that the strict implementation of the Shoreline mMaster pProgram will
impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the policies set forth in RCW
90.58.020. Specifically,
i. References to variances in Section ACC 16.10.090 “Buffer areas and setbacks”
shall not apply; and
ii. ACC section 16.10.160 “Variances” shall not apply. Variance procedures and
criteria shall be established in this SMP, Chapter 6, and in WAC 173-27-170.
i. ACC 16.10.170 “Special exception for public agencies and utilities” shall not apply.
2. All shoreline uses and activities shall be located, designed, constructed and managed to protect
and/or enhance the ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes provided by critical
areas including, but not limited to: Wetlands, Streams, Wildlife Habitat, Groundwater Protection
AreasAquifer Recharge Areas, Geologically Hazardous Areas, and Flood Hazard Areas as defined
and designated by the Critical Areas Ordinance; and Critical Freshwater Habitats as defined by
the Shoreline Master Program.
3. Proponents of development in shoreline areas that may impact Ggeologically Hhazardous areas,
as defined and designated in the Critical Areas Ordinance (Chapter 16.10 ACC), critical areas
must submit a gGeologictechnical hazard rReport that complies that is prepared consistent with
Page 120 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-10
Chapter 16.10 ACC and the City of Auburn Engineering Design Standardsthe submittal
requirements provided in Appendix C.
4.4.5 Critical Area Regulations Table
The following table provides a summary of standards and provisions per ACC “Critical Areas.” The table
is only meant to serve as a reference; applicable provisions ACC (included as Appendix A) should be
consulted directly to determine the full extent of the regulation. Per ACC , the Green River and White
River are considered Class I Streams. Other designated critical areas that may be located within
shoreline jurisdiction include wetlands, wildlife habitat areas, and geologic hazard areas.
Page 121 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-11 Draft
Table 1. Critical Area Regulations
Critical Area Minimum Buffer
Width
Maximum Buffer
Width
How to Measure Buffer
Width Buffer Composition
Buffer
Averaging/Width
Reduction
Class I Streams
100 feet (Urban
Conservancy and
Shoreline Residential)
200 feet (Natural)
Buffer width may be
increased by the
Director by up to a
maximum of 50%
pursuant to ACC
(E)(2)(b)
The buffer shall be
measured from the
ordinary high water
mark.
Buffers shall typically
consist of an
undisturbed area of
native vegetation
retained or established
to achieve the purpose
of the buffer. No
buildings or structures
shall be allowed within
the buffer unless as
otherwise permitted by
ACC or the Master
Program. If the site has
previously been
disturbed, the buffer
area shall be
revegetated pursuant
to an approved
enhancement plan.
Buffer averaging is not
permitted
Buffer widths may be
reduced by up to 35%
provided the applicant
demonstrates that a
reduction will not result
in any adverse impact
to the stream.
Enhancement of the
buffer may be required.
Buffer width reduction
must comply with ACC
(E)(1).
Wetlands The buffer shall be
measured perpendicular
from the wetland edge as
delineated and marked in
the field using the 1997
Washington State
Wetlands Identification
Manual.
Buffer width averaging
may be allowed
provided the total area
contained within the
buffer after averaging is
no less in area than
contained within the
standard buffer prior to
averaging, where such
reduction shall not
result in greater than a
Category I 100 feet 200 feet
Category II 50 feet 100 feet
Page 122 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft 4-12
Critical Area Minimum Buffer
Width
Maximum Buffer
Width
How to Measure Buffer
Width Buffer Composition
Buffer
Averaging/Width
Reduction
Category III 25 feet 50 feet
35 percent reduction in
the buffer width and
the applicant
demonstrates
compliance with ACC
(E)(1) Buffer Areas and
Setbacks.
Buffer width can be
reduced by up to 35%
provided the applicant
enhances or restores
the buffer. The
restoration or
enhancement would
have to meet
requirements per ACC
(E)(1) Buffer Areas and
Setbacks.
Category IV 25 feet 30 feet
Page 123 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-13 Draft
Critical Area Minimum Buffer
Width
Maximum Buffer
Width
How to Measure Buffer
Width Buffer Composition
Buffer
Averaging/Width
Reduction
Wildlife Habitat
Areas
Buffer widths shall be
determined by the
director based on the
following factors:
• species
recommendations of
the Department of Fish
and Wildlife;
• recommendations
contained in the
wildlife report and the
nature and intensity of
land uses and activities
occurring on the site
and on adjacent sites.
N/A N/A
Buffers shall typically
consist of an
undisturbed area of
native vegetation
retained or established
to achieve the purpose
of the buffer. No
buildings or structures
shall be allowed within
the buffer unless as
otherwise permitted by
ACC or the Master
Program. If the site has
previously been
disturbed, the buffer
area shall be
revegetated pursuant
to an approved
enhancement plan.
Buffer widths for critical
habitat areas may be
modified by averaging
buffer widths or by
enhancing or restoring
buffer quality.
Geologic Hazard
Areas
Required buffers may
vary in width. The
widths of the buffer
shall reflect the
sensitivity of the
geologic hazard area in
question and the types
and density of uses
proposed on or
adjacent to the
geologic hazard.
N/A
Geologic hazard area
buffers shall be
measured from the top
and toe and along the
sides of the slope.
Not permitted
Page 124 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft 4-14
Critical Area Minimum Buffer
Width
Maximum Buffer
Width
How to Measure Buffer
Width Buffer Composition
Buffer
Averaging/Width
Reduction
Buffers shall typically
consist of an
undisturbed area of
native vegetation
retained or established
to achieve the purpose
of the buffer. No
buildings or structures
shall be allowed within
the buffer unless as
otherwise permitted by
ACC 16.10 or the
Master Program. If the
site has previously
been disturbed, the
buffer area shall be
revegetated pursuant
to an approved
enhancement plan.
Buffers shall typically
consist of an
undisturbed area of
Page 125 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-15 Draft
Critical Area Minimum Buffer
Width
Maximum Buffer
Width
How to Measure Buffer
Width Buffer Composition
Buffer
Averaging/Width
Reduction
native vegetation
retained or established
to achieve the purpose
of the buffer. No
buildings or structures
shall be allowed within
the buffer unless as
otherwise permitted by
ACC 16.10 or the
Master Program. If the
site has previously
been disturbed, the
buffer area shall be
revegetated pursuant
to an approved
enhancement plan.
Page 126 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-16
4.4.64.4.5 Public Access (including views)
Policies
1. Public access improvements should not result in adverse impacts to the natural character and
quality of the shoreline and associated wetlands or result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions. Developments and activities within the shoreline should not impair or detract from
the public’s visual or physical access to the water.
2. Protection and enhancement of the public’s physical and visual access to shorelines should be
encouraged.
3. The amount and diversity of public access to shorelines should be increased consistent with the
natural shoreline character, property rights, and public safety.
4. Publicly owned shorelines should be limited to water-dependent or public recreation uses,
otherwise such shorelines should remain protected, undeveloped open space.
5. Public access should be designed to provide for public safety. Public access facilities should
provide auxiliary facilities, such as parking and sanitation facilities, when appropriate, and
should be designed to be ADA accessible.
Regulations
1. All shoreline permits shall include provisions to provide public access where any of the following
conditions are present:
a. Where a development or use will create increased demand for public access to the
shoreline;
b. Where a development or use will interfere with an existing public access way;
c. Where a use is not a priority use under the Act;
d. Where a new multi-unit residential development or land subdivision for more than four
parcels is proposed
e. Where a non-water-dependent use (including water-enjoyment and water-related use) is
proposed or,
f. Where a use or development will interfere with the public use of the lands or waters subject
to the public trust doctrine.
2. An applicant need not provide public access where one or more of the following conditions
apply:
a. The City of Auburn provides more effective public access through preparation and adoption
of a public access planning process and plan as described in WAC 173-26-221(4)(c);
b. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exists which cannot be prevented by
practical means;
c. Inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of
alternative design features or other solutions;
d. Environmental harm will result from the public access that cannot be mitigated; or,
Page 127 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-17 Draft August 5, 2019
e. Adverse and unavoidable conflict between access requirements and the proposed use
cannot be mitigated.
3. Public access shall be designed to respect private properties.
4. Development uses and activities shall be designed and operated to avoid blocking, obstructing,
reducing or adversely interfering with the public’s physical and visual access to the water and
shorelines.
5. Development on the water shall be constructed of non-reflective materials that are compatible
in terms of color and texture with the surrounding area.
6. Public access locations shall be clearly marked with visible signage.
7. Public access provided by shoreline street ends, public utilities, and rights-of-way shall not be
diminished (RCW 36.87.130).
8. Shoreline development by any public entities, including the City of Auburn, port districts, state
agencies, and public utility districts, shall include public access measures as part of each
development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety,
security, impact to the shoreline environment or other provisions listed in WAC 173-26-
221(4)(d).
4.4.74.4.6 Flood Hazard Reduction
Policies
1. The City should manage flood protection through the City’s Comprehensive Drainage Plan,
Comprehensive Plan, stormwater regulations, and flood hazard areas regulations.
2. Discourage development within the floodplains associated with the City’s shorelines that would
individually or cumulatively result in an increase to the risk of flood damage.
3. Non-structural flood hazard reduction measures should be given preference over structural
measures. Structural flood hazard reduction measures should be avoided whenever possible.
When necessary, they should be accomplished in a manner that assures no net loss of ecological
functions and ecosystem-wide processes. Non-structural measures include setbacks, land use
controls prohibiting or limiting development in areas that are historically flooded, stormwater
management plans, or bioengineering measures.
4. Where possible, public access should be integrated into publicly financed flood control and
management facilities.
Regulations
1. No permanent non-water dependent structures or uses shall be placed in the floodway zone.
Bank protection associated with bridge construction and maintenance may be permitted and
shall conform to provisions of the State Hydraulics Code (RCW 77.55).
2. Normal maintenance and repair of existing flood control structures, such as levees and dikes, to
a state comparable to its original condition, shall be allowed per WAC 173-27-040(2) (b).
3. Rehabilitation or replacement of existing flood control structures, such as levees and dikes,
whose primary purpose is to contain the 1-percent annual chance flood event, shall be allowed
where it can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis that the existing structure:
Page 128 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-18
a. Does not provide an appropriate level of protection for surrounding lands; or
b. Does not meet appropriate engineering design standards for stability (e.g., oversteepened
side slopes for existing soil and/or flow conditions).
Rehabilitated or replaced structures shall maintain equal or lesser side slope angles to existing
conditions, and shall not extend the toe of slope laterally into the channel.
4. New structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be allowed only under the following
circumstances:
a. When it can be demonstrated by a scientific and engineering analysis that they are
necessary to protect existing development;
b. That non-structural measures are not feasible;
c. That impacts to ecological functions and priority species and habitats can be successfully
mitigated so as to assure no net loss; and
d. That appropriate vegetation restoration and conservation actions are undertaken consistent
with regulations under Section 4.4.2 “Shoreline Vegetation Conservation” of the Master
Program and ACCChapter 16.10 ACC, “Critical Areas”.
5. Permanent structures placed within the 100-year floodplain shall be designed and constructed
in accordance with the requirements of ACC Chapter 15.68 ACC, “Flood Hazard Areas”.
6. New structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as dikes, levees, berms and similar flood
control structures shall be placed landward of the floodway as determined by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the State of Washington, Department of Ecology.
7. New structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as dikes, levees, berms shall be placed
landward of associated wetlands, and designated vegetation conservation areas, except when
the project includes increasing ecological functions as part of the design or as mitigation for
impacts.
8. Dikes, levees, berms and similar flood control structures shall be shaped and planted with
vegetation suitable for wildlife habitat.
9. New structural public flood hazard reduction measures, such as dikes and levees shall dedicate
and provide or improve public access unless public access improvements would cause
unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security problems,
significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated, unavoidable conflict with the proposed
use, or a cost that is disproportionate and unreasonable to the total long-term cost of the
development.
10. Removal of gravel from the river channel for flood management purposes is prohibited.
4.4.84.4.7 Water Quality, Storm water and Non-Point Pollution
Policies
1. The City should prevent impacts to water quality and storm water quantity that would result in a
net loss of shoreline ecological functions, or a significant impact to aesthetic qualities, or
recreational opportunities.
Page 129 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-19 Draft August 5, 2019
2. Storm water management treatment, conveyance, or discharge facilities should be discouraged
in the shoreline jurisdiction, unless no other feasible alternative is available.
3. Low impact development techniques that allow for greater amount of storm water to infiltrate
into the soil should be encouraged to reduce storm water run-off.
4. Encourage conservation of existing shoreline vegetation which provides water quality protection
by slowing and filtering stormwater runoff.
Regulations
1. Shoreline development and use shall incorporate measures to protect and maintain surface and
ground water quantity and quality in accordance with all applicable laws. Appropriate
vegetation restoration and conservation actions shall be undertaken consistent with regulations
under Section 4.4.2, “Shoreline Vegetation Conservation” and ACCChapter 16.10 ACC, “Critical
Areas”.
2. Development within the City’s shoreline shall conform to all requirements in the City’s
Comprehensive Drainage Plan and stormwater standards, Comprehensive Plan, and Flood
Hazard Areas regulations.
3. The construction of new outfalls into water bodies and improvements to existing facilities shall
comply with all appropriate Federal, State, and City regulations for water quality.
4. Water discharged to rivers shall receive appropriate treatment as determined by the
Department of Ecology and shall not present a thermal or other barrier to fish migration.
5. Use of pesticides and fertilizers in or near shoreline jurisdiction shall conform to the following:
a. Pesticides applied using aerial spraying techniques within the shoreline jurisdiction,
including over water bodies or wetlands, shall be prohibited unless specifically permitted
under the Washington Departments of Agriculture or Ecology.
b. Pesticides, organic or mineral derived fertilizers, or other hazardous substances, if necessary
shall be restricted in accordance with: the state Department of Fish and Wildlife
Management Recommendations; the regulations of the state Department of Ecology as the
Environmental Protection Agency’s delegated authority and permitting body for the
application of pesticides and herbicides to the waters of Washington State; and pesticide
labels as per the authority of the state Department of Agriculture.
c. Pesticides shall be used, handled, and be disposed of in accordance with provisions of the
Washington State Pesticide Application Act (RCW 17.21) and the Washington State Pesticide
Act (RCW 15.587) to prevent contamination and sanitation problems.
4.4.94.4.8 Educational and Archeological Areas and Historic Sites
Policies
1. Where possible, Educational and Archeological Areas and Historic sites in the shoreline should
be permanently preserved for scientific study, education, and public observation.
Page 130 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-20
2. Consideration should be given to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Chapter
43.51 RCW to provide for the protection, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of
districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects located or associated with the shoreline that are
significant in American, Washington and local history, architecture, archeology or culture.
3. Where feasible and appropriate, access trails to shorelines should incorporate access to or
educational signage acknowledging protected, historical, cultural and archeological sites or
areas in the shoreline.
Regulations
1. If any archeological artifacts are uncovered during excavations in the shoreline, work must stop
and the City of Auburn, the State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation and the
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe must be notified.
2. Permits issued in areas known or highly suspected to contain archeological artifacts and data
shall have provisions providing for a site inspection and evaluation by an archeologist prior to
initiation of disturbance and for monitoring of potentially disruptive activities. Cost for
inspection and evaluation of the site will be the responsibility of the developer. This condition
shall require the approval by the Director before work can begin or resume on a project.
Significant archeological data or artifacts shall be recovered before work resumes or begins on a
project.
Page 131 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-21 Draft August 5, 2019
4.4.104.4.9 Nonconforming Use and Development Standards
Policies
1. Legally established uses and developments that predate the City’s Shoreline Master Program
(1973, as amended) should be allowed to continue as legal nonconforming uses provided that
future development or redevelopment does not increase the degree of nonconformity with this
program.
Regulations
1. Nonconforming structures.
a. Structures that were legally established and are used for a conforming use but which are
nonconforming with regard to setbacks, buffers or yards; area; bulk; height or density may
be maintained and repaired.
a.b. Nonconforming structures and may be enlarged or expanded provided that said
enlargement meets the applicable provisions of the SMP. The proposed expansion shalldoes
not increase the extent of nonconformity by further encroaching upon or extending into
areas where construction or use would not be allowed for new development or
usesstructures, unless a Shoreline Variance is obtained.
b.c. Uses and developments that were legally established and are nonconforming with regard to
the use regulations of the master program may continue as legal nonconforming uses. Such
uses shall not be enlarged or expanded, except that nNonconforming single-family
residences that are located landward of the ordinary high water markOHWM may be
enlarged or expanded in conformance with applicable bulk and dimensional standards by
the addition of space to the main structure or by the addition of normal appurtenances as
defined in WAC 173-27-040 (2)(g) upon approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit.
2. A use which is listed as a conditional use, but which existed prior to adoption of the master
program or any relevant amendment and for which a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit has not
been obtained shall be considered a nonconforming use.
a.d. A structure for which a variance has been issued shall be considered a legal nonconforming
structure and the requirements of this section shall apply as they apply to preexisting
nonconformities.
b.e. In the absence of other more specific regulations, Aa structure which is being or has been
used for a nonconforming use may be used for a different nonconforming use only upon the
approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit may be
approved only upon a finding that:
i. No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical; and
ii. The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the
Shoreline Master Program and as compatible with the uses in the area as the
preexisting use; and
iii. Meets WAC conditional use permit review criteria.
In addition, such conditions may be attached to the permit as are deemed necessary to
assure compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the master program and the
Page 132 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-22
Shoreline Management Act and to assure that the use will not become a nuisance or a
hazard.
c.f. A nonconforming structure which is moved any distance must be brought as closely as
practicable into conformance with the Shoreline Master Program.
d.g. If a nonconforming development structure is damaged to an extent not exceeding seventy-
five percent of the replacement cost of the original developmentstructure, it may be
reconstructed to those configurations existing immediately prior to the time the
development structure was damaged, provided that application is made for the permits
necessary to restore the development structure within six monthstwo years of the date the
damage occurred, all permits are obtained and the restoration is completed within two
years of permit issuance.
2. Nonconforming uses.
a. Uses that were legally established and are nonconforming with regard to the use regulations
of the master program may continue as legal nonconforming uses.
b. In the absence of other more specific regulations in the master program, such uses shall not
be enlarged or expanded, except upon approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit.
c. If a nonconforming use is discontinued for twelve consecutive months or for twelve months
during any two-year period, the nonconforming rights shall expire and any subsequent use
shall be made conforming unless re-establishment of the use is authorized through a
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit which must be applied for within the two-year period.
Water-dependent uses should not be considered discontinued when they are inactive due
to dormancy, or where the use includes phased or rotational operations as part of typical
operations. A use authorized pursuant to subsection (61)(e) of this section shall be
considered an allowed nonconforming use for purposes of this section.
3. Nonconforming lots.
a. 10. An nonconforming undeveloped lot, tract, parcel, site, or division of land
located landward of the ordinary high water mark which was established in accordance
with local and state subdivision requirements prior to the effective date of the Act or
the applicable master program but which does not conform to the present lot size
standards may be developed if permitted by other land use regulations of the local
government City and so long as such development conforms to all other requirements
of the applicable master program and the Shoreline Management Act. New single-family
development on nonconforming lots shall meet the development standards established
in Section 4.7.8 of this SMP, except as provided in the following subsections (b-c).
b. Nonconforming lots – Modest Home Provision (development allowed without a variance).
New single-family development on a vacant legal lot within the shoreline jurisdiction that is
significantly encumbered by the shoreline buffer may be allowed without a Shoreline
Variance when:
i. There is no opportunity to consolidate lots under common ownership that will
alleviate the nonconformity; and
ii. The building area lying within the shoreline buffer and interior to the required side
yard and front yard setbacks is not more than 2,500 square feet for a single-family
residence, otherwise all the provisions of the SMP apply. Building area means the
Page 133 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-23 Draft August 5, 2019
entire area utilized to construct a single-family residence (including all appurtenances,
except driveways). A driveway shall not be more than 600 square feet and must be
located entirely on the landward side of all structures; and
iii. The residence is located in the least environmentally damaging location relative to the
shoreline and any critical areas, as determined by the Director after recommendation
by a qualified consultant; and
iv. The lot does not contain any critical geologic hazard areas as defined in Chapter 16.10
ACC; and
v. All structures are as far landward as possible and not closer than 30 feet from the
OHWM; and
vi. At least 80 percent of the buffer area between the structures and the shoreline
and/or critical area is maintained or enhanced to a naturally vegetated condition; and
vii. All single-family residences approved under this section shall not extend waterward of
the common-line setback/buffer (see the following and Figure 1 below), as
determined by the Director. The setback can be determined as follows:
1. Where there are existing legally established nonconforming residences that
encroach on the established setback within 200 feet of either side of the proposed
building footprint, the Director may reduce the required setback/buffer for the
single-family residence (see Figure 1 below). In such cases, the proposed
residence may be set back from the OHWM to a common line drawn between the
nearest corners of each adjacent residence closest to the lot (measured to the
residence’s foundation). The common line buffer does not include measurements
from appurtenant or accessory structure.
2. In those instances where only one existing non-conforming single-family residence
is within 200 feet of the proposed building footprint, the Director may reduce the
setback/buffer of the proposed structure to a line drawn between the nearest
corner of the existing adjacent residence and the nearest applicable setback for
the adjacent vacant parcel as measured at the intersection of the setback line and
the property line, as shown in Figure 1 below.
3. In no case shall the reduced setback/buffer applied be less than 30 feet landward
of the OHWM. In all cases, buffers shall meet the requirements of 4.4.9(3)(b)(vi),
above.
4. Any further setback/buffer reduction for non-conforming lots beyond what is
allowed in this section shall require approval of a Shoreline Variance.
Figure 1. Common-Line Setback.
Page 134 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-24
4.5 Permitted Use Table
The following table illustrates which shoreline modifications and shoreline uses are allowed or
prohibited in each shoreline environment. This table is intended for reference purposes only. Refer to
text sections of the SMP for all applicable provisions related to specific uses and modifications. If
information in the table conflicts with provisions in other parts of the SMP conflict, the provisions
contained in text sections of the SMP shall apply.
Page 135 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-25 Draft August 5, 2019
P = Permitted - Permitted uses may require Shoreline Substantial Development Permits and
any other permits required by the Auburn Municipal Code and/or other regulatory
agencies.
C = Conditional Use - Conditional uses require Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and may
require other permits required by the Auburn Municipal Code and/or other regulatory
agencies.
X = Prohibited
Page 136 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-26
Table 1. Permitted Use
Shoreline Modification or Use
Shoreline Environment Designations
Natural Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential
Minimum Setbacks from OHWM 200-feet 100-feet 100-feet
Shoreline Modification
Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and
weirs
X X X
Dredging and Dredge Material
Disposal
P: For maintaining location,
depth, and width previously
authorized under this
program.
C: For habitat maintenance and
improvement and flood
protection in consultation
with the WDFW.
X: All other dredging and
disposal.
P: For maintaining location,
depth, and width previously
authorized under this program.
C: For habitat maintenance and
improvement and flood
protection in consultation with
the WDFW.
X: All other dredging activities.
P: For maintaining location, depth,
and width previously authorized
under this program.
C: For habitat maintenance and
improvement and flood
protection in consultation with
the WDFW.
X: All other dredging activities.
Dune modification X X X
Piers and Docks X X X
Structural flood hazard reduction
(dikes and levees)
C: Replacement or rehabilitation
of existing levees or dikes.
X: New levees or dikes.
P: Replacement or rehabilitation of
existing levees.
X: New levees or dikes.
P: Replacement or rehabilitation of
existing levees.
X: New levees or dikes.
Page 137 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-27 Draft August 5, 2019
Shoreline Modification or Use
Shoreline Environment Designations
Natural Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential
Shoreline Stabilization
(Bulkheads and Revetments)
X P: If accessory to single-family
residence.
C: If not accessory to a single-
family residence.
P: If accessory to single-family
residence.
C: If not accessory to a single-family
residence.
Clearing and Grading P: If associated with allowed
shoreline development.
P: If associated with allowed
shoreline development.
P: If associated with allowed
shoreline development.
Fill C: For activities associated with
habitat restoration.
X: All other fills.
P: Fills at or above the OHWM or
the natural bank, whichever is
less if associated with allowed
shoreline development.
Fills extending waterward of
OHWM for restoration projects
only.
C: Fills extending waterward of
OHWM for water dependent
uses only..
P: Fills at or above the OHWM or
the natural bank, whichever is
less if associated with allowed
shoreline development.
Fills extending waterward of
OHWM for restoration projects
only.
C: Fills extending waterward of
OHWM for water dependent
uses only..
Shoreline Habitat and Natural
Systems Enhancement Projects
P P P
Shoreline Use
Page 138 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-28
Shoreline Modification or Use
Shoreline Environment Designations
Natural Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential
Agriculture P: Existing and ongoing
agricultural activities.
X: All other agricultural activities.
P: Existing and ongoing agricultural
activities.
X: All other agricultural activities.
P: Existing and ongoing agricultural
activities.
X: All other agricultural activities.
Aquaculture C: Fish hatcheries and
associated facilities.
X: All other aquaculture activities
and uses .
C: Fish hatcheries and associated
facilities.
X: All other aquaculture activities
and uses .
X
Boating Facilities X P: Boat launching ramps open to
the public otherwise
prohibited.
P: Boat launching ramps open to
the public otherwise prohibited.
Commercial Development X X X
Forest Practices X X X
Industrial Development X X X
In-stream Structures C: Fish Hatcheries and
associated facilities.
C C
Mining X: New or expanded mining. X: New or expanded mining
C: Existing mining and related
activities.
X: New or expanded mining.
Page 139 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-29 Draft August 5, 2019
Shoreline Modification or Use
Shoreline Environment Designations
Natural Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential
Recreation P: Unpaved bridle, bicycling and
hiking trails, including over
water pedestrian bridges;
viewpoints, including
interpretative viewpoints;
fishing access areas not
requiring structural facilities;
and pedestrian boardwalks.
X: Golf courses; ORV trails and
areas; resorts; high intensity
parks; walk-in campgrounds.
P: Paved and unpaved
bridle/bicycling/ walking trails,
interpretive viewpoints,
pedestrian boardwalks and
piers, pedestrian bridges, over
water, water-enjoyment uses,
golf courses, and incidental
retail activity in conjunction
with a public access pier.
C: Non-water related uses.
X: Walk in campgrounds, resorts,
off road vehicles (ORV) trails
P: Paved and unpaved
bridle/bicycling/walking trails,
interpretive viewpoints,
pedestrian boardwalks,
pedestrian bridges, over water.
C: Non-water related accessory
uses and water-enjoyment uses.
X: Golf courses, incidental retail
activity associated with a
recreational use, walk in
campgrounds, resorts, and off
road vehicles (ORV) trails.
Residential Developments P: Residential development and
land divisions are permitted
provided no improvements
are located within the
required buffer.
P: Uses commonly accessory to
single family residences.
C: New single-family residence1;
C: rResidential subdivisions;
multi-family residential
development.
P: New a single-family residence;
residential subdivisions; and uses
accessory to single family
residences.
C: Multifamily development.
Signs P: Warning signs, navigational
signs, and informational
signs.
X: Commercial signs.
P P
Permanent Solid Waste Storage
or Transfer Facilities
X X X
Transportation Facilities (Roads
and Bridges)
P P P
Page 140 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-30
Shoreline Modification or Use
Shoreline Environment Designations
Natural Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential
Transportation Facilities
(Railroads)
X P: Pedestrian overpasses and
underpasses.
C: Relocation of existing tracks
landward of an existing right-
of-way with no expansion in
the number of tracks or
expansion of railroads within
the existing right-of-way.
X: Expansion of existing railroad
into new right of way and new
railroads.
P: Pedestrian overpasses and
underpasses.
C: Relocation of existing tracks
landward of an existing right-of-
way with no expansion in the
number of tracks or expansion of
railroads within the existing
right-of-way.
X: Expansion of existing railroad
into new right of way and new
railroads.
Utilities C: Underground linear utility
facilities and primary
conveyance facilities (pump
stations and pipelines), but
only when unavoidably
necessary to cross a body of
water; Storm drain outfalls.
X: Site-specific utility facilities
(i.e. sewage treatment plant,
water reclamation, electrical
substations); Linear utility
facilities except as listed
above.
P: Storm drain outfalls; primary
conveyance and distribution
facilities such as pipes and
pump stations; accessory utility
facilities to serve allowed
development.
C: Primary utilities such as
transmission facilities;
reclaimed water facilities;
potable water production;
wastewater treatment plant,;
and storm water storage or
treatment ponds.
X : Reclaimed water
discharge/application facilities.
P: Storm drain outfalls; primary
conveyance and distribution
facilities such as pipes and pump
stations; accessory utility
facilities to serve allowed
development.
C: Primary utilities such as
transmission facilities and storm
water storage and treatment
ponds.
X: Wastewater treatment plants;
reclaimed water facilities;
potable water production
facilities.
Unclassified Uses C C C
Page 141 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-31 Draft August 5, 2019
4.6 Shoreline Modification
Shoreline modifications are generally related to construction of a physical element such as a levee,
bulkhead, or pier at or near the river’s edge or extending into the channel. Other shoreline
modification actions include dredging, filling, or vegetation clearing in the shoreline jurisdiction.
Modifications are usually undertaken in support of or in preparation for an allowed shoreline use or
development.
4.6.1 Prohibited Modifications
The following shoreline modifications are prohibited in all shoreline environments unless addressed
separately in this sShoreline mMaster pProgram under another use:
1. Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs;
2. Dune modifications; and
3. Piers and docks.
4.6.2 Dredging and Dredge Material Disposal
Policies
1. Dredging and dredge material disposal should be done in manner, which avoids or minimizes
significant ecological impacts. Where impacts cannot be avoided, mitigation measure are
required that result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
2. Dredge spoil disposal in water bodies, on shorelands, or wetlands within a river’s channel
migration zone should be discouraged, except as needed for habitat improvement.
3. New development shall be sited and designed to avoid or, if that is not possible, to minimize the
need for new and maintenance dredging.
Regulations
1. Dredging of bottom materials for the sole purpose of obtaining fill material or aggregate
resources is prohibited, except when the material is necessary for the restoration of ecological
functions. When allowed, the site where the fill is to be placed must be located waterward of
the ordinary high-water mark. The project must be either associated with a MTCA or CERCLA
habitat restoration project or, if approved through a sShoreline cConditional uUse pPermit, any
other significant habitat enhancement project.
2. Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins shall be restricted to
maintaining location, depth, and width previously authorized under this program.
3. Material dredged in conformance with state and federal water quality standards may be used in
permitted fill projects.
4. Returned water from any dredge material disposed of on land shall meet all applicable water
quality standards and regulations. If necessary, disposal sites shall be protected by berms and
outlets to remove suspended solids and to ensure that the quality of return water meets state
Department of Ecology standards.
Page 142 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-32
5. When dredging is permitted, the dredging shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate the
proposed use or activity.
6. Disposal of dredged materials in water areas shall only be permitted in an approved disposal site
for habitat improvement, to correct material distribution problems affecting fish resources,
where depositing materials on land would be more detrimental to shoreline resources than
water deposition, or as fill in conjunction with an environmental remediation project.
7. Disposal of dredge material on shorelands or wetlands within a river’s channel migration zones
shall be prohibited. Proposals for the disposal of dredged materials in shoreline jurisdiction shall
require a cConditional uUse pPermit and must show that the site will be suitable for uses
permitted for that shoreline environment.
4.6.3 Piers and Docks
Policies
1. The City should discourage the construction of new piers, docks, or floats in the shoreline
jurisdiction along the Green and White Rivers.
Regulations
1. Construction of new piers, docks, or floats or expansion of existing piers, docks, or floats shall be
prohibited except as necessary for habitat monitoring or habitat improvement projects.
2. Maintenance of existing legally established piers, docks, and floats shall be allowed provided
that maintenance activities do not adversely impact shoreline ecological functions.
4.6.4 Shoreline Stabilization (bulkheads and revetments)
Policies
1. Shoreline stabilization activities that may necessitate new or increased shoreline stabilization on
the same or other affected properties where there has been no previous need for stabilization
should be discouraged
2. New shoreline uses and development be located away from the shoreline in order to preclude
the need for new shoreline stabilization structures.
3. Structural or “hard” shoreline stabilization techniques and structures should be allowed only
after it is demonstrated that non-structural or “soft” shoreline protection measures are not
feasible.
4. The cumulative effect of allowing bulkheads or revetments along river segments should be
evaluated. If it is determined that the cumulative effects of bulkheads or revetments would
have an adverse effect on shoreline functions or processes, then permits should not be granted.
5. Bulkheads should not be permitted as a solution to geo-physical problems such as mass slope
failure, sloughing, or land slides. Bulkheads and revetments should only be approved for the
purposes of protecting existing developments by preventing bank erosion by the rivers.
Page 143 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-33 Draft August 5, 2019
Regulations
1. Bulkheads or revetments shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that does
not degrade ecological function including fish habitat, and shall conform to the requirements of
the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife criteria and guidelines.
2. The builder of any bulkhead or revetment shall be financially responsible for determining the
nature and the extent of probable adverse effects on fish and wildlife or on the property of
others caused by his construction and shall propose to the City actions to minimize such effects.
3. A person who has received approval to construct a bulkhead in keeping with these regulations
may be required to grant adjacent property owners the privilege to tie in and meet with a
bulkhead when they have an approved permit.
4. When a bulkhead is required at a public access site, provision for safe access to the water shall
be incorporated in the design whenever possible.
5. Repair and maintenance shall maintain the aesthetic integrity of the existing structure.
6. Bulkheads or revetments shall be constructed of suitable materials that will serve to accomplish
the desired end with maximum preservation of natural characteristics. Automobile bodies, other
junk, solid waste or other materials with the potential for water quality degradation shall not be
used. Design and construction methods shall consider aesthetics and habitat protection.
7. New or enlarged structural shoreline stabilization measures for an existing development or
residences shall not be allowed unless there is conclusive evidence, documented by a
geotechnical analysis that the structure is in danger from shoreline erosion. The geotechnical
report must include estimates of erosion rates and damage within three years and must
evaluate on-site drainage issues and address drainage problems away from the shoreline edge
before considering structural shoreline stabilization. The project design and analysis must also
evaluate vegetation enhancement as a means of reducing erosion and promoting bank stability.
The report must demonstrate that “soft” shoreline protection measures or bioengineering
erosion control designs will not provide adequate upland protection of existing structures or
would pose a threat or risk to adjacent property.
8. An existing shoreline stabilization structure shall not be replaced with a similar structure unless
there is need to protect primary structures from erosion caused by currents, tidal action, or
waves. At the discretion of the City Engineer, the demonstration of need does not necessarily
require a geotechnical report by a licensed geotechnical engineer or related licensed
professional. The replacement structure shall be designed, located, sized, and constructed to
minimize harm to ecological functions. Replacement walls or bulkheads shall not encroach
waterward of the OHWM or existing structures unless the residence was occupied prior to
January 1, 1992, and there are overriding safety or environmental concerns. In such cases, the
replacement structure shall abut the existing shoreline stabilization structure. Soft shoreline
stabilization that restores ecological functions may be permitted waterward of the OHWM.
9. Provided that regulation #8 has been met, the replacement of lawfully established, existing
bulkheads or revetments shall be allowed, subject to the following priority system:
a. First priority. The first priority for replacement of bulkheads or revetments shall be to install
“soft” shoreline protection measures or bioengineering erosion control designs.
b. Second priority. The second priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments
shall be to install “hard” shoreline protection measures only when “soft” measures would
Page 144 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-34
not provide adequate upland protection of existing structures or would pose a threat or risk
to adjacent property.
c. Third priority. The third priority for replacement of bulkheads or revetments shall be
landward of the existing bulkhead.
d. Fourth Priority. The fourth priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments shall
be to replace in place (at the bulkhead’s existing location).
e. Fifth Priority. The fifth and last priority for replacement of existing bulkheads shall be a one-
time replacement no greater than three feet waterward of the existing bulkhead. Under this
fifth priority, documentation must be provided that habitat will not be adversely impacted
and habitat friendly materials shall be used. The property owner shall also demonstrate
that removing the existing structure would either
i. Cause irreversible environmental damages, or
ii. Undermine and damage the residential structure on the property.
10. When evaluating a proposal against the above priority system, at a minimum the following
criteria shall be considered:
a. Existing topography;
b. Existing development;
c. Location of abutting bulkheads; and,
d. Impact to habitat.
11. Bank protection material shall be placed on/from the bank. Dumping of bank protection
material directly from a truck bed onto the bank face is prohibited.
12. Bank protection material shall be clean and shall be of a sufficient size to prevent its being
washed away by high water.
13. When riprap is washed out and presents a hazard to the safety of recreational users, it shall be
removed by the owner of such material.
14. Whenever feasible, trees and vegetation shading streams and rivers shall be retained when
riprap is placed.
4.6.5 Clearing and Grading
Policies
1. Clearing and grading activities should only be allowed in association with a permitted shoreline
development.
2. Clearing and grading activities shall be limited to the minimum necessary for the intended
development, including residential development.
Regulations
1. Clearing and grading activities shall only be allowed in association with an allowed (permitted)
shoreline development.
Page 145 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-35 Draft August 5, 2019
2. Clearing and grading activities shall be limited to the minimum necessary for the intended
development, including any clearing and grading approved as part a landscape plan. If the area
of clearing or grading totals one-acre or greater (43,560 square feet), located on site, in or
outside of shoreline jurisdiction, then water quality and erosion control measures shall be
established through the NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit and associated
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). If the area of clearing or grading is less than
one-acre, but includes disturbance in shoreline jurisdiction, a Temporary Erosion and Sediment
Control (TESC) Plan shall be required. The TESC Plan shall employ best management practices
(BMPs) consistent with cityCity engineering design and construction standards.
3. Clearing and grading activities shall adhere to a prepared schedule and mitigation plan as
approved by the Director. This schedule and mitigation plan shall include, but not be limited to,
limits of clearing and grading activities and the design, implementation, maintenance, and
monitoring of mitigation requirements to prevent erosion, siltation, and destruction of
vegetation.
4. All grading shall be completed or stabilized by October 31st of each year unless the applicant
provides technical analysis that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Director that no harm to
the shoreline environment or safety problems would result from grading between October 31st
and April 1st.
5. Clearing invasive non-native shoreline vegetation listed on the King or Pierce County Noxious
Weed List is permitted in the shoreline, provided hand held equipment is used and native
vegetation is promptly reestablished in the disturbed area.
4.6.6 Fill
Policies
1. Fill placed waterward of the OHWM should be prohibited and only allowed to facilitate water-
dependaent uses or restoration projects.
2. Where permitted, fill should be the minimum necessary to provide for the proposed use and
should be permitted only when tied to a specific development proposal that is permitted by the
Shoreline Master Program.
3. The perimeter of fill activities should be designed to avoid or eliminate erosion and
sedimentation impacts, both during initial fill activities and over time.
Regulations
1. Fill extending no further than the OHWM or the natural bank, whichever is less, may be
permitted provided that probable significant adverse impacts are mitigated.
2. Fill for the purpose of creating new land shall be permitted only for water dependent uses.
3. Fill placed waterward of the OHWM for restoration purposes, such as nourishment of shoreline
areas, shall be permitted.
4. Perimeters of cuts and fills shall be provided with vegetation, riprap, retaining walls, or other
approved means for slope protection.
Page 146 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-36
5. Fill materials shall not cause violation of water quality standards or otherwise be toxic to
humans or to fish and wildlife.
4.6.7 Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects
Policies
1. All proposed shoreline habitat and natural systems enhancement projects should assure that
the activities associated with each project address legitimate restoration needs and priorities
and facilitate implementation of the Restoration Plan developed with this Shoreline Master
Program pursuant to WAC 173-26-201(2)(f).
Regulations
1. A shoreline habitat or natural systems enhancement project involving environmental
remediation activities shall not harm human health or the environment. Cleanup methods shall
not have significant negative impacts on adjacent and existing land uses in the area.
2. Where possible, habitat improvement projects shall be protected in perpetuity through a
conservation easement conveyed to the cityCity or public agency. The Director of Planning,
Building and Community may approve other forms of encumbrances. If future development
proposes to impact existing habitat improvement sites, it must be demonstrated that there are
no practicable alternatives to avoid adverse impacts and, further, that adequate mitigation is
provided to address unavoidable losses.
3. Habitat improvements shall use an ecosystem or landscape approach, integrate projects into
their surrounding shoreline environments and include greenbelts for species movement and
use.
3.4. The City may grant relief from shoreline master program development standards and use
regulations resulting from shoreline restoration projects within urban growth areas consistent
with criteria and procedures in WAC 173-27-215. “Shoreline restoration project" means a
project designed to restore impaired ecological function of a shoreline.
4.7 Shoreline Uses
Shoreline use activities are developments or activities that exist or are anticipated to occupy shoreline
locations.
Regulations are developed on the premise that all appropriate shoreline uses require some degree of
control to minimize adverse aeffects to the shoreline environment and adjoining properties.
Each proposed development within the Shoreline Management Act’s jurisdiction will be evaluated to
determine its conformance with the use activity policies and regulations, as well as the Shoreline
Management Element goals and policies, the SMA, and the SMP. Even uses and activities that are
exempt from the requirements for a sShoreline sSubstantial dDevelopment pPermit must be consistent
with the policies and regulations of the SMP, the SMA, and its provisions.
4.7.1 Prohibited Uses
The following uses are prohibited in all shoreline environments unless addressed separately in this
sShoreline mMaster pProgram under another use:
Page 147 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-37 Draft August 5, 2019
1. Boat houses;
2. Commercial development;
3. Forest practices;
4. Industrial development;
5. New or expanded mining; and
6. Permanent solid waste storage or transfer facilities.
4.7.2 Agriculture
Policies
1. This Program allows for existing, ongoing agricultural activities while also maintaining shoreline
ecological functions and processes.
2. Agricultural activities that do not meet the definition for existing and ongoing agricultural
activities should not be allowed in the shoreline.
3. Appropriate farm management techniques and new development construction should be
encouraged to prevent contamination of nearby water bodies and adverse effects on valuable
plant, fish, and animal life from fertilizer, herbicides and pesticide use and application.
4. A vegetative buffer should be encouraged to be placed and maintained between agricultural
lands and water bodies or wetlands in order to reduce harmful bank erosion and resulting
sedimentation, enhance water quality, provide shade, reduce flood hazard, and maintain habitat
for fish and wildlife.
5. Public access to the shoreline should be encouraged where it does not conflict with agricultural
activities.
6. Proposals to convert agricultural uses to other uses should comply with all policies and
regulations established by the Comprehensive Plan and this Master Program for said uses and
should not result in a net loss of ecological functions.
Regulations
1. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities shall be permitted in all shoreline environment
designations. All other agricultural activities shall be prohibited.
2. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities are encouraged to provide a buffer of natural or
planted permanent native vegetation between areas of crops, grazing, or other agricultural
activity and adjacent waters, channel migration zones, and wetlands.
3. Farming of fin fish, shellfish and management of other aquatic products are subject to the
policies and regulations for Aquaculture under Section 4.7.3.
4. Erosion control measures shall conform to guidelines and standards established by the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
5. The application of agricultural chemicals shall prevent the direct runoff of chemical-laden waters
into water bodies. Adequate provision shall be made to minimize their entry into any body of
water. Shoreline waters shall not be used for livestock watering.
Page 148 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-38
6. Livestock waste shall be disposed in a manner that will prevent surface or ground water
contamination.
7. Conversion of agricultural uses to other uses shall comply with the provisions of ACC Chapter
16.10 ACC, Critical Areas and this Program for the proposed use.
4.7.3 Aquaculture
Policies
1. Aquaculture is a water-dependent use, and when consistent with control of pollution and
avoidance of adverse impacts to the environment and preservation of habitat for resident native
species, is an accepted use of the shoreline.
2. Development of aquaculture facilities and associated activities, such as hatcheries and fish
counting stations should assure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes.
Aquacultural facilities should be designed and located so as not to spread disease to native
aquatic life, establish new non-native species which cause significant ecological impacts, or
significantly impact the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline.
3. Since locations for aquaculture activities are somewhat limited and require specific water
quality, temperature, oxygen content, and adjacent land use conditions, and because the
technology associated with some forms of aquaculture is still experimental, some latitude
should be given when implementing the regulations of this section, provided that potential
impacts on existing uses and shoreline ecological functions and processes are given due
consideration. Experimental aquaculture projects should be monitored and adaptively managed
to maintain shoreline ecological functions and processes.
Regulations
1. Development of aquaculture facilities shall be permitted as a conditional use in the Urban
Conservancy and Natural shoreline environments.
2. New upland aquaculture developments shall be screened from view from adjacent residential or
recreational areas by fences, berms, and/or vegetative buffers.
3. Reflected glare or direct light generated by aquaculture developments shall be minimized to the
greatest extent possible. Lighting fixtures shall be designed and hooded to prevent the light
source from being directly visible from outside the boundaries of the property.
4. The operators of aquaculture developments shall control odor through the proper storage and
disposal of feed and other organic materials and by maintaining a clean operation. A specific
plan for identifying and controlling odors shall be developed and approved as part of the permit
approval process.
5. Aquaculture that involves significant risk of cumulative adverse effects on water quality,
sediment quality, benthic and pelagic organisms, and/or wild fish populations through potential
contribution of antibiotic resistant bacteria, or escapement of nonnative species, or other
adverse effects on ESA-listed species shall not be permitted.
6. Aquaculture wastes shall be disposed of in a manner that will ensure strict compliance with all
applicable governmental waste disposal standards, including but not limited to the Federal
Page 149 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-39 Draft August 5, 2019
Clean Water Act, Section 401, and the Washington State Water Pollution Control Act (RCW
90.48).
4.7.4 Boating Facilities
Policies
1. Boating facilities should not be allowed unless they are accessible to the general public or serve
a community.
2. New boat launching ramps should be allowed only where they are located at sites with suitable
environmental conditions, shoreline configurations, access and neighboring uses.
3. Development of new or modifications to existing boat launching ramps and associated and
accessory uses should not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or other
significant adverse impacts.
Regulations
1. Public boat launching ramps shall be permitted in the Urban Conservancy and Shoreline
Residential Environments. Other types of boating facilities shall be prohibited in Natural, Urban
Conservancy, and Shoreline Residential Environments.
2. Before granting approval of a permit to allow any boat launching ramp, the applicant must
satisfactorily demonstrate that:
a. Adequate facilities for the efficient handling of sewage and litter will be provided.
b. The ramp will minimize impediments to migrating fish and will not locate on sites important
for salmonids, including spawning, feeding or rearing areas.
c. Important navigation routes or recreation areas will not be obstructed.
d. Adequate separation will be maintained between structures and adjacent properties.
e. Adequate separation and buffers will be maintained between the facility's associated
parking area and adjacent properties such that the landscaping requirements per Auburn
Municipal CodeChapter 18.50 ACC, “Landscaping and Screening” are met.
f. The dimensions and composition of buffers between the OHWM and the facility’s associated
parking area shall meet requirements per ACC Section 16.10.090, “Buffer areas and
setbacks”.
g. The boat launch shall be designed so that structures are aesthetically compatible with, or
enhance, existing shoreline features and uses.
4.7.5 In-Stream Structural Uses
Policies
1. Approval of applications for in-stream structures should require inclusion of provisions for the
protection and preservation of ecosystem-wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural
resources, including, but not limited to, fish and fish passage, wildlife and water resources,
shoreline critical areas, hydro geological processes, and natural scenic vistas.
Page 150 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-40
2. The location and planning of in-stream structures should give consideration to the full range of
public interests, watershed functions and processes, and environmental concerns, with special
emphasis on protecting and restoring priority habitats and species.
3. Non-structural and non-regulatory methods to protect, enhance, and restore shoreline
ecological functions and processes and other shoreline resources should be encouraged as an
alternative to structural in-stream structures.
Regulations
1. In-stream structures shall only be permitted as a cConditional uUse in the Urban Conservancy,
Shoreline Residential, and Natural (highly limited) environments.
2. Where in-stream structures are permitted, they shall be developed and maintained in a manner
that does not adversely impact ecological functions or wildlife habitat.
3. In-stream structures that divert water shall return flow to the river in as short a distance as
possible.
4. All permit applications for in- stream structures shall contain, at a minimum, the following:
a. Provision for public access to and along the affected shoreline and proposed recreational
features at the site, where applicable. Public access provisions shall include vistas and trails.
b. A plan describing the extent and location of vegetation proposed for removal to
accommodate the proposed facility and restoration plans.
c. All design work shall be done in consultation with the State Department of Fish and Wildlife,
State Department of Ecology and other relevant agencies.
4.7.6 Mining
Policies
1. Limit mining activities near the shoreline to existing mining uses.
Regulations
1. New or expanded mining activities shall be prohibited.
2. Impacts to shorelines and water bodies due to existing mining operations upland of the
shoreline jurisdiction shall be minimized.
4.7.7 Recreation
Policies
1. 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.
2. Shoreline areas with the potential for providing recreation or public access opportunities should
be identified for this use and, wherever possible, acquired and incorporated into the Public Park
and open space system.
Page 151 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-41 Draft August 5, 2019
3. Public recreational facilities should be located, designed and operated in a manner consistent
with the purpose of the environment designation in which they are located and such that no net
loss of shoreline ecological functions or ecosystem-wide processes result.
4. The coordination of local, state, and federal recreation planning should be encouraged so as to
mutually satisfy needs. Shoreline recreational developments should be consistent with the
City’s Comprehensive Plan and Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan.
5. Recreational development should not interfere with public use of navigable waters.
Regulations
1. Accessory use facilities such as rest rooms and parking areas shall be set back from the ordinary
high water markOHWM unless accessory use facilities are essentially water-oriented. These
areas should be linked to the shoreline by walkways.
2. For recreation developments requiring fertilizers, pesticides or other toxic chemicals, such as
golf courses and play fields, the applicant shall submit plans demonstrating the methods to be
used to prevent these chemicals and the resultant leachate from entering adjacent water bodies
and wetlands. At a minimum, plans shall meet the following:
a. Native vegetation zone strips and, if practical, shade trees shall be included in the
development. The City shall determine the maximum width necessary for buffer strips,
but in no case shall the buffer strip be less than 50 feet.
b. A chemical-free swath of at least 100 feet in width shall be established next to water
bodies and wetlands except that spot spraying for weed control is allowed on golf
courses.
c. Slow release fertilizers and herbicides are permitted outside the required chemical-free
swath. Liquid or concentrate application shall only be allowed for weed control spot
spraying.
d. Plans shall be consistent with Section 4.4.2., “Shoreline Vegetation Conservation” and
Section 4.4.8, “Water Quality, Storm water and non-point pollution” regulations of the
Master Program.
3. A coordinated system of signs indicating the publics’ right of access to shoreline areas shall be
installed and maintained in conspicuous locations at the point of access and the entrance
thereto.
4. In approving shoreline recreational developments, the City shall ensure that the development
will maintain, enhance or restore desirable shoreline features including scenic views. To this
end, the City may adjust and/or prescribe project dimensions, location of project components
on the site, intensity of use, screening, parking requirements, and setbacks, as deemed
appropriate to achieve this intent.
5. Recreational development shall be subject to the following design requirements:
a. Development shall be designed to maintain, enhance and/or restore desirable shoreline
features including areas of native vegetation, scenic views and aesthetic values.
b. Recreational developments shall provide non-motorized access to the shoreline such as
pedestrian and bicycle paths. Motorized vehicular access is prohibited on stream beds,
except for boat launching and maintenance activities.
Page 152 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-42
c. To protect natural resources and adjacent properties, recreational facility design and
operation shall prohibit the use of all-terrain and off-road vehicles in the shoreline area.
d. Proposals for developments shall include a landscape plan that uses primarily native, self-
sustaining vegetation. The removal of on-site native vegetation shall be limited to the
minimum necessary for the development of permitted structures or facilities. See “Clearing
and Grading” and “Shoreline Vegetation Conservation” sections of the Master Program for
specific regulations.
e. No recreation buildings or structures shall be built over water, except water dependent or
public access structures such as docks, piers, viewing platforms or walkways subject to
applicable regulations of this sShoreline mMaster pProgram.
f. Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions, such as screening, buffer strips fences
and signs to prevent parking overflow and to protect the value and enjoyment of adjacent
and natural areas.
g. Proposals for recreational developments must include plans for sewage disposal, water
supply, and solid waste disposal. All disposal facilities shall meet all applicable State and
local standards and regulations.
h. Accesses for boats shall allow safe and convenient passage to the public water, dictated by
the class of boats using the access.
4.7.8 Residential Development
Policies
1. New over-water residences, including floating homes, are not a preferred use and should be
prohibited.
2. New multi-unit residential development and land subdivisions for more than four parcels should
provide community and/or public access in conformance to the City’s public access planning and
this Shoreline Master Program. Adjoining access shall be considered in making this
determination.
3. Accessory development (to either multiple family or single- family) should be designed and
located to blend into the site as much as possible.
4. New residential developments and land divisions 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.
Regulations
1. Residential development shall be subject to the requirements of the City of Auburn Zoning Code
(Title 18 ACC). In case of a discrepancy between the requirements of this Master Program and
the Zoning Code, or other regulations, consistency with the SMP, the SMA, and its provisions
shall prevail.
2. The creation of new lots shall be prohibited unless all of the following can be demonstrated.
a. A primary residence can be built on each new lot without any of the following being
necessary:
Page 153 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-43 Draft August 5, 2019
i. New structural shoreline stabilization;
ii. New improvements in the required shoreline buffer or required critical area
buffer;
iii. Causing significant vegetation removal that adversely impacts ecological
functions;
iv. Causing significant erosion or reduction in slope stability; and
v. Causing increased flood hazard or erosion in the new development or to other
properties.
b. Adequate sewer, water, access, and utilities can be provided.
c. The intensity and type of development is consistent with the City’s cComprehensive pPlan
and development regulations.
d. Potential significant adverse environmental impacts (including significant ecological impacts)
can be avoided or mitigated to achieve no net loss of ecological functions, taking into
consideration temporal loss due to development and potential adverse impacts to the
environment.
3. Channel mMigration zZones and floodplain areas should be avoided if possible when new
residential lots are being created.
4. Prior to the granting of a Substantial Development Permit or Building Permit, the City shall make
a determination that the proposed project is consistent with the policies and regulations of the
Shoreline Master Program including the following standards:
a. The proposed development site is suited for residential use and is not located in areas
having significant hazard to life and property and likely to require future public funds to
protect and rehabilitate. Adequate methods of erosion control will be utilized during and
after project construction.
b. Disturbance of established, native shoreline vegetation will be minimized.
c. Solutions will be provided to the problem of contamination of surface waters, depletion and
contamination of ground water supplies and generation of increased runoff into water
bodies.
5. Residential development over water including garages, accessory buildings, and boathouses
shall not be permitted unless otherwise specified in this chapter.
6. New multi-unit multiple -family residential development, including the subdivision of land for
more than four parcels, shall include public access in conformance to with Section 4.4.6 “Public
Access” and the City’s public access planning.
7. The following lot coverage, setback and height limitations shall be applicable to residential
development in all shoreline environments:
a. Lot Coverage. Not more than 33 and 1/3 percent of the gross lot area within the regulated
shoreline shall be covered by impervious material including parking areas but excluding
driveways.
b. Setbacks. All setbacks, with the exception of the setbacks from the ordinary high water
markOHWM, shall be as required by the City of Auburn Zoning Code or other City
regulations.
Page 154 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-44
c. The required Ssetbacks for buildings and structures on Shoreline Sites from the Ordinary
High Water MarkOHWM in the Urban Conservancy and Shoreline Residential environment
designations. The required setback for buildings and structures from the ordinary high water
shall be measured from the OHWM mark or lawfully constructed bulkhead or revetment,
whichever is further upland, shall be 100 feet except that the shoreline setback shall not
apply to approved docks, floats, buoys, bulkheads, launching ramps, and similar structures.
d. The required Ssetbacks for Shoreline Sites from the OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark in
the Natural environment designation. The required setback for buildings and structures
from the ordinary high water mark shall be 200 feet. Residential development is allowed on
property with a Natural designation, provided the lot size and configuration can
accommodate such use without locating buildings, structures, impervious surface, or other
improvements within the 200-foot setback.
8. Site Preparation. It shall be the intent of this Chapter to require the maintenance, enhancement,
and preservation of the natural site amenities. To this end, the City may limit the extent of
grading and clearing to the extent deemed necessary for the reasonable and necessary use of
the site or tract.
9. Height Limitations. The maximum height above average grade level of any residential building or
structure shall be 35 feet.
10. Fences.
a. No fence shall extend waterward of the OHWM; and,
b. Fences waterward of the furthest waterward extension of the house shall be limited to four
feet in height or less.
c. Fences shall not be constructed in the floodway.
i. For instances where a floodway boundary changes, existing legally permitted
established fences may be maintained and repaired in place. Replacement fences shall
be relocated outside of the floodway.
11. The following uses shall be permitted provided they are accommodated by residential facilities
and are allowed by the underlying zoning as a permitted use (i.e., does not require a
cConditional uUse Permit per the applicable zoning regulations):
a. Home based daycare; and
b. Supportive housing.
4.7.9 Signs
Policies
1. Signs should be designed, constructed and placed so that they are compatible with the natural
quality of the shoreline environment and adjacent land and water uses.
Regulations
1. The location, erection, and maintenance of all signs must comply with the Chapter 18.56 ACC,
(Signs)ity of Auburn Sign Code.
Page 155 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-45 Draft August 5, 2019
2. Off-premise outdoor advertising signs are prohibited in all shoreline environments.
3. No signs will be erected or maintained upon trees, or drawn or painted upon rocks or other
natural features.
4.7.10 Transportation
Policies
1. Plan, locate, design and where appropriate construct, proposed roads, non-motorized systems
and parking facilities where routes will have the least possible adverse effect on unique or
fragile shoreline features, will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or
adversely impact existing or planned water-dependent uses. Where other options are available
and feasible, new roads or road expansions should not be built within shoreline jurisdiction.
2. The number of river crossings should be minimized.
3. Parking facilities in shorelines are not a preferred use and shall be allowed only as necessary to
support an authorized use and then as remote from the Sshoreline as possible.
4. Trail and bicycle systems should be encouraged along the White and Green Rivers wherever
possible.
5. Joint use of transportation corridors within the shoreline jurisdiction for roads, utilities, and
non-motorized transportation should be encouraged.
6. New railroad corridors should be prohibited.
Regulations
Roads & Bridges
1. Developers of new roads must be able to demonstrate the following:
a. The need for a shoreline location and that no reasonable upland alternative exists.
b. That construction is designed to protect the adjacent shorelands against erosion,
uncontrolled or polluting drainage, and other factors detrimental to the environment both
during and after construction.
c. That the project will be planned to fit the existing topography as much as possible thus
minimizing alterations to the natural environment.
d. That all debris, overburden and other waste materials from construction will be disposed of
in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion from drainage into the water body.
e. That proposed bridges will be built high enough to allow the passage of debris and
anticipated high water flows.
f. That when new roads will afford scenic vistas, viewpoint areas will be provided. Scenic
corridors shall have sufficient provision for safe pedestrian and non-motorized vehicular
travel.
2. Developers of roads must demonstrate that:
Page 156 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-46
a. The road is located on grade rather than elevated unless crossing wetlands. Road designs
must provide appropriate pedestrian and non-motorized vehicular crossings where public
access to shorelines is intended.
3. Where bridges cross the Green and White Rivers, pedestrian linear access along the water will
be provided except where precluded by safety factors. Pedestrian and bicycle passage across
water shall be provided except on limited access highways.
4. Bridges shall be used when crossing marshes, swamps, bogs, ponds, natural recharge areas and
other wetlands to avoid obstructing movement of surface and groundwater.
5. All cut and fill slopes shall be stabilized and planted with native and/or appropriately introduced
grasses, shrubs and/or trees which shall be maintained by the installing agency until established.
6. Roads shall be located so as to avoid the use of culverts to the maximum extent possible.
7. Major roads shall cross shoreline areas by the shortest most direct route feasible, unless such
route would cause significant additional environmental damage.
8. Private access roads providing ingress and egress for individual single family residences or lots
shall be limited to one lane with turnouts and may not exceed a maximum width of fifteen (15)
feet.
9. Private access roads serving two or more families may be two lanes in width.
Railroads
1. New railroads requiring right-of-way expansion are prohibited.
2. Expansion of existing railroad within existing rights-of-way (i.e. additional track) must
demonstrate the following:
a. The need for a shoreline location and that no reasonable upland alternative exists.
b. The construction is designed to protect adjacent shorelands against erosion, uncontrolled or
polluting drainage, and other factors detrimental to the environment both during and after
construction.
c. The identification of anticipated adverse environmental impacts and mitigation measures.
d. That the project is planned to fit the existing topography as much as possible thus
minimizing alterations to the natural environment.
e. That all debris, overburden and other waste materials from construction will be disposed of
in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion from drainage into a water body.
f. That proposed bridges, if any, will be built high enough to allow the passage of debris and
anticipated high water flows.
3. Relocation of existing tracks and right-of-way landward of an existing right-of-way with no
expansion in the number of tracks shall be a conditional use.
4. All cut and fill slopes shall be stabilized and planted with native and/or appropriately introduced
grasses, shrubs and/or trees which shall be maintained by the installing agency until fully
established.
5. Bridges shall be used when crossing marshes, swamps, bogs, ponds, natural recharge areas and
other wetlands to avoid obstructing movement of surface and groundwater.
Page 157 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-47 Draft August 5, 2019
6. Railroad overpasses and underpasses shall be encouraged and designed to promote safety for
the pedestrian and for the railroad.
7. Public access improvements, including tying in to existing access, shall be required with any
railroad expansion.
8. Easement crossings shall be granted by the railroad for public facilities and services as part of
railroad expansion or right-of-way relocation.
4.7.11 Utilities
Policies
1. Utility facilities should be designed and located to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological
functions, preserve the natural landscape and vistas, preserve and protect fish and wildlife
habitat, and minimize conflicts with present and planned land and shoreline uses.
2. Primary utility production and processing facilities, such as power plants, sewage treatment
plants, water reclamation plants, or parts of those facilities that are non-water-oriented should
not be allowed in shoreline areas.
3. Utilities should utilize existing transportation and utilities sites, rights-of-way and corridors,
whenever possible. Joint use of rights-of-way and corridors should be encouraged.
4. Transmission facilities for the conveyance of services, such as power lines, cables, and pipelines,
shall be located outside of the shoreline area where feasible. Where no other option exists,
utilities should be placed underground or alongside or under bridges.
5. New utilities facilities should be located so as not to require extensive shoreline protection
structures.
6. Where storm water management, conveyance, and discharge facilities are permitted in the
shoreline, they should be limited to the minimum size needed to accomplish their purpose and
should be sited and designed in a manner that avoids, or mitigates adverse effects to the
physical, hydrologic, or ecological functions.
7. Stormwater conveyance facilities should utilize existing transportation and utility sites, rights-of-
way and corridors, whenever possible. Joint use of right-of-way and corridors should be
encouraged.
Regulations
1. Shoreline permit applications for installation of primary utility facilities shall include the
following:
a. Reason why utility facility requires a shoreline location;
b. Alternative locations considered and reasons for their elimination; including alternate
methods of crossing such as directional boring;
c. Location of other utility facilities in the vicinity of the proposed project including facilities of
other types of utilities;
d. Plans for reclamation of areas disturbed during construction;
e. Plans for control of erosion and turbidity during construction;
Page 158 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 4-48
f. Possibility for consideration of the proposed facility within existing utility right-of-way.
2. Utilities shall be located to be consistent with the policies of comprehensive plan utilities
element.
3. The State of Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife and Ecology shall be notified of any
utility proposal which would require withdrawals or diversions of water from any body of water
under shoreline management jurisdiction.
4. Construction of underwater utilities or those within the wetland perimeter shall be timed to
avoid major fish migratory runs.
5. All underwater pipelines transporting liquids intrinsically harmful to aquatic life or potentially
detrimental to water quality shall provide automatic shut off valves.
6. Upon completion of utility installation/maintenance projects on shorelines, banks shall, at a
minimum, be restored to pre-project configuration, replanted and provided with maintenance
care until the newly planted vegetation is fully established. Plantings shall be native species
and/or be similar to vegetation in the surrounding area.
7. Above ground site specific primary utility facilities such as generating facilities, switching
complexes, wastewater treatment plants, water reclamation facilities, storage tanks, and
substations shall be located at least 200 feet from the ordinary high water markOHWM unless
the permittee can show the need for a shoreline location.
8. Water reclamation discharge facilities such as injection wells or activities such as land
application are prohibited in the shoreline jurisdiction.
9. Where major generating facilities must be placed in a shoreline area, scenic views shall not be
obstructed
10. Transmission, distribution, and conveyance facilities shall cross shoreline jurisdictional areas by
the shortest, most direct route feasible, unless such route would cause significant
environmental damage.
11. Where overhead transmission lines must parallel the shoreline, they shall be outside of the two
hundred (200) -foot shoreline environment unless topography or safety factors would make it
unfeasible.
12. Over water crossings of utilities shall be prohibited unless attached to a bridge structure.
13. Where practical, utilities should consolidate permit applications in situations where multiple
permits from individual utilities are required.
14. Accessory utility facilities, such as those typical and normal to support and serve a permitted
shoreline use, shall be a permitted use in all environments. This will typically consist of
distribution lines and individual service lines. Such utility facilities may be new or may be
relocated facilities associated with, by way of example, a road improvement project.
15. Storm water management facilities, limited to detention / retention / treatment ponds, media
filtration facilities, and lagoons or infiltration basins, within the shoreline jurisdiction shall only
be permitted when the following provisions are met:
a. Construction of the storm water facility does not displace or impact a critical area;
Page 159 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
4-49 Draft August 5, 2019
b. There is no other feasible location for the storm water facility and the facility is located,
constructed, and maintained in a manner that minimizes adverse effects to shoreline
ecological functions;
c. The storm water facility is designed to mimic and resemble natural wetlands and meets
applicable CountyCity or State storm water management standards and the discharge
water meets state water quality standards;
d. Low impact development approaches have been considered and implemented to the
maximum extent feasible.
16. Primary conveyance facilities, including storm water, wastewater, or water supply pump
stations; and storm water discharge facilities such as dispersion trenches, level spreaders, and
outfalls, may be located in the shoreline jurisdiction on a case by case basis with a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit when the Director of Planning, Building and Community
determines that all of the following are met:
a. Due to topographic or other physical constraints there are no feasible locations for these
facilities outside the shoreline;
b. The discharge is sited in a manner that minimizes disturbance of soils and vegetation.
c. The discharge outlet is designed to prevent erosion and promote infiltration.
17. Construction of stormwater facilities in the shorelines jurisdiction shall be timed to avoid fish
and wildlife migratory and spawning periods.
18. Proposal for all new storm water facilities shall include landscaping plans that enhance the
aesthetic quality of the shoreline, utilize native vegetation, and provide for maintenance care
until newly planted vegetation is established.
19. Development of stormwater facilities within the shoreline jurisdiction shall include public access
to the shoreline, trails systems, or other forms of recreation, providing such uses will not unduly
interfere with stormwater facility operations, endanger public health, safety, and welfare, or
create a significant and disproportionate liability for the owner.
Page 160 of 215
Page 161 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
5-1 Draft August 5, 2019
CHAPTER 5.0 Shoreline Master Program Amendments
5.1.1 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to set forth procedures when proposals are made to adopt or amend the
official controls of area-wide applicability which implement the sShoreline mMaster pProgram, i.e., the
shoreline use regulations and maps made a part thereof.
5.1.2 Amendments authorized.
The provisions of the sShoreline mMaster pProgram use regulations or the shoreline environment map
may be amended as provided for in RCW 90.58.120 and 90.58.200 and Chapter 173-26 WAC.
5.1.3 Adoption required by the council.
Adoption of an amendment to the official controls shall be adopted by the cityCity council by ordinance
after a public hearing and report by the planning commissionPlanning Commission.
5.1.4 Initiation of amendments.
The shoreline use regulations or map amendments thereto may be initiated by:
A. The adoption of a motion by the cityCity council requesting the planning commissionPlanning
Commission to set a matter for hearing and recommendation.
B. The adoption of a motion by the planning commissionPlanning Commission.
C. Application of one or more owners of property affected by the proposal.
D. A department or agency of the cityCity or governmental entity.
5.1.5 Applications required.
The Director shall prescribe the form(s) on which applications are made for amendments to the master
program use regulations and/or shoreline environment designation map.
Applications for amendments to the master program must satisfy the requirements of the State
Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 413.21C RCW and Chapter 197-11 WAC).
5.1.6 Public hearing required by planning commissionPlanning Commission.
Whenever an amendment to the use regulations and/or shoreline environment designation map is
initiated under Section 5.1.4 of this Master Program, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one
public hearing thereon, and notice of such hearing shall be given.
5.1.7 Burden of proof.
Proponents for shoreline environment map redesignations (i.e., amendments to the shoreline
environment designation map) shall bear the burden of proof for demonstrating consistency with the
Page 162 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 5-2
shoreline environment criteria of the master program, Chapter 173-26 WAC, and the goals and policies
of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan.
5.1.8 Public notice.
Notice shall be given pursuant to Chapter 173-26 WAC. Additional notice may be employed at the
discretion of the Director of Planning, Building, and Community.
5.1.9 City cCouncil.
The action by the Planning Commission on an amendment shall be considered advisory to the council.
Final and conclusive action on an amendment shall be taken only by the City Ccouncil.
5.1.10 Transmittal to the Department of Ecology.
Subsequent to final action by the cCouncil adopting or amending the Shoreline Master Program or
official control, said Master Program, official control or amendment thereto shall be submitted to the
Department of Ecology for approval. No such Master Program, official control or amendment there to
shall become effective until 14 days after written notice of approval by the Department of Ecology is
obtained per WAC 173-26-110.
Page 163 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
6-1 Draft August 5, 2019
CHAPTER 6.0 Shoreline Management Administrative and Permitting Procedures
The purpose of this chapter is to provide the administrative and permitting procedures for the SMP.
Each proposed development within the Shoreline Management Act’s jurisdiction will be evaluated to
determine its conformance with the use activity policies and regulations, as well as the Shoreline
Management Element goals and policies, the SMA, and the SMP. Even uses and activities that are
exempt from the requirements for a shoreline substantial development permit must be consistent with
the policies and regulations of the SMP, the SMA, and its provisions.
The following provisions are codified in Chapter Shoreline Management Administrative and Permitting
Procedures.
Sections:
16.08.010 Chapter purpose and intent.
16.08.015 Adoption of shoreline management procedures.
16.08.020 Definitions.
16.08.030 Administration and enforcement.
16.08.040 Application – Generally.
16.08.050 Application – Notices.
16.08.052 Statement of Exemption.
16.08.054 Application – Shoreline substantial development permit – Review criteria.
16.08.056 Application – Shoreline conditional use permit – Review criteria.
16.08.058 Application – Shoreline variance – Review criteria.
16.08.060 Application – Review criteria – Additional information.
16.08.070 Development conformance burden of proof.
16.08.080 Application – Hearing – Required.
16.08.090 Application – Hearing – Official conducting.
16.08.100 Application – Hearing – Continuance.
16.08.110 Application – Hearing – Decision.
16.08.120 Application – Hearing – Rules of conduct.
16.08.130 Application – Decision final.
16.08.140 Grant or denial decision – Notifications.
16.08.150 Development commencement time.
16.08.160 Termination or review and extension for nondevelopment.
16.08.170 Conditions or restrictions authorized.
16.08.180 Issuance limitations.
16.08.190 Decision appeals.
16.08.200 Rescission or modification.
16.08.210 Violation – Penalty.
16.08.220 Administration rules promulgation.
16.081.010 Chapter purpose and intent.
It is the intention of the city council that the provisions of this chapter will promulgate and adopt a
program for the administration and enforcement of a permit system that shall implement by reference
the State Shoreline Management Act of 1971, Chapter 90.58 RCW; the State Department of Ecology
regulations and guidelines adopted as Chapters 173-26 and 173-27 WAC; the Auburn shoreline master
program attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter, together with amendments and/or additions
thereto, and to provide for the implementation of the policy and standards as set forth in the aforesaid
Page 164 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 6-2
laws and regulations which are by reference made a part of this chapter with the force and effect as
though set out in full in this chapter. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987;
1957 code § 11.94.010.)
16.081.0152 Adoption of shoreline management procedures.
The city of Auburn hereby adopts by reference the following sections or subsections of Chapter 173-27
WAC, as amended, entitled “Shoreline Management Permit and Enforcement Procedures.”
WAC
173-27-020 Purpose
173-27-040 Developments exempt from substantial development permit requirement
173-27-050 Letter of exemption
173-27-060 Applicability of Chapter 90.58 RCW to federal land and agencies
173-27-090 Time requirements of permit
173-27-100 Revisions to permits
173-27-120 Special procedure for limited utility extensions and bulkheads
173-27-130 Filing with department
173-27-210 Minimum standards for conditional use and variance permits
173-27-270 Order to cease and desist
173-27-280 Civil penalty
173-27-290 Appeal of civil penalty
173-27-300 Criminal penalty
(Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008.)
16.081.0203 Definitions.
As used in this chapter:
A. “Act” means the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 (Chapter 90.58 RCW) and state departmental
regulations pursuant thereto, including any amendments thereto.
B. “Committee” means the planning and community development committee of the city council.
CB. “Definitions by reference” means the definitions and concepts set forth in Chapter 6 of the
Auburn shoreline master program attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter, the Act (RCW
90.58.030), and state departmental definitions (WAC 173-27-030 and 173-27-250) adopted pursuant
thereto which shall also apply as used in this chapter as they would pertain to shorelines within the city
limits.
DC. “Director” means the director of the department of planning and community development of the
city, or his duly authorized designee. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987;
Ord. 4047 § 71, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.020.)
16.081.0304 Administration and enforcement.
A. The director shall have the responsibility for the administration of the permit system pursuant to
the requirements of the Act and regulations adopted and promulgated by the State Department of
Ecology as pertains to the city.
B. The city attorney shall bring such injunctive, declaratory or other actions, which shall include the
provisions of Chapter 1.25 ACC, as are necessary to ensure that no uses are made of the shorelines of
the city in conflict with the provisions of this chapter or the Shoreline Management Act or in conflict
with the master program, rules or regulations adopted pursuant thereto, and to otherwise enforce the
Page 165 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
6-3 Draft August 5, 2019
provisions of this chapter and the Act. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4504 § 14, 1991;
Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.030.)
16.081.0405 Application – Generally.
In addition to the requirements for a completed application as set forth in ACC Title 14, applications for
substantial development permits, variances and conditional use permits shall be completed on forms
provided by the director. The application shall be substantially consistent with the information required
by WAC 173-27-180 including the following information:
A. Completed Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JARPA) form.
B. Completed intake form from WAC 173-27-990, Appendix A – Shoreline Management Act Permit
Data Sheet and Transmittal Letter.
C. The name, address, phone number and e-mail address of the applicant. The applicant should be
the owner of the property or the primary proponent of the project and not the representative of the
owner or primary proponent.
D. The name, address, phone number and e-mail address of the applicant’s representative, if other
than the applicant.
E. The name, address, phone number and e-mail address of the property owner, if other than the
applicant.
F. Location of the Property. This shall, at a minimum, include the property address and identification
of the section, township and range to the nearest quarter, quarter section or latitude and longitude to
the nearest minute. All applications for projects located in open water areas away from land shall
provide a longitude and latitude location.
G. Identification of the name of the shoreline (water body) that the site of the proposal is associated
with. This should be the water body from which jurisdiction of the Act over the project is derived (e.g.,
Puget Sound).
H. A general description of the proposed project that includes the proposed use or uses and the
activities necessary to accomplish the project.
I. A general description of the property as it now exists including its physical characteristics and
improvements and structures.
J. A general description of the vicinity of the proposed project including identification of the adjacent
uses, structures and improvements, intensity of development and physical characteristics.
K. A site development plan consisting of maps and elevation drawings, drawn to an appropriate scale
to depict clearly all required information, photographs and text which shall include:
1. The boundary of the parcel(s) of land upon which the development is proposed.
2. The ordinary high water mark of all water bodies located adjacent to or within the boundary
of the project. This may be an approximate location; provided, that for any development where a
determination of consistency with the applicable regulations requires a precise location of the ordinary
high water mark the mark shall be located precisely and the biological and hydrological basis for the
location as indicated on the plans shall be included in the development plan. Where the ordinary high
water mark is neither adjacent to or within the boundary of the project, the plan shall indicate the
distance and direction to the nearest ordinary high water mark of a shoreline.
3. Existing and Proposed Land Contours. The contours shall be at intervals sufficient to
accurately determine the existing character of the property and the extent of proposed change to the
land that is necessary for the development. Areas within the boundary that will not be altered by the
development may be indicated as such and contours approximated for that area.
4. A delineation of all wetland areas that will be altered or used as a part of the development.
5. A general indication of the character of vegetation found on the site.
Page 166 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 6-4
6. The dimensions and locations of all existing and proposed structures and improvements
including but not limited to: buildings, paved or graveled areas, roads, utilities, septic tanks and
drainfields, material stockpiles or surcharge, and stormwater management facilities.
7. Where applicable, a landscaping plan for the project.
8. Where applicable, plans for development of areas on or off the site as mitigation for impacts
associated with the proposed project shall be included and contain information consistent with the
requirements of this section.
9. Quantity, source and composition of any fill material that is placed on the site whether
temporary or permanent.
10. Quantity, composition and destination of any excavated or dredged material.
11. A vicinity map showing the relationship of the property and proposed development or use to
roads, utilities, existing developments and uses on adjacent properties.
12. Where applicable, a depiction of the impacts to views from existing residential uses and
public areas.
L. Copy of completed SEPA environmental checklist, declaration of nonsignificance or environmental
impact statement, if required. Note that if the environmental review has not occurred prior to
application for a shoreline permit, the time period for application review may be extended.
M. The names, addresses and legal description for each parcel of property within 300 feet of the
exterior boundary of the subject property as shown by the records of the King County or Pierce County
assessor.
N. Other information, plans, data and diagrams as required by the shoreline administrator.
The director shall determine if the application is complete based upon the information required by
this chapter. The application may be submitted by the property owner, lessee, contract purchaser, other
person entitled to possession of the property, or by an authorized agent. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord.
4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 72, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.040(a).)
16.081.0506 Application – Notices.
The director shall give notice of the application in accordance with the applicable provisions of ACC
14.07.040, no less than 30 days prior to permit issuance.
The notices shall include a statement that any person desiring to present his view to the director with
regard to the application may do so in writing to the director, and any person interested in the hearing
examiner’s action on an application for a permit may submit his views or notify the director of his
interest within 30 days of the last date of publication of the notice. Such notification or submission of
views to the director shall entitle said persons to a copy of the action taken on the application. (Ord.
6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 5811 § 5, 2003; Ord. 5170 § 1, 1998; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord.
4047 § 73, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.040(b).)
16.081.0526 Statement of Exemption.
Where development proposals in shoreline jurisdiction are subject to review, approval, and permitting
by a federal or state agency, the Director shall prepare a statement of exemption, addressed to the
applicant, the federal or state permitting agency, and Ecology. The letter shall indicate the specific
exemption provision from WAC 173-27-040 that is being applied to the development and provide a
summary of the analysis demonstrating consistency of the project with the Auburn SMP and the SMA.
Page 167 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
6-5 Draft August 5, 2019
16.081.0547 Application – Shoreline substantial development permit – Review criteria.
A. A substantial development permit shall be granted by the director only when the development
proposed is consistent with the following:
1. Goals, objectives, policies and use regulations of the Auburn SMP;
2. Auburn Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code; and
3. The policies, guidelines, and regulations of the SMA (Chapter 90.58 RCW; Chapters 173-26
and 173-27 WAC).
B. The director may attach conditions to the approval of permits as necessary to assure consistency of
the proposal with the above criteria. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008.)
16.081.0568 Application – Shoreline conditional use permit – Review criteria.
A. Pursuant to WAC 173-27-210, the criteria below shall constitute the minimum criteria for review
and approval of a shoreline conditional use permit. Uses classified as conditional uses, and not uses
prohibited by the regulations of this SMP, may be authorized; provided, that the applicant can
demonstrate all of the following:
1. That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020, the policies of
this SMP, the city of Auburn comprehensive plan and other applicable plans, programs and/or
regulations;
2. That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use or access to public
shorelines;
3. That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other
permitted uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and
shoreline master program;
4. That the proposed use will cause no unreasonably adverse effects to the shoreline, will not
result in a net loss of ecological functions, and will not be incompatible with the environment
designation or zoning classification in which it is to be located;
5. That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect;
6. That the proposed use is in the best interest of the public health, safety, morals or welfare;
and
7. That consideration of cumulative impacts resultant from the proposed use has occurred and
has demonstrated that no substantial cumulative impacts are anticipated, consistent with WAC 173-27-
160(4).
B. The director may attach conditions to the approval of permits as necessary to assure consistency of
the proposal with the above criteria.
C. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be the final decision of the city. The Department of
Ecology shall be the final authority authorizing a shoreline conditional use permit consistent with WAC
173-27-200. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008.)
16.081.0589 Application – Shoreline vVariance – Review criteria.
A. The purpose of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional
or performance standards set forth in this SMP, and where there are extraordinary or unique
circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict
implementation of the SMP would impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the SMA
policies as stated in RCW 90.58.020. Requests for allowing uses different than those specifically
identified as allowed in the shoreline environment cannot be considered in the variance process, but
shall be considered through the conditional use process in ACC 16.08.080.
Page 168 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 6-6
B. Pursuant to WAC 173-27-210, the criteria below shall constitute the minimum criteria for review
and approval of a sShoreline vVariance permit. Variance permits for development that will be located
landward of the ordinary high water mark (per RCW 90.58.030(2)(b) definition), except those areas
designated as marshes, bogs or swamps pursuant to Chapter 173-22 WAC, may be authorized, provided
the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1. That the strict requirements of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in
the master program precludes or significantly interferes with a reasonable use of the property not
otherwise prohibited by this SMP;
2. That the hardship described above is specifically related to the property, and is the result of
unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and not, for example, from deed
restrictions or the applicant’s own actions;
3. That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted activities within the
area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program
and will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment;
4. That the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by
other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief; and
5. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect;
6. Variance permits for development that will be located either waterward of the ordinary high
water mark or within marshes, bogs or swamps as designated in Chapter 173-22 WAC, may be
authorized, provided the applicant can demonstrate all the criteria stated above as well as the following:
a. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in
this SMP precludes all reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by this SMP; and
b. That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely
affected by the granting of the variance.
C. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of
additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if variances were granted to other
developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the variances should also
remain consistent with the policies of Chapter 90.58 RCW and should not produce substantial adverse
effects to the shoreline environment or result in a net loss of ecological functions.
D. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be the final decision of the city. The Department of
Ecology shall be the final authority authorizing a sShoreline vVariance consistent with WAC 173-27-200.
(Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008.)
16.081.0610 Application – Review criteria – Additional information.
A. The director shall review an application for a permit based on the following:
1. The application;
2. The environmental impact statement, if one has been prepared, or other environmental
documents;
3. Written comments from interested persons;
4. Information and comments from other city departments affected and from the city attorney;
5. Independent study of the planning department staff and evidence presented at the public
hearing held pursuant to provisions of this chapter.
B. The director may require that an applicant furnish information in addition to the information
required in the application forms prescribed. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1,
1987; 1957 code § 11.94.040(c).)
Page 169 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
6-7 Draft August 5, 2019
16.081.07011 Development conformance burden of proof.
The burden of proving that the proposed development is consistent with the criteria set forth in this
chapter and the master plan for the city shall be on the applicant, plus the requirements pursuant to
Section 14(6) of the Act. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code §
11.94.040 (d).)
16.081.08012 Application – Hearing – Required.
A. The hearing examiner shall hold at least one public hearing on each application for a shoreline
substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or sShoreline vVariance on shorelines
within the city. The public hearing shall be held not less than 30 days following the final publication of
the notice required by ACC 16.08.050.
B. The notice and conduct of the public hearing shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.66 ACC. (Ord.
6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.050(a).)
16.081.09013 Application – Hearing – Official conducting.
The public hearing required by ACC 16.08.080 shall be conducted by the hearing examiner. (Ord. 6095
§ 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.050(b).)
16.081.1400 Application – Hearing – Continuance.
If, for any reason, testimony on any matter set for public hearing, or being heard, cannot be completed
on the date set for such hearing, the hearing examiner may, before adjournment or recess of such
matters under consideration, publicly announce the time and place of the continued hearing and no
further notice is required. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 §
74, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.050(c).)
16.081.1510 Application – Hearing – Decision.
When the hearing examiner renders a decision, the hearing examiner shall make and enter written
findings from the record and conclusions thereof which support the decision. The findings and
conclusions shall set forth the manner in which the decision is consistent with the criteria set forth in
the Act and departmental regulations. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987;
Ord. 4047 § 75, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.050(d).)
16.081.1620 Application – Hearing – Rules of conduct.
The hearing examiner shall have the power to prescribe rules and regulations for the conduct of
hearings and to issue summonses for and compel the appearance of witnesses, to administer oaths, and
to preserve order. The privilege of cross-examination of witnesses shall be accorded all interested
persons or their counsel in accordance with the rules of the hearing examiner. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008;
Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 76, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.050 (e).)
16.081.1730 Application – Decision final.
The decision of the hearing examiner shall be the final decision of the city, unless appealed to the State
Shorelines Hearings Board, pursuant to ACC 16.08.190. On all applications the hearing examiner shall
render a written decision and transmit copies of such decision to persons who are required to receive
Page 170 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Draft August 5, 2019 6-8
copies of the decision pursuant to ACC 16.08.140. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 §
1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 77, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.050 (f).)
16.081.1840 Grant or denial decision – Notifications.
The director shall notify the following persons in writing of the hearing examiner’s final approval,
disapproval or conditional approval of a substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use
permit, or sShoreline vVariance aApplication within eight days of its final decision:
A. The applicant;
B. The State Department of Ecology;
C. The State Attorney General;
D. Any person who has submitted to the director written comments on the application;
E. Any person who has written the director requesting notification. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 §
1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 78, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.060(a).)
16.081.1509 Development commencement time.
Development pursuant to a substantial development permit shall not begin and shall not be authorized
until 21 days from the date the director files the approved substantial development permit with the
State Department of Ecology and Attorney General, or until all review proceedings initiated within 21
days of the date of such filing have been terminated. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord.
4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 79, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.060(b).)
16.081.1620 Termination or review and extension for nondevelopment.
Construction or substantial progress toward construction of a project for which a permit has been
granted pursuant to this chapter must be undertaken within two years after permit approval or the
permit shall terminate. If such progress has not been made, a new permit application will be required. If
a project for which a permit has been granted has not been completed within five years after permit
approval, the director shall, at the expiration of the five-year period, review the permit; and, upon a
showing of good cause, either extend the permit for one year or terminate the permit; provided, that no
permit shall be extended unless the applicant has requested such review and extension prior to the
permit expiration date. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code §
11.94.060(c).)
16.081.2170 Conditions or restrictions authorized.
In granting or extending a permit, the director may attach thereto such conditions, modifications and
restrictions regarding the location, character and other features of the proposed development as he
finds necessary to make the permit compatible with the criteria set forth in the Act and state
departmental regulations. Such conditions may include the requirement to post a performance bond
assuring compliance with other permit requirements, terms and conditions. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord.
4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.060(d).)
16.081.18022 Issuance limitations.
Issuance of a substantial development permit does not obviate requirements for other federal, state
and county permits, procedures and regulations. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 §
1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.060(e).)
Page 171 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
6-9 Draft August 5, 2019
16.081.19023 Decision appeals.
Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying or rescission of a substantial development permit by the
hearing examiner may seek review from the State Shorelines Hearings Board by filing a petition for
review with the board within 21 days of the date of filing, as defined by RCW 90.58.140(6), of the
council’s final decision. Within seven days of the filing of the petition for review with the board, the
person seeking review shall serve a copy of his petition with the State Department of Ecology, the office
of the Attorney General and the director. (Ord. 6186 § 3, 2008; Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996;
Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 80, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.070.)
16.081.2400 Rescission or modification.
A. Any permit granted pursuant to this chapter may be rescinded or modified upon a finding by the
director that the permittee has not complied with the conditions of his permit.
B. The director may initiate rescission and modification proceedings by serving written notice of
noncompliance on the permittee.
C. Before a permit can be rescinded or modified, a public hearing shall be held by the hearing
examiner no sooner than 30 days following the service of notice upon the permittee. The hearing
examiner shall have the power to prescribe rules and regulations for the conduct of such hearings. (Ord.
6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; Ord. 4047 § 81, 1985; 1957 code § 11.94.080.)
16.081.2510 Violation – Penalty.
A. The criminal and civil penalties contained in the provisions of the State Act are hereby adopted.
B. In addition to the penalties adopted in subsection A of this section, any violation of this chapter
may be enforced pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 1.25 ACC. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1,
1996; Ord. 4504 § 15, 1991; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.090.)
16.081.2620 Administration rules promulgation.
The director is authorized to adopt such rules as are necessary and appropriate to implement this
chapter. The director may prepare and require the use of such forms as are necessary to its
administration. (Ord. 6095 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4225 § 1, 1987; 1957 code § 11.94.100.)
Page 172 of 215
Page 173 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Exhibit A Draft August 5, 2019
Exhibit A.
Shoreline Environment Designation Maps
1. Overview Map (cityCity-wide)
2. Green River 1
3. Green River 2
4. Green River 3
5. Green River 4
6. White River 1
7. White River 2
8. White River 3
9. White River 4
10. White River 5
Page 174 of 215
Page 175 of 215
Auburn Shoreline Master Program
Appendix A Draft August 5, 2019
Appendices
A. Critical Area Provisions in Shoreline Jurisdiction (Applicable Sections of ACC Chapter )
B. ACC Chapter Nonconforming Structures, Land and Uses
C. Geologic Hazard Report Submittal Requirements
D. Permit Data Sheet
Page 176 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 1/36
Chapter 16.10
CRITICAL AREAS
Sections:
16.10.010 Purpose and intent.
16.10.020 Definitions.
16.10.030 Applicability – Regulated activities.
16.10.040 Exemptions and nonconforming uses.
16.10.050 Critical areas maps.
16.10.060 Relationship to other regulations.
16.10.070 Critical area review process and application requirements.
16.10.080 Classification and rating of critical areas.
16.10.090 Buffer areas and setbacks.
16.10.100 Alteration or development of critical areas – Standards and criteria.
16.10.110 Mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements.
16.10.120 Performance standards for mitigation planning.
16.10.130 Monitoring program and contingency plan.
16.10.140 Procedural provisions.
16.10.150 Reasonable use provision.
16.10.160 Variances.
16.10.170 Special exception for public agencies and utilities.
16.10.180 Severability.
16.10.010 Purpose and intent.
A. The city of Auburn contains numerous areas that can be identified and characterized as critical or
environmentally sensitive. Such areas within the city include wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, significant trees,
geologic hazards, ground water protectionaquifer recharge areas, and flood hazards.
B. The city finds that these critical areas perform a variety of valuable and beneficial biological and physical
functions that benefit the city and its residents. Alteration of certain critical areas may also pose a threat to public
safety or to public and private property or the environment. The city therefore finds that identification, regulation
and protection of critical areas are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. The city further
finds that the functions of critical areas and the purpose of these regulations include the following:
1. Wetlands. Wetlands perform a variety of functions that include maintaining water quality; storing and
conveying storm water and flood water; recharging ground water; providing important fish and wildlife habitat;
and serve as areas for recreation, education and scientific study, and aesthetic appreciation.
Wetland buffers serve to moderate runoff volume and flow rates; reduce sediment, che mical nutrient and toxic
pollutants; provide shading to maintain desirable water temperatures; provide habitat for wildlife; and protect
wetland resources from harmful intrusion.
The primary goals of wetland regulation are to avoid adverse effects to wetlands; to achieve no net loss of
wetland function and value – acreage may also be considered in achieving the overall goal; to provide levels of
protection that reflect the sensitivity of individual wetlands and the intensity of proposed land uses; and to
restore and/or enhance existing wetlands, where possible.
2. Streams. Streams and their associated riparian corridors provide important fish and wildlife habitat; help to
maintain water quality; store and convey storm water and flood water; recharge ground water; and serve as
areas for recreation, education and scientific study and aesthetic appreciation. Stream buffers serve to moderate
runoff volume and flow rates; reduce sediment, chemical nutrient and toxic pollutants; provide shading to
maintain desirable water temperatures; provide habitat for wildlife; and protect stream resources from harmful
intrusion.
Page 177 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 2/36
The primary goals of stream regulation are to avoid adverse effects to streams and associated riparian corridors;
to achieve no net loss of functions and values of the larger ecosystem in which the stream is located; to protect
fish and wildlife resources; to protect water quality through appropriate management techniques; and, where
possible, to provide for stream enhancement and rehabilitation.
3. Wildlife Habitat. Wildlife habitat provides opportunities for food, cover, nesting, breeding and movement for
fish and wildlife; maintains and promotes diversity of species and habitat; coordinates habitat protection with
elements of the open space system; helps to maintain air and water quality; helps control erosion; serves as
areas for recreation, education, scientific study, and aesthetic appreciation; and provides neighborhood
separation and visual diversity within urban areas.
The primary goals of wildlife habitat regulation are to avoid adverse effects to critical habitats for fish and
wildlife; to achieve no net loss of functions and values of the larger ecosystem in which the wildlife habitat is
located; to implement the goals of the Endangered Species Act; to promote connectivity between habitat areas
to allow for wildlife movement; to provide multi-purpose open space corridors; and where possible to provide
for fish and wildlife habitat enhancement and rehabilitation that reflect the sensitivity of t he species.
4. Ground Water ProtectionAquifer Recharge Areas. Ground water protection Aquifer recharge areas provide a
source of potable water and contribute to stream discharge/flow. Such areas contribute to the recharge of
aquifers, springs and/or wells and are susceptible to contamination of water supplies through infiltration of
pollutants through the soil.
The primary goals of ground wateraquifer recharge protection regulations are to protect ground water quality
by maintaining the quantity of recharge; avoiding or limiting land use activities that pose potential risk of
aquifer contamination; and to minimize or avoid adverse effects to ground water protection areas through the
application of performance standards, and to comply with the requirements of the Federal Safe Drinking Water
Act and Washington Administrative Code that require Group A public water systems to develop and implement
a wellhead protection program.
5. Geologically Hazardous Areas. Geologically hazardous areas means include lands or areas that because of
their susceptibility characterized by geologic, hydrologic and topographic conditions that render them
susceptible to varying degrees of risk of landslides,to erosion, sliding, seismic earthquake, or volcanic activity,
or other geological events, are not suited to the siting of commercial, residential, or industrial development
consistent with public health of safety concerns.
The primary goals of regulating geologic hazards are to avoid and minimize potential impacts to life and
property by regulating and/or limiting land uses where necessary, and to conduct appropriate levels of analysis
and ensure sound engineering and constr uction practices to address identified hazards.
6. Flood Hazard Areas. Floodplains help to store and convey storm water and flood water; recharge ground
water; provide important areas for riparian habitat; and serve as areas for recreation, education, and scientific
study. Development within floodplain areas can be hazardous to those inhabiting such development, and to
those living upstream and downstream. Floods also cause substantial damage to public and private property that
results in significant costs to the public and individuals.
The primary goals of flood hazard regulations are to limit or condition development within the regulatory
floodplain to avoid substantial risk of damage to public and private property and that results in significant costs
to the public and individuals; to avoid significant increases in peak storm water flows or loss of flood storage
capacity; to protect critical habitat for fish and wildlife, and to meet the purposes set forth in Chapter 15.68
ACC. Requirements for the identification, assessment, alteration, and mitigation of flood hazard areas are
contained in Chapter 15.68 ACC.
C. This chapter of the Auburn City Code and other sections as incorporated by reference contain standards,
procedures, criteria and requirements intended to identify, analyze, and mitigate potential impacts to the city’s
critical areas, and to enhance and restore degraded resources where possible. The general intent of these regulations
is to avoid impacts to critical areas. In appropriate circumstances, impacts to specified critical areas resulting from
Page 178 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 3/36
regulated activities may be minimized, rectified, reduced and/or compensated for, consistent with the requirements
of this chapter.
D. It is the further intent of this chapter to:
1. Comply with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW) and implement rules
to identify and protect critical areas and to perform the review of development regulations required by RCW
36.70A.215;
2. Develop and implement a comprehensive, balanced and fair regulatory program that avoids impacts to
critical resources where possible, that requires that mitigation be performed by those affecting critical areas,
and that thereby protects the public from injury, loss of life, property or financial losses d ue to flooding,
erosion, landslide, seismic events, soil subsidence, or steep slope failure;
3. Implement the goals and policies of the Auburn comprehensive plan, including those pertaining to natural
features and environmental protection, as well as goals relating to land use, housing, economic development,
transportation, and adequate public facilities;
4. Serve as a basis for exercise of the city’s substantive authority under the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA) and the city’s environmental review procedures, where necessary to supplement these regulations,
while also reducing the city’s reliance on project-level SEPA review;
5. Provide consistent standards, criteria and procedures that will enable the city to effectively manage and
protect critical areas while accommodating the rights of property owners to use their property in a reasonable
manner;
6. Provide greater certainty to property owners regarding uses and activities that are permitted, prohibited,
and/or regulated due to the presence of critical areas;
7. Coordinate environmental review and permitting of proposals involving critical areas with existing
development review and approval processes to avoid duplication and delay pursuant to the Regulatory Reform
Act, Chapter 36.70B RCW;
8. Establish conservation and protection measures for threatened and endangered fish species in compliance
with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and the Growth Management Act requirements to
preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries, WAC 365 -195-925;
9. Alert members of the public, including appraisers, assessors, owners, potential buyers or lessees, to the
development limitations of critical areas and their required buffers.
E. Best Available Science. The city has considered and included the best available science in developing these
regulations, consistent with RCW 36.70A.172 and WAC 365 -195-900, et seq. This has been achieved through
research and identification of relevant technical sources of information, consultation with experts in the disciplines
covered by this chapter, and consultation and requests for technical information regarding best avail able science
from state and federal resource agencies.
Preparation of this chapter has included the use of relevant nonscientific information, including consideration of
legal, social, policy, economic, and land use issues. This reflects the city’s respon sibilities under numerous laws and
programs, including other provisions of the Growth Management Act, and the need to weigh and balance various
factors as part of decision making to accomplish municipal objectives. This may result in some risk to the funct ions
and values of some critical areas, however, it is recognized that the Growth Management Act requires the City to
designate and protect critical areas. The city will also use its authority under the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA) to identify, consider and mitigate, where appropriate, significant adverse effects on critical resources not
otherwise addressed by the regulations of this chapter.
The city intends to review and monitor implementation of its critical areas regulations and to use an adaptive
management approach. It will make adjustments to the regulations, as appropriate, in response to changing
conditions, new information about best available science, or empirical data indicating the effectiveness of its
Page 179 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 4/36
regulatory program. This will occur in the context of the city’s ongoing review and revision of its comprehensive
plan and development regulations pursuant to the Growth Management Act.
Additional information, both scientific and nonscientific, regarding compliance with WAC 365 -195-915(c),
including identification of risks to resources and Washington State Department of Ecology guidance, is contained in
the findings and conclusions and the overall record supporting adoption of Auburn’s critical areas regulations. (Ord.
6295 § 3, 2010; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.020 Definitions.
For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
“Anadromous fish” means fish that spawn and rear in freshwater and mature in the marine environment, such as
salmon, steelhead, sea-run cutthroat, and bull trout.
“Applicant” means the person, party, firm, corporation, or other entity that proposes or has performed any activity
that affects a critical area.
“Aquifer” means, generally, any water bearing soil or rock unit. Specifically, a body of soil or rock that contains
sufficient saturated permeable material to conduct ground water and yield economically significant quantities of
ground water to wells or springs.
“Artificially created wetlands” means wetlands created from nonwetland sites through purposeful, legally authorized
human action, such as irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, retention or detention facilities,
wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities.
“Aquifer Recharge Area” means areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water, including
areas where an aquifer that is a source of drinking water is vulnerable to contamination that would affect the
potability of the water, or is susceptible to reduced recharge.
“Best Available Science.” As defined in the Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations for Best Available Science at WAC 365-195-900, et seq.
“Buffer or buffer area, critical area” means a naturally vegetated, undistu rbed, enhanced or revegetated zone
surrounding a critical area that protects the critical area from adverse impacts to its integrity and value, and is an
integral part of the resource’s ecosystem.
“City” means the city of Auburn.
“Clearing” means the removal of timber, brush, grass, ground cover or other vegetative matter from a site, which
exposes the earth’s surface of the site, or any actions, which disturb the existing ground surface.
“Comprehensive plan” means the city of Auburn comprehensive plan as now adopted or hereafter amended.
“Critical areas” or “environmentally sensitive areas” means areas that possess important natural functions and
embody a variety of important natural and community values. Such areas include wetlands, streams, fish and
wildlife habitat, geologically hazardous areas, ground water protection areas aquifer recharge areas, and flood
hazard areas. If not conducted properly, development or alteration of such areas may cause significant impacts to the
valuable functions and values of these areas and/or may generate risks to the public health and general welfare,
and/or to public and private property.
“Critical area report” means a report prepared by a qualified consultant to determine the presence, type, class, size,
function and/or value of an area subject to these regulations. Also see “Stream and/or Wetland reconnaissance
report,” “Wetland impact assessment report” and “Wildlife report.”
“Critical erosion hazard areas” means lands or areas underlain by soils identified by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (SCS) (now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service) as having
“severe” or “very severe” erosion hazards. This includes, but is not limited to, the following group of soils when
they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: Alderwood -Kitsap (AkF), Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgD),
Page 180 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 5/36
Kitsap silt loam (KpD), Everett (EvD), and Indianola (InD). Additional soil groups may be identified through site-
specific analysis.
“Critical geologic hazard areas” means lands or areas subject to high or severe risks of geologic hazard, including
critical erosion hazard areas, critical landslide hazard areas, critical volcanic hazard areas, and critical seismic
hazard areas.
“Critical habitat” or “critical wildlife habitat” means habitat areas associated with threatened, endangered, or
sensitive species of plants or wildlife (pursuant to WAC 232 -12-297(2.4), (2.5) and (2.6)) and which, if altered,
could reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term.
“Critical landslide hazard areas” means lands or areas where there is a high (Class III) or very high (Class IV) risk of
landslide due to a combination of slope, soil permeability, and water.
“Critical seismic hazard areas” means lands or areas where there is a high risk of seismic events and damage.
“Delineation manual,” “wetland delineation manual,” or “wetland delineation methodology” means the manual and
methodology used for to identify wetlands in the field, as described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification
and Delineation Manual (Publication No. 96-94), adopted by the Department of Ecology in 1997 (pursuant to RCW
36.70A.175 and 90.58.380), and which is based on the U.S. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
(1987). Use of this manual is required by RCW 36.70A.175 and 90.58.380 identification of wetlands and delineation
of their boundaries and shall be done in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and the
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Regional supplement, as required by WAC 173-22-035.
“Department” means the city of Auburn department of planning and community development development or
successor agency, unless the context indicates a different city department.
“Director” means the director of the city of Auburn department of community development department of planning
and development or successor agency.
“Earth/earth material” means naturally occurring rock, soil, stone, sediment, or combination thereof.
“Enhancement” means the improvement of an existing viable wetland, stream or habitat area or the buffers
established for such areas, through such measures as increasing plant diversity, increasing wildlife habitat, installing
environmentally-compatible erosion controls, increasing structural diversity or removing plant or animal sp ecies that
are not indigenous to the area. Enhancement also includes actions performed to improve the quality of an existing
degraded wetland, stream, or habitat area. See also “Restoration.”
“Erosion” means a process whereby wind, rain, water, and other natural agents mobilize and transport soil particles.
“Erosion hazard areas” means lands or areas that, based on a combination of slope inclination and the characteristics
of the underlying soils, are susceptible to varying degrees of risk of erosion. Erosi on hazard areas are classified as
“low” (areas sloping less than 15 percent) or “high” (areas sloping 15 percent or more) on the following Soil
Conservation Service (SCS), now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), soil types:
Alderwood-Kitsap (AkF), Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgD), Kitsap silt loam (KpD), Everett (EvD) and
Indianola (InD). Additional soil groups may be identified through site -specific analysis.
“Excavation” means the removal or displacement of earth material by huma n or mechanical means.
“Existing and ongoing agricultural activities” means those activities conducted on lands defined in RCW
84.34.020(2), and those activities involved in the production of crops and livestock. Such activity must have been in
existence as of July 1, 1990 (the effective date of the Growth Management Act). The definition includes, but is not
limited to, operation and maintenance of farm and stock ponds or drainage ditches, irrigation systems, changes
between agricultural activities or crops, and normal operation, maintenance or repair of existing serviceable
structures, facilities, or improved areas. Activities, which bring an area into agricultural use from a previous
nonagricultural use, are not considered part of an ongoing activity. An operation ceases to be ongoing when the area
on which it was conducted is proposed for conversion to a nonagricultural use or has lain idle for a period of longer
Page 181 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 6/36
than five years, unless the idle land is registered in a federal or state soils conservation p rogram. Forest practices are
not included in this definition.
“Exotic” means any species of plant or animal that is foreign and not indigenous to the lower Puget Sound area.
“Fill/fill material” means a deposit of earth material placed by human or mechanical means.
“Filling” means the act of transporting and placing (by any manner or mechanism) fill material from, to, or on any
surface water body or wetland, soil surface, sediment surface, or other fill material.
“Geologically hazardous areas” means lands or areas characterized by geologic, hydrologic, and topographic
conditions that render them susceptible to varying degrees of risk of landslides, erosion, sliding, seismic earthquake,
or volcanic activityother geological events.
“Geotechnical report” means a report prepared in accordance with the City’s Engineering Design Standards.
“Grading” means any excavating, filling, clearing, leveling or contouring of the ground surface by human or
mechanical means.
“Ground water protection areas” means land areas designated by the city beneath which ground water occurs that is
a current or potential future source of drinking water for the city. Please see the definition of “aquifer recharge
areas” for additional regulated areas.
“Habitat management” means management of land and its associated resources/features to maintain species in
suitable habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated subpopulations are not created. This
does not imply maintaining all habitat or individuals of all spec ies in all cases.
“Hazardous materials” means any material, either singularly or in combination, that is a physical or health hazard
as defined and classified in Article 80 of the Uniform Fire Code as adopted or amended by the city, whether the
materials are in usable or waste condition; and any material that may degrade ground water quality when improperly
stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, disposed of, or otherwise mismanaged. Hazardous materials shall
also include, without exception:
1. All materials defined as or designated by rule as a dangerous waste or extremely hazardous waste under
Chapter 70.105 RCW and Chapter 173-303 WAC;
2. Any substance defined as or designated by rule as a hazardous substance under Chapter 70.105 RCW and
Chapter 173-303 WAC; and
3. Petroleum or petroleum products, including any waste oils or sludges.
“Hazardous materials inventory statement” means a form provided by the fire department and completed by a
business owner that provides specified information regarding hazardous materials at the business.
“Hazardous substances” means any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product,
commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits any of the physical, chemical, or biological prop erties
described in WAC 173-303 or RCW 70.105.
“Hydrologically isolated” means wetlands which: (1) have no surface water connection to a lake, river, or stream
during any part of the year; (2) are outside of and not contiguous to any 100 -year floodplain of a lake, river, or
stream; and (3) have no contiguous hydric soil between the wetland and any lake, river, or stream. May also be a
pond excavated from uplands with no surface water connection to a stream, lake, or other wetland.
“In-kind wetland mitigation” means replacement of wetlands with wetlands whose characteristics closely
approximate those destroyed or degraded by a regulated activity.
“Injection well” means a “well” that is used for the subsurface emplacement of fluids. (From WAC 173 -218-030.)
Page 182 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 7/36
“Intentionally created streams” means streams created through purposeful human action, such as irrigation and
drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, and canals. This definition does not include stream modifications performed
pursuant to city authorization, such as changes or redirection of stream channels.
“Lahar” means mudflows or debris flows associated with volcanic activity and which pose a threat to life, property,
and structures.
“Landslide” means episodic downslope movement of a mass of soil or rock.
“Landslide hazard areas” means areas that, due to a combination of slope inclination, relative soil permeability, and
hydrologic conditions are susceptible to varying degrees of risk of landsliding. Landslide hazard areas are classified
as Classes I through IV based on the degree of risk as follows:
1. Class I/Low Hazard. Areas with slopes of 15 percent or less.
2. Class II/Moderate Hazard. Areas with slopes of between 15 percent and 40 percent and that are underlain by
soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or glacial till.
3. Class III/High Hazard. Areas with slopes between 15 percent and 40 percent that are underlain by soils
consisting largely of silt and clay.
4. Class IV/Very High Hazard. Areas with slopes steeper than 15 percent with identifiable zones of emergent
water (e.g., springs or ground water seepage), areas of identifiable landslide deposits regardless of slope and all
areas sloping more steeply than 40 percent.
The slopes referenced above include only those where the surface drops 10 feet or more vertically within a
horizontal distance of 25 feet.
“Mature and old-growth forested wetlands” means wetlands containing mature or old-growth forested areas,
generally requiring a century or more to develop. These systems represent two priority habitats , as defined by the
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
“Mitigation” means activities which include:
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of actions .;
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using
appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts.;
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment ;.
4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of
the action;.
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments;.
and/or
6. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
While monitoring without additional actions is not considered mitigation for the purposes of these regulations, it
shall be part of a comprehensive mitigation program.
“Mitigation sequencing” means considering or performing mitigation actions, as defined in the definition of
“mitigation,” in a preferred sequence from (1) through (5). Avoidance is preferred and must be considered prior to
pursuing other forms of mitigation.
“Native” means any species of plant or animals which are or were indigenous to the lower Puget Sound area.
Page 183 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 8/36
“Natural heritage wetlands” means wetlands that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage
Program/DNR as high quality, relatively undisturbed wetlands, or wetlands that support st ate-listed threatened or
endangered plants.
“Off-site mitigation” means performance of mitigation actions, pursuant to standards established in this chapter, on a
site or in an area other than that proposed for conduct of a regulated activity.
“Out-of-kind mitigation” means replacement of wetlands or habitat with substitute wetlands or habitat whose
characteristics do not closely approximate those adversely affected, destroyed, or degraded by a regulated activity.
“Permanent erosion control” means continuous on-site and off-site control measures that are needed to control
conveyance or deposition of earth, turbidity, or pollutants after development, construction, or restoration.
“Plant association of infrequent occurrence” means one or more plant species which because of the rarity of the
habitat and/or the species involved, or for other botanical or environmental reasons, do not often occur in the city of
Auburn. Examples include but are not limited to:
1. Wetlands with a coniferous forested class or subclass consisting of trees such as western red cedar, Sitka
spruce, or lodge pole pine growing on organic soils;
2. Bogs with a predominance of sphagnum moss, or those containing sphagnum moss, and typically including
one or more species such as Labrador tea, sundew, bog laurel, or cranberry.
“Qualified consultant,” for purposes of these regulations, shall mean a person who has attained a degree from an
accredited college or university in the subject matter necessary to evaluate the critical area in question (e.g., biology,
ecology, or horticulture/arboriculture for wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, and geology and/or civil engineering
for geologic hazards, and hydrogeologist for ground water protectionaquifer recharge areas), and/or who is
professionally trained and/or certified or licensed by the state of Washington to practice in the scientific disciplines
necessary to identify, evaluate, manage, and mitigate impacts to the critical area in question. In addition, a qualified
consultant for wetlands and streams must be a professional wetland scientist with at least two years of full-time
work experience as a wetlands professional, including delineating wetlands using the federal manual and
supplements, preparing wetland reports, conducting function assessments, and development and implementin g
mitigation plans. A qualified consultant for aquifer recharge areas must be a currently licensed Washington State
geologist holding a current specialty license in hydrogeology.
“Reasonable use” means a legal concept articulated by federal and state courts in regulatory taking cases.
“Regulated activities” means activities that have a potential to significantly impact a critical area that is subject to
the provisions of this chapter. Regulated activities generally include, but are not limited to, any fill ing, dredging,
dumping or stockpiling, release of contaminants to soil or water, draining, excavation, flooding, clearing or grading,
construction or reconstruction, driving pilings, obstructing, clearing, or harvesting.
“Restoration” means actions taken to re-establish wetland, stream or habitat functional values, and the
characteristics that have been destroyed or degraded by past alterations (e.g., filling or grading). See also
“Enhancement.”
“Salmonids” means the family of fish which includes salmon, trout, and char.
“Secondary habitat” means areas that offer less diversity of animal and plant species than critical habitat but are
important for performing the essential functions of habitat.
“Seismic hazard areas” means areas that, due to a combination of soil and ground water conditions, are subject to
risk of ground shaking, subsidence, or liquefaction of soils during earthquakes. These areas are typically underlain
by soft or loose saturated soils (such as alluvium), have a shallow ground water table, a nd are typically located on
the floors of river valleys.
Page 184 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 9/36
“Site” means the location containing a regulated critical area and on which a regulated activity is proposed. The
location may be a parcel or portion thereof, or any combination of contiguous parcel s where a proposed activity may
impact a critical area.
“Slope” means an inclined earth surface, the incline of which is expressed as the ratio of horizontal distance to
vertical distance. The slopes referenced above includes only those where the surface drops 10 feet or more vertically
within a horizontal distance of 25 feet.
“Sole source aquifer” means an area formally designated as such by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
“Spring” means a source of water where an aquifer comes in contact with the ground surface.
“Stream or wetland reconnaissance report” means a type of critical area report prepared by an applicant’s qualified
consultant to describe a stream or wetland and to characterize its conditions, source of hydrologic support, wildlife,
habitat values and water quality. The report may also includes an analysis of impacts but generally does not include
adequate impact assessment and definition of a mitigation proposal sufficient to meet all the requirements of a more
comprehensive critical areas report.
“Streams” means those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed that demonstrates clear
evidence of the passage of water and includes, but is not limited to, bedrock channels, gra vel beds, sand and silt beds
and defined-channel swales. The channel or bed need not contain water year -round. This definition is not intended to
include artificially created irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water devices, or other entirely art ificial
watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or created for the purposes of stream mitigation.
“Structural diversity, vegetative” means the relative degree of diversity or complexity of vegetation in a wildlife
habitat area as indicated by the stratification or layering of different plant communities (e.g., ground cover, shrub
layer and tree canopy), the variety of plant species and the spacing or pattern of vegetation.
“Substrate” means the soil, sediment, decomposing organic matter or combination of those located on the bottom
surface of the wetland, lake, stream, or river.
“Temporary erosion control” means on-site and off-site control measures that are needed to control conveyance or
deposition of earth, turbidity, or pollutants during development, construction, or restoration.
“Tertiary habitat” means habitat that supports some wildlife but does not satisfy the definition of secondary or
critical habitat.
“Tree” means any self-supporting perennial woody plant characterized by natural growth of one main stem or trunk
with a definite crown, and maturing at a height of at least six feet above the ground.
“Tree base fee” means the current cost of the tree based on species and minimum code required installation size,
installation (labor and equipment) maintenance for two years and fund administration.
“Utility” includes natural gas, electric, telephone and telecommunications, cable communications, water, sewer or
storm drainage and their respective facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment and appurtenances.
“Variance” means permission to depart from the requirements of the specific regulations of this title for a particular
piece of property.
“Volcanic hazard areas” means areas identified by the U.S. Geological Survey (maps dated 1998 or as hereafter
revised) as subject to a risk of large lahars with a recurrence interval of 500 to 1,000 years.
“Water dependent use” means a principal use which can only exist when the land/water interface provides biological
or physical conditions necessary for the use.
Page 185 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 10/36
“Well” includes any excavation that is drilled, cored, bored, washed, driven, dug, jetted or otherwise constructed
when the intended use of an excavation is for the location, diversion, artificial recharge, or withdrawal of ground
water.
“Wellhead protection area” means the portion of a well’s, wellfield’s or spring’s zone of contribution within the ten-
year time of travel boundary, or boundaries established using alternate defined as such using the criteria approved
established by the city state Department of Health in those settings where ground water time of travel is not a
reasonable delineation criterion.
“Wetland” or “wetlands” means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs,
and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites,
including but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities,
wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990,
that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway . However, wWetlands
may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of
wetlands. (Definition taken from the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, Ecology
Publication No. 96-94.RCW 36.70A.030(23))
“Wetland impact assessment report” means a report prepared by a qualified consultant that identifies, characterizes
and analyzes potential impacts to wetlands consistent with applicable provisions of these regulations. A wetland
impact assessment may be combined with and include a formal wetland delineation.
“Wetland mosaic” means an area with a concentration of multiple small wetlands, in which each patch of wetland is
less than one acre; on average, patches are less than 100 feet from each other; and areas delineated as vegetated
wetland are more than 50% of the total area of the entire mosaic , including uplands and open water.
“Wildlife report” means a report prepared by a qualified consultant that evaluates plant communities and wildlife
functions and values on a site, consistent with the format and requirements established by this chapter. T he report
also includes an analysis of impacts. (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.030 Applicability – Regulated activities.
A. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to any activity that potentially affects a critical area or its buffer unless
otherwise exempt. Such regulated activities include but are not limited to:
1. Removing, excavating, disturbing or dredging soil, sand, gravel, minerals, organic matter, or materials of any
kind;
2. Dumping, discharging or filling with any material ;
3. Draining, flooding or disturbing the water level or water table, or diverting or impeding water flow;
4. Driving pilings or placing obstructions;
5. Constructing, reconstructing, demolishing, or altering the size of any structure or infrastructure;
6. Destroying or altering vegetation through clearing, grading, harvesting, shading, or planting vegetation that
would alter the character of or impact a critical area;
7. Release of contaminants to soil or water;
8. Activities that result in significant changes in water temperature, physical or chemical characteristics of
water sources, including quantity and pollutants; and
9. Any other activity potentially affecting a critical area or buffer not otherwise exempt from the provisions of
this chapter as determined by the director.
Page 186 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 11/36
B. To avoid duplication, the following permits and approvals shall be subject to and coordinated with the
requirements of this chapter: land clearing; grading; subdivision or short subdivision; building permit; planned unit
development (if permitted by the city code); shoreline substantial development; variance; conditional use permit;
and any other permits that may lead to the development or alteration of land.
C. Administrative actions, such as rezones, annexations, and the adoption of plans and programs, shall be subject to
the requirements of this chapter. However, the director may, using discretion, permit any studies or evaluations
required by this chapter to use methodologies and provide a level of detail appropriate to the a dministrative action
proposed. (Ord. 6187 § 3, 2008; Ord. 5991 § 3, 2006; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.040 Exemptions and nonconforming uses.
A. The following activities performed on sites containing critical areas as defined by this chapter shall be exemp t
from the provisions of this chapter:
1. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities, as defined in this chapter;
2. Activities involving artificially created wetlands or streams intentionally created from nonwetland sites,
including but not limited to grass-lined swales, irrigation and drainage ditches, retention or detention facilities,
and landscape features, except wetlands or streams created as mitigation or that provide critical habitat for
salmonids and except when the site contains another critical area;
3. Normal and routine maintenance, operation, repair and reconstruction of existing roads, streets, utilities and
associated structures; provided, that reconstruction of any structures may not increase the impervious area and
may not cause further encroachment on the critical area or its buffer, and may not result in adverse impacts to
surface water and ground water quality. Operation and maintenance includes vegetation management
performed in accordance with best management practices that is part of ongoing maintenance of structures,
infrastructure, or utilities; provided, that such management actions are part of regular and ongoing maintenance,
do not expand further into the critical area, are not the result of an expansion of the structure or uti lity, and do
not directly impact an endangered or threatened species;
4. Minor Utility and Street Projects. Utility or street projects which have minor or short duration impacts to
critical areas, as determined by the director in accordance with the criter ia below, and which do not
significantly impact the functions or values of a critical area(s); provided, that such projects are constructed
with best management practices and additional restoration measures are provided. Minor activities shall not
result in the transport of sediment or increased storm water. Such allowed minor utility projects shall meet the
following criteria:
a. There is no practical alternative to the proposed activity with less impact on critical areas;
b. The activity involves the placement of underground piping, conduit, traffic signal equipment, lighting
equipment, utility pole(s), signs, anchor, or vault or other small component of a utility or street facility;
5. Normal maintenance, repair and reconstruction of residential or commer cial structures, facilities and
landscaping; provided, that reconstruction of any structures may not increase the previous floor area;
6. The addition of floor area within an existing building which does not increase the building footprint;
7. Additions to a legally established single-family residential structure in existence before May 13, 2005,
located within a wetland or stream buffer may be permitted if all of the following criteria are a met:
a. The addition is no greater than 500 square feet of build ing footprint over that in existence as of May 13,
2005;
b. The addition is not located closer to the critical area than the existing structure;
c. Impacts on critical area functions are avoided consistent with the purpose and intent of this title and as
demonstrated in a critical areas report by a qualified consultant; and
Page 187 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 12/36
d. There are no changes in slope stability, flood conditions or drainage;
8. Site investigative work and studies that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development
authorization including soils tests, water quality studies, wildlife studies and similar tests and investigations;
provided, that any disturbance of the critical area shall be the minimum necessary to carry out the work or
studies;
9. Educational activities, scientific research, and outdoor passive recreational activities, including but not
limited to interpretive field trips, birdwatching and hiking, that will not have a significant effect on the critical
area;
10. Emergency activities necessary to prevent an immediate threat to public health, safety, property or the
environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full compliance with this chapter
as long as any alteration undertaken pursuant to this subsection is reported to the city as soon as possible. Only
the minimum intervention necessary to reduce the risk to public health, safety or welfare and/or the imminent
risk of damage to private property shall be authorized by this exemption. The director s hall confirm that an
emergency exists or existed and determine what, if any, additional applications and/or measures shall be
required to protect the environment consistent with the provision of this section and to repair any damage to a
pre-existing resource;
11. Activities affecting previously legally filled wetlands or wetlands accidentally created by human actions
prior to July 1, 1990 (the effective date of the Growth Management Act). The latter shall be documented
through photographs, statements and/or other conclusive evidence;
12. Activities in storm and water quality basins and “wetlands” created by poorly maintained or plugged
culverts or lines, and artificially created ditches that are not used by salmonids;
13. Minor activities not mentioned above and determined by the director to have minimal impacts to a critical
area.
B. Notwithstanding the exemptions provided by this subsection, any otherwise exempt activities occurring in or near
a critical area shall comply with the purpose and intent of these standards and shall consider on-site alternatives that
avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts.
C. Exempt activities occurring in flood hazard areas shall not alter flood storage capacity or conveyance except in
conformance with floodplain drainage requirements of Chapter 15.68 ACC.
D. No property owner or other entity shall undertake exempt activities in subsections (A)(2), (7) or (13) of this
section without first providing 14 days’ notice to the city in writing and receiving confirmation in writing that the
proposed activity is exempt. In case of any question as to whether a particular activity is exempt from the provisions
of this section, the director’s determination shall govern and shall be confirmed in writing.
E. An established use or existing structure that was lawfully permitted prior to May 13, 2005, but which is not in
compliance with this chapter, shall be deemed a nonconforming use as defined in ACC 18.04.650. Unless otherwise
provided for, existing structures, which intrude into critical areas buffers, shall not be reconstructed in such a
manner that results in the further intrusion into the buffer area. Structures or developments that are nonconforming
solely due to being contrary to the provisions of this chapter shall not be sub ject to the nonconforming use
provisions of Chapter 18.54 ACC. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.050 Critical areas maps.
Maps have been developed by the city that show the general location of critical areas. These maps are available for
reference at the city planning anddepartment of community development department. These maps shall be used for
informational purposes as a general guide only for the assistance of property owners and other interested parties; the
boundaries and locations shown are generalized. The actual presence or absence, type, extent, boundaries a nd
classification of critical areas on a specific site shall be identified in the field by a qualified consultant and
determined by the city, according to the procedures, definitions and criteria established by this chapter. In the event
of any conflict between the critical area location or designation shown on the city’s maps and the criteria or
Page 188 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 13/36
standards of this section, the criteria, definition, and standards shall prevail. (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 5894 § 1,
2005.)
16.10.060 Relationship to other regulations.
A. These critical area regulations shall apply as an overlay and in addition to zoning, land use and other regulations
established by the city of Auburn. In the event of any conflict between these regulations and any other regulations of
the city, the regulations which provide greater protection to critical areas shall apply.
B. Areas characterized by particular critical areas may also be subject to other regulations established by this chapter
due to the overlap or multiple functions of some sensitive or critical areas. Wetlands, for example, may be defined
and regulated according to the wetland, habitat and stream management provisions of this chapter. In the event of
any conflict between overlapping regulations for multiple critical areas on the same site, the regulations which
provide greater protection to critical areas shall apply. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
C. Compliance with the provisions of this Chapter does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local
regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, Shoreline Substantial Development Permits,
Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permits, Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permits, National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these
requirements, apart from the process established in this Chapter. Where applicable, the director will encourage use
of information such as permit applications to other agencies or special studies prepared in response to other
regulatory requirements to support required documentation submitted for critical areas review.
16.10.070 Critical area review process and application requirements.
A. Pre-Application Conference. A pre-application conference is available and encouraged prior to submitting an
application for a project permit.
B. Application Requirements.
1. Timing of Submittals. Concurrent with submittal of a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist, or
concurrent with submittal of an application for projects exempt from SEPA, a critical area report must be
submitted to the city for review when the city believes that a critical area may be present. The purpose of the
report is to determine the extent, characteristics and functions of any critical areas located on or potentially
affected by activities on a site where regulated activities are proposed. The report will also be used by the city
to determine the appropriate critical area classification and, if applicable, to establish appr opriate buffer
requirements.
2. Report Contents. Reports and studies required to be submitted by this chapter shall contain, at a minimum,
the information indicated in the provisions of this chapter applicable to each critical area. The director may
tailor the information required to reflect the complexity of the proposal and the sensitivity of critical areas that
may potentially be present.
C. Consultant Qualifications and City Review. All reports and studies required of the applicant by this section sha ll
be prepared by a qualified consultant as that term is defined in these regulations. The city may retain a qualified
consultant paid for by the applicant to review and confirm the applicant’s reports, studies and plans if the following
circumstances exist:
1. The city has technical information that is unavailable to the applicant; or
2. The applicant has provided inaccurate or incomplete information on previous proposals or proposals
currently under consideration.
D. Review Process. This section is not intended to create a separate critical area review permit for development
proposals. To the extent possible, the city shall consolidate and integrate the review and processing of critical area -
related aspects of proposals with other land use and environmen tal considerations and approvals. Any permits
required by separate codes or regulations, such as floodplain development permits or shoreline substantial
development permits, shall continue to be required. (Ord. 6295 § 4, 2010; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
Page 189 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 14/36
16.10.080 Classification and rating of critical areas.
A. To promote consistent application of the standards and requirements of this chapter, critical areas within the city
of Auburn shall be rated or classified according to their characteristics, function and value, and/or their sensitivity to
disturbance.
B. Classification of critical areas shall be determined by the director based on consideration of the following factors
and in the following order:
1. Consideration of the technical reports submitted by qualified consultants in connection with applications
subject to these regulations;
2. Application of the criteria contained in these regulations; and
3. Critical areas maps maintained by the planning and department of community development department.
C. Wetland Classification. Wetlands shall be designated Category I, Category II, Category III, Category IV and as
artificially created according to the criteria in this section. Wetlands classifications shall be rated according to
incorporate the Washington Department of Ecology State Wwetlands Rrating Ssystem, as set forth in the for
Western Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update ((Department of Ecology,
2004, Publication no. 14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology). Publication No. 04-06-025). Wetland
rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists on the date of adoption of the rating system by the local
government, as the wetland naturally changes thereafter, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permitted
activities. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications.
1. “Category I wetlands” are thoseinclude wetlands which meet any of the following criteria: represent unique
or rare wetland types, are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands, are relatively undisturbed and
contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime , or provide a high level of
functions, as indicated by a rating system score of 23 points or more on the classification system referenced
above.
a. Represent a unique or rare wetland type; or
b. Are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; or
c. Are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a
human lifetime; or
d. Are providing a high level of functions, scoring 70 points or more out of 100 (DOE Wetlands Rating
System, 2004); or
e. Are characterized as a national heritage wetland; or
f. Are characterized as a bog; or
g. Are over one acre and characterized as a mature and old-growth forested wetland.
2. “Category II wetlands” are: those wetlands which are not Category I wetlands and which meet any of the
following criteria:
a. Pprovide high levels of some functions, being difficult, though not impossible to replace , and; have aor a
moderately high level of functions, scoring between 20 and 22 points.
b. Perform most functions relatively well, scoring 51 20 – 6922 out of 10027 points (DOE Wetlands
Rating System, 20104).
3. “Category III wetlands” have a score between 16 and 19 points, generally have been disturbed in some way
and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II
Page 190 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 15/36
wetlands. Such wetlands are: are those wetlands that are not Category I or II wetlands, and which meet the
following criterion:
a. Provide moderate levels of functions, scoring between 30 – 50 out of 100 points (DOE Wetlands Rating
System, 2004). Wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scoring between 16 and 19 points);
b. Can often be adequately replaced with a well-planned mitigation project;
c. Interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1 acre.
4. “Category IV wetlands” are those wetlands that meet the following criterion: have the lowest levels of
functions, scoring fewer than 16 points and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that should be able
to be replaced, or in some cases be improved. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be
guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and should be
protected to some degree.
a. Provide low levels of functions, scoring less than 30 16 out of 10027 points (DOE Wetlands Rating
System, 20104).
5. “Artificially created wetlands” are purposefully created landscape features, ponds and storm water detention
or retention facilities. Artificially created wetlands do not include wetlands created as mitigation, and wetlands
modified for approved land use activities. Purposeful creation must be demonstrated to the director through
documentation, photographs, statements and/or other evidence. Artificial wetlands intentionally created from
nonwetland sites are excluded from regulation under this section.
D. Stream Classification. Streams shall be classified according to the water typing system as provided in WAC 222-
16-030, as amended, and designated as Class IType S, Class IIType F, Class IIIType Np, and Class IVType Ns
according to the criteria in this section:.
1. “Class I Type S streams” are those natural streams identified as “shorelines of the state” under Chapter 90.58
RCW and the city of Auburn shoreline master program.
2. “Class IIType F streams” are those natural streams that are not Class I streams and are either perennial or
intermittent and have one of the following characteristics:
a. Contain fish habitat; or
b. Has significant recreational value, as determined by the director.
3. “Class IIIType Np streams” are those natural streams with perennial (year-round) or intermittent flow and do
not contain fish habitat.
4. “Class IV Type Ns streams” are those natural streams and drainage swales with channel width less than two
feet taken at the ordinary high water mark, that do not contain fish habitat.
5. “Intentionally created streams” are those manmade streams defined as such in these reg ulations, and do not
include streams created as mitigation. Purposeful creation must be demonstrated through documentation,
photographs, statements and/or other evidence. Intentionally created streams may include irrigation and
drainage ditches, grass-lined swales and canals. Intentionally created streams are excluded from regulation
under this section, except manmade streams that provide “critical habitat,” as designated by federal or state
agencies, for salmonids.
E. Wildlife Habitat Classification. Wildlife habitat areas shall be classified as critical, secondary or tertiary
according to the criteria in this section:
1. “Critical habitat” are those habitat areas which meet any of the following criteria:
Page 191 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 16/36
a. The documented presence of species or habitat listed by federal or state agencies as “endangered,”
“threatened,” or “sensitive”; or
b. The presence of unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries;
c. Category I wetlands, as defined in these regulations; or
d. Class IType S streams, as defined in these regulations.
2. “Secondary habitat” is habitat which is valuable to fish and wildlife and supports a wide variety of species
due to its undisturbed nature, a diversity of plant species and structure, presence of water, or the area’s size,
location, or seasonal importance.
3. “Tertiary habitat” is habitat which is not classified as critical or secondary. It is habitat which, while
supporting some wildlife and performing other valuable functions, does not currently possess esse ntial
characteristics necessary to support diverse wildlife communities. Tertiary habitat also includes habitat which
has been created purposefully by human actions to serve other or multiple purposes, such as open space areas,
landscape amenities, and detention facilities.
F. Aquifer Recharge Ground Water Protection Areas. The following Ground water protection areas are hereby
designated as aquifer recharge areas subject to review under this in this chapter. correspond to water resource
protection areas,:
Type I.
which are described in the “Water Resource Protection Report” prepared for the city by Pacific Groundwater
Group, December 2000. Water resource protection areas are based on time-related “capture zones” also referred to
as “time-of-travel zones” which are derived using a numerical ground water flow model developed for the city and
upon geologic conditions. A capture zone is the area that supplies ground water recharge to a pumping well or a
spring. A time-related capture zone is the area that supplies ground water recharge to a pumping well or spring
within a specified period of time. The location of ground water protection areas have been revised to include all of a
parcel where capture zones include a portion of the parcel.
Ground water protection areas have been divided into four zones as follows:
1. “Ground water protection zone 1” represents the land area overlying the one -year time-of-travel zone of any
well or spring owned by the city.
2. “Ground water protection zone 2” represents the land area in the central part of the city beneath which the
principal aquifer used by the city for water supply is overlain by highly permeable sand and gravel deposits.
These geologic conditions provide a direct pathway for contaminants that may be released to t he soil to reach
the aquifer.
3. “Ground water protection zone 3” represents the land area overlying the region between the one -year and 10-
year time-of-travel zone of any well or spring owned by the city.
4. “Ground water protection zone 4” represents the land area within the city limits not designated as water resource
protection zones 1, 2 or 3.
1. Sole source aquifers and wellhead protection areas designated pursuant to the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act .
2. Areas established for special protection pursuant to a ground water management program as described by
Chapters 90.44, 90.48 and 90.54 RCW and Chapters 173 -100 and 173-200 WAC.
3. Any other area meeting the definition of “areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable
water” as described in Chapter 365-190 WAC and the Auburn comprehensive plan, including ground water
protection areas #1-3 as designated in the “Water Resource Protection Report” prepared for the City by the Pacific
Groundwater Group, December 2000.
Page 192 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 17/36
Type II
1. Ground water protection area #4 as designated in the “Water Resource Protection Report” prepared for the city by
the Pacific Groundwater Group, December 2000.
2. Any other area within the city that is not otherwise designated or that is added to the city via annexation shall be
treated as a Type II aquifer recharge area.
G. Geologically Hazardous Classifications. Geologically hazardous areas shall be classified according to the criteria
in this section:
1. Critical Erosion Hazard Areas. Critical erosion hazard areas are lands or areas underlain by soils identified
by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (SCS), now known as the Natural Resource
Conservation Service, as having “severe” or “very severe” erosion hazards. This includes the following group
of soils when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: Alderwood -Kitsap (AkF), Alderwood gravelly
sandy loam (AgD), Kitsap silt loam (KpD), Everett (EvD), and Indianola (InD).
2. Landslide Hazard Areas. Landslide hazard areas are classified as Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV as
follows:
a. Class I/Low Hazard. Areas with slopes of 15 percent or less.
b. Class II/Moderate Hazard. Areas with slopes of between 15 percent and 40 percent and that are
underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel, or glacial till.
c. Class III/High Hazard. Areas with slopes between 15 percent and 40 percent that are underlain by soils
consisting largely of silt and clay.
d. Class IV/Very High Hazard. Areas with slopes steeper than 15 percent with mappable zones of
emergent water (e.g., springs or ground water seepage), areas of known (mappable) landslide deposits
regardless of slope, and all areas with slopes 40 percent or greater.
3. Seismic Hazard Areas. Seismic hazard areas are lands that, due to a combination of soil and ground water
conditions, are subject to severe risk of ground shaking, subsidence, or liquefaction of soils during earthquakes.
These areas are typically underlain b y soft or loose saturated soils (such as alluvium), have a shallow ground
water table and are typically located on the floor of river valleys. (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.090 Buffer areas and setbacks.
A. General Provisions. The establishment of on-site buffers, buffer areas or setbacks shall be required for all
development proposals and activities in or adjacent to critical areaswetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, and
geologically hazardous areas. The purpose of the buffer shall be to protect the integrity, function, value, and
resources of the subject critical area (in the case of wetlands, streams, and/or wildlife habitat areas), and/or to protect
life, property and resources from risks associated with development on unstable or cri tical lands (in the case of
geologically hazardous areas). Buffers shall typically consist of an undisturbed area of native vegetation retained or
established to achieve the purpose of the buffer. No buildings or structures shall be allowed within the buffer unless
as otherwise permitted by this section. If the site has previously been disturbed, the buffer area shall be revegetated
pursuant to an approved enhancement plan. Buffers shall be protected during construction by placement of a
temporary barricade, notice of the presence of the critical area and implementation of appropriate erosion and
sedimentation controls. Restrictive covenants or conservation easements may be required to provide long -term
preservation and protection of buffer areas.
B. Required buffer widths shall reflect the sensitivity of t he particular critical area and resource or the risks
associated with development and, in those circumstances permitted by these regulations, the type and intensity of
human activity proposed to be conducted on or near the critical area.
C. Buffers shall be measured as follows:
Page 193 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 18/36
1. Wetland buffers – the buffer shall be measured perpendicular from the wetland edge as delineated and
marked in the field using the 1997 Washington State approved federal Wwetlands Identification and
Ddelineation Mmanual and the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Regional supplement. Wetland
delineations are valid for five years; after such date the City shall determine whether a revision or additional
assessment is necessary;
2. Stream buffers – the buffer shall be measured perpendicular from the ordinary high water mark;
3. Geologically hazardous area buffers shall be required for critical landslide hazard areas and shall be
measured from the top and toe and along the sides of the slope.
D. Buffer Width Variances. A variance from buffer width requirements may be granted by the city subject to the
variance criteria set forth in ACC 16.10.160. Minor variances, defined as up to and including 10 percent of the
requirement, shall be considered by the director. Variance requests which exceed 10 percent shall be considered by
the hearing examiner.
E. Buffer widths shall be established for specific critical areas according to the following standards and criteria:
1. Wetland buffers shall be established as follows: per the following table. Different buffer width requirements
may apply to various portions of a site, without requiring averaging or variances, based on the site plan, the
intensity of land uses in various locations, and differences in the category of wetland.
Wetland Category
Minimum Buffer Width (in feet) with
Minimization Measures listed in ACC
16.10.090(E)(2)
Minaximum Buffer Width (in feet)
without Minimization Measures listed in
ACC 16.10.090(E)(2)
(see subsection (E)(1) (g) of this section)
Habitat Score* Habitat Score*
Low (3-5) Medium (6-7) High (8-9) Low (3-5) Medium (6-7) High (8-9)
Category I 100 feet75 110 225 200 feet100 150 300
Category II 50 feet75 110 225 100 feet100 150 300
Category III 25 feet60 110 225 50 feet80 150 300
Category IV 25 feet40 40 40 30 feet50 50 50
*As determined per ACC 16.10.080(C).
a. Standard buffer widths as noted in subsection (E)(1) in the Table heading “Without Minimization
Measures” of this section may be reduced to the buffer width in the Table heading “With Minimization
Measures”, if all of the following minimization measures are implemented and as follows:
i. For wetlands that score 6 points or more for habitat function, a relatively undisturbed, vegetated
corridor at least 100 feet wide is protected between the wetland and any other Priority Habitats as
defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The corridor must be protected for
the entire distance between the wetland and the Priority Habitat consistent with ACC 16.10.110(D).
Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a qualified biologist
ii. For wetlands that score 3-5 habitat points, on the minimization measures are required.
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights - Direct lights away from wetland
Page 194 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 19/36
Noise - Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland
- If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source
- For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy
industry or mining, establish an additional 10’ heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to
the activity
Toxic runoff - Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered
- Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 ft of wetland
- Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater Runoff - Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development
- Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer
- Use Low Intensity Development techniques
Change in water regime - Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new
lawns
Pets and human disturbance - Use privacy fencing or plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance
using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion
- Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a long term conservation easement
Dust - Use best management practices to control dust
Different buffer width requirements may apply to various portions of a site, without re quiring averaging or
variances, based on the site plan, the intensity of land uses in various locations, and differences in the category
of wetland.
ab. Buffer width averaging to improve wetland protection may be permitted when all of may be allowed
where the applicant demonstrates to the director that the wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to
existing physical characteristics, that lower intensity land uses would be located adjacent to areas where
buffer width is reduced, that width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland functional values
and/or that the total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less in area than contained
within the standard buffer prior to averaging. Buffer width averaging may b e allowed only where such
reduction shall not result in greater than a 35 percent reduction in the buffer width established in this
section and the applicant demonstrates the following conditions are met:
i. The proposed buffer area is extensively vegetated and has less than 25 percent slopes, and the
reduction will not result in adverse impacts to the wetland; or The wetland has significant differences
in characteristics that affect its habitat functions, such as a wetland with a forested component adjacent
to a degraded emergent component or a “dual-rated” wetland with a Category I area adjacent to a
lower-rated area.
ii. The project includes a buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning area of habitat or more-
sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower -functioning or less-sensitive
portion as demonstrated by a critical areas report from a qualified wetland professional . enhancement
plan, as part of the mitigation required by this chapter and has less than 25 percent slopes. The buffer
enhancement plan shall use plant species which are native to the project area, and shall substantiate
that an enhanced buffer will improve the functional attributes of the buffer to provide additional
protection for wetland functional values; or
iii. The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging acreage
included in the buffer would substantially exceed the size of the wetland and the reduction will not
Page 195 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 20/36
result in adverse impacts to the wetland and the project includes a buffer enhancement plan which
ensures that the reduction will not result in adverse impacts to the wetland..
iv. The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either 75 percent of the required width or 75 feet
for Category I and II, 50 feet for Category III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever buffer is greater.
b. Buffer width may be reduced by up to 35 percent if an applicant undertakes measures approved by the
director to enhance or restore the buffer. The restoration or enhancement may include, but is not limited
to, planting of native trees or shrubs, increasing the diversity of plant cover types or replacement of exotic
species with native species which approximate in composition a naturally occurring plant community.
cb. Application of subsections (E)(1)(a) and (b) of this section shall not result in a buff er width less than
25 feet.
dc. Certain uses and activities which are consistent with the purpose and function of the wetland buffer
and do not detract from its integrity may be permitted by the director within the buffer depending on the
sensitivity of the wetland. Examples of uses and activities with minimal impacts which may be permitted
in appropriate cases include permeable pedestrian trails, viewing platforms, and utility easements ;
provided, that any impacts to the buffer resulting from such permitt ed activities shall be mitigated. Uses
permitted within the buffer shall generally be located as far from the wetland as possible . Walkways and
trails Trails and easements should be limited to minor crossings having no adverse impact on water
quality. They should be generally parallel to the perimeter of the wetland, located only in the outer 25
percent of the wetland buffer area, and located to avoid removal of significant trees. Trails They should be
limited to pervious surfaces no more than 8 feet in width for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks
utilizing non-treated pilings may be acceptable.
ed. Where existing buffers are degraded, the director may allow limited filling within the buffer when the
applicant demonstrates that the buffer will be enhanced according to standards of this chapter, including
appropriate soil preparation, will not result in slopes exceeding 25 percent, and there will be no net loss of
wetland or buffer functions and values.
f. Long-term protection of a regulated wetland and its associated buffer shall be provided by one of the
following methods. It shall be placed in a separate tract on which development is prohibited, protected by
execution of an easement dedicated to the city, a conservation organization or land trust, or similarly
preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the city. The location a nd limitations
associated with the wetland and its buffer shall be shown on the face of the deed or plat applicable to the
property and shall be recorded with the King or Pierce County recording department .
g. The director may require increased buffer widt hs up to the amount in this column when a larger buffer
is deemed necessary to protect wetland functions and values based on site conditions, site design, intensity
and operational characteristics of the development/land use. Examples where increased buffe rs may be
required include, but are not limited to, where a larger buffer is necessary to maintain viable populations
of species listed as endangered, threatened or sensitive, or when land adjacent to the buffer is susceptible
to severe erosion and erosion control measures are inadequate to effectively prevent adverse wetland
impacts.
2. Stream buffers shall be established as follows:
Stream ClassType
Minimum
Buffer Width
(in feet)
Class I
(see subsection (E)(2)(b) of this section)Type S
100 feetPer
SMP
Page 196 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 21/36
Stream ClassType
Minimum
Buffer Width
(in feet)
Class II Type F 75 feet100
Class IIIType Np 25 feet 50
Class IVType Ns 25 feet 50
a. The applicable minimum buffer for Class IType S streams shall be the larger of the buffer established
by these regulations or that established byis listed in the city’s shoreline master program (SMP).
b. The buffer widths required in this section may be increased by the director up to a maximum of 50
percent for Class I, II and IVType F, and Ns streams and up to 100 percent for Class III Type Np streams
in response to site-specific conditions and based on the report information submitted to characterize the
functions and values of the stream. This includes, but is not limited to, situations where the critical area
serves as habitat for threatened, endangered or sensitive species. The applicant may propose to implement
one or more enhancement measures, listed in order of preference below, which will be considered in
establishing buffer requirements:
i. Removal of fish barriers to restore accessibility to anadromous fish.
ii. Enhancement of fish habitat using log structures incorporated as part of a fish habitat enhancement
plan.
iii. Enhancement of wildlife habitat by adding structures that are likely to be used by wildlife,
including wood duck houses, bat boxes, nesting platforms, snags, root wads/stumps, birdhouses, and
heron nesting areas.
iv. Additional mitigating measures may include but are not limited to:
(A) Landscaping outside the buffer area with native vegetation or a reduction in the amount of
clearing outside the buffer area;
(B) Planting native vegetation within the buffer area, especially vegetation that would increase
value for fish and wildlife, increase stream bank or slope stability, improve water quality, or
provide aesthetic/recreational value;
(C) Creating a surface channel where a stream was previously culverted or piped;
(D) Removing or modifying existing stream culverts (such as at road crossings) to improve fish
passage and flow capabilities which are not detrimental to fish;
(E) Upgrading retention/detention facilities or other drainage facilities beyond required level s; or
(F) Similar measures determined applicable by the director.
c. No structures or improvements shall be permitted within the stream buffer area, including buildings,
decks, docks, except as otherwise permitted or required under the city’s adopted shore line master program,
or under one of the following circumstances:
i. When the improvements are part of an approved enhancement, restoration or mitigation plan; or
ii. For construction of new public roads and utilities, and accessory structures, when no fea sible
alternative location exists; or
Page 197 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 22/36
iii. Construction of foot trails, according to the following criteria:
(A) Designed to minimize impact of permeable materials;
(B) Designed to minimize impact on the stream system;
(C) Of a maximum width of 12 feet;
(D) Located within the outer half of the buffer, i.e., the portion of the buffer that is farther away
from the stream; or
iv. Construction of footbridges; or
v. Construction of educational facilities, such as viewing platforms and informational signs.
d. Buffer width averaging may be allowed for Class IIType F and Class III Type Np streams only;
provided, that all of the following are demonstrated by the applicant:
i. One or more of the enhancement measures identified in subsection (E)(2)(b)(i) through (iv) of this
section is implemented;
ii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less in area than contained within the
standard buffer prior to averaging;
iii. The buffer width averaging will result in stream functions and values equal or greater than before
averaging; and
iv. The buffer width is not reduced by more than 35 25 percent in any location than the buffer widths
established by this chapter.
e. Stream buffer widths may be reduced by the director on a case -by-case basis by up to 35 25 percent if
an applicant demonstrates that a reduction will not result in any adverse impact to the stream. Further, if
an existing buffer is vegetated, a buffer enhancement plan may be required to demonstrate how the
function and values of the buffer and stream will be improved. If the existing buffer has been disturbed
and/or is not vegetated, an enhancement plan shall be required that identifies measures to enhance the
buffer functions and values and provide additional protection for the stream f unction and values.
Enhancement plans are subject to approval by the planning director.
f. Long-term protection of a regulated stream and its associated buffer shall be provided by one of the
following methods, except for the portion of Class I streams which are owned by the State Department of
Natural Resources. The stream and buffer shall be placed in a separate tract on which development is
prohibited, protected by execution of an easement dedicated to the city, a conservation organization, l and
trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the city. The
location and limitations associated with the stream and its buffer shall be shown on the face of the deed or
plat applicable to the property and shall be recorded with the King or Pierce County recording department .
3. Wildlife Habitat Areas.
a. Buffer widths for critical habitat areas shall be determined by the director based on consideration of the
following factors: species recommendations of the Depart ment of Fish and Wildlife; recommendations
contained in the wildlife report and the nature and intensity of land uses and activities occurring on the site
and on adjacent sites. Buffers shall not be required for secondary or tertiary habitat.
b. Buffer widths for critical habitat areas may be modified by averaging buffer widths or by enhancing or
restoring buffer quality.
c. Certain uses and activities which are consistent with the purpose and function of the buffer for critical
habitat areas and do not detract from its integrity may be permitted by the director within the buffer
Page 198 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 23/36
depending on the sensitivity of the habitat area. Examples of uses and activities with minimal impact
which may be permitted in appropriate cases include permeable pedestrian trail s and viewing platforms
and utility easements; provided, that any impacts to the buffer resulting from permitted facilities shall be
mitigated. When permitted, such facilities shall generally be located as far from the critical habitat area as
possible.
d. Long-term protection of critical habitat areas and their associated buffer(s) shall be provided by one of
the following methods. The critical habitat area and buffer(s) shall be placed in a separate tract on which
development is prohibited, protected by execution of an easement, dedicated to the city, a conservation
organization, land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to
the city. The location and limitations associated with the critical habitat area and its buffer(s) shall be
shown on the face of the deed or plat applicable to the property and shall be recorded with the King or
Pierce County recording department.
4. Geologically Hazardous Areas.
a. Required buffer widths for geologically hazardous areas shall reflect the sensitivity of the geologically
hazardous area in question and the types and the risks associated with development and, in those
circumstances permitted by these regulations, the type and intensity of human activity and site design
proposed to be conducted on or near the area.
b. Required buffers may vary in width. The widths of the buffer shall reflect the sensitivity of the
geologically hazardous area in question and the types and density of uses proposed on or adjacent to the
geologic hazard. In determining the appropriate buffer width, the director shall consider the
recommendations contained in any geotechnicallogic hazards report required by these regulations and
prepared by a qualified consultant.
c. Buffers may be reduced to a minimum width of 15 feet when the applicant demonstrates through the
geotechnicallogic hazard report that the reduction will adequately protect the geologic hazard and the
proposed development through use of proposed engineering techniques. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.100 Alteration or development of critical areas – Standards and criteria – Prohibited Uses.
Alteration of specific critical areas and/or their buffers may be allowed by the director subject to the criteria of this
section. Alteration shall implement the mitigation standards as identified in ACC 16.10.110, and the performance
standards of ACC 16.10.120 and the monitoring requirements of ACC 16.10.130.
A. Wetlands.
1. Category I Wetlands. Alterations of Category I wetlands shall be avoided subject to the reasonable use
provisions of this chapter.
2. Category II Wetlands.
a. Alteration and mitigation shall comply with the mitigation performance standards and requirements of
these regulations;
b. Where enhancement, restoration or creation is proposed, replacement ratios shall comply with the
requirements of these regulations; and
c. No net loss of wetland functions and values may occur.
3. Category III and IV Wetlands.
a. Alteration and mitigation shall comply with the mitigation performance standards and requirements of
these regulations;
b. Where enhancement, restoration or creation is proposed, replacement ratios shall comply with the
requirements of these regulations; and
Page 199 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 24/36
c. No net loss of wetland functions and values may occur.
d. The following wetlands may be exempt from the requirement to avoid impacts and they may be filled if
the impacts are fully mitigated based on the remaining actions. If available, impacts should be mitigated
through the purchase of credits from an in-lieu fee program or mitigation bank, consistent with the terms
and conditions of the program or bank. Mitigation requirements may be determined using the credit/debit
tool described in Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western
Washington: Final Report (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, or as revised and approved by Ecology). In
order to verify the following conditions, a critical area report for wetlands meeting the requirements in
ACC 16.10.060 must be submitted.
i. All non-federally regulated Category IV wetlands less than 4,000 square feet that:
(A) Are not associated with riparian areas or their buffers
(B) Are not associated with shorelines of the state or their associated buffers
(C) Are not part of a wetland mosaic
(D) Do not score 6 or more points for habitat function based on the 2014 update to the Washington
State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-
029, or as revised and approved by Ecology).
(E) Do not contain a Priority Habitat or a Priority Area for a Priority Species identified by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, do not contain federally listed species or their
critical habitat, or species of local i mportance identified in ACC 16.10.080(E).
ii. Wetlands less than 1,000 square feet that meet the above criteria and do not contain federally listed
species or their critical habitat are exempt from the buffer provisions contained in this Chapter.
B. Streams.
1. Relocation of a Class IIType F, IIINp and IVNs stream exclusively to facilitate general site design shall not
be allowed. Relocation of a stream may take place only when it is part of an approved mitigation or
enhancement/restoration plan, and will result in equal or better habitat and water quality, and will not diminish
the flow capacity of the stream.
2. Bridges shall be used to cross Class IType S streams; boring/micro-tunneling may be considered for utility
crossings if it would result in the same or lower impacts as bridging.
3. Culverts are allowable only under the following circumstances:
a. Only in Class II, III, and IVType F, Type Np, and Type Ns streams;
b. When fish passage will not be impaired;
c. When the following design criteria are met:
i. Oversized All new culverts will shall be installed designed following guidance provided in the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s document: Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013
(or most recent version thereof). The applicant shall obtain a HPA from the Department of Fish and
Wildlife;
ii. Culverts will include gradient controls and creation of pools withi n the culvert for Class IIType F
streams;
iii. Gravel substrate will be placed in the bottom of the culvert to a minimum depth of one foot for
Class IIType F and Class III Type Np streams;
Page 200 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 25/36
d. The applicant or successors shall, at all times, keep any culvert free of debris and sediment to allow free
passage of water and, if applicable, fish. This responsibility shall be part of the required long term
preservation measure and may be subject to securing all the necessary approvals for any ongoing
maintenance.
4. The city may require that an existing culvert be removed from a stream as a condition of approval, unless the
culvert is not detrimental to fish habitat or water quality, or removal would be a long -term detriment to fish or
wildlife habitat or water quality.
C. Wildlife Habitat.
1. Critical Habitat. Alterations of critical habitat shall be avoided, subject to the reasonable use provisions of
this chapter.
2. Secondary Habitat. Alterations of secondary habitat may be permitted; provided, that the ap plicant mitigates
adverse impacts consistent with the performance standards of ACC 16.10.120, and other requirements of this
chapter.
3. Tertiary Habitat. Alterations of tertiary habitat are permitted consistent with applicable provisions of these
regulations and provided that no other regulated critical area is present.
D. Ground Water Protection Aquifer Recharge Areas. Requests to establish Tthe following land uses and activities
applied for on or after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, as amended, shall be prohibited in
ground water protection zones 1, 2, and 3 : Type I aquifer recharge areas:
1. Class V injection wells that inject industrial, municipal, or commercial waste fluids (as defined in WAC 173 -
218-030);
2. Surface impoundments for treating, storing and disposing of dangerous waste (as defined in WAC 173 -303-
040 and 173-304-100);
3. Waste piles for treating or storing solid waste (as defined in WAC 173 -303-040, 173-303-660 and 173-304-
420);
4. Hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal (as defined in WAC 173-303-040);
5. All types of solid waste landfills (as defined in WAC 173-304-100);
6. On-site sewage systems (as defined in WAC 246-272A-01001) except as related to R-RC, rural residential
conservancy zoned properties; and properties located within sole source aquifer (community well sites not
classified as groundwater protection areas) 5- and 10-year time of travel areas. On-site sewage systems may be
allowed in instances that there are no other means of sewage disposal and the applicant can demonstrate to the
King County Health Department, that the system can meet treatment standard N, as provided in WAC chapter
246-272A-0110. Should an on-site sewage system be unable to meet these requirements, the applicant may
apply for a critical areas variance in accordance with this chapter.
7. Recycling facilities that accept, store, or use hazardous materials; substances as defined in WAC 173-218-
030.
8. Underground storage of hazardous materials substances as defined in WAC 173-218-030, excluding the
underground storage of petroleum and other regulated substances as regulated by Chapter 173-360A WAC;
9. Use, storage, treatment, or production of perchlorethylene (PCE) or tetrachloroethylene (PERC), other than
in closed-loop systems that do not involve any discharge of PCEchemicals;
10. Petroleum refining, reprocessing, and storage, excluding the underground storage of petroleum products
and other substances as regulated by Chapter 173-360A WAC;
Page 201 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 26/36
11. Petroleum-product pipelines not associated with underground storage of petroleum and other regulated
substances as regulated by Chapter 173-360 WAC; and
12. Storage or distribution of gasoline treated with the additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE).
E. Geologically Hazardous Areas.
1. General Standards. The city may approve, condition or deny proposals for the alteration of geologic ally
hazardous areas, as appropriate, based on the degree to which the significant risks posed by critical hazard areas
to public and private property and to public health and safety can be mitigated. The objective of mitigation
measures shall be to render a site containing a critical geologic hazard as safe as one not containing such hazard
or one characterized by a low hazard. In appropriate cases, conditions may include limitations of proposed uses,
modification of density, alteration of site layout and other appropri ate changes to the proposal. Where potential
impacts cannot be effectively mitigated or where the risk to public health, safety and welfare, public or private
property, or important natural resources is significant notwithstanding mitigation, the proposal shall be denied.
2. Specific Standards.
a. Class IV Landslide Hazard Areas. Alteration shall be prohibited subject to the reasonable use provisions
of this chapter.
b. Critical Seismic Hazard Areas.
i. For one-story and two-story residential structures, the applicant shall conduct an evaluation of site
response and liquefaction potential based on the performance of similar structures under similar
foundation conditions; or
ii. For all other proposals, the applicant shall conduct an evaluation of site resp onse and liquefaction
potential including sufficient subsurface exploration to provide a site coefficient (S) for use in the
static lateral force procedure described in the International Building Code.
c. When development is permitted in geologically hazardous areas by these regulations, an applicant
and/or its qualified consultant shall provide assurances which, at the city’s discretion, may include one or
more of the following:
i. A letter from the geotechnical engineer and/or geologist who prepared the geotechnicallogic hazard
report required by these regulations, stating that the risk of damage from the proposal, both on -site and
off-site, are minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the report, that the proposal will not increase
the risk of occurrence of the potential geologic hazard, and that measures to eliminate or reduce risks
have been incorporated into its recommendations;
ii. A letter from the applicant, or the owner of the property if not the applicant, stating its
understanding and acceptance of any risk of injury or damage associated with development of the site
and agreeing to notify any future purchasers of the site, portions of the site, or structures located on the
site of the geologic hazard;
iii. A legally enforceable hold harmless agreement, which shall be recorded as a covenant and noted on
the face of the deed or plat, and executed in a form satisfactory to the city, acknowledging that the site
is located in a geologically hazardous area; the risks associated with development of such site; and a
waiver and release of any and all claims of the owner(s), their directors, employees, or successors, or
assigns against the city of Auburn for any loss, damage, or injury, whether direct or indirect, arising
out of issuance of development permits for the proposal; and
iv. Posting of a bond, guarantee or other assurance device approved by the city to cover the cost of
monitoring, maintenance and any necessary corrective actions.
F. Flood Hazard Areas. Development standards are defined by Chapter 15.68 ACC. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
Page 202 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 27/36
16.10.110 Mitigation standards, location, and timing, criteria wetland replacement ratios, and plan long
term protection requirements.
A. Mitigation Standards. Adverse impacts to critical area functions and values shall be mitigated. Mitigation actions
shall generally be implemented in the preferred sequence identified in this chapter. Proposals which include less
preferred and/or compensatory mitigation shall demonstrate that:
1. All feasible and reasonable measures as determined by the department have been taken to reduce impacts
and losses to the critical area, or to avoid impacts where avoidance is required by these regulations;
2. The restored, created or enhanced critical area or buffer will be as viable and enduring as the critical area or
buffer area it replaces; and
3. No overall net loss will occur in wetland or stream functions and values. The mitigation shall be functionally
equivalent to or greater than the altered wetland or stream in terms of hyd rological, biological, physical, and
chemical functions.
B. Location and Timing of Mitigation.
1. The preferred location of mitigation is on site when ecologically preferable to other identified alternatives.
Mitigation may be allowed off site when it is determined by the department Director that on-site mitigation is
not ecologically preferable to other identified alternatives, or, in the case of wetlands, where the affected site is
identified as appropriate for off-site mitigation in the Mill Creek Special Area Management Plan (SAMP),
April 2000. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to demonstrate that mitigation cannot be provided on
site or is consistent with the SAMP. If it is determined that on-site mitigation is not ecologically preferable to
other identified alternatives, mitigation shall be provided in the same drainage basin as the permitted activity on
property owned, secured, or controlled by the applicant, or provided by the applicant using alternative
mitigation options such as mitigation banking or in-lieu fee programs. The mitigation should result in no net
loss to the critical area functions impacted and associated watershed. Where mitigation is authorized to be
located outside the city limits, the applicant shall assure to the satisfaction of the department director that other
requirements of this chapter will be met, including but not limited to, monitoring and maintenance.
2. In-kind mitigation shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates, and the department director
concurs, that greater functional and habitat value can be achieved through out -of-kind mitigation.
3. When wetland, stream or habitat mitigation is permitted by these regulations, the mitigation project shall
occur near an adequate water supply (river, stream, ground water) with a hydrologic connection to the critical
area to ensure a successful mitigation or restoration. A natural hydrologic connection is preferential as
compared to one which relies upon manmade or constructed features requiring routine ma intenance.
4. Any mitigation plan shall be completed before initiation of other permitted activities, unless a phased or
concurrent schedule that assures completion prior to occupancy has been approved by the department.
C. Wetland Replacement Ratios.
1. Where wetland alterations are permitted by the director, the applicant shall enhance or create areas of
wetlands in order to compensate for wetland losses. The compensation shall be determined according to
acreage, function, type, location, timing factors a nd projected success of enhancement or creation.
2. The following acreage replacement and enhancement ratios shall be implemented; however, the department
may vary these standards if the applicant can demonstrate and the director agrees that the variation will provide
adequate compensation for lost wetland area, functions and values, or if other circumstances as determined by
the director justify the variation. Except as provided for Category IV wetlands in subsection (C)(3) of this
section, iIn no case shall the amount of mitigation be less than the area of affected wetland. The director may at
his discretion increase these standards where mitigation is to occur off-site or in other appropriate
circumstances.
Page 203 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 28/36
3. Category IV wetlands can be mitigated by either: (a) meeting one of the replacement ratios (*selisted in the
following table); or (b) filled and implementing mitigatedion consistent with 16.10.100(A)(3)(d) which ensures
no net loss of values and functions of the larger ecosystem in which the critical area is located .
Wetland
Category and
type of
Wetland
Wetland Creation Ratio
(Acres)or Re-establishment
Rehabilitation
Wetland Enhancement Ratio
(Acres)
(Acres Created or Enhanced: Acres Impacted)
Category I:
Bog, Natural
Heritage Site
6:1 Not considered possible Case by case 12:1Case by case
Category I:
Mature
Forested
6:1 12:1 24:1
Category I:
Based on
functions
4:1 8:1 16:1
Category II Forested
3:1
6:1 612:1
Scrub/Shrub 2:1 4:1
Emergent 2:1 4:1
Category III Forested
23:1
4:1 68:1
Scrub/Shrub 2:1 4:1
Emergent 2:1 4:1
Category IV* 1.25:1* 3:1 2.56:1*
D. Long-term protection of regulated wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat areas, geologically
hazardous areas, aquifer recharge areas, and any associated buffer(s) shall be provided by one of
the following methods:
1. It For subdivisions, short subdivisions, and binding site plans, the critical area and its buffer
shall be placerotected long-term by one of the following measures in the following order of
preference:
a. The critical area and its buffer shall be placed in a separate tract on which development
is prohibited and a note shown on the face of the plat indicating that the homeowners or
homeowners’ association is responsible for maintenance of the tract. If the City agrees to
accept dedication of the tract, a City-approved note shall be shown on the face of the plat
indicating that the City is responsible for long term ownership and maintenance of the
tract and there shall be adequate provisions for City access to the tract from a public
street, as approved by the director.
b. The critical area and its buffer shall be protected by execution of an easement
dedicated to the city, a conservation organization or land trust, or similarly preserved
through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the city. Access to the easement
must be assured from the public street.
Page 204 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 29/36
2. For all other developments. The critical area and its buffer shall be protected by execution
of an easement dedicated to the city, a conservation organization, or land trust, or similarly
preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the city. The legal
description, depicted location, and limitations associated with the critical area and its buffer,
and access from the public street shall be shownincluded within on the easement document.
face of the deed or plat applicable to the property and The easement provisions shall be
reviewed and acceptable to the City prior to recordeding with the King County Recorder or
Pierce County recording departmentAuditor. Any area in which Department of Natural
Resources has jurisdiction, ownership such as Type S streams, will not be subject to this
requirement.
(Ord. 6476 § 1, 2013; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.120 Performance standards for mitigation planning.
The performance standards in this section shall be incorporated into mitigation plans submitted to the city for
impacts to critical areas.
A. Wetlands and Streams.
1. Use plants native to the Puget Lowlands or Pacific Northwest ecoregion; non -native, introduced plants or
plants listed by the Washington State Department of Agriculture as noxious weeds (Chapter 16-750 WAC)
shall not be used;
2. Use plants adapted to and appropriate for the proposed habitats and consider the ecological conditions known
or expected to be present on the site. For example, plants assigned a facultative wetland (FACW) wetland
indicator status should be used for sites with soils that are inundated or saturated for long periods during the
growing season. Use nearby reference wetlands or aerial photos to identify plants suitable to the site conditions
and hydrologic regimes planned for the mitigation site. Avoid planting significant areas of the site with species
that have questionable potential for successful establishment, such as species with a narrow range of habitat
tolerances;
3. Utilize plant species’ heterogeneity a nd structural diversity that emulates native plant communities described
in “Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington” (Franklin, J.F. and C.T. Dyrness, 1988) or other regionally
recognized publications on native landscapes;
4. Specify plants that are commercially available from native-plant nurseries or available from local sources. If
collecting some or all native plants from donor sites, collect in accordance with ecologically accepted methods,
such as those described in the “Washington Native Plant Society’s Policy on Collection and Sale of Native
Plants,” that do not jeopardize the survival or integrity of donor plant populations;
5. Use perennial plants in preference to annual species; the use of annuals species should be limited to a
temporary basis in order to provide erosion control, support the establishment of perennial plants, or if
mitigation monitoring determines that native plants are not naturally colonizing the site or if species diversity is
unacceptably low compared to approved performance standards;
6. Use plant species high in food and cover value for native fish and wildlife species that are known or likely to
use the mitigation site (according to reference wetlands, published information, and professional judgment);
7. Install a temporary irrigation system and specify an irrigation schedule and responsible party to maintain
unless a sufficient naturally-occurring source of water is demonstrated. Temporary irrigation facilities shall be
removed after the time specified by the qualified consultant;
8. Identify methods of soil preparation. For stream substrate or wetland soils, at least one foot of clean
inorganic and/or organic materials, such as cobble, gravel, sand, silt, clay, muck, soil, or peat, as appropriate,
shall be ensured. The stream substrate or wetland soils shall be free from solid, dangerous, or hazardous
substance as defined by Chapter 70.105 RCW and implementing rules;
Page 205 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 30/36
9. Confine temporary stockpiling of soils to upland areas. Identify construction access routes and mea sures to
avoid resultant soil compaction. Unless otherwise approved by the director, comply with all applicable best
management practices for clearing, grading, and erosion control to protect any nearby surface waters from
sediment and turbidity;
10. Show densities and placement of plants; these should be based on the ecological tolerances of species
proposed for planting, as determined by a qualified consultant;
11. Provide sufficient specifications and instructions to ensure proper placement and spacing of seeds, tubers,
bulbs, rhizomes, springs, plugs and transplanted stock, and other habitat features, and to provide a high
probability of success, and to reduce the likelihood of prolonged losses of wetland functions from proposed
development;
12. Do not rely on fertilizers and herbicides to promote establishment of plantings; if fertilizers are used, they
must be applied per manufacturer specifications to planting holes in organic or controlled release forms, and
never broadcast on the ground surface; if herbicides are used to control invasive species or noxious weeds and
to help achieve performance standards, only those approved for use in aquatic ecosystems by the Washington
Department of Ecology shall be used; herbicides shall only be used in conformance with all applicable laws and
regulations and be applied per manufacturer specifications by an applicator licensed in the state of Washington;
and
13. Include the applicant’s mitigation plan consultant in the construction process to ensure the approved
mitigation plan is completed as designed. At a minimum, the consultant’s participation will include site visits to
inspect completed rough and final grading, installation of in-water or other habitat structures, and to verify the
quality and quantity of native plant materials before and after installation;
14. Signs and Fencing of Wetlands and Streams Critical Areas.
a. Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the critical area or buffer and the limits of those areas to be
disturbed pursuant to an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field in such a way as to
ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur, and verified by the depar tment prior to the
commencement of authorized activities. This temporary marking shall be maintained throughout
construction, and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place.
b. Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the
department may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a critical area or
buffer. Permanent signs shall be made of metal face and attached to a metal post, firmed anchored, or
other materials of equal durability approved by the director. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per
lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The
sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director:
“Habitat Conservation AreaSensitive Area Boundary”
“Do Not DisturbHelp protect and care for this area. Trampling or cutting vegetation, placing
fill or garbage, and any other activities that may disturb the sensitive area are prohibited, as
regulated under Auburn City Code Chapter 16.10.
Please contact City of Auburn at 253-931-3090 with questions or concerns.”
Contact the City of Auburn Planning Department regarding uses and restrictions
c. Fencing.
i. The director shall condition any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter to require the
application to install a permanent fence at the edge of the critical area or buffer, when fencing will
prevent future impacts on the critical area.
Page 206 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 31/36
ii. The applicant shall be required to install a permanent fence around the critical area or buffer when
domestic grazing animals are present or may be introduced on-site.
iii. Fencing installed as part of a proposed activity or as required in this subsection shall be designed so
as to not interfere with species migration, including fish runs, and shall be constructed in a ma nner that
minimizes habitat impacts.
iv. Fencing shall include a permanent natural wood split-rail fence, such as cedar or other non-pressure
treated wood with fence posts be set in concrete footings, or similar, as approved by the director.
B. Wetlands. Do not exceed a maximum water depth of 6.6 feet (two meters) at mean low water unless approved as
part of a planned interspersion of wetland vegetation classes and deep-water habitats.
1. Do not exceed a slope of 25 percent (4H:1V) in the wetland unless it can be clearly demonstrated by
supporting documentation that wetland hydrology and hydric soils capable of supporting hydrophytic (wetland)
vegetation will be created on steeper slopes;
2. Do not exceed a slope of 25 percent (4H:1V) in the wetland buffer ; and
3. Limit deep-water habitat (greater than 6.6 feet at mean low water) in compensatory wetland to no more than
60 percent of the total area, and approach this limit only when deep -water habitat is highly interspersed with
wetland vegetation classes, including aquatic bed, emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested.
C. Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas.
1. Incorporate relevant performance standards from subsections A and B of this section, as determined by the
director;
2. Include the following additional mitigation measures in mitigation planning:
a. Locate buildings and structures in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on critical habitats used by
threatened or endangered species and identified by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife,
NOAA Fisheries, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
b. Integrate retained habitat into open space and landscaping;
c. Wherever possible, consolidate critical habitats into larger, unfragmented, contiguous blocks;
d. Use native plant species for landscaping of disturbed or undeveloped areas and in any habitat
enhancement or restoration activities;
e. Create habitat heterogeneity and structural diversity that emulates native plant communities described in
Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington (Franklin, J.F. and C.T. Dyrness, 1988) or other regionally
recognized publications on native landscapes;
f. Remove and/or control any noxious weeds or exotic animals which are problematic to the critical habitat
area as determined by the director or consultant hired by the city to review the mitigation plan; and
g. Preserve significant or existing native trees, preferably in stands or groups, consistent with achieving
the goals and standards of this chapter; the plan shall reflect the report prepared pursuant to ACC
16.10.070.
D. Geologically Hazardous Areas.
1. Incorporate relevant performance standards from the preceding subsections, as determined by the director;
2. The following additional performance standards shall be reflected in proposals within geologic ally hazardous
areas:
Page 207 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 32/36
a. A geotechnical logic hazard report shall be prepared to identify and evaluate potential hazards and to
formulate mitigation measures;
b. Construction methods will not adversely affect geologic hazards or will reduce adverse impacts on
geologic hazards;
c. Site planning shall minimize disruption of existing topography and natural vegetation;
d. Impervious surface coverage shall be minimized;
e. Disturbed areas shall be replanted with permanent vegetation as soon as feasible pursuant to a
mitigation or landscape plan;
f. Clearing and grading shall be limited to between April 1st and October 31st unless the geo technicallogic
hazard report specifically addresses measures necessary to perform clearing and grading during other
portions of the year;
g. The limited use of retaining walls that minimize disturbance or alteration of existing natural slope areas
are preferred over graded slopes;
h. Temporary erosion and sedimentation controls, pursuant to an approved plan, shall be implemented
during construction;
i. A drainage plan shall be prepared for large projects as required by the city engineer;
j. Development shall not increase instability or create a hazard to the site or adjacent properties, or result
in a significant increase in sedimentation or erosion.
E. Ground Water Protection Aquifer Recharge Areas. A mitigation plan is Protective measures are required of all
development except an individual single-family or two-family (duplex) dwelling unit. The mitigation plans
Development applications shall include the following minimum measures and incorporate the appropriate responses.
1. Ground Water Protection Zones 1, 2 and 3Type I Aquifer Recharge Areas.
a. Indicate how hazardous materials substances shall be stored and used such that any unauthorized release
or discharge of the hazardous materials substances is prevented.
b. Specify that pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers shall be applied in strict conformance with
manufacturer’s instructions and by persons licensed to perform such applications, if applicable.
c. Document hazardous materials substances management procedures, including, but not limited to,
operations plans, drawings and as-built diagrams, emergency response and spill cleanup plans, and
employee training documentation. This information can be provided in the form of copies of permits or
other documentation required by other authorities.
d. Indicate that any fill material shall be documented to be free of contaminants that exceed Method A and
Method B soil cleanup standards specified in Chapter 173-340 WAC prior to placement on the ground, if
applicable.
e. Specify that any contaminant release reported to the Washington State Department of Ecology
(Ecology) per Chapter 173-340 WAC shall also be reported to the city of Auburn public works department
concurrent with notification of Ecology.
f. Include a provision that the implementation of the mitigation plan protective measures will be kept up-
to-date maintained during the life of the project. Updates shall occur whenever there is a change in use or
business occupancy or when there are significant changes in facility operations or hazardous materials
substances management. A copy of the plan is to be available for review by city inspectors at the business
Page 208 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 33/36
or businesses within the development. The plan should cover the facility site in general as well as have a
section(s) specific to any tenants within the development.
2. Ground Water Protection Zone 4Type II Aquifer Recharge Areas. Business Property owners shall implement
best management practices for water resource protection. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.130 Monitoring program and contingency plan.
A. For all actions requiring a mitigation plan, a monitoring program shall be prepared and implemented by the
applicant to evaluate the success of the mitigation project and to determine necessary corrective actions. This
program shall determine if the original goals and objectives are being met. The monitoring program shall be
reviewed and approved by the city prior to implementation. The monitoring program shall include a contingency
plan in the event that implementation of the mitigation plan is inadequa te or fails.
B. A performance and maintenance security is required to ensure the applicant’s compliance with the terms of the
approved mitigation plan. The amount of the performance security shall equal 125 percent of the cost of the
mitigation project for the length of the monitoring period; the director may agree to reduce the security in proportion
to work successfully completed over the period of the security.
C. Incorporate the following into monitoring programs prepared to comply with this chapter:
1. Appropriate, accepted, and unbiased qualitative or precise and accurate quantitative sampling methods to
evaluate the success or failure of the project compared to performance standards approved by the city;
2. Quantitative sampling methods that include permanent photo points installed at the completion of
construction and maintained throughout the monitoring period and shall also include permanent transects,
sampling points (e.g., quadrants or water quality or quantity monitoring stations), and wildlife monitoring
stations;
3. Clearly stipulated qualitative and quantitative sampling methods that are approved by the city before
implementation by the project proponent;
4. Appropriate qualitative and/or quantitative performance standards that will be used t o measure the success or
failure of the mitigation. For wetlands, streams and habitat areas these will include, at a minimum, standards for
plant survival and diversity, including structural diversity, the extent of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and
habitat types and requirements as appropriate; all proposed standards are subject to review and approval by the
city or the consultant selected by the city to review the mitigation monitoring plan. The qualitative and/or
quantitative performance standards shall generally address the following subject areas:
a. Requirements for survival of plantings;
b. Requirements for plant density or percent cover by plants;
c .Requirements for plant diversity (species composition diversity, structural diversity – tree, shrub, and
groundcover layers, deciduous and evergreen, etc.);
d, Requirements that are staged over time so that different performance standards must be met as the
mitigation area matures;
e. Measures to verify that the type and amount of functional areas that are part of the mitigation plan are
successfully established (e.g. identify steps that will be implemented to confirm that the amount and type
of created wetland meets the criteria of a wetland);
f. Requirements specifically limiting occurrence of exotic and nuisance plant species ’
g. Requirements for ongoing preservation and protection measures such as continued existence in good
condition of fencing and critical area signage. Also, avoidance of disturbance, trampling and the
accumulation of litter or debris within the critical area wetland and its buffer.
Page 209 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 34/36
5. Monitoring programs for a minimum period of three five years for buffer enhancement and a minimum of
five years for other types of mitigation programs that include, at a minimum, preparation of an as -built plan;
biannual monitoring and preparation of annual monitoring reports following implementation; and a
maintenance plan. More stringent monitoring requirements or longer monitoring periods may be required on a
case-by-case basis for more complex mitigation plans (e.g. ten years or more when forested or scrub-shrub
wetlands are the intended result);
6. Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the director by December 1st of the year in which monitoring is
conducted. The reports are to be prepared by a qualified consultant and must contain all qualitative and
quantitative monitoring data, photographs, and an evaluation of each of the applicable performance standards.
If performance standards are not being met, appropriate corrective or contingency measures must be identified
and communicated to the director and upon concurrence, implemented to ensure that performance standards
will be met;
7. Provision for the extension of the monitoring period beyond the minimum timeframe if performance
standards are not being met at the end of the initial five-year period; and provision for additional financial
securities or bonding to ensure that any additional monitoring and contingen cies are completed to ensure the
success of the mitigation. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.140 Procedural provisions.
A. Interpretation and Conflicts. The director shall have the authority to administer the provisions of this chapter, to
make determinations with regard to the applicability of the regulations, to interpret the intent of unclear provisions,
to require additional information, to determine the level of detail and appropriate methodologies for critical area
reports and studies, to prepare application forms and informational materials as required, and to promulgate
procedures and rules for unique circumstances not anticipated within standards and procedures contained in this
section. Administrative interpretations may be appealed to the hearing exa miner as prescribed in ACC 18.70.050.
B. Penalties and Enforcement. Compliance with these regulations and penalties for their violation shall be enforced
pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.25 ACC.
C. Appeals offrom Critical Area Review Decisions. Appeals of critical area review decisions shall be governed by
the procedures set forth in ACC 18.70.050. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.150 Reasonable use provision.
A. The standards and requirements of these regulations are not intended, and shall not be construed or applied in a
manner, to deny all reasonable use of private property. If an applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the hearing
examiner that strict application of these standards would deny all reasonable economic use of a property,
development may be permitted subject to appropriate conditions.
B. Applications for a reasonable use exception shall be processed as a Type III decision, pursuant to ACC 14.03.030
and Chapter 2.46 ACC.
C. An applicant for relief from strict application of these standards shall demonstrate that all of the following criteria
are met:
1. No reasonable use with less impact on the critical area and its buffer is possible.
There is no feasible and reasonable on-site alternative to the activities proposed, considering possible changes
in site layout, reductions in density and similar factors, that would allow a reasonable and economically viable
use with fewer adverse impacts;
2. The proposed activities, as conditioned, will result in the minimum possible impacts to affected critical areas;
3. All reasonable mitigation measures have been implemented or assured;
4. The inability to derive reasonable use is not the result of the applicant’s actions or that of a previous property
owner, such as by segregating or dividing the property and creating an undevelopable condition; and
Page 210 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 35/36
5. The applicant shall demonstrate that the use would not cause a hazard to life, health or property.
D. Any alteration of a critical area approved under this section shall be subject to appropriate conditions and will
require mitigation construction authorized by under an approved mitigation plan.
E. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to provide evidence in support of the application and to provide
sufficient information on which any decision has to be made.
EF. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise
required for a proposal by applicable city codes.
FG. Except when application of this title would deny all r easonable use of a site, an applicant who seeks an
exception from the regulations of the title shall pursue a variance as provided in ACC 16.10.160. (Ord. 6442 § 13,
2012; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.160 Variances.
Applications for variances to the strict application of the terms of this chapter to a property may be submitted to the
city. Minor variances, defined as up to and including 10 percent of the requirement, may be granted by the director
as a Type II decision as defined by Chapter 14.03 ACC. Variance requests which exceed 10 percent may be granted
by the hearing examiner as a Type III decision, pursuant to ACC 14.03.030 and Chapter 2.46 ACC. Approval of
variances from the strict application of the critical area requirements shall conform to the foll owing criteria:
A. There are unique physical conditions peculiar and inherent to the affected property which make it difficult or
infeasible to strictly comply with the provisions of this section;
B. The variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate the building footprint and access;
C. The proposed variance would preserve the functions and values of the critical area, and/or the proposal does not
create or increase a risk to the public health, safety and general welfare, or to public or private property ;
D. The proposed variance would not adversely affect surrounding properties adjoining;
E. Adverse impacts to critical areas resulting from the proposal are minimized; and
F. The special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are not a result o f the actions of the applicant or
previous owner. (Ord. 6442 § 14, 2012; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.170 Special exception for public agencies and utilities.
A. If the application of this chapter would prohibit a development proposal by a public agency or public utility, the
agency or utility may apply for an exception pursuant to this section.
B. Exception Request and Review Process. An application for a public agency and utility exception shall be made to
the city and shall include a critical area identification form; critical area report, including mitigation plan, if
necessary; and any other related project documents such as permit applications to other agencies, special studies,
and environmental documents prepared pursuant to the State Environmental Po licy Act (Chapter 43.21C RCW and
Chapter 197-11 WAC). The director shall prepare a recommendation to the hearing examiner based on review of the
submitted information, a site inspection, and the proposal’s ability to comply with public agency and utility
exception review criteria in subsection D of this section.
C. Hearing Examiner Review. The hearing examiner shall review the application and director’s recommendation,
and conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 2.46 ACC. The hearing examiner shall approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the request based on the proposal’s ability to comply with all of the public agency
and utility exception criteria in subsection D of this section.
D. Public Agency and Utility Review Criteria. The criteria for review and approval of public agency and utility
exceptions follow:
1. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less impact on critical areas;
Page 211 of 215
Auburn Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 CRITICAL AREAS
Page 36/36
2. The application of this chapter would unreasonably restrict the ability to provide utility services to the
public;
3. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the
development proposal site;
4. The proposal attempts to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area functions and values consistent with
other applicable regulations and standards. The proposal protects critical area functions and values to the extent
feasible and provides for mitigation in accordance with the provisions of this chapter; and
5. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards.
E. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to bring forth evidence in support of the
application and to provide sufficient information on which any decision has to be made on the application. (Ord.
6442 § 15, 2012; Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
16.10.180 Severability.
If any provision of these regulations or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court of
competent jurisdiction, the remainder of these regulations or the application to other persons or circumstances shall
not be affected. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.)
Page 212 of 215
S 277TH ST
S 272ND ST
WEST VALLEY HWY NW68TH AVE SMILITARY RD SCENTRAL AVE SPEASLEYCANYON
R
D
S
S 288TH ST
MILITARYRDSS 272ND ST
S272NDWAYAUBURNWAYNTS167
B ST NWWEST VALLEY HWY N15TH ST NW51ST AVE SC ST NWS 277TH ST
37TH ST NWD ST NWA ST NERONCROCKETTDRNWA ST NWS 316TH ST D ST NEAUBURN WAY
N
37TH ST NE
TERRACEDRNW
16TH ST NW
AUBURNW AY NC ST NEM ST NWS 296TH ST
55TH AVE SI ST NWE ST NEWSTNWS 287TH ST
S
300THPL
44TH ST NW
57THPLSFRONTAGE RD46TH PL S52ND AVE SS 305TH ST
54TH AVE SR ST NW61STAVESS300THST
6 5 TH AVE S30TH ST NE
29TH ST NW
56THAVESVSTNWS29
7THPLCLAY ST NW58TH AVE SS 288TH ST
51ST AVE SPIKESTNW42ND ST NW
49TH AVE SHICRESTDRNW24THSTNW
T ST NWH ST NWS312THST
B PL NW
S 2 92NDST
52NDPLS42ND ST NE
S 303RD PL
S 319TH ST
S 322ND ST
S 302ND PL
30TH ST NW
S324THST
S310THST
26THSTNES296THPL
U CT NW59TH AVE S63RD PL S66TH AVE SS307THST
S 302N
D
S
T
S
297THST
AABYDRNW
S 321ST ST
26TH ST NW
S 292NDPL
S 299TH ST
S 325TH
S
T
S 2 9 8 TH P L
58TH PL SS 320TH ST
47TH AVE S23RD ST NE54TH PL SS 294TH ST
S 301ST ST
53RD AV E S 59TH PL S55THAVES29TH ST NW
E ST NE56TH AVE SS 288TH ST
57TH PL S29TH ST NW
S 292ND ST
R ST NW58THAVESS 321ST ST
KING
COUNTY
KING
COUNTY
KENTKENT
Information shown is for general reference purposes
only and does not necessarily represent exact
geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The
City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Ci t y of Aubur n ( Nor t hwes t )
Printed On: 9/25/2019
Map ID: 6154
¬
Group A Time of Travel
6 Month
1 Year
5 Year
10 Year Page 213 of 215
132ND AVE SESE 274TH ST
SE 272ND ST
S
E
K
E
N
T
-
K
A
N
G
L
E
Y
R
D
116TH AVE SE124TH AVE SE108TH AVE SE123RD AVE SESE 272ND ST
124TH AVE SEAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE124TH AVE SESE 304TH ST 132ND AVE SESE 312TH ST
SE 320TH ST104THAVESELEAHILLRDSE112TH AVE SESE304TH W A Y
SE281STST
8TH ST NE
132NDWA Y SE112TH AVE SESE304THSTSE 304TH ST
124TH AVE SE112TH AVE SESE 288TH ST
SE 284TH ST
118TH AVE SESE 299TH ST
116TH AVE SESE 316TH ST 127TH PL SE144TH AVE SE140TH AVE SESE 310TH ST
SE290THST
SE296THWAY
SE301STST
130TH AVE SESE287THST
SE318THWAY105T
HPLSESE 298TH PLGREENRIVERRDSE
SE 282ND ST
21STSTNE
108TH A V ESE19THDRNE
SE295THST
SE 286TH ST
128THPLSE22NDSTNE
SE 285TH ST105TH AVE SESE 307TH PL
20TH ST NE
S
E
299THPL
SE 308TH PL
SE 290TH PLSE2
8
9THST
SE307THST
SE 292ND ST
SE300THWAY
SE 306TH ST129THAVESESE 286TH PL
SE 300TH STR ST NESE 305TH P
L107TH AVE SES
E288THPL
SE 302ND ST
SE 318TH PL 113TH PL SESE 304TH PL 120TH AVE SE114THWAYSESE 320TH PL 128TH AVE SE114THPLSE138TH AVE SESE 310TH LN
SE 307TH ST108TH AVE SE108TH AVE SESE 286TH ST
S
E282NDST
118TH AVE SEKENTKENT
KING
COUNTY
KING
COUNTY
Information shown is for general reference purposes
only and does not necessarily represent exact
geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The
City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Ci t y of Aubur n ( Nor t heas t )
Printed On: 9/25/2019
Map ID: 6154
¬
Group A Time of Travel
6 Month
1 Year
5 Year
10 Year Page 214 of 215
LAKE
TAPPS
LAKE
TAPPS
TS18
PACIFIC AVE S142ND AVE E8TH ST E
24TH ST E140TH AVE EELLINGSON RD SW
EASTVALLEYHWYA ST SE12TH ST E182ND AVE E214TH AVE E9
THSTE
FORESTCANYONRDE
SU M N ER-TAPPSHWYE210TH AVE E
16TH ST E
AUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE
A ST SEAU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
C ST SWR ST SEM ST SELAKETAPPSPKWY SE
29TH ST SE
KERSEYWAYSE
LAKELANDHILLSWAYSEORAV E T Z R DSE
15TH ST SW
EAST VALLEY HWY E6TH ST SE
A ST SE2ND ST E
STUCKRIVERDRSE
53RD ST SE
37TH ST SE
41STSTSE
17TH ST SE
12TH ST SE
K ST SEPERIMETERRDSW
D ST SEEAST BLVDPACIFIC AVE SS
CE
NI
C
DRSE62NDSTSE
EVERGREENWAYSEF ST SEL ST SEACADEMYDRSEMONTEVISTADR SEBRIDGET AVE SEDOGWOOD ST SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE47TH ST SE
56TH ST SE
RI VE R D R SE
35THWAYSE
26TH ST SE
32NDSTSE
36THSTSE
OLIVEAVESEAST E
24TH ST SE HEMLOCK ST SEF
O
RESTRIDGEDRSE
23RD ST SE22ND ST SE
O ST SEHIGHLANDDRSE20THSTSE
72NDSTSE
37THWAY S E
16TH ST SE
148TH AVE SE73RD ST SE
57TH ST SE ELM ST SEPEARLAVESE61STSTSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SE
HEATHER AVE SE19TH ST SE
MAPLE DR SE
21ST ST SE
RANDALL AVE SE33RD ST SE
55TH ST SEWARD AVE SE63RDPLSE
55
T
HWAYSE JASMINE AVE SEFIR ST SEC PL SE65TH ST SEK ST SE65TH ST SEEVERGRE
ENWAYSE16TH ST SE
F ST SE57TH ST SE
MUCKLESHOOT
CASINO
MUCKLESHOOT
CASINO
THE
OUTLET
COLLECTION
THE
OUTLET
COLLECTION
PIERCE
COUNTY
PIERCE
COUNTY
SUMNERSUMNER
KING
COUNTY
KING
COUNTY
PACIFICPACIFIC
ALGONAALGONA
Information shown is for general reference purposes
only and does not necessarily represent exact
geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The
City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Ci t y of Aubur n ( Sout h)
Printed On: 9/25/2019
Map ID: 6154
¬
Group A Time of Travel
6 Month
1 Year
5 Year
10 Year Page 215 of 215