HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 10/04/2004 I
•
Planning & Economic Development
Committee Agenda
KENT Councilmembers: Ron Harmon •Bruce White•Tim Clark, Chair
SPECIAL MEETING October 4, 2004
4:00 p.m.
Item Descri tion Action Speaker Time Page
1. Approval of Minutes dated September 20,2004 YES 1
2. Critical Areas Ordinance Update YES Kim Marousek 30 min 3
#ZCA-2002-4
Please note that the Planning Committee is holding two meetings this month on the I"and 3`d Monday of October
at the regularly scheduled time of 4:00 p.m. in Council Chambers East,Kent City Hall,220 4th Avenue South,
Kent,98032-5895. For further information please contact Planning Services at(253)856-5454.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office at
(253)856-5725 in advance. For TDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay
Service at1-800-833-6388.
This page intentionally left blank.
i
1
PLANNING& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 20,2004
COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White
The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M.
Approval of Minutes
Committee Member White Moved and Committee Member Harmon Seconded a motion to approve
the minutes of the July 19, 2004 meeting. Motion Carried.
#RZ-2003-2 Howard's Addition Rezone
Planner Sharon Clamp stated that the purpose for bringing this rezone request before the Committee
was to review the Public Hearing and Hearing Examiner's decision, then forward this on to City
Council for action.
Ms. Clamp stated that an open record hearing was held on May 19, 2004 as required by City Code
and continued to July 7, 2004 upon the Hearing Examiner's request. The Hearing Examiner
requested clarification concerning the comprehensive plan and zoning designations in relation to
allowable densities as he felt there were some discrepancies.
Ms. Clamp stated that a rezone application is a non-project action and that this applicant submitted a
project specific proposal for an associated subdivision simultaneously; wherefore the open record
hearings were combined to hear both actions. Ms. Clamp stated that since the plat request was
contingent on approval of the rezone, the Hearing Examiner stated in his recommendation to
Council that he would not act on the plat application until Council acts on the rezone.
Ms. Clamp stated that it was necessary to clarify some issues concerning wetlands, storm water and
drainage as a result of public comments. She stated that those issues are specific to the plat request
and not the rezone.
Member Harmon discussed his concerns with how the public perceived how the wetlands would
impact the rezoning and subsequent site specific development. He questioned how accurate the
City's Wetland's Inventory was. Ms. Clamp stated that the city's wetlands inventory indicates
where wetlands likely exist, but that it was not a delineation. She added that the current wetlands
inventory was prepared in April 2001.
Chair Clark questioned if the Hearing Examiner considered whether a rezone would comply with
wetland setback criteria. Ms. Clamp explained that a wetland delineation is specific to the plat
request. She stated that had this rezone request (a non-project action) been submitted by itself, a
wetland delineation report would not have been required.
Chair Clark discussed concerns with staff over storm water run-off issues related to the subject site.
In response to Clark's concerns, Ms. Clamp explained that when an applicant submits a plat
proposal they are required to submit a storm water study describing how storm water collected from
new impervious surfaces will be handled. The applicant must submit a down-stream analysis as
well as analyze existing conditions. This material must be presented for review and approval with
the plat application.
In response to Chair Clark, Sharon Clamp described how the SEPA review process was affected in
relation to this specific proposal.
Ms. Clamp referred to the Hearing Examiner's Findings Report in responding to Chair Clark's
inquiry as to what the Hearing Examiner's conclusions were on the wetlands issue.
2
City Engineer Gary Gill responded to concerns voiced by Chair Clark regarding wetlands. He
stated that the City's wetland code would stand as it is, whether the site is zoned SR-2 or SR-3. He
stated that there are buffer requirements for wetlands regardless of what zoning is in place. Mr. Gill
stated that the applicant completed a wetland delineation report, subsequently approved by the
Public Works Department. He stated that a certified wetland biologist visited the site and flagged
all the wetlands and the city hired an outside consulting firm to substantiate the report.
Mr. Gill stated that the applicant is required to comply with the City's Storm Water Management
Standards requiring on-site detention and treatment of storm water by providing an analysis of
existing drainage conditions and associated problems, take measures to correct downstream
problems related to development of the site, and complete additional improvements to lessen the
impacts to all properties in the area. Mr. Gill addressed drainage issues raised by Member Harmon.
Mr. Gill described the traffic improvements the applicant would be required to complete as part of
the development of the subject site along the frontage of their property on 108th Avenue Southeast.
He indicated that development of the subject site would likely only generate an additional 1 to 2
peak hour trips if the zoning is changed from SR-2 to SR-3.
Assistant City Attorney Kim Adams Pratt responded to questions from Member White concerning
the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) mandates on development within urban growth
boundaries. She stated that unless certain environmental constraints exist on property located
within an urban area, the land should be developed with four units per acre (considered by the
Growth Management Hearings Board to be"urban density").
Ms. Pratt responded to concerns raised by Member Harmon with respect to steep slopes. She stated
that the GMHB indicates that the city must be able to substantiate that its sensitive area regulations
cannot adequately protect existing environmental constraints on the property. She stated that the
constraints must be of regional importance and the city must specify where their current sensitive
regulations do not adequately protect those areas, thus necessitating the added protection of zoning
density lower than four units per acre. Ms. Pratt stated that if the city's sensitive areas regulations
adequately protect the sensitive areas during the platting process, then the higher zoning is
acceptable.
In response to Member White's question concerning the status of the directive given to staff to
inventory and review all parcels within the city limits with zoning designations lower than 4 units
per acre, Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that staff will direct their attention to
analyzing those areas upon completing the development regulations process associated with the
updated Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Adams Pratt responded to an inquiry by Member White by, describing possible legal actions
that the applicant could pursue to challenge Council if Council denied an increase in zoning to 3
units per acre. A challenge could focus on both the Growth Management Hearings Board's
decisions regarding urban densities and any basis Council cites as the reason to change the Hearing
Examiner's recommendation. .
Member Harmon Moved and Member White Seconded a Motion to send RZ-2003-2 Howard's
Addition Rezone on to City Council without action as Other Business. Motion Carried 3 to 0.
Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 4:30 p.m.
Pamela Mottram,
Admin Secretary, Planning Services
S:Termit\Plan\Planning Committee\2004\lvlinutes\092004pc-min.doc
Planning&Economic Committee Meeting 9/20/04
Page 2 of 2
3
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,Director
• PLANNING SERVICES
Nll* K E N T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager
WASHINOTON
Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
September 27,2004
TO: CHAIR TIM CLARK AND PLANNING &ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: KIM MAROUSEK, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
SUBJECT: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT #ZCA-2002-4
CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE UPDATE
MOTION: I move to approve/deny/modify#ZCA-2002-4 as recommended by the Land Use
and Planning Board and forward the draft ordinance to the City Council for consideration.
SUMMARY: On September 13, 2004, after closing the public hearing, the Land Use and Planning
Board moved to accept the staff's recommendation on #ZCA-2002-4, and forward the proposed code
amendment to the City Council. The motion carried 4-1 with five "conditions" which are identified in
the minutes. Additionally, all written correspondence submitted at the public hearing are included as
exhibits. A copy of the complete file is available for review in the council conference room.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND: As a requirement of the five—year GMA update, the City is evaluating its existing
critical area regulations. Staff has prepared a draft ordinance with recommended changes to the
existing regulations based upon best available science (BAS) review. The critical areas ordinance
(CAO) addresses regulations relative to wetlands, geologic hazard areas, critical aquifer recharge areas,
and fish and wildlife habitat. By state law, frequently flooded areas are also considered a critical area.
Kent's frequently flooded areas are contained in KCC 14.09; proposed revisions to this code section
are also included. The draft CAO consolidates all regulations, with the exception of frequently flooded
areas, into one code section to be administered by the Public Works Department. The adoption of the
CAO will repeal existing regulations relative to wetlands, streams and geologic hazard areas and
consolidate those into one new code section.
Workshops with the Land Use and Planning Board were held on May 29, 2004 and August 9, 2004
where staff presented the proposed code revisions based upon the BAS analysis that had been
completed. Additionally, a public open house was held on July 22, 2004 to inform the public on the
proposed code revisions. Staff also held a "focus group" meeting on September 8"' with interested
parties to informally discuss the proposed code revisions. Notice of the code amendment was sent to
the state Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development (DOTED) on July 1, 2004 as
required by RCW 36.70A.106(3) and other state agencies. Comments were received from both the
DCTED and from the Department of Ecology and are included in the file as exhibits. The state agency
comments were addressed at the public hearing. Staff s response to the state comments are
summarized in the exhibit titled, "Errata and Response to State Agency comments," dated September
13, 2004.
4
PROPOSED CHANGES: Upon review of the Best Available Science (BAS), internal review and
public comments, staff has formalized the recommended code revisions for each critical area element.
The following highlights substantive proposed changes to the existing critical area regulations. In
addition,minor changes to the previous draft ordinance (dated June 29, 2004), are also identified.
Administration: The CAO is drafted to be administered as one, consolidated ordinance by the
Public Works Department. The exception is that the frequently flooded regulations will remain in
KCC 14.09, but will also be administered by the Public Works Department. This will provide for a
more consistent approach to applying the regulations especially when there are multiple critical areas
present on a site, such as wetlands and streams. The code will also administratively provide for a
limited number of activities which are exempt from the CAO because they would not, by their nature,
cause significant impacts to critical areas, or because they are exempt by other provisions of state law
(e.g., legally vested projects), or because they provide valuable educational or recreational
opportunities. Additionally, there is discretion granted to the Director to allow for administrative
variations to buffer widths, for example through buffer averaging. Buffer averaging would only be
permitted in certain instances and when appropriate mitigation is also provided. The ability to provide
buffer averaging was considered within the BAS evaluation.
Wetlands:
Currently, the wetland regulations are found in KCC 11.05. Staff is proposing a three-tiered wetland
category approach which is similar to the existing regulations. The primary change from the existing
regulations is relative to the proposed buffer widths, which are reflected in the table below.
Category Existing Buffer Draft Pro osed Buffer
1 100—feet 125—feet
2 50—feet 75—feet
3 25—feet 50—feet
Geologic Hazard Areas:
Current hazard area regulations are contained within KCC 15.08.220-224. They are defined as low,
moderate and severe hazard areas. The existing regulations limit the amount of impervious surface
area which can be placed within the defined hazard area. The regulations also call out setbacks for
"ravines." Under the GMA, geologic hazard areas are defined as: landslide, erosion, seismic and
volcanic hazard areas. The BAS analysis supports a minimum buffer for landslide hazard areas equal
to the vertical height of the landslide area or fifty (50) feet, whichever is greater. Buffer reductions
may be permitted if supportable through a site-specific geotechnical evaluation. However, from a
policy standpoint, staff has added language that would not allow a reduction of a landslide buffer
below 25-feet. The draft regulations would also limit the way in which work could proceed within an
erosion area.
Frequently Flooded Areas:
These regulations currently exist in Section 14.09 of the Kent City Code and will remain in this code
section. The proposed changes are minor in nature and deal primarily with administrative
clarifications. Some minor language was also added with respect to water well locations and
recreational vehicles that may be placed in flood areas.
Wildlife Conservation Areas:
The existing code does not contain a provision for wildlife conservation areas. This new code section
is defined as an area with the documented presence of listed species or habitat by a federal or state
agency; unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees; category 1
wetlands; and ponds less than 20 acres in size. Appropriate buffers would be established through a site
specific wildlife study, except for ponds which would have a prescriptive buffer width of 75—feet. It is
Planning&Economic Development Committee Meeting 10/4/04
Critical Areas Ordinance Update#ZCA-2002-4
Page 2 of 5
5
important to note that wildlife areas often overlap with other critical areas such as wetlands or streams.
All of the regulatory requirements for each critical area on a specific site would apply.
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARAs):
The existing city code does not currently contain a provision for CARAs. Generally, CARAs are
defined as wellhead protection areas and are areas that have geologic conditions associated with
infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources, or contribute
significantly to the replenishment of ground water. Within CARAs, certain types of land uses would
either be prohibited or would require additional analysis and may be restricted. Types of prohibited
land uses include heavy land uses such as: landfills; injection wells; mining operations; wood
treatment facilities; storage, processing and handling of radio active waste; and, other activities that
could significantly impact potable water sources or stream base flows. Types of uses that would
require additional analysis and may result in restrictions include: above ground storage tanks; dry
cleaners; pipelines with hazardous liquid transmission; auto repair facilities; underground storage
tanks; and gas stations.
Streams:
Current regulations for streams are found in KCC 15.08.220-224. These regulations differentiate
between the stream systems in the valley (Major Creeks, Minor Creeks and ditches) and those within
the Soos Creek system (stream Types 1 — 3 and ditches). The "valley" stream system regulations were
created in the early 1980's, whereas the Soos Creek regulations were developed by King County in the
early 1990's and were retained by Kent when the East Hill areas were annexed.
Staff proposes a three-tiered system which closely resembles the existing Soos Creek Overlay
standards. The stream-typing system is expressed in the table below. Functionally, the proposed
setbacks remain largely unchanged.
Proposed Stream Regulations
Category Definition Proposed Buffer
Type 1 Shorelines of the State By SMP
Type 2 Salmonid bearing segments of natural waters not classified as 100 feet
Type 1 Water,with documented salmonid use. This category also
refers to lakes,ponds,or impoundments having a surface area of 1
acre of greater at seasonal low water. Salmonid Bearing waters
are used by fish forspawning,rearing or migration.
Type 3 Non-salmonid segments of natural waters not classified as Type 1 40 feet
or 2 Waters. These are stream segments within the bankfull width
of defined channels that are perennial and intermittent non-
salmonid habitat streams. These waters begin at a point along the
channel where documented salmonid fish use ends.
Valley Stream Kent Valley stream system as mapped. Generally sections of Mill, 50 feet with
Overlay Garrison and S rin brook Creeks. miti ation lantin
Soos Creek Basin East Hill —Existing Regulations
Category Definition Existing Buffer
Class 1 Shorelines of the State By SMP
Class 2 Flow year round or are used by salmonids 100 feet
w/salmonids
50 feet w/out
salmonids
Class 3 Intermittent orephemeral streams 25 feet
Ditches Irrigation ditches,canals,storm or surface water conveyance 10 feet
channels,or other entirely artificial watercourses not utilized by
salmonids.
Planning&Economic Development Committee Meeting 10/4/04
Critical Areas Ordinance Update#ZCA-2002-4
Page 3 of 5
6
Vallev Streams—Existing Regulation40
Category Definition Existing Buffer
Major Creek Mill,Garrison, Springbrook,Johnson,Midway Star lake, 50 feet
Bin aman,Mullen Slough
Minor Creek Any naturally flowing defined channel not identified as a Major 25 feet
Creek
Ditch Manmade channel with a bed,bank or sides which discharge into 10 feet
a major or minor creek
The valley stream systems (Mill Creek, Springbrook Creek and Garrison Creek) present a unique
situation, in that many of the affected parcels are built to the current setbacks and are as small in places
as 15-feet. This area is primarily developed with existing buildings, impervious surfaces and other
structures. In many cases land uses have altered the area to such a degree that sufficient area is not
available, in most cases, to meet a 100-foot buffer. The natural stream condition is also degraded with
respect to habitat and water quality. The draft ordinance proposes an `overlay' zone in this area which
focuses on enhancing particular stream functions while working within the limited riparian area that is
available.
Because many of the riparian areas are dominated by invasive plant species, one major component of
this approach is to require re-vegetation of the streamside area to promote shade, filter pollutants and
provide large woody debris (LWD) recruitment. This recommended buffer width is still within the
range identified as Best Available Science, with the exception of the function for microclimate.
As discussed at the public hearing, microclimate is one function, among several, that are analyzed in
the BAS for riparian areas. Specifically, microclimate looks at those components that are necessary to
support optimum long-term riparian habitat. As such, the buffer ranges associated with the
microclimate function are the largest expressed in the scientific literature, between 150-650 feet. The
buffer widths recommended for Kent's CAO with respect to salmonid and non-salmonid bearing
streams provide habitat protection for a range of ecologically important functions. Many of these other
functions overlap with the microclimate function. For example, the recommended buffers will provide
for adequate shading over 60% or more of the stream channel. This shading component is an
important element to the microclimate function. As the recommended buffer widths for streams and
riparian areas were developed, staff considered those functions that could be reasonably protected
within the constrains of an urban development pattern.
The proposed CAO update includes Best Available Science in the buffer recommendations, mitigation
ratios as well as other provisions. The Valley Stream Overlay area and other stream regulations,
although within the general range of BAS, work to strike a balance between an existing development
pattern and the long-term protection of the city's stream resources.
Surrounding Jurisdictions:
Staff has been tracking the process of the CAO updates for surrounding jurisdictions as well as King
County. Although not yet adopted, the proposals from surrounding jurisdictions appear to be similar to
Kent's proposal. Specifically, staff has focused on stream and wetland buffers since the other critical
areas (in Kent) are least impacted by the proposed regulatory changes.
Since the classification systems for streams and wetlands differ among different cities and the county,
it is difficult to compare them across the board. However, it appears that Kent's recommendations for
wetland and stream buffers are within a range of 25 feet, plus or minus. King County's proposal, also
not yet adopted, differentiates between the "urban" and `Mural" areas. Within the "urban" areas, the
range of buffer recommendations for wetlands and streams are similar to Kent's. Although the
wetland buffers are slightly smaller than Kent is recommending, the County's proposed stream buffers
are slightly higher.
Planning&Economic Development Committee Meeting 10/4/04
Critical Areas Ordinance Update#ZCA-2002-4
Page 4 of 5
7
Buildable Lands:
The issue of buildable lands and capacity, relative to residential development, was raised by the Master
Builders Association at the public hearing. Staff has looked at this issue against the proposed changes
to critical area buffers. Certain assumptions were made regarding critical areas when the buildable
lands analysis was completed in 2001. Many of those assumptions are still valid even given the
potential for revised buffer widths. Within the proposed regulations, wetland buffers would increase
by 25-feet for each category. However, other critical area regulations remain largely unchanged,
although buffers to steep slopes would likely decrease.
The trend in Kent's residential development shows that achieved densities for over the past three years
are slightly higher than the previous four years. This suggests that the capacity numbers that Kent
utilized previously may be slightly conservative. With the proposed revisions to the critical areas
ordinance, some buffers will increase and others will decrease. Additionally, recent regulatory options
to achieve densities (i.e. clustering and PUD ordinances) as well as administrative options written into
the draft CAO, such as buffer averaging, would allow for more flexibility on sites constrained by
sensitive areas to achieve densities that are consistent with the capacities identified in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Land Use and Planning Board Concerns:
The LUPB identified five conditions along with their recommendation. These conditions asked staff
to: address the raptor comment presented at the public hearing; review the Master Builder's
Association (MBA) letter and associated legal issues; incorporate staff comments made at the public
hearing; look at wetland banking; and incorporate the definitions.
Staff has addressed the concerns brought forward at the public hearing regarding language in the draft
ordinance associated with the protection of "raptor nesting trees." Additional language (p. 40 draft
CAO) was added to clarify this portion of the regulations. Staff has evaluated the materials submitted
by the MBA and has determined that those issues raised did not necessitate modifications to the draft
CAO. All staff comments from the public hearing are incorporated in the enclosed draft regulations.
Those changes are highlighted in strikeout/underline text. As a separate work-program, the Public
Works Environmental Engineering section is working on a wetland banking program. A request was
made at the public hearing to differentiate between "river," "ditch," and "culvert" and to incorporate
those definitions. It was explained at the public hearing that the only "river" in Kent, is the Green
River. Regulations associated with the Green River are covered under the Shoreline Master Program.
A "ditch" is defined by default through the definition of a"stream" in the draft ordinance. A "culvert"
was not defined as it is not a critical area.
Staff, as well as the city's consultants, will be available to answer questions at the Planning Committee
meeting.
KM/pm S.IPermitlPlanIZONECODEAMEND120021CAO19-27PCmemo.doc
Enc: Minutes 9-13-04 LUPB Public Hearing
Draft Ordinance 9-27-04
KCC 14.09,Flood Hazard Regulations,Revised
SEPA EIS Addendum and Adoption Notice
cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director
Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Services Manager
Don Wickstrom,PW Director
Gary Gill,City Engineer
Kim Adams-Pratt,Assistant City Attorney
Bill Wolinski,Environmental Engineering Manager
Kelly Peterson,Environmental Engineering
Project File
Parties of Record: K Michael McDowell, Principal fisheries Biologist, MGS Environmental Inc, 6505 216' St. SW, Suite L00, MT Lake
Terrace, WA;Richard Weinman, Huckell Weinman Associates,270-3'Ave,Suite 200,Kirtland,WA 99033;Teresa Vanderburg,Dir.Of
Natural Sciences,Adolfson&Assoc.,5309 Shilshole Ave.NW,Suite 200,Seattle,WA;and Attached Mail List of P of R.
Planning&Economic Development Committee Meeting 10/4/04
Critical Areas Ordinance Update#ZCA-2002-4
Page 5 of 5
8
This page intentionally left blank.
9
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom,Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager
KEN T Phone:253-856-5454
WASNINOTON
Fax. 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
LAND USE &PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PUBLIC HEARING
September 13,2004
The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Acting Chair Greg
Worthing at 7:00 pm on Monday, September 13, 2004, in Chambers East and West of Kent City
Hall.
LUPB MEMBERS PRESENT:
Greg Worthing,Vice-Chair, Steve Dowell,Elizabeth Watson,Kenneth Wendling,David Malik.
LUPB MEMBERS ABSENT:
Jon Johnson, Excused; Theresa Ferguson, Excused.
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager; Kim Marousek, Principal Planner; Kim Adams
Pratt,Assistant City Attorney; Kelly Peterson, Public Works; Bill Wolinski, Public Works.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Steve Dowell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to approve the minutes of August 23,
2004. Motion CARRIED.
ADDED ITEMS:
None
COMMUNICATIONS
None
NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS
None
ZCA-20024 CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE
Principal Planner Kim Marousek submitted Exhibits for the record, adding two items: Exhibit 8,
Errata and Response prepared by Staff and Exhibit 9, a letter from John Welch. Steve Dowell
MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to accept Exhibits 1 through 9 into the record.
MOTION CARRIED.
Marousek continued her presentation regarding the Critical Areas Ordinance. She commented
that the State deadline for approval of this ordinance is December 1, 2004, and went on to
discuss the various critical area elements.
Ms. Marousek discussed the proposed wetland categories and associated buffers: 125 foot buffer
for Category I wetlands; 75 foot buffer for Category II and a 50 foot buffer for Category III. She
commented that buffer averaging in Category I and H buffers may be permitted.
10
The Wildlife Habitat criteria currently are not listed in the City's regulations. She mentioned
that there are various types of habitats. Generally this included species listed by Federal or State
agencies as threatened, endangered, sensitive or candidate species. It also includes ponds not
governed under the Shoreline Master Program and unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron
rookeries or raptor trees.
Ms. Marousek discussed the Geo-Hazard areas. Currently, the various requirements are listed in
the City's Zoning Code. Under the new regulations, the Code requires a 50 foot setback for
landslide hazard areas which could be reduced through special studies to 25-feet. -
Marousek continued to discuss aspects of the Ordinance such as the Erosion Protection and
Construction Area as well as the Aquifer Areas.
A map was shown identifying the proposed critical aquifer recharge areas. She listed some uses
that would be prohibited or potentially restricted in these areas. Restricted uses would require a
special study with recommendations to protect ground water.
There are no major changes recommended for City Code Section 14,09, Frequently Flooded
Areas. The few changes mainly clarify some requirements.
The Stream category was discussed at length by Ms. Marousek. The East Hill is in the Soos
Creek Basin and generally follows existing King County Standards while the Valley Floor area
has different regulations. Ms.Marousek described three types of streams and their buffers. Type
I streams are covered under the City's Shoreline Management Program; Type 2 requires a 100
foot buffer and are identified as areas with salmonid use; and Type 3 streams, defined as non-
salmonid systems, requires a 40 foot buffer. A map of the setback from streams on the Valley
Floor was shown. The Valley Floor areas would have a 50-foot setback which would require
vegetative plantings riparian enhancement.
Ms. Marousek commented buffer averaging may be permitted within Type 2 systems with a
special stream report. Buffer reductions would require a variance process.
Ms. Marousek stated that there are some proposed administrative changes in the Ordinance.
Generally these changes include a standard variance process, a reasonable use exception process
and consolidation into one ordinance with the exception of Title 14.09. The ordinance would be
administered by the Public Works-Department.
Ms. Marousek informed the Board that there was an open house in mid-July concerning the
Critical Area Ordinance and about 35 people attended that meeting. A focus group meeting was
held last week.
Mike McDowell, MCS, Consultant, for the City of Kent, commented they did an in-depth study
using the State's requirements of Best Available Science (BAS) analysis concerning the critical
areas in Kent, specifically Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. McDowell commented
on the stream buffer recommendations relative to the function of microclimate. Some of the
buffer recommendations specific to this function call for a buffer range of 100 to 600 feet.
McDowell indicated that these setbacks do not work well in a built-out urban area such as Kent.
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
September 13,2004
Page 2 of 5
11
Some of the methods to achieve this function in reduced setback areas would be the use of
riparian mitigation plantings.
Bill Applegate,24520 112th Avenue SE,Kent,WA 98030, commented he lives on two acres of
land with a stream located at the back of this property that he believes is Garrison Creek. He
didn't have a water problem until Daniel Elementary was constructed and since then there has
been scotch broom, Canadian thistle and oil in the water. He felt the entire picture should be
considered when any development takes place. Further, if the buffer area was moved out farther
from the creek, what would be gained by requiring more setbacks from the creeks or streams.
Mr. Applegate submitted five photos for the record. - --
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association, 335 116d' Avenue SE, Bellevue, WA 98004,
briefly commented on the impact the setbacks would have on the development of housing in
Kent and the increase in cost to housing. Mr. Huffman felt there wasn't any justification for
increasing the setbacks for critical areas. He asked what effect the new regulations would have
on the buildable lands inventory. He submitted a packet of information for the record.
Joe Heutmaker, 3238 S. 270`h, Kent, WA 98032, commented he has property on the East Hill
of Kent which has a creek on it. He felt there should be some type of grace period allowed
before the ordinance is passed so people that want to develop their property could do so or at
least get their permits in so the permits are vested prior to having the new setbacks from creeks
in place. He asked when a project would be vested.
Kim Adams Pratt, Assistant City Attorney, commented that if a permit is taken in right now,
the permit would vest to the current code. The regulations for the new Critical Areas Ordinance
• would be in effect on December 1, 2004 at the earliest. She also clarified that once the City
Council takes action,the ordinance will not be in effect for 30-days.
Ron Novak, 29226 118th Avenue SE, Auburn, WA 98002, was hopeful that this would protect
the environment. He felt there were some conflicts in the proposed Ordinance when the 1987
Army Corps of Engineers criteria are used in the definition section while in Section 13, the
ordinance uses the Fish and Wildlife definition. He questioned why the City of Kent was only
using 3 wetland categories instead of the 4 recommended by King County. He stated buffers
serve a variety of functions, including protection from runoff and also fish and wildlife habitat
and questioned which wetland functions the city evaluated for protection.
Mary Roberts, 502 8th Street NE#24, Auburn, WA 98002, submitted a letter with attachments
to the record. She talked about how the documents attached to her letter provide a wealth of
information that could be used in preserving streams and habitats. She suggested staff take time
to consider DOE Volumes 1 and 2 relative to recommended wetland buffers. Volume 1 lists the
state of the science while Volume 2 provides a management repertoire.
Leonard Olive, 28029 142nd Place SE, Kent, WA 98032, urges staff and Board to look at the
broad picture of preservation,systemic impacts across jurisdictions.
Mark Hancock, PO Box 88028, Tukwila, WA 98138, mentioned that the ordinance talked
about setbacks and preservation of raptor areas. He felt that the ordinance should be specific
about the raptors that should be protected. He felt the language should specifically include those
raptors that are on the endangered or protected species list.
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
September 13,2004
Page 3 of 5
12
Public hearing was closed. Steve Dowell MOVED and Kenneth Wendling SECONDED to
accept exhibits 10 through 13 into the record. MOTION CARRIED.
Theresa VanDenberg, Adolphson & Associates, 5309 Avenue NE, Seattle, primary
scientist working with the Best Available Science (BAS) report prepared for the City specific to
wetlands. She commented that when they prepared the BAS report, higher preference was given
to science and research that was conducted in the Pacific Northwest. She commented that the
State Department of Ecology has produced two large volumes of work based on the review of
literature for science relating to overall wetlands. The scientific record provides a range of
effective buffers and the range most quoted is -50 to 360 ee as a ra—nge oT- u ers t►]dta are--
effective in protecting all functions of wetlands. Science does not give prescriptive buffer
widths.
Ms. VanDenberg stated that there is reference in the Ordinance to delineating wetlands via a
wetland delineation method from the US Army Corps of Engineers 1987. That is the method
that is used to determine the boundary of the wetland. In 1979,US Fish and Wildlife developed
a methodology that is used in the National Wetland Inventory Mapping and that methodology
also is referred to in Kent's Ordinance. That methodology is only for habitat typing and
classifications of the different types of habitats and wetlands,not for delineation of the boundary.
Ms. VanDenberg commented that in general, wetland buffers are effective at around 100 to 150
feet for protecting all functions of a wetland. However, when looking at lower value and lower
quality wetlands then it becomes a balancing of the GMA goals by looking not only at the
science but also looking at the other GMA goals, such as for providing housing. As a result, in
looking at the lower level wetlands (i.e. category 2 and 3 wetlands), the recommendation is for
less protection. The higher value wetlands are rated as Category 1 and they are protected with a
larger buffer to protect more of the functions and values including wildlife habit and then it
grades down from there. She remarked that buffers that are narrower than 50 feet are not
adequate to protect wetlands. Ms. VanDenberg commented that Storm Water Management and
other types of land use protection also protect wetlands. She stated the proposed ordinance
reflects a compromise and balancing effort among many GMA goals.
Ms. VanDenberg stated that the Department of Ecology has recommended a four category
system; however, the City has been using a three level system very effectively and it is adequate
for preserving wetlands. Ms. VanDenberg commented that if you are determining whether or not
there are wetlands on property, you would use the Army Corps of Engineers methodology and
the Department of Ecology methodology for delineating the boundary of the wetland. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife document would be used to determine the wetland classification.
Mike McDowell, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, commented that the intent is to protect the raptor
nests of listed species and not particularly the common species. However, Federal and State
regulations relating to raptors should apply and the Ordinance should reflect that.
In response to other questions that arose, Kim Marousek remarked that staff would propose to
clarify that portion of the Wildlife Habitat section of Code based on testimony. It is not the
City's intent to regulate nesting sites that are not already identified in the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife inventory as a threatened or endangered species. In response to
Mr. Malik's question about stream, river and culvert definitions, she commented that the
definition section identifies Streams and can be found in the Definition Section which by default
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
September 13,2004
Page 4 of S
13
defines ditches. Rivers are regulated under the Shoreline Master Program. Culverts are not
specifically defined.
Ms. Marousek stated that Mr. Huffman had submitted a report to the focus group and staff has
discussed the points that he had identified in that report. Ms. Marousek felt that the
recommendation before the Board has been carefully crafted to adequately and appropriately
meet the needs of our City.
Ms. Marousek stated that it is not the intent of the regulations to result in a complete taking of
property, which would be the denial of reasonable use. There are two provisions in the Code.
One is a variance provision which would allow an administrative remedy, or a person could seek
a reasonable use exception which would allow some development on the property, although
limited in scale.
In response to Ms. Watson's question regarding the state's comment about the definition of
"practicable", Ms. Marousek stated that staff recommends retaining the current definition in the
draft ordinance because it allows consideration of cost benefit analysis while evaluating
alternative's. Ms. Watson is concerned about cost being considered.
Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager stated the Board has the following options:
1. Make a decision tonight.
2. Continue hearing to a certain date.
3. Continue the public hearing on September 27,2004
4. Or continue hearing to another undetermined date
• Ms. Anderson stated that there will be a continued public hearing for the Downtown Strategic
Action Plan on September 27, 2004. She stated that four applications have been received for the
Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments and these are scheduled for a workshop on September
27. In addition a public hearing is scheduled concerning the Development Regulations to
implement the recent Comprehensive Plan update. Those regulations as well as the Critical
Areas Ordinance have an effective deadline date of December 1 as established by Growth
Management.
David Malik MOVED to accept staffs recommendation on #ZCA-2002-4 Critical Areas
Ordinance and send this on to City Council for full approval with the following conditions:
1. Staff will address the raptor bald eagle issue
2. Staff will review Master Builder's Association(MBA)letter and associated legal issues.
3. All comments made by staff will be incorporated
4. Staff will look at the wetland banks, and
5. Staff will incorporate the definitions
Steve Dowell SECONDED. MOTION CARRIED 4 to 1.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager
Secretary,Land Use and Planning Board
pm S:1Permit\Plan\LUPB120041Minutes1091304mm doc
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
September 13,1004
Page 5 of 5
14
This page intentionally left blank.
•
15
(( DRAF1'
Mtlgwst30, 2004
DRAFT
City of Kent
Critical Area Regulations
PART A. PROCEDURAL &ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISONS
SECTION 1. PURPOSE & INTENT
A. The City of Kent contains numerous areas that can be identified and characterized as critical
or environmentally sensitive. Such areas within the City include wetlands, streams, wildlife and
fisheries habitat , geologic hazard areas, frequently flooded areas, and aquifer recharge areas.
B. The City finds that these critical areas perform a variety of valuable and beneficial biological,
physical and economic functions that benefit the City and its residents. Alteration of certain
critical areas may pose a threat to public safety, private property and the environment. The City
finds, therefore, that identification,regulation and protection of critical areas is 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:
Wetlands
1. Wetlands perform a variety of functions that include maintaining water quality; storing and
conveying stormwater and floodwater; recharging groundwater; providing important fish and
wildlife habitat; and providing areas for recreation, education, scientific study and aesthetic
appreciation.
Wetland 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 wetland resources from harmful intrusion.
The primary goals of wetland regulation are to avoid wetland impacts; 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.
Fish&Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
2. Streams and their associated riparian corridors provide important fish and wildlife habitat,
including habitat for threatened and endangered species; help maintain water quality; store and
convey stormwater and floodwater; recharge groundwater; and serve as areas for recreation,
education, scientific study and aesthetic appreciation. Stream buffers serve to moderate
stormwater runoff volume and flow rates; reduce sediment, chemical nutrient and toxic
1
16
DRAF
August 30,2004
pollutants; provide shading to maintain desirable water temperatures; provide habitat for
wildlife; and protect stream resources from harmful intrusion.
The primary goals of stream regulation are to avoid or otherwise mitigate significant impacts to
streams and associated riparian corridors; to protect threatened and endangered species; to
protect water quality through appropriate management techniques; and, where possible, to
provide for stream enhancement and rehabilitation.
3. Wildlife habitat provides opportunities for food, cover, nesting,breeding and movement for
fish and wildlife within the City; maintains and promotes diversity of species and habitat within
the City; integrates habitat protection with elements of the City's open space system; helps
maintain air and water quality; helps control erosion; serves as areas for recreation, education
and scientific study and aesthetic appreciation; and provides neighborhood separation and visual
diversity within urban areas.
The primary goals of wildlife habitat regulations are to identify and protect fish and wildlife
habitat; to avoid impacts to critical habitats for fish and wildlife; 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 enhance and
rehabilitate wildlife habitat.
Geologic Hazard Areas
4. Geologic hazard areas include land characterized by geologic, hydrologic and topographic
conditions that render them susceptible to varying degrees of risk of landslides, erosion, seismic
or volcanic activity.
The primary goals of regulating geologic hazards are to avoid and minimize potential impacts to
life and property; to regulate land uses where necessary; and to conduct appropriate levels of
analysis to ensure sound engineering and construction practices to address identified hazards.
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas
5. Aquifer recharge areas provide a source of potable water and contribute to stream
discharge/flow during periods of low flow. The City finds that certain locations are susceptible
to contamination of water supplies by infiltration of pollutants through soil to groundwater
aquifers.
The primary goals of aquifer recharge regulations are to protect critical aquifer recharge areas
and groundwater quality by avoiding or limiting land use activities that pose potential risk of
aquifer contamination; and to minimize impacts to significant aquifer recharge areas through the
application of performance standards.
2
17
,.nbe "004 DRAFT
August'l30, 2004
Flood Hazard Areas
6. Floodplains help to store and convey stormwater and flood water; recharge groundwater;
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
developments, 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
100 year floodplain to avoid substantial risk and damage to public and private property that
results in significant costs to the public and individuals; and to avoid significant increases in
peak stormwater flows or loss of flood storage capacity.
Specific Flood Hazard Regulations are located in Kent City Code Chapter 14.09.
C. This section of the Kent 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 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 section to:
(1) comply with the requirements of the Growth Management Act(RCW 36.70A) and
implementing rules to identify and protect critical areas, and perform the review of development
regulations required by 36.70A.215 RCW;
(2) consider and include the best available science in the City's critical area policies and
regulations, consistent with RCW 36.70A.172 and WAC 365-195-900;
(3) develop and implement a comprehensive,balanced and fair regulatory program that
avoids impacts to critical resources where possible, that requires mitigation be performed by
those persons or activities affecting critical areas, and that thereby protects the public from
injury, loss of life,property or financial losses;
(4)implement the goals and policies of the Kent Comprehensive Plan and development
regulations, including provisions pertaining to natural features and environmental protection; as
well as goals, objectives and policies relating to land use, housing, economic development,
transportation,utilities and adequate public facilities;
(5) 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
3
g��"`q$g 18
August 39-2984
necessary to supplement these regulations, while also reducing the City's reliance on project-
level SEPA review to develop standards;
(6) 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;
(7) provide greater certainty to property owners regarding uses and activities that are
permitted,prohibited and/or regulated due to the presence of critical areas;
(8) coordinate environmental review and permitting of proposals involving critical areas
with existing development review and approval processes to avoid duplication and delay,
consistent with RCW 36.70B;
(9) establish conservation and protection measures for threatened and endangered species
in compliance with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and WAC 365-195-925, and
provide special consideration for anadromous fish;
(10) alert members of the public, including: appraisers, assessors, owners,potential
buyers or lessees,to the development limitations of critical areas and their required buffers; and
(11) exercise the City's police power to protect the public's health, safety and general
welfare.
4
19
2,104
• Augu6t 392994
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this chapter,the following definitions shall apply.
Adjacent Wetland: Wetlands bordering, contiguous or neighboring a river, stream or
lake.
Applicant: The person,party, firm, corporation, or other entity that proposes or has
performed any activity that affects a critical area.
Aquifer: Generally, any water bearing soil unit or geologic formation. Specifically, a
body of soil unit or geologic formation that contains sufficient saturated permeable material to
conduct groundwater and yield economically significant quantities of groundwater to wells or
springs.
Aquifer Susceptibility: A contributory factor of potential contamination of an aquifer
that results from soil, rock and groundwater characteristics within a recharge area.
Aquifer Vulnerability: The combined effect of aquifer susceptibility and contaminant
loading potential: it includes hydrogeologic, land use and other factors that affect the potential
for groundwater contamination.
Artificially Created Wetland: Wetlands created from non-wetland sites through
• purposeful, legally authorized human action, including but not limited to irrigation and drainage
ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, retention or detention facilities, wastewater treatment
facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities.
Best Available Science (BAS): Current scientific information used in the process to
designate, protect or restore critical areas, that is derived from a valid scientific process as
defined by WAC 365-195-900 through 925.
Best Management Practices (BMPs): Conservation practices or systems of practices
and management measures that(1) control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused
by nutrients, animal waste, toxics, and sediment; and (2) minimize adverse impacts to surface
water and groundwater flow, circulation patterns, and to the chemical, physical, and biological
characteristics of critical areas.
Bog: A peat-accumulating wetland that has no significant inflows or outflows and
supports acidophilic mosses, particularly sphagnum.
Buffer or Buffer Area: A vegetated zone contiguous to and surrounding a critical area
that protects the critical area from adverse impacts to its integrity and value. Buffers are
necessary for the continued maintenance, function, and/or structural stability of a critical area,
and are an integral part of the resource's ecosystem. Buffers may be enhanced and/or re-
vegetated where they are degraded or as part of a mitigation program. Buffers shall be measured
perpendicular from the edge of the critical area.
5
20
04-
• Aagust34;2004
Building Setback Line (BSBL): An area in which structures, including but not limited
to sheds,homes (including overhangs),buildings, and awnings shall not be permitted within, or
allowed to project into, a critical area buffer. Roads,parking areas,uncovered at grade decks,
patios, lawns and landscaping are permitted within the BSBL.
Clearing: 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.
Compensatory Mitigation: Replacement of project-related critical area impacts,
including,but is not limited to, the following:
1. Restoration. Actions performed to reestablish stream or wetland functional
characteristics and processes which have been lost by alterations, activities, or
catastrophic events within an area which no longer meets the definition of a stream or
wetland.
2. Creation. Actions performed to intentionally establish a wetland at a site where it did
not formerly exist.
3. Enhancement. Actions performed to improve the condition of existing wetlands or
riparian areas so that the functions they provide are of a higher quality.
Comprehensive Plan: The adopted City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and amendments
thereto.
Compensatory Flood Storage: Any new, excavated flood storage volume equivalent to
any flood storage capacity which has been or would be eliminated by filling or grading within
the flood fringe. The compensatory flood storage must be hydraulically associated with the
floodway.
Contaminant Loading Potential: The availability within an aquifer recharge area of
any potential physical, chemical,biological, or radiological substance that enters the
hydrological cycle and may cause a deleterious effect on ground water resources.
Creation of Critical Areas: The purposeful and legally authorized construction or
forming of a wetland or stream from an upland(non-wetland or dry) site through artificial
means.
Critical Area, or Environmentally Sensitive Area: 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, geologic hazard areas, critical 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: 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.
6
Ap 21
• A�gosF-38�-2A04
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas: Areas designated Wellhead Protection Areas
pursuant to Wellhead Protection plans or via the calculated fixed radius method, Susceptible
Groundwater Areas pursuant to WAC 173-100 and Special Protection Areas pursuant to WAC
173-200-090.
Critical Facilities: Those facilities necessary to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare which are defined under the occupancy categories of Essential Facilities and
Special Occupancy Structures in the International Building Code, ( or subsequent amendment).
Critical Habitat, or Critical Wildlife Habitat, or Critical Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Area: Habitat areas associated with threatened, endangered, sensitive, monitor or
priority species of plants or wildlife and which, if altered, could reduce the likelihood that the
species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. Such areas are identified herein with
reference to lists, categories and definitions of species promulgated by the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (Non-Game Data System Special Animal Species) as identified
in WAC 232-12-011 or 232-12-014; in the Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) program of the
Department of Fish and Wildlife; or by rules and regulations adopted currently or hereafter by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Dedication: Conveyance of land to the city or other not-for-profit entity by deed,
easement or other instrument of conveyance.
Delineation Manual, or Wetland Delineation Manual/Methodology: The manual and
methodology used to identify wetlands in the field, as described in the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, adopted by the Department of Ecology in 1997
(pursuant to RCW 90.58.380/36.70A.175), and which is based on the U.S. Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987). Use of this manual is required by RCW
90.58.3 80/36.70A.175.
Department: The City of Kent Department of Public Works or successor agency, unless
the context indicates a different City department.
Director: The Director of the City of Kent Department of Public Works or his/her
designee.
Earth/Earth Material: Naturally occurring rock, soil, stone, sediment, or combination
thereof.
Elevated Construction: A construction technique that employs posts or pilings to raise
a structure so that waters can flow freely beneath the structure.
Emergent Wetland: A wetland with at least thirty(30) percent of the surface area
covered by erect, rooted,herbaceous vegetation as the uppermost vegetative strata.
7
22
i Augu6t 30, 2094
Enhancement: 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 species 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: A process whereby gravity,wind, rain, water, freeze-thaw and other natural
agents mobilize and transport soil particles.
Erosion Hazard Areas: Areas within the City of Kent underlain by soils which are
subject to severe erosion when disturbed. Such soils include, but are not limited to those
delineated in the "Soil Survey, King County Area, Washington" (USDA, 1973) as having a
moderate to severe, severe or very severe erosion hazard potential. These soils consist of the
following:
• Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (AgD)
• Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep (AkF)
• Arents, Alderwood Material, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AmC)
• Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (BeD)
• Beausite gravelly sandy loam,40 to 75 percent slopes (BeF)
• Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (EvD)
. • Indianola loamy fine sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes (InD)
• Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (KpC)
• Kitsap silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (KpD)
• Ovall gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes (OvD)
• Ovall gravelly loam,40 to 75 percent slopes (OvF)
• Pilchuck loamy fine sand(Pc)
• Ragnar fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes (RaD)
• Ragnar-Indianola association,moderately steep (RdE)
• Riverwash(Rh)
Essential Habitat: Habitat necessary for the survival of federally listed threatened,
endangered and sensitive species and state listed priority species.
Excavation: The removal or displacement of earth material by human or mechanical
means.
Existing and Ongoing Agricultural Activities: "Existing and ongoing agricultural
activities" includes 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 the effective date of this chapter r Vte afi e Su eh aeti.ity Ni •^` have been in
The definition,
includes but is not limited to operation and maintenance of farm and stock ponds or drainage
8
23
.r Via" ;
AaQast 39 2004
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 non-agricultural 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 non-agricultural 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.
Exotic: Any species of plant or animal that is foreign and not indigenous to the Kent
area.
Fen: A peat-accumulating wetland that receives some drainage from surrounding
mineral soil and usually supports marshlike vegetation.
Fill/Fill Material: A deposit of earth material placed by human or mechanical means.
Filling: The act of transporting or 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.
Forested Wetland: A wetland defined by the Cowardin system with at least thirty (30)
percent of the surface area covered by woody vegetation greater than twenty (20) feet in height
that is at least partially rooted in the wetland.
Functions, Beneficial Functions, or Functions and Values: The beneficial roles
served by wetlands including,but not limited to, water quality protection and enhancement, fish
and wildlife habitat, food chain support, flood storage, conveyance and attenuation, groundwater
recharge and discharge, erosion control,wave attenuation,historical and archaeological and
aesthetic value protection, and recreation. These beneficial roles are not listed in order of
priority.
Geologic Hazard Areas: Lands or areas characterized by geologic,hydrologic and
topographic conditions that render them susceptible to varying degrees of potential risk of
landslides, erosion, or seismic or volcanic activity; and areas characterized by geologic and
hydrologic conditions that make them vulnerable to contamination of groundwater supplies
through infiltration of contaminants to aquifers.
Grading: Any excavating, filling,clearing, leveling, or contouring of the ground surface
by human or mechanical means.
Growing Season: The average frost-free period of the year in Kent as recorded in
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Frost/Freeze Data from Climatology of the
U.S. No. 20, supplement No. 1, or in equivalent U.S. government agency records. Growing
season, for the purposes of these regulations, may be considered to be the period from March 1
through October 31 of any calendar year.
9
[ y [ '"``"g`` 24
P'
.'fA(1? ,tl"LS �,._ 1�1...}" C✓ ik� r..,_ S
August 30, 2004
Habitat Management: 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
species in all cases.
Hydric Soil: Soil that is saturated, flooded or ponded long enough during the growing
season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. The presence of hydric soil shall be
determined following the methods described in the federal manual.
Hydrologically Isolated: 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-
yr 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.
Hydrophytic Vegetation: Macrophytic plant life growing in water or on a substrate that
is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content. The presence of
hydrophytic vegetation shall be determined following the methods described in the federal
manual.
In-Kind Compensation or Mitigation: Replacement of wetlands or other critical areas
with substitute wetlands or resources whose characteristics closely approximate those destroyed
or degraded by a regulated activity.
Intentionally Created Streams: Man-made 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 and does not include streams created as mitigation.
Purposeful creation must be demonstrated through documentation,photographs, statements
and/or other evidence. Intentionally created streams are excluded from regulation under this
chapter, except manmade streams that provide "critical habitat," as designated by federal or state
agencies, for anadromous fish.
Lahar: Mudflows or debris flows associated with volcanic activity, and which pose a
threat to life,property and structures.
Landslide: Episodic downslope movement of a mass of soil or rock.
Landslide Hazard Areas: Landslide Hazard Areas include :
1. Any existing active or dormant landslide or debris flow that has shown movement
during the Holocene epoch (from ten thousand years ago to the present) or that are
underlain or covered by mass wastage debris of that epoch.
2. Areas delineated in the "Soil Survey, King County Area, Washington" (USDA, 1973)
as having a "severe" limitation for building site development. These soils consist of the
following:
10
3 "q DRAFT
�^@}}�, 25
27,
• Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (AgD)
• Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep (AkF)
• Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (BeD)
• Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 40 to 75 percent slopes (BeF)
• Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (EvD)
• Indianola loamy fine sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes (InD)
• Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (KpQ
• Kitsap silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes (KpD)
• Ovall gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes (OvD)
• Ovall gravelly loam,40 to 75 percent slopes (OvF)
• Ragnar fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes (RaD)
• Ragnar-Indianola association, moderately steep (RdE)
3. Areas designated as quaternary slumps, earth flows, mudflows, or landslides on maps
published by the US Geological Survey, Washington Department of Natural Resources,
or geologic consultant reports completed for the City of Kent.
4. Areas with all three of the following characteristics:
• slopes steeper than 15 percent;
• slopes intersecting granular material over silts or clays; and
• springs or ground water seepage or evidence of seasonal springs or ground water
seepage.
5. Slopes that are parallel or subparallel to planes of weakness (such as bedding planes,
joint systems, and fault planes) in subsurface materials.
6. Slopes subject to failure during seismic shaking.
7. Areas potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion.
8. Areas located in a canyon or on an active alluvial fan, presently or potentially subject
to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding.
9. Any area with a slope of 40 percent or steeper and with a vertical relief of 10 or more
feet. A slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top and measured by averaging the
inclination over 10 feet of vertical relief.
Mitigation: "Mitigation" includes:
(a)Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of actions.
(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation.
(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 during the life of the action.
(e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or
environments.
(f) The enhancement,restoration or creation of critical areas as compensation for impacts
resulting from development activities.
While monitoring without additional actions is not considered mitigation for the purposes
of these regulations, it may be part of a comprehensive mitigation program.
Also see "Compensatory Mitigation."
11
26
iti .., ?i7t3 i E1 AFT
Augu6t30, 2004
Native Vegetation: Plant species indigenous to the
Puget Sound region that could occur or could have occurred naturally on the site.which are or
were indigenous to the area in question.
Off-Site Mitigation: 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.
Onsite Mitigation/Compensation: Replacing wetlands or other resources at or adjacent
to the site on which a wetland or other resource has been impacted by a regulated activity.
Out-of-Kind Mitigation: 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: 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: 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 Kent. 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;
Pond (Deepwater Aquatic Habitat): Areas of open surface water that are less than 20
acres in size that are either permanently inundated at mean annual water depths greater than 6.6
feet, or permanently inundated at less than 6.6 feet in depth that do not support rooted-emergent
or woody plant species. [Source: Washington State Wetland Delineation Manual, DOE, 1997]
Also see definition of"wetlands" for exclusions of certain types of ponds from regulation.
Practicable Alternative: An alternative that is available and capable of being carried
out after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall
project purposes, and having less impacts to critical areas. It may involve using an alternative
site in the general region that is available to the applicant and may feasibly be used to
accomplish the project
Priority Habitat/Species, or Priority Wildlife Habitat/Species: Habitats and species
of local importance and concern in urban areas, as identified by the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat& Species (PHS)program. 'Priority species" are wildlife
species of concern due to their population status and their sensitivity to habitat alteration.
"Priority habitats" are areas with one or more of the following attributes: comparatively high
12
27
DRAFT
August 30,2004
wildlife density; high wildlife species richness; significant wildlife breeding habitat; significant
wildlife seasonal ranges; significant movement corridors for wildlife; limited availability;
and/or high vulnerability. General types of priority habitat identified in the PHS program—some
of which do not occur in the City of Kent -- include Aspen stands, cliffs, meadows, oak
woodlands, old-growth/mature forests, riparian areas, shrub-steppe, snag-rich areas and
wetlands.
Qualified Consultant: For purposes of these regulations, qualified consultant 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 and wildlife habitat and significant vegetation,
geology and/or civil engineer licensed in the State of Washington for geologic hazards and
aquifer 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. For purposes of wetland studies and
planning, a qualified consultant is one who has obtained certification by the Society of Wetland
Scientists as a Professional Wetland Scientist or Wetland Professional in Training. For the
purpose of Geologic Hazards, a qualified consultant shall be a professional geologist,
professional engineering geologist or licensed engineer with the state of Washington.
Regulated Activity: 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 filling, dredging, dumping or stockpiling, draining, excavating, flooding, clearing
or grading, constructing or reconstructing, driving pilings, obstructing, shading, clearing or
harvesting.
Repair or Maintenance: An activity that restores the character, scope, size, and design
of a structure, or land use to its previously authorized and undamaged condition. Activities that
change the character, size, or scope of a project beyond the original design and drain, dredge, fill,
flood, or otherwise alter additional critical areas are not included in this definition.
Restoration: Actions taken to reestablish wetland, stream or habitat functional values
and characteristics that have been destroyed or degraded by past alterations (e.g. filling or
grading). See also, "Enhancement'
Secondary Habitat: Areas that offer less diversity of animal and plant species than
priority habitat but that are important for performing the essential functions of habitat.
Seismic Hazard Areas: Areas subject to a risk of earthquake damage due to soil
liquefaction. These areas generally contain saturated alluvial sediments and poorly compacted
fill that either is or can become saturated. These areas are mapped as Category I and Category II
liquifaction susceptibility areas on maps contained within:
• Palmer, Walsh, Logan, Gerstel, Liquefaction Susceptibility for the Auburn and Poverty Bay
7.5-Minute Quadrangles, Washington, Washington State Department of Natural Resources,
September 1995.
13
28
DRAFT
August 39i904
• Palmer, Shasse and Norman, Liquifaction Susceptibility for the Des Moines and Renton 7.5
minute Quadrangles, Washington, Washington State Department of Natural Resources,
December, 1994.
• Slopes that could fail during an earthquake. In the City of Kent,these areas generally consist
of Vashon ice-contact deposits in areas of 15 percent slope or steeper. Vashon Ice-Contact
deposits (Qvi) are mapped in:
• Luzier, Water Supply Bulletin No. 28, Geology and Ground-Water Resources of
Southwestern King County, Washington, State of Washington Department of Water
Resources, 1969.
Scrub-Shrub Wetland: A wetland with at least thirty (30)percent of its surface area
covered by woody vegetation less than twenty(20) feet in height as the uppermost strata.
Sensitive Area Tract: A separate tract that is created to protect the sensitive area and its
buffer.
Site: 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
parcels where a proposed activity may impact a critical area.
Slope: An inclined earth surface, the inclination of which is expressed as the ratio of
horizontal distance to vertical distance.
Slope,top: The uppermost limit of an area where the ground surface drops ten feet or
more vertically within a horizontal distance of 25 feet on slopes greater than 40 percent.
Streams: Those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A
defined channel or bed is an area which demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water and
includes, but is not limited to,bedrock channels, gravel 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 artificial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or created for the
purposes of stream mitigation.
Stream Reconnaissance Report: A type of critical area report prepared by an
applicant's qualified consultant to describe a stream and to characterize its conditions, wildlife,
habitat values and water quality.
Structural Diversity, Vegetative: 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.
Substantial Improvement or Reconstruction: Any repair,reconstruction or
improvement the cost of which is more than fifty percent of the market value of the structure
14
zs
auqw6t 3g,2004
either(a)before the improvement is started or(b)before the damage occurred if the structure
damaged is being replaced. An improvement occurs when the first alteration of any wall,
ceiling, floor or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not the alteration
affects the external dimensions of the structure. Substantial improvement does not include (a) an
improvement to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary or safety(Uniform Building
Code/Uniform Fire Code) specifications which are necessary to assure safe conditions; or(b)
alteration of a structure listed on the national Register of Historic Places or a state inventory of
historic places.
Substrate: 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: 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.
Unavoidable and Necessary Impacts: Impacts to wetlands that remain after an
applicant has demonstrated that no practicable alternative exists for the proposed project.
Utility: 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.
Volcanic Hazard Area: Areas subject to a risk of inundation by lahars or other related
flooding events resulting from volcanic activity originating from Mount Rainer. These areas are
mapped as Class M Lahars on maps contained within:
• Hoblitt, R.P., Walder, J.S., Driedger, C.L., Scott, K.M., Pringle, P.T., and Vallance, J.W.,
Volcano Hazards from Mount Rainer, Washington. U.S. Geologic Survey Open File
Report 98-428, 1998.
Wetland: "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 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. However,
wetlands include those artificial wetlands intentionally created to mitigate conversion of
wetlands. Wetlands determined prior converted cropland(PCC)by Federal agencies may still be
considered wetlands by the City of Kent. If these wetlands meet requirements of the Washington
State Department of Ecology Manual, the wetlands shall be regulated, and the critical area shall
be protected like any other wetland pursuant to this code.
Wetland Class: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wetland classification scheme uses
an hierarchy of systems, subsystems, classes and subclasses to describe wetland types (refer to
USFWS, December 1979, Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United
15
30
004
Aagost-30,2004
States for a complete explanation of the wetland classification scheme). Eleven class names are
used to describe wetland and deepwater habitat types. These include: forested wetland, scrub-
shrub wetland, emergent wetland,moss-lichen wetland,unconsolidated shore, aquatic bed,
unconsolidated bottom, rock bottom,rocky shore, streambed, and reef.
Wetland Edge: The boundary of a wetland as delineated based on the definitions in this
chapter and the procedures specified in this Chapter.
Wildlife Habitat: Areas that provide food, protective cover, nesting, loafing, breeding or
movement for fish and wildlife and with which individual species have a primary association.
Wildlife habitat includes naturally occurring ponds under 20 acres in area.
•
16
31
DRAFT
August 30,209
SECTION 3. APPLICABILITY-REGULATED ACTIVITIES
A. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to any regulated activity that potentially affects a
critical area or its buffer unless otherwise exempt by these regulations. Applicable activities are
as follows:
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, substantially reconstructing, demoliting or altering the size of any
structure or infrastructure;
6. destroying or altering vegetation through clearing, grading,harvesting, shading or
planting vegetation that would negatively affect the character of a critical area; 7. activities
that result in significant changes in water temperature, physical or chemical characteristics of
water sources, including quantity and pollutants;
8. any other activity potentially affecting a critical area or buffer not otherwise exempt
from the provisions of this chapter as determined by the Department; and
9. the construction of new recreation trails within the buffer,which shall be low
intensity, designed and constructed of permeable materials which protect water quality, allow
adequate surface water and groundwater movements, do not contribute to erosion, and are
located where they do not disturb nesting, breeding and rearing areas, and designed to avoid or
reduce the removal of trees.
Where a regulated activity would be partly within and partly outside a critical area or its buffer,
the entire activity shall be reviewed pursuant to the requirements of this chapter.
B. To avoid duplication, all permits and approvals identified in KCC 12.01 shall be subject to,
and coordinated with,the requirements of this chapter.
C. Non-project actions, including but not limited to rezones, comprehensive plan map
amendments, annexations, and the adoption of plans and programs, shall be subject to the
requirements of this chapter. However, the Department may at its discretion, permit any studies
or evaluations required by this chapter to use methodologies and provide a level of detail
appropriate to the action proposed.
D. Activities within the Green River Natural Resources Area shall be subject to this chapter with
the exception of activities allowed by Resolution 922, adopted by the City of Kent in March
1981.).
17
32
,. DRAFT
Est 39, 2804
SECTION 4. EXEMPTIONS
A. The following activities performed on sites containing critical areas as defined by this chapter
shall be exempt from the provisions of these regulations:
1. conservation or preservation of soil, water,vegetation, fish and other wildlife that does
not entail changing the structure or functions of the critical area;
2. existing and ongoing agricultural activities, as defined in this chapter;
3. activities involving artificially created wetlands or streams intentionally created from
non-wetland 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 anadromous fish;
4. operation,maintenance, repair and reconstruction of existing structures, roads, trails,
streets, utilities and associated structures, dikes, levees or drainage systems,provided that
reconstruction of any facilities or structures is not"substantial reconstruction"and may not
further encroach on a critical area or its buffer, and shall incorporate Best Management
Practices;
5. normal maintenance,repair and reconstruction of residential or commercial structures,
facilities and landscaping,provided that reconstruction of any structures may not increase the
previous footprint, and further provided that the provisions of this chapter are followed;
6. the addition of floor area within an existing building which does not increase the
building footprint;
7. site investigative work and studies that are prerequisite to preparation of an
application for development 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;
8. educational activities, scientific research, and outdoor recreational activities, including
but not limited to interpretive field trips,birdwatching,boating, swimming, fishing and hiking,
that will not have a significant effect on the critical area.
9. the harvesting of wild crops and seeds to propagate native plants in a manner that is
not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require
tilling of soil, planting of crops, or alteration of the critical area by changing existing topography,
water conditions or water sources;
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 determined by the Department;
11. development of lots vested and/or legally created through a subdivision, short
subdivision, or other legal means and approved prior to the effective date of this chapter;
12. previously legally filled wetlands or wetlands accidentally created by human actions
prior to July 1, 1990. The latter shall be documented through photographs, statements and/or
other conclusive evidence and be agreed to by the Director;
13. removal of invasive plants and planting of native vegetation in wetland and stream
buffers for the purpose of enhancing habitat values of these areas pursuant to an approved
mitigation plan;
14. stabilization of sites where erosion or landsliding threatens public or private
structures, utilities, roadways, driveways or publicly maintained trails or where erosion or
18
33
RA
August 3g,2994
landsliding threatens any lake, stream, wetland or shoreline. Stabilization work shall be
performed in a manner which causes the least possible disturbance to the slope and its vegetative
cover. This activity shall be performed in accordance with approved site stabilization plans.
And;
15. minor activities not mentioned above and determined in advance and in writing 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 or its buffer shall comply with the intent of these standards
and shall consider on-site alternatives that avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts.
Emergency activities shall mitigate for any impacts caused to critical areas upon abatement of
the emergency.
C. With the exception of emergency actions, and existing and ongoing agricultural activities,no
property owner or other entity shall undertake exempt activities prior to providing fourteen(14)
days notice to the Director 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 prevail and shall be confirmed in writing.
D. Legally established uses, developments or structures that are nonconforming solely due to
inconsistencies with the provisions of this chapter, shall not be considered nonconforming
pursuant to KCC 15.08.100. Reconstruction or additions to existing structures which intrude into
critical areas or their buffers shall not increase the amount of such intrusion except as provided
by section 10(A) of this title. Once a non-conforming use is discontinued for a period of one-
year, that use cannot be re-established.
E. The exemptions established by this section shall apply only to activities that are otherwise
permitted by federal, state and/or local laws.
SECTION 5. CRITICAL AREAS MAPS
The approximate location and extent of critical areas within the City are shown on the critical
areas inventory maps. adopted as poi' of this ehapter. These maps shall be used for
informational purposes and 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, and classification of critical areas on a specific site shall be
identified in the field by a qualified consultant and confirmed by the Department, 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
standards of this section, the criteria and standards shall prevail.
SECTION 6. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER REGULATIONS
19
34
A--%
2004 �"".w
AuguGt3g, 2004
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 Kent. In the event of any conflict between these
regulations and any other City regulations,those regulations which provide greater protection to
environmentally critical areas shall apply, as determined by the Director.
B. Areas characterized by specific critical areas may also be subject to other regulations
established by this chapter due to the overlapping or multiple functions of some critical areas.
Wetlands, for example, may be defined and regulated according to the wetland, wildlife habitat
and stream management provisions of this chapter. In the event of any conflict between
regulations for particular critical areas in this chapter, the regulations which provide greater
protection to environmentally critical areas shall apply, as determined by the Director.
SECTION 7. CRITICAL AREA REVIEW PROCESS AND APPLICATION
REOUIREMENTS
A. Pre-Application Conference.
1. For those projects subject to Environmental Review pursuant to SEPA,the pre-
application requirements of KCC 12.01 shall apply.
2. For projects which are subject to this Chapter but are exempt from the SEPA
requirements, the applicant is encouraged to meet with the City prior to submitting an
application.
3. The purpose of these meetings shall be to discuss the City's critical area requirements,
processes and procedures; to review any conceptual site plans prepared by the applicant;
to identify potential impacts to critical areas and appropriate mitigation measures; and to
the extent it can be determined, generally inform the applicant of any known federal or
state regulations or approvals applicable to the subject critical area. Such conference
shall be for the convenience of the applicant, shall not constitute legal advice or scientific
opinion, and any recommendations shall not be binding on the applicant or the City. It
shall be the applicant's sole responsibility to identify and secure all necessary permits
from any agencies with jurisdiction notwithstanding that the City of Kent may also have
the authority to issue a permit.
B. Application Requirements.
1. Timing of Submittals. Concurrent with submittal of a 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. 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 Department
to determine the appropriate critical area rating or classification,where applicable, and to
establish appropriate 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 attachments to this chapter applicable to
20
35
August30 2904
each critical area. The Department may tailor the information required to reflect the complexity
of the proposal and the sensitivity of critical areas that may potentially be present.
C. Critical Area Consultants - Qualifications & City Review. All reports and studies required of
the applicant by this section shall be prepared by a qualified consultant as defined in these
regulations. The Department may, at its discretion,retain a qualified consultant to review and
confirm the applicant's reports, studies and plans. Such review shall be paid for by the applicant.
D. Review Process. This section is not intended to create a separate critical area review permit
process 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 environmental considerations, reviews and approvals. Any permits required by separate
codes or regulations, such as Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, shall continue to be
required.
SECTION S. PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS
A. Interpretation and Conflicts. The Director of the Department or his/her designee 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 and informational materials as required, to
promulgate procedures and rules for unique circumstances not anticipated by the standards and
procedures contained within this section.
B. Penalties and Enforcement. Compliance with these regulations and penalties for their
violation shall be enforced pursuant to the procedures set forth in KCC 1.04.
C. Appeals from Critical Area Review Decisions. Appeals from critical area review decisions
shall be governed by the procedures set forth in KCC 12.01.190 and KCC 2.32.
D. Burden of Proof. The burden of proving that a proposed activity meets the standards
established by this chapter shall be on the applicant.
SECTION 9. 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 use of a property, development may be permitted subject to
appropriate conditions.
B. Applications for a reasonable use exception shall be processed as a Process III application ,
pursuant to KCC 12.01.
21
36
Q0.1 DRAFT
Aaqu6t30,2004
C. An applicant requesting 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; and
2. 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 economic use with fewer adverse impacts; and
3. the proposed activities, as conditioned, will result in the minimum possible impacts to
affected critical areas, considering their functions and values and/or the risks associated with
proposed development ; and
4. all reasonable mitigation measures have been implemented or assured; and
5. the inability to derive reasonable economic 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,
6. any alteration of a critical area approved under this section shall be subject to
appropriate conditions and will require mitigation under an approved mitigation plan.
D. 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 regulations.
SECTION 10. VARIANCES
A. Applications for variances from the strict application of the terms of this chapter to a specific
property may be submitted to the City. All variances except administrative variances per
subsection B shall be considered by the Hearing Examiner as a Process III application,pursuant
to KCC 12.01.040 . Approval of variances from the strict application of the critical area
requirements shall be consistent with the following criteria:
1. there are unique physical conditions peculiar and inherent to the affected property
which makes it difficult or infeasible to strictly comply with the provisions of this section;
2. the variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate the building footprint and
access;
3. 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;
4. the proposed variance would not adversely affect properties surrounding the subject
site;
5. adverse impacts to critical areas resulting from the proposal are minimized;
6. the special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are not a result of the
actions of the applicant or previous owner; and
7. the variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege.
B. Other minor buffer modifications may be permitted by the DDirector, as outlined in the
provisions of this chapter.
22
p 37
DRA
�d�l�tltlY
SECTION 11 GENERAL MITIGATION STANDARDS, CRITERIA AND PLAN
REQUIREMENTS
A. Mitigation Standards.
1. Mitigation sequencing shall be avoidance,minimization,mitigation. Any proposal to
impact a critical area shall demonstrate- that it is unavoidable or will provide a greater function
and value to the critical area.
2. Adverse impacts to critical area functions and values shall be mitigated. Mitigation
actions shall be implemented in the preferred sequence identified in this chapter. Proposals
which include less preferred and/or compensatory mitigation shall demonstrate that:
a. All feasible and reasonable measures have been taken to reduce impacts and
losses to the critical area, or to avoid impacts where avoidance is required by
these regulations;
b.T he restored, created or enhanced critical area or buffer will at a minimum be
as viable and enduring as the critical area or buffer area it replaces; and
c. In the case of wetlands and streams, no overall net loss will occur in wetland
or stream functions and values. The mitigation shall be functionally
equivalent to the altered wetland or stream in terms of hydrological,
biological,physical and chemical functions.
B. Location and Timing of Mitigation.
1. Mitigation shall be provided on-site where possible, unless the Director agrees that a
higher function and value can be accomplished off-site within the same drainage basin.
Mitigation may be allowed off-site only when it is determined, through the SEPA review
process, that on-site mitigation is not scientifically feasible or practical due to physical features
of the property. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to demonstrate that mitigation
cannot be provided on-site.
2. When mitigation cannot be provided on-site, mitigation shall be provided in the same
drainage basin as the permitted activity on property owned, secured or controlled by the
applicant where such mitigation is practical and beneficial to the critical area and associated
resources. Mitigation sites shall be located within the City, unless otherwise approved by the
Director.
3. In-kind mitigation shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates, and the
Director concurs, that greater function and value can be achieved through out-of-kind mitigation.
4. When wetland, stream or habitat mitigation is permitted by these regulations on-site or
off-site, the mitigation project shall occur near an adequate water supply (river, stream,
groundwater) 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 features requiring routine maintenance.
23
38
DRAFT
AugusI30 2994
5. Any agreed upon mitigation plan shall be completed prior to issuance of a building or
construction permit, unless a phased or concurrent schedule that assures completion prior to
occupancy has been approved by the Department.
SECTION 12 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND CONTINGENCY
PLANNING
A. For any actions permitted by this chapter which require 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 of the mitigation plan are being met. The monitoring program
shall be submitted to, reviewed and approved by the Department as a part of the mitigation plan.
B. The monitoring program shall include a contingency plan in the event that implementation of
the mitigation plan fails to satisfy the approved goals and objectives. A performance and
maintenance bond or other acceptable security device is required to ensure the applicant's
compliance with the terms of the approved mitigation plan. The amount of the performance and
maintenance bond shall equal 125 percent of the cost of the mitigation project for the length of
the monitoring period.
C. The following elements shall be incorporated into monitoring programs prepared to comply
with this chapter and shall be a part of the approved mitigation plan:
1. Appropriate, accepted, and unbiased qualitative or precise and accurate quantitative
sampling methods to evaluate the success or failure of the project;
2. Quantitative sampling methods that include permanent photopoints installed at the
completion of construction and maintained throughout the monitoring period, 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;
4. Appropriate qualitative and/or quantitative performance standards that will be used to
measure the success or failure of the mitigation. 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;
5. Monitoring programs shall be for a period of at least five years and include at a
minimum: preparation of an as-built plan; annual monitoring and preparation of annual
monitoring reports following implementation; and a maintenance plan. More stringent
monitoring requirements may be required on a case-by-case basis for more complex mitigation
plans;
6. Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the Department at intervals identified in the
approved mitigation plan. A schedule for the submittal of monitoring reports and maintenance
24
39
D RARw
August 8 2904
periods shall be described in the approved mitigation plan. The reports shall 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 implemented to ensure that performance standards will be met.
7. The Director may extend the monitoring period beyond the minimum timeframe if
performance standards are not being met at the end of the initial five-year period; and require
additional financial securities or bonding to ensure that any additional monitoring and
contingencies are completed to ensure the success of the mitigation.
25
40
Du fit
Awgust30, 2004
PART B. CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS & STANDARDS
SECTION 13. WETLANDS
A. Wetlands Ratios System
1. The following rating system is hereby adopted for the purpose of determining the size
of wetland buffers and for the review of permits under this chapter. For the purposes of this
section,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats
of the United States, FWS/OBS-79-31 (Cowardin et al., 1979) contains the descriptions of
wetland classes and subclasses.
a. Category 1 wetlands. Wetlands which meet any of the following criteria:
i. The documented presence of species proposed or listed by the federal or state
government as endangered, threatened, or other species identified by the State
Department of Natural Resources through its natural heritage data or by the State
Department of Wildlife as a priority species, or the presence of critical or
outstanding actual habitat for those species;
ii. Wetlands equal to or greater than two (2) acres in size having forty (40)percent
to sixty(60) percent permanent open water in dispersed patches with two (2) or
more classes of vegetation;
iii. Wetlands equal to or greater than ten(10) acres in size and having three (3) or
more wetland classes, one of which is open water; or
iv. The presence of bogs or fens.
b. Category 2 wetlands. Wetlands which meet any of the following criteria, and which are
not category 1 wetlands:
i. Wetlands greater than one (1) acre in size;
ii. Wetlands equal to or less than one(1) acre in size and having three (3) or more
wetland classes;
iii. Wetlands equal to or less than one (1) acre,but greater than 1000 sq. ft., that
have a forested wetland class; or
iv. Wetlands that contain the documented presence of heron rookeries or raptor
nesting sites.
c. Category 3 wetlands. Wetlands which meet the following criteria, and which are not
category 1 or 2 wetlands.
Wetlands that are equal to or less than one (1) acre in size and that have two (2)
or fewer wetland classes.
B. Determination of Wetland Boundary by Delineation.
1. Delineations shall be required when a development is proposed on property containing
wetlands identified on the City of Kent wetland inventory or when any other credible evidence
26
41
AugList 2004
may suggest that wetlands could be present. Delineations shall also be performed when the
evidence suggests that buffers from wetlands on adjacent properties may impact the proposed
development.
2. The exact location of the wetland boundary shall be determined through the
performance of a field investigation applying the wetland definition of this chapter. An applicant
may request the Department to perform the delineation,provided the applicant pays the
Department for all necessary expenses associated with performing the delineation. The
Department shall consult with qualified professional scientists and technical experts or other
experts as needed to perform the delineation. Where the applicant has provided a delineation of
the wetland boundary,the Department shall verify the accuracy of, and may render adjustments
to, the boundary delineation. The decision of the Department may only be appealed pursuant to
procedures outlined in this chapter.
3. The delineation shall contain the following information:
a. A written assessment and accompanying maps of wetlands and buffers within 100-feet
of the project area, including the following information at a minimum: all known
wetland inventory maps (including a copy of the City of Kent Wetland Inventory Map);
wetland delineations and required buffers; existing wetland acreage; wetland category;
vegetative, faunal and hydrologic characteristics; soil and substrate conditions; and
topographic data.
b. A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation
proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any wetlands that were degraded prior
to the current proposed land use activity.
c. A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to
protect and enhance on-site habitat and wetland functions.
4. Time Limits for Delineation. A wetland delineation which has been confirmed by the
Department pursuant to SEPA review for a proposed project shall be binding upon the city and
the applicant. If a wetland delineation report has not gone through SEPA review as a part of the
application process, and the City has approved a wetland delineation report for another purpose,
the wetland delineation report shall be valid for a period of two (2)years from the date of the
approved report.
C. Wetland Buffers and Building Setback Lines
1. Standard buffer widths. Wetland buffer zones shall be required for all regulated
activities adjacent to wetlands. Any wetland created, restored or enhanced as compensation for
approved wetland alterations shall also include the standard buffer required for the category of
the created,restored, or enhanced wetland. All buffers shall be measured from the wetland
boundary as surveyed in the field. The width of the wetland buffer zone shall be determined
according to the rating assigned to the wetland.
i
27
42
Aaga6E-�9;-2994
Wetland Category Minimum Buffer
1 125 feet
2 75 feet
3 50 feet
2. Enhanced buffer widths. Enhanced wetland buffers may be used to satisfy landscaping
requirements where the city determines that the buffer, as enhanced by the applicant, will
provide greater protection of wetland functions, and will serve the same function as landscaping
that would otherwise be required pursuant to Ch. 15.07 KCC. Approved landscaping vegetation
must meet wetland buffer vegetation requirements.
3. Building setback lines. A minimum building setback line of fifteen (15) feet shall be
required from the edge of a wetland buffer unless otherwise approved by the Director.
Alterations of the building setback lines shall not be permitted to create additional lots for
subdivisions, but only to make reasonable use of existing properties. Approval of alterations of
the BSBL shall be provided in writing by the Director, or his/her designee, and may require
mitigation such as buffer enhancement.
4. Increased wetland buffer width. The Director may require increased buffer widths on a
case-by-case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values
based on local conditions in accordance with recommendations of a qualified professional
biologist and best available science (BAS). This determination shall be supported by appropriate
documentation showing that it is reasonably related to protection of the functions and values of
the wetland. The documentation must demonstrate that:
a. A larger buffer is necessary to protect the function and values of the wetland; or
b. A larger buffer is necessary to maintain a viable population of existing species; or
c. The wetland is used by species listed by the federal government or the state as
endangered,threatened, sensitive or documented priority species or habitats, or essential
or outstanding potential habitats for those species or has unusual nesting or resting sites
such as heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees;
d. The adjacent land is susceptible to severe erosion and erosion control measures will
not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts; or
e. The adjacent land has minimal vegetation cover or slopes greater than fifteen (15)
percent.
5 . Standard buffer width averaging. Standard wetland buffers may be modified by
averaging buffer widths. Wetland buffer width averaging shall be allowed only where the
applicant demonstrates all of the following:
a. Averaging will provide the necessary biological, chemical and physical support
necessary to protect the wetland in question, taking into account the type, intensity, scale,
landscaping and the location of the proposed land use;
b. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical characteristics
which justify the averaging;
28
g%^{, g4-^^ 43
30, 04
c. The proposal minimizes disturbances caused by land uses in areas adjacent to any
buffers which are reduced;
d. Width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland functional values;
e. The total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that
contained within the standard buffer prior to averaging. In no instance shall the buffers
for Category 2 wetlands be reduced to less than 50 feet in width and Category 1 wetlands
less than 85 feet in width. Buffer averaging shall not be permitted for Category 3
wetlands.
f. In instances where decreased buffers occur, the Director or designee shall have the
ability to require an applicant to submit and receive approval of a wetland buffer
enhancement plan to ensure wetland buffer functions are maintained.
g. The functions and values of the averaged buffer are consistent with BAS; the buffer is
planted or will be planted with native vegetation; and no portion of the buffer averaged
areas contain slopes that are greater than 10%.
6. Except as otherwise specified,wetland buffers shall be retained in their natural
condition. Where buffer disturbance has occurred during construction,re-vegetation with native
vegetation shall be required pursuant to an approved mitigation plan consistent with this code.
7. Permitted uses in a wetland buffer. Activities shall not be allowed in a buffer except
for the following and when properly mitigated:=
a. when the improvements are part of an approved enhancement,restoration or mitigation
plan; or
b. for construction of new public roads and utilities, and accessory structures, when no
practicable alternative location exists; or
c. construction of foot trails, according to the following criteria:
(i) constructed of permeable materials;
(ii) designed to minimize impact on the stream system;
(iii) of a maximum width of eight(8) feet;
(iv) located within the outer half of the buffer, i.e., the portion of the buffer that is
farther away from the stream, except to cross a stream when approved by the City
and all other applicable agencies; or
d. construction of footbridges and boardwalks; or
e. construction of educational facilities, such as viewing platforms and informational
signs.
f. The construction of outdoor recreation such as fishing piers,boat launches,benches.
g. Maintenance of pre-existing facilities or temporary uses having minimal adverse
impacts on buffers and no adverse impacts on wetlands. These may include but are not
limited to: maintenance of existing drainage facilities, low intensity passive recreational
activities such as pervious trails, nonpermanent wildlife watching blinds, short term
scientific or educational activities, and sports fishing.
h. Stormwater discharge outlets with energy dissipation structures as approved by the
City of Kent. These shall be located near the outside portion of the buffer. Mitigation
shall be required for impacts to the buffer.
29
q3 RAF
am`'';" �q 44
Q, 2004
i. On-going maintenance activities by the City of Kent vegetation management division
of Public Works and Parks Department shall be permitted to continue general
maintenance of wetlands and associated buffers. Maintenance shall include but not be
limited to trash removal, removal of non-native vegetation, maintenance of existing
vegetation as necessary,restoration, enhancement and sign and fence maintenance.
D. Avoiding Wetland Impacts
1. Regulated activities shall not be authorized in"Category 1 wetlands except where it
can be demonstrated that the impact is both unavoidable and necessary as described below, or
that all reasonable economic uses are denied.
a. Where water-dependent activities are proposed,unavoidable and necessary impacts
may be permitted where no reasonable alternatives exist which would not involve
wetland impacts; or which would not have less of an adverse impact on a wetland; and
that would not have other significant adverse environmental consequences.
b. Where non-water-dependent activities are proposed, the applicant must demonstrate
that:
i. The basic project purpose cannot reasonably be accomplished using an
alternative site in the general region that is available to the applicant.
ii. A reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project as
proposed; and all alternative designs of the project as proposed that would avoid,
or result in less adverse impacts on a wetland or its buffer will not accomplish the
basic purpose of the project; and
iii. In cases where the applicant has rejected alternatives to the project as proposed
due to constraints such as zoning, deficiencies of infrastructure, or parcel size, the
applicant has made reasonable attempt to remove or accommodate such
constraints.
E. Limits of Impacts to Wetlands
1. For wetlands where buffers are not connected to riparian corridors, (Category 3
wetlands, and Category 2 wetlands which are not Category 3 wetlands only because they exceed
one (1) acre in size) the following applies: regulated activities which result in the filling of no
more than ten thousand(10,000) square feet of a wetland may be permitted if mitigation is
provided consistent with the standards.
2. In computing the total allowable wetland fill area under this subsection, the Director
shall include any areas that have been filled since January 1, 1991. For example, if five thousand
(5,000) square feet of a wetland were filled in February, 1991, future applicants would only be
allowed a maximum of five thousand (5,000) additional square feet under this subsection. Any
proposed fill over ten thousand(10,000) square feet must demonstrate unavoidable and
necessary impacts.
F. Fencing and Signage
All development and subdivisions to which this chapter applies shall construct a wildlife
passable fence along the entire buffer edge,unless otherwise approved by the Director. Wetland
30
45
• A -as��A;2AA4
Sensitive Area Signs must also be attached to the fence or located just inside the wildlife
passable fence attached to a 4 x 4 cedar post(or other non-pressure treated materials approved by
the City). Signs must be located at a rate of one sign per residential lot and one sign per 100 feet
for all public rights of way, trails, parking areas,playgrounds and all other uses located adjacent
to wetlands and associated buffers.
G. Sensitive Area Tracts\Easements
1. Condition of approval. As a condition of approval pursuant to this chapter, the Director shall
require creation of a separate sensitive area tract containing the areas determined to be wetland
and/or wetland buffer. Sensitive area tracts\easements are separate tracts containing wetlands and
wetland buffers with perpetual deed restrictions requiring that the tract remain undeveloped.
Sensitive area tracts are an integral part of the lot in which they are created, are not intended for
sale, lease or transfer, and may be included in the area of the parent lot for purposes of
subdivision method and minimum lot size.
2. Protection of sensitive area tracts. The Director shall require that a sensitive area be protected
by one (1) of the following methods:
a. The applicant shall dedicate to the city or other public or nonprofit entity specified by
the Director, an easement or tract for the protection of native vegetation within a wetland
and/or its buffer; or
b. The applicant shall record against the property, a permanent and irrevocable deed
restriction on all lots containing a sensitive area tract or tracts created as a condition of
approval. Such deed restriction(s) shall be approved by the Director and the city attorney
and prohibit in perpetuity the development, alteration, or disturbance of vegetation within
the sensitive area tract except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an
enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the city and any
other agency with jurisdiction over such activity.
H. Notice on Title
The owner of any property with field verified presence of wetlands or wetland buffers for which
a permit application is submitted shall, as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice of the
existence of such wetland or wetland buffer against the property with the King County
Recorder's Office. The notice shall be approved by the Director and the city attorney for
compliance with this provision. The titleholder will have the right to challenge this notice and to
have it deleted if the wetland designation no longer applies, however the applicant shall be
responsible for completing a wetland delineation report which will be subject to approval by the
Director. Any unapproved alterations of a wetland will result in a code violation and will be
enforced to the fullest extent of Kent City Code.
I. Compensatine for Wetland Impacts
1. Condition of approval. As a condition of any approval allowing alteration of wetlands
and/or wetland buffers, or as an enforcement action, the Director shall require that the applicant
31
46
August 3 200 F
engage i 9,n the restoration, creation or enhancement of wetlands and their buffers in order to offset
the impacts resulting from the applicant's or violator's actions. The applicant shall develop a
plan that provides for land acquisition, construction, maintenance and monitoring of replacement
wetlands that recreate as nearly as practicable, or improves, the original wetlands in terms of
acreage, function, geographic location and setting.
2. Goal. The overall goal of any compensatory mitigation project shall be to replace the
wetland lost, with appropriate functions and values. No net loss of wetland acreage or function
shall be approved. Compensation shall be completed prior to wetland destruction, where
practicable. Compensatory mitigation programs shall incorporate the standards and requirements
contained in sections 11 and 12, above.
3. Restoration and creation of wetlands and wetland buffers.
a. Any person who alters wetlands shall restore or create equivalent areas or greater areas
of wetlands than those altered in order to compensate for wetland losses. Any created or
restored wetlands shall be protected by the provisions of this chapter.
b. Acreage replacement and enhancement ratio. Wetland alterations shall be replaced or
enhanced using the formulas below,however the Director may choose to double
mitigation ratios in instances where wetlands are filled or impacted as a result of code
violations. The first number specifies the acreage of wetlands requiring replacement and
the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered. These ratios do not apply to
remedial actions resulting from illegal alterations.
i. Compensation for alteration of Category 1 wetlands shall be accomplished as follows:
(a)By creation of new wetlands at a ratio of three (3)to one(1); or
(b) By creation of new wetlands at a ratio of one (1)to one (1) and by
enhancement of existing wetlands at a ratio of three(3) to one (1); or
(c)By a combination of creation of new wetlands and enhancement of existing
wetlands within the range of the ratios set out in subsections (a) and(b) above, so
long as a minimum one (1)to one (1) creation ratio is met(for example, creation
of new wetlands at a one and one-half(1.5)to one (1) ratio along with
enhancement of existing wetlands at a ratio of two and one-half(2.5)to one (1)
may be acceptable).
ii. Compensation for alteration of Category 2 and 3 wetlands shall be accomplished as
follows:
(a) By creation of new wetlands at a ratio of one and one-half(1.5)to one (1); or
(b)By creation of new wetlands at a ratio of one (1) to one (1) and by
enhancement of existing wetlands at a ratio of one (1)to one(1); or
(c)By a combination of creation of new wetlands and enhancement of existing
wetlands within the range of ratios set out in subsections (a) and(b) above, so
long as a minimum one (1)to one (1) creation ratio is met.
4. Decreased replacement ratio. The Director may decrease the required replacement ratio
where the applicant provides the mitigation prior to altering the wetland, and a minimum acreage
replacement ratio of one (1)to one (1) is provided. In such a case, the mitigation must be in
32
47
F..
'�. ,,,+��..,
August 30, 2004
place,monitored for three (3) growing seasons and be deemed a success prior to allowing any
alterations.
5. Wetlands enhancement.
a. Any applicant proposing to alter wetlands may propose to enhance existing Category 2
wetlands and Category 3 wetlands in order to compensate for wetland losses.
b. Not all Category 2 and 3 wetlands are in need of enhancement. If an applicant
proposes to complete enhancement of an existing wetland, the proposed enhancement
shall be consistent with best available science and shall be approved by the Department.
c. A wetlands enhancement compensation project shall be considered, provided that
enhancement for one function and value will not degrade another function or value.
Acreage replacement ratios for enhancement shall be 3:1.
d. Category 1 wetlands shall not be enhanced as the only method of mitigation. Category
1 wetlands shall be mitigated pursuant tothe provisions of this chapter.
6. Mitigation may be allowed within a Wetland/Habitat Mitigation Bank located within
the City of Kent once a bank is formed. Proposed developments must continue to
demonstrate avoidance, minimization,mitigation prior be allowed to mitigate using a
wetland bank site. Feasibility of on-site mitigation will be required to be prior to
allowing mitigation credits from a mitigation bank..
7. Wetland type. In-kind compensation shall be provided except that, out-of-kind
compensation may be accepted where:
a. The wetland system to be replaced is already significantly degraded and out-of-kind-
replacement will result in a wetland with greater functional value;
b. Technical problems such as exotic vegetation and changes in watershed hydrology
make implementation of in-kind compensation impracticable; or
c. Out-of-kind replacement will best meet identified regional goals (e.g.,replacement of
historically diminished wetland types).
S. Location. On-site compensation shall be provided except where the applicant can
demonstrate that:
a. The hydrology and ecosystem of the original wetland and those who benefit from the
hydrology and ecosystem will not be substantially damaged by the onsite loss; and
b. On-site compensation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology,
soils, or other factors; or
c. Compensation is not practical due to potentially adverse impacts from surrounding
land uses; or
d. Existing functional values at the site of the proposed restoration are significantly
greater than lost wetland functional values; or
e. Established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance,habitat or other wetland
functions have been established and strongly justify location of compensatory measures
at another site.
9. Off-site compensation shall occur within the same drainage basin as the wetland loss
occurred, unless the applicant can demonstrate extraordinary hardship.
33
g 48
Aagdst 30,20N
10. In selecting compensation sites for creation or enhancement, applicants shall pursue
siting in the following order of preference:
a. Upland sites which were formerly wetlands and significantly degraded wetlands. Such
wetlands are typically small; have only one (1) wetland class; and have one (1) dominant
plant species or a predominance of exotic species;
b. Idle upland sites generally having bare ground or vegetative cover consisting primarily
of exotic introduced species, weeds, or emergent vegetation; and
c. Other disturbed upland.
11. Timing. Where feasible, compensatory projects shall be completed prior to activities
that will disturb wetlands, or immediately after activities that will temporarily disturb wetlands,
or prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development which was conditioned upon such
compensation. Construction of compensation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to
existing wildlife and flora.
12. On completion of construction, any approved mitigation project must be signed off
by the applicant's qualified consultant and approved by the Department. A signed letter from the
consultant will indicate that the construction has been completed as approved, and approval of
the installed mitigation plan will begin the monitoring period if appropriate.
SECTION 14. FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation areas are comprised of streams and associated species
and habitat, including anadromous fish, and wildlife habitat. For purposes of establishing
regulatory standards, these critical areas are divided into separate stream and wildlife ha
bitat components in this chapter.
SECTION 14-1. STREAMS
A. Classification and Ratine.
1. To promote consistent application of the standards and requirements of this chapter,
streams within the City of Kent shall be rated or classified according to their characteristics,
function and value, and/or their sensitivity to disturbance.
2. Classification of streams shall be determined by the Department based on
consideration of the following factors:
a. Approved technical reports submitted by qualified consultants in connection with
applications for activities subject to these regulations
b. application of the criteria contained in these regulations; and
c. maps adopted pursuant to this chapter;
3. Streams shall be designated Types 1 through 3 as follows:
34
49
• August 30,2004
a. Type 1 Water—means all shorelines identified in the Kent Shoreline Master Program.
(i)b. Type 2 Water — means salmonid bearing segments of natural waters not
classified as Type 1 Water, with documented salmonid use. This category also
refers to lakes, ponds, or impoundments having a surface area of 1 acre of greater
at seasonal low water. Salmonid Bearing waters are used by fish for spawning,
rearing or migration.
c. Type 3 Water—means non-salmonid segments of natural waters not classified as Type
1 or 2 Waters. These are stream segments within the bankfull width of defined channels
that are perennial and intermittent non-salmonid habitat streams. These waters begin at a
point along the channel where documented salmonid fish use ends.
B. Buffer Areas, Setbacks, Fencingand nd Signage
1. General Provisions.
a. The establishment of buffers shall be required for all development proposals and
activities in or adjacent to streams. The purpose of the buffer shall be to protect the
integrity, function, value and resources of the stream. Buffers shall typically consist of an
undisturbed area of native vegetation established to achieve the purpose of the buffer. No
• buildings, structures, impervious surfaces or non-native landscaping shall be allowed in a
buffer unless otherwise permitted by this chapter. If the site has previously been
disturbed, the buffer area shall be re-vegetated pursuant to an approved enhancement
plan. Where flexible buffer widths are permitted by this chapter, such enhancement shall
be considered in determining appropriate buffer widths. 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 will be required to provide long-term preservation
and protection of buffer areas.
b. Required buffer widths shall reflect the functions and values of the stream,the risks
associated with development, and the type and intensity of human activity proposed to be
conducted on or near the stream in those circumstances where such activity is permitted
by these regulations.
c. All stream buffers shall have a minimum building setback line, as defined by this
Chapter, of 15-feet from the edge of all stream buffers.
d. All stream buffers shall have a wildlife passable fence installed at the edge of the
buffer. Fencing shall consist of split rail cedar fencing (or other non-pressure treated
materials approved by the City). The fencing shall also include sensitive area signage at
a rate of one (1) sign per lot or one (1) sign per 100 feet for large parcels and along public
right of way whichever is greater.
35
50
i y DRAFT
• August
2. Standard Buffer Widths. The following standard buffers are established for streams,
as measured from the ordinary high water mark.
Stream Type Standard Buffer
Type 1 Per Kent SMP
Type 2 100 feet
Type 3 40 feet
3. Valley Stream Buffers. A special stream buffer and mitigation/enhancement program
shall apply to the industrialized areas adjacent to portions of Mill Creek Garrison Creek and
Springbrook Creek on the valley floor. These areas are substantially developed for industrial
uses and existing, historical setbacks are typically less than 50 feet. Existing buffers are
degraded. These areas are generally identified by the Valley Stream Overlay Map. The Valley
Stream Overlay area is generally described as that area beginning at the Kent city limits where
the Green River and South 180` Street intersect, following 180`h Street easterly to the eastern
right-of-way line to SR 167, then moving south along the SR 167 eastern right-of-way line to the
intersection of 98`h Avenue South,then along the Green River Valley floor to West Smith Street,
then east along West Smith Street to East Titus Street, then along East Titus Street to Central
Avenue, then following the Green River Valley floor to the Green River,then following the
eastern edge of Green River to the point of beginning.
a. Stream buffers shall be 50 feet.
b. The goal of the special program applicable to these streams shall be to enhance
existing vegetation and habitat to accomplish sediment removal and erosion control,pollutant
removal,placement of large woody debris, and particularly to control water temperature. These
objectives can be accomplished with the required buffers.
c. A buffer management and enhancement plan shall be required, consistent with the
mitigation performance standards in this section and Attachment 1.
d. Buffer reductions or averaging shall not be permitted except as permitted through the
reasonable use provisions of Section 9, or the Variance provision of Section 10 of these
regulations.
4. Increased Buffers. A buffer width greater than the standard may be required by the
City based on the findings of site-specific studies prepared consistent with these regulations, or
to comply with state or federal plans to preserve endangered or threatened species.
5. Buffer Averaging. The Department may permit buffer widths to be averaged for Type
2 and Type only, in accordance with the stream report, subject to the following criteria:
a. stream functions will not be reduced;
b. salmonid habitat will not be adversely affected;
c. additional enhancement of habitat is provided in conjunction with the reduced buffer;
d. the total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is not less that what would
be contained in the standard buffer;
e. the buffer width is not reduced by more than 50 percent in any location; and
f. the buffer area width is not less than 40 feet.
36
51
• August 30 2994
g. all reduced buffers shall be mitigated through buffer enhancement pursuant to the
requirements of Section 11.
6. Activities Within Buffer. No structures or improvements shall be permitted within the
stream buffer area, including buildings, decks, docks, except as otherwise permitted by this
section,by the City's adopted Shoreline Master Program, or under one of the following
circumstances:
a. when the improvements are part of an approved enhancement, restoration or mitigation
plan; or
b. construction of new public roads and utilities, and accessory structures, when no
feasible alternative location exists; or
c. construction of foot trails, according to the following criteria:
(i) constructed of permeable materials;
(ii) designed to minimize impact on the stream system;
(iii) of a maximum width of eight(8) feet;
(iv) located within the outer half of the buffer, i.e.,the portion of the buffer that is
farther away from the stream, except to cross a stream when approved by the City
and all other applicable agencies; or
d. construction of footbridges and boardwalks; or
e. construction of educational facilities, such as viewing platforms and informational
signs; or
f. stormwater discharge points and energy dissipation structures, provided mitigation and
enhancement is completed and approved by the City.
7. Protection of Streams/Buffers. Long term protection of a regulated stream and its
associated buffer shall be provided by placing it in a separate tract on which development is
prohibited; executing an easement; dedication to a conservation organization or land 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 County
Recorder's Office.
8. Buffer Width Variances. Required buffers shall not deny all reasonable use of
property. A variance from buffer width requirements may be granted by the City subject to the
variance criteria set forth in Section 10 of these regulations. Variances to buffers shall require a
buffer enhancement plan pursuant to Section 11, including bonding pursuant to Section 12. Prior
to obtaining a variance, the applicant must demonstrate that all other reasonable alternatives
including avoidance,minimization and buffer-averaging have been explored and would prohibit
all reasonable economic use of the property.
9. Buffer Enhancements. 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:
a. Removal of fish barriers to restore accessibility to anadromous fish.
37
fy {p�(g g«� 52
• August 30, 2994
b. Enhancement of fish habitat using log structures incorporated as part of a fish habitat
enhancement plan.
c. Creating or enhancing the surface channel if approved by the Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife.
d. 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;
e. Landscaping outside the buffer area with native vegetation or a reduction in the amount
of clearing outside the buffer area; or
f. Enhancement of wildlife habitat by adding structures that are likely to be used by
wildlife, including wood duck houses,bat boxes, nesting platforms, snags,
rootwads/stumps, birdhouses, and heron nesting areas.
g. Additional mitigating measures may include but are not limited to the following:
(i) Creating a surface channel where a stream was previously culverted or piped;
or
(ii) Removing or modifying existing stream culverts (such as at road crossings)to
improve fish passage and flow capabilities which are not detrimental to fish;
(iii)Upgrading retention/detention facilities or other drainage facilities beyond
required levels; or
(iv) similar measures determined to be appropriate by the Department.
C. Alteration or Development— Standards and Criteria
iAlteration of streams and/or their established buffers may be permitted by the Department
subject to the criteria of this section. Standards for mitigation of impacts to critical areas are
identified in Section 11 of these regulations.
1. Alteration shall not degrade the functions and values of the stream.
2. Activities located in water bodies and associated buffers, used by anadromous fish
shall give special consideration to the preservation and enhancement of fish habitat, including
but not limited to the following:
a. the activity is timed to occur only within the allowable work window for the particular
species;
b. the activity is designed so as not to degrade the functions and values of the habitat and
any impacts are mitigated; and
c. an alternate location or design is not feasible.
3. Relocation of a Type, 2 or 3 stream solely to facilitate general site design shall not be
permitted. Relocation of a stream may be permitted 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.
4. Bridges shall be used to cross Type 1 streams; boring/micro-tunneling may be
considered for utility crossings if it would result in the same or lower impacts as bridging.
5. Culverts. All new culverts shall be designed following guidance provided in the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's document: " Design of Road Culverts for Fish
Passage, 2003 (or most recent version thereof) ." The applicant shall obtain a HPA from the
Department of Fish and Wildlife. Culverts are allowed only in Type 2,and 3.
38
53
? )RAFT
A6igust30, 2004
6. 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.
7. The City may require that a 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.
D. Mitigation Performance Standards. The performance standards in this section, and the
standards in Sections 11 and 12 shall be incorporated into mitigation plans submitted to the City
for impacts to streams. Mitigation plans shall contain the information described in Attachment 1
of this chapter and are subject to approval by the City of Kent.
1. Use plants native to the Puget Lowlands or Pacific Northwest ecoregion; nonnative,
introduced plants or plants listed by the Washington State Department of Agriculture as
noxious weeds (WAC 16-750) 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.
3. 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;
• 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; annuals shall be planted following
the second or third year after initial installation of plantings to determine the success of
initial plantings and maintenance practices. Annual plants shall only be used 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 unless a sufficient
naturally-occurring source of water is demonstrated.;
8. Confine temporary stockpiling of soils to upland areas. Unless otherwise approved by the
Department, comply with all applicable best management practices for clearing, grading,
and erosion control to protect any nearby surface waters from sediment and turbidity;
39
54
F FT
• 30, 2004
9. Show densities and placement of plants. These should be based on the ecological
tolerances of species proposed for planting,
10. Provide sufficient specifications and instructions to ensure proper placement diversity
and spacing of seeds, tubers, bulbs, rhizomes, springs, plugs, and transplanted stock and
other habitat features, to provide a high probability of success, and to reduce the
likelihood of prolonged losses of wetland functions from proposed development. Prepare
contingency plans as described in Section 11 for all mitigation proposals.
11. Do not rely on fertilizers and herbicides to promote establishment of plantings. If
fertilizers are used, they must be approved in writing by the Department and other
applicable agencies, and shall be applied per manufacturer specifications to planting
holes in organic or time-release forms, such as Osmocote® or comparable formulations,
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.
SECTION 14-2. WILDLIFE HABITAT
• A. Classification&Rating. Wildlife habitat areas subject to these regulations include habitat
classified as"critical'habitat and"ponds" according to the criteria in this section.
1. "Critical Habitat" are those habitat areas which meet any of the following criteria:
a. the documented presence of species or habitat listed by federal or state
agencies as "endangered", "threatened", "candidate", "sensitive" or"priority"; or
b. the presence of unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries or
raptor nesting trees. This provision shall be limited to raptors which are included within the
listed categories of wildlife noted in paragraph(a), above, and shall apply to active nests. To
demonstrate that a nesting site is inactive and not subject to these regulations, an applicant must
monitor the nesting site during construction and submit a report documenting that it is not
currently being used by the relevant species.;
A list of critical habitat/species believed to be present in the City of Kent,based on
information in databases maintained by the Department of Natural Resources and Department of
Fish and Wildlife is contained in Attachment 3.
2. "Ponds" (deepwater aquatic habitat), as defined in this chapter, which are important to
and support a wide variety of species of fish, wildlife or vegetation.
B. Buffer Areas and Setbacks.
40
55
August 30, 2004
1. Buffer widths for critical habitat areas shall be determined by the Department,based
on an critical area report prepared by the applicant pursuant to this chapter and
consideration of the following factors.
a. research and evaluation of best available science sources relevant to species and
habitat present within the City, as documented in Critical Areas Issue Paper: Regulatory
Audit, Gap Analysis and Best Available Science Review (City of Kent, 2003)or
amendments thereto;
b. species-specific management guidelines of the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife;
c. recommendations contained in the wildlife study submitted by a qualified
consultant, following the reporting requirements of these regulations; and
d. the nature and intensity of land uses and activities occurring on the site and on
adjacent sites. Buffers are encouraged but are not required for secondary habitat.
2. Buffers for ponds shall be 75 feet plus a 15-foot BSBL
3. Wildlife habitat buffer widths may be modified by averaging buffer widths, , If buffer
averaging is approved, it shall include enhancement or restoration of buffer quality.
4. Certain uses and activities which are consistent with the purpose and function of the
habitat buffer and do not detract from its integrity may be permitted by the Department within
the buffer 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 trails,
fishing piers and viewing platforms, and utility easements,provided that any impacts to the
buffer resulting from permitted facilities shall be mitigated. When permitted, such facilities
should be located in the outer 10 feet of the buffer, unless otherwise approved by the Director.
5. Long term protection of critical habitat areas and their associated buffer(s) shall be
provided by placing them in a separate tract on which development is prohibited; protection by
execution of an easement; dedication to a conservation organization or land trust; or a similar
permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City. The location and limitations associated
with the habitat 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 County Recorder's Office.
C. Alteration or Development of Wildlife Habitat
1. Critical Habitat: Alterations of critical habitat shall be avoided, subject to the variance
or reasonable use provisions of this chapter.
2. Where permitted by these regulations, alteration shall not degrade the functions and
values of the habitat.
D. Performance Standards for Mitigation Planning.
1. The performance standards in this section, and the general standards in Section 11 of
this chapter, shall be incorporated into mitigation plans submitted to the Department for impacts
•
41
56
• Aagust39, 2004
to wildlife habitat. Mitigation plans shall contain the information described in Attachment 1.
The following additional mitigation measures shall be incorporated in mitigation planning:
a. locate buildings and structures in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on critical
habitats used by priority, threatened or endangered species and identified by the
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Services,
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services.
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 and invasive weeds or exotic animals which are
problematic to the critical habitat area as determined by the Department; and
g. preserve significant or existing native trees, preferably in stands or groups, consistent
with achieving the goals and standards of this chapter.
2. On completion of construction, any approved mitigation project must be signed off by the
applicant's qualified consultant and approved by the Department. A signed letter from the
consultant will indicate that the construction has been completed as approved, and approval of
the installed mitigation plan will begin the monitoring period if appropriate.
SECTION 15. GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS
Geologic Hazard Areas include landslide, erosion, seismic and volcanic hazard areas.
A. Alterations of Geologic Hazard Areas
1. Alterations of geological hazard areas or associated buffers may only occur for
activities that meet the following criteria:
a. will not increase the existing threat of the geological hazard to adjacent
properties;
b. will not adversely impact other critical areas;
c. are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level
equal to or less than pre-development conditions; and
d. are certified as safe as designed under anticipated conditions by a qualified
engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington.
The Department may condition or deny proposals as appropriate to achieve these criteria.
Conditions may include limitations of proposed uses, modification of density, alteration of site
layout, and other appropriate changes to the proposal.
2. Public emergency, health, and safety facilities and public utilities shall not be
sited within geologically hazardous areas unless there is no other practicable alternative.
42
57
IT
August3O, 2004
3. Landslide Hazard Areas
a. Alterations to landslide hazard areas may be permitted based on the findings and
recommendations of a geologic report prepared consistent with the requirements of this
chapter and certifying that the development complies with the criteria in subsection 1
above.
b. Unless otherwise provided or as a necessary part of an approved alteration, removal of
any vegetation from a landslide hazard area or buffer shall be prohibited, except for
removal of hazard trees as verified by the Department.
c. Vegetation on slopes within a landslide hazard area or buffer which has been damaged
by human activity or infested by noxious and invasive weeds may be replaced with
vegetation native to Kent pursuant to an enhancement plan approved by the Department.
The use of hazardous substances, pesticides and fertilizers in landslide hazard areas and
their buffers is prohibited unless otherwise approved by the Department in writing.
d. All alterations shall be undertaken in a manner to minimize disturbance to the landslide
hazard area, slope and vegetation unless the alterations are necessary for slope
stabilization.
4. Erosion Hazard Areas
a. Clearing in an erosion hazard area is not limited to time of year, except when such
restrictions are recommended in the geotechnical report and approved by the Department.
b. Alterations to erosion hazard areas may only occur for activities for which a hazard
analysis has been completed and submitted certifying that the development complies with
the criteria in subsection A.l. The hazard analysis must be completed in general
accordance with the requisites described in the geologic report.
c. Where the Department determines that erosion from a development site in an erosion
hazard area poses a significant risk of damage to downstream receiving waters, based
either on the size of the project, the proximity to the receiving water or the sensitivity of
the receiving water, the applicant shall be required to provide regular monitoring of
surface water discharge from the site. Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the
Department based on provisions in an approved mitigation plan. If the project does not
meet state water quality standards, the Department may suspend further development
work on the site until such standards are met.
d. The use of hazardous substances, pesticides and fertilizers in erosion hazard areas is
prohibited unless otherwise approved by the Department.
5. Seismic Hazard Areas
a. Alterations to seismic hazard areas may be allowed only as follows:
i. The evaluation of site-specific subsurface conditions shows that the proposed
development site is not located in a seismic hazard area;
ii. Mitigation based on the best available engineering and geotechnical practices
shall be implemented which either eliminates or minimizes the risk of damage, death, or
injury resulting from seismically induced settlement or soil liquefaction. Mitigation shall
be consistent with the requirements of KCC 14.01 and shall be approved by the Building
Official; and
43
58
• August-39-2894
iii. Mobile homes may be placed in seismic hazard areas without performing
special studies to address the seismic hazard. Such mobile homes may be subject to
special support and tie-down requirements.
6. Volcanic Hazard Areas
The City shall maintain a map that indicates the location of volcanic hazards. Sites which
are located on or within 200 feet of an identified volcanic hazard area shall include a
notation on the title to the affected property disclosing the presence of the hazard.
B. Buffers and Setbacks
1. A buffer shall be established to protect geologic hazard areas. Buffers and setbacks
shall be established from the top,bottom, and sides of critical areas. Unless permitted by the
Director,native vegetation within buffer areas shall not be impacted, and shall remain in their
natural state. The width of the buffer shall be established by the Department based on
consideration of the following factors:
a. the recommendations contained in the geologic report required by this chapter and
prepared by a qualified consultant;
b. the sensitivity of the geologic hazard in question; and
c. the type and intensity of the proposed land use.
2. All buffers shall include a minimum fifteen(15) foot BSBL.
• 3. When the geotechnical report demonstrates that, due to application of design and
engineering solutions, lesser buffer and setback distances will meet the intent of this regulation,
such reduced buffer and setback distances may be permitted.
a. Minimum buffer width for landslide hazard areas shall be equal to the vertical height
of the landslide hazard or fifty (50) feet, whichever is greater, for all landslide hazard
areas that measure 10 feet or more in vertical elevation change from top to toe of slope,
as identified in the geotechnical report, maps, and field-checking. No disturbance may
occur within the buffer except as provided within this chapter.
b. The buffer may be reduced when a qualified professional demonstrates to the
Department's satisfaction that the reduction will adequately protect the proposed
development, adjacent developments and uses and the subject critical area. In no case
shall the buffer be less than 25-feet.
c. To increase the functional attributes of the buffer, the Department may require that the
buffer be enhanced through planting of indigenous species.
d. The edge of the buffer area shall be clearly staked, flagged, and fenced prior to any
site clearing or construction. The buffer boundary markers shall be clearly visible,
durable, and permanently affixed to the ground. Site clearing shall not commence until
the engineer has submitted written notice to the Department that buffer requirements of
this regulation are met. Field marking shall remain until all construction and clearing
phases are completed and final approval has been granted by the Department.
SECTION 16. CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
A. Designation. Rating and Mapping
•
44
59
• 1"ldgust3g, 2004
1. Critical aquifer recharge areas designation. Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARA)
are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as
defined by WAC 365-190-030 (2). CARA have prevailing geologic conditions
associated with infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground
water resources or contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. These
areas include the following:
a. Wellhead protection areas. Wellhead protection areas shall be defined by the
boundaries of the ten(10)year time of ground water travel, or boundaries established
using alternate criteria approved by the Department of Health in those settings where
ground water time of travel is not a reasonable delineation criterion, in accordance with
WAC 246-290-135.
b. Susceptible ground water management areas. Susceptible ground water management
areas are areas that have been designated as moderately or highly vulnerable or
susceptible in an adopted ground water management program developed pursuant to
Chapters 173-100 WAC.
c. Special protection areas. Special protection areas are those areas defined by WAC
173-200-090.
d. Private wells are not governed by this code,however all provisions of the King County
Board of Health Code 12.24.010 shall be applicable.
2. Mapping of critical aquifer recharge areas.
• a. The approximate location and extent of critical aquifer recharge areas are shown on the
Wellhead Protection Area Map.
b. These maps are to be used as a guide for the City of Kent, project applicants and/or
property owners, and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified or
when updates to the City of Kent Wellhead Protection Program are completed. They are a
reference and do not provide a final critical area designation.
c. This mapping does not include private water wells for single family residences.
B. Critical area report required—Activities that require a critical area report
1. If located within a CARA, the following land use proposals shall be required to complete a
critical aquifer recharge area report. The report shall be submitted to, reviewed and approved by
the Department.
a. Above ground storage tanks
b. Dry cleaners
c. Pipelines (hazardous liquid transmission)
d. Auto repair shops (including oil/lube facilities)
e. Underground storage tanks
f. Gas stations
e. other land use types as determined by the Director that may have the potential to
significantly impact groundwater resources.
C. Critical aquifer area report—Requirements for critical aquifer recharge areas
45
60
,:FF.M 3 i ; . [)F- AFT
Augdst-30,2004
1. Prepared by a qualified professional. An aquifer recharge area critical area report shall be
prepared by a qualified professional who is a hydrogeologist, or engineer,who is licensed
in the state of Washington and has experience in preparing hydro-geologic assessments.
2. Hydro-geologic assessment required. For all proposed activities identified in Section
16.B.1 a critical recharge area report shall be required.
3. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Requirements. A critical aquifer recharge area report shall
include the following site and proposal related information at a minimum:
a. Available information regarding geologic and hydrogeologic characteristics of the site
including the surface location of all critical aquifer recharge areas located on site or
immediately adjacent to the site, and permeability of the unsaturated zone based on
available information;
b. Ground water depth, flow direction and gradient based on available information;
c. Currently available data on wells and springs within 1,300 feet of the project area;
d. Location of other critical areas, including surface waters, within 1,300 feet of the
project area;
e. Available historic water quality data for the area to be affected by the proposed activity;
and
f. Best management practices proposed to be utilized.
g. Historic water quality data for the area to be affected by the proposed activity compiled
for at least the previous five (5) year period based on available information;
h. Ground water monitoring plan provisions;
i. Discussion of the effects of the proposed project on the ground water quality and
quantity, including:
i. Predictive evaluation of ground water withdrawal effects; and
ii. Predictive evaluation of contaminant transport based on potential releases to ground
water; and
j. A spill plan that identifies equipment and/or structures that could fail,
resulting in an impact for construction periods and for general operating business
procedures post construction. Spill plans shall include provisions for regular
inspection, repair, and replacement of structures and equipment that
could fail.
D. Performance standards—General requirements
1. Activities may only be permitted in a critical aquifer recharge area if the applicant can
show that the proposed activity will not cause contaminants to enter the aquifer and that the
proposed activity will not adversely affect the recharging of the aquifer.
2. The proposed activity must comply with the water source protection requirements and
recommendations of the federal Environmental Protection Agency, state Department of
Health, and the Seattle King County Health Department.
3. The proposed stormwater management facilities must be designed and constructed in
accordance with the King County Surface Water Design Manual as adopted by the City of
Kent pursuant to KCC Chapter 7.07.
E. Performance standards— Specific uses
1. Storage Tanks. All storage tanks proposed to be located in a critical aquifer
•
46
61
D ' i
Aagost39 2004
recharge area must comply with all applicable codes including, but not limited to,the
Washington State Department of Ecology and local code requirements and must conform
to the following:
a. Underground Tanks. All new underground storage facilities proposed for use in the
storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and constructed
so as to:
i. Prevent releases due to corrosion or structural failure for the operational life of the
tank;
ii. Be protected against corrosion, constructed of non-corrosive material, steel clad with
a non-corrosive material, or designed to include a secondary containment system to
prevent the release or threatened release of any stored substances; and,
iii. Use material in the construction or lining of the tank that is compatible with the
substance to be stored.
b. Aboveground Tanks. All new aboveground storage facilities proposed for use in the
storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and constructed
so as to:
i. Not allow the release of a hazardous substance to the ground,
ground waters, or surface waters;
ii. Have primary containment areas enclosing or underlying the tank
or part thereof,
iii. A secondary containment system either built into the tank structure
or a dike system built outside the tank for all tanks; and
iv. All outside above ground storage tanks shall be covered to prevent rainwater from
filling secondary containment areas.
2. Vehicle repair and servicing. Vehicle repair and servicing must be conducted over
impermeable pads and within a covered structure capable of withstanding normally
expected weather conditions. Chemicals used in the process of vehicle repair and servicing
must be stored in a manner that protects them from weather and provides containment
should leaks occur.
3. No dry wells shall be allowed in critical aquifer recharge areas. Dry wells existing on the
site prior to facility establishment must be abandoned using techniques approved by the
state Department of Ecology prior to commencement of the proposed activity.
4. Residential use of pesticides and nutrients. Application of household pesticides,
herbicides, and fertilizers shall not exceed times and rates specified on the packaging.
5. Spreading or injection of reclaimed water. Water reuse projects for reclaimed water must
be in accordance with the adopted water or sewer comprehensive plans that have been
approved by the departments of Ecology and Health.
a. Surface spreading must meet the ground water recharge criteria given in
Chapter 90.46.080 RCW and Chapter 90.46.010(10).
b. Direct injection must be in accordance with the standards developed by
authority of Chapter 90.46.042 RCW.
F. Prohibited Uses
The following activities and uses are prohibited in critical aquifer recharge areas:
1. Landfills. Landfills, including hazardous or dangerous waste, municipal solid waste,
special waste, woodwaste, and inert and demolition waste landfills;
•
47
62
AagU6t38-2994
2. Underground injection wells. Class I, III, and IV wells and subclasses F01, 5D03, 51`04,
5W09, 5W10, 5W11, 5W31, 5X13, 5X14, 5W20, 5X28, and 5N24 of Class V wells;
3. Mining
a. Metals and hard rock mining.
b. Sand and gravel mining is prohibited from critical aquifer recharge areas
determined to be highly susceptible or vulnerable.
4. Wood treatment facilities. Wood treatment facilities that allow any portion of the treatment
process to occur over permeable surfaces (both natural and manmade);
5. Storage, processing, or disposal of radioactive substances. Facilities that store process, or
dispose of radioactive substances;
6. Any property within the City of Kent using a private well for water supply shall abate the
well in accordance with Department of Ecology Standards ,when development is proposed
and can be serviced by a municipal water purveyor. Retention of exempt wells shall not be
permitted for irrigation purposes to prevent potential cross-contamination issues.
a. All property currently with a private well, or within 200-feet of a private well, shall
follow all conditions of the King County Board of Health Code 12.24.010 in the design of
the development of the property. Any proposed development plans shall show all private
wells within 200-feet.
7. Other
a. Activities that would significantly reduce the recharge to aquifers currently or
potentially used as a potable water source;
b. Activities that would significantly reduce the recharge to aquifers that are a
source of significant baseflow to a regulated stream;
SECTION 17. FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
Flood Hazard regulations are contained in KCC 14.09.
SECTION 18. 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Critical Area Reporting Requirements
- Mitigation Plan Requirements
- Wetland Study& Reporting Requirements
- Stream Reconnaissance Report Requirements
- Wildlife Habitat Study &Reporting Requirements
- Geologic Hazard Reporting Requirements
- Aquifer Recharge Area Reporting Requirements
- Flood Hazard Study Requirements
B. List of Wildlife Species
48
63
August 30,2994
ATTACHMENT
MITIGATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS
1. Where it is determined by the Department that compensatory mitigation is required or appropriate,a mitigation
plan shall be prepared. The purpose of the plan is to prescribe mitigation to compensate for impacts to the affected
sensitive area functions,values and acreage as a result of the proposed action. This plan shall consider the chemical,
physical,and biological impacts on the sensitive area system using a recognized assessment or evaluation
methodology and/or professional judgment.
2. The mitigation plan shall be prepared in two phases--a conceptual phase and a detailed phase.
a. Conceptual Plan-Standards and Criteria.
The applicant shall prepare a conceptual mitigation plan for submission to the Department which shall be approved
prior to the issuance of any land use decision or issuance of a building permit if applicable. The conceptual
mitigation plan shall include:
i. purpose
ii. description of property
iii.description of impacts
iv.description of mitigation
v.General goals and of the mitigation plan;
vi.A review of alternative actions that would avoid or lessen the impacts on the wetland;
vii.A review of literature or experience to date in restoring or creating the type of mitigation
proposed;
viii. Approximate site topography following construction;
ix.Location of proposed compensation area;
x.General hydrologic patterns on the site prior to and following construction;
xi.Nature of compensation,including wetland or habitat types(in-kind and out-of-kind),general
plant selection and justification,approximate project sequencing and schedule,and approximate size of the new
sensitive areas and applicable buffers.
xii. Conceptual planting plan;
xiii. A conceptual maintenance plan;and
xiv.Conceptual monitoring and contingency plan.
b. Detailed Plan-Standards and Criteria. Following acceptance of the conceptual mitigation plan by the
Department,the applicant shall submit a detailed mitigation plan prepared by a qualified consultant. Each detailed
plan shall contain,at a minimum,the following components,and shall be consistent with applicable mitigation
standards:
i.A clear statement of the objectives of the mitigation. The goals of the mitigation plan should be
stated in terms of the new functions and values compared to the functions and values of the original area. Objectives
should include:
(a)Qualitative and quantitative standards for success of the project,including hydrologic
characteristics(water depths,water quality,hydroperiod/hydrocycle characteristics,flood storage
capacity); vegetative characteristics(community types,species composition,density,and
spacing); faunal characteristics,and final topographic elevations.
(b) An ecological assessment of the values and buffers that will be lost as a result of the activities,
and of the replacement values and buffers,including but not limited to the following:
(i)Acreage of project;
(ii)Existing functions and values;
(iii)Sizes of mitigation area,buffers,and areas to be altered;
•
49
64
r.�FA 3
At�sY--0, 2894
(iv)Vegetative characteristics,including community type,areal coverage,species
composition,and density;
(v)Habitat type(s)to be enhanced,restored, or created; and
(vi)Dates for beginning and completion of mitigation project,and sequence of
construction activities.
(c) A statement of the location,elevation,and hydrology of the new site,including:
(i)Relationship of the project to the watershed and existing water bodies;
(ii)Topography of site using five foot contour intervals;
(iii)Water level data,including depth and duration of seasonally high water table;
(iv)Water flow patterns;
(v)Grading,filling and excavation,including a description of imported soils;
(vi)Irrigation requirements,if any;
(vii)Water pollution mitigation measures during construction;
(viii)Aerial coverage of planted areas to open water areas(if any open water is to be
present); and
(ix)Appropriate buffers.
(d) A planting plan,describing what will be planted where and when,including:
(i)Soils and substrate characteristics and any applicable soil amendments needed;
(ii)Specify substrate stockpiling techniques; and
(iii)Planting instructions,including species,stock type and size,density or spacing of
plants,and water and nutrient requirements.
(e) A monitoring and maintenance plan,consistent with applicable requirements of this
chapter.
(i)Specify procedures for monitoring and site maintenance; and
(ii)Submittal of periodic monitoring reports to the Department.
(f) A contingency plan,which addresses the potential need and responsibility to modify the
mitigation program in response to changes,and consistent with requirements of this chapter.
(g) A detailed budget for implementation of the mitigation plan,including monitoring,
maintenance and contingency phases.
(h) A guarantee,in the form of a bond or other security device in a form and amount
acceptable to the City,assuring that the work will be performed as planned and approved,
consistent with the requirements of this chapter. The financial guarantee shall be 125%of the
mitigation costs,including construction,maintenance and monitoring.
50
65
DRAFT
atgU6t3e;2004
ATTACHMENT
STREAM RECONNAISSANCE REPORT REQUIREMENTS
1. Prior to the issuance of a SEPA threshold determination for a proposal,a stream reconnaissance report must be
submitted to the City for review. The purpose of the report is to determine the physical and biological
characteristics of streams on any site where regulated activities are proposed. The report will also be used by the
Department to determine the appropriate stream rating designation and buffering requirement for the stream. The
information required for this report should be coordinated with the study and reporting requirements established for
any other sensitive areas located on the site.
2. Stream banks(Ordinary High Water Mark)should be flagged in the field by a qualified consultant. Field
flagging must be distinguishable from other survey flagging on the site. A survey of field flagging must be
accompanied by a stream reconnaissance report. The report shall include the following information:
a. Vicinity map;
b. Site designated on a City of Kent Stream Inventory Map;
c. Streams shall be located approximately on a site map at an appropriate engineering scale such that
information shown is not cramped or illegible. Generally,a scale of 1"=40'or greater(such as V=20')should be
used. Existing features must be distinguished from proposed features. The map must show:
i.site boundary property lines and roads;
ii. internal property lines,rights-of-way,easements,etc.;
iii.existing physical features of the site including buildings,fences,and other structures,roads,
parking lots,utilities,water bodies,etc.;
iv.contours at the smallest readily available intervals,preferably at 5-foot intervals;
v.approximate locations of all streams on the property;
vi.hydrologic mapping showing patterns of water movement into,through,and out of the site
area;
vii. for large and/or complex projects,an air photo with overlays displaying the site boundaries
and stream locations may be required. Generally,an orthophotograph at a scale of 1"=400'or greater(such as 1"_
200')should be used. If an orthophotograph is not available,the center of a small scale(e.g., 1"=2,000')aerial
photograph enlarged to V=400'may be used.
viii. identify other sensitive areas as defined by this Chapter;and
ix. location of proposed use or proposed parcel lines.
d. The report must describe:
i. locational information including legal description and address;
ii.all natural and man-made features within 150 feet of the site boundary;
iii, general site conditions including topography, acreage,and area hydrology;
iv. specific descriptions of streams,including gradient and flow characteristics,stream bed
condition,stream bank and slope stability,presence of fish or habitat for fish,presence of obstructions to fish
movement,general water quality,and stream bank vegetation; and(seems excessive if there is not going to be any
impacts to the stream and the applicant will stay out of the buffer.)
v. a summary of existing stream value for fisheries habitat.
e. A summary of proposed stream and buffer alterations,impacts,and the need for the alterations as
proposed. Potential impacts may include but are not limited to vegetation removal,stream bed and stream bank
alterations,alteration of fisheries habitat,changes in water quality,and increases in human intrusion. If alteration of
a stream is proposed,a stream mitigation plan is required according to the standards of Section 12.
i
51
66
DRAFT'
August 30, 2004 ATTACHMENT
WILDLIFE STUDY AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Prior to the issuance of a SEPA threshold determination for a proposal,a wildlife habitat report must be
submitted to the City for review. The purpose of the report is to determine the extent,function and value of wildlife
habitat on any site where regulated activities are proposed. The report will also be used by the Department to
determine the sensitivity and appropriate classification of the habitat,appropriate buffering requirements,and
potential impacts of proposed activities. The information required by this report should be coordinated with the
study and reporting requirements for any other sensitive area located on the site.
2. The report shall include the following information:
a. Vicinity map;
b. A map showing:
i.site boundary property lines and roads;
ii. internal property lines,rights-of-way,easements,etc.;
iii.existing physical features of the site including buildings,fences,and other structures,roads,
parking lots,utilities,water bodies,etc.;
iv.contours at the smallest readily available intervals,preferably at 5-foot intervals;
v.for large and/or complex projects,an air photo with overlays displaying the site boundaries and
wetland delineation may be required. Generally,an orthophotograph at a scale of 1"=400'or greater(such as 1"_
200')should be used. If an orthophotograph is not available,the center of a small scale(e.g., V=2,000')aerial
photograph enlarged to 1"=400'may be used;
vi.a map of vegetative cover types,reflecting the general boundaries of different plant
communities on the site;
vii. a description of the species typically associated with the cover types,including an
identification of any critical wildlife species that might expected to be found;
viii.the results of searches of DNR's Natural Heritage and Non-Game Data System databases;
and
viii.the result of searches of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and
Species database.
c. The report must describe:
i.locational information including legal description and address;
ii. all natural and man-made features within 150 feet of the site boundary;
iii.general site conditions including topography,acreage,and water bodies or wetlands;
iv.identification of any areas that have previously been disturbed or degraded by human activity
or natural processes;
v.the layers,diversity and variety of habitat found on the site;
vi. identification of edges between habitat types and any species commonly associated with that
habitat;
vii.the location of any migration or movement corridors; and
viii. a narrative summary of existing habitat functions and values. The analysis shall use a habitat
evaluation procedure or methodology approved by the Department.
d. A summary of proposed habitat and buffer alterations,impacts and mitigation. Potential impacts may
include but are not limited to clearing of vegetation,fragmentation of wildlife habitat,expected decreases in species
diversity or quantity,changes in water quality,increases in human intrusion,and impacts on wetlands or water
resources.
e. The level of detail contained in the report shall generally reflect the size and complexity of the proposal
and the function and value of the habitat. The Department may require field studies in appropriate cases.
•
52
67
DRAAugust FT
30, 2004 Attachment x
Critical Species&Habitat Located Within the City of Kent
The following species/habitat are believed to be located within the City of Kent. This list is based on information
obtained from the Department of Natural Resources and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and from the
City of Kent Critical Areas Issue Paper and Best Available Science Report(March 2003). It will be updated as new
information about the presence of critical species becomes available.
This list will be used to provide information to staff,applicants and the general public. It is also intended to be used
as a guide to determine the appropriate scope of wildlife reports that are required to be prepared by this chapter,and
to help determine appropriate buffers where appropriate.
Birds
Bald Eagle
Great Blue Heron
Mountain Quail
Pileated woodpecker
Osprey
Mammals
Small mammals(e.g.,moles,bats, shrews)
Large mammals(e.g.,beaver,raccoon)
Townsends big eared bat
Amphibians and Reptiles
Western pond turtle
i Fish
Anadromous
Resident
Aquatic insects/macro-invertebrates
53
68
This page intentionally left blank.
•
•
69
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, amending chapter 14.09 of the Kent City Code,
regarding flood hazard regulations, to
WHEREAS, the city council desires to amend chapter 14.09 of the Kent City
Code, to
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. —Amendment. Chapter 14.09 of the Kent City Code is amended as
follows:
Chapter 14.09
FLOOD HAZARD REGULATIONS*
14.09.010 Definitions.
1 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
. Flood Hazard Regulations
70
• The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Appeal means a request for review of any final action pursuant to this chapter, or of the
interpretation of any provision of this chapter by any city official.
Area of shallow flooding means the land within the floodplain where the base flood depths range
from one (1) to three (3) feet; a clearly defined channel does not exist; the path of flooding is
unpredictable and indeterminate; and,velocity flow may be evident.
Area of special flood hazard means the land within the floodplain which is subject to a one (1)
percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year.
Base flood means the flood having a one (1) percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any
given year, also referred to as the one hundred(100)year flood.
Base flood elevation means the actual elevation (in mean sea level) of the water surface of the
base flood determined by the federal flood insurance administration or other qualified person or
agency as described in this chapter.
Critical facility means a facility for which even a slight chance of flooding might be too great.
Critical facilities include, but are not limited to: schools, nursing homes, hospitals, police, fire
and emergency response installations; and public and private facilities which produce, use, or
store hazardous materials or hazardous waste as defined by State Department of Ecology.
Development means any proposed or actual manmade changes to improved or unimproved real
estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling,
grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations located within flood hazard areas and other
site preparation activities.
Director means the director of the department of public works of the city.
Flood or flooding means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of
normally dry land areas from:
1. The overflow of inland or tidal waters;
2. The unusual and rapid accumulation of run-off of surface water from any source.
Flood insurance rate map (FIRM) means the official map on which the federal flood insurance
administration has delineated both the special flood hazard areas and the risk premium zones
applicable to the community.
Flood insurance study means the official report provided by the federal insurance administration
that includes flood profiles, the flood boundary andfloodway map, flood insurance rate map, and
the water surface elevation of the base flood.
Flood season means the period from November 1 to March 31 during which, historically, the
frequency, distribution and volume (inches of rainfall) of storms in the Green River Basin have
been the largest and all known major floods have occurred.
Floodplain means that portion of a river or stream channel and adjacent lands which are subject
to the base flood flooding.
Floodway means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must
be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water
surface elevation more than one (1) foot.
Floodway fringe means that portion of a floodplain which is not floodway.
Lowest floor means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An
unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or
2 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
71
• storage, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor,
provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the
applicable nonelevation design requirements of this chapter.
Manufactured home means a structure, transportable in one (1) or more sections, which is built
on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when
connected to the required utilities. For floodplain management purposes the term "manufactured
home" also includes park trailers, travel trailers, and other similar vehicles placed on a site for
greater than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. For insurance purposes the term
"manufactured home" does not include park trailers, travel trailers, and other similar vehicles.
Manufactured home park or subdivision means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land divided
into two (2) or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale.
New construction means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or after
the effective date of this chapter.
Special flood hazard area means those land and water areas identified by the Federal Insurance
Administration in a report entitled"The Flood Insurance Study for King County Washington and
Incorporated Areas" dated September 30, 1989, with accompanying pages on file with King
County or the department of public works of the city.
Start of construction includes substantial improvement, and means the date a building permit was
issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other
improvement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The actual start
means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the
pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work
beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation.
Permanent construction does not include submission of an application for development, land
preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets
and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, or foundations
or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of
accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the
main structure.
Structure means a walled and roofed building including a gas or liquid storage tank that is
principally above ground.
Substantial improvement means any repair, remodeling, reconstruction, or improvement of a
structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty(50)percent of the appraised fair market value
of the structure either:
1. Before the improvement or repair is started; or
2. If the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For
the purposes of this definition, "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first
alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building commences, whether
or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not,
however, include either:
a. Any project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local health,
sanitary, or safety code specifications which are necessary solely to assure safe living conditions;
or
3 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
72
is b. Any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or a
recognized state or local inventory of historic places.
14.09.020 Findings.
The city council finds that:
1. The flood hazard areas of the city are subject to periodic inundation which endangers life
and property, presents health and safety hazards, disrupts commerce and governmental services,
and necessitates extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, all of which
adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare, and
2. These flood losses are caused by the natural accumulation and ponding of floodwaters
and the cumulative effect of obstructions in flood hazard areas which increase flood heights and
velocities. Uses inadequately floodproofed, elevated or protected from flood damage or that
otherwise encroach on the natural holding capacity of the floodplain also contribute to the flood
loss.
14.09.030 Purpose.
It is the purpose of this chapter to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and to
minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by enacting
provisions designed to:
1. Protect life and property by preventing the hazardous use of flood-prone lands;
2. Protect downstream or surrounding property from higher velocities or higher flood levels
which may be caused by loss of holding capacity in the floodplain;
3. Minimize turbidity and pollution from upstream or surrounding development during a
flood;
4. Minimize the expenditure of public money for remedial flood control measures;
5. Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding which are
generally undertaken at the expense of the general public;
6. Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric,
telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in flood hazard areas;
7. Alert appraisers, assessors, owners, potential buyers, and lessees to the natural limitations
of flood-prone land;
8. Ensure that those who occupy or seek to develop in flood hazard areas assume
responsibility for their actions;
9. Qualify the city and existing homes and businesses for participation in the federal flood
insurance program; and
10. Implement local, state and federal flood protection programs.
14.09.040 Policies and standards for reducing flood losses.
In order to accomplish its purpose, this chapter includes policies and standards to:
1. Restrict, condition, or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety and property
due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion, flood heights
or velocities;
4 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
73
2. Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be
protected against flood damage at the time of initial development and construction;
3. Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective
barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters;
4. Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood
damage; and
5. Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert flood-
waters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas.
14.09.050 Lands to which this chapter applies.
This chapter shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the city.
14.09.060 Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard.
The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in a
scientific and engineering report entitled "Flood Insurance Study for King County, Washington
and Incorporated Areas," dated June 16, 1995, with accompanying flood insurance maps is
hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter as if stated verbatim. The
flood insurance study is on file and available for examination at the office of the department of
public works.
14.09.070 Penalties for noncompliance.
No structure or land shall hereafter be developed, constructed, located, extended, converted, or
altered without full compliance with the terms of this chapter and other applicable regulations.
Violation of the provisions of this chapter by failure to comply with any of its requirements
(including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with conditions)
shall constitute a misdemeanor. Any person who violates this chapter or fails to comply with any
of its requirements shall upon conviction thereof be fined not more than five hundred dollars
($500) or imprisoned for not more than one hundred eighty (180) days, or both, for each
violation, and in addition shall pay all costs and expenses involved in the case. Nothing herein
contained shall prevent the city from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent or
remedy any violation.
14.09.080 Abrogation and greater restrictions.
This chapter is not intended to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or
deed restrictions. However, where this chapter and another ordinance, easement, covenant, or
deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall
prevail.
14.09.090 Interpretation.
In the interpretation and application of this chapter, all provisions shall be:
1. Considered as minimum requirements;
2. Liberally construed in favor of the governing body; and
3. Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any other powers granted under state statutes.
5 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
74
• 14.09.100 Warning and disclaimer of liability.
The degree of flood protection required by this chapter is considered reasonable for regulatory
purposes and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will
occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by manmade or natural causes. This
chapter does not imply that land outside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted
within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages. This chapter shall not create
liability on the part of the city, its elected officials or any officer or employee thereof, or the
Federal Insurance Administration, for any flood damages that result from reliance on this chapter
or any administration decision lawfully made hereunder.
14.09.110 Green River flood control zone number 2.
All building and development within the boundaries of the Green River flood control zone
number 2 shall comply with all provisions of Chapter 86.16 RCW and Chapter 508-60 WAC, the
state flood control zone act and permit program regulations.
14.09.120 Permits and licenses.
No permit or license for structures or the development or use of land shall be issued by the city
within a special flood hazard area unless approved by the director or other designate. Such
approval shall be based on a review of the provisions set forth in this chapter and the technical
findings and recommendations of city departments including, but not limited to building, fire and
planning departments. Compliance with the provisions of this chapter does not obviate the need
to obtain other permits which may be required pursuant to state or federal law including but not
. limited to approvals required from the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the State
Departments of Social and Health Services and Ecology relating to water and sewer systems
which ensure that water and sewer systems will be designed to avoid infiltration, inflow or
impairment.
14.09.130 Procedural requirements.
City permits or licenses which relate to the development and use of land within a flood hazard
area or special flood hazard areas shall be referred to the department of public works by the
issuing department for approval. If it can be determined from information at hand that the
property does not lie in a special flood hazard area, the issuing department may approve the
permit or license directly. If it appears that the property may lie in a special flood hazard area,
the department of public works shall require its owner to submit information necessary to
determine if in fact the property lies within the floodway or floodway fringe. If it is determined
that the property lies within the floodway or floodway fringe, the applicant shall be required by
the department of public works to submit such surveys, plans and supporting documents as are
necessary to determine the applicability of city regulations to the proposed structure,
development or use. The department of public works shall consider not only the individual
structure, development or use, but shall also consider it in combination with existing and future
similar structures, developments and uses. Whenever technical information is furnished to the
city by an applicant, the city shall consider such report in acting upon the requested permit. In
performing such review, the department of public works may request additional applicant
information, including the preparation and submission of an environmental checklist under the
6 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
75
IsState Environmental Policy Act or a supplement thereto if already submitted to an issuing
department. The director or his designate shall, within a reasonable time, indicate approval or
disapproval of the requested permit or license; and if approved, the conditions of approval, in a
letter to the issuing department, with copies to the applicant, issuing department, commenting
departments, other agencies and other known parties of interest.
14.09.140 Use of other base flood data.
In order to administer the provisions of this chapter when base flood elevation data has not been
provided in accordance with sections herein, the director shall obtain, review, and reasonably
utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state or other source
determined by the director to provide accurate and detailed flood related information. Such
information shall supplement special flood hazard area information and maps and shall be
retained on file with the department of public works, including information under KCC
14.09.150.
14.09.150 Designation of Local Administrator
The Public Works director or his/her designee is hereby appointed to administer and implement
this ordinance by granting or denying development permit applications in accordance with its
provisions.
1. Duties of the administrator shall include,but not be limited to:
A. Permit Review
1. Review all development permits to determine that the permit requirements of this
ordinance have been satisfied.
2. Review all permits to determine that all necessary permits have been obtained from
those Federal, State or local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required.
3. Review all permits to determine if the proposed development is located within a
floodway. If proposed development is located within a floodway ensure that that section
14.09.190 is enforced.
B. Use of Other Base Flood Data in(A and V Zones)
1. When base flood elevation data has not been provided(A and V Zones) in accordance
with KCC 14.09.060, Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard, the Public Works
Director or his/her designee shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation
and floodway data available from a Federal, state or other source to administer this Title.
C. Information to be obtained and maintained
1. Where base flood elevation data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study,
FIRM, or required as in section 14.09.220(1) (B), obtain and record the actual elevation (in
relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new or substantially
improved structures, and whether or not the structure contains a basement.
2. For all new or substantially improved floodproofed structures where base flood
elevation data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study, FIRM, or as required in 14.09.220
(1) (B):
a. Obtain and record the elevation ( in relation to mean sea level) to which the structure
was flood proofed: and
b. Maintain flood proofing certifications required pursuant to KCC 14.09.150 (2) (b)
7 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
76
c. Maintain for public inspection all records pertaining to the provisions of this
ordinance.
D. Alteration of Watercourses
1. Notify adjacent communities and the Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or
relocation of a watercourse, submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance
Administration.
2. Require that maintenance is provided within the altered or relocated portion of said
watercourse so that the flood carrying capacity is not diminished.
E. Interpretations of FIRM boundaries.
Make interpretations where needed, as to exact location of boundaries of the areas of
special flood hazards (for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped
boundary and actual field conditions). The person contesting the location of the actual boundary
shall be given reasonable opportunity to appeal the interpretation as provided for in KCC
14.09.230.
I. 1A'71;P'rP'hFir'L. flRAL4 data is provided thfough the flood insur-anee study or-re"ired
level) of the lowest fleer, ineluding basement, of all new ef substantially ifflPfeved stpdetiares,
r..1 .yhether e et the stfuet..re a ntai s a basement
7. Fer all new ..substantially improved fl . dpr-oo f d stpaetures•
z
a. Verif., a.,,1 reear- the aet,.al elevation(ir. relatie;; ♦e m,-, ea level\. afia
3. Maintain for-pahlie : eetio all r ards pertaining to the provisions of this eha ter
1 09 160 Alteration of water-Bourses
Whenever an altef-ation or reloeation of any w posed, the department of publie
wodEs shall:
eeenffnunities,
afld the State Depai-7tfnent of Eeeleg� Prior to any
2. De....:re that . .,tenanee is pr-ov:!loll 1.vithin the a4ered— rel.,aate.l pofti..., of the
.ateree..rse so that the fleed a nit... et diminished.
14.09.16-0 General standards.
In all areas of special flood hazards, the following standards are required:
1. Anchoring.
a. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent
flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure.
b. All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or
lateral movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood
damage. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame
S Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
• Flood Hazard Regulations
77
• ties to ground anchors (reference FEMA's "Manufactured Home Installation in Flood Hazard
Areas" Guidebook for additional techniques).
2. Construction materials and methods.
a. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials
and utility equipment resistant to flood damage.
b. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using
methods and practices that minimize flood damage.
c. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air-conditioning equipment and other
service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water
from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding.
3. Utilities.
a. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or
eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the system;
b. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or
eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharge from the systems into
floodwaters; and
c. Onsite waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or
contamination from them during flooding.
d. Proposed water wells shall be located on high ground that is not located within a
special flood hazard area.
4. Subdivision proposals.
a. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage;
b. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas,
electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage;
c. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to
flood damage;
d. Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from
another authoritative source, it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed
developments which contain at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres (whichever is less); and
e. Subdivision approval should depict or state what portions of the development are
within special flood hazard areas.
5. Review of building permits. Where elevation data is not available either through the
flood insurance study or from another authoritative source, applications for building permits
shall be reviewed by both the issuing department and department of public works to assure that
proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a
local judgment and engineering practices and includes use of historical data, high-water marks,
photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two (2) feet above
grade in these zones may result in higher insurance rates.
14.09.1790 Specific standards.
In all areas of special flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been provided as set
forth in KCC 14.09.060 or KCC 14.09.140, the following provisions are required:
1. Residential construction.
9 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
• Flood Hazard Regulations
78
• a. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have
the lowest floor, including basement, elevated one (1) foot or more above base flood elevation.
b. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited,
or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by
allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either
be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the
following minimum criteria:
(1) A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than one
(1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed areas subject to flooding
shall be provided.
(2) The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above grade.
(3) Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters.
2. Nonresidential construction. New construction and substantial improvement of any
commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor,
including basement, elevated one (1) foot or more above the level of the base flood elevation; or,
together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall:
a. Be floodproofed so that below one (1) foot above the base flood level the structure is
watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water;
b. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads
and effects of buoyancy;
c. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and
• methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting
provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design,
specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the official as set forth in KCC
14.09.150(2).
d. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not floodproofed, must meet the same
standards for space below the lowest floor as described in subsection(1)(b) of this section.
e. Applicants floodproofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood
insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one (1) foot below the floodproofed level
(e.g., a building floodproofed to one (1) foot above the base flood level will be rated as at the
base flood level).
3. Critical facility. Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent possible,
located outside the limits of the base floodplain. Construction of new critical facilities shall be
permissible within the base floodplain if no feasible alternative site is available. Critical
facilities constructed within the base floodplain shall have the lowest floor elevated to three (3)
feet or more above the level of the base flood elevation at the site. Floodproofing and sealing
measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be displaced by or released into
floodwaters. Access routes elevated to or above the level of the base floodplain shall be
provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible.
4. Manufactured homes. All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved
within zones Al-30, AH, and AE on the community's FIRM shall be elevated on a permanent
foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is one (1) foot or more above the
10 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
79
• base flood elevation; and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system in
accordance with the provisions of KCC 14.09.170 (1)(b).
5. Recreational Vehicles. Recreational vehicles placed on sites are required to meet all
applicable provisions of Kent City Code. If allowed by code, recreational vehicles are required
to either:
a. Be on-site for fewer than 180 days;
b. Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or jacking system, attached
to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and have no permanently
attached additions; or
c. Meet the requirements of 14.09.180(1) above and the elevation and anchoring
requirements for manufactured homes.
6. Drainage around structures. Adequate drainage paths are required around structures on
slopes to guide waters around and away from proposed structures.
14.09.1890 Floodways.
Within the floodway of the areas of special flood hazard, the following provisions apply:
1. Prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and
other development unless certification by a registered professional engineer or architect is
provided demonstrating that encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels during
the occurrence of the base flood discharge.
® 2. Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated
floodways, except for: repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not
increase the ground floor area; and repairs, reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the
cost of which does not exceed fifty(50)percent of the market value of the structure either,before
the repair, reconstruction, or repair is started, or if the structure has been damaged, and is being
restored, before the damage occurred. Work done on structures to comply with existing health,
sanitary, or safety codes or to structures identified as historic places shall not be included in the
fifty(50)percent determination.
3. If subsection (1) above is satisfied, all new construction and substantial improvements
shall comply with all applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of KCC 14.09.170.
14.09.200190 Wetlands management.
To the extent possible adverse impacts to wetlands should be avoided as such:
1. Proposals for development within base floodplains shall be reviewed by both issuing
departments and department of public works for their possible impacts on wetlands located
within the floodplain.
2. Development activities in or around wetlands shall not negatively affect public safety,
health, and welfare by disrupting the wetlands' ability to reduce flood and storm drainage.
3. Assistance from the United States Army Corps of Engineers or State Department of
Ecology shall be sought in identifying wetland areas.
14.09.240200 Standards for shallow flooding areas (AO zones).
11 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
is Flood Hazard Regulations
80
i
Shallow flooding areas appear on FIRM's as AO zones with depth designations. The base flood
depths in these zones range from one (1) to three (3) feet above ground where a clearly defined
channel does not exist, or where the path of flooding is unpredictable and where velocity flow
may be evident. Such flooding is usually characterized as sheet flow. In these areas, the
following provisions apply:
1. New construction and substantial improvements of residential structures within AO zones
shall have the lowest floor(including basement) elevated above the highest grade adjacent to the
building, one (1) foot or more above the depth number specified on the FIRM (at least two (2)
feet if no depth number is specified).
2. New construction and substantial improvements or nonresidential structures within AO
zones shall either:
a. Have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated above the highest adjacent grade
of the building site, one (1) foot or more above the depth number specified on the FIRM (at least
two (2) feet if no depth number is specified); or
b. Together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, be completely flood- proofed to
or above that level so that any space below that level is watertight with walls substantially
impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components having the capability of
resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy. If this method is used,
compliance shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect as in KCC
14.09.180(2).
3. Require adequate drainage paths around structures on slopes to guide floodwaters around
and away from proposed structures.
14.09.2120 Appeals.
The decision of the department of public works to approve condition or disapprove a permit or
license in a flood hazard area may be appealed to the land use hearing examiner. The requested
permit or license shall not be issued by a city department during the appeal period. The
following procedures apply to appeals for the decision of the department of public works to
approve, condition or deny proposals within a flood hazard area:
1. Written notice of appeal shall be filed with the department of public works within ten
(10) days from the date of the decision which aggrieves the appealing party. A fee of twenty-
five dollars ($25) shall be paid at the time of filing the written appeal. The appeal will not be
accepted unless accompanied by full payment.
2. All notices of appeal shall state in full the decision appealed and the reasons why the
appealed decision should be reversed or modified.
3. All appeals so filed shall be heard by the hearing examiner and a determination by the
examiner made within thirty (30) days from the closing date of the hearing.
4. At least seven (7) days before the appeal hearing, the department of public works will
provide the hearing examiner, the appellant, and any other person expressing written interest in
the application or appeal a copy of the decision which is being appealed.
5. In passing upon such applications, the hearing examiner shall consider all technical
evaluations, all relevant factors and standards and the criteria specified in this chapter and
applicable state regulations.
12 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
• Flood Hazard Regulations
81
• 6. The hearing examiner shall prepare a written report and decision containing findings and
conclusions which show how its decision implements the purposes of this chapter and is
consistent with the criteria, standards, and limitations of this chapter.
7. The decision of the land use hearing examiner shall be final and conclusive unless, within
fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision, an aggrieved party
obtains a writ of certiorari from superior court for the purpose of review of the action taken.
14.09.220 Variances
Variances shall be completed in accordance with those provisions identified in the City of Kent
Critical Area Regualtions found in Kent City Code Title 11.
SECTION 3.
SECTION 4. — Savin zs. The existing Chapter of the Kent City Code,
which is repealed and replaced by this ordinance, shall remain in full force and effect until the
effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 5. —Severability. If any one or more section, subsections, or sentences
of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and
effect.
SECTION 6. — E/eective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force
(thirty (30) days from and after passage) OR (five (5) days from and after passage and
publication) as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
13 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
. Flood Hazard Regulations
82
•
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of 12003.
APPROVED: day of 12003.
PUBLISHED: day of 12003.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the
City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as
hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P:N0,i10rdi.e114.U9RmsiomAm
14 Revisions to Chapter 14.09—
Flood Hazard Regulations
83
`� KENT
ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
Adoption Document(s): EIS
Description of current proposal: The action proposed by the City consists of the adoption of updated
development regulations to designate and protect critical areas in conformance with the requirements of
the Growth Management Act. The update consolidates and revises regulations that are currently
dispersed in multiple chapters and sections of the Kent City Code, and adds regulations for additional
critical areas. The critical areas ordinance addresses the following resources: wetlands, fish and wildlife
habitat,geologic hazard areas, frequently flooded areas and critical aquifer recharge areas.
Proponent: City of Kent
Location of proposal: The proposal is a city-wide action.
Title of document(s)being adopted: City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact
Statement Draft(July 1994)and Final (January 1995)—Prepared by the City of Kent.
Description of document(or portion)being adopted: The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS is
being adopted in total. This document evaluated three different land use alternatives for the city. The
analysis evaluated the type and range of impacts to the environment associated with each land use
alternative and associated development regulations.
If the document has been challenged (WAC 197-11-630). please describe: The document was not
challenged.
Document availability: This document is available for review at the City of Kent Planning Services
office,220 Fourth Ave S,Kent,WA 98032 from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
We have identified and adopted this document as being appropriate for this proposal after independent
review. Along with the addendum, this document meets our environmental review needs for the current
proposal and will accompany the proposal to the decisionmaker(s).
Name of agency adopting the document:City of Kent
Contact person/Responsible Official: Kim Marousek,AICP(253)856-5436
Principal Planner
City of Kent Community Development Dept.
220 Fourth Ave South
/f Kent,WA 98032
Date: Signature
KMjm\S\Permit\Plan\Env\2004\CAOadoption doc
84
0 This page intentionally left blank.
•
85
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
• Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
Phone:253-856-5454
KEN T Fax: 253-856-6454
WASHINGTON
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA 98032-5895
CITY OF KENT
ADDENDUM TO THE KENT COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT(#ENV-93-51)
CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE ADOPTION
Responsible Official: Kim Marousek
SCOPE
The action proposed by the City consists of adoption of updated development regulations to designate and
protect critical areas in conformance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA). The
update consolidates and revises regulations that are currently dispersed in multiple chapters and sections
of the Kent Municipal Code, and adds regulations for additional critical areas.
The critical areas ordinance(CAO)addresses the following resources:
• Wetlands,
• • Streams;
• Fish&Wildlife Habitat;
• Geologic Hazards;
• Frequently Flooded Areas;
• Aquifer Recharge Areas
The ordinance contains standards and requirements to protect critical areas. These regulations and
standards would work to mitigate the potential impacts of future development upon these resources.
The proposal would not in itself authorize development, but would provide a framework of regulations
within which future development would occur consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal
may be characterized as a mitigation measure designed to protect critical areas and would not cause
significant adverse environmental impacts.
The proposed CAO is organized into the following major sections:
Part A. Procedural &Administrative Provisions
1. Purpose and Intent: Describes the functions of critical areas and the City's objectives in
protecting them.
2. Definitions: Defines key terms used in the ordinance.
3. Regulated Activities: Defines the broad range of activities that are subject to the
ordinance's regulations.
86
ENV-2003-26
City of Kent Critical Areas Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan EIS-Addendum
4. Exernmions: Describes a limited number of activities which are exempt from the CAO
because they would not, by their nature, cause significant impacts to critical areas, or
because they area exempt by other provisions of state law (e.g., legally vested projects), or
provide valuable educational or recreational opportunities.
5. Critical Area Maus: Describes the City's mapping of critical areas and how those maps
will be used. In general, the definitions of critical areas and their identification to the field
will determine where critical areas exist and are located,not the referenced inventory maps.
6. Relationship to Other Regulations: Notes that the CAO applies as an overlay and in
addition to other development regulations. In the event of conflicting regulations, the ones
that provide the greater protection to critical areas will apply.
7. Critical Area Review Process: Describes how the City will integrate review of critical
areas into its development review process and not create a separate or redundant process.
This section also describes application and report requirements.
8. Procedural Provisions: Describes how the ordinance will be interpreted, penalties for
violations and enforcement, and how decisions may be appealed.
9. Reasonable Use: Provides a process to ensure that the regulations do not result in property
owners being denied all reasonable use of their property.
10 Variances: Provides a review process and criteria by which the Hearing Examiner (or the
• administrator in some cases)can grant relief from strict application of the regulations where
there are unique physical conditions present.
11. Mitigation Standards. Criteria and Plan Requirements: Describes what"mitigation"means
and how it should be achieved, and how and when impacts are to be avoided before other
forms of mitigation may be used.
12. Mitigation Monitoring and Contingency: Requires preparation of plans containing
specified elements for mitigation projects.
Part B. Regulations&Standards
13. Wetlands: Categorizes wetlands according to type, size, function and value; describes how
delineations are to be performed; specifies minimum wetland buffers; describes situations
in which increased or decreased buffers may be required or permitted, respectively;
specifies uses permitted within buffers; provisions to ensure that wetland impacts are
avoided and/or otherwise mitigated; and provides standards for compensatory mitigation.
14-1 Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas - Streams: Categorizes streams according to
type, size and the presence of certain fish species; establishes minimum buffer widths;
describes situations in which increased or decreased buffers may be required or permitted,
respectively; describes what activities are permitted to occur in buffers; contains standards
for buffer enhancement, which may be required or proposed; includes standards for the
alteration of streams; and describes mitigation requirements.
14-2 Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas -- Wildlife Habitat: Categorizes the types of
wildlife habitat regulated by the ordinance; establishes the standards and process that will
be used to establish buffer areas and setbacks; describes when habitat alterations will be
permitted; and provides performance standards for mitigation.
Page 2 of 6
87
ENV-2003-26
City of Kent Critical Areas Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan EIS-Addendum
15. Geologic Hazard Areas - Landslide, Erosion. Seismic and Volcanic Hazards: Describes
the criteria for allowing alteration or development of geologic hazard areas; establishes
setbacks; requires geotechnical reports to ensure safety.
16. Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas: Describes how critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs)
are identified, mapped and rated; requires preparation of a technical report for certain
activities that could affect groundwater; provides requirements and performance standards
for activities located in CARAs, and prohibits certain uses involving wastes or byproducts
that could pollute water resources.
17. Flood Hazard Areas: References the City's adopted flood regulations contained in Kent
City Code 14.09
18. Severability: A standard legal provision that states the ordinance may apply differently to
differently situated property owners.
Attachments to the ordinance contain report requirements for critical area studies, and lists of
wildlife species expected to be found in the City.
BACKGROUND
A. Growth Management Act Critical Area Requirements
The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes a framework for local planning to manage growth.
The GMA's planning goals identify key concerns (e.g. reducing sprawl, protecting the environment,
providing services and facilities cost-effectively, involving citizens in decisions, etc.) that must be
addressed in local plans. The GMA also requires that local jurisdictions adopt development
regulations to implement the policies of their Comprehensive Plans. More specifically, the GMA
requires that jurisdictions adopt regulations to protect critical areas and to review and amend these
regulations as necessary when they revise their comprehensive plans or development regulations
(RCW 36.70A.060(2) & (3)). The City of Kent is updating its critical areas regulations to meet this
requirement, and to include the "best available science" in its regulations as required by RCW
36.70A.172.
B. Kent Research,Evaluation &Review Process
The City began its process for revising its critical area regulations by evaluating, with the assistance
of a team of technical consultants, it's existing regulations and the requirements of the GMA,
including the statute and implementing rules [the BAS rule (WAC 365-195-900), and minimum
guidelines WAC 365-190-040 through 080)]. It also examined the range of scientific information
applicable to various critical areas. This review began with the Citations of Recommended Sources
of Best Available Science (2002), and included numerous publications of agencies with expertise,
such as Ecology and DNR. This review of the existing framework of laws and policies influencing
critical area decisions was documented in an issue paper(Regulatory Audit and Gap Analysis,August
2004). Subsequently, the City has documented its review of best available science literature (Best
Available Science Review, September, 2004). Discussions during this research have included
consideration of a wide range of regulatory options and standards, and have involved public review
and comment.
A notice of intent to adopt development regulations, and a copy of the draft ordinance, was circulated
for comment to CTED, as required by the GMA. Copies of the draft ordinances were also posted on
the City's website and provided to interested parties and property owners for review and comment.
Page 3 of 6
88
ENV-2003-26
City of Kent Critical Areas Ordinance
• Comprehensive Plan EIS-Addendum
A public workshop was held on July 22, 2004, from 3-7 PM. Interested citizens were provided an
opportunity to ask questions of City staff and consultants and to learn about the City's draft
ordinance.
Workshops were held with the Kent Land Use and Planning Board on May 29, 2004 and August 9,
2004. A public hearing is scheduled for September 13, 2004, at which time public testimony will be
taken. Following these hearings, a recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for their
consideration.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW—SCOPE OF EIS ADDENDUM
Kent has been following a process of phased environmental review in its adoption and updating of the
Comprehensive Plan and development regulations to meet the requirements of the GMA. This EIS
Addendum has been prepared for the review and use by agencies, interested citizens and elected officials
consistent with SEPA and applicable rules(WAC 197-11) .
Non-Project Document. Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) on comprehensive plans and
regulations are referred to in the state SEPA rules as "non-project" or programmatic documents (WAC
197-11-704). Their purpose is to help the public and decision-makers identify and evaluate the
environmental effects of alternative policies, implementation approaches and similar choices related to
future growth. While plans and regulations do not directly result in alteration of the physical
environment, they do provide a framework within which future growth and development—and resulting
environmental impacts—will occur.
Phased Environmental Review. Kent has been conducting phased environmental review of its GMA-
mandated planning actions over the course of several years. Consistent with SEPA rules (WAC 197-11-
060[5]),phasing of environmental review helps decision makers and the public to focus on environmental
issues that are clearly defined and ready for decision,while deferring others where additional information
is needed to bring them into sharper focus and to permit an informed decision. Phased environmental
review generally progresses from decisions that are very broad and general in scope (conceptually and
geographically) to those that are narrower in scale. Each step builds on and adds to prior information
without duplicating what has gone before. Phased review may also be structured to track the sequence
and timing of GMA actions(WAC 197-11-228[2][b]).
Prior phases of environmental review included preparation of Draft and Final EISs for the City's
Comprehensive Plan (1994 and 1995, respectively). The EIS identified a broad range of environmental
impacts associated with future growth in the City that could affect soils,plants and animals,wetlands and
streams. The EIS also identified a variety of actions — including land use planning and development
controls--that could mitigate anticipated impacts. The Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element,Natural
Resource Goals and Policies incorporate numerous provisions for designating and protecting
This Addendum represents another phase in planning and environmental review. It was prepared to
provide additional information about the current proposal and to assist decision-makers in making
informed decisions about how the City will achieve its planning goals and meet its GMA responsibilities.
SEPA Compliance
According to SEPA rules, an addendum provides new information about a proposal or impacts evaluated
in a prior environmental document, but does not substantially change the prior analysis (WAC 1917-1 I-
600[4][c]). This addendum has been prepared to provide additional information about the content of
Kent's Critical Areas Ordinance,which are intended to mitigate impacts and to comply with provisions of
Page 4 of 6
89
ENV-2003-26
City of Kent Critical Areas Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan EIS-Addendum
state law. The analysis does not significantly change the prior environmental analysis or identify
significant new impacts as a result of the proposed action.
The Comprehensive Plan's policies are intended to accomplish a variety of GMA-mandated
responsibilities, including protection of critical areas, and to mitigate the impacts of future growth. The
EIS for the Kent Comprehensive Plan evaluated the environmental impacts associated with adoption of
policies and land use designations. This analysis included the impacts associated with future growth and
development that would occur to water resources, plants and animals, and geology. These impacts
generally encompass the critical areas addressed in Kent's proposed CAO.
In general, environmental impacts associated with regulations that are consistent with and implement the
Comprehensive Plan's policies and land use designations will be the same as the effects of the policies
themselves. To the extent that the proposed action is consistent with and implements the policies and
designations of the Comprehensive Plan,therefore, no additional or new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the EIS for the Comprehensive Plan will occur. Relevant policies are discussed below.
Kent's Comprehensive Plan contains policies relevant to critical areas. Substantive policies relevant to the
CAO,contained in the plan's Land Use Element, include the following:
LU-22.1 Provide incentives for environmental protection.
LU-25.2 Provide property owners with information about hazards and critical areas. Require
developers to provide site-specific information about critical areas.
LU-25.3 Indemnify the City from damages resulting from development in constrained areas.
Require that developers provide accurate and valid environmental information to the City.
LU-26.1 Maintain and increase the quantity and quality of wetlands.
LU-26.2 Base wetland protection measures on functions and values, and the effects of on-site
and off-site activities.
LU-26.4 Maintain rivers and streams in their natural state. Rehabilitate degraded channels and
banks in conjunction with new development.
LU-26.5 Evaluate the adequacy of existing building setback and stream setback requirements in
relation to goals for water resource,fisheries and wildlife resource protection.
LU-26.7 Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater used for public water supplies.
LU-26.9 Update critical area regulations in accordance with GMA.
LU-26.10 Protect wildlife habitat and preserve open space corridors.
LU-28 Regulate development in steep slope and landslide hazard areas to prevent harm,protect
public health and safety,and save sensitive areas.
The proposed CAO would be consistent with the implemented Comprehensive Plan's relevant policies.
The definitions and maps, for example,provide information about the location of critical areas(LU-25.2).
The ordinance also contains detailed reporting requirements to ensure that critical areas are identified and
evaluated. The ordinance's provisions for geologic hazards include indemnification provisions (LU-
25.3). The CAO's wetland provisions are intended to achieve no net loss of wetlands, area based on
functions and values, and require mitigation for impacts from on-site and off-site activities (LU-
26.1/26.2). Much of Kent's streams do not exist in their natural state and many have been degraded; the
CAO includes requirements for buffer and habitat enhancement(LU-26.4). The process for updating the
CAO has included evaluation of appropriate buffer widths including the best available science (LU-26.5);
the draft CAO generally increases buffer widths relative to existing regulations. The CAO includes
regulations to protect critical aquifer recharge areas and drinking water supplies (LU-26.7). The
ordinance would also require site-specific critical area studies to determine the limits of safe and
appropriate development(LU-28).
It is possible that adoption and enforcement of the proposed regulations could limit the development
capacity of some parcels of land, due to larger buffer requirements or critical area mitigation
Page 5 of 6
90
ENV-2003-26
City of Kent Critical Areas Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan EIS-Addendum
requirements. A reduced land supply could, in turn, make it relatively more difficult to accomplish other,
non-resource related GMA goals, such as accommodating housing and projected population at higher
densities, or encouraging economic development. The City has considered these multiple goals and the
best available science in developing its CAO.
Working with biologists and engineers, the City has applied both science-based information and non-
science based information to help make some decisions on CAO provisions. For example, existing land
use data (i.e., GIS maps) for the valley were produced to show the location of existing and vested
buildings and impervious surfaces adjacent to the Valley Creek System (i.e. portions of Mill Creek,
Springbrook Creek and Garrison Creek). This indicated that the area adjacent to these systems are
substantially developed and that setbacks are 50 feet or less. The City used science-based inventories and
analysis to identify stream habitat conditions. This indicated that existing buffers are degraded in quality.
A review of scientific literature identified that relevant stream functions (e.g., temperature) could be
protected through the use of buffers of varying widths (e.g., 25 feet or 50 feet). The proposed stream
buffer and enhancement program proposed for the valley creek systems reflects this variety of
information: it would protect and enhance fisheries habitat and existing degraded vegetation would be
enhanced. It also reflects the reality of the well established land use pattern. Although the proposal may
not include the largest buffers found in the literature, what is proposed would be effective and is within
the range considered to be the "best available science." This is generally the case for wetland buffers as
well. Implementation of the CAO,therefore,would not result in an adverse impact to critical areas.
DECISION
The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS, draft and final,provided extensive analysis with regard to the
• environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. The mitigating
conditions included and anticipated the adoption of development regulations that support the
Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. The City has reviewed this proposal and has found it to be
consistent with the range, types and magnitude of impacts and corresponding mitigation outlined in the
Comprehensive Plan EIS. The proposal implements many of the goals and policies contained within the
Comprehensive Plan.
This analysis and subsequent addendum did not identify any new significant impacts associated with this
proposal. Therefore, this addendum, combined with the Comprehensive Plan EIS adequately evaluates
any potential adverse environmental impacts. As part of a phased approach, subsequent site-specific
development proposals will be required to show consistency with appropriate environmental regulations
as well as the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance. Based upon this analysis, a separate threshold
determination is not required for this action.
A 4 tqm
Dated: September 3,2004 Signatur
Kim ro ek,AIC ,Responsible Official
KM Im\\S\Permit\Plan\Env\2004\CAOaddendum doc
Page 6 of 6