HomeMy WebLinkAbout1605RESOLUTION NO. I It? Ob
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, implementing enhanced
review procedures under the State Environmental Policy
Act in response to the listing of endangered, threatened,
and candidate species under the Endangered Species
Act.
WHEREAS, the City of Kent is covered by a complex network of
permanent and intermittent streams that collectively form significant portions of the
drainage basins of the Green-Duwamish and Cedar River basins; and
WHEREAS, because of shifting priorities, many prior developments
within the City have had the impact of degrading and otherwise adversely affecting
these streams and river drainage environments; and
WHEREAS, these degraded environments, both within the City of
Kent and within the western Washington region, have also degraded fisheries and
fisheries habitat, impacting the future viability of certain species; and
WHEREAS, on May 24, 1999, the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) formalized its listing of the Puget Sound Chinook Salmon as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA); and
WHEREAS, on or about May 24, 1999, NMFS also identified Coho
Salmon as a candidate for listing as a threatened species under the ESA; and
Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
WHEREAS, on December 1, 1999, the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) formally listed Bull Trout in Puget Sound as a threatened species
under the ESA; and
WHEREAS, on January 9, 2001, the USFWS further announced that it
is proposing to protect Dolly Varden char in the coastal Puget Sound region of
Washington under the "similarity of appearance" provision of the ESA, because Dolly
Varden so closely resemble Bull Trout; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife,
King County's Department of Natural Resources, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and
City of Kent staff and consultants have all documented use by Chinook salmon of
various areas of streams within the City of Kent. These streams include the lower
reaches of Mill Creek, Mullen Slough, Midway Creek, and Springbrook Creek; and
WHEREAS, Bull Trout are known to use the lower reaches of the
Duwamish River, which is part of the Green-Duwamish River basin; and
WHEREAS, a majority of the rivers, streams, and tributaries of the
Cedar and Green-Duwamish River basins in the City of Kent constitute viable
salmonid habitat; and
WHEREAS, salmonids are defined as members of the family
Salmonidae which includes salmon, trout, char and whitefish; and
WHEREAS, the entirety of these stream and river systems within the
City of Kent form an interconnected habitat critical for the survival of these salmonid
species. For example, the lower and middle reaches of these rivers and streams may
provide active habitat for mature adults; the middle and upper reaches of these rivers
and streams may provide habitat for spawners and fingerlings in juvenile phases; and
the further reaches of these streams may also form a complex assemblage of surface
2 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
water drainage channels, springs, streams, and wetlands that determine the overall
quality of the habitat for salmonid species. In addition, although not directly used by
these salmonid species, the upper reaches of these intermittent and permanent streams
have a significant impact on water temperature, water quality, and food sources for
these affected salmonid species; and
WHEREAS, Puget Sound Chinook are regarded as a large river system
species, and Coho are associated with smaller streams. As a result, in many areas
throughout the Green-Duwamish and Cedar watersheds, their various habitat needs
commonly overlap at different life stages. Because of the complex interconnectivity
among these various riverine environments and because of the overlapping habitat
concerns, it is appropriate to consider both listed and candidate salmonid species as
the City addresses impacts of the Endangered Species Act on its land use and
development practices, to the extent those practices affect this watershed environment;
and
WHEREAS, the condition of stream buffers, or riparian areas, has a
direct influence on the quality and quantity of insect life, water temperature, and
dissolved oxygen upon which all species of salmonids depend. Further, the conditions
of these buffers directly affects the amount and type of vegetation along these streams,
all of which have an interrelated and cumulative impact on the quality of these riparian
environments. The condition of upstream environments has a direct effect on
downstream environments and ultimately impacts the water quality of the Green,
Duwamish, and Cedar Rivers; and
WHEREAS, because past development practices resulted in ineffective
management of these riparian areas, widespread problems currently exist related to
temperature, water quality (in particular, dissolved oxygen), and insect life throughout
the watershed; and
3 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
WHEREAS, the condition of these riparian buffer areas is recognized
as a critical limiting factor to salmon habitat quality and, ultimately, to salmon
survival; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kent has two separate regulatory frameworks
that establish development setbacks from watercourses. In the "Soos Creek Basin
Overlay Area," an area including the City's Meridian Annexation Area and all lands
annexed after that date, the City adopted King County setback standards, which
provide greater buffer areas (from 25' to 100', depending upon the significance of the
watercourse). Elsewhere in the City, predominantly in the Green River valley, the
established setback requirements are less stringent (from 10' to 50'). As a result, a
greater need exists to address development impacts on salmonids in areas subject to
the less stringent setback requirements. Accordingly, the focus of the City's review
under this resolution will be in a 200' management zone, measured from the ordinary
high water mark, or if that cannot be determined, the top ofbank, of all rivers, streams,
creeks, ditches and tributaries located on the City's Hazard Area Inventory map.
WHEREAS, the enforcement of the Endangered Species Act to protect
these candidate, threatened, and endangered species in western Washington makes it
appropriate for the City of Kent, at this time, to develop interim land use and
development regulatory procedures, under the authority of the State Environmental
Policy Act, to provide for further analysis and review of impacts to salmonid habitat
on all new development and redevelopment proposals; and
WHEREAS, other planning and regulatory concerns also make it
appropriate, at this time, to revise land use and development standards. Since 1999,
the City of Kent has actively participated in a regional cost sharing proposal to
develop Salmon Conservation Plans in the Green-Duwamish watershed and the Cedar
River watersheds. These Salmon Conservation Plans are directed toward the recovery
of multiple species of salmonids. These plans utilize a "shared strategy," which
reflects a cooperative effort among federal agencies, tribal concerns, the State of
4 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
Washington, and environmental and business interests in the western Washington
regiOn. Their purpose is to effectively coordinate salmon recovery planning
throughout the State of Washington, embracing a multiple species recovery plan; and
WHEREAS, as a requirement of the Federal Clean Water Act, the
amount of pollution that must be reduced to attain Federal Clean Water quality
standards must be determined. Water bodies that are not in compliance with these
standards have been identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Numerous stream reaches throughout the City of Kent are listed as inadequate for both
temperature and dissolved oxygen. The lower Green River and the Duwamish River
are also listed for temperature. The Washington State Department of Ecology is
developing a program to reduce pollution and improve water temperatures that will
also regulate development practices in riparian environments within the City of Kent;
and
WHEREAS, gtven the context of all the proceeding regulatory,
development, and natural history, it is now appropriate to provide the following
interim review procedures to evaluate impacts to salmonids from proposed
development and redevelopment projects within the City of Kent; NOW
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Recitals Incorporated. The foregoing recitals are
incorporated into the body of this Resolution.
SECTION 2. Purpose. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide
interim protection to listed salmonids and their habitat within the City of Kent. It is
anticipated that these interim measures will be superceded by more formal changes to
the City's codes. These changes, however, will take one to two years to fully
5 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
implement, and the City has a compelling interest to provide interim protection to
listed and candidate species and their habitat.
SECTION 3. Areas Affected-Management Zones. These policies
and procedures will apply to all properties, projects or portions of projects that fall
within the 200 ft management zone measured from the ordinary high water mark, or if
that cannot be determined, the top of bank of all rivers, streams, creeks, ditches and
tributaries located on the City's Hazard Area Inventory map. The City's SEPA
Responsible Official may also apply these policies and procedures to major
development proposals within the City's Soos Creek Basin Overlay area, if it appears
that the development proposal may impact the 200 foot management zone adjacent to
all rivers, streams, ditches and creeks within the Soos Creek Basin Overlay area.
These policies and procedures will apply, even though the affected river, stream,
creek, ditch or tributary may be intermittent or permanent and even though the course
of the river, stream, ditch or creek is in a natural, altered, or manmade condition.
These policies and procedures, however, will not apply to minor development
proposals that do not impact the 200 foot management zones (e.g., and without
limitation, certain changes in use, interior tenant improvements, above-ground storage
tanks (1200 gallons or under) that involve little or no paving, etc.)
SECTION 4. Procedure. This process will be included as part of the
City's State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") review under the City's substantive
SEP A authority.
SECTION 5. Fisheries Study Required. Applicants will submit a
concise Fisheries Study that evaluates the likelihood of construction and/or operational
aspects of the project that may have adverse affects on salmonid habitat adjacent to the
project site. The Fisheries Study will be completed and submitted with the SEPA
Checklist for all projects that occur within the described management zone. The
Fisheries Study shall be prepared by a qualified engineer, hydrologist, biologist or
geomorphologist who understands the requirements for properly functioning
6 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
conditions for Bull Trout, Chinook and Coho salmon. The consultant must
demonstrate such expertise to the satisfaction of the City of Kent, which may require
the submittal of resumes, work examples or other information demonstrating
professional expertise on relevant fisheries issues. An annotated outline that describes
the Fisheries Study contents is provided below for guidance:
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION -Identify the name of the applicant, date of
submission, property address, tax parcel number and project name.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Location of the Project and Action Areas -Provide a vicinity
map (with its own north arrow) which clearly shows the
location of the development parcel with respect to public streets
and other parcels and developments. The map should identify
the locations of staging and work corridors associated with the
project The action area includes the project area and all areas
surrounding the development parcel up to where effects will no
longer be felt.
2.2 Project Description -Provide a narrative description of the
proposed project and the project purpose. Describe the
construction methods and timing of construction to be
employed in building the project in sufficient detail to allow the
evaluation of potential impacts. The objective is to identify
both temporary and permanent actions that could affect
salmonid species or critical habitat. Consider actions such as,
but not limited to, vegetation removal, temporary or permanent
increases in noise level, temporary or permanent water quality
impacts associated with sedimentation, turbidity and/or erosion,
temporary or permanent channel modifications, temporary or
permanent hydrological or hydraulic alterations. The project
description should include secondary impacts such as access
roads, power lines, etc.
3.0 HABITAT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Existing Environmental Conditions
3.1.1 Biota -List all federally listed or proposed species
present in the vicinity of the project. Provide the species
7 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
listing status (threatened or endangered). Describe how
the listed species is currently utilizing the action area,
such as spawning, breeding, rearing, over-wintering, or
travel corridor.
3 .1.2 Habitat -Describe the present condition of the habitat
elements essential for the listed or proposed species.
For a list of habitat elements essential for listed or
proposed salmonids in freshwater habitats, refer to the
Pathways and Indicator developed by the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in "A Guide to
Biological Assessments (NMFS, March 1999), and the
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) document
entitled "A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered
Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or
Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulation
Watershed Scale" (USFW, February 1998).
3.1.3 Other Sensitive Areas -Identify and describe all other
sensitive areas as defined by the Kent City Code and
reference all other environmental reports completed for
the project.
4.0 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION
4.1 Effects Analysis -These sections should describe the direct,
indirect, and secondary effects of the development project on
ESA listed or proposed species and their habitat. Direct effects
are defined as effects that may result from the project that
would directly affect the species. Indirect effects are effects
that may result from the project that would occur later in time.
4.1.1 Construction Disturbances -Describe any direct or
indirect effects resulting from project construction
activities within the action area. The evaluation of
construction effects should consider the construction
sequencing, site preparation, equipment used, materials
used, work corridor, staging areas and equipment wash
outs, stockpiling areas, running of equipment during
construction, soil stabilization, clean-up and re-
vegetation, project timing, and the duration of
construction.
4.1.2 Habitat -Describe any alterations to essential habitat
identified for the ESA listed or proposed species within
the action area. Include habitat alterations to essential
8 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
features such as spawning sites, over-wintering areas,
travel corridors, loss of prey or food sources, water
quality and quantity, and riparian vegetation. Address
the timing of disturbances to habitat relative to the life
history of the listed or proposed species within the
action area.
4.1.3 Biota -Describe any direct or indirect effects of the
development project on listed or proposed species
within the action area. Consider impacts to both
individuals and the population. Describe any project
effects relative to the life history of the species that may
be affected.
4.1.4 Net Effects of Action -Provide a summary of the
project impacts with a concluding statement for each
listed or proposed species of effect. Effect
determinations should be selected from the following
three categories:
No Effect (NE) -no effect whatsoever for the listed
species or its required habitat;
May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA) -
effects to the listed species of required habitat are
insignificant. This determination would be made for
activities that have only a beneficial effect with no short-
or long-term adverse impacts;
Likely to Adversely Affect (LAA)-effects will result in
a short-or long-term adverse effect on the listed species
or their required habitat.
4.2 Conservation/ Mitigation Measures Describe the
conservation/mitigation measures that will be taken to reduce or
eliminate the adverse impacts of the proposed project
development. Include a discussion of how construction
methods and/or site locations have minimized potential impacts
to listed species. These conservation/mitigation measures may
include alterations in the proposed activity such as timing
restrictions or changes in project features or location which are
intended to reduce impacts, or Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that will be implemented. The report shall clearly
propose on, and/or, off-site mitigation measures that will result
in protection of affected species.
9 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
4.2.1 Mitigation Plans -If applicable, conceptual mitigation
plans shall be appended to this report.
5.0 REFERENCES-Provide a listing of the references cited in the report.
SECTION 6. Review and Approval. The City must review and
approve the Fisheries Study prior to issuing an Environmental Decision under SEP A.
In the event it determines that insufficient content exists or that additional content is
necessary to approve the Fisheries Study, the SEP A Responsible Official may require
additional studies or additional supporting information.
SECTION 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph,
sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution is declared unconstitutional or invalid for
any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
resolution.
SECTION 8. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and
prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed.
SECTION 9. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect and be
in force immediately upon its passage.
PASS ED at a regular open public meeting by the City Council of the City
ofKent, Washington, this fg' dayofSeptember, 2001.
CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the City of Kent this It' day of
September, 2001.
J
10 Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA
ATTEST:
........... -
BRENDA JACOBE~, ITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
--/ -/
. -.-..
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No.
/htJ6passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, the If'" day
of September, 2001.
11
-. -.:.:--·
Enhanced Review Procedures -
SEPA&EPA