The following changes are required to comply with the SMA (RCW 90.58) and the SMP guidelines (WAC , Part III);

Transcription

1 ATTACHMENT B - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REQUIRED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, NOVEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO The following changes are required to comply with the SMA (RCW 90.58) and the SMP guidelines (WAC , Part III); ITEM SMP PROVISION TOPIC Bill Format Changes [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE 1 Chapter 1 E.4 pages 1-3 to 1-4 Relationship to other plans and regulations 4. This Shoreline Master Program adopts by reference, subject to the exceptions listed in Chapter 5 C 3.xi, the following City ordinances regulations contained in the Puyallup Municipal Code (PMC) Chapters and 21.07, which are attached to this document: a.pmc (Ord. 3076(December 26, 2014), Environmentally Critical Areas (CAO), as adopted concurrently with this master program s final adoption on [City to insert Month, day], b. PMC (Ord. 2888, 2007) Flood Damage Protection Ordinance (as last amended by Ord. 3031), as in force on the date of this master program s final adoption on [City to insert Month, day], c. Incorporation of any subsequent amendments to the CAO will require an amendment to the master program and approval by the Department of Ecology pursuant to WAC (2)(b). The first change is required for compliance with WAC (2)(a)(ii)(A) - Master Program regulations shall be sufficient in scope and detail to ensure the implementation of the Shoreline Management Act, statewide shoreline management policies in the SMP Guidelines, and local master program policies. The changes clarify that the regulations in effect or concurrently revised at the time of local SMP adoption are incorporated into the SMP by reference. The changes to 4.a and b ensure that all of the city s critical area and flood damage protection regulations are adopted by reference into the SMP. Ordinance No. 3076, passed on November 25, 2014, amended only a portion of the city s critical area ordinance relating to wetland buffers (Section ). Additional changes related to the wetlands ratings system methodology are now recommended for inclusion (see Attachment C) to avoid the need for an immediate limited amendment. Ordinance No adopted in 2007 does not incorporate the most recent changes which occurred in Chapter 1 G page 1-5 Shoreline jurisdiction 1. The SMA applies to all rivers and streams and their associated wetlands downstream from a point where the mean annual flow is 20 cubic feet per second or greater. In the City of Puyallup, this includes the Puyallup River and Clark s Creek (downstream of Maplewood Springs). The SMA also applies to adjacent shorelands located 200 feet from the ordinary high water mark (measured on a horizontal plane) and all wetlands directly connected to or within the 200 area of the rivers and streams listed herein. The addition of (c) is required for consistency with WAC (2)(b) and clarifies that incorporating future changes to regulations adopted by reference requires an SMP amendment and approval by Ecology. This change is required because associated wetlands can occur more than 200 from the ordinary high water mark. The determination of association is a field call, often made during project review. In addition, associated wetlands are included in the first sentence. Associated wetlands are defined in WAC (1) as wetlands which are in proximity to and either influence or are influenced by tidal waters or a lake or stream subject to the Shoreline Management Act. The WAC goes on to define shoreland area designation criteria for streams (WAC (3)) and includes the following criterion: (c) Those wetlands which are in proximity to and either influence or are influenced by the stream. This influence includes but is not limited to one or more of the following: Periodic inundation; location within a flood plain; or hydraulic continuity. August 21,

2 ATTACHMENT B - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REQUIRED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, NOVEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION TOPIC Bill Format Changes [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE 3 Chapter 2 page Chapter 5 C.2 page Chapter 8 I pages 8-9 to 8-10 Definitions Aquaculture Ecological Protection and Critical Areas Permit Revisions Aquaculture means the culture or farming of fish, shellfish, or other aquatic plants and animals. The culture or farming of fishery resources in freshwater areas which may require development of fish hatcheries, rearing pens and structures, as well as use of natural spawning and rearing areas. Activities include the hatching, cultivating, feeding, and raising of fisheries and the maintenance and construction of necessary equipment, buildings and growing areas. 2. Policies i. All shoreline use and development should be carried out in a manner that avoids and minimizes adverse impacts so that the resulting ecological condition does not become worse than the current condition. This means assuring no net loss of ecological functions and processes and protecting critical areas designated in Puyallup Municipal Code (PMC) Chapter that are located in the shoreline. All incorporation by reference to PMC relate to ordinance no. (December 26, 2014, ORD. #3076 and September 26, 2006, ORD. #2859). Shoreline ecological functions that should be protected include hydrology, water quality, riparian habitat, and in-stream habitat functions. Shoreline processes that should be protected include surface and groundwater flow; sediment delivery; water quality; and organics delivery. I. Permit Revisions A permit revision is required whenever an applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms or conditions of a project from that which was approved in the permit. When a revision of a permit is sought, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and text describing the proposed changes in the permit and demonstrating compliance with minimum standards pursuant to WAC Decisions on all permit revisions shall be filed with Ecology. If the revision to the original permit involves a conditional use or variance, the revision shall be submitted to Ecology for approval, approval with conditions, or denial. This change is required in order to assure consistency with the definition in WAC (6). Chapter 1 E.4 speaks to the codes incorporated by reference into the SMP. To ensure internal consistency and to avoid confusion, it is being struck here. (See item 1 above). This change is required for consistency with WAC August 21,

3 The following changes are recommended to clarify elements of the City s updated SMP. ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION 1 Table of Contents 2 Chapter 1 E.2 page Chapter 1 G page Chapter 2 page Chapter 2 page Chapter 2 page Chapter 2 page Chapter 2 page Chapter 4 page Chapter 4 page Chapter 4 2.B Page 4-11 Severability Definitions Definitions Definitions Definitions Definitions TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE Existing policies and shoreline access plans Other access areas Recreation policies Add a table of contents In order to preserve and enhance the shorelines of the City of Puyallup, it is important that all development proposals and modifications occurring in relating to the 200 regulatory shoreline area jurisdiction be evaluated in terms of the Shoreline Master Program, 1. If any provision of this Master Program, or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Master Program, or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected. Any conflicts between the referenced ordinances and the Master Program are resolved in favor of the regulation that is most protective of the shoreline ecological functions. Appurtenance An associated use which is connected to the use and enjoyment of a single-family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water mark and the perimeter of a wetland. Normal appurtenances include a garage; detached accessory buildings over under 200 square feet in floor area; deck. Exempt developments Those development activities set forth in Appendix HD of the Puyallup SMP which are not required to obtain a Substantial Development permit but which must otherwise comply with applicable provisions of the act and the SMP. Permit-exemptions are established in the Shoreline Management Act at WAC , RCW (3)(e), RCW (9), , , and Historic, cultural, scientific and education resources All scientific, archaeological, historic and cultural areas, sites, objects, structures buildings, districts, and objects, landscapes and traces that are or may be of educational, cultural, and scientific value to citizens of the city, state, or nation or affected tribes. Historic site Those buildings, structures, sites, districts, objects, and landscapes that are listed in, or eligible for listed listing on in the National Register of Historic Places, the Washington Heritage Register or the Puyallup National Register of Historic Places. Inland The land area that lies beyond the geographic jurisdiction of this Program or two hundred (200) feet from the ordinary high water mark, whichever is farther. The comprehensive plan recognizes and envisions a comprehensive trail system throughout the city that connects city parks and open space resources. Most of the city s policies regarding shoreline public access are contained within the city s Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan Element. 3 rd paragraph: Of particular interest are both the Melroy Bridge and the Meridian overpass, given their age and state of deterioration. The Meridian bridge under replacement construction which began in 2014 will provide an eight foot (8 ) walkway along one side of the bridge deck for viewing. XIII. Seek to partner with various public agencies, non-profits, advocacy organizations and private landowners, and developers to diversify, increase and enhance public recreational opportunities and facilities along the city s shorelines. 12 Chapter 5 B Historic, Cultural, Goal: page 5-1 Scientific and Educational To prevent the destruction, of or damage, or inappropriate alteration to any cultural and historic August 20, 2015 Page 1 of 8 A table of contents is recommended to assist the user. Recommend deletion to improve clarity and avoid unnecessary confusion. Associated wetlands may be located greater than 200 from the ordinary high water mark. Recommend deleting the last sentence which is not about severability and is already included as F.7 on the previous page. Typographical error. Typographical error Recommended revisions per Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) comment received during state comment period. Recommended revisions per Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation comment received during state comment period. Recommend removal. This term is not used in the SMP. Apparent typographical error Typographical error Typographical error DAHP recommendation to clarify property types associated with the term site.

4 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION 13 Chapter 5 B.2 page Chapter 5 B.3 page Chapter 5 B.3 page Chapter 5 B.3 page Chapter 5 C.3 page Chapter 5 C.3 page Chapter 5 C.3 page 5-5 Resources TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Resources Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Resources Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Resources Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Resources Ecological Protection and Critical Areas Ecological Protection and Critical Areas Ecological Protection and Critical Areas resources including a site, building, district, structure or object having historical, cultural, scientific, or educational value as identified by the appropriate authorities, including affected Indian tribes, and the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 2. Policies i. Work with tribal, federal, state, and local governments as appropriate to maintain an inventory of all known significant local historic, cultural, and archaeological resourcessites. As appropriate, such sites these resources should be protected, preserved, and/or restored for study and/or public education. The location of sensitive historic, cultural and/or archaeological sites should not be disclosed to the general public, consistent with applicable state and federal laws. 3. Regulations i. Significant Cultural, archaeological and historic resources shall be permanently preserved in situ or recovered for scientific study, education and public observation. 3. Regulations ii. Upon receipt of application for a shoreline permit or request for a statement of exemption for development on properties known to contain an historic, cultural or archaeological resource(s), the City shall require a site inspection, evaluation, and written report by a professional archaeologist or historic preservation professional, as applicable, to determine the presence of cultural, historic or archaeological resource(s). The professional should meet qualification standards for cultural resource management professionals promulgated by the National Park Service, published in 36 CFR Part 61, and included on the DAHP approved consultant list. If it is determined that a site has a significant resource(s), shoreline permits or a statement of exemption shall not be issued until protection or mitigation is developed to the satisfaction of both DAHP and affected tribes. 3. Regulations iii. All shoreline permits and statements of exemption shall contain provisions which require developers to immediately stop work and notify the City, the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe if any artifacts of possible historic, cultural, or archaeological value are uncovered during excavations. In such cases, the developer shall be required to provide for a site inspection and evaluation by a professional archaeologist or historic preservation professional, as applicable, in coordination with the state and/or affected tribes. Mitigation for an application affecting a historic site may involve additional or alternative measures that are site and project specific, as required by DAHP and/or affected Tribal Governments. 3. Regulations i. All shoreline development and uses shall be located, designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that results in no net loss of shoreline ecological processes and functions to the greatest extent feasible. Unavoidable impacts to shoreline ecological functions and processes shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this section to esnureensure no net loss of ecological functions. Regulation 3.viii b. After mitigation sequencing has been applied and avoidance of disturbance is minimized to the maximum extent practicable, a stream buffer may be reduced to accommodate a water-dependent use. Regulation 3.viii c. Except as allowed by (d) and (e) below, Wwater-enjoyment, water-related, non-water oriented uses shall not reduce riparian buffer area vegetation, encroach further into a riparian buffer area or impact ecological functions/critical areas unless no other feasible alternative exists to locate outside these areas. Impacts may only be allowed through a shoreline variance permit process. See Chapter 7, Residential Uses, for options for single family residential use expansions in riparian buffer areas. The developed envelope shall be located outside of the prescribed buffer area to the maximum extent DAHP recommendation to remove the word significant because pre-contact archaeological resources are protected in Washington state regardless of significance. In addition, the significance of historic archaeological resources is determined by DAHP. DAHP recommendation (see item 13 above) DAHP comment: No such list exists. Professional archaeologists must meet the definition under RCW (11). City proposed supplemental language in response to DAHP comment suggesting that it be clear in the regulations that mitigation for an application affecting a historic site may involve additional or alternative measures that are site and project specific. Typographical error Typographical error Recommended addition of language for clarification August 20, 2015 Page 2 of 8

5 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE feasible. Mitigation shall be provided in accordance with PMC , and Chapter 5 C.3 page 5-5 Ecological Protection and Critical Areas Regulation 3.viii e. Improvements for shoreline public access as a stand alone use should only be located only in the outer 50% of the riparian buffer area. Exceptions may be made for shoreline recreational uses such as beaches or viewing platforms to encroach further into the buffer area. Replacement of an existing access system. Typographical error 21 Chapter 5 C.3 page 5-5 Ecological Protection and Critical Areas Regulation C.3 x. Any application to develop within the regulatory floodplain of the City s shoreline planning area jurisdiction shall be accompanied by a biological assessment Recommended to improve clarity. The shoreline planning area was a concept used for the Inventory & Characterization. It is not a regulatory description. 22 Chapter 5 C.3 page 5-6 Ecological Protection and Critical Areas Regulation 3.xi xi. (d) In the event an applicant wishes to adjust standards and provisions of the PMC , such application shall be processed as a Shoreline Variance permit process, per the provisions of this Program Typographical correction 23 Chapter 6 F.5 page 6-5 Puyallup River Urban Conservancy 5. Allowed Uses. The following uses and development may be permitted subject to the applicable policies, regulations, and permitting procedures of this Program and the underlying zoning code requirements: a. Agriculture (Allowed only where permitted by the underlying zoning designation of agriculture, recreation and open space (ARO) Recommend correction of formatting errors Recommend the addition of agriculture for clarity. Recommend the addition of non-motorized to clarify allowance. a. Non-motorized Boating facilities and docks* (*see Boating facilities and Docks, 7-7 for conditionally permitted boating facilities and docks) b. Commercial and industrial development 24 Chapter 6 G.5 page 6-7 Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy 5. Allowed Uses. The following uses and development may be permitted subject to the applicable policies, regulations, and permitting procedures of this Program and the underlying zoning code requirements: a. Agriculture when the underlying comprehensive plan land use designation is agriculture overlay (AGO) d. Non-motorized Boating facilities and docks*(*see Boating facilities and Docks, 7-7 for conditionally permitted boating facilities and docks) b.freshwater aaquaculture facilities (hatcheries or hatchery related facilities, including in-stream structures) c. Non-motorized boating or boat access facilities Formatting corrections needed. Recommend deletion of 5.a because the city has clarified that the ARO zone does not exist along Clarks Creek and there is no plan to apply it in the Clarks Creek area. Existing agriculture may continue under the new SMP. Renumber the remaining provisions. Recommend addition of non-motorized to clarify allowance. Recommend deletion of freshwater because it s unnecessary. Recommend deletion of provision 5.c because it s redundant. 25 Chapter 7 page 7-2 Table 7-1 Permitted Uses Table 7-1. Permitted Uses and Development Shoreline Environment Designation 1. Adding the term and development to the title of this table is recommended because the SMP and the Act speak to both uses and development Shoreline Use and Modification Puyallup River Urban Conservancy Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy Natural Agriculture, FORESTRY AND MINING P 1 P 1 X X Aquaculture (hatcheries) C 2 P 2 C 2 Aquatic weed management P 12 P 12 C 12 Boating Facilities and docks (nonmotorized only) P 13, C 13 P 13, C 13 X 2. Deletion of Forestry and Mining is recommended since the table contains both uses lower in the list, and more accurately shows both as prohibited in all environment designations. Revising the agriculture allowance to X (prohibited) in Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy is recommended consistent with the City s current zoning which does not allow for new agricultural uses in the Clarks Creek area. Commercial and Industrial P 3, C 3 X X August 20, 2015 Page 3 of 8

6 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE Development Dredging and Dredge Material Disposal C C C 14 Forest Practices X X X Flood Control Works P P C In-Stream Structures P P 4 P 4 Filling, Grading and Excavation P 5 P 5 X 3. Filling, Grading and Excavation recommend adding a sentence to footnote 5 that fill waterward of the OHWM is a Conditional Use (see Item 33 below) Mining X X X Recreational P 3 P 3 P 3, 7 Residential Development P 3 P 3 X Restoration P P P Shoreline Stabilization P 8 P 8 P 8 (soft only) 4. Recommended language to clarify the restriction to soft stabilization in the Natural designation. Signs P 3 P 3 P 7 Transportation Facilities P C P X Parking (Primary use) X X X Parking (Accessory use) P 5, 6 P 5, 6 X 5. Transportation - Change recommended for consistency with listed allowances in the Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy in 6.G 5. Utility Development P 10, 11 P 10,C 11 P 10, 11 P 10 C 11 P 9 Unclassified Uses C C C Footnote 5: Only in association with a use permitted through this program. Fill waterward of the OHWM is a Conditional Use. 6. Utility Development - Recommended changes which more accurately reflect the distinction between accessory and primary utility development and the provisions in chapter 7 of the SMP. 26 Chapter 7 A.1 page 7-3 Agriculture Agricultural activity means a condition or activity which occurs in connection with the production of farm products, either for personal consumption or sale, and includes, but is not limited to, marketed produce at roadside stands or farm markets; noise; odors; dust; fumes; operation of machinery and irrigation pumps; movement including, but not limited to, use of current road ditches, streams, rivers, canals, and drains, and use of water for agricultural activities; ground and aerial application of seed, fertilizers, conditioners, and plan protection products; employment and use of labor; roadway movement of equipment and livestock; protection from damage by wildlife; prevention of trespass; construction and maintenance of buildings, greenhouses, fences, roads, bridges, ponds, drains, waterways, and similar features and maintenance of stream banks and watercourses; and conversion from one agricultural activity to another. This change is recommended for consistency within the SMP because the term agricultural activity is clearly defined in RCW , and the SMP properly includes this definition in Chapter 2. Agricultural activity means agricultural uses and practices including but not limited to: producing, breeding, or increasing agricultural products; rotating and changing agricultural crops; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie fallow in which it is plowed and tilled but left unseeded; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie dormant as a result of adverse agricultural market conditions; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie dormant because the land is enrolled in a local, state, or federal conservation program, or the land is subject to a conservation easement; conducting agricultural operations; maintaining, repairing, and replacing agricultural equipment; maintaining, repairing, and replacing agricultural facilities, provided that the replacement facility is no closer to the shoreline than the original facility; and maintaining agricultural lands under production or cultivation. 27 Chapter 7 Boating Facilities 1. Definition Typographical errors August 20, 2015 Page 4 of 8

7 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION C.1 and C.2 page 7-7 and Docks TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE II. Docks includes structures generally built from the shore extending over the water to for publically accessible water-oriented recreational use. Docks may be either anchored and floating or permanently fixed to pilings. They do not include floats or launch ramps. 2. Policies IV. Private piers and docks are should be prohibited within all shoreline environment designations 28 Chapter 7 C.3 Pages 7-8 to 7-9 Boating Facilities and Docks 3. Regulations I. Boating facilities are limited to those serving non-motorized watercraft. Publically owned boating facilities and docks, as defined, are allowed in the Puyallup River and Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy environments as a permitted use. Publically owned bboating facilities are prohibited in the Natural environment. Recommended language clarifies the types of boating facilities allowed. II. f. Appropriate critical area reports for disturbance of the associated critical areas and their buffers related to the installation are provided and any and all required mitigation is implemented. All mitigation plans shall prove demonstrate, through a functional assessment of the critical area(s) disturbed as a part of the boating facility installation, that the proposed mitigation actions will improve critical area functions in the area; and, Recommended changes for readability and to be clear that mitigation is for unavoidable impacts. Typographical error. f. g. Privately owned piers and docks are prohibited within all shoreline environment designations. 29 Chapter 7 E.3 page 7-12 Dredging and Dredge Material Disposal Regulation 3 I. Dredging and dredge material disposal is allowed in all Puyallup shoreline environments as a conditional use except dredge material disposal in the Natural environment is prohibited. Recommended language additions for consistency with Table 7-1. III. Dredge spoil material disposal in water bodies Edits made for consistent language usage. 30 Chapter 7 F.3 page Chapter 7 F.3 page Chapter 7 G.2 page 7-15 Flood Control Works Flood Control Works In-Stream Structures IV. Spoil disposal in open waters may be approved only when coordinated with affected Tribes, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Department of Ecology; and when found to meet the following conditions: a. Land disposal is infeasible, less consistent with this Program, or prohibited by law. b. Nearshore disposal as part of a program to restore or enhance shoreline ecological functions and processes is not feasible. c. Offshore habitat will be protected, restored, or enhanced. d. Adverse effects on water quality or biologic resources from contaminated materials will be mitigated. e. Shifting and dispersal of spoil will be minimal. f. Water quality will not be adversely affected. 2. Policies VII. Planning and design of flood control works should be consistent with and incorporate elements from the adopted watershed management plans, restoration plans and/or surface water management plans. 3. Regulations I. Flood control works are allowed in the Puyallup River Urban Conservancy and Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy environments as a conditional permitted use. Flood control works are conditionally permitted in the Natural environment. Policy 2.II Planning and design of flood control works and in-stream structures should be consistent with and incorporate elements from adopted watershed management plans, restoration plans and/or surface water management plans. August 20, 2015 Page 5 of 8 Recommended deletion as this language relates to disposal in open waters such as Puget Sound. Recommended addition in light of revised language proposed in the in-stream structures policy in item 32 below. Recommended revision for consistency with Chapter 6 and Table 7-1. Recommended deletion since this policy is in the section addressing in-stream structures.

8 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION 33 Chapter 7 H.3 page Chapter 7 3.I Page 7-27 TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE Filling, Grading and Excavation Transportation 3. Regulations I. Filling, grading and excavation is allowed in the Puyallup River Urban Conservancy and the Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy environments as a conditional use and only in association with a permitted use. Filling, grading and excavation is prohibited in the Natural environment. Fill waterward of the OHWM shall require a Shoreline Conditional Use permit. Where allowed, filling, grading and excavation shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate the development and shall cause no impacts to ecological functions, including protection of channel migration processes. 3. Regulations I. Transportation facilities are allowed in the Puyallup River Urban Conservancy and the Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy environments. Transportation facilities may be allowed in the Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy environments as a conditional use. Transportation facilities are prohibited in the Natural environment. Recommended edits to improve clarity and consistency with Chapter 6 and Table 7-1. Change recommended for consistency with listed allowances in the Clarks Creek Urban Conservancy in 6.G 5. (also corrected on Table 7-1 above) 35 Chapter 8 WAC citations Global change: Replace periods with a hyphen in all Washington Administrative Code (WAC) citations: WAC WAC This editing is recommended for consistency with the accepted standard for WAC citations. 36 Chapter 8 C.1 pages 8-3 and 8-4 Substantial Development Permit C. Types of Shoreline Permits 1. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit a. Purpose The purpose of a Substantial Development Permit is to provide an approval process for any development defined as substantial development with a total cost or fair market value exceeding six thousand four hundred sixteen dollars ($6,416) or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state, except those exempted developments set forth in WAC The recommended changes improve consistency with the statutory definition. Recommend deletion of the monetary threshold here as it is defined in Chapter 2 (and is subject to change). Recommend deletion of the last phrase of the paragraph because the position in the paragraph implies exempt development could materially interfere with normal public use of the water. b. Process An open record decision hearing by the.is required for a Substantial Development, shoreline Conditional Use or shoreline Variance Permit. Public notice of complete application Recommend deletion because this section applies to Substantial Development permits. 37 Chapter 8 2.c page 8-5 Conditional use permit review criteria vi. That consideration of cumulative impacts resulting from the proposed use has occurred and it has been demonstrated that no substantial cumulative impacts are anticipated, consistent with WAC (2). Recommend deletion because WAC (2) is quoted verbatim in the following paragraph. 38 Chapter 8 D page 8-7 Statement of Exemption Development or activities that are exempt from the requirement to obtain a Substantial Development Permit as established in WAC (see appendix HD) are required to obtain a letter of exemption from the Shoreline Administrator. Typographical errors 2. A statement of exemption must be obtained from the Administrator for a development activity or use that is exempt from a Substantial Development Permit, but which requires other permit approvals, such as a building permit. The statement of exemption shall indicate the specific exemption provision from WAC (see appendix HD) that is being applied to the development and provide a summary of the Administrator s analysis of the consistency of the project with the Master Program and the Act. According to State guidelines, the burden of proof that a development activity or use is exempt from the permit process is on the applicant. 39 Chapter 8 D page 8-7 Statement of Exemption 1. The City shall prepare a letter of exemption, addressed to the applicant, affected Tribal governments and the Department of Ecology, whenever a development is determined by the Administrator to be exempt from the Substantial Development Permit requirements. Recommended change in response to comment from Muckleshoot Tribe received during the state public comment period. 40 SMP Global Formatting Recommend correction of numerous formatting and typographical errors. These are non- August 20, 2015 Page 6 of 8

9 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION Change 41 Critical Areas Ordinance Critical Areas Ordinance Critical Areas Ordinance Critical Areas Ordinance Definitions Definitions Definitions TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE Exempt activities (67) Hydric soil means a 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 Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual approved federal manual and applicable regional supplements (RCW36.70A.175). (75) Isolated wetland means a wetland that is not adjacent to or hydraulically connected via surface water, ground water, or other conveyance to another wetland, lake, or stream. Isolated wetland means a wetland that is hydrologically isolated from other aquatic resources, as determined by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Isolated wetlands may perform important functions and are protected by state law (RCW 90.48) whether or not they are protected by federal law. (107) Rehabilitation means the reestablishment of a viable stream, wetland, or habitat conservation area from a previously filled or degraded area. the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing natural or historic functions and processes of a degraded wetland, stream or habitat conservation area. Activities could involve breaching a dike to reconnect wetlands to a floodplain, restoring tidal influence to a wetland, or breaking drain tiles and plugging drainage ditches. Rehabilitation results in a gain in critical area function(s) but does not result in a gain in critical area acres. (e) The removal of trees that are hazardous, posing a threat to public safety, or posing an imminent risk of damage to private property, from critical areas and buffers; provided, that: (i) The applicant submits a report from a certified arborist, or registered landscape architect that documents the hazard and provides a replanting schedule for the replacement trees; substantive but will improve readability of the document. The change is recommended consistent with your proposed revision in Section Designation, mapping and rating in Article IX Wetlands, and the 2011 amendment to WAC which deleted the state delineation manual and replaced it with the approved federal manual and applicable regional supplements. This change is recommended to clarify that the USACE determines whether a wetland is isolated and regardless of this determination, these systems are still protected under state law. Revisions are recommended consistent with Ecology s wetlands guidance for small cities (Ecology Publication No ) We recommend adding a requirement that the tree should be retained as large woody debris. Also we recommend defining hazard tree to discourage property owners from cutting trees in a critical area or buffer for a view corridor or other non-exempt reason. (ii)tree cutting shall be limited to limbing and crown thinning, unless otherwise justified by a qualified professional certified arborist; (iii) The landowner shall replace any trees that are felled or limbed with new trees at a ratio of two replacement trees for each tree felled or limbed within one year in accordance with an approved restoration plan. To the extent possible, any felled trees shall be left on site as a habitat feature/snag. The director may reduce the ratio when it can be demonstrated that a lower ratio is adequate to protect critical areas. Tree species that are native to the area shall be used; and 45 Critical Areas Ordinance Exempt activities (iv) Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or danger to public health or safety, property, or cause serious environmental degradation may be removed by the landowner prior to receiving written approval from city; provided, that a reasonable attempt is made to contact the city prior to removal and, within 14 days following removal, the landowner shall submit a restoration plan that demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this chapter. (l) Emergency actions that impact a critical area or its buffer, provided such actions use reasonable methods to address the emergency and have the least possible impact to the critical area and its buffer. Prior to an emergency action, the director shall provide written determination, on a case-by-case basis, of the emergency action that satisfies the general requirements of this section. In the event a person or agency determines that the need to take emergency action is so urgent that there is insufficient time for review by the director, such emergency action may be taken immediately. Once the immediate threat related to the emergency action has been addressed, any adverse impacts on critical areas shall be minimized and mitigated fully in accordance with applicable sections of PMC Emergency actions that must be undertaken immediately or for which there is insufficient time for full compliance with this chapter include actions necessary to: (i) Prevent an imminent threat to public health or safety; August 20, 2015 Page 7 of 8 Additional language is recommended to clarify that the exemption for emergencies should not eliminate the need for later mitigation to offset the impacts of emergency activity. Once the immediate threat has been addressed, any adverse impacts on critical areas should be minimized and mitigated.

10 ATTACHMENT C - DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, DECEMBER 2014 SMP - ORDINANCE NO ITEM SMP PROVISION 46 Critical Areas Ordinance TOPIC BILL FORMAT CHANGES [underline-additions; strikethrough-deletions] ECOLOGY - DISCUSSION/RATIONALE Exception for minor new developments in buffers (ii) Prevent imminent danger to public or private property; or (iii) Prevent an imminent threat of serious environmental degradation. (1) Remodels and additions to an existing, legally established structure or impervious area that currently encroaches on a wetland buffer, fish and wildlife habitat, or landslide/erosion hazard area buffer shall be allowed as conditioned by all of the following criteria: (a) The proposed minor development is consistent with the existing use of the site; (b) The impacts on critical area functions and values are avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter; (c) The affected area is located at least 25 feet from the critical area boundary; (d) The minor development does not cause the existing structure/impervious surface to encroach any closer to the critical area; (e) There are no changes in slope stability, flood conditions, or drainage; and (f) The minor development does not increase the affected site structural/impervious surface footprint by more than the following: Ecology recommended limiting the increase to 10% from the current 25% to ensure the development can still be considered minor. The city proposed the graduated allowance based on the habitat value. i. 25 percent if the minor development proposal relates to a fish and wildlife habitat buffer where a functional analysis by a qualified professional has demonstrated the buffer is not a Priority Habitat (as defined by WDFW); OR, the buffer has been determined by a qualified professional to not provide habitat for a state or federally designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species; OR, the buffer relates to a landslide/erosion hazard area; OR, a wetland buffer when it relates to a wetland which has scored low for habitat value (less than 5 points on the state wetland rating form; ii. 15 percent when the buffer relates to a wetland which has scored medium for habitat value (less than 5-7 points on the state wetland rating form); 47 Critical Areas Ordinance Mitigation monitoring iii. 10 percent when the buffer relates to a wetland which has scored high for habitat value (more than 8 points on the state wetland rating form); OR, the buffer is protecting a Priority Habitat or habitat related to a state or federally designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species). (1) All compensatory mitigation projects shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five years; a longer monitoring timeline should be considered if a forested or scrub-shrub wetland is the intended outcome of the mitigation project. Extended monitoring of up to 10 years for sites intended to result in a forested or scrub-shrub wetland is generally recommended. 48 Critical Areas Ordinance Article IX Wetlands See Exhibit 1 to Attachment C for changes to Article IX Wetlands a section of the city s Critical Areas Ordinance. Ecology recommends incorporating the updated ratings system changes and other minor revisions into the City s CAO consistent with the requirement to use the most current, accurate and complete scientific and technical information (per WAC (2)(a). In addition, incorporation of these changes now will avoid the need for a limited amendment to the SMP in the near future. Because of the scope of the recommended changes, Exhibit C-1 was created. All recommended changes to this section of the SMP are shown in bill format. August 20, 2015 Page 8 of 8

11 Article IX. Wetlands Designation, mapping, and rating. (1) Wetlands are those areas identified through any and all technical wetland delineation manuals as required by RCW 36.70A.175. Wetland delineations will be conducted in accordance with the current manual(s) required to be utilized by the Department of Ecology, including federally approved Army Corps of Engineers manual(s) and regional supplements. All areas within the city meeting the criteria in the approved federal manual and applicable regional supplements Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this chapter. Ponds and other open water bodies shall also be subject to the provisions of this chapter. (2) The approximate location and extent of previously identified wetlands are shown on the city s adopted critical area maps. These maps are to be used as a guide for the city, project applicants and/or property owners, and shall be updated as new wetlands are identified. The city s maps do not represent to show all possible wetlands within city boundaries. The actual location of a wetland s boundary shall be determined through field investigation by a qualified professional applying the methods and procedures in the approved federal manual and applicable regional supplements Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manu al methods and procedures. (3) Wetlands shall be rated and regulated according to the categories defined by the most current Washington Department of Ecology Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. This document contains the methods for determining the wetland category based on the following criteria: (a) Category I. Category I wetlands are rare and irreplaceable in terms of their function and value to Puyallup s natural aquatic systems. All wetlands with one or more of the following criteria shall be considered Category I wetlands: (i) Wetlands that are designated as natural heritage wetlands by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources; (ii) High quality, regionally rare wetland communities with irreplaceable ecological functions, including sphagnum bogs and fens, and mature forested wetlands as defined in PMC ; or

12 (iii) Wetlands that provide a very high level of functions as evidenced by a score of 70 points or more on the Western Washington Wetland Rating System form. (b) Category II. Category II wetlands are ecologically important and provide high levels of function. A wetland is considered a Category II wetland if it meets the following criteria: (i) Wetlands that do not meet the criteria of Category I wetlands; and (ii) Wetlands performing significant wildlife habitat and/or hydrologic functions, which cannot be replicated through creation or restoration as determined by a critical area report; or (iii) Wetlands with significant functions and values as indicated by a score of 51 to 69 points on the Western Washington Wetland Rating System form. (c) Category III. Category III wetlands provide a moderate level of functions. They are typically more disturbed, smaller, and/or more isolated in the landscape than Category I or II wetlands. Category III wetlands include all wetlands that score 30 to 50 points on the Western Washington Wetland Rating System form. (d) Category IV. Category IV wetlands provide the lowest level of function, but still provide important functions as demonstrated by a score of less than 30 points on the Western Washington Wetland Rating System form. Category I. Category I wetlands are: (1) relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2) wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR; (3) bogs; (4) mature and old-growth forested wetlands larger than 1 acre; (5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; (6) interdunal wetlands that score 8 or 9 habitat points and are larger than 1 acre; and (7) wetlands that perform many functions well (scoring 23 points or more). These wetlands: (1) represent unique or rare wetland types; (2) are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; (3) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or (4) provide a high level of functions. Category II. Category II wetlands are: (1) estuarine wetlands smaller than 1 acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2) interdunal wetlands larger than 1 acre or those found

13 in a mosaic of wetlands; or (3) wetlands with a moderately high level of functions (scoring between 20 and 22 points). Category III. Category III wetlands are: (1) wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scoring between 16 and 19 points); (2) can often be adequately replaced with a well-planned mitigation project; and (3) interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1 acre. Wetlands scoring between 16 and 19 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. Category IV. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scoring fewer than 16 points) and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that we should be able to replace, or in some cases to improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and should be protected to some degree. (4) All wetlands shall be regulated and subject to the provisions of this chapter regardless of size, except for Category III wetlands less than 2,500 square feet if the wetland is not associated with a riparian corridor or part of a wetland mosaic and Category IV wetlands less than 10,000 square feet. Impacts will be allowed to Category III wetlands between 2,500 square feet and 3,000 square feet, if the following criteria are met as detailed in an approved critical area report demonstrating: (a) The wetland is not associated with a riparian corridor; (b) The wetland is not part of a wetland mosaic; (c) The wetland does not score 5 20 points or greater for habitat in the Western Washington Wetland Rating System form; and (d) The wetland does not contain habitat identified as essential for local populations of priority species identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife;. and