Regulatory Context Natural Environment Chapter Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS for ANTIDEGRADATION
Advertisements

Module 2: Bioretention Area Siting and Design Andy Rowe, PE, LEED AP, QSD Cannon.
Current Tukwila Tree Policies & Regulations. Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies Related to Trees/Landscape (1) Vegetated hillsides and freeway corridors.
Environmental Scoping Guidance Jerry Vogt Region Environmental Coordinator ODOT – Region 3.
Fish and Wildlife Protection through Critical Areas Ordinances: WDFW’s role.
Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions Third Generation Watershed Management Plan.
MINING OPERATIONS ON NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND APPROVING, MONITORING, AND RECLAIMING OPERATIONS MINING OPERATIONS ON NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND APPROVING,
NATURAL RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP FOR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS Presented by: (Leader’s Name/Agency)
BUILDING STRONG ® Mitigation in a Modern World or 33 CFR 332 and You Presented by Jayson M Hudson To the Texas Association of Environmental Professionals.
Proposed Stormwater Regulations Public Forum Richland County Government September 2009.
Bill Orme, Senior Environmental Scientist, State Water Board Liz Haven, Asst. Deputy Director, Surface Water Regulatory Branch, State Water Board Dyan.
& Community Design LSU Green Laws Research Project Green Laws Louisiana Department of Agriculture & Forestry EBR Parish Tree And Landscape Commission Louisiana.
What is an In Lieu Fee Program ? Clean Water Act - Section 404 : “no overall net loss” of wetland acreage and functions. One mechanism for providing Compensatory.
Wetland Assessment Methods FHWA Needs. Laws and Regulations National Environmental Policy Act Section 404 CWA Regulatory Program Executive Order 11990,
Alachua County Wetland Protection Regulations Alachua County Board of County Commissioners October 22, 2013.
State of Water: Minnesota’s Lakes, Rivers and Wetlands John Jaschke Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Nov 13, 2014.
KING COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE Harry Reinert King County Department of Development and Environmental Services.
WETLANDS and ODOT Environmental Services Oregon Department of Transportation.
WETLANDS and LOCAL PROGRAMS Environmental Services Oregon Department of Transportation.
PC Meeting July 1, 2015 CUP 15-02/DR 15-06/DR
Crafting Stormwater Programs Oregon Coastal Planners Fall Network Meeting October 9, 2008 Florence Event Center Alissa Maxwell, PE.
1 ELEMENTS OF AN EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN PLANNING APPROACH Issued May 2009 Level II: Introduction to Design Education and Certification for Persons.
Chanhassen’s 2006 Surface Water Management Plan Carver County WENR Meeting March 27, 2007 Lori Haak Water Resources Coordinator
Grand Haven Pond Study: An Investigation to Reduce Nutrient Loads and Evaluate Alternative Management Practices in Stormwater Ponds Mark Clark Wetlands.
Integrating LID Into the Development Planning Process.
THE COST AND LEVEL OF SERVIC E PRESENTED BY: COURTNEY REICH, AICP ECOLOGICAL PLANNING GROUP Stormwater Management Programs for Local Governments.
Balancedgrowth.ohio.gov Best Local Land Use Practices Kirby Date, AICP Cleveland State University.
Ohio Balanced Growth Program Best Local Land Use Practices Development Incentives Kirby Date, AICP, Cleveland State University.
Loudoun Watershed Watch “ Restoring Loudoun Streams” LCSA Water Forum Presented by: Darrell Schwalm Loudoun Watershed Watch Loudoun Wildlife Conservancy.
Protective Regulations Ohio Lake Erie Commission Best Local Land Use Practices January, 2007 Kirby Date, Countryside Program Coordinator.
Habitat Protection. Public Benefits of Wildlife Habitat Preservation of Rural Character Hunting, Fishing, and Recreational Economies Ecological Services.
1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Indian River Lagoon North Restoration Feasibility Study Public Meeting September.
KITSAP SMP TASK FORCE Reconvened Meeting #1 November 9, 2011 Draft SMP Progress Update.
Forestry-related Ordinances in Florida What are the potential influences of county and municipal ordinances on forest land retention and sustainability?
New Stormwater Regulations “C.3” Provisions in effect Feb. 15, 2005.
Watershed Protection & CodeNEXT Austin Neighborhoods Council March 25, 2015 Watershed Protection & CodeNEXT Austin Neighborhoods Council March 25, 2015.
Chumstick Creek Salmon Habitat Conditions* Land development, road construction, and other human activities have affected channel migration and sediment.
Icicle Creek Salmon Habitat Conditions* Land Development has affected stream channel movement, off channel habitat, and LWD recruitment. Barriers to migration.
Hazard Mitigation Assistance Hazard Mitigation means any action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk too human life and property from natural.
Watercourse DPA District of North Vancouver Streamside DPA Development Permit Area for the Protection of the Natural Environment: Streamside Areas Public.
Stormwater Retrofitting: The Art of Opportunity Prepared by the Center for Watershed Protection.
Community Development Department Special Exceptions for: Automotive parts (e.g. accessories and tires) and Automotive, Recreational Vehicle, and Boat Dealers.
Marin Coastal Watersheds Permit Coordination Program Marin Resource Conservation District U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Sustainable Conservation.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.
APPLICATIONS OF WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS Module 22, part c – Applications.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Inter-Agency Coordination BLM PILOT VERNAL & GLENWOOD SPRINGS U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & U.S. Bureau of Land.
SAGHA Annual Homeowners Meeting August 28, Agenda  Collect ballots  Treasurer’s Report  Common Area Maintenance Presentation  Election Results.
Planning under the Growth Management Act
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service “Helping people help the land"
Bureau of Watershed Management Regulatory Proposal Chapter 102 [Erosion and Sediment Control] Erosion, Sediment and Stormwater Management February 21,
Update: Where We Are and Feedback Lake George Stream Corridor Management Stake Holder Meeting June 25, 2008.
Transportation Projects City Council Workshop May 14, 2013.
Bureau of Watershed Management Preliminary Regulatory Proposal Chapter 102 Erosion, Sediment and Stormwater Management December 19, 2007.
What is Stormwater? Direct result of rainfall Recharges groundwater by infiltration Produces “runoff” (excess rainfall after infiltration) May be concentrated.
 What is EWP & How Does the Program Work? Emergency Watershed Protection Program.
Community Development Department Ryan’s Landing Planned Unit Development Application No
Overview of Everything You Need to Know About Mitigation.
Wetlands Focus Group. Responsibilities and Goals   Growth Managements Act (Chapter 163, FS) of 1985   Included the adoption of the State Comprehensive.
GREEN GROWTH TOOLBOX Wildlife & Natural Resource Stewardship in Planning Wildlife & Natural Resource Stewardship in Planning Black-crowned night heron.
OPEN SPACE/ CONSERVATION
October 26, 2016 Amanda Gumbert Extension Water Quality Specialist
Flood Damage Prevention Code Update
Environmental Critical Areas Regulations
THE CORPS REGULATORY AUTHORITY
PENNSYLVANIA STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MANUAL
Hudson Wetlands Protection Bylaw
Land Use and Zoning Committee Special Workshop
36 CAs across Ontario (mainly in the south)
Construction Management & Inspection
Anne Arundel County Maryland
Presentation transcript:

Regulatory Context Natural Environment Chapter Tukwila Comprehensive Plan

State and Federal Regulations/Policies Federal Clean Water Act – Protection of waters of the US – wetlands, watercourses – Water quality (discharge standards, permits, stormwater management) State Growth Management Act (Comprehensive Plan; protection of critical areas – wetlands, watercourses, steep slopes, coal mine areas) County-wide planning policies Department of Ecology and Corps of Engineers wetland delineation, mitigation guidance and various rules

Tukwila Implementation of State and Federal Environmental Requirements Comprehensive Plan – Natural Environment Chapter Sensitive (Critical) Areas Regulations Tree Regulations (sensitive areas) Surface Water Regulations (stormwater) Land Clearing Regulations (erosion control, slope protection)

Comprehensive Plan Current goals, policies and implementation strategies related to: Protection of wetlands and watercourses and retention of areas of geologic instability Water quality and quantity Fish habitat Paleontological and archaeological artifacts and sites

Tukwila’s Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45, updated 2010) Requirements, Standards, How Being Implemented

Establishes the Purpose Protect environment, human life and property Designate and classify sensitive areas Protect sensitive area functions while allowing for reasonable use of property Comply with Growth Management Act

Establishes General Standards Minimize impacts of development Protect water resource quantity & quality Prevent loss of slope stability (clearing) Protect community aesthetic resources Balance property rights with preservation Provide special consideration for anadromous fish (salmonids) Use Best Available Science (BAS) in decisions

Defines and Classifies Sensitive Areas Wetlands and buffers Watercourses and buffers Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas and buffers Areas of potential geologic instability Abandoned coal mines

Requires Geotechnical study for steep slopes Sensitive area studies (wetlands, watercourses) Mitigation sequencing (avoid, minimize, repair/rehabilitate/restore, reduce over time, & compensate for impacts) Mitigation Plan including maintenance, monitoring and corrective action plans Ratios for the amount of mitigation required, improvement in functions, buffers and banks (State/Federal guidance adopted for ratios, based on BAS)

Defines Allowed Uses – No Permit, But Mitigation Required Maintenance and repair - existing facilities & essential infrastructure Education and research Passive recreation and open space Emergency actions Maintenance of existing landscape and gardens (but tree and native plant removal requires permit)

Defines Allowed Uses with Permit – Mitigation Required Maintenance and repair infrastructure (if heavy equipment used or fill added) Essential public utilities Essential public streets/roads, ROW Public/private access (recent policy changes) Dredging, digging, filling (flood management, maintenance, restoration, etc.)

Defines Allowed Location of Wetland Mitigation On-site except where not scientifically feasible, not practical, or won’t improve functions Off-site (where functions can be sustained) – Within immediate sub-basin – Within next higher sub-basin – In Tukwila (City has identified possible public sites) – In Green/Duwamish River watershed Mitigation Bank (recent policy change)

Establishes Rules for Sensitive Areas Buffers Minimum required widths depending on classification of sensitive area – for changes in structures or land use Buffer reduction up to 50%, if applicant enhances buffer (certain criteria apply) Additional setbacks for new structures Buffer impacts must be mitigated on-site (recent policy change)

Requires Mitigation, Maintenance and Monitoring Performance standards established in approved mitigation plan How long: – Minimum 5 years (recent policy change) – 10 years when forested wetland or buffers being established (recent policy change) – May be extended if performance standards aren’t being met Financial assurance generally required (bonding not always effective)

How is it working? Examples of Successful Mitigation

Existing Characteristics of Tukwila’s Sensitive Areas Wetlands: – Disturbed, fragmented in landscape – Invasive vegetation – Poor quality/narrow buffers Watercourses: – Roadside ditches/maintained for drainage – Piped – Poor quality riparian vegetation/invasive vegetation/narrow or non-existent buffers, erosion, armored banks Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas

Typical Tukwila Watercourse

Macadam Wetland

Ramifications of Implementation of Sensitive Areas Regulations Highest quality wetlands are the most protected - no impacts allowed except for essential public utilities & roads – mitigation is required Due to buffer reductions - narrower buffers, but enhanced over existing conditions (in most cases) Increased wetland functions and some additional acreage at mitigation sites

Ramifications of Implementation of Sensitive Areas Regulations (cont.) Some riparian areas enhanced along streams due to land use permits or violations, but road and highway construction will continue to adversely impact them Conflicts between stormwater maintenance and riparian vegetation protection No longer allowing streams to be used for regional stormwater detention (recent change)

How the City Implements Regulations Periodically updates Sensitive Areas Map Reviews and approves mitigation plans Offers technical assistance to homeowners for mitigation Reviews monitoring reports and inspects mitigation sites Coordinates with Department of Ecology and Corps of Engineers Responds to violations in coordination with Code Enforcement

Off-site Mitigation Project Adjacent to Tukwila Pond

Recent Riverton Creek riparian enhancement required as part of change in land use and buffer reduction (2010)

Stream Buffer Mitigation near Riverton Creek

Recently Installed Wetland Mitigation, Tukwila South

Johnson Creek, relocated watercourse channel Tukwila South

Gilliam Creek recently enhanced by WSDOT as mitigation for SR 405 project

WSDOT Mitigation Gilliam Creek, SR 518 widening

Southcenter Parkway Extension, Wetland Buffer Mitigation

Wetland Buffer Mitigation, Sound Transit Southgate Creek Buffer Enhancement

City Sponsored Sensitive Areas Restoration

Tukwila Pond Wetland Buffer Restoration/Enhancement - Before

Tukwila Pond Wetland Buffer Enhancement Project

After - newly planted – blackberries gone

Cottage Creek Buffer Restoration Project

Conclusions Most sensitive area impacts are related to buffers (tree removal, encroachment by property owners, new or redevelopment, road/highway expansion, maintenance for stormwater) Large, commercial mitigation projects seem to be functioning well and have increased wetland/watercourse/buffer functions and/or acreage Greatest difficulty is maintenance/monitoring of small projects (homeowners, small developers) to ensure success

New Issues for Consideration Establish in-lieu fee program for wetland mitigation? Allow mitigation to go to an off-site in-lieu fee program (such as King County)? Improve City’s oversight of monitoring and maintenance of mitigation projects, especially small projects in residential areas