The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAppendix P - LU Plans & Policies DRI-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project, I-5 to SR 169 LAND USE PLANS AND POLICIES DISCIPLINE REPORT October 2005 %&e( !"b$ AÉ !"`$ !"`$ Aæ %&e( Bothell Kirkland Bellevue Renton AÊ AÐ Aí Aô AÌ Aí Aç AÅ Lake Washington Arterial Road Freeway Municipality Lake Park M0 2 Miles I-405 Project Area Renton Nickel Improvement Project LAND USE PLANS AND POLICIES DISCIPLINE REPORT I-405, Renton Nickel Improvement Project Prepared for Washington State Department of Transportation Urban Corridors Office And Federal Highway Administration Prepared by Lisa Grueter, AICP, Jones & Stokes October 12, 2005 Title VI WSDOT ensures full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by prohibiting discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the provision of benefits and services resulting from its federally assisted programs and activities. For questions regarding WSDOT's Title VI Program, you may contact the Department's Title VI Coordinator at 360. 705.7098. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information If you would like copies of this document in an alternate format—large print, Braille, cassette tape, or on computer disk, please call 360.705.7097. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, please call the Washington State Telecommunications Relay Service, or Tele-Braille at 7-1-1, Voice 1.800.833.6384, and ask to be connected to 360.705.7097. Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report i T ABLE OF C ONTENTS Glossary.............................................................................................................................................................................iii Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Report .........................................................................................................v Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................1 What is the Renton Nickel Improvement Project? ...........................................................................................................1 What is the No Build Alternative?................................................................................................................................2 What is the Build Alternative?.....................................................................................................................................2 How will stormwater from the project be managed? .................................................................................................12 What environmental and utilities issues influenced the project design and what was done to avoid and minimize project effects?....................................................................................................................................13 What is planned for wetland and stream mitigation?.....................................................................................................16 What benefits will the project provide?......................................................................................................................17 How will the project incorporate community design preferences?.............................................................................17 How will the project be constructed?.........................................................................................................................18 Why do we consider land use plans and policies as we plan this project?....................................................................19 What are the key points of this report?..........................................................................................................................21 Build Alternative........................................................................................................................................................21 No Build Alternative...................................................................................................................................................23 Existing Conditions and Potential Effects.....................................................................................................................25 How was information collected and what studies were completed?..............................................................................25 What is the study area for this analysis and how was it determined?............................................................................25 What are the requirements for comprehensive plans, shoreline master programs, capital facility plans, and zoning codes?...........................................................................................................................................................................27 Comprehensive Plans and Zoning............................................................................................................................27 Shoreline Master Programs.......................................................................................................................................29 Key Plan/Regulation Sections Reviewed..................................................................................................................30 How were the effects of the alternatives determined?...................................................................................................31 What existing local plans and policies are relevant to this project? Is the project consistent with these local plans and policies?.........................................................................................................................................................................33 City of Tukwila...........................................................................................................................................................33 City of Renton ...........................................................................................................................................................45 How would the Build and No Build Alternatives cause indirect effects? ........................................................................67 Build Alternative........................................................................................................................................................67 No Build Alternative...................................................................................................................................................67 Measures to Avoid or Minimize Project Effects ............................................................................................................68 Are measures to avoid or minimize project effects required for the Build Alternative?..................................................68 Are there plan and policy consistency measures that should be considered?...............................................................68 References........................................................................................................................................................................70 Published Documents....................................................................................................................................................70 Personal Communications.............................................................................................................................................70 TABLE OF CONTENTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project ii Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Appendices A - Tukwila Shoreline Regulations River and Low Impact Environments B - Renton Aquifer Protection Area Regulations C - State Level of Service Policy D - Draft Renton Shoreline Master Program Buffer Regulations E XHIBITS Exhibit 1. Project Vicinity Map..........................................................................................................................................1 Exhibit 2. Project Overview Section 1..............................................................................................................................3 Exhibit 3. Project Overview Section 2..............................................................................................................................4 Exhibit 4. Project Overview Section 3..............................................................................................................................5 Exhibit 5. Project Overview Section 4..............................................................................................................................6 Exhibit 6. Project Overview Section 5..............................................................................................................................7 Exhibit 7. Project Overview Section 6..............................................................................................................................8 Exhibit 8. Project Overview Section 7..............................................................................................................................9 Exhibit 9. Project Overview Section 8............................................................................................................................10 Exhibit 10. Build Alternative Consistency Summary......................................................................................................22 Exhibit 11. Renton Nickel Improvement Project Vicinity Map Detail..............................................................................26 Exhibit 12. Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Map (2003)...................................................................................................37 Exhibit 13. City of Tukwila Zoning Map..........................................................................................................................38 Exhibit 14. Green River Shoreline Management Environments.....................................................................................43 Exhibit 15. Renton Aquifer Protection Zones.................................................................................................................47 Exhibit 16. City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map............................................................................................49 Exhibit 17. City of Renton Zoning Map...........................................................................................................................50 Exhibit 18. City of Renton Arterial Streets......................................................................................................................52 Exhibit 19. Renton Arterial Plan.....................................................................................................................................54 Exhibit 20. Improvements Assumed to be WSDOT Responsibility in Renton Transportation Element 2002 to 2022...56 Exhibit 21. Improvements Assumed to be WSDOT Responsibility in Renton Transportation Element Post 2022........57 Exhibit 22. Average P.M. Peak Travel Distance in 30 Minutes from the City in All Directions.......................................59 Exhibit 23. Renton Shoreline Master Program Use Environments: Springbrook Creek.................................................62 Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report iii GLOSSARY Commute Trip Reduction Commute Trip Reduction refers to methods that are designed to achieve reductions in the proportion of single-occupant vehicle commute trips during peak travel periods. Such methods may include promoting carpools and vanpools, public and private transit, and bicycling and walking; allowing alternative/flexible work hours and telecommuting; promoting mixed land uses to facilitate use of alternative modes; implementing parking fees; and others. Concurrency Concurrency means that transportation improvements are provided at the time of development or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. If a development causes the level of service on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, and transportation improvements are not provided concurrent with development or within six years, local governments are required to deny the permit application in accordance with the Growth Management Act (Revised Code of Washington - RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b)1). Context Sensitive Solutions CSS is a model for transportation project development that has recently received much discussion and broad acceptance. Its essence is that a proposed transportation project must be planned not only for its physical aspects as a road serving specific transportation objectives, but also for its effects on the aesthetic, social, economic, and environmental values, needs, constraints, and opportunities in a larger community setting. Critical Areas The Washington State Growth Management Act defines critical areas as aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, flood hazard areas, geologic hazard areas, and wetlands. Critical area functions and values are protected by ordinances that require development to avoid or compensate for adverse effects on critical areas. Element Elements typically consist of “plan chapters” that state plans/schemes/designs/objectives/principles for each topic. The Washington State Growth Management Act requires several elements in a local government Comprehensive Plan including: land use, housing, capital facilities, utilities, rural development (counties only), transportation, economic development, and parks and recreation. Optional elements, e.g., subarea plans or other topics, can be addressed as well. Essential Public Facilities Essential public facilities are uses or activities that are typically difficult to site, such as airports, state education facilities, and state or regional transportation facilities as defined in RCW 47.06.1401, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure community transition facilities, as defined in RCW 71.09.0201. (RCW 36.70A.2001). The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that counties and cities include a process for the identification and siting of essential public facilities. RCW 36.70A.200(2)(5)1 states that “No local comprehensive plan or development regulation may preclude the siting of essential public facilities.” Growth Management Act The Growth Management Act is a Washington State Law codified at RCW 36.70A1 that requires and guides the preparation and amendment of local comprehensive plans by counties and cities. Such comprehensive plans must address several required topics, including but not limited to, land use, transportation, capital facilities, etc., and must be based on a locally sponsored public participation program. 1 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. January 2005. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). GLOSSARY Renton Nickel Improvement Project iv Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Level of service Level of service is a measure of system operating performance for roadways, transit, non- motorized, and other transportation modes. For example, roadway measures of level of service often assign criteria based on volume-to-capacity ratios.2 Ordinary High Water Mark An "ordinary high water mark" is a location where the vegetation and soil show the effects of the water. According to the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.583), it is found by examining the bed and banks of tidal waters, streams, and lakes and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, that the soil and vegetation have a character distinct from that of the abutting upland. Where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, it is the line of mean high water – the highest that the water gets in an average year, but not the highest it gets during extreme flooding. Subarea Plans Subarea plans are elements of comprehensive plans developed under the Washington State Growth Management Act. Subarea plans consider an area smaller than the whole local government boundaries. Shoreline Master Programs Local shoreline master programs (SMPs) regulate new development and use of shorelines along larger streams/rivers with flows of at least 20 cubic feet per second, lakes over 20 acres, and marine waterfronts. SMPs are required by the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (codified at RCW 90.583), and typically contain shoreline policies, shoreline use environments or “zones,” and shoreline regulations. Staging Area Staging areas are locations in unused right-of-way that will provide room for employee parking, large equipment storage, and material stockpiles. Zoning Zoning is a law established by local governments that defines land use districts, allowable land uses, structure size and location, and other similar issues in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to maintain or enhance the character of different neighborhoods or districts. 2 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). February 2002. 2003-2022 Washington State Highway System Plan. 3 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. January 2005. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report v ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT a.m. morning APA aquifer protection area, Renton BMP best management practice BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe cfs cubic feet per second CSS Context Sensitive Solutions CTR commute trip reduction EA Environmental Assessment Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration GMA Growth Management Act GP general purpose HOV high-occupancy vehicle HSS Highway of Statewide Significance I Interstate LOS level of service NEPA National Environmental Policy Act OHWM ordinary high water mark p.m. afternoon RCW Revised Code of Washington RMC Renton Municipal Code ROD Record of Decision ROW right-of-way SEPA State Environmental Policy Act SMP Shoreline Master Program SOV single-occupant vehicle SR State Route TDM Transportation Demand Management TMC Tukwila Municipal Code TIP Transportation Improvement Program ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT Renton Nickel Improvement Project vi Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report UP Union Pacific WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 1 R:\04156\33-06 Renton Nickel\Task 3 - Discipline Reports\all reports\Final DRs\Renton Nickel Land Use Plans & Policies DR_completed.doc INTRODUCTION What is the Renton Nickel Improvement Project? The Renton Nickel Improvement Project is a highway expansion project that will improve mobility and safety through Tukwila and Renton. On I-405, this project begins just east of the I-5/I-405 interchange in Tukwila and extends north past the Cedar River to the SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway) interchange. The project will build an additional lane both northbound and southbound between I-5 and SR 169. On SR 167, the project will extend the southbound high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane north to I-405 and add a southbound auxiliary lane from I-405 to the SW 41st Street off-ramp. These limits comprise the study area for the project. Prior to planning this specific project, WSDOT created the I-405 Corridor Program. This program provides a comprehensive strategy to reduce congestion and improve mobility throughout the I-405 corridor. The corridor begins at the I-5 interchange in the city of Tukwila and extends northward 30 miles to the I-5 interchange in the city of Lynnwood. The program’s purpose is to provide an efficient, integrated, and multimodal system of transportation solutions. Using the I-405 Corridor Program’s Selected Alternative as the Master Plan to improve I-405, WSDOT developed relatively low cost, congestion relief roadway improvements as an interim step in achieving the Master Plan. As part of this effort, WSDOT began to define the Renton Nickel Improvement Project. The Renton Nickel Improvement Project was developed as part of a first step in providing a focused strategy to improve I-405 between I-5 in Tukwila and SR 169 in Renton and SR 167 southbound from I-405 to SW 41st Street, see Exhibit 1. This discipline report analyzes two project alternatives: the No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative. Exhibit 1. Project Vicinity Map G r e en R i v e r C e d ar Riv er Interurban TrailCedar River Interpretive Trail Panther Creek Wetlands Green River TrailBlack River Riparian Forest Fort Dent Park Cedar River Park Liberty Park SW 41st St S W 3 4 t h S t S W 2 7 t h S t SW 16th St Southcenter ParkwayW Valley HwyI n t e r u r ban Ave SMa ple V alley H w yRainier Ave SS W Sun s e t B lvdS W 7 t h S t S W G r a d y W a y Lind Ave SWTUKWILA RENTON S pri n g br ook CreekBenson Rd SSW 23rd St Talbot Rd SBenson Dr SI-405 Northern Project Limit at SR 169 I-405 Southern Project Limit at I-5 !"`$ %&e( Aæ Aç Aí SR 167 Southern Project Limit at SW 41st St 0 0.25 0.5 Miles M AÅ Arterial Road Freeway Trail Stream Lake Park Municipality INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 2 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report What is the No Build Alternative? The No Build Alternative assumes that only routine activities such as road maintenance, repair, and safety improvements would take place over the next 20 years. This alternative does not include improvements to increase roadway capacity or reduce congestion. For these reasons, it does not satisfy the project’s purpose—improve I-405 between I-5 in Tukwila and SR 169 in Renton and SR 167 southbound from I-405 to SW 41st Street. The No Build Alternative has been evaluated in this discipline report to establish a baseline for comparing the effects associated with the Build Alternative. What is the Build Alternative? The new lanes that will be built under this project are: An I-405 northbound general-purpose (GP) lane from I-5 to the SR 167 off-ramp. An I-405 northbound auxiliary lane from the SR 167 to I-405 on-ramp to the SR 169 off-ramp. An I-405 southbound auxiliary lane from the SR 169 to I-405 on-ramp to the SR 167 off-ramp. An I-405 southbound GP lane from the SR 167 to I-405 on-ramp to the I-5 off-ramp. A SR 167 southbound auxiliary lane from I-405 to the SW 41st Street off-ramp. Also, the existing inside HOV lane will be extended north to I-405 from its present starting point in the vicinity of SW 21st Street. See Exhibits 2 through 9 show the project features. In addition to adding lanes to I-405 and SR 167, this project will provide the following improvements. Improve Interchanges Minor modifications will be made to the ramps at the SR 167 interchange: The one-lane ramp from northbound I-405 to SR 167 will be widened to a 2-lane off connection, which provides a dedicated lane to southbound SR 167 and a dedicated lane to northbound Rainer Avenue. See Exhibit 5. Traffic from two consecutive single-lane on- ramps from southbound I-405 to SR 167 will be separated by a concrete barrier. This will provide a smoother transition to the mainline and reduce congestion on the on-ramps. What is an auxiliary lane? An auxiliary lane is a lane added between interchanges—from one on-ramp to the next off-ramp. It is dedicated to traffic entering and leaving the freeway and provides motorists with more time and extra room to accelerate or decelerate and merge when getting on and off the freeway. 89:P 89:T Existing On-ramp On-ramp with proposed auxiliary lane INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 3 T u k w i l a P a r k w a y I-405 Southern Project Limit at I-5 Gilliam Creek Cottage Creek Westfield Shoppingtown MallSouthcenter ParkwaySouthcenter Blvd 65th Ave STUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí I-405 Northboundbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. I-405 Southbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. M0250500 Feet I-405 NORTHBOUND Existing Proposed I-405 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel Ecology EmbankmentÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Retaining Wall Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW Areas of Construction New ROW Exhibit 2. Project Overview Section 1 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 4 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃInterurban TrailFort Dent Park W Valley HwyInterurban Ave S RENT ONT UKWI L AG r e en RiverSouthcenter B lv d65th Ave SAí %&e( %&e(UP RRBNSF RRBridge Restripe Only Bridge Rail Replacement Bridge Rail Replacement M o n s t e r R d S WTUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí I-405 Northbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. I-405 Southbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. M0250500 Feet I-405 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton I-405 NORTHBOUND Existing Proposed %&e( Retaining Wall Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Areas of Construction Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW New ROW Exhibit 3. Project Overview Section 2 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 5 ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ SW 16th St S W G r a d y W a y SW G ra d y W a y Oakesdale Ave SWSW 16th St %&e( Potential Staging Area Bridge Replacement S prin g br o o k Cr eekBridge Replacement TUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí I-405 Northbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. The existing Springbrook Creek and Oakesdale Avenue bridges will be replaced and the existing culvert will be removed. I-405 Southbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 70 feet to the outside at some locations. The existing Springbrook Creek and Oakesdale Avenue bridges will be replaced and the existing culvert will be removed.M0250500 Feet I-405 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton I-405 NORTHBOUND Existing Proposed Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Retaining Wall Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Areas of Construction Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW New ROW Exhibit 4. Project Overview Section 3 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 6 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ SW 19th StLind Ave SWS G r a d y W a y Aæ %&e( Potential Staging Area Noise Wall Renton CinemaRolling Hills Creek Panther Creek Wetlands SW 16th St Lake AveSouthRainier Ave STUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí I-405 Northbound Improvements: A general-purpose lane will be added up to the SR 167 interchange and an auxiliary lane will be added from the SR 167 to I-405 on-ramp north. These lanes will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. I-405 Southbound Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added up to the I-405 to SR 167 on-ramp and a general-purpose lane will be added south of the interchange. These lanes will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. SR 167 Southbound Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping existing pavement and adding up to 19 feet of pavement at the outside at some locations. The existing HOV lane will be extended north from SW 21st Street to the interchange with I-405.M0250500 Feet I-405 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton I-405 NORTHBOUND Existing Proposed SR 167 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel Proposed Noise Wall ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Retaining Wall Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Areas of Construction Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW New ROW Exhibit 5. Project Overview Section 4 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 7 ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃPanther Creek Wetlands S W 2 7 t h S t Talbot Rd SEast Valley RdTalbot Rd SPotential Staging Area SW 23rd St TUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí SR 167 Improvements: In addition to extending the HOV lane north from SW 21st Street, an auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 19 feet to the outside at some locations. M0250500 Feet SR 167 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton RentonÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Retaining Wall Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Areas of Construction Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW New ROW Exhibit 6. Project Overview Section 5 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 8 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃSW 41st St S W 3 3 r d S t Panther CreekEast Valley RdTalbot Rd SLind Ave SWAæ SR 167 Southern Project Limit at SW 41st St TUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí SR 167 Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 19 feet to the outside at some locations. The new lane will tie into the existing ramp connection to SW 41st Street. M0250500 Feet SR 167 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Retaining Wall Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Areas of Construction Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW New ROW Exhibit 7. Project Overview Section 6 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 9 ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃS G rady W ayB e a c o n S 7 t h S tWilliams %&e( Potential Staging Area Replace Bridge Bridge Widening Existing Bridge to be Demolished Thunder Hills Creek Rolling Hills Creek Noise Wall Benson Rd STalbot Rd STUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec, 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí I-405 Northbound Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. I-405 Southbound Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 24 feet to the outside at some locations. Benson Rd S Improvements: The Benson Rd S overpass will be replaced and realigned to the west of its current location. The new overpass will have 2 lanes with 5-foot bike lanes on both sides and a 6-foot sidewalk on the west side.M0250500 Feet I-405 NORTHBOUND Existing Proposed I-405 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton Parcel Acquisition New ROW Existing ROW Easement Acquisition Areas of Construction New Pavement Stormwater Flow Control Facility Retaining Wall ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Proposed Noise Wall Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel Exhibit 8. Project Overview Section 7 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 10 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report C edar River Cedar River Interpretive Trail Cedar River Park Liberty Park Ma p l e V a ll e y H w y H o u s e r W a y S N 3 r d S t Bronson Wa y N%&e( I-405 Northern Project Limit at SR 169 Aç Restripe Only Main AvenueCedar Ave SRenton Ave STUKWILA RENTON!"`$ %&e( Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Aæ Aç Sec. 8 Aí I-405 Northbound Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. I-405 Southbound Improvements: An auxiliary lane will be added by restriping the existing pavement and adding pavement up to 15 feet to the outside at some locations. M0250500 Feet I-405 NORTHBOUND Existing Proposed I-405 SOUTHBOUND Existing Proposed Renton Renton Piped River/Creek Channel Open River/Creek Channel ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ Ecology Embankment Retaining Wall Stormwater Flow Control Facility New Pavement Areas of Construction Easement Acquisition Parcel Acquisition Existing ROW New ROW Exhibit 9. Project Overview Section 8 INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 11 Improve Benson Road The Benson Road overpass will be replaced and realigned to accommodate the southbound auxiliary lane on I-405 as well as future improvements to I-405 as shown on Exhibit 8. Improvements on Benson Road include a 6-foot sidewalk on the west side and 5-foot bike lanes on both sides. Widen and replace bridges Several bridges within the study area will be widened or replaced based on present location, cost, and existing soil conditions. To construct the new lanes, the project will: Widen Talbot Road Bridge on both the northbound and the southbound sides. See Exhibit 8. Replace Springbrook Creek Side Channel Bridge and Oakesdale Avenue Bridge with new southbound and northbound structures and remove the Springbrook Creek box culvert. See Exhibit 4. Replace the rail on the I-405 bridges over SR 181 and the Union Pacific and Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroads. The project will not affect the I-405 bridges over the Green River, Lind Avenue, or the Cedar River. The project will also not affect the Cedar Avenue or Renton Avenue overpasses. The roadway will be restriped in these areas to accommodate the new lanes. Use retaining walls Widening I-405 and SR 167 will require retaining walls to minimize the construction footprint and right-of-way acquisition. Retaining walls will also help avoid and minimize effects to wetlands and other sensitive areas. Improve culverts WSDOT anticipates that construction will affect some existing stormwater cross culverts and one stream culvert. Associated culvert improvements include extending the existing structures due to widening the roadway and stabilizing culvert ends with rock or retaining walls. The I-405 Team will conduct a hydraulic analysis of the culverts to ensure that the modifications will have no effect on the base flood elevations. See the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Discipline Report for detailed discussion on fish passage. Why rebuild Benson Road on a new alignment over I-405? By building the new overpass to the west on a new alignment, the new structure can be constructed while the existing structure remains open to traffic. Traffic can then be shifted onto the new structure, while the old overpass is demolished. What does a “rail” replacement involve? Typically, a bridge rail replacement project consists of making minor adjustments to the width of the bridge deck and replacing the guard rail or barrier. This type of project does not include adding new bridge columns or footings. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 12 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Build a noise wall One noise wall will be built on the northbound side of the freeway as shown on Exhibits 5 and 8. The wall will begin at the intersection of South 14th Street and South 15th Street and follow South 14th Street east to Talbot Road. This wall will be approximately 2,150 feet long and 18 feet tall. How will stormwater from the project be managed? Stormwater from the project will be managed for both quality and peak flows using currently accepted best management practices (BMPs). The I-405 Team has designed the stormwater management facilities to comply with the following guidelines and procedures: WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual M 31-16 WSDOT Hydraulics Manual M 23-03 Stormwater treatment facilities The project will add new impervious surface within the study area, most of which will be within the Springbrook Creek basin. This project will treat runoff for an area equal to 100 percent of these new surfaces. The project will use BMPs that the HRM lists as enhanced treatment facilities. The I-405 Team has proposed that stormwater be treated using a combination of these facilities. In most of the study area, ecology embankments will be used to capture runoff from the edge of the pavement and provide water quality treatment. Ecology embankments also serve to convey treated runoff to receiving waters or to flow control facilities as required. The project also includes a combined stormwater quality wetland and detention facility that addresses water quality and flow control in one facility. Exhibits 2 through 9 show the location of stormwater facilities that will be built for this project. Ecology Embankment Cross-Section What are the guidelines for stormwater management facilities? Water quality treatment will be provided for an area equal to the new impervious surfaces created on the project. Impervious surfaces, such as pavement, are those that do not allow water to penetrate into the ground. Stormwater from new impervious surfaces or an equal area will be controlled in detention facilities. This process allows water to be held (detained) and thus released at rates that are equal to existing conditions. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 13 Drainage Collection and Conveyance Some changes to existing drainage will be necessary to provide flow control and water quality treatment to address the new impervious area added by the project. However, existing storm drainage systems will be kept to the greatest extent possible and existing flow patterns will be maintained. Where roadway widening affects drainage ditches that convey water from adjacent private properties, the project design will assure that existing conveyance capacities are maintained. What environmental and utilities issues influenced the project design and what was done to avoid and minimize project effects? Throughout the development of the Renton Nickel Improvement Project design, environmental elements were reviewed and design features were modified to avoid or minimize negative effects to the environment. Influence on the project design came from: Soil Conditions: the soils in the project area are highly prone to accentuate earthquake shaking, which influences how bridges can be widened or replaced. Noise: highway noise in the project area already exceeds acceptable levels, which means that including noise walls as part of the project had to be considered. Wetland Locations: many wetlands are located along the edges of the highway, which influence whether the widened sections will use retaining walls or fill slopes. Historical Sites: some historic sites exist within the study area, so the project design was coordinated to avoid these properties. Because the I-405 Team planned for these environmental considerations, several design features have the benefit of avoiding or minimizing potential effects due to the project. These design features are described from south to north below. I-405, I-5 to SR 167 WSDOT will construct a retaining wall from west of the 68th Avenue structure over I-405 at Tukwila Parkway What are detention facilities? These facilities control stormwater runoff so that it can be released at a controlled rate. Two types are commonly used: Ponds. Vaults. Similar to a pond, but with a hard-sided construction. These concrete structures function like a pond but also provide detention storage. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 14 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report The proposed design modifications allow the additional lanes to be added over the Green River by restriping instead of bridge widening. This avoids effects on the river, stream habitat, floodplain, and Interurban Trail. to the Green River. This wall avoids the need to construct a fill slope that would extend into Gilliam Creek. See Exhibit 2. WSDOT will provide a narrower outside shoulder on northbound I-405 at the Green River Bridge. The shoulder will vary from 10 to just over 3 feet at the west abutment of the existing bridge. Narrowing the shoulder avoids modifications to the existing bridge. As a result, the design also avoids effects to the river, the 100-year floodplain, the ordinary high water level, and adjacent riparian zones. At the SR 181 interchange, the bridge and ramp will be restriped to provide the new general-purpose lane and ramp improvements. This approach minimizes the need to widen the existing SR 181 Bridge, reconstruct the SR 181 interchange, or modify the Southcenter Boulevard crossing of the Green River. This in turn avoids relocating or diverting the Interurban Trail, which goes under the bridge. See Exhibit 3. Near the Westfield Shoppingtown Mall, a large Seattle Public Utilities water transmission line parallels I-405. WSDOT will line this pipe so that is can support the loads from the new roadway embankment. This approach allows the line to stay in its present location. WSDOT will remove the existing I-405 bridges over the Springbrook Creek side channel and Oakesdale Avenue and replace them with a single northbound and a single southbound bridge. This approach will allow for the removal of the Springbrook Creek box culvert. Construction of the new bridges will be phased with the southbound bridge built slightly to the north of the existing roadway. This phasing minimizes the need to construct temporary roadway to maintain traffic operations. WSDOT also evaluated the location of the new bridge piers and selected locations that will minimize the effect on the existing stream, stream buffer, and trail that crosses under the bridge. WSDOT will construct a narrower exit gore from I-405 to the northbound ramp at the SR 167 interchange as shown in Exhibit 5. By building a narrower exit gore, the project can be constructed within the existing right- of-way. This has the benefit of avoiding right-of-way acquisition, avoiding effects to the wetland outside the right-of-way, and avoiding effects to the existing Lind Avenue Bridge. What is an exit gore? An exit gore is a roadway feature that separates an exiting lane from the main lanes. An exit gore can be defined either by paint stripes, raised buttons, physical barriers, or a combination of these. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 15 Retaining walls will help to avoid and minimize effects on the Panther Creek wetlands along SR 167 SR 167, southbound from I-405 to SW 41st Street WSDOT will build a retaining wall along a large portion of the west edge of SR 167 southbound instead of an earth fill slope. See Exhibits 6 and 7. The retaining wall minimizes effects on three wetlands. The retaining wall has the added benefit of minimizing right-of-way needs and reduces the effect on existing utility crossings, in particular, the City of Seattle’s 60- inch water line and Olympic Petroleum’s two high pressure pipelines, which all cross under SR 167. I-405, SR 167 to SR 169 WSDOT will add a lane by restriping I-405 northbound next to the Talbot Hill retaining wall immediately east of the SR 167 interchange. Restriping instead of widening avoids the need to reconstruct the existing Talbot Hill retaining wall and avoids effects on properties south of I-405 in this area. Between Talbot Road and the “S-Curves”, northbound I-405 will be widened to achieve standard lane and shoulder widths. Most of this length will be supported by retaining walls to minimize effects to Thunder Hills Creek, adjacent properties, and the existing cut slope south of I-405. To support the fill required to widen the roadway on the north side of I-405 next to the outfall for the original Rolling Hills Creek culvert, the design uses a retaining wall. By using the retaining wall, the project improvements at this location can be constructed without affecting the existing culvert. WSDOT will use a non-standard design for the I-405 to SR 167 exit ramp. The changes from the design standards include not providing a recovery lane, narrowing the distance between the through lane and ramp, and providing narrower shoulders. While these changes deviate from WSDOT design standards they are an improvement over existing conditions. These features will avoid effects to the existing Rolling Hills Creek/Thunder Hills Creek channel located between I-405 and the Renton Cinema complex as shown in Exhibit 5. Using retaining walls along the west side of Benson Road avoids effects to Rolling Hills Creek and the wetlands east of Talbot Road. WSDOT will use retaining walls to support widening southbound I-405 south of the Cedar Avenue overpass. Using retaining walls versus a fill slope, avoids encroaching on Cedar Avenue and Main Avenue in Renton. What is a recovery lane? A recovery lane is a paved area adjacent to an off-ramp. This area gives drivers, who find themselves exiting the freeway unintentionally, room to maneuver back onto the freeway. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 16 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report WSDOT also plans to replace the existing Benson Road overpass on a new alignment. The new bridge will be located slightly to the west of the existing bridge. This will allow traffic to continue to use the existing overpass until the new one is completed. This will minimize disruption for local traffic and to emergency response vehicles. Where northbound and southbound I-405 passes under the Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue overpasses, WSDOT will add lanes by restriping. This design avoids replacing the two overpasses; however, the available area does not allow the standard shoulder and lane widths. WSDOT shifted a proposed stormwater facility to avoid effects to the existing Renton Coal Mine Hoist Foundation site south of Benson Road. This site is on the Washington Historic Register. What is planned for wetland and stream mitigation? WSDOT will compensate for unavoidable effects to wetlands with credits from the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. Mitigation is needed for 1.66 acres of wetlands. The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank is being developed as a joint effort between WSDOT and the City of Renton. This ‘bank’ will construct a new high quality wetland complex that will serve to replace other wetlands that are filled in by projects such as the Renton Nickel Improvement Project. The location of the bank is shown to the left. In addition to wetland mitigation, the site will also provide flood storage mitigation. The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank will be one of the first urban mitigation banks to be certified in Washington. To mitigate project effects on streams, WSDOT will remove the existing Springbrook Creek box culvert. With the new I-405 southbound and northbound bridges that will span both Springbrook Creek and Oakesdale Avenue, the box culvert is no longer needed. After the new bridges are in place, the box culvert will be removed and the streambed in that area will be restored. This will improve fish habitat within Springbrook Creek. Any additional stream mitigation required to offset project effects will be accommodated within the project vicinity. Renton Coal Mine Hoist Foundation site looking west r Interurban TrailPanther Creek Wetlands Green River TrailFort Dent Park SW 41st St S W 3 4 t h S t S W 2 7 t h S t SW 16th St W Valley HwyS W 7 t h S t S W G r a d y W a y Lind Ave SWS pri n g br ook CreekSW 23rd St Aæ Aí M 0 0.25 0.5 Miles 100 Year Floodplain 500 Year Floodplain Park Renton Tukwila Springbrook Creek Wetland & Habitat Mitigation Bank Wetlands Local Road Legend Trail Arterial Road Freeway River/Creek Channel Study Area Limits Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 17 What benefits will the project provide? The Build Alternative will benefit the area by reducing congestion at chokepoints, reducing the duration of congestion during peak commuter travel hours, and improving freight movement. This section of I-405, from the I-5 interchange to SR 169, is congested due to large traffic volumes and merging and diverging traffic. The new lanes will help relieve congestion by adding roadway capacity. This in turn will improve safety by providing drivers with more time and extra room to accelerate or decelerate and move into and out of the stream of traffic when getting on and off the freeway. This provides a smoother transition for motorists as they get on and off I-405 in Tukwila and Renton and helps decrease rear- end and sideswipe collisions. The project reduces congestion approaching the SR 167 interchange, and it complements the completed southbound I-405 to southbound SR 167 flyover ramp. This project will construct one noise wall along northbound I-405 from the intersection of South 14th Street and South 15th Street east to Talbot Road. This wall will benefit residents in that area by lowering the overall noise levels. Another benefit of this project is that it continues the application of the Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) design choices made by the communities within the I-405 corridor. The Benson Road realignment will reflect the most comprehensive application of these design choices as explained further in the next section. How will the project incorporate community design preferences? The Renton Nickel Improvement Project is being planned, developed, and designed according to CSS guidelines. These guidelines establish the community design preferences used to design the project features. Working within the framework for the overall I-405 corridor, the Urban Design Guidelines will be adapted to incorporate the communities’ design preferences. These preferences will be included in the contract documents prepared for the Renton Nickel Improvement Project. The selected I-405 theme of “Culture, Nature, and Progress,” with nature This rendering shows the new Benson Road overpass with the CSS Guidelines applied INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 18 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report being the dominant theme, will be carried into corridor- wide and local I-405 designs. The new Benson Road overpass is the main project feature that will receive CSS treatment. The new southbound and northbound bridges over Springbrook Creek and Oakesdale Avenue will also receive CSS treatments. The rest of the project elements will be designed to match in color and vegetation type only, as many of these elements will be affected by construction of future Master Plan projects. During future Master Plan phases for the overall I-405 corridor, the approved CSS guidelines will be applied throughout. How will the project be constructed? Construction of the entire Renton Nickel Improvement Project is expected to take two years, beginning in early 2008 and being completed in late 2010. However, construction activity will not be constant for the entire study area throughout this time, and in some locations, the work will take substantially less time than two years. Construction will pose some minor inconveniences because of localized travel delays due to temporary lane closures and narrowed lanes and shoulders. At-grade construction At-grade construction, which occurs on the same elevation as the existing lanes, will be staged to minimize traffic delays and detours. Typically, lanes are shifted toward the median. WSDOT then places a concrete barrier to close off the shoulder. Staging allows construction to occur safely without closing lanes for the duration of construction. Access to construction areas will occur from the roadway side to minimize property effects. Bridge construction Construction of the I-405 bridges will occur in multiple stages to minimize traffic delays and detours. The following describes typical staging for bridge construction. As the first stage, traffic is shifted toward the I-405 median and the existing lanes and shoulders are narrowed slightly to allow widening of the existing structure or construction of the new bridge depending on the design. In the next stage, traffic is shifted onto the new bridge area. If the bridge is being replaced rather than simply widened, the old structure is demolished after traffic is shifted to the new bridge. At-grade construction for this project will likely be staged similar what is shown above. Here, the southbound lanes of I-5 were shifted toward the median and a concrete barrier closed off the shoulder to provide crews a safe work area. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 19 The new Benson Road overpass will also be staged. The new structure will be built to the west, while the existing overpass remains in service. After traffic has been shifted onto the new overpass, the existing structure will be demolished. Staging areas Construction staging areas along I-405 and SR 167 will be within the WSDOT right-of-way. Potential staging areas have been identified as shown on Exhibits 2 through 9. Traffic control Detour agreements with the local agencies will be obtained after WSDOT awards the contract. A traffic control plan will be approved by WSDOT prior to starting construction. The plan’s primary objectives will be to provide a safe facility, to streamline the construction schedule, and to minimize reductions to existing traffic capacity. To lessen effects on traffic, the duration of activities will be minimized and reductions in capacity will be limited and will be targeted to a period when they will have the least effect. Why do we consider land use plans and policies as we plan this project? WSDOT considers land use plans and policies to ensure that the Renton Nickel Improvement Project is consistent with the adopted plans and policies of the cities of Tukwila and Renton. Comprehensive Plans are management tools required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) and used by local governments to establish priorities and allocate limited financial resources. Comprehensive Plans set the direction for growth and land use. These plans also guide supporting infrastructure plans or subarea plans and regulations. State agencies are required to comply with local government comprehensive plans and development regulations pursuant to RCW 36.70A.103.4 Consistency among plans and regulations and implementing projects such as the Renton Nickel Improvement Project provides for 4 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. January 2005. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 20 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report coordinated multi-jurisdictional decision-making by federal, state, and local governments. Since the I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact Statement (referenced hereafter as the Corridor EIS)5 already addressed consistency of the Corridor Program with state and regional plans, this discipline report focuses on local plans and policies, particularly comprehensive plan elements, capital improvement plans, shoreline master programs (SMPs), and zoning regulations. For a description of each type of plan/regulation, please see the Existing Conditions and Potential Effects Section, question “What are the requirements for comprehensive plans, shoreline master programs, capital facility plans, and zoning codes?” Topics related to this discipline report are found in other Renton Nickel Improvement Project discipline reports, including: Land Use Patterns: Effects upon existing land uses patterns found today including zoning conformity. Section 4(f) Evaluation: Effects upon parks and recreation resources, including planned park improvements in the near term. Fisheries and Aquatic Resources; Soils, Geology, and Groundwater; Floodplains; Wetlands; Upland Vegetation and Wildlife: Effects upon these critical areas as well as compliance with local government critical area ordinances. Social: Effects upon neighborhoods, including, among other topics, a review of nonmotorized facilities and plans. Public Services and Utilities: Demand for services and consistency of utility plans with local government plans and requirements. Transportation: Effects upon traffic and circulation on I-405 and immediate local networks, including level of service (LOS) analysis. 5 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) et al. 2002. I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact Statement. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 21 What are the key points of this report? Build Alternative The I-405 team reviewed comprehensive plans, SMPs, capital improvement programs, and development regulations to determine whether the Renton Nickel Improvement Project is consistent with them. Based on our review the Build Alternative is consistent with Tukwila and Renton plans, policies, and regulations as follows: The Build Alternative is one step in the overall Corridor Program and helps meet the growth expected in Tukwila and Renton land use plans. The Build Alternative is consistent with zoning regulations that allow for roadway facilities. The Build Alternative will meet Tukwila and Renton policies and regulations related to street and landscape design with the “context sensitive solutions” applied to permanent improvements (see “What is the Build Alternative” section for more information about context sensitive solutions). Acoustical treatments are provided where appropriate according to the Noise and Vibration Discipline Report. Shoreline policies and regulations can be met with the proposed design and measures to reduce effects described in Floodplains, Surface Water and Water Quality, Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Upland Vegetation and Wildlife, and Wetlands Discipline Reports. The Build Alternative is largely contained within the existing ROW. Where the project extends beyond the current ROW, this extension does not impede Tukwila or Renton plans for local street improvements. There are two inconsistencies regarding city plans, both of which are not caused by the Build Alternative: future LOS results at local intersections in Tukwila and Renton and project list consistency in the Renton Transportation Element. These inconsistencies are described in Exhibit 10 along with measures to reduce inconsistencies. The Cities will be responsible for any mitigation required due to their planning efforts. What are level of service (LOS) standards? Level of service is a measure of system operating performance for roadways, transit, non-motorized, and other transportation modes. Letter “grades” have been assigned to different congestion conditions: A – Free flow, low volumes, no delays B – Stable flow, minor delays C – Stable flow, speeds controlled due to higher volumes D – Stable flow, speeds controlled due to higher volumes E – Unstable flow, low speeds, considerable delay F – Forced flow, very low speeds, long delays Jurisdictions may develop other LOS standards based on local policy choices. Transportation Research Board (TRB). 1997 and 2000 updates. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Special Report 209. National Research Council. Washington, DC. INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 22 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Additional discussion of LOS standards and planned transportation improvements is found in the Existing Conditions and Potential Effects section. Exhibit 10. Build Alternative Consistency Summary Jurisdiction/Plan Project is Consistent? Discussion Measures to Reduce Inconsistencies Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Policies Yes Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plans Yes Tukwila Capital Improvement Plans Yes Tukwila Levels of Service Yes: City plans require review With or without the Build Alternative, growth is expected to increase traffic at local street intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In 2014, LOS would be exceeded at an intersection on Southcenter Boulevard and 65th Avenue S; city average LOS standard for the segment has not been calculated with this analysis. The City’s standard is an average LOS E across the segment; additional review would be needed to confirm the average LOS across the segment according to the City’s methodologies. Dependent on this further review, the City may revisit LOS standards or land use and growth projections to meet concurrency requirements. Tukwila SMP Policies Yes Tukwila SMP Regulations Yes Tukwila Zoning Map Yes Tukwila Zoning Regulations Yes Renton Comprehensive Plan Policies Yes Renton Comprehensive Land Use Plans Yes Renton Transportation Network (functional class) Yes INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 23 Exhibit 10. Build Alternative Consistency Summary (continued) Jurisdiction/Plan Project is Consistent? Discussion Measures to Reduce Inconsistencies Renton Capital Improvement Plans Yes; City plans require review The Build Alternative implements part of the City’s transportation improvement program and is consistent with City plans. However, Renton includes improvements after 2022 that are beyond the scope of the I-405 Corridor Program. To eliminate City plan inconsistencies, the City of Renton could make Comprehensive Plan amendments, or the City could be part of coordinated planning effort between City of Renton and WSDOT for the period after 2022. Renton Levels of Service Yes; City plans require review With or without the Build Alternative, growth is expected to increase traffic at local street intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In 2014, LOS would be exceeded at some local intersections based on City’s “operational” standard, particularly north of the I-405 and SR 167 interchange near Rainier Avenue S and SW Grady Way; results of Renton’s LOS index are not known. The City applies a travel time index as its LOS standard and uses “letter” standards only as a gauge of operational impacts. Upon further review, the City may revisit LOS standards or land use and growth projections to meet concurrency requirements. Renton SMP Policies Yes Renton SMP Regulations Yes A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required. New SMP and critical area regulations may take effect, and generally based on I-405 design concepts, proposed criteria appear to be met. Renton Zoning Map Yes Renton Zoning Regulations Yes Source: Jones & Stokes No Build Alternative State highway maintenance and operation activities would continue, but no capacity changes would occur. The lack of improvements would not fulfill City policies to the same degree as the Build Alternative, such as promoting multiple modes (e.g., HOV facilities on SR 167) and improving state highways to facilitate regional traffic. Future growth combined with no roadway improvements would achieve less congestion relief on I-405 than with the Build Alternative. The No Build INTRODUCTION Renton Nickel Improvement Project 24 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Alternative has the same effects on local street LOS as the Build Alternative. The No Build Alternative would not conflict with the following plans: Essential public facility policies would not apply since improvements would not be proposed. SMP policies and regulations and zoning regulations would not apply since improvements would not be proposed. However, overall, the No Build Alternative may slow or impede local government plans, or it may cause local jurisdictions to revisit their land use, transportation, and capital facility plans to balance growth with levels of service. Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 25 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS How was information collected and what studies were completed? The I-405 team prepared the Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report using the following methods: Agency long-range plans and regulations were collected via agency web sites and at agency offices, as appropriate; and Meetings, teleconferences, or correspondence with City staff members were used to interpret how the cities apply local policies and regulations. The focus of the analysis is on the most relevant sections of local governments’ long-range plans for the I-405 Corridor in the areas of land use, transportation, and capital facilities. SMPs and zoning codes were also assessed for applicable policies and regulations. What is the study area for this analysis and how was it determined? The Renton Nickel Improvement Project extends along I-405 from I-5 to SR 169, as well as along SR 167 from I-405 to SW 41st Street. Communities abutting the Renton Nickel Improvement Project include the cities of Tukwila and Renton. See Exhibit 11. Accordingly, plans prepared by these communities are reviewed in this discipline report. Specifically, this discipline report considers land use plans, policies, and regulations applicable to the Renton Nickel Improvement Project itself or applicable to the lands, local streets, or neighborhoods within the study area. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 26 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 11. Renton Nickel Improvement Project Vicinity Map Detail EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 27 What are the requirements for comprehensive plans, shoreline master programs, capital facility plans, and zoning codes? This section presents an overview of comprehensive plan, zoning, and SMP requirements for the Cities of Tukwila and Renton. Comprehensive Plans and Zoning Comprehensive plans provide overall policy and planning guidance, which is implemented by development regulations such as zoning. SMPs are considered a part of local governments’ comprehensive plans and development regulations. A summary of requirements or features of comprehensive plans, zoning regulations, and SMPs is provided below. Comprehensive Plans and the Growth Management Act A comprehensive plan provides the vision, goals, and policies of the community both in written and map form. These plans direct the allocation of resources and guide the preparation of rules and regulations for plan implementation. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)6 requires and guides the preparation and amendment of local comprehensive plans. The GMA contains 13 goals addressing the following: Urban growth Reduce sprawl Transportation Housing Economic development Property rights Permits Natural resource industries Open space and recreation Environment Historic preservation Public facilities and services Citizen participation and coordination Local comprehensive plans must respond to state GMA goals with the following required elements: land 6 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. January 2005. Revised Code of Washington RCW 36.70A. What are comprehensive plan elements? The Washington State Growth Management Act requires several “elements” in a local government Comprehensive Plan including: land use, housing, capital facilities, utilities, rural development (counties only), transportation, economic development, and parks and recreation. Optional elements, e.g., subarea plans or other topics, can be addressed as well. Elements typically consist of “plan chapters” that include plans/schemes/designs/objectives/ principles for each required or voluntary topic. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 28 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report use, housing, transportation, capital facilities, utilities, parks and recreation, and economic development. For the proposed Renton Nickel Improvement Project, the most relevant GMA goal is: Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. To respond to this goal, Transportation Elements must include inventories, analyses and policies. GMA also identifies several other planning requirements applicable to roads and highways. Specifically, GMA requires adoption of concurrency regulations, ensuring that transportation strategies or improvements are in place at the time of development or within six years to meet local LOS requirements. Local LOS requirements do not apply to “Highways of Statewide Significance,” which include I-405 and SR 167. For Highways of Statewide Significance, local jurisdictions are to evaluate the effects of land use upon the state facility. Local jurisdictions should also consider differences between state LOS standards for urban facilities as described in Appendix C. Regarding local streets, LOS standards and methodologies may differ from State LOS standards. Additionally, Highways of Statewide Significance, such as I-405 and SR 167, are one type of “essential public facility”. Essential public facilities are those typically difficult to site (e.g., airports, jails, inpatient facilities). Local comprehensive plans are required to address processes for identifying such facilities. No local plans or regulations may preclude the siting of essential public facilities. Further, local governments are encouraged in GMA to coordinate their permitting and environmental review processes for transportation projects.7 The sidebar provides more detailed explanation of this process. This discipline report does not repeat an overall review of the Corridor Program’s consistency with GMA since this was accomplished in 2002 in the completed I-405 Corridor EIS.8 This discipline report focuses on local 7 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. January 2005. Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70A.420). 8 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) et al. 2002. I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact Statement. How are transportation project reviews coordinated among jurisdictions? RCW 36.70A.420, in part, indicates: “It is the intent of the legislature to provide for more efficiency and equity in the decisions of local governments regarding major transportation projects by encouraging coordination or consolidation of the processes for reviewing environmental planning and permitting requirements for those projects. The legislature intends that local governments coordinate their regulatory decisions by considering together the range of local, state, and federal requirements for major transportation projects. Nothing in RCW 36.70A.420 or 36.70A.430 alters the authority of cities or counties under any other planning or permitting statute.” Additionally, RCW 36.70A.430 states: “For counties engaged in planning under this chapter, there shall be established by December 31, 1994, a collaborative process to review and coordinate state and local permits for all transportation projects that cross more than one city or county boundary. This process shall at a minimum, establish a mechanism among affected cities and counties to designate a permit coordinating agency to facilitate multi-jurisdictional review and approval of such transportation projects.” EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 29 government plans that are required to be consistent with GMA. The GMA discussion above provides a context to help interpret local government comprehensive plans and regulations reviewed in this report. Zoning Zoning is a law adopted by local government to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by defining compatible and incompatible uses, establishing the density and intensity of development for adequate light, air, infrastructure, and defining or maintaining the character of established districts. Zoning divides the regulated land into several classifications or zones to identify the following types of regulations for each zone: allowable uses, structure size, and structure locations on a lot. One or more letters define different zones within a jurisdiction (e.g., Low Density Residential - LDR, Urban Center - UC). The classification codes are placed on a map, which applies to all parcels and lots in the defined district. Zoning codes typically address roadways and other transportation improvements, such as park-and-ride facilities. Per the Washington Administrative Code,9 zoning is required to be consistent with each jurisdiction’s respective comprehensive plan, particularly the future land use map. Shoreline Master Programs An SMP is required by the State Shoreline Management Act for streams with flows greater than 20 cubic feet per second (cfs) and lakes greater than 20 acres in size. The Green River, Springbrook Creek, and Cedar River are subject to SMPs. Gilliam Creek, Panther Creek, and other named and unnamed creeks in the study area are not subject to SMPs, because each has a flow less than 20 cfs; however, activities in proximity to the creeks are subject to critical area regulations. The shoreline jurisdiction includes the land area within 200 feet of its ordinary high water mark (OHWM; see sidebar), associated wetlands, and, in some cases, associated floodplains. 9 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. July 20, 2005. Washington Administrative Code (WAC 365- 195-800). What does ordinary high water mark (OHWM) mean? An "ordinary high water mark" is a location where the vegetation and soil show the effects of the water. According to the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58), it is found by examining the bed and banks of tidal waters, streams, and lakes and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, that the soil and vegetation have a character distinct from that of the abutting upland. Where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, it is the line of mean high water— the highest that the water gets in an average year, but not the highest it gets during extreme flooding. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 30 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report An SMP is both a policy and regulatory document, and an SMP is considered a part of a jurisdiction’s GMA Comprehensive Plan and implementing development regulations. In addition to expressing policies, the SMP governs uses and activities within the shoreline jurisdiction. Its policies and regulations address circulation, conservation, and other topics relevant to the Renton Nickel Improvement Project. Key Plan/Regulation Sections Reviewed For each affected jurisdiction, this discipline report addresses consistency of the Renton Nickel Improvement Project with the following specific chapters or sections of local government plans and regulations: GMA Comprehensive Plan for Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements. The reason we address these elements in this discipline report is because of their direct relationship to transportation issues as follows: Land Use Plans direct growth and development, which creates demand for transportation systems. Transportation Plans provide analysis, roadway and intersection standards of service, and multimodal transportation facility improvement programs to meet land use plans. Capital Facilities Plans identify the facilities, including transportation, required to meet future land use demands and the funding sources committed or in place to fund the needed facilities. Some jurisdictions address essential public facilities in this element if not already addressed in the Land Use Element. I-405 and SR 167 are considered essential public facilities. SMP policies and regulations. Along regulated shorelines, SMP policies and regulations may govern design and construction of roadway and related improvements. Zoning regulations. Zoning regulations primarily implement local governments’ long- range land use elements and may govern uses, including public and transportation facilities, such as those proposed with the Renton Nickel Improvement Project. In this EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 31 report, the focus is on accommodating planned transportation improvements within local governments’ zoning regulations. Discussions of how transportation improvements would affect private properties’ conformance with zoning requirements are found in the Land Use Patterns Discipline Report. How were the effects of the alternatives determined? The I-405 team determined the effects of the alternatives by conducting a consistency analysis comparing City of Tukwila and City of Renton comprehensive plans and regulations with the Renton Nickel Improvement Project. Consistency criteria were developed using state laws and rules as a guide. Pursuant to the State of Washington Local Project Review Act,10 the types of projects that are to be reviewed for consistency include those that require any land use or environmental permit or license from a local government for a project action. Permits or licenses include, but are not limited to, building permits, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, and permits or approvals required by critical area ordinances. Projects are to be reviewed for consistency in terms of land use, density and intensity, infrastructure, and design characteristics. This project will require several permits including, but not limited to, shoreline substantial development permits. The State of Washington Local Project Review Act and implementing state rules, Washington Administrative Code,11 provide a means for local governments to determine consistency of specific projects with the GMA-required comprehensive plans and implementing regulations. For the purposes of this analysis, several specific “consistency questions” were developed using the state’s consistency review categories, i.e., land use, density, infrastructure, and design: Are the local governments’ GMA comprehensive plans and SMP policies 10 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. January 2005. Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70B). 11 Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser. July 20, 2005. Washington Administrative Code (WAC 365- 197). How do state rules guide determination of a project’s “consistency” with plans and regulations? The Washington State Local Project Review Act in RCW 36.70B, State rules (WAC 365-197-010 and 050) describe how to determine a project’s consistency with plans and regulations by essentially reviewing four topics: 1) The type of land use allowed; 2) The level of development allowed, such as dwelling units per acre or other measures of intensity; 3) Infrastructure, such as the adequacy of public facilities and services to serve development; and 4) The characteristics of the proposed development, such as compliance with specific development regulations or standards. The rules include sample questions under each of the project consistency topics, which are intended to be advisory. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 32 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report supportive of or not in conflict with the Renton Nickel Improvement Project? Do local governments’ zoning provisions or, in their absence, policies make allowances for transportation-related improvements? Is the Renton Nickel Improvement Project consistent with local governments’ comprehensive plans and/or LOS standards? Do the local governments’ GMA comprehensive plan transportation or capital facilities improvement programs and/or analyses consider or include the Renton Nickel Improvement Project? Is the Renton Nickel Improvement Project design consistent with local governments’ policies that address design? Is the I-405 Renton Nickel Improvement Project design consistent with SMP and zoning regulations? Are local street modifications made consistent with local government adopted arterial standards? The I-405 team reviewed relevant City of Tukwila and City of Renton plans, policies, and regulations. Using the above questions, the I-405 team analyzed the Renton Nickel Improvement Project’s consistency or inconsistency with these relevant documents. See sidebar for an example of this process. What is an example of the Build Alternative’s consistency with a plan policy? A City of Tukwila policy reads “1.4.2 Coordinate a planting program with the Washington State Department of Transportation to introduce major trees along the freeway corridors within Washington State Department of Transportation right-of-ways.” The Renton Nickel Improvement Project includes vegetation removal to accommodate structure widening, yet it also includes “context sensitive solutions” addressing lighting and landscaping. Where permanent improvements are installed, “context sensitive” landscaping includes revegetating in disturbed areas and planting trees where they can be safely accommodated. Revegetation and tree planting will follow WSDOT guidelines for ensuring that a “clear zone” is maintained for driver visibility (pers. com. Brian Elrod, May 20, 2005). Therefore, the Renton Nickel Improvement Project design is consistent with this City of Tukwila design-related policy. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 33 What existing local plans and policies are relevant to this project? Is the project consistent with these local plans and policies? City of Tukwila This section reviews Tukwila’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan policies for consistency with the Build and No Build Alternatives.12 The goals and policies addressed in this section are contained in the following plan elements: Community Image, Residential Neighborhoods, Transportation Corridors, Tukwila Urban Center, Transportation, and Capital Facilities. Policies are grouped by the topics of land use and design, transportation, and capital facilities: Land Use and Design Policies Tukwila goals and policies encourage landscaping and noise attenuation along all freeways in the Tukwila community (see sidebar). Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Renton Nickel Improvement Project includes vegetation removal to accommodate structure widening. It also includes “context sensitive solutions” addressing lighting and landscaping where improvements are intended to be permanent.13 “Context sensitive” landscaping includes revegetation in disturbed areas and trees where they can be safely accommodated. Revegetation and tree planting will follow WSDOT guidelines for ensuring that a “clear zone” is maintained for driver visibility. The “clear zone” accounts for slope, volumes, and speeds, and is used to determine the height of low growing vegetation and the distance of trees from the shoulder. As part of its context sensitive solutions, WSDOT is working with the cities along the corridor to come up with “theme” trees that relate to the community. For example, WSDOT is considering hazelnut trees as part of the landscaping theme in Tukwila since it is on 12 City of Tukwila. 2004. Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 13 Renton Nickel Improvement Project elements are one step in a larger Corridor Program; where improvements are built to the full Corridor Program level, greater levels of context sensitive solutions would be included than where further improvements will be implemented at a later date for the full Corridor Program. Interim aesthetic approaches may involve color and landscaping. See the Introduction section. What are examples of City of Tukwila Land Use and Design Policies? Following are pertinent land use and design policies: 1.3.1 Develop a set of distinctive physical features or gateways to be located at freeway off-ramps…; use graphics, orientation maps, informational signage, lighting, specimen trees, plantings with seasonal color, artwork, monument forms, or combinations thereof. 1.3.4 Work with the Washington Department of Transportation to develop a planting plan distinctive to Tukwila... 1.4.2 Coordinate a planting program with the Washington Department of Transportation to introduce major trees along the freeway corridors... 7.2.2 Discourage noise levels which are incompatible with current or planned land uses... 7.2.7 Ensure that urbanization and development do not negatively impact current neighborhood noise levels or E.P.A. standards. 8.4.7 Work with the State Department of Transportation to landscape and maintain the appearance of its properties and provide noise attenuation where technically feasible. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 34 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report the City logo.14 These aspects of the Build Alternative are consistent with policies 1.3.1, 1.3.4, 1.4.2, and 8.4.7 as shown on the sidebar on the prior page. Additional travel lanes on I-405 and higher vehicle speeds may increase perceived noise levels at sensitive receptors (e.g., residential areas). In Tukwila, this may include lands zoned and used for single and multiple family residences north of I-405. The Noise and Vibration Discipline Report analyzes whether noise barriers are warranted to buffer roadway noise to nearby residential uses. The noise analysis and agency coordination efforts will meet policies 7.2.2 and 7.2.7. See the Noise and Vibration Discipline Report. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: Policies and objectives regarding landscaping and acoustical buffering (i.e., all policies in sidebar on prior page) would not be implemented with the No Build Alternative, since it includes only routine maintenance, repair, and safety improvements. Transportation Policies Transportation policies support a balanced transportation network and regional solutions as shown in the sidebar at left. Note LOS policies are addressed in the section, Tukwila Levels of Service, further below. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Build Alternative will improve regional access (policies 10.3.1 and 13.3.9) by delaying the onset of I-405 peak hour congestion and clearing congestion a little faster than otherwise would be the case as described in the LOS section below. Also see the Transportation Discipline Report for more discussion. In Tukwila, the Build Alternative includes roadway improvements, and it does not include transit elements as promoted in policy 13.4.4. However, the Build Alternative will reduce projected congestion for transit as well as single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) and high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs). The Build Alternative implements in part the overall I-405 Corridor Program that does include both transit and roadway improvement elements. 14 Elrod, Brian, I-405 Project Team. Personal communication, teleconference, May 20, 2005. What are examples of City of Tukwila Transportation Policies? Selected Tukwila transportation policies include: 10.3.1 Regional Access. Promote transportation and transit services and facilities, as well as traffic management systems that increase and improve access to and from the Tukwila Urban Center for all transportation modes; encourage a range of solutions, including but not limited to local circulator systems, regional-serving park-n-ride sites, connections to regional rail alignments, and regional and local high- occupancy vehicle systems. 13.3.9 Regional or non-local traffic will be discouraged on residential access streets. 13.4.4 Recommend and pursue a bus route along Interstate 405 connecting a Tukwila multimodal center, located at Interstate 405 and Interurban, with Everett (Boeing) and serving the freeway stations, such as the Bellevue Transit Center. 13.4.8 Support transportation system management programs and measures developed by Washington State Department of Transportation, Metropolitan King County, Tukwila, and others, including the private sector, to reduce congestion and serve travel needs. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 35 Transportation systems management (TSM) programs (policy 13.4.8) seek to make more efficient use of existing capacity by such measures as ramp metering, variable message signs, and others. Currently, WSDOT provides a TSM program on I-405, including ramp meters, incident response, and closed circuit television. The Build Alternative is a limited expansion that implements in part an overall package of transit, intelligent transportation systems, and capacity improvements described in the I-405 Corridor EIS15, and therefore, the project is consistent with City policies overall. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: With no capital improvements, the No Build Alternative will not implement City transportation policies. Capital Facilities Policies Capital Facility Element goals and policies are broad and focus primarily on City-provided facilities. A general goal includes: Goal 14.1 Public facilities that reflect desired levels of quality, address past deficiencies, and anticipate the needs of growth through acceptable levels of service, prudent use of fiscal resources, and realistic timelines. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Build Alternative reduces congestion modestly and responds to growth in the region. Designs are intended to maximize the congestion reduction benefits given the funding levels provided. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: With no capital improvements, the No Build Alternative will not implement City capital facility policies. 15 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) et al. 2002. I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact Statement. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 36 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Map The portion of the study area that is in Tukwila is designated on the Comprehensive Plan map as follows: North side of I-405, Office (O), Regional Commercial (RC), Low Density Residential (LDR), Medium Density Residential (MDR), and High Density Residential (HDR). South side of I-405, Tukwila Urban Center (TUC). Most of the land has been developed with these uses and there is little vacant land, if any. The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan map is shown in Exhibit 12. Zoning districts implement the Comprehensive Plan map districts. See Exhibit 13 for the City of Tukwila zoning map. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Most improvements will occur within the existing ROW. Some easements for improvements will be requested. Some detention facilities will be located immediately near the ROW. Improvements may affect existing land uses marginally as discussed in the Land Use Patterns Discipline Report. However, the modified and expanded facility is not anticipated to alter the City’s planned land use concepts overall. The Build Alternative will support the City’s land use plan and its resultant growth, as well as regional growth. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: With no I-405 capacity improvements planned in the area, it is unlikely that property effects would occur. The operational and maintenance activities of the No Build Alternative may not support the planned land use of Tukwila, and the lack of improvements may slow implementation of the City’s growth management plans. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 37 Exhibit 12. Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Map (2003) EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 38 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 13. City of Tukwila Zoning Map EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 39 Tukwila Capital Improvement Plans The City of Tukwila developed a 2005-2010 Capital Improvement Program.16 Programmed improvements in the vicinity of I-405 include: Klickitat/Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Access Revisions, Southcenter Boulevard Widening (I-5 – 61st Avenue S Bridge), Andover Park West (Tukwila Parkway to Strander Boulevard), West Valley Highway/S 156th Street Intersection, West Valley Highway (I-405 – Strander Boulevard), and Tukwila Urban Center – Transit Center Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Build Alternative does not appear to affect the physical location of planned improvements in the vicinity of the Build Alternative improvement limits: Although in the vicinity, the Klickitat/Southcenter Parkway/I-5 Access Revisions are not in the Build Alternative improvement limits. The I-405 improvements do not extend beyond the current ROW in the vicinity of Southcenter Boulevard. The Andover Park West/Tukwila Parkway Intersection is in the vicinity of a planned expansion of the I-405 ROW but the expansion does not intrude into the Tukwila Parkway ROW. Build Alternative improvements are not proposed at the West Valley Highway/S 156th intersection. The Build Alternative should not affect the West Valley Highway widening from I-405 to Strander Boulevard. The Tukwila Urban Center zone abuts I-405 to the south. Possible locations for the Transit 16 City of Tukwila. December 13, 2004. City of Tukwila, Washington, Adopted 2005-2010 Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 40 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Center include Andover Park East or near the existing bus zone near the Westfield Mall. The Transit Center will not be located within the improvement limits of the Build Alternative. Regarding individual local intersection operations, please see the LOS discussion below. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: The No Build Alternative would not include capital improvements, and it would not affect the location of Tukwila’s planned capital projects. Tukwila Levels of Service Tukwila designates LOS standards for city streets, and consistent with state law, does not designate LOS standards for Highways of Statewide Significance such as I-405 as shown at left. Local LOS standards equal an average “E” in the study area. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Growth will continue between 2002 and 2014 and will increase traffic congestion. The Transportation Discipline Report identifies benefits of the Renton Nickel Improvement Project on the I-405 mainline as having benefits for the periods of time before and after the peak travel periods when traffic volumes are lower and delaying the onset of congestion and clearing congestion more quickly during peak travel periods. See sidebar at left for definition of peak and non-peak travel. Consistent with state law, the City of Tukwila exempts Highways of Statewide Significance from its local LOS requirements. There are no conflicts with City LOS policies addressing state highway facilities. The Transportation Discipline Report describes that with or without the Build Alternative, growth is expected to increase traffic at local street intersections during the morning and afternoon peak hour. The City’s LOS standards will be met at all the studied intersections during the 2014 a.m. peak hour. The City’s LOS standards will be met at all studied intersections during the 2014 p.m. peak hour except at the Southcenter Boulevard/65th Avenue South intersection projected to operate at LOS F. However, the City’s standard is an average LOS E across the segment. The City would need to initiate additional review to confirm the average LOS according to the City’s methodologies. Dependent on this further review, the City may revisit LOS standards or land use What are examples of City of Tukwila LOS Policies? Tukwila LOS policies state: 13.3.1 Use the following LOS standards to guide City improvement and development approval decisions:1 The Tukwila Urban Center area LOS average is not to exceed E. The Interurban Avenue corridor LOS average is not to exceed E. Southcenter Boulevard between Grady Way and Interstate 5 is not to exceed average LOS E. 13.7.4 Highways of Statewide significance (HSS), including Interstate 5 (I-5), Interstate 405 (I-405), and State Route 518 (SR 518), are exempt from concurrency requirements. What does peak vs. off-peak travel mean? Peak travel direction is the direction of the freeway with the higher demand and more congestion. Off-Peak travel direction is the direction of the freeway with the lower demand. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 41 and growth projections to meet concurrency requirements. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: By 2014, the No Build Alternative results in increased a.m. and p.m. peak hour congestion and increased off-peak congestion in the p.m. hours along I-405. The City does not apply LOS standards to I-405, and no conflicts with City policies are expected. At local street intersections, there is no difference in the Build and No Build LOS results. The conclusions of the Build Alternative above apply to the No Build Alternative as well. Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Shoreline Policies The Green River, and lands within 200 feet of the OHWM, are subject to the City’s SMP. The Green River is considered a Shoreline of Statewide Significance by the State of Washington Shoreline Management Act. The City’s shoreline policies establish a shoreline use environment, priority activities, and design principles to minimize adverse environmental effects (see sidebar). The portions of the Renton Nickel Improvement Project under the shoreline jurisdiction are in the Urban-Open Space Environment. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Build Alternative will construct a retaining wall within 200 feet of the west bank of the Green River and stormwater facilities within 200 feet of the east bank of the Green River. These activities will occur within the city’s “Urban-Open Space” shoreline use environment. Other road improvements will occur within the existing I-405 ROW. These improvements will not substantively affect the location or extent of priority uses identified in policy 5.1.1, i.e., single-family residential, commercial, or industrial areas (see sidebar). The natural environment (policies 5.1.1, 5.3.2, 5.7.3, and 5.9.1) will be protected by several measures, such as compliance with SMP regulations, critical area regulations, and stormwater requirements. The City regulations guide habitat effects assessment and mitigation, fill and compensatory storage in floodplains, and water quality treatment measures. See the Floodplains, Surface Water and Water Quality, Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Upland What are examples of City of Tukwila SMP Policies? Relevant and representative shoreline policies include the following: 5.1.1 … priority shall be given to the following: Maintenance of existing single- family residential development patterns; and Redevelopment of existing commercial and industrial areas, with enhanced access to the river; and Protection and restoration of natural environment features… 5.3.2 … minimize impacts on areas identified as important for other river uses, such as wildlife and aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, historical resources, and flood control. 5.3.3 Allow structures to be placed in the water, or structural reinforcement of the riverbank, only when this provides a significant, long-term public benefit or is essential to a water-dependent use. 5.7.1 Design and locate transportation uses … to provide for shoreline multiple uses, such as trees or other habitat features, turn-outs or parking areas for public access, boat ramps, biofiltration swales to protect water quality, public art, or interpretive signs. 5.7.2 Ensure that transportation uses … provide safe, convenient, and attractive pedestrian, bicycle and boater access and facilities for public transportation. 5.7.3 Minimize impacts on the natural environment (such as noises, odors, and air or water pollution). 5.9.1 Ensure that shoreline development minimizes impacts on wildlife and that significant vegetation, sandbars, wetlands, watercourses, and other areas identified as important for habitat are maintained... 5.9.2 … protect riverbank vegetation and, where feasible, restore degraded riverbanks, in order to minimize and compensate for impacts on fish and wildlife habitat. 5.11.1 Design, locate, and manage shoreline uses, such as capital improvement projects and private development, in a manner which does not endanger public health, safety and welfare, or the capacity of the river to provide long-term benefits and resources to the community. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 42 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Vegetation and Wildlife, and Wetlands Discipline Reports. Since no structures are proposed within the water or to reinforce the riverbank, there are no conflicts with policy 5.3.3. The retaining wall will lie within the 200- foot jurisdictional area, but the wall will not be located in the water or result in structural hardening of the riverbank. Context sensitive solutions will provide appropriate landscaping in areas where vegetation is disturbed, implementing policy 5.9.2. Policies 5.7.1 and 5.7.2 require transportation uses to be designed to provide for: shoreline multiple uses; safe, convenient, and attractive crossings; and multiple transportation modes. The I-405 improvements are intended to meet the function of I-405 as a regional roadway minimizing adverse environmental effects as much as possible. I-405 today and in the future gives access to those wishing to travel between communities to destinations such as public open space and parks along the river in Tukwila. I-405 is not intended to provide local access to shorelines as indicated in policies 5.7.1 and 5.7.2. The I-405 improvements will be designed to avoid or reduce adverse effects to the river, consistent with policy 5.11.1. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: Improvements would not occur with the No Build Alternative, and, therefore, shoreline policies would not apply. Shoreline Regulations Tukwila’s Shoreline Overlay regulations17 implement the Shoreline Element policies above. The Green River shoreline is Urban, consistent with the Shoreline Element policy 5.1.1 above. However, the 200-foot shoreline jurisdictional area is divided into three “management environments”: 17 City of Tukwila. February 2005. Tukwila Municipal Code, Title 18 Zoning. TMC Sections 18.44 and 18.44.120. What are relevant City of Tukwila Shoreline Regulations? Relevant shoreline regulations in TMC 18.44.110 include performance standards: 4. There shall be no disruption of existing trees or vegetation within the river environment unless necessary for public safety or flood control, or if allowed as a part of an approved shoreline substantial development permit; 5. No effluent shall be discharged into the Green River which exceeds the water quality classification as established by the state for the adjacent portion of the river; 6. All state and federal water quality regulations shall be strictly complied with; 7. Wildlife habitat in and along the river should be protected; 8. All perimeters of landfills or other land forms susceptible to erosion shall be provided with vegetation, retaining walls or other satisfactory mechanisms for erosion prevention; 9. All necessary permits shall be obtained from federal, state, county or municipal agencies; 14. Landfilling is prohibited within the river channel unless such landfill is determined by the Planning Commission to protect or promote the public interest. 15. Notwithstanding any provisions of this Code to the contrary, removal of any cottonwood tree within the river environment or the low-impact environment, which tree is 12 inches or greater in diameter as measured 4.5 feet above grade, shall be subject to the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.54, Tree Regulations. More specific “management environment” standards appear to be directed to local access roads rather than state highways. These other standards are shown in Appendix B. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 43 1. River environment. The area between the mean high water mark and the low-impact environment, having the most environmentally protective land use regulations; 2. Low-impact environment. The area between the river environment and 100 feet from the mean high water mark; 3. High impact environment. The area between 100 feet and 200 feet from the mean high water mark having the least environmentally protective land use regulations. It is intended that this area be aesthetically and architecturally oriented to the low impact environment. Exhibit 14 illustrates these three environments. All of the management environments will allow the I-405 improvements proposed in the Green River shoreline jurisdiction. TMC Section 18.44.130.A.618 allows bridges in the River environment. The existing I-405 bridge across the Green River will remain, and improvements to it will occur within the existing ROW. TMC Section 18.44.14018 allows bridges and public roads in the Low-Impact environment. All activities are allowed in the High Impact environment in TMC 18.44.15018. General shoreline regulations, applicable to all management environments, address design or environmental performance standards related to vegetation/tree retention, water quality, wildlife, habitat, permitting and similar topics. See sidebar on prior page. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: All shoreline regulation use environments, as described in TMC 18.44.130, 140, and 15018, permit public roads, accommodating the Build Alternative and the related improvements within the Green River shoreline jurisdiction. The retaining wall and stormwater improvements that are proposed within 200 feet of the OHWM will meet design or environmental performance standards in TMC 18.44.11018 (see sidebar on previous page). The Build Alternative design includes stormwater treatment measures consistent with TMC subsections 18.44.110.5 and 6.18 Context sensitive solutions will 18 City of Tukwila. February 2005. Tukwila Municipal Code, Title 18 Zoning. Exhibit 14. Green River Shoreline Management Environments EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 44 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report provide appropriate landscaping in areas where vegetation will be disturbed, implementing TMC subsections 18.44.110.4, 8 and 15.18 Habitat will be protected as required by TMC subsection 18.44.110.718 through habitat effects assessment and mitigation. See the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Discipline Report and the Upland Vegetation and Wildlife Discipline Report for more information. Regarding TMC subsection 18.44.110.14,18 fill is not proposed within the river channel. The retaining wall and stormwater facility proposed within the 200 foot jurisdictional area will be designed to meet applicable flood regulations. A shoreline substantial development permit and federal and state permits will be obtained consistent with TMC subsection 18.44.110.9.18 Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: With the No Build Alternative, improvements to I-405 would not occur, and therefore, shoreline regulations would not apply. Tukwila Zoning Regulations The City of Tukwila Zoning Code18 does not apply to roads and highways in terms of permitted, conditional, accessory, or unclassified uses or development standards. Certain zones indicate that essential public facilities (includes Highways of Statewide Significance) are allowed subject to unclassified use permits. However, the zoning map does not apply a designation to the I-405 ROW. Railroads are permitted uses in the zones established along the BNSF rail line (Urban Center and Commercial Light Industrial). The zoning regulations are set up for uses on lots, not for rights-of-way. This is similar to the interpretation City staff used when reviewing the Sound Transit improvements and station.19 Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Build Alternative improvements do not conflict with zoning provisions. No local land use permits are required. 19 Gierloff, Nora, City of Tukwila. Personal communication, teleconference, May 20, 2005. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 45 Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: No improvements are proposed, and local land use permits are not applicable. City of Renton The I-405 team reviewed several Renton Comprehensive Plan Elements for this discipline report including: Land Use, Community Design, Transportation, Environment, and Capital Facilities. Analysis of selected policies appears below.20 Land Use, Design, and Essential Public Facilities Policies Renton land use and design policies address regional facilities, essential public facilities, and roadway design and compatibility. Design and compatibility policies address visual and acoustical buffer and aesthetic improvements in particular. See sidebar. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Permanent Build Alternative improvements will be designed in a “context sensitive” manner implementing policy CD-20. Context-sensitive solutions will include design standards and guidelines for the corridor, addressing landscaping and lighting, among other elements. Similar to Tukwila, WSDOT is working with the City of Renton to determine a theme tree. In Renton, this theme tree may be the western red cedar, a tie in to the name of the Cedar River.21 As described under the Tukwila policy review above, the Build Alternative implements a part of the overall Corridor Program. Build Alternative improvements that are likely to be modified with the full Corridor Program at a later date will receive interim aesthetic treatments, such as color and landscaping rather than the full “context-sensitive” solutions. A noise wall (policy CD-20) is included along I-405 east of SR 167 consistent with the Noise and Vibration Discipline Report. Modified streets (Benson Road overpass) will be designed to meet City standards and to provide context-sensitive solutions per policies CD-27 and 58. 20 City of Renton. 2004. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 21 Elrod, Brian, I 405 Project Team. Personal communication, teleconference, May 20, 2005. What are examples of City of Renton Land Use, Design, and Essential Public Facility Policies? Relevant land use, design, and public facility policies include the following: LU-79. Guide and modify development of essential public facilities to meet Comprehensive Plan policies and to mitigate impacts and costs to the City. LU-80. Use public processes and create criteria to identify essential public facilities. Public processes should include notification, hearings, and citizen involvement. Criteria should be developed to review and assess proposals for public facilities. Objective LU-T: Site and design regional facilities to provide the most efficient and convenient service for people while minimizing adverse impacts on adjacent uses and the Urban Center. LU-90. Siting of regional facilities that are specialized (e.g., landfills, maintenance shops) or serve a limited sector of the population (e.g., justice centers) should rely more strongly on special location needs of the facility and compatibility of the facility with surrounding uses. CD-20. Development should be visually and acoustically buffered from adjacent freeways. CD-27. New streets should be designed to provide convenient access and a choice of routes between homes and parks, schools, shopping, and other community destinations. CD-58. Aesthetic improvements along street frontages should be provided, especially for properties abutting major streets and boulevards. Incentives should be provided for the inclusion of streetscape amenities including: landscaping, public art, street furniture, paving, signs, and planting strips in development and redeveloping areas. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 46 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Policies and objectives addressing essential public facilities (policies LU-79, LU-80 and LU-90 and Objective LU-T) have been implemented with the broad environmental and public review process conducted as part of the overall I-405 Corridor Program in 2001/2002. Additional public processes have been conducted with Renton Nickel Improvement Project scoping meetings. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: Policies and objectives regarding visual screening, acoustical screening, and landscaping would not be implemented with the No Build Alternative. It includes only ongoing and maintenance activities. Essential public facilities policies would not be applicable since improvements are not planned. Transportation Policies Renton transportation policies address multimodal systems, agency coordination, reducing regional traffic on local roads, and other related issues (see sidebar at left). Functional class and LOS policies and programs are addressed separately below. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Build Alternative will add general-purpose auxiliary lanes in each direction on I-405 consistent with policy T- 14. Per policy T-72, surface water management will be addressed. The Surface Water and Water Quality Discipline Report provides more information on this topic. An HOV lane will be extended on SR 167 southbound, approximately a half-mile north from its current beginning. This partially implements Objective T-G and policies T-26 and T-76. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: With no capital or transit improvements, the No Build Alternative will not implement City transportation policies. What are examples of City of Renton Transportation Policies? Pertinent transportation policies are listed below: T-14. Proactively work with the state and neighboring jurisdictions to provide capacity on regional transportation systems and to reduce regional traffic on local streets. Objective T-G: Develop HOV facilities on freeways and arterials to support and encourage ridesharing by enabling HOVs to bypass or avoid severe traffic congestion on regional street and highway networks. T-26. The City should support completion of a comprehensive system of HOV improvements and programs on state highways and regional arterials that give high-occupancy vehicles a travel time advantage over SOVs. T-72. Incorporate in transportation facilities vehicular pollutant and surface water runoff management and treatment techniques that maximize water quality. T-76. WSDOT should provide funding for and construct grade-separated inside HOV lanes with direct-access (or a barrier-separated HOV facility) in the SR 167 corridor from Auburn to Renton, and the I-405 Corridor, extending from SeaTac Airport north to Bothell. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 47 Capital Facility Policies Capital facility policies are general and apply to any utility or facility. The Capital Facility Element provides text and analysis for each capital facility, (e.g., transportation, water systems, parks, etc.). See the Renton Levels of Service section below. Environmental Policies Policies addressing groundwater and water supply are found in the Environment Element, and are addressed in this section because of potential effects on the city’s aquifer recharge area: Objective EN-I: Ensure the long-term protection of the quality and quantity of the groundwater resources of the City of Renton to maintain a safe and adequate potable water supply for the City. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Within the City’s Zone 1 Aquifer Protection Area (APA), the Build Alternative will restripe lanes along the mainline. Within Zone 2, the southbound lanes would be widened near Cedar Avenue South. Benson Road improvements appear to be located south of the City’s APA Zones. See Exhibit 15 for a map and the sidebar at left for definitions. Construction activity effects may include the use of hazardous materials near the APAs during construction. Construction dewatering activities may affect aquifers. Application of City APA regulations will minimize effects during construction. Appendix B includes the City’s APA regulations. Applicable aquifer protection requirements relate to limiting the application of pesticides and nitrates during construction and after operation, and meeting construction activity requirements and fill material requirements. Application of pesticides and nitrates: During construction and after operation landscaped areas may be treated with pesticides and nitrates, if landscaping is installed along the study area as part of context-sensitive solutions. Application of pesticides and nitrates is allowed in the City regulations subject to conditions (e.g., limiting the amount of application; meeting EPA application requirements; and following state reporting requirements). However, application of pesticides and nitrates is not permitted within Exhibit 15. Renton Aquifer Protection Zones What are Aquifer Protection Area Zones? Renton’s critical area regulations define aquifer protection areas (APA), including: APA Zone 1 is defined in RMC 4-3-050.H as: “The land area situated between a well or well field owned by the City and the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour.” APA Zone 2 is defined as: “The land area situated between the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour and the boundary of the zone of potential capture for a well or well field owned or operated by the City.” EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 48 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report one hundred feet (100) of a well or two hundred feet (200) of a spring. Construction activity requirements: Standards require secondary containment for hazardous material storage, dispensing, and refueling areas, and apply if construction vehicles will be refueled on site and/or the quantity of hazardous materials that will be stored, dispensed, used, and handled on the construction site will exceed twenty (20) gallons (does not apply to fuel tanks of vehicles). There are other requirements for security, storage, and records. Fill material requirements: Fill material requirements for cleanliness and other aspects are included in the regulations and will apply where fill material will be used. Since the Build Alternative improvements will not involve ongoing hazardous materials storage, handling, treatment, usage or production, requirements for “facilities” (such as limiting amounts and requiring secondary containment) will not apply. However, it is possible that similar requirements will be applied only at the construction stage (see above). Also since surface water management and pipelines are not proposed in the APA zones, additional City stormwater and pipeline requirements will not apply. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: No improvements near APAs will occur, and no inconsistencies with City Objective EN-I are expected. Renton Comprehensive Land Use Plan Future land use classifications vary along the study area in Renton. Commercial Corridor and Urban Center Downtown designations lie along the north side of I-405. South of I-405 and west of SR 167 the City has designated “Employment Area – Valley.” East of SR 167 and south of I-405 the City has designated residential land uses, principally Residential Single Family. However, Commercial Corridor, Residential Medium Density, and Residential Multifamily classes flank the area along Benson Road. Zoning classes implement the comprehensive plan map classifications. See Exhibit 16 for the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Exhibit 17 for the Zoning Map. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 49 Exhibit 16. City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 50 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 17. City of Renton Zoning Map EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 51 Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Build Alternative improvements, such as the Benson Road overpass, may marginally affect existing land uses as discussed in the Land Use Patterns Discipline Report. However, the changes in roadway configuration and expanded I-405 facility are not anticipated to alter the City’s planned land use concepts overall. The Build Alternative will support the City’s land use plan and its resultant growth. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: With no I-405 improvements planned in the area, no property acquisition or pavement expansions would occur. The operational and maintenance activities of the No Build Alternative may not support the planned land use of Renton or other communities along the corridor. This may slow implementation of the City’s growth management plans. Renton Transportation and Capital Improvement Plan Transportation Networks City policies and plans manage the local street system, shown on Exhibit 18, based on the hierarchy and function of streets, as described in policy T-8: Policy T-8. Each street in the city would be assigned a functional classification based on factors including traffic volumes, type of service provided, land use, and preservation of neighborhoods. Freeways are not assigned a functional classification in Renton’s Transportation Element. Regarding local streets, Renton classifies Benson Road as a Minor Arterial as shown in Exhibit 18 and defined in the sidebar. Additionally, the Southeast Area Bicycle Route is planned along Benson Road from Main Avenue South to Southeast 168th Street. What are the City of Renton Arterial Classes? The City of Renton specifies arterial street functional classifications in its 2004 Comprehensive Plan as follows: “Principal Arterials” are streets and highways that connect major intra-city activity centers, have primarily high traffic volumes that travel at relatively fast vehicle speeds, and therefore, have less emphasis on land use access. Grady Way in south central Renton and N.E. 3rd/4th Street in East Renton are examples of principal arterials. “Minor Arterials” are streets that provide links between principal arterials and collector arterials, and carry moderately high traffic volumes at less vehicle speed than on principal arterials. These arterials also connect intra-city activity centers with some emphasis on land use access. Southwest 7th Street in west central Renton and Union Avenue in northeast Renton are examples of minor arterials. “Collector Arterials” are streets that distribute traffic between principal and minor arterials and local access streets. Collector arterials include streets that provide major traffic circulation with more emphasis on land use access within commercial and industrial areas, and residential neighborhoods. East Valley Road in southwest Renton and N.E. 12th Street in northeast Renton are examples of collector arterials. What is a transportation network? A network comprises a system of streets within a specified area. Networks are used by cities to measure how well their street systems function to provide needed capacity and move people. These networks often include planned improvements that are in their Transportation Improvement Programs. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 52 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 18. City of Renton Arterial Streets EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 53 Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: Renton Nickel Improvement Project enhancements will rebuild Benson Avenue South as an overpass across I-405. Motorized and nonmotorized improvements will meet City design standards. It is not anticipated that a change to the functional classification will be needed since the road will still link between Grady Way (Principal Arterial) and County arterials to the south. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: The No Build Alternative would not affect City’s functional classification plan, nor the City’s nonmotorized modes plans, since local streets and arterials would not be modified. Planned Capital Facilities Several improvements to I-405 or to the City’s affected roadway network are planned in the City’s Transportation and Capital Facilities Elements for the 2005 to 2010 period, see Exhibit 19: SR 167 / SW 27th Street HOV (TIP #2) SR 169 HOV – Sunset Boulevard to east City Limits (TIP #4) SR 169 Corridor Study (TIP #11) I-405 Improvements in Renton (TIP #13) Benson Road – S 26th to Main (TIP #17) Sound Transit HOV Direct Access (TIP #23) WSDOT Coordination Program (TIP 41) Park-Sunset Corridor (TIP #44) The City’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Element identify Renton’s total costs or its share of joint projects with WSDOT. Projects for which the City is not contributing are not listed, including several I-405 improvements. However, the City has been testing LOS and concurrency citywide, assuming I-405 Corridor improvements will be implemented. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 54 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 19. Renton Arterial Plan EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 55 Amendments to Renton’s Transportation and Capital Facilities Elements were made in 2004, and these amendments resulted from the Final Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS.22 In the Draft23 and Final Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS documents, the City tested various land use concepts and transportation networks, which in some cases exceeded some WSDOT’s currently planned I-405 improvements. The Boeing redevelopment land use assumptions at the time were not a part of the regional land use assumptions used by the Puget Sound Regional Council. The 2004 Transportation Element24 identifies City, county, and state improvements, including I-405 Corridor improvements that support the City’s land use plans. WSDOT projects assumed by the City between the years 2002 and 2022 (the City of Renton plan horizon year) include those on Exhibit 20. City listed improvements that lie in the Renton Nickel Improvement Project study area are shown with bold text. 22 City of Renton. 2003b. Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS, Final Environmental Impact Statement. October 21, 2003. 23 City of Renton. 2003a. Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment Draft EIS. July 8, 2003. 24 City of Renton. 2004. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 56 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 20. Improvements Assumed to be WSDOT Responsibility in Renton Transportation Element 2002 to 2022 Arterial Plan # Roadway/Section Type of Improvement 47. I-405 – I-5 to SR 167 add one lane in each direction 48. I-405 – SR 167 to North City Limits add two lanes in each direction 49. SR 167 – I-405 to SW 43rd Street add one lane in each direction 50. I-405/SR 167 Interchange Southbound I-405 to Southbound SR 167 construct direct connection ramp Northbound SR 167 to Northbound I-405 construct direct connection ramp Northbound I-405 to Southbound SR 167 construct direct connection ramp 51. I-405 between Lind Avenue SW and Talbot Road construct one-way frontage road in each direction with ramp connections to I-405 at Lind and Talbot 52. I-405/SR 169 Interchange SR 169/North 3rd Street construct split-diamond interchange Southbound I-405 to Eastbound SR 169 construct direct connection ramp 53. I-405/Park Avenue N Interchange reconstruct to accommodate I-405 widening 54. I-405/N 30th Street Interchange reconstruct to accommodate I-405 widening 55. I-405/NE 44th Street Interchange reconstruct to accommodate I-405 widening and future improvements 56. SW 43rd Street – Lind Avenue SW to Talbot Road arterial widening 57. East Valley Road – SW 16th to SW 34th Street arterial realignment 58. Lind Avenue SW – Grady Way to SW 16th Street arterial widening to accommodate frontage road and I-405 ramps 59. Talbot Road – South Renton Village Place to South 15th Place arterial widening to accommodate frontage road and I-405 ramps 60. Mill Avenue South – Houser Way to Bronson Way convert to one-way northbound 61. Renton and Cedar Avenue Overpasses of I-405 realignment/revisions to accommodate I-405 widening 62. Sunset Boulevard – west of I-405 realignment/revisions to accommodate I-405 widening 63. Houser Way – north of North 4th Street realignment/revisions to accommodate I-405 widening 64. Lake Washington Boulevard – north of NE 44th Street realignment to accommodate I-405 widening 65. Benson Road/I-405 Overpass replacement to accommodate I-405 widening Source: City of Renton 2004 Note: Bold text indicated listed improvements are in the Renton Nickel Improvement Project study area. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 57 The 2004 Transportation Element also includes state highway improvements beyond the Renton Nickel Improvement Project and the I-405 Corridor Program scope, but the Element identifies these as post-2022 improvements. These post-2022 improvements are shown in Exhibit 21. City listed improvements that lie in the Renton Nickel Improvement Project study area are shown with bold text. Exhibit 21. Improvements Assumed to be WSDOT Responsibility in Renton Transportation Element Post 2022 Roadway/Section Type of Improvement I-405 – 1-5 to SR 167 add one lane in each direction I-405/SR 167 Interchange Northbound SR 167 to Southbound I-405 construct direct connection ramp East Valley Road at SW 34th Street construct new ramps connecting to SR 167 I-405 at North 10th Street construct direct connection ramps to and from the north I-405 at SR 169 Northbound I-405 to Houser Way construct direct connection ramp Southbound Houser Way to Southbound I-405 construct direct connection ramp Northbound SR 169 to Northbound I-405 construct direct connection ramp Rainier Avenue – Grady Way to East Valley Road realign roadway to connect to East Valley Road at SW 16th Street East Valley Road – SW 16th to SW 34th Street arterial widening Source: City of Renton 2004 Note: Bold text indicated listed improvements are in the Renton Nickel Improvement Project study area. WSDOT and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approval will be required for improvements beyond the I-405 Corridor Program scope. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: I-405 improvements that affect Renton are addressed generally in the City’s adopted Transportation Element. City modeling prepared in 2002 for the recent EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 58 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Transportation Element25 assumed I-405 improvements, and modeling prepared as part of land use plan amendments in 2003 (Boeing redevelopment) fully integrated the planned I-405 improvements. The City studied improvements consistent with the I-405 Corridor Program as well as other improvements. As the first step towards the I-405 Corridor Program, the Renton Nickel Improvement Project implements the following improvements shown on Exhibit 20: 47 48 (one of the two lanes added each direction) 49 (lane added in southbound direction only) 65 Some freeway and local road improvements assumed in Exhibit 20 are not planned with the Build Alternative, (for example, projects 56 through 59, and 61), and could be implemented with other future projects. However, the Renton Nickel Improvement Project is a first step that achieves a portion of the Renton Transportation Element, and the project is consistent with City goals and policies. Unrelated to the Build Alternative, there are inconsistencies between City plans compared with the larger I-405 Corridor Program. The City Transportation Element is based on greater land use assumptions (with Boeing redevelopment) than are assumed with the I-405 traffic modeling conducted for the I-405 Corridor Program, and the City’s element assumes additional roadway projects beyond the current I-405 Corridor Program as shown on Exhibit 21. WSDOT and FHWA approvals will be required to program and implement improvements beyond the current I-405 Corridor Program. However, the City-anticipated additional improvements appear not to be needed until after 2022, beyond the horizon year (see sidebar) of the I-405 Corridor Program and the 2003-2022 Washington State Highway System Plan.26 Future planning periods by the state can allow for additional programming and implementation as needed. Additionally, the ability of the existing or improved corridor and arterial system to support growth will be metered and monitored by local concurrency programs, as well as the implementation 25 City of Renton. 2004. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 26 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). February 2002. 2003-2022 Washington State Highway System Plan. What is a horizon year? Horizon Year means the expected completion date of a project, or the years that a plan is effective. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 59 of state LOS policy. See Appendix C for more information. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: The No Build Alternative would not include capital or transit improvements and would not be consistent with City capital improvement plans. If this occurs, reevaluations of LOS and/or land use may be required. Renton Levels of Service City policy establishes LOS for roadways, which accounts for multiple travel modes: Policy T-11. A LOS should be maintained that: maximizes mobility by emphasizing transit and HOV improvements; is coordinated with LOS standards of adjacent jurisdictions; and meets state requirements under GMA and concurrency. The City’s LOS policy is based on travel times (see sidebar). The LOS policy is used to evaluate citywide transportation plans. A 2002 LOS travel time index was determined for the City by establishing the sum of the average 30-minute travel distance for SOVs, HOVs, and transit as shown in Exhibit 22 (the 30-minute distance is a City of Renton standard). Exhibit 22. Average P.M. Peak Travel Distance in 30 Minutes from the City in All Directions Year SOV HOV 2 Times Transit ** (includes access time) LOS Index 2002 16.6 miles 18.7 miles 6.8 miles 42 2022 15* miles 17* miles 10* miles 42 *Rounded **The transit index value takes into account the time to walk from the work site or residence to the bus stop and the time spent waiting for the bus to arrive. The initial value is then weighted by doubling it to recognize the advantage that the transit mode has over SOV and HOV modes in its passenger-carrying capacity. Source: City of Renton, 2004 Because the Renton network is not field-tested for travel time when development applications are submitted, a practical concurrency measure is applied to individual developments. The committed network improvements support a “bank” of projected new trips, and the trips for each development are compared with the total annual and 6-year “bank” of trips (net new What are Renton LOS standards? The City of Renton bases its citywide LOS standard on a “travel time” index. This index is the sum of the average 30- minute travel distance for single- occupant vehicles, high-occupancy vehicles, and transit. The City’s 2022 index is 42 miles for all modes. On a citywide basis, the City hopes to achieve a roadway system that allows single occupancy vehicles to travel an average of 15 miles during 30 minutes of the p.m. peak hour period, 17 miles for high occupancy vehicles and 10 miles for transit. These index values for the different modes assume a mode shift from 2002 measured travel times of 16.6 miles for SOV, 18.7 miles for HOV, and 6.8 miles for transit. Because testing travel time for each new development is impractical, the City also applies a “practical” concurrency test as a proxy to see if its citywide LOS is met: at the time specific development applications are submitted, the City compares a proposed development’s number of trips to a “bank” of trips supported by the 6-year transportation improvement program, and also reviews the rate at which City improvements are being funded. Last, to look at operational issues, through environmental review, the City requires applicants to determine if their projects would result in LOS D or E conditions on nearby intersections. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 60 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report trips supported by the 6-year transportation improvement project are divided into equal annual projections). If the annual, or at least the 6-year bank, is not exceeded, development may be allowed. Additionally, the rate at which the City’s transportation improvements are funded and implemented is tracked. If the annual improvement program meets or exceeds the Transportation Plan, the City may allow development. Through project and environmental review, the City additionally requires applicants to identify the need for road improvements based on operational levels of service of ‘D’ or ‘E’ depending on location. In 2003, the City completed a study on its future land use and transportation network. This study, Final Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS,27 incorporated the I-405 assumptions. The City’s analysis indicated that in the year 2015 with Boeing property redevelopment and with the I-405 Corridor Program improvements, the Main Avenue/Benson Road/Grady Way intersection would be LOS E, and the Rainier Avenue/Grady Way intersection would be LOS D meeting the City’s operational LOS guidelines. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Transportation Discipline Report describes the effects of the Build Alternative on highway operations as improving peak period vehicle throughput and increasing travel speeds on I-405 and SR 167 when it opens in approximately 2008. As traffic volumes increase due to growth over time, the benefits of the project will decrease during peak travel periods, but there will continue to be benefits during non-peak travel periods. The City of Renton does not apply local LOS standards to I-405, and no policy conflicts will occur. The Transportation Discipline Report describes that with or without the Build Alternative, growth is expected to increase traffic at local street intersections during the morning and afternoon peak hour. The City’s a.m. and p.m. LOS on local roads will be maintained in most locations between 2002 and 2014 based on the Transportation Discipline Report results. Areas where LOS is projected to change from D or better in 2002 to E or F in 2014 include: 27 City of Renton. 2003b. Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS, Final Environmental Impact Statement. October 21, 2003. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 61 Grady Way at Lind Avenue S (p.m.) Grady Way at Rainier Avenue S (p.m.) Rainier Avenue at SW 7th (p.m.) East Valley Highway at SW 43rd Street (a.m.) These LOS forecasts do not include Boeing redevelopment as they are based on Puget Sound Regional Council Forecasts as described in the Transportation Discipline Report. The Renton Nickel Improvement Project also does not include the level of improvements tested in Renton’s Traffic Model, which assumed the full I-405 Corridor Program plus other City road improvements. As described above, the City applies a travel time index as its LOS standard, and the City uses “letter” standards only as a gauge of operational impacts. Upon further review, the City may either revisit LOS standards or land use and growth projections in order to allow development that meets concurrency requirements. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: By 2014, the No Build Alternative results in increased a.m. and p.m. peak hour congestion and increased off-peak congestion in the p.m. hours along I-405. The City does not apply LOS standards to I-405, and no conflicts with City policies are expected. At local street intersections, there is no difference in the Build and No Build LOS results. The conclusions of the Build Alternative above apply to the No Build Alternative as well. Renton Shoreline Master Program Within the Renton Nickel Improvement Project study area, two water bodies are subject to the Renton SMP: Springbrook Creek and the Cedar River. Springbrook Creek is classified as Urban in most instances, but Conservancy where there are associated wetlands as discussed in the sidebar and shown in Exhibit 24. The Cedar River is classified as Urban within the study area. Roads are allowed in the Urban Environment, and “necessary” roads are allowed in the Conservancy Environment. The City SMP does not define “necessary” roads. The discipline report author interprets this to mean that the number of roadways in the Conservancy Environment will be limited to those that are essential for access. Applicable policies and regulations are discussed below. What are Renton’s Shoreline Master Program Use Environments? The adopted Renton Shoreline Master Program (SMP) applies three possible Use Environments to regulated shorelines (areas within 200 feet of streams greater than 20 cfs and lakes greater than 20 acres in size): Natural, Conservancy, and Urban. Shoreline use environments are applied based on the shoreline characteristics and the extent to which mapping criteria and objectives are met. Allowable uses and development standards may vary based on the designated Use Environment. The Renton SMP generally defines the three use environments as follows: Natural Environment: The objective in designating a Natural environment is to protect and preserve unique and fragile shoreline or wetland environments in their natural state. The Natural environment is intended to provide areas of wildlife sanctuary and habitat preservation. Conservancy Environment: The objective in designating a Conservancy environment is to protect, conserve, and manage existing areas with irreplaceable natural or aesthetic features in essentially their native state, while providing for limited use of the area. The Conservancy environment is intended to provide a pleasant break in the surrounding urban community. Urban Environment: The objective of the Urban environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by providing for public use, especially access to and along the water’s edge and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 62 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Exhibit 23. Renton Shoreline Master Program Use Environments: Springbrook Creek EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 63 Renton Shoreline Master Program Policies Construction and development in water or within 200 feet of Springbrook Creek or the Cedar River will be subject to the SMP policies. In addition, the City SMP has identified associated wetlands with Springbrook Creek, and any activities within these wetlands are also subject to SMP policies. Shoreline conservation and circulation policies in particular are the most relevant and appear respectively in the sidebar at left and the sidebar on the following page.28 The City adopted shoreline policy amendments in April 2005, but the amendments are not effective until the City receives Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) approval expected in Summer 2005. As part of Renton’s April 2005 ordinance, the City made some amendments to the shoreline policies listed in the sidebars, but the changes are editorial in nature rather than substantial. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: In summary, Renton shoreline goals and policies address natural resource protection, water quality, compatible permanent and temporary uses, roadway minimization, multimodal shoreline access, and roadway character. No expansion of the I-405 bridge over the Cedar River is proposed. No stormwater improvements, retaining walls, or other features are proposed in the Cedar River shoreline jurisdiction. The I-405 bridge over Springbrook Creek is proposed for replacement. Springbrook Creek in this area is generally characterized by urban development (e.g., industrial and commercial uses). Bridge replacement will require that new piers and fill be placed in the floodplain. Also see the Floodplains Discipline Report. Although the Build Alternative improvements are located in an urban area, some areas of natural riparian vegetation and wetlands may need attention. Also, see the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources and Wetlands Discipline Reports. Specific construction designs at shorelines are not available, but WSDOT will comply with conservation policies 4.02.02.A through D. 28 City of Renton. 1998. City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. What are example Renton Shoreline Master Program Conservation Policies? Following are selected conservation related policies from Conservation Element 4.02.02: A. Existing natural resources should be conserved. 1. Water quality and water flow should be maintained ... 2. Aquatic habitats and spawning grounds should be protected, improved, and, if feasible, increased. 3. Wildlife habitats should be protected, improved, and, if feasible, increased. 4. Unique natural areas should be designated and maintained as open space ... Access and use should be restricted, if necessary... B. Existing and future activities… should be designed to minimize adverse effects on the environment. C. … assure that discharges from all drainage basins are considered an integral part of shoreline planning. 1. Soil erosion and sedimentation, which adversely affect any shoreline within the City of Renton, will be avoided or controlled. 2. The contamination of existing water courses will be avoided or controlled. D. Shoreline areas having historical, cultural, educational, or scientific value should be identified and protected… E. Festivals and temporary uses involving public interest and not substantially or permanently impairing water quality, water flow, or unique and fragile areas would be permitted ... F. All further development of the shorelines of May Creek east of the I-405 right-of-way, and that portion of Springbrook Creek (…SW 27th Street on the north to SW 31st Street on the south, … and … the west side of the Creek in the vicinity of SW 38th Street …) should be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. 1. Low density development should be encouraged ... 2. The existing waterway … should be left in an undeveloped natural state as much as possible. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 64 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Erosion control and stormwater management required by City shoreline policies will be accomplished consistent with applicable state and local requirements as outlined in the Surface Water and Water Quality Discipline Report. This meets conservation policies 4.02.02 A and C. Temporary uses could include construction staging. Staging areas will include shoreline setbacks and restoration upon completion. This meets conservation policy 4.02.02 E. Regarding permanent operation of the replacement bridge, WSDOT will prepare a backwater analysis to verify that the project meets zero use floodplain requirements. This will meet conservation policies 4.02.02 A and E. The I-405 improvements will not inhibit future public access opportunities along Springbrook Creek through its design (circulation policy 4.06.02 C) and will minimally disrupt the shoreline character by replacing an existing facility and not interfering with shoreline use or access (conservation policies 4.02.02 B and F, and circulation policy 4.06.02 C). A single northbound and southbound structure will span Springbrook Trail, Springbrook Creek, and Oakesdale Avenue. This new structure should not impede pedestrian access along Springbrook Creek. Visual effects will be reduced by context-sensitive solutions described in the Introduction section (circulation policy 4.06.02 A). Improvements will lessen congestion that will benefit transit operation as well as other modes (circulation policy 4.06.02 B). Bikeways are not proposed on I-405 since the facility is a freeway, and freeways are not expected to provide bicycle paths given its purpose. Circulation policy 4.06.02 is most applicable to local streets, and the Renton Nickel Improvement Project is a regional highway. Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: Improvements along I-405 would not be proposed, and therefore shoreline policies would not apply. Renton Shoreline Master Program Regulations As permitted uses in the Urban or Conservancy Use Environments, construction and operation of roadway improvements, will require a substantial development permit. Compliance with shoreline regulations will be required, particularly standards related to What are example Renton Shoreline Master Program Circulation Policies? Following are selected circulation related policies: Circulation Element 4.06.02 Policies: A. Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards, where possible. B. Public transportation should be encouraged to facilitate access to shoreline recreation areas. C. Pedestrian and bicycle pathways…should be developed. 1. Access points to and along the shoreline should be linked by pedestrian and bicycle pathways. 2. Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in new or expanded bridges or scenic boulevards within the shorelines. 3. Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in publicly- financed transportation systems or rights-of-way, consistent with public interest and safety. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 65 environmental conditions, preservation of opportunities for public access, landscaping, fill limitations, and roadway design.29 See sidebars on this page and following page for more information. Recently, the City adopted amendments to its SMP in April 2005. It also adopted amendments to its stream regulations (critical area regulations) to meet GMA “best available science” requirements. These recent amendments may affect the design of I-405 and related local roadway improvements that cross Springbrook Creek. The City will apply a 100-foot buffer along Class 1 watercourses (i.e., Springbrook Creek and Cedar River in the study area) when the shoreline amendments become effective after Ecology approval.30 The April 2005 City-amended standards are included in Appendix D. Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: SMP regulations emphasize minimizing negative effects on water quality, habitat, and aquatic resources, erosion, and aesthetics; as well as fitting in with natural topography, providing public access, and minimizing roadways in shoreline areas. The discussion of the Build Alternative and SMP policies applies to these related regulatory topics as well (see Renton SMP policies above). Regarding fill, the Renton SMP regulations allow fill “in a public use area” when it is “advantageous to the general public.” The Build Alternative involves fill to improve a public highway important to the Renton community and region. This is consistent with SMP Section 7.08.01. When new City SMP regulations are adopted by Ecology, the Build Alternative will be subject to stricter standards, such as buffers and setbacks. The SMP amendments will apply a 100-foot wide buffer along Shorelines of the state, which include Springbrook Creek. New shoreline setbacks may be reduced under proposed criteria upon an environmental study and compliance with criteria. New criteria and requirements for roadways include, but are not limited to: 29 City of Renton. 1998. City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. 30 Similar requirements were adopted in the City’s critical areas ordinance for other streams in the City. These critical areas ordinance requirements took effect in early May 2005. A 100-foot buffer would be required along Class 2 salmonid bearing waters, including Panther Creek. What do Renton’s Shoreline Regulations say about environmental, access, and landscaping requirements? The following shoreline regulations are pertinent to the proposed project: 6.02 Environmental Effects 6.02.01 Pollution and Ecological Disruption: The potential effects on water quality, … vegetation, water life and other wildlife …, soil quality, and all other environmental aspects must be considered ... 6.02.03 Erosion: Erosion is to be controlled through the use of vegetation rather than structural means where feasible. 6.02.04 Geology:.. Whatever activity is planned… must be safe and appropriate... 6.03 Use Compatibility and Aesthetic Effects: 6.03.01 The potential impact of any of the following on …land and shoreline users shall be considered … and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: A. View Obstruction: … B. Community Disturbances: Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities. C. Design Theme: … design.. shall be a uniform or coordinated design... D. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Landscaped screening shall be used to hide from public view any area that may impinge upon the visual quality of a site... 6.04 Public Access 6.04.01 Where possible, space and right- of-way shall be left available on the immediate shoreline so that trails, nonmotorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may be developed... 6.06 Landscaping. 6.06.01 General: … landscaping should represent the indigenous character of the … waterway... The scenic, aesthetic, and ecological qualities of… shorelines should be recognized and preserved.... 6.07 Unique and Fragile Areas: Unique features and wildlife habitats should be preserved and incorporated into the site. Fragile areas shall be protected... EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project 66 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Demonstrating there is no other feasible alternative route with less negative effects, Avoiding parallel routes, Designing bridges according to Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) guidelines, and Meeting seasonal work window requirements. Compliance with these new standards will be required if permits are requested after adoption of SMP amendments by Ecology (expected by Summer 2005). Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: Improvements would not occur with the No Build Alternative, and, therefore, shoreline regulations would not apply. Renton Zoning Regulations Renton zones extend to the centerline of streets. However, streets and highways do not appear specifically in the tables identifying permitted uses by zones. Generally, streets and infrastructure necessary to support land uses are, at a minimum, considered a permitted accessory use (RMC 4-2- 050.C.431). In practice, streets of any type have been treated as permitted uses.32 Generally, site plan review permits have not been required for City or other agency roadway improvements. Street designs will need to meet City street and arterial standards (4-6-060 Street Standards), particularly for those local roads that may be affected by planned improvements, i.e., Benson Road. State roads will follow state standards. City permit requirements for environmental review, critical areas, shoreline permits, and the like, would apply in any case.32 Consistency Discussion – Build Alternative: The Build Alternative will be designed to meet City regulatory requirements. Build Alternative improvements do not require local land use permits, except for shoreline substantial development permits. 31 City of Renton. 2005. Renton Municipal Code, Title 4 Development Regulations. 32 Nicolay, Laureen, City of Renton. Personal communication, teleconference, November 14, 2003. What do Renton’s Shoreline Regulations say about Fill and Roadways? The following shoreline regulations are pertinent to the proposed project: 7.08 Landfill 7.08.01 Landfills shall be permitted in the following cases: C. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or, 7.15 Roads and Railroads 7.15.01 Design Requirements A. Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards where possible. B. Roadways located in shoreland areas should be limited and designed and maintained to avoid soil erosion and to permit natural movement of groundwater. C. All debris and other waste materials from construction are to be disposed of in such a way as to avoid their entry by erosion into any water body. D. Road locations are to be planned to fit the topography, where possible, in order that minimum alteration of existing natural conditions will be necessary. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 67 Consistency Discussion – No Build Alternative: No improvements are proposed, and local land use permits are not required. How would the Build and No Build Alternatives cause indirect effects? Build Alternative The I-405 improvements are expected to have minimal indirect effects upon Tukwila and Renton plans and policies. The Build Alternative is part of an overall Corridor Program that supports local jurisdictions’ land use and growth management plans. Once I-405 improvements are implemented there may be changes in local traffic flow, greater or lesser, such as in the vicinity of Benson Road improvements. Should the potential change in traffic conditions cause the cities to re-evaluate land use, the local jurisdictions, as part of their regular comprehensive plan review and amendment updates, will control the monitoring, evaluation, and amendment process. No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative would not improve congestion, and not building the project may either slow or impede local government plans. Accordingly, local jurisdictions may revisit their land use, transportation, and capital facility plans to balance land use and growth with LOS. What are Indirect Effects? Indirect effects are defined in the WSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual as the “effect caused by the proposed action that is later in time or farther removed in distance, but still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect effects may include growth-inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems.” Were cumulative effects looked at for this discipline? The team did not evaluate cumulative effects for this discipline report. A report of cumulative effects is not needed for every discipline studied for NEPA and SEPA documentation. The disciplines that were studied for cumulative effects are Air Quality, Surface Water and Water Quality, Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat, and Wetlands. The cumulative effects for these disciplines are presented in the Cumulative Effects Analysis Discipline Report. Renton Nickel Improvement Project 68 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report MEASURES TO AVOID OR MINIMIZE PROJECT EFFECTS Are measures to avoid or minimize project effects required for the Build Alternative? WSDOT will comply with all applicable environmental rules, regulations, and other measures as described in the Build Alternative project description (see the Introduction). The mitigation measures of the prior Corridor EIS33 and Record of Decision (ROD) will be implemented. These will allow the Build Alternative to meet the various criteria, such as Tukwila and Renton SMP regulations. Build Alternative plan and policy inconsistencies were not identified, and, therefore, additional measures to avoid or minimize project effects are not required. Are there plan and policy consistency measures that should be considered? Unrelated to the Build Alternative, some City plan inconsistencies were noted in this discipline report and are addressed below. With or without the Build Alternative, City of Tukwila and Renton LOS standards for local intersections appear to be exceeded at locations along Southcenter Boulevard, Grady Way, Rainier Avenue, and East Valley Highway. Local LOS standards are more complex than those reported with the Transportation Discipline Report (e.g., Tukwila has an average LOS on some segments; Renton has an LOS index as well as “operational” standards), and in order to determine if LOS standards would be exceeded due to future growth, additional City review would be needed. In any case, certain policies adopted by WSDOT and the cities of Tukwila and Renton function to minimize inconsistencies in future capital plans and LOS policies: 33 Washington State Department of Transportation et al. 2002. I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact Statement. MEASURES TO AVOID OR MINIMIZE PROJECT EFFECTS Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 69 The Cities of Tukwila, Renton, and WSDOT will monitor development and implement concurrency programs as required by the GMA or other state legislative authority. (See Appendix C for WSDOT’s LOS policy. See Existing Conditions and Potential Effects for Tukwila and Renton concurrency policies.) Unrelated to the Build Alternative, this discipline report identified a Renton Transportation Element inconsistency with State plans, and that is the City of Renton assumes some future highway and local road improvements beyond the I-405 Corridor Program. To resolve the inconsistency, the following measures may be considered: City of Renton future growth after 2022 and/or greater regional growth may affect the I-405 Corridor projects and require additional improvements or a reduction in planned land use, or lower LOS, or a combination of these. If additional improvements are deemed appropriate by the state, the city-anticipated additional improvements would not be needed until after 2022, beyond the horizon year of the Build Alternative and the 2003-2022 Washington State Highway System Plan.34 Future planning periods by the state can allow for additional programming and implementation as needed. The City and WSDOT will monitor development and implement concurrency programs as described above. 34 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). February 2002. 2003-2022 Washington State Highway System Plan. Renton Nickel Improvement Project 70 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report REFERENCES Published Documents Renton, City of 2005 Renton Municipal Code, Title 4 Development Regulations. 2004 City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 2003a Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment Draft EIS. July 8, 2003. 2003b Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS, Final Environmental Impact Statement. October 21, 2003. 1998 City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. Tukwila, City of 2004 Adopted 2005-2010 Financial Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program. December 13, 2004. City of Tukwila, Washington. 2004 Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 2005 Tukwila Municipal Code, Title 18 Zoning. February 2005. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 2002 2003-2022 Washington State Highway System Plan. February 2002. 2002 I-405 Corridor Program NEPA/SEPA Final Environmental Impact Statement. Washington State Legislature, Office of the Code Reviser 2005 Revised Code of Washington (RCW). January 2005. 2005 Washington Administrative Code (WAC). July 20, 2005. Personal Communications Elrod, Brian, I-405 Project Team. Personal communication, teleconference, May 20, 2005. Gierloff, Nora, City of Tukwila. Personal communication, teleconference, May 20, 2005. Nicolay, Laureen, City of Renton. Personal communication, teleconference, November 14, 2003. APPENDIX A Tukwila Shoreline Regulations River and Low Impact Environments Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report A-1 A PPENDIX A T UKWILA S HORELINE R EGULATIONS R IVER AND L OW I MPACT E NVIRONMENTS River environment uses shall conform to the following standards: 1. Access roads, parking or storage areas, the closest edge of which shall be a minimum of 40 feet from the mean high water mark; 2. The centerline of railroad lead tracks shall be located no closer than 40 feet from the mean high water mark, except where the railroad lead track is bridging the river; 3. Where the riverbank has been reconstructed, it shall be landscaped with suitable plant material consistent with flood control measures to include large hardy shade or fruit trees, at maximum of 30 feet on center, such as maple, alder, poplar, cottonwood, sycamore, willow, oak, beech, walnut, ash and birch, or other species approved by the Director. In addition, at least one of the following landscape materials shall be used: a. Live groundcover at a maximum of 18 inches on center, b. Natural grass, c. Addition to the existing natural vegetation where appropriate; 4. Facilities such as pumps, pipes, etc., shall be suitably screened with hardy plant material; 5. Utility easements where necessary shall be landscaped with live groundcover or natural grass cover. Low-impact environment uses shall conform to the following standards: 1. Structures shall be sited and appropriately landscaped in accordance with underlying zoning regulations; 2. Access roads shall be located no closer than ten feet to buildings, spur tracks or parking/loading and storage facilities, and the effective setback area shall be suitably landscaped. This shall not prohibit ingress and egress points between an access road and the described facilities; APPENDIX A Renton Nickel Improvement Project A-2 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 3. Parking, loading, and storage facilities shall be appropriately screened from the river with: a. A solid evergreen screen of a minimum six-foot height, or b. Decorative fence six feet high. (Note: Chain link fence shall be slatted and planted with ivy or other trailing vine except where a safety hazard may exist.), or c. Large hardy shade or fruit trees such as maple, alder, poplar, cottonwood, sycamore, willow, oak, beech, walnut, ash, birch or other species approved by the Director at a maximum of 30 feet on center, or d. Earth berms at a minimum of four feet high, suitably planted with live groundcover or natural grass; 4. Railroad lead trackage shall be no closer than 15 feet to parking/loading and storage facilities, and shall be suitably landscaped. APPENDIX B Renton Aquifer Protection Area Regulations Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-1 A PPENDIX B R ENTON A QUIFER P ROTECTION A REA R EGULATIONS Following are selected Renton Municipal Code (RMC) sections that present the main requirements for development and construction in Aquifer Protection Areas. Universal sections such as permit procedures are not repeated here. 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations H. AQUIFER PROTECTION: 1. Applicability: The aquifer protection regulations apply to uses, activities, and facilities located within an aquifer protection area (APA) as classified below. a. Aquifer Protection Area (APA): Aquifer protection areas are the portion of an aquifer within the zone of capture and recharge area for a well or well field owned or operated by the City, as depicted in subsection Q.1 of this Section, Maps. b. Aquifer Protection Zones: Zones of an APA are designated to provide graduated levels of aquifer protection. Zone boundaries are determined using best available science documented in the City of Renton Wellhead Protection Plan, an appendix of the City of Renton Water System Plan, as periodically updated. The following zones may be designated: i. Zone 1: The land area situated between a well or well field owned by the City and the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour. ii. Zone 1 Modified: The same land area described for Zone 1 but for the purpose of protecting a high-priority well, well field, or spring withdrawing from an aquifer that is partially protected by overlying geologic strata. Uses, activities, and facilities located in this area are regulated as if located within Zone 1 except as provided by C.6(a)(iii) of this section. iii. Zone 2: The land area situated between the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour and the boundary of the zone of potential capture for a well or well field owned or operated by the City. If the aquifer supplying water to a well, well field, or spring is naturally protected by overlying geologic strata, the City may choose not to subdivide an APA into two (2) zones. In such a case, the entire APA will be designated as Zone 2. c. Mapping: i. Determination of Location within a Zone of an Aquifer Protection Area: In determining the location of facilities within the zones defined by subsection Q.1 of this Section, the following rules shall apply. (a) Facilities located wholly within an APA zone shall be governed by the restrictions applicable to that zone. (b) Facilities having parts lying within more than one zone of an APA shall be governed as follows: Each part of the facility shall be reviewed APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-2 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report and regulated by the requirements set forth in this Section for the zone in which that part of the facility is actually located. (c) Facilities having parts lying both in and out of an APA shall be governed as follows: That portion which is within an APA shall be governed by the applicable restrictions in this Section; and That portion which is not in an APA shall not be governed by this Section. ii. Zone Maps: The locations of aquifer protection areas (APA) in the City are depicted by the map in subsection Q.1 of this Section, Maps. d. Performance Standards: In addition to the general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections H2 to H10, apply to all non-exempt uses, activities, and facilities on sites located within an aquifer protection area per subsection H1, Applicability. e. Authority to Require Hydrogeologic Assessment: The City may require an applicant to prepare a hydrogeologic study if the proposal has the potential to significantly impact groundwater quantity or quality, and sufficient information is not readily available. Such a report shall be prepared by a qualified professional at the applicant's expense. Report content requirements may be specified by the City in accordance with state or federal guidelines or tailored to the particular development application. Peer review of the applicant's report may be required in accordance with 4- 3-050.F.7. 2. Facilities: a. Removal of Existing Facilities – Zone 1: i. The storage, handling, use, treatment or production of hazardous materials in aggregate quantities greater than five hundred (500) gallons shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of an APA after October 14, 2002. The storage, handling, use, treatment or production of tetrachloroethylene (e.g., dry-cleaning fluid) shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of an APA after March 31, 1999. ii. Once a facility in Zone 1 is closed, relocated, or the use of hazardous materials is terminated, reinstatement of the use of hazardous materials on the site in quantities greater than that allowed for new facilities locating in Zone 1 as described in subsection C.8.e(ii), Prohibited Activities, Zone 1, shall be prohibited. iii. Closure of a facility or termination of any or all facility activities shall be conducted in accordance with the closure requirements in RMC 4-9- 015.F, Closure Permit. b. Existing Facilities Change in Quantities – Zone 1: In Zone 1 of an APA, no change in operations at a facility shall be allowed that increases the aggregate quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced with the following exception: The aggregate quantity of hazardous materials may be increased not to exceed 500 gallons. c. Existing Facilities – Allowances in Zone 2: The storage, handling, treatment, use or production of hazardous materials at existing facilities APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-3 shall be allowed within Zone 2 of an APA upon compliance with the provisions of this Section. d. Requirements for Facilities – Zones 1 and 2: The following conditions in subsections H.2.d(i) to (vi) of this Section will be required as part of any operating permit issued for facilities in Zone 1 of an APA. Conditions in subsections H.2.d(i) to (v) shall apply to facilities in Zone 2 of an APA. i. Secondary Containment – Zones 1 and 2: (1) Materials Stored in Tanks subject to DOE – Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous materials stored in tanks that are subject to regulation by the Washington Department of Ecology under chapter 173-360 WAC are exempt from containment requirements in subsection H.2.d(i), Secondary Containment – Zones 1 and 2, but are subject to applicable requirements in RMC 4-5-120, Underground Storage Tank Secondary Containment Regulations. (2) Secondary Containment Devices and Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Every owner of a facility shall provide secondary containment devices adequate in size to contain on-site any unauthorized release of hazardous materials from any area where these substances are either stored, handled, treated, used, or produced. Secondary containment devices shall prevent hazardous materials from contacting soil, surface water, and groundwater and shall prevent hazardous materials from entering storm drains and, except for authorized and permitted discharges, the sanitary sewer. Design requirements for secondary containment devices are as follows: (A) The secondary containment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the primary container in cases where a single container is used to store, handle, treat, use, or produce a hazardous material. In cases where multiple containers are used, the secondary containment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the largest container. Volumes specified are in addition to the design flow rate of the automatic fire extinguishing system, if present, to which the secondary containment device is subjected. The secondary containment device shall be capable of containing the fire flow for a period of twenty (20) minutes or more. (B) All secondary containment devices shall be constructed of materials of sufficient thickness, density, and composition to prevent structural weakening of the containment device as a result of contact with any hazardous material. If coatings are used to provide chemical resistance for secondary containment devices, they shall also be resistant to the expected abrasion and impact conditions. Secondary containment devices shall be capable of containing any unauthorized release for at least the maximum anticipated period sufficient to allow detection and removal of the release. (C) Hazardous materials stored outdoors and their attendant secondary containment devices shall be covered to preclude precipitation with the exception of hazardous materials stored in tanks that have been approved by and are under permit from the City of Renton Fire Prevention Bureau. Secondary containment for such tanks, if uncovered, shall be able to accommodate the volume of precipitation that could enter the containment device during a twenty four (24) hour, twenty five (25) year storm, in addition to the volume of the hazardous material stored in the tank. Storage of hazardous APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-4 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report materials, both indoors and outdoors, shall, at all times, meet both the requirements of this Section and the Uniform Fire Code. (D) Secondary containment devices shall include monitoring procedures or technology capable of detecting the presence of a hazardous material within twenty four (24) hours following a release. Hazardous materials shall be removed from the secondary containment device within twenty four (24) hours of detection and shall be legally stored or disposed. (E) Areas in which there are floor drains, catchbasins, or other conveyance piping that does not discharge into a secondary containment device that meets the requirements of this Chapter shall not be used for secondary containment of hazardous materials. Closure of existing piping shall be according to procedures and designs approved by the Department. (F) Primary containers shall be impervious to the contents stored therein, properly labeled, and fitted with a tight cover which is kept closed except when substances are being withdrawn or used. (G) Hazardous materials stored outdoors when the facility is left unsupervised must be inaccessible to the public. Such techniques as locked storage sheds, locked fencing, or other techniques may be used if they will effectively preclude access. (H) Stored hazardous materials shall be protected and secured, as needed, against impact and earthquake to prevent damage to the primary container that would result in release of hazardous materials that would escape the secondary containment area. ii. Hazardous Material Monitoring Requirements for Existing Facilities – Zones 1 and 2: (1) The owners of all existing facilities shall implement hazardous materials monitoring. (2) All hazardous material monitoring activities shall include the following: (A) A written routine monitoring procedure which includes, when applicable: the frequency of performing the monitoring method, the methods and equipment to be used for performing the monitoring, the location(s) from which the monitoring will be performed, the name(s) or title(s) of the person(s) responsible for performing the monitoring and/or maintaining the equipment, and the reporting format. (B) Written records of all monitoring performed shall be maintained on-site by the operator for a period of three (3) years from the date the monitoring was performed. The Department may require the submittal of the monitoring records or a summary at a frequency that the Department may establish. The written records of all monitoring performed in the past three (3) years shall be shown to the Department upon demand during any site inspection. Monitoring records shall include but not be limited to: • The date and time of all monitoring or sampling; • Monitoring equipment calibration and maintenance records; • The results of any visual observations; • The results of all sample analysis performed in the laboratory or in the field, including laboratory data sheets; APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-5 • The logs of all readings of gauges or other monitoring equipment, groundwater elevations or other test results; and • The results of inventory readings and reconciliations. (C) Visual monitoring must be implemented unless it is determined by the Department to be infeasible to visually monitor. (3) On every day of operation, a responsible person designated by the permittee shall check for breakage or leakage of any container holding hazardous materials. Electronic sensing devices approved by the Department may be employed as part of the inspection process, provided that the system is checked daily for malfunctions. iii. Emergency Collection Devices – Zones 1 and 2: Vacuum suction devices, absorbent scavenger materials, or other devices approved by the Department shall be present on site (or available within an hour by contract with a cleanup company approved by the Department), in sufficient quantity to control and collect the total quantity of hazardous materials plus absorbent material. The presence of such emergency collection devices and/or cleanup contract are the responsibility and at the expense of the owner and shall be documented in the operating permit. iv. Inspection of Containment and Emergency Equipment – Zones 1 and 2: Owners shall establish procedures for monthly in-house inspection and routine maintenance of containment and emergency equipment. Such procedures shall be in writing, a regular checklist and schedule of maintenance activity shall be established, and a log shall be kept of inspections and maintenance activities. Such logs and records shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Department for examination. v. Employee Training – Zones 1 and 2: Operators shall schedule training for all new employees upon hiring and once per year thereafter to explain the conditions of the operating permit such as emergency response procedures, proper hazardous waste disposal, monitoring and reporting requirements, record keeping requirements, and the types and quantities of hazardous materials on site. These training sessions will be documented and recorded and the names of those in attendance will be recorded. These records shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Department for inspection. vi. Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1: Owners shall complete the following: (1) Site Monitoring: For facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, an owner of a facility may, at their own expense, be required to institute a program to monitor groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or site soils. The Department may require that the owner of a facility install one or more groundwater monitoring wells in a manner approved by the Department in order to accommodate the required groundwater monitoring. Criteria used to determine the need for site monitoring shall include, but not be limited to, the proximity of the facility to the City’s production or monitoring wells, the type and quantity of hazardous materials on site, and whether or not the hazardous materials are stored in underground vessels. Every owner required to monitor groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or soils shall perform such monitoring semi-annually and obtain APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-6 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report independent analytical results of the presence and concentration of those chemicals requiring monitoring (including breakdown and transformation products) as identified by the Department in the operating permit. The analytical results shall be obtained through the use of Department of Ecology-approved methods for water and/or soils. The results shall be filed within ten (10) days with the Department. If a facility is required to perform site monitoring pursuant to subsection H.2.d(vi) of this Section, Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1, Site Monitoring, then a site monitoring plan will be required. This plan must indicate procedures to be followed to assess groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or soil for concentrations of those chemicals requiring monitoring as identified by the Department in the operating permit. If a groundwater monitoring program is in effect per the requirements of 40 CFR 264 or 265, and this program includes all of the chemicals identified in the operating permit, then it shall be incorporated into the site monitoring plan which shall also include provisions to address the groundwater monitoring requirements of subsection H.2.d(vi) of this Section, Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1, Site Monitoring, and RMC 4-9-015.G.3, Unauthorized Releases, Monitoring Results. (2) Site Improvements: (A) For facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, the owner may be required to pave all currently unpaved areas of their facility that are subject to any vehicular use or storage, use, handling, or production of hazardous materials. (B) For those facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA in which the nature of the business involves the use of hazardous materials outside of fully enclosed structures, the City shall evaluate the existing stormwater collection and conveyance system, and reserves the right to require the owner to upgrade the system to meet the provisions of RMC 4-6-030.E.3, Additional Requirements in Aquifer Protection Areas – Amendments to King County Surface Water Design Manual. (C) For those facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, the City may require the owner to test interior wastewater plumbing and the building side sewer for tightness according to subsection H.6.a(ii), Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1, and reserves the right to require that such wastewater conveyance be repaired or replaced according to subsection H.6.a(i), Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1. (3) Capital Cost Reimbursement for Additional Operating Permit Requirements: The City shall pay fifty percent (50%) of documented capital costs up to twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) for required installation and construction of monitoring wells, site paving, wastewater conveyance, and stormwater improvements as required in subsections H.2.d(vi)(1) and (2), Site Monitoring and Site Improvements. Payment by the City shall be made according to adopted administrative rules. 3. Use of Pesticides and Nitrates – APA Zones 1 and 2: a. Use of Pesticides: The application of hazardous materials such as pesticides shall be allowed in an APA, except within one hundred feet (100) of a well or two hundred feet (200) of a spring, provided that: i. The application is in strict conformity with the use requirements as set forth by the EPA and as indicated on the containers in which the substances are sold. APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-7 ii. Persons who are required to keep pesticide application records by RCW 17.21.100.1 and WAC 16-228-190 shall provide a copy of the required records to the Department within seventy two (72) hours of the application. b. Nitrate-Containing Materials: The application of fertilizers containing nitrates shall be allowed in an APA except within one hundred feet (100) of a well or two hundred feet (200) of a spring; provided, that: i. No application of nitrate-containing materials shall exceed one-half (0.5) pound of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per single application and a total yearly application of five (5) pounds of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet; except that an approved slow- release nitrogen may be applied in quantities of up to nine-tenths (0.9) pound of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per single application and eight (8) pounds of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per year; and ii. Persons who apply fertilizer containing nitrates to more than one contiguous acre of land located in the APA either in one or multiple application(s) per year shall provide to the Department within seventy two (72) hours of any application the following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the person applying the fertilizer; (2) The location and land area of the application; (3) The date and time of the application; (4) The product name and formulation; (5) The application rate. 4. Wastewater Disposal Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-6- 040J, Sanitary Sewer Standards, Additional Requirements that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. 5. Surface Water Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-6-030E, Drainage Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis for additional surface water requirements applicable within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. 6. Pipeline Requirements: a. Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1: i. All new and existing pipelines in Zone 1 shall be constructed or repaired in accordance with material specifications contained in subsection S of this Section, Pipeline Material. All existing product pipelines in Zone 1 shall be repaired and maintained in accordance with BMPs and best available technology. ii. All new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 shall be tested for leakage in conformance with the following provisions prior to being placed into service. (1) Pipeline leakage testing shall be conducted in accordance with best available technology, to the satisfaction of the Department. (2) Pipeline leakage testing methods shall be submitted to the Department for review prior to testing and shall include: a detailed description of the testing methods and technical assumptions; accuracy and precision of the test; proposed testing durations, pressures, and APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-8 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report lengths of pipeline to be tested; and scale drawings of the pipeline(s) to be tested. (3) Upon completion of testing, pipeline leakage testing results shall be submitted to the Department and shall include: record of testing durations, pressures, and lengths of pipeline tested; and weather conditions at the time of testing. (4) Routine leakage testing of new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. iii. If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing pipeline in Zone 1 of an APA may degrade groundwater quality, the Department may require leakage testing of the existing pipeline in accordance with subsection H6a(ii) of this Section; and installation, sampling, and sample analysis of monitoring wells. Routine leakage testing of existing pipelines in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. Criteria for this determination is specified under subsection D2b(ii), Potential to Degrade Groundwater – Zone 2, Criteria. iv. Should pipeline leakage testing reveal any leakage at any level then the Department shall require immediate repairs to the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that no infiltration of water into the pipeline or exfiltration of substances conveyed in the pipeline shall occur. Any repairs which are made shall be tested for leakage pursuant to subsection H6a(ii) of this Section. b. Pipeline Requirements – Zone 2: If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing pipeline in Zone 2 of an APA may degrade groundwater quality, the Department may require: leakage testing in accordance with subsection H6a(ii) of this Section; installation, sampling, and sample analysis of groundwater monitoring wells; repair of the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that degradation of groundwater quality is minimized or eliminated. Criteria for this determination is specified under subsection D2b(ii), Potential to Degrade Groundwater – Zone 2, Criteria. 7. Construction Activity Standards – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-4-030.C.7, Construction Activity Standards – APA Zones 1 and 2. 8. Fill Material Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material, regarding quality of fill and fill material source statement requirements within aquifer protection areas. 9. Regulations for Existing Solid Waste Landfills – Zones 1 and 2: a. Materials: Earth materials used as fill or cover at a solid waste landfill shall meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material. b. Groundwater Monitoring: The Department shall have the authority to require an owner of a solid waste landfill to implement a groundwater monitoring program equal to that described by King County Board of Health Title 10 (King County Solid Waste Regulations) Section 10.72.020 and a corrective action program equal to that described by Section 10.72.030. The Department shall have the authority ascribed to the health officer in said regulations. Quarterly reports shall be provided to the Department detailing groundwater monitoring activity during the preceding three (3) months. Reports detailing corrective action required by the Department APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-9 shall be submitted according to a written schedule approved by the Department. 10. Hazardous Materials – Release Restrictions – Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous materials shall not be spilled, leaked, emitted, discharged, disposed, or allowed to escape or leach into the air, into groundwater, surface water, surface soils or subsurface soils. Exception: Intentional withdrawals of hazardous materials for the purpose of legitimate sale, use, or disposal and discharges permitted under federal, state, or local law. Any unauthorized releases shall be subject to the procedural requirements of RMC 4-9-015G, Unauthorized Releases. R. GENERIC HAZARDOUS MATERIALS LIST: GENERIC HAZARDOUS MATERIALS LIST FOR INFORMATIONAL USE ONLY Acid and basic cleaning solutions Antifreeze and coolants Arsenic and arsenic compounds Battery acid Bleaches, peroxides Brake and transmission fluids Brine solution Casting and foundry chemicals Caulking agents and sealants Cleaning solvents Cooling water (not isolated from process chemicals) Corrosion and rust prevention solutions Cutting fluids Degreasing solvents Deicing materials Disinfectants Dyes Electroplating solutions Engraving solutions Etching solutions Explosives Fertilizers Food processing wastes Formaldehyde Fuels and additives Glues, adhesives, and resins Greases Hydraulic fluid Indicators Industrial and commercial janitorial supplies Industrial sludges and stillbottoms Inks, printing, and photocopying chemicals Laboratory chemicals Medical, pharmaceutical, dental, veterinary, and hospital solutions Metal dusts Mercury and mercury compounds Metals finishing solutions Oils APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-10 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report Paints, pigments, primers, thinners, dyes, stains, wood preservatives, varnishing, and cleaning compounds Painting solvents PCBs Pesticides and herbicides Plastic resins, plasticizers, and catalysts Photo development chemicals Poisons Polishes Pool chemicals Processed dust and particulates Radioactive sources Reagents and standards Refrigerants Roofing chemicals and sealers Sanitizers, disinfectants, bactericides, and algaecides Soaps, detergents and surfactants Solders and fluxes Stripping compounds Tanning industry chemicals Transformer and capacitor oils/fluids Wastewater treatment sludges (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-11 S. PIPELINE MATERIAL: 1. PIPELINE MATERIAL REQUIREMENT Pipe Diameter in Inches Pipe Material <4 4-8 10- 12 14- 20 24- 30 36- 54 Suggested Material Spec Considerations (See subsection S2) Ductile Iron, Rubber Gaskets Cement Mortar-Lined Polyethylene-Lined Ductile Iron, Nitrile Gaskets Cement Mortar-Lined Polyethylene-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 AWWA C151, C104 AWWA C151 AWWA C151, C104 AWWA C151 abcdnopr abcdnopr bcdinopr bcdeinopr PVC, Rubber Gasket Joints CL 150 or 200 SDR 35 PVC, Nitrile Gasket Joints CL 150 or 200 PVC, Solvent Welded Joints Sch 80 1,2 1 2,3 1,2 1 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2 1,2,3 1,2,3 AWWA C900 ASTM D3034 AWWA C900 ASTM D1784, D1785 abjlnoprt bijlnoprt hjklnoprt Welded Steel, Rubber Gaskets Cement Mortar-Lined Dielectric-Lined Welded Steel, Welded Joints Cement Mortar-Lined Dielectric-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,3 AWWA C200, C205 AWWA C200, C210 AWWA C200, C205 AWWA C200, C210 abfghnopr abfghnopr fghnopr fghnopr High Density Polyethylene Pipe Corrugated High Density Polyethylene Pipe - Smooth Interior 1,2 1 1,2 1 1,2 1 1,2 1 1 1 ASTM D1248 and D3350 ASTM D1248 and AASHTO hkpqu kpqsu Slip Form Liner 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 ASTM D638 mnopqr PIPELINE SERVICE 1. Storm Sewer 2. Sanitary Sewer and Side Sewer 3. Leachate Pipeline 4. Rehab Existing Storm Sewer 5. Rehab Existing Sanitary Sewer 2. CONSIDERATIONS ON SELECTION OF PIPE MATERIALS The Utility maintains a list of materials meeting performance standards. Other materials meeting similar performance standards or developed as the result of new technology may be approved by the Utility. a. Rubber gaskets may be severely damaged by petroleum products, particularly in prolonged exposures to concentrated flows containing little or no stormwater or sanitary sewage. In cases where heavy concentrations of petroleum products may be experienced, nitrile (Nitrile-Butadiene; i.e., NBR) gaskets should be used. b. Gasketed joints may not be leak-proof at zero or low pressures, if improperly installed. c. Mechanical joints may be less likely to leak at low pressures than push-on joints. d. May need protective coatings and/or cathodic protection against external corrosion. e. Considered most reliable gasket and lining material for ductile iron leachate pipeline. f. Very difficult to repair linings on inside of joints in pipe smaller than 24-inch diameter. APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-12 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report 2. CONSIDERATIONS ON SELECTION OF PIPE MATERIALS g. Almost always needs protective coatings and cathodic protection against external corrosion. h. Properly made joints are considered leak-proof. i. Nitrile gaskets may require long delivery time. j. Requires special attention to bedding and backfill depth to avoid structural failure of pipe. k. Large thermal expansion coefficient. May need to limit solvent welded joints to 4-inch and smaller pipe. May require careful evaluation of pipe installation temperature and temperature of piped liquids to ensure joint integrity. l. Pipe not available over 12-inch diameter. m. Slip form lining is available in 6-inch through 60-inch diameter for almost any pressure, if sufficient pipe cross sectional-area is available. n. Pressure grouts and gels are not acceptable for rehabilitation or patching of storm and sanitary sewers. o. Suitability of pipe lining and gasket material to resist chemical attack by conveyed fluids must be determined for each pipeline service considered. p. All storm and sanitary sewer manholes, catch basins, and inlets should be equipped with precast concrete bottom and sidewalls with rubber gasketed joints between sections, water-tight epoxy grout or other approved pipe entrances through walls, and approved waterproof coating of all interior floor and wall surfaces. Manholes, catch basins, and inlets should have no leakage when hydrostatically tested at atmospheric pressure. q. Has good resistance to a number of chemicals, petroleum products, and hydrogen sulfide corrosion. r. “Zero leakage” test requirement may be impossible to achieve under the best conditions for any pipe materials because trapped air may distort test results, even in a drop-tight pipe. Pressure and leakage test requirements should consider whether the pipe has steep slope or will stand full of liquid. Pipelines should be tested with the intent to prevent or minimize leakage. Air testing should not be allowed; hydrostatic testing should be as stringent as any found in the industry. Pipe materials, without regard for chemical attack, corrosion, or puncture, are generally ranked as follows, in decreasing order of liquid-tight reliability: welded steel with welded joints PVC with solvent welded joints slip form liner ductile iron with viton or rubber gaskets welded steel with rubber gasketed joints PVC with viton or rubber gasketed joints s. Joints should consist of “heat-shrink” wrap, standard corrugated coupling, and full pipe band clamps. t. The use of PVC may be restricted by other Utility policy in regards to depth of pipe cover. u. HDPE may be adversely affected by solvents; its use is not recommended where contact with solvents may occur. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) 4-4-030C8, Construction Activity Standards – APA Zones 1 and 2. C. CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS: 8. Construction Activity Standards – Aquifer Protection Area (APA) Zones 1 and 2: The following standards shall apply to construction activities occurring in the Aquifer Protection Area if construction vehicles will be refueled on site and/or the quantity of hazardous materials that will be stored, dispensed, used, and handled on the construction site, exclusive of the quantity of hazardous materials contained in fuel or fluid reservoirs of construction vehicles, will exceed twenty (20) gallons. Weight of solid hazardous materials will be converted to volumes for purposes of determining whether de minimus amount is exceeded. Ten (10) pounds shall be considered equal to one gallon. APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-13 a. Designated Person: There shall be a designated person on site during operating hours who is responsible for supervising the use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials and who shall take appropriate mitigating actions necessary in the event of fire or spill. b. Secondary Containment: Hazardous material storage, dispensing, and refueling areas and, to the extent possible, use and handling areas shall be provided with secondary containment in accordance with RMC 4-3- 050H2d(i), Secondary Containment – Zones 1 and 2. c. Securing Hazardous Materials: Hazardous materials left on site when the site is unsupervised must be inaccessible to the public. Locked storage sheds, locked fencing, locked fuel tanks on construction vehicles, or other techniques may be used if they will preclude access. d. Removal of Leaking Vehicles and Equipment: Construction vehicles and stationary equipment that are found to be leaking fuel, hydraulic fluid, and/or other hazardous materials shall be removed from the site and the aquifer protection area or repaired in place as soon as possible and may remain on the site in the interim only if leakage is completely contained. e. Flammable and Combustible Liquids – Storage and Dispensing: Storage and dispensing of flammable and combustible liquids from tanks, containers, and tank vehicles into the fuel and fluid reservoirs of construction vehicles or stationary equipment on the construction site shall be in accordance with these standards and the Uniform Fire Code Section 7904.2, as adopted or amended by the City. f. Clean-Up Equipment and Supplies: Equipment and supplies adequate for the immediate clean-up of the worst case release shall be stored on the construction site in close proximity to hazardous materials. g. Unauthorized Releases: Unauthorized releases as defined in RMC 4-11- 210, Definitions U, shall immediately be contained, reported, and cleaned up as required by RMC 4-9-015G, Unauthorized Releases. Contaminated soil, water, and other materials shall be disposed of according to state and local requirements. h. Application of Pesticides and Fertilizer: Application of pesticide and fertilizer shall be in accordance with the requirements of RMC 4-3-050H3, Use of Pesticides and Nitrates – APA Zones 1 and 2. i. Hazardous Materials Management Statement: A hazardous materials management statement as described in RMC 4-8-120D8, Definitions H, Hazardous Materials Management Statement, shall be submitted to and approved by the Department prior to issuance of a permit regulating construction activity in the APA. RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material L. FILLS: 4. Fill Material: Fill materials shall have no more than minor amounts of organic substances and shall have no rock or similar irreducible material with a APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-14 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report maximum dimension greater than eight inches (8"). Fill material shall meet the following requirements: a. Construction, Demolition, and Land Clearing Waste Prohibited: Fill material shall be free of construction, demolition, and land clearing waste except that this requirement does not preclude the use of recycled concrete rubble per Washington State Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. b. Cleanliness of Fill Material: Fill material shall not contain concentrations of contaminants that exceed cleanup standards for soil specified in WAC 173-340-740, Model Toxics Control Act. c. Special Requirement for Projects Located in Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area and Which Will Involve Placement of More than Fifty (50) Cubic Yards of Imported Fill: A source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington shall be provided to the Department and shall be reviewed and accepted by the Department prior to stockpiling or grading imported fill at the project site. The source statement, as defined in RMC 4-8-120D19, shall be required for each source location from which imported fill will be obtained. d. Special Requirement for Projects Located in Zone 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area and Which Will Involve Placement of More than One Hundred (100) Cubic Yards of Imported Fill: The source statement described in RMC 4-8-120D19 is required for each source location from which imported fill will be obtained. e. Abbreviated Source Statement for Aquifer Protection Area: The Department may accept a source statement, as defined in RMC 4-8- 120D19, that does not include results of sampling and analysis of imported fill if a professional geologist or engineer licensed in the State of Washington certifies that the source location from which fill will be obtained has never been filled, developed, or subjected to use that could have introduced chemical contamination to the site. f. Department Authority to Request Additional Information or Reject Certified Source Statement: The Department has the authority to request additional information regarding imported fill material and the source thereof and to reject a source statement or abbreviated source statement if they do not demonstrate that the fill material to be imported to a project site meets fill material standards in subsections L4a and L4b of this Section and/or the Department has reason to suspect that the fill material could be contaminated. Such requests or rejections shall be made in writing to the applicant. g. Source Statement Not Required for Imported Fill Obtained from Washington State Department of Transportation Approved Source: The source statement defined in RMC 4-8-120D19 is not required for those projects located in the aquifer protection area if documentation is provided that imported fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation approved source. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) h. Sampling and Analysis Procedures: The licensed professional engineer or geologist or person under their supervision who samples earth materials APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-15 to be used as imported fill, oversees analysis, and prepares the source statement required by subsections L4c and L4d of this Section shall follow procedures specified in WAC 173-340-820 and 173-340-830 of the Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation. i. Permittee Subject to Required Actions after Illegal Placement of Imported Fill: A permittee who stockpiles or grades imported fill at the site without Department review and acceptance of the source statement required by subsections L4c and L4d of this Section or who stockpiles or grades fill at the site that does not meet the fill quality standards of subsections L4a and L4b of this Section is subject to measures specified by the Department to reduce risk of contamination of the site due to illegal placement of fill. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, any or all of the following and shall be implemented at the permittee’s expense: i. Provide the Department with the source statement defined in RMC 4- 8-120D19 within a time-period specified by the Department; ii. Immediately cover fill with a waterproof cover; iii. Immediately remove fill; iv. Installation of monitoring wells and monitoring of groundwater quality; v. Remediation of contamination of the site caused by the illegal placement of fill according to a schedule specified by the Department and in accordance with cleanup standards for soil and groundwater described in the Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation, chapter 173-340 WAC. j. Department Authority to Conduct Independent Sampling and Analysis: The Department shall have the authority to enter on to private property to conduct independent sampling and analysis of fill. If the Department determines that fill does not meet fill quality standards of subsections L4a and L4b of this Section, then it may require the permittee to accomplish any or all of the measures listed in subsection L4i of this Section at his or her own expense. k. Department Authority to Implement Removal and Remediation Measures: The Department or its authorized agents shall have the authority to implement measures listed in subsection L4i of this Section if the permittee fails to accomplish such measures in a timely manner. The permittee shall be responsible for any costs incurred by the Department or its authorized agents in the conduct of such activities. (Amd. Ord. 4740, 7- 19-1999; Ord. 4992, 12-9-2002) RMC 4-6-030E, Drainage Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis E. DRAINAGE PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS: 1. Content: All persons applying for any of the permits and/or approvals contained in subsection C1 of this Section shall provide a drainage plan for surface water flows entering, flowing within and leaving the subject property. The drainage plan and supportive calculation report(s) shall be stamped by a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Washington. The drainage plan shall be prepared in conformance with the Core and Special Requirements contained in sections 1.2 and 1.3 of chapter 1, the hydrologic analysis methods contained in chapter 3, the hydraulic analysis and design criteria in chapter 4, APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-16 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report and the erosion/sedimentation control plan and practices contained in chapter 5 of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual, except where amended or appended by the Department. (Ord. 4367, 9-14-1992; Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7- 2000) 2. Special Requirement #13; Aquifer Recharge and Protection Areas: a. Threshold: If a proposed project lies within an Aquifer Recharge and/or Protection Area as defined and designed by City ordinance and as indicated on the Aquifer Recharge and Protection Map at the City Permit Counter. b. Requirement: Then the proposed project drainage review and engineering plans shall be prepared in accordance with the special requirements, methods of analysis and design standards that have been adopted for aquifer recharge and protection areas by City ordinance. 3. Additional Requirements in Aquifer Protection Areas – Amendments to King County Surface Water Design Manual, Chapter 1: The following sections of chapter 1 of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual (which has been incorporated in the Renton Municipal Code by reference) is hereby amended to read as follows by adding additional requirements following the end of each section: (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) a. Section 1.2.1, CORE REQUIREMENT #1: DISCHARGE AT THE NATURAL LOCATION: i. Requirements that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area: Surface water and stormwater runoff from a proposed project that proposes to construct new, or modify existing drainage facilities must be discharged at the natural location so as not to be diverted onto, or away from, the adjacent downstream property, except that surface and storm runoff from new or existing impervious surfaces subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals should be discharged at the location and in the manner which will provide the most protection to the aquifer, as directed and approved by the Stormwater Utility and the Water Utility. ii. Discharge from the project must produce no significant adverse impact to the downhill property. Where no conveyance system exists at the adjacent downstream property line or other acceptable location and the discharge was previously unconcentrated flow, the runoff must: Be conveyed across the downstream properties to an acceptable discharge point (see CORE REQUIREMENT #2; OFF-SITE ANALYSIS in § 1.2.2), with drainage easement secured from the downstream owners and recorded at the King County Office of Records and Elections prior to drainage plan approval, OR Be discharged onto a rock pad shaped in a manner so as to disperse flow (see Figure 4.3.5I) if the runoff is less than 0.2 cfs runoff rate for the one hundred (100) year, twenty four (24) hour duration design storm event existing site conditions. b. Section 1.2.3, CORE REQUIREMENT #3; RUNOFF CONTROL, “Biofiltration”: i. Requirements for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: Proposed project runoff resulting from more than five thousand (5,000) square feet of impervious surface, and subject to vehicular use or storage of APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-17 chemicals, shall not be treated prior to discharge from the project site by on-site biofiltration measures but shall instead be treated by a wet vault meeting the design criteria contained in § 1.3.5 SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #5; SPECIAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS. New or existing retrofitted wet vaults and appurtenances shall meet the pipeline requirements specified in RMC 4-3-050H6a, Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) ii. Requirements for Zone 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area: Proposed project runoff resulting from more than five thousand (5,000) square feet of impervious surface, and subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals, shall be treated prior to discharge from the project site by on- site biofiltration measures as described in § 4.6.3 in Chapter 4 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual. Biofiltration facilities may require a liner per the design criteria described in the section Liner to Prevent Groundwater Contamination in the introduction to § 4.6, Water Quality Facility Design. iii. The biofiltration design flow rate shall be based on the peak rate of runoff for the two (2) year, twenty four (24) hour duration design storm event total precipitation. Note, biofiltration facilities installed following peak rate runoff control facilities may be sized to treat the allowable release rate (predeveloped) for the two (2) year, twenty four (24) hour duration design storm event for the peak rate runoff control facility. Biofiltration facilities installed prior to peak rate runoff control facilities shall be sized based on the developed conditions. (Amd. Ord. 4740, 7- 19-1999) c. Section 1.2.3, CORE REQUIREMENT #3; RUNOFF CONTROL, “Detention Facilities”: i. Requirements for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: The City of Renton prohibits the construction of new detention ponds to control the peak rate of runoff from new or existing impervious surfaces subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. d. Section 1.2.3, CORE REQUIREMENT #3; RUNOFF CONTROL, “Retention Facilities”: i. Requirements for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: The City of Renton prohibits the construction of new retention ponds to control the peak rate of runoff from new or existing impervious surfaces subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. (Amd. Ord. 4740, 7-19-1999; Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) e. Section 1.2.3, CORE REQUIREMENT #3; RUNOFF CONTROL, “Infiltration Facilities”: i. Requirement for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: The City of Renton prohibits the construction of new infiltration facilities to control the peak rate of runoff from new or existing impervious surfaces subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. f. Section 1.2.4, CORE REQUIREMENT #4; CONVEYANCE SYSTEM “(4) For new drainage ditches or channels”: i. Requirements for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: New drainage ditches or channels shall not be employed to convey the runoff resulting from impervious surface that is subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project B-18 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report ii. Requirements for Zone 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area: New drainage ditches or channels may be employed in lieu of a pipe system. A groundwater protection liner may be required for new drainage ditches or channels per the design criteria, and existing drainage ditches or channels reconstructed, to convey the peak runoff from the twenty five (25) year design storm using the design criteria described in the section Liner to Prevent Groundwater Contamination in the introduction to § 4.6, Water Quality Facility Design, and the methods of analysis described in § 4.3.7 in Chapter 4 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual with a freeboard to overflow of 0.5 feet. In addition, new drainage ditches or channels must be demonstrated to convey the peak runoff from the one hundred (100) year design storm without overtopping. (Amd. Ord. 4740, 7-19-1999) g. Section 1.2.4, CORE REQUIREMENT #4; CONVEYANCE SYSTEM, “Composition”: i. Requirements for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: New conveyance systems shall be constructed in accordance with the pipeline requirements specified in RMC 4-3-050H6a, Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1, of the aquifer protection regulations. Proposed projects shall provide an impervious surface for all new or existing areas that will be subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. Said impervious surface shall be provided with the proper catch basins and a pipeline storm drainage system in order to collect surface water runoff and direct it into the downstream drainage conveyance system. ii. Requirements for Zone 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area: A groundwater protection liner may be required for new drainage ditches or channels per the design criteria described in the section Liner to Prevent Groundwater Contamination in the introduction to § 4.6, Water Quality Facility Design. Exception: New drainage ditches or channels do not require a groundwater protection liner following the last water quality facility. Proposed projects shall provide an impervious surface for all new or existing areas that will be subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. Said impervious surface shall be provided with the proper catch basins and an approved conveyance system in order to collect surface water runoff and direct it into the downstream drainage conveyance system. (Amd. Ord. 4740, 7-19-1999; Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) h. Section 1.3.5, SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #5; SPECIAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS: i. Requirements for Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Area: Threshold: If a proposed project will discharge runoff from more than one acre of impervious surface that will be subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals, and: (1) Proposes direct discharge of runoff to a regional facility, receiving water, lake, wetland, or closed depression without on-site peak rate runoff control; or (2) The runoff from the project will discharge into a Type 1 or 2 stream, or Type 1 wetland, within one mile from the project site. Requirement: The wet vault size shall be increased by a factor of 1.5 times the size of the wet vault normally required per § 4.6.2 of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual and shall satisfy the wet vault required by § 1.2.3. CORE REQUIREMENT #3: RUNOFF CONTROL in APPENDIX B Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report B-19 Zone 1 of the aquifer protection area. New or existing retrofitted wet vaults and appurtenances shall meet the pipeline requirements specified in RMC 4-3-050H6a, Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) ii. Requirements for Zone 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area: Threshold: If a proposed project will construct more than one acre of impervious surface that will be subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals, and (1) Proposes direct discharge of runoff to a regional facility, receiving water, lake, wetland, or closed depression without on-site peak rate runoff control; or (2) The runoff from the project will discharge into a Type 1 or 2 stream, or Type 1 wetland, within one mile from the project site. Requirement: Then a wetpond meeting the standards described above shall be employed to treat a project’s runoff prior to discharge from the site. A wet vault or water quality swale, as described above, may be used when a wetpond is not feasible. A groundwater protection liner may be required for wetponds and water quality swales per the design criteria described in the section Liner to Prevent Groundwater Contamination in the introduction to § 4.6, Water Quality Facility Design. (Ord. 4367, 9-14- 1992; amd. Ord. 4740, 7-19-1999) APPENDIX C State Level of Service Policy Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report C-1 A PPENDIX C S TATE L EVEL OF S ERVICE P OLICY The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires local jurisdictions to assess and mitigate the impacts of new development projects, including impacts to traffic. Together, local jurisdictions and WSDOT agree on an acceptable LOS. For highways of statewide significance, the LOS is set by law. A particular development could cause impacts to traffic on a highway segment or an intersection to fall below the LOS* thresholds following: For Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS): Urban Areas: LOS “D” Rural Areas: LOS “C”; or For Regionally Significant State Highways (non-HSS), the LOS thresholds adopted by the local MPO/RTPO shall apply. In the absence of an adopted LOS threshold, the LOS for HSS shall apply. Where there is a specific inter- local agreement with WSDOT, the applicable LOS threshold levels are established by the agreement; and When a development affects a segment or intersection where the LOS is already below the applicable threshold, the predevelopment LOS will be used instead of the otherwise applicable deficiency level. When a development will degrade the facility’s LOS below the applicable threshold, the facility will be considered deficient to support the development, and WSDOT and its partners will seek mitigation of traffic impacts. Mitigation can take the form of development constraints (for example, the appropriate placement of highway access points), developer constructed transportation improvements, or developer financial contribution to transportation improvements constructed by others. Details on these and other mitigation strategies are contained in the WSDOT Design Manual. (Appendix G: Development Impacts Assessment) APPENDIX D Draft Renton Shoreline Master Program Buffer Regulations Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-1 R:\04156\33-06 Renton Nickel\Task 3 - Discipline Reports\all reports\Final DRs\Renton Nickel Land Use Plans & Policies DR_completed.doc A PPENDIX D D RAFT R ENTON S HORELINE M ASTER P ROGRAM B UFFER R EGULATIONS The following presents the City of Renton’s April 2005 adopted Shoreline Master Program (SMP) regulation amendments. They will not be effective until the Ecology approves them. However, several sections such as those relating to landfill and dredging have not changed in a substantive way since the 1998 adopted regulations. J. GENERAL USE REGULATIONS FOR ALL SHORELINE USES: 1. Applicability and Exemptions: a. Applicability: i. General: The Renton SMP regulations apply to any use, activity, or development on the Shorelines of the State within the City. No authorization to conduct a use, activity or development shall be granted unless such use, activity, or development is found consistent with the Renton SMP. ii. Nonconforming uses: See RMC 4-10-095 regarding the extent to which Renton SMP standards apply to nonconforming uses and activities. b. Exemptions: i. Permit Exemptions: RMC 4-9-197.C identifies developments or activities which are not required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit, but which must otherwise comply with all applicable provisions of the Renton SMP. ii. Use or Activity Exemptions: Reserved. 2. Studies Required: a. When Standard Stream or Lake Study Is Required: If a proposed development site contains a Shoreline of the state or associated buffer area, or the project area is within one hundred feet (100’) of the Shoreline of the State even if the water body is not located on the subject property but the Reviewing Official determines that alterations of the subject property could potentially impact the water body in question, then the applicant shall be required to conduct a Standard Stream or Lake Study per RMC 4-8-120. b. When Supplemental Stream or Lake Study is Required: Changes to buffer requirements, or alterations of the Shoreline of the State requires a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study as identified in RMC 4-8-120. c. When Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan Required: A Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan shall be required per RMC 4-8-120.D., if impacts are identified within a required Supplemental Stream or Lake Study. The approval of the Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan by the Administrator shall be based on the criteria located in Subsection J.2.c.ii. below. APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-2 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report i. Timing of Mitigation Plan – Final Submittal and Commencement: When a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan is required, the applicant shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Administrator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits, whichever comes first. The applicant shall receive written approval of the final mitigation plan prior to commencement of any mitigation activity. ii. Criteria for Approval of Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan for Alterations of Shorelines and Associated Buffers: In order to approve a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan the Administrator shall find that the Plan demonstrates compliance with the following criteria: (a) Mitigation Location: Mitigation location shall follow the preferences in (i) to (iv) below: (i) On-site mitigation: On-site mitigation is required unless the Reviewing Official finds that on-site mitigation is not feasible or desirable; (ii) Off-site mitigation within same drainage subbasin as subject site: Off- site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage subbasin as the subject site and if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation on the subject site; (iii) Off-site mitigation within same drainage basin within City limits: Off- site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project; (iv) Off-site mitigation within the same drainage basin outside the City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals. (b) Mitigation Type: Types of mitigation shall follow the preferences in (i) to (iv) below: (i) Daylighting (returning to open channel) of streams or removal of manmade salmonid migration barriers; (ii) Removal of impervious surfaces in buffer areas and improved biological function of the buffer; (iii) In stream or in-lake mitigation as part of an approved watershed basin restoration project; (iv) Other mitigation suitable for site and water body conditions that meet all other provisions for a mitigation plan. In all cases, mitigation shall provide for equivalent or greater biological functions per ii(e) below. (c) Contiguous Corridors: Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or achieve contiguous riparian or wildlife corridors to minimize the isolating effects of development on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed; and (d) Non-indigenous species: Wildlife, or fish species not indigenous to the region shall not be introduced into a riparian mitigation area unless authorized by a state or federal permit or approval. Plantings shall be consistent with Section 4-3-090.J.6.g.i; and APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-3 (e) Equivalent or greater biological functions: The Administrator shall utilize the report “City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations” by AC Kindig & Company and Cedarock Consultants, dated February 27, 2003, unless superceded with a City-adopted study, to determine the existing or potential ecological function of the stream or lake or riparian habitat that is being affected. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the alteration. Mitigation to compensate alterations to stream/lake areas and associated buffers shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. No-net-loss of riparian habitat or water body function shall be demonstrated; and (f) Minimum Mitigation Plan Performance Standards: For any required Stream or Lake Mitigation Plans, the applicant shall: (i) Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the supervisory capability, and the financial resources to carry out the mitigation project; and (ii) Demonstrate the capability for monitoring the site and making corrections during the monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet projected goals; and (iii) Protect and manage, or provide for the protection and management of the mitigation area to avoid further development or degradation and to provide for long-term persistence of the mitigation area; and (iv) Provide for project monitoring and allow City inspections; and (v) Avoid mitigation proposals that would result in additional future mitigation or regulatory requirements for adjacent properties, unless it is a result of a code requirement, or no other option is feasible or practical; and (vi) For onsite or offsite mitigation proposals, abutting or adjacent property owners shall be notified when wetland creation or restoration, stream relocation, critical area buffer increases, flood hazard mitigation, habitat conservation mitigation, or geologic hazard mitigation have the potential to considerably decrease the development potential of abutting or adjacent properties. For example, if a created wetland on a property would now result in a wetland buffer intruding onto a neighboring property, the neighboring property owner would be notified. Notification shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the mitigation proposal shall be given by posting the site and notifying abutting or adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted. Written notification may be made prior to or at the time of the SEPA determination. (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, the mitigation proposal shall be identified in the notice of application and mailed to abutting or adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted; if the determination of the mitigation requirements is not known at the time of the notice of application, written notice to abutting or adjacent property owners shall be given instead at the time of the SEPA determination. (g) Additional Conditions of Approval: The Administrator shall condition approvals of activities allowed within or abutting a stream/lake or its buffers, as necessary to minimize or mitigate any potential adverse impacts. Conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-4 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report (i) Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; (ii) Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; (iii) Seasonal restriction of construction activities; and (iv) Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation activities. (h) Based on Best Available Science: The applicant shall demonstrate that the mitigation is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. Performance Surety: The Administrator shall require a performance surety to ensure completion and success of proposed mitigation, per RMC 4-1-230. The surety device shall be sufficient to guarantee that structures, improvements, and mitigation required by permit condition perform satisfactorily for a minimum of 5 years after they have been completed. iv. Alternative Mitigation: The mitigation requirements set forth in this Subsection may be modified at the Administrator’s discretion if the applicant demonstrates that improved habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be obtained in the affected sub-drainage basin as a result of alternative mitigation measures. d. Studies Waived: i. Standard Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that: (a) A road, building or other barrier exists between the water body and the proposed activity, or (b) The water body or required buffer area does not intrude on the applicant’s lot, and based on evidence submitted, the proposal will not result in significant adverse impacts to nearby water bodies regulated under this Section, or (c) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed exists and an additional study is not necessary. ii. Supplemental Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when: (a) No alterations or changes to the stream or lake, or its standard buffer are proposed; or (b) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed exists and an additional study is not necessary. iii. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan: May only be waived when no impacts have been identified through a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study. e. Independent Secondary Review: Studies may require secondary review pursuant to RMC 4-9-197.E.4. 3. Disturbance Prohibited: Streams and lakes and their buffer areas shall be undisturbed, except where the buffer is to be enhanced or in conformance with allowances of Section J.4 or 5. 4. Shoreline Buffers: The following shoreline setbacks/buffers shall be required: APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-5 a. Buffer Width: i. Standard Buffer Width: Shorelines shall have a minimum 100-foot buffer measured from the OHWM of the regulated shoreline of the state. Where streams enter or exit pipes, the buffer shall be measured perpendicular to the OHWM from the end of the pipe along the open channel section of the stream. 90o Figure 4-3-090.J.4.a.i. Buffer measurement at pipe opening. ii. Piped Streams: (1) Building structures over a natural stream located in an underground pipe or culvert except as may be granted by a variance is prohibited. Roads, bridges, trail, or utility crossings or other alterations pursuant to Section K are allowed. Pavement over a pre-existing piped stream is allowed. Relocation of the piped stream system around structures is allowed. If structure locations are proposed to be changed or the piped stream is being relocated around buildings, a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of existing piped stream systems will be required for any development project site that contains a piped stream to ensure it is sized to convey the 100-year runoff level from the total upstream tributary area based on future land use conditions. (2) No buffers are required along segments of piped or culverted streams. The City shall require easements and setbacks from pipes or culverts consistent with stormwater requirements in RMC 4-6-030 and the adopted drainage manual. iii. Alternative Buffer Width: Shoreline buffers may be increased or reduced as required or allowed in Subsections b through d. b. Use of Buffers: i. Natural or Partially Developed Shorelines: Buffers shall be maintained as stated in Subsections J.3, Disturbance Prohibited; J.6.e, Native Growth Protection Areas Required; and J.6.g., Revegetation Required. ii. Developed Shorelines: On sites predominantly containing impervious surfaces in the shoreline buffer areas the buffer widths shall be considered APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-6 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report building setbacks, with the setback area to be managed in accordance with Subsection J.5.b, Sites with Developed Shorelines. c. Increased Buffer Width: i. Areas of High Blow-down Potential: Where the stream/lake area is in an area of high blow-down potential as determined by a qualified professional, the buffer width may be expanded up to an additional fifty feet (50’) on the windward side, when determined appropriate to site circumstances and ecological function by the Responsible Official. ii. Buffers Falling Within Protected Slopes or Very High Landslide Areas: When the required stream/lake buffer falls within a protected slope or very high landslide hazard area or buffer, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope or the very high landslide hazard buffer. iii. Notification: Notification of an increased buffer width may be required pursuant to J.2.c.ii(f)(vi). d. Reduction of Buffer or Setback Width: i. Authority: Based upon an applicant’s request, and the acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the standard buffer widths/setbacks where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with Subsections below and any mitigation requirements applied as conditions of approval. ii. Public Notice: Public notification of any buffer reduction determination shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and notifying parties of record in accordance with RMC 4-8. (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, per RMC 4-8, the buffer determination or request for determination shall be included with notice of application, and upon determination, notification of parties of record shall be made. iii. Criteria for Approval of Reduced Buffer Width: If a proposal meets Subsections (a) or (b) or (c) below and meets the environmental criteria of (d), minimum buffer widths may be reduced as stated in Subsection J.4.d.iv: (a) Buffer condition: Either subsection i and iii through v shall be met or subsection ii through v shall be met: i. The abutting land is extensively vegetated with native species, including trees and shrubs, and has less than 5 percent non-native invasive species cover and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes, or ii. The buffer can be enhanced with native vegetation and removal of non-native species per criteria (d)(i), and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes; and iii. The width reduction will not reduce stream or lake functions, including those of anadromous fish or non-fish habitat; and iv. The width reduction will not degrade riparian habitat; and v. No direct or indirect, short-term or long-term, adverse impacts to regulated water bodies, as determined by the City, will result from a APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-7 regulated activity. The City’s determination shall be based on specific site studies by recognized experts, pursuant to Subsection J.2 and RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 4-9-197 E.4; or (b) The proposal includes daylighting of a stream through the entirety of its course through the property, or removal of a legally installed, as determined by the Administrator, salmonid passage barrier; or (c) The proposal includes priority uses pursuant to RCW 90.58.020, as interpreted in the adopted Renton SMP, which cannot be accommodated reasonably using standard buffers/setbacks; and (d) Environmental Criteria: Proposals meeting Subsection (a) or (b) or (c) above shall also meet the following environmental criteria: (i) Buffer Enhancement: The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and provides documentation that the enhanced buffer area will maintain or improve the functional attributes of the buffer; or In the case of existing developed sites where a natural buffer is not possible, the proposal includes on- or off-site riparian/lakeshore or aquatic enhancement proportionate to its project specific or cumulative impact on shoreline ecological functions; or In the case of construction activity connected with an existing single family residence and/or garage where the temporary or permanent construction work does not increase the footprint of the structure lying within the buffer and no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the existing structure, enhancement is not required; and (ii) The proposal will result in, at minimum, no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (iii) The proposal does not result in increased flood hazard risk; and (iv) The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365- 195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iv. Minimum Buffer Width Permissible by Administrator: If the criteria in Subsection J.4.d.iii are met, the reduced buffer or setback width shall not be less than the following minimum standards. (a) 75 feet for non-water-oriented development, unless otherwise listed below. (b) 50 feet for water related or water enjoyment development, unless otherwise listed below. (c) 50 feet for multi-family development in the Urban Environment along the Cedar River. (d) 25 feet for a single family residential dwelling on a pre-existing legal lot, where there is not enough developable area elsewhere on the site to reasonably accommodate building pads and off-street parking. The setback shall be equal to the existing structure setback in the case of construction activity connected with an existing single family residence and/or accessory garage where the work does not increase the footprint APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-8 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report of the structure lying within the buffer and no portion of the new work occurs closer to the required buffers than the existing structure, unless the structure or addition can meet required buffers. (e) 25 feet for existing essential public facilities in the Urban Environment not otherwise considered water dependent. The appropriate buffer/setback shall be based on the facility type, conformance with adopted master plans, ability to provide for safe public access, or other legal or safety concerns. (f) 25 feet for water dependent development that does not require an abutting shoreline location. Ancillary water dependent or water enjoyment uses may be co-located with water dependent uses. (g) 0 feet for water dependent development if the use depends on an abutting shoreline location. Ancillary water dependent or water enjoyment uses may be co-located with water dependent uses. (h) 0 feet for public access connections to the water’s edge, or public access water body crossings, or public access segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not practical, or where public access alignment avoids impacts to other critical areas, or where safety requires an abutting location; otherwise 25 feet for public access proposals paralleling the water. (i) 0 feet for necessary roads, bridges, and railroads and utilities when consistent with the standards of Subsection K. (j) 0 feet for piers, docks, marinas, boat launches, and bulkheads when consistent with applicable standards in Subsection K. Ancillary water dependent or water enjoyment uses may be co-located with water dependent uses. (k) As determined by the Administrator, for development proposed on sites separated from the shoreline by pre-existing, intervening, and lawfully created structures, roads, bulkheads/hard structural shoreline stabilization, or other substantial existing improvements. For the purposes of this section, the intervening lots/parcels, roads, bulkheads/hard structural shoreline stabilization, or other substantial improvements shall be found to: (i)Separate the subject upland property from the water body due to their height or width; and (ii)Substantially prevent or impair delivery of most riparian functions from the subject upland property to the water body. The buffer width established shall reflect the riparian functions that can be delivered to the regulated stream/lake. v. Documentation: Reduced buffer width determinations and evidence shall be included in the application file. vi. Variance Required for Narrower Buffer Width: Greater buffer width or setback reductions require review as a shoreline variance by the Land Use Hearing Examiner per RMC 4-9-197. The setback provisions of the zoning district for the use must also be met unless a variance to the zoning code is achieved. e. Averaging of Buffer Width: APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-9 i. Authority: Based upon an applicant’s request, and the acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, the Administrator may approve buffer width averaging. ii. Criteria for Approval: Buffer width averaging may be allowed only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: (a) The water body and associated riparian area contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and (b) Buffer width averaging will result in no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (c) The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and (d) In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced to less than fifty feet (50’); and (e) The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. Buffer Enhancement May Be Required: Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required where appropriate to site conditions, habitat sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. iv. Variance Required for Narrower Buffer Width: Greater buffer width or setback reductions require review as a shoreline variance by the Land Use Hearing Examiner per RMC 4-9-197. The setback provisions of the zoning district for the use must also be met unless a variance to the zoning code is achieved. v. Notification: Notification may be required per Section J.2.c.ii.(f)(vi) f. Incentives for Restoration of Streams Located in an Underground Pipe or Culvert: Daylighting of culverted watercourses should be encouraged and allowed with the following incentives: i. Modified Standards: (a). Residential Zones: Setbacks, lot width and lot depth standards of RMC 4-2 may be reduced by the Reviewing Official without requirement of a variance for lots that abut the daylighted watercourse to accommodate the same number of lots as if the watercourse were not daylighted. (b). Mixed Use, Commercial, and Industrial Zones: (i.) Where greater lot coverage allowances are provided for structured parking in RMC 4-2, lot coverage may be increased to the limit allowed for structured parking if instead a stream is daylighted. The increase in impervious surface allowed shall be equal to the area of stream restoration. (ii.) Density bonuses may be allowed pursuant to RMC 4-9-065 where specified. APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-10 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report ii. Standard buffers may be reduced per 4-3-090J.4.d. If reduced buffers in J.4.d along with other development standards of the zone would not allow the same development level as without the watercourse daylighting, the Administrator may approve a reduction consistent with the following criteria: (a) The buffer is lowered only to the amount necessary to achieve the same amount of development as without the daylighting. (b) The buffer width is no less than 50 feet. (c) The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. When designed consistent with the City’s flood regulations in RMC 4-3- 050.I.6, portions of the daylighted stream/created buffer may be considered part of compensatory storage in flood hazard areas. iv. Stream relocation is permitted subject to RMC4-3-090.K. 5. Stream/Lake Buffer Standards: Any proposal subject to RMC 4-3-090 shall comply with the following standards within required buffer areas: a. Sites with Natural or Partially Developed Shorelines: Streams and lakes and their buffer areas shall be undisturbed, except where: i. Buffer averaging or buffer reduction requests are evaluated in a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study and authorized pursuant to Subsections J.4.d, Reductions of Buffer or Setback Width and J.4.e, Averaging of Buffer Width, or ii. The activity consists of a habitat or watershed enhancement proposal exempt from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit process, or iii. A variance has been approved for the use or activity. iv. Where impervious surfaces exist in buffer areas the proposal is additionally subject standards of 5.b. v. Specific criteria of Section K shall apply to the specific use or activity in addition to Subsection J. b. Sites with Developed Shorelines: Where the shoreline is largely in an unnatural state and the buffer predominantly contains impervious surfaces due to existing, legally permitted activities, the following standards shall apply: i. Streams and lakes shall be undisturbed. ii. No new buildings may be constructed within the required buffer. iii. Where impervious surfaces exist in buffer areas, such impervious surfaces shall not be increased or expanded within the buffer area. The extent of impervious surfaces within the buffer area may only be re- arranged if the reconfiguration of impervious surfaces and restoration of prior surfaced areas is part of an enhancement proposal that improves ecological function of the area protected by the buffer. iv. Existing native vegetation shall be preserved or enhanced to the extent possible, preferably in consolidated areas. APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-11 v. The proposal will result in, at minimum, no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function. vi. Specific criteria of Subsection K shall apply to the specific use or activity in addition to Subsection J. c. Proposed Activities Independent of a Use: Section K includes standards for practices or activities within waters or along the shoreline that can be unassociated with a land use, including but not limited to dredging, landfills, and stream alteration. Proposed activities or practices that are independent of a land use are subject to: i. Authorization in the Use Environment. ii. Evaluation in a Stream/Lake Reconnaissance and Supplemental Study. iii. Preparation of a Mitigation Plan consistent with subsection J.2 as appropriate. iv. Consistency with applicable specific criteria in subsection K in addition to Subsections J2, J5 and J6. 6. Permit Evaluation Criteria for Shoreline Developments: a. Burden on Applicant: Applicants must explain to the satisfaction of the Administrator the methods that will be used to halt, avoid or otherwise control any harmful effects associated with the proposal. b. Erosion: Vegetation shall be used to control erosion rather than structural means where feasible. c. Geology: Important geological factors – such as possible slide areas – on a site must be considered. Whatever activity is planned under the application for the development permit must be safe and appropriate in view of the geological factors prevailing. d. No-Net-Loss of Functions: Shoreline uses or activities shall not adversely impact unique or fragile areas or stream/lake/riparian ecology function unless adequate mitigation measures are provided to ensure that there is no-net-loss of ecological functions as a result of the shoreline uses or activities. e. Native Growth Protection Areas Required: The Reviewing Official shall require the establishment of Native Growth Protection Areas consistent with RMC 4-3-050.E.4 to protect streams or lakes or riparian or lakeshore habitat where present. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation may be required as a condition of approval. f. Preservation of Existing Vegetation: Existing native vegetation shall be preserved to the extent possible, preferably in consolidated areas. g. Revegetation Required: Revegetation may be required in order to achieve reduced buffer widths; in cases where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities; or as a result of findings addressed in required studies. When revegetation is required, it shall meet the following standards: i. Use of Native Species: When revegetation is required, native species, or other appropriate species naturalized to the Puget Sound region and APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-12 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report approved by the Reviewing Official, shall be used. A variety of species shall be used which serve as food or shelter from climatic extremes and predators, and as structure and cover for reproduction and rearing of young. ii. Removal of Noxious Species: When required as a condition of approval, noxious or undesirable species of plants shall be removed or controlled so as to not compete with native vegetation. h. Studies Required: All required studies shall be submitted in compliance with Subsection J.2. and RMC 4-8-120. i. Use Compatibility and Aesthetic Effects: The potential impact of any of the following on adjacent, abutting, and possibly distant land and shoreline users shall be considered in the design plans and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: i. View Obstruction: Buildings, smokestacks, machinery, fences, piers, poles, wires, signs, lights, and other structures. ii. Community Disturbances: Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities. iii. Design Theme: Coordination and uniformity of architectural styles, exterior designs, landscaping patterns and other aspects of the overall design of a site. iv. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Landscaped screening shall be used to hide from public view any area that may negatively impact the visual quality of a site. v. Outdoor Activities: (a) Residential Areas: Work areas, storage, and other activities on a site in a residential area shall be in enclosed buildings, as is reasonably possible, to reduce distractions and other effects on surrounding areas. (b) Commercial and Industrial Areas: Outdoor activities of commercial and industrial operations shall be limited to those necessary for the operation of the enterprise. Outdoor areas shall not be used for storage of more than minimal amounts of equipment, parts, materials, products, or other objects. j. Public Access: i. Where possible and consistent with this Section, space and ROW shall be left available on the immediate shoreline so that greater public use of the shoreline can be provided. ii. Trail systems shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property rights. iii. No property shall be acquired for public use without just compensation to the owner. k. Orientation: Where feasible, shoreline developments shall locate the water- dependent, water-related and water-enjoyment portions of their developments along the shoreline and place all other facilities inland. l. Other Permit Criteria: Also see criteria in Section 4-9-197.F. APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-13 K. SPECIFIC USE REGULATIONS: 6. Dredging: a. Definition: The removal of earth or sediment from the bottom or banks of a body of water. b. Permitted Dredging: Dredging is to be permitted only when: i. Dredging is necessary for flood control purposes, if a definite flood hazard would exist unless dredging were permitted. ii. Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material distribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely affecting aquatic life or recreational areas. iii. Dredging is necessary to obtain additional water area so as to decrease the intrusion into the lake of a public, private or marina dock. This type of dredging may only be allowed if the following conditions are met: The water of the dredged area shall not be stagnant or polluted; and the water of the dredged area shall be capable of supporting aquatic life. iv. Dredging may be permitted where necessary for the development and maintenance of public shoreline parks and of private shorelines to which the public is provided access. Dredging may be permitted where additional public access is provided and/or where there is anticipated to be a significant improvement to fish or wildlife habitat, provided there is no net reduction upon the surface waters of the lake. v. Dredging may be permitted to maintain water depth and navigability. vi. Dredging is performed pursuant to a remedial action plan, approved under authority of the Model Toxics Control Act or pursuant to other authorization by the Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineer or other agency with jurisdiction. c. Prohibited Dredging: i. Dredging is prohibited in unique or fragile areas (see RMC 4-11-210) except for the purposes identified in subsection K.6.b of this Section where appropriate federal and/or state authorization has been received, and any required environmental review and mitigation is conducted. ii. Dredging solely for the purpose of obtaining fill or construction material, which dredging is not directly related to those purposes permitted in subsection K.6.b of this Section, is prohibited. d. Regulations on Permitted Dredging: i. Report by Engineer Required: All proposed dredging operations shall be planned by an appropriate state licensed professional engineer. An approved engineering report shall be submitted to the Renton Development Services Division as part of the application for a shoreline permit. ii. Applicant’s Responsibility: The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposed dredging operation. APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-14 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report iii. Minimal Adverse Effect: The responsibility further rests with the applicant to demonstrate that there will be a minimal adverse effect on aquatic life and/or on recreational areas. iv. Timing: The timing of any dredging operation shall be planned so that it has minimal impact or interference with fish migration. v. Abutting Bank Protection: When dredging bottom material of a body of water, the banks shall not be disturbed unless absolutely necessary. The responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out practices to protect the banks. If it is absolutely necessary to disturb the abutting banks for access to the dredging area, the responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out a method of restoration of the disturbed area to a condition minimizing erosion and siltation. vi. Minimize Impacts: The responsibility rests with the applicant to demonstrate a method of eliminating or preventing conditions that may: (a) Create a nuisance to the public or nearby activity. (b) Damage property in or near the area. (c) Cause substantial adverse effect to plant, animal, aquatic or human life in or near the area. (d) Endanger public safety in or near the area. vii. Contamination: The applicant shall demonstrate a method to control contamination and pollution to water, air, and ground. viii. Disposal of dredged material: The applicant shall demonstrate a method of disposing of all dredged material. Dredged material shall not be deposited in a lake or stream except if the material is approved as part of a contamination remediation project approved by appropriate state and/or federal agencies. In no instance shall dredged material be stockpiled in a shoreland area. If the dredged material is contaminant or pollutant in nature, the applicant shall propose and carry out a method of disposal that does not contaminate or pollute water, air, or ground. 8. Landfills: a. When Permitted: Landfills shall be permitted in the following cases: i. For detached single family residential uses, when the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty five feet (125 ) in length along the OHWM and thirty five feet (35 ) into the water, and provided the provisions of RMC 4-9-197I4b(i) through 4-9-197I4b(vi) are satisfactorily met; or ii. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, a landfill shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or iii. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or iv. When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and fills; or v. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-15 vi. When a landfill is part of a remedial action plan approved by the Department of Ecology pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act, or otherwise authorized by the Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or other agency with jurisdiction. vii. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than those listed in subsections K.8.ai through vi of this Section will be allowed only with prior approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 15. Roads and Railroads: a. Scenic Boulevards: Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards where possible. b. Sensitive Design: Roadways and Railroads located in shoreland areas shall be limited and allowed only if the following conditions are met: i. The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and ii. The facility is designed and maintained to prevent soil erosion and to permit natural movement of groundwater. iii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and iv. Roads and railroads in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and v. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and vi. Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Design at Road Culverts, 1999, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Responsible Official; and vii. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and viii. Mitigation for impacts is provided pursuant to an approved mitigation plan per Subsection J.2. c. Debris Disposal: All debris and other waste materials from construction are to be disposed of in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion into any water body. 18. Utilities: a. Native Vegetation: The native vegetation shall be maintained whenever possible. When utility projects are completed in the water or shoreland, the disturbed area shall be restored and landscaped as nearly as possible to the original condition, unless new landscaping is determined to be more desirable. b. Landscaping: All vegetation and screening shall be hardy enough to withstand the travel of service trucks and similar traffic in areas where such activity occurs. APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-16 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report c. Screening of Public Utilities: When a public utility building, telephone exchange, sewage pumping operation or a public utility is built in the shoreline area, the requirements of this Master Program shall be met and the following screening requirements shall be met. If the requirements of subsection K.18.a of this Section, Native Vegetation, and the requirements of this subsection are in disagreement, the requirements of this subsection shall take precedence. i. If the installation is housed in a building, the building shall conform architecturally with the surrounding buildings and area, or with the type of building that will develop due to the zoning district. ii. An unhoused installation on the ground or a housed installation that does not conform with subsection K.18.c.i of this Section shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier within five (5) years. iii. An unhoused installation of a dangerous nature, such as an electrical distribution substation, shall be enclosed with an eight foot (8’) high open wire fence. Such installations shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier except at entrance gate(s), within five (5) years. d. Special Considerations for Pipelines: Installation and operation of pipelines shall protect the natural conditions of abutting watercourses and shorelines. i. Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of marine life nor shall water quality standards be violated. ii. Native soils shall be protected from erosion and natural conditions restored. Watercourse banks and bottoms shall be protected, where necessary, with suitable surface treatment. iii. Petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall have automatically controlled shutoff valves at each side of the water crossing. iv. All petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall be constructed in accordance with the regulations of the Washington State Transportation Commission and subject to review by the City Public Works Department. e. Major Utilities – Specifications: i. Overhead High Voltage Power Lines: Structure of overhead power lines should be single-pole type or other aesthetically compatible design. Joint use docks and piers may extend to eighty feet (80 ) beyond the OHWM or to a depth of twelve feet (12 ), whichever is reached first. ii. Electrical Distribution Substations: Electrical distribution substations shall be at a shoreland location only when the applicant proves there exists no other site out of the shoreland area and when the screening requirements of subsection K.18.c of this Section are met. iii. Communications: This Section applies to telephone exchanges including radar transmission installations, receiving antennas for cable television and/or radio, and any other facility for the transmission of communication systems. Communications installations may be permitted in the shoreline area only when there exists no feasible site out of the shoreline and water area and when the screening requirements of subsection K.18.c of this APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report D-17 Section are met. In an aesthetic interest, such installations shall be located as far as possible from residential, recreational, and commercial activities. iv. Pipeline Utilities: All pipeline utilities shall be underground. When underground projects are completed on the bank of a water body or in the shoreland or a shoreline, the disturbed area shall be restored to the original configuration. Underground utility installations shall be permitted only when the finished installation shall not impair the appearance of such areas. v. Public Access: All utility companies shall be asked to provide pedestrian public access to utility owned shorelines when such areas are not potentially hazardous to the public. Where utility rights-of-way are located near recreational or public use areas, utility companies shall be encouraged to provide said rights-of-way as parking or other public use areas for the abutting public use area. f. Local Service Utilities, Specifications: i. Waterlines: Sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with City standards. ii. Sanitary Sewer: The existence or use of outhouses or privies is prohibited. All uses shall hook to the municipal sewer system. There shall be no septic tanks or other on-site sewage disposal systems. Storm drainage and pollutant drainage shall not enter the sanitary sewer system. During construction phases, commercial sanitary chemical toilets may be allowed only until proper plumbing facilities are completed. All sanitary sewer pipe sizes and materials shall be approved by the Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department and METRO. iii. Storm Sewers: A storm sewer drainage system shall be required. Pretreatment of storm runoff or diversion to sanitary sewers may be required to keep deleterious substances out of neighboring watercourses. Storm sewer sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with City standards. iv. Discharges of Pollutants and Petroleum Products: (a) Agency Review: Discharges of pollutants into watercourses and groundwater shall be subject to Ecology, Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency for review of permits for discharge. (b) Oil Separations: These units shall be required at sites that have oil waste disposal into sanitary or storm sewer. These units shall be built to Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) or State of Washington Department of Public Health specifications. (c) Petroleum Bulk Storage and Distribution: Petroleum facilities shall hereafter not be allowed. g. Local and Major Utilities – Location and Crossings: Local and Major Utilities shall be designed and developed according to the following criteria and meeting mitigation criteria of J.2: i. Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be avoided to the maximum extent possible; and APPENDIX D Renton Nickel Improvement Project D-18 Land Use Plans and Policies Discipline Report ii. The Utility is designed consistent with one or more of the following methods: (a) Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone; or (b) The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel centerline; or (c) Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or utility crossing ; and iii. New utility routes shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a down- valley course near the channel; and iv. The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the natural rate of shore migration or channel migration; and v. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and vi. Mitigation for impacts is provided pursuant to an approved mitigation plan per Subsection J.2.