HomeMy WebLinkAbout6. L2ST Seg A Proj Narritive-Permit Descr & Justif
Lake to Sound Trail – Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
Prepared for
King County
April 2015
Prepared by
April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
Zoning Compliance
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
Shoreline Variance
Prepared for
King County
Parks Division
201 South Jackson, Seventh Floor
Seattle, WA 98104
Prepared by
Parametrix
719 2nd Avenue, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98104
T. 206.394.3700 F. 1.855.542.6353
www.parametrix.com
CITATION
Parametrix. 2015. Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification. Prepared by Parametrix,
Seattle, Washington. April 2015.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 1-1
1. PROJECT NARRATIVE
This document addresses City of Renton Submittal Requirements for:
Zoning Compliance
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
Shoreline Variance
1.1 Project name, size and location of site
Name
Lake to Sound Trail, Segment A
Location
Linear corridor from the Green River Trail in Tukwila to the west to Naches Avenue SW in Renton on the
east.
Size
The trail section is 14,317 feet long and 12 feet wide for an area of 3.94 acres, with the addition of two
foot shoulders, the area is 5.26 acres.
1.2 Land use permits required for proposed project
Zoning Compliance
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
Shoreline Variance
The trail has portions that are within and portions that are outside of Shoreline Management Act
Jurisdiction. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required for the entire project. Specific
sections of the trail require Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and Shoreline Variance approval.
The portions of the trail within Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction are subject to the decision
criteria and design criteria of the Renton Shoreline Master Program RMC 4-3-090 including Critical Area
regulations in RMC 4-3-090.D.2.c. that apply only in the shoreline.
Portions of the trail outside Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction are subject to non-shoreline
Development Regulations in RMC Title IV, including Critical Area regulations found in RMC 4-3-050.
The application of regulations to specific subsections of the trail is described below.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
1-2 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
1.3 Zoning designation of the site and adjacent properties
The trail corridor is located within three zoning districts:
CO, Commercial Office to the east;
RC, Resource Conservation within the largest portion of the Black River Riparian Forest; and
IM, Industrial-Medium west of Monster Road.
The adjacent land has the following zoning:
CO, Commercial Office extends to the east to approximately Powell Avenue SW
IM, Industrial-Medium is to the east and southeast of the CO zoning
North of BNSF Railway the zoning is IL, Industrial-Light and IH, Industrial-High and contains a
quarry
IM, Industrial-Medium is located to the south of the Black River and south and west of Monster
Road
IH, Industrial High is located south and west of Oaksdale Avenue SW
The portion of the Black River Riparian Forest south of the river is zoned RC along the river and
CO further south
1.4 Current use of the site and any existing improvements
The western portion of the trail between Fort Dent Park and Monster Road is located on a combination
of existing dirt path, dirt road, and paved surface area, on land owned by the City of Tukwila, the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway and the Union Pacific Railway. The westernmost 600 feet of the
proposed trail alignment is on maintained lawns associated with Fort Dent Park in the City of Tukwila.
The trail then crosses under two existing railroad bridges and crosses Monster Road southeast of the
existing Monster Road Bridge.
The eastern portion of the alignment traverses the perimeter of the Black River Riparian Forest via an
existing maintenance road and access path, both of which are used currently for recreation. The
existing road surface in most of this portion consists of compacted gravel and ranges from 10 to 12 feet
wide. This special area is described further below.
1.5 Special site features (i.e. wetlands, water bodies, steep
slopes)
For the western portion of the proposed trail alignment, the Black River is the major natural feature in
this area. The city Sensitive Area Maps designate the river bank as a steep slope. The confluence of the
Black and Green Rivers is located just north of the west end of the Segment A project area.
The eastern portion of the trail in the Black River Riparian Forest contains the Black River and six
wetlands along the trail corridor and a Blue Heron nesting colony.
The eastern three-quarters of the proposed trail alignment from Monster Road to the cul-de-sac at
Naches Avenue SW (approximately 4,300 linear feet) follows an existing gravel maintenance road south
of the BNSF east-west railroad tracks and north of the Black River, along the northern perimeter of the
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 1-3
Black River Riparian Forest. The gravel maintenance road is currently used for walking and pet exercise.
Areas immediately outside the edge of the existing gravel surface generally consist of grasses, low-
growing annual plants, blackberry thickets, and native riparian trees. The Black River Riparian Forest
was acquired by the City in the early 1990s. This area supports a diverse wildlife community, including
bald eagles and a colony of great blue herons that has actively nested here every year since 1986 and
has been one of the largest such colonies in the Puget Sound region. Data from the WDFW PHS program
indicate that the Black River Riparian Forest is also used by many waterfowl species, other bird species
commonly found in riparian and wetland habitats in the Puget Lowlands, mammals, reptiles and
amphibians. (See Vegetation and Wildlife Report, Section 3.3)
1.6 Statement addressing soil type and drainage conditions
Soils very somewhat in different portions of the trail corridor:
Fort Dent Park to Monster Road – Soils are Newberg silt loam, an alluvial soil formed on
floodplains.
East of Monster Road – Soils are primarily Woodinville silt loam, also an alluvial soil formed on
floodplains with a substantial component of muck. This is a soil often associated with wetlands.
A smaller portion of the area is Tukwila much, which is primarily organic materials formed within
wetlands.
Subsurface exploration occurred in the vicinity of the new bridge over the Black River, where the
subsurface is underlain by granular soil (fill), over loose alluvium, over medium dense alluvium, and over
Glacial Till or Bedrock. Because the loose alluvium is of geotechnical concern due to earthquake loading
conditions, ground improvements will be constructed in the vicinity of the bridge foundation.
Soils are further discussed in the Draft Geotechnical Report and in the Critical Areas Report in reference
to wetlands delineated.
Drainage from the existing informal trail, and from the land over which the proposed trail passes
discharges through overland sheet flow to the north to the Green River, the Black River and wetland
that are downgradient from the alignment. (See Technical Information Report Drainage and Floodplain.)
1.7 Proposed use of the property and scope of the proposed
development
King County, together with the Cities of Renton and Tukwila, Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is proposing to develop a
1.2-mile segment of what will ultimately be the 16-mile Lake to Sound Trail. The 1.2-mile segment is
referred to as Segment A of the Lake to Sound Trail. Segment A extends from the Starfire Sports
Complex in Fort Dent Park to Naches Avenue SW. It runs from the Green River Trail parallel to the Black
River, it crosses under two railroad bridges, crosses Monster Road, crosses the Black River on a non-
motorized bridge and parallels railroad tracks north of the Black River Riparian Forest to Naches Avenue
SW. (Figure 1-1). Most of the trail is within the City of Renton, with the municipal limit roughly between
the two sets of railroad tracks west of Monster Road.
Segment A is part of a Regional Trail System that provides non-motorized, alternative transportation and
a recreational corridor for multiple trail users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, skaters, and others. Once
complete, Segment A would provide a much needed trail connection between the regional growth
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
1-4 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
centers of Renton and Tukwila and safe passage under the heavy rail lines. In addition to the Green River
Trail, Segment A will connect to the Interurban Trail to the south, and in the future to the Cedar River
Trail and a trail in the Eastside Rail Corridor.
Project Features
Segment A is typically 12 feet of asphalt pavement bounded by two 2-foot-wide shoulders and 1-foot-
wide clear zones, in accordance with American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials’ (AASHTO) guidelines. The project includes:
Constructing a 12-foot-wide asphalt pavement trail with soft-surface (gravel) shoulders.
Creating a new pedestrian bridge spanning the Black River east of the existing Monster Road
Bridge, which cannot be improved to safely accommodate the envisioned trail use.
Installing a pedestrian-actuated signal crossing of Monster Road south of the bridge.
Constructing an undercrossing feature beneath two railroad bridges to protect trail users from
potential falling debris.
Constructing two approximately 10-foot by 20-foot pull-out rest areas (one at the northern
perimeter of the Black River Riparian Forest and one east of Monster Road and northwest of the
Black River pump station)
Installing split-rail fencing and plantings to minimize the potential for disturbance to sensitive
wildlife
Between Fort Dent Park and Monster Road, the trail alignment lies south of the Black River. The
westernmost 600 feet of the proposed trail alignment is on maintained lawns associated with Fort Dent
Park. It follows a dirt footpath that joins an existing dirt road beneath the railroad bridges for 650 feet.
The 150 feet west of Monster Road is on existing paved surfaces.
The proposed trail alignment crosses over the Black River using a new pedestrian bridge.
The eastern three-quarters of the proposed trail alignment from Naches Avenue SW to Monster Road
(approximately 4,300 linear feet) follows an existing gravel maintenance road south of the BNSF east-
west railroad tracks and north of the Black River, along the northern perimeter of the Black River
Riparian Forest. The east terminus is located at a cul-de-sac on Naches Avenue SW near an office park.
1.8 For plats indicate the proposed number, net density and
range of sizes (net lot area) of the new lots
Not applicable
1.9 Proposed off-site improvements (i.e. installation of
sidewalks, fire hydrants, sewer main, etc.)
Not applicable
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 1-5
1.10 Total estimated construction cost and estimated fair
market value of the proposed project
$3,000,000
1.11 Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any
fill or excavation is proposed
Construction of the trail will involve the following:
Preliminary earthwork quantities indicate approximately 1,500 cubic yards of cut and 3,000 cubic yards
of fill, including crushed rock and asphalt, will be necessary. Please note that cuts and fills within the
100-year floodplain are balanced, with no net fill.
In addition, based on geotechnical conditions, ground improvements will be constructed in the vicinity
of the new bridge. Several options are under consideration: stone columns and deep soil mixing. These
ground improvements would disturb an area of approximately 0.17 acre on the approaches to the
bridge.
1.12 Number, type and size of any trees to be removed
The City of Renton has determined that all trees within 10 feet of the paved edge of the trail should be
removed, as should all cottonwood trees within 20 feet of the paved edge of the trail, for the protection
of public safety and the trail surface. A total of 151 trees would be removed as part of the project.
Approximately 51 trees are within the riparian Vegetation Conservation buffer of the Black River in the
City of Renton. About 45 trees would be removed within wetland buffers, of those 15 are also within
riparian Vegetation Conservation buffers. About 70 trees are outside Critical Areas.
1.13 Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City
A trail easement across rights-of-way owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific
Railroads is proposed to connect the trail to the Green River Trail.
1.14 Any proposed job shacks, sales trailers, and/or model
homes
During construction, a staging area and job shacks will be located on site, likely near the Monster Road
portion of the alignment on areas currently cleared.
1.15 Any proposed modifications being requested (include
written justification)
Variances are requested for Wetland buffers within shoreline jurisdiction and are addressed in Section 7
of this submittal.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
1-6 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
1.16 For projects located within 100 feet of a stream or wetland,
Distance in feet from the wetland or stream to the nearest area of work
Wetland 1/2 the trail surface is within 25 feet at the closest (139+30) with the cut/fill line within 18 feet
Wetland 2A the trail surface is within 20 feet at the closest (139+50) with the cut/fill line within 3 feet
Wetland 3, the trail surface is within 8 feet at the closest (126+70) with the retaining wall within 3 feet
Wetland 5, the trail surface is within 15 feet at the closest (104+10) with the cut/fill line within 10 feet
Wetland 6, the trail surface is within 12 feet at the closest (106+90 with the cut/fill line within 10 feet
Distance from closest area of work to the ordinary high water mark.
Black River, the trail is within 22 feet at the closest (6+70) and the cut/fill line is within 20 feet.
Description of the nature of the existing shoreline
South side of the Black River
The south side of the Black River, from the mouth to the railroad bridges is riprapped with shrub
vegetation on the river banks and a scattering to medium to large trees between the river and the
nearly sports fields.
At the railroad bridges, there is little or no vegetation under the bridges, with shrub/scrub vegetation
between the bridges.
Between the railroad bridges and west Monster Road there is a variety of shrub/scrub understory with
overstory trees consisting largely of cottonwood between the river and the existing roadway.
On the east side of Monster Road to the proposed bridge there is a variety of shrub/scrub understory
with overstory trees consisting largely of willows and cottonwood with a large grass areas adjacent to
the road.
North side of the Black River
On the north side of the Black River from Monster Road to the dam/pump station the bank is riprapped
with shrub/scrub vegetation and a scattering of trees near the top of the bank.
East of the dam/pump station the shoreline on both sides of the river has a variety of understory with
dense overstory trees.
The approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an
obstructed view in the event the proposed project exceeds a height of 35-feet above the average
grade level
Does not apply. No element of the project exceeds 35 feet. The project is largely at grade level.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-1
2. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
2.1 Introduction
The following addresses criteria that apply to the project including
Zoning
Critical Areas Regulations in RMC 9-3-050 for portions of the project outside Shoreline
Jurisdiction
Shoreline Master Program Regulations in RMC 4-3-090
The primary regulations that apply to the proposed trail are found in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC)
4-3-090 Shoreline Master Program Regulations. These regulations also cross reference other applicable
regulations that apply in the shoreline. In addition RMC 4-3-090.D.1 provides that:
Although there are a variety of criteria for approval of a Conditional Use and Variance for this project,
the basic criteria are met, as outlined below.
Justification
The proposed trail is allowed in the Natural Shoreline Environment if it meets Conditional Use
criteria.
The Lake to Sound Regional Trail is designed as part of the regional trail network in Renton and
King County. It is in harmony with the Shoreline Management Act and local Shoreline Master
Program goals of enhancing public access to the shoreline.
The trail is an expansion of an existing trail and gravel road and incorporates design features to
assure that it meets the overall Shoreline Management criteria of no net loss of ecological
processes and functions.
A variance is required for a paved trail in excess of four feet wide within wetland buffers. The
existing gravel road in the trail corridor is currently 10 to 12 feet wide and exceeds the code
standard. The minor widening within the existing cleared area and the removal of additional
vegetation will be mitigated by buffer enhancement that will enhance overall wetland function in
the Black River Riparian Forest.
Vegetation removed to accommodate the trail will be replaced by additional plantings both within
wetland and stream buffers and outside critical areas.
The proposed trail will follow existing paths, maintenance roads, and disturbed areas at the
periphery of the Black River Riparian Forest. Construction activities likely to disturb nesting herons
will not be allowed near the Black River heron colony during sensitive periods. Areas between the
nesting colony and the trail will be planted with native trees and shrubs to provide additional
visual screening for herons.
The primary regulations that apply to the proposed trail are found in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC)
4-3-090 Shoreline Master Program Regulations. These regulations also cross reference other applicable
regulations that apply in the shoreline. In addition RMC 4-3-090.D.1 provides that:
Applicability: This Section shall apply to all use and development activities within the shoreline.
Items included here will not necessarily be repeated in subsection E of this Section, Use
Regulations, and shall be used in the evaluation of all shoreline permits.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-2 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Renton Municipal Code provisions in Title IV, Development Regulations, Chapter 4, City-wide
Property Development Standards (chapter 4-4 RMC) contain regulations and standards
governing site development of property City-wide, such as parking, landscaping, fencing, and
others. Such provisions shall apply within shoreline jurisdictions unless there is a conflict with
the standards set forth by the Shoreline Master Program. In case of conflict, the standards set
forth in the Shoreline Master Program shall prevail.
A portion of the trail east of Monster road in the far northerly portion of the site near the railroad tracks
is entirely outside Shoreline Management Act Jurisdiction.
This report reproduces or summarizes applicable code requirements.
Justification for how the proposal meets these criteria is provided in the boxed text.
2.2 Zoning Regulations
Zoning Districts and regulations
The trail corridor is located within three zoning districts as indicated in Figure 2-1:
CO, Commercial Office to the East;
RC, Resource Conservation within the largest portion of the Black River Riparian Forest; and
IM, Industrial-Medium west of Monster Road.
The Zoning Use Table in RMC 4-2-060 does not list trails as a use. Parks are an allowed use for
Neighborhood Parks and for Existing regional and community parks and an administrative conditional
use for new regional and community parks in the RC, IM and CO districts.
Critical Areas
Within Critical Areas regulated by RMC 4-3-050 trails are designated as an Exemption in Buffers by RMC
4-3-050.C.7.a. subject to the following:
i. Trails and Open Space: Walkways and trails, and associated open space in critical area buffers
located on public property, or where easements or agreements have been granted for such
purposes on private property. All of the following criteria shall be met.
(1) The trail, walkway, and associated open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. The City may allow private trails as part of
the approval of a site plan, subdivision or other land use permit approvals.
(2) Trails and walkways shall be located in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer,
i.e., the portion of the buffer that is farther away from the critical area. Exceptions to this
requirement may be made for:
• Trail segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not practical.
• Public access points to water bodies spaced periodically along the trail.
(3) Enhancement of the buffer area is required where trails are located in the buffer. Where
enhancement of the buffer area abutting a trail is not feasible due to existing high quality
vegetation, additional buffer area or other mitigation may be required. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-
2012)
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-3
(4) Trail widths shall be a maximum width of twelve (12) feet. Trails shall be constructed of
permeable materials. Impervious materials may be allowed if pavement is required for
handicapped or emergency access, or safety, or is a designated nonmotorized
transportation route or makes a connection to an already dedicated trail, or reduces
potential for other environmental impacts.
Justification:
The portion of the trail outside of Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction is allowed outright.
The location is not restricted to the outer 25% of the buffer if it connects to existing tails where an
alternative alignment is not practical.
The proposed 12 foot trail is allowed by Critical Area regulations. Impervious surface is allowed
for a Regional Trail that is designed for nonmotorized traffic.
2.3 Shoreline Master Program Regulations Decision Criteria
The trail corridor within Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction is within a Natural Environment
Designation as shown in Figure 2-2.
Pursuant to RMC 4-9-190.B.7. Approval Criteria: In order to be approved, the Administrator of the
Department of Community and Economic Development or designee must find that a proposal is
consistent with the following criteria:
a. All regulations of the Shoreline Master Program appropriate to the shoreline designation and the
type of use or development proposed shall be met, except those bulk and dimensional standards
that have been modified by approval of a shoreline variance.
b. All policies of the Shoreline Master Program appropriate to the shoreline area designation and
the type of use or development activity proposed shall be considered and substantial compliance
demonstrated. A reasonable proposal that cannot fully conform to these policies may be
permitted, provided it is demonstrated to the Administrator of the Department of Community and
Economic Development or designee that the proposal is clearly consistent with the overall goals,
objectives and intent of the Shoreline Master Program.
c. For projects located on Lake Washington the criteria in RCW 90.58.020 regarding shorelines of
statewide significance and relevant policies and regulations of the Shoreline Master Program shall
also be adhered to.
Pursuant to RMC 4-9-190.I.5. Conditional Use, the following criteria must be met:
a. Purpose: Upon proper application, and findings of compliance with conditional use permit criteria,
a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective of a conditional use provision is to provide
more control and flexibility for implementing the regulations of the Shoreline Master Program.
With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of uses can be expanded to include many
uses.
b. Decision Criteria: Uses classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after consideration and
by meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses
within that area. A conditional use permit may be granted subject to the Administrator of the
Department of Economic Development or designee determining compliance with each of the
following conditions:
i. The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area.
ii. The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines.
iii. Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the Shoreline Master Program.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-4 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
iv. The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline Master
Program.
v. The use meets the conditional use criteria in WAC 173-27-160.
Pursuant to WAC 173-27-160, the following criteria must be met
The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide a system within the master program which
allows flexibility in the application of use regulations in a manner consistent with the policies of
RCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit
by local government or the department to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or
to assure consistency of the project with the act and the local master program.
(1) Uses which are classified or set forth in the applicable master program as conditional uses may
be authorized provided that the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
(a) That the proposed use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the master
program;
(b) That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines;
(c) That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other
authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive
plan and shoreline master program;
(d) That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment
in which it is to be located; and
(e) That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
(2) In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative
impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if conditional use permits
were granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of
the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and shall
not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
Because there is overlap in the criteria in RMC 4-9-190.I.5. and WAC 173-27-160, the criteria are
discussed below in the following subsections:
2.4.1 Conditional Use Criteria – Allowed Use, Consistency with Purpose and Regulations
2.4.2 Conditional Use Criteria – Compatibility with Permitted Uses
2.4.3 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Use of Public Shorelines
2.4.4 Conditional Use Criteria – Cumulative Impacts
2.4.5 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Interest
Pursuant to RMC 4-9-190.I.4. Variances, the following criteria must be met:
a. Purpose: Upon proper application, a substantial development permit may be granted which is at
variance with the criteria established in the Shoreline Master Program where, owing to special
conditions pertaining to the specific piece of property, the literal interpretation and strict
application of the criteria established in the Shoreline Master Program would cause undue and
unnecessary hardship or practical difficulties.
b. Decision Criteria: The fact that the applicant might make a greater profit by using his property in a
manner contrary to the intent of the Shoreline Master Program is not, by itself, sufficient reason
for a variance. The Hearing Examiner must find each of the following:
i. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject property, or to
the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to other properties on shorelines in the
same vicinity.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-5
ii. The variance permit is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property
right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties on shorelines in the same
vicinity.
iii. The variance permit will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property on the shorelines in the same vicinity.
iv. The variance granted will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline
Master Program.
v. The public welfare and interest will be preserved; if more harm will be done to the area by
granting the variance than would be done to the applicant by denying it, the variance shall be
denied, but each property owner shall be entitled to the reasonable use and development of
his lands as long as such use and development is in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and the provisions of the Shoreline Master
Program.
vi. The proposal meets the variance criteria in WAC 173-27-170.
Pursuant to WAC 173-27-170, the following criteria must be met
The purpose of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional
or performance standards set forth in the applicable master program where there are extraordinary
circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict
implementation of the master program will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or
thwart the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020.
(1) Variance permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the permit would result in
a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant must
demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances shall be shown and the public interest shall suffer
no substantial detrimental effect.
(2) Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located landward of the ordinary high
water mark (OHWM), as defined in RCW 90.58.030 (2)(b), and/or landward of any wetland as
defined in RCW 90.58.030 (2)(h), may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all
of the following:
(a) That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the
applicable master program precludes, or significantly interferes with, reasonable use of the
property;
(b) That the hardship described in (a) of this subsection is specifically related to the property, and
is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the
application of the master program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the
applicant's own actions;
(c) That the design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area and
with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program
and will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment;
(d) That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by the other
properties in the area;
(e) That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to afford relief; and
(f) That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
(3) Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located waterward of the ordinary
high water mark (OHWM), as defined in RCW 90.58.030 (2)(b), or within any wetland as defined in
RCW 90.58.030 (2)(h), may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the
following:
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-6 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
(a) That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the
applicable master program precludes all reasonable use of the property;
(b) That the proposal is consistent with the criteria established under subsection (2)(b) through (f)
of this section; and
(c) That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected.
(4) In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of
additional requests for like actions in the area. For example if variances were granted to other
developments and/or uses in the area where similar circumstances exist the total of the
variances shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and shall not cause
substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
(5) Variances from the use regulations of the master program are prohibited.
Because there is overlap in the criteria in RMC 4-9-190.B.7.4. and WAC 173-27-170, the criteria are
discussed below in the following subsections:
2.5.1 Variance Criteria – Exceptional or Unique Conditions
2.5.2 Variance Criteria – Reasonable Use
2.5.3 Variance Criteria – Detrimental to Public Welfare or Cause Adverse Impacts
2.5.4 Variance Criteria – Special Privilege
2.5.5 Variance Criteria – Minimum Necessary
2.5.6 Variance Criteria – Summary
2.4 Conditional Use Criteria
Because there is overlap in the criteria in RMC 4-9-190.I.5. and WAC 173-27-160, the criteria are
discussed below in the following subsections:
2.4.1 Conditional Use Criteria – Allowed Use, Consistency with Purpose and Regulations
2.4.2 Conditional Use Criteria – Compatibility with Permitted Uses
2.4.3 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Use of Public Shorelines
2.4.4 Conditional Use Criteria – Cumulative Impacts
2.4.5 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Interest
Conditional Use Criteria – Allowed Use, Consistency with Purpose
and Regulations
This subsection addresses the following criteria:
RMC 4-9-190.I.5. a. Purpose: Upon proper application, and findings of compliance with conditional
use permit criteria, a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective of a conditional use
provision is to provide more control and flexibility for implementing the regulations of the Shoreline
Master Program. With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of uses can be expanded
to include many uses.
RMC 4-9-190.I.5. b.iv. The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the
Shoreline Master Program.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-7
WAC 173-27-160 (1) Uses which are classified or set forth in the applicable master program as
conditional uses may be authorized provided that the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
(a) That the proposed use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the master program;
(d) That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in
which it is to be located; and
In evaluating this criteria, the following subsections address the following provisions:
2.4.1.1 Consistency with Policies in the Act and Comprehensive Plan
2.4.1.2 SMP Use Regulations in RMC 4-3-090.E. Use Table
2.4.1.3 SMP Wetland Regulations in RMC 4-3-090.D.2 No Net Loss
2.4.1.4 Mitigation Sequence
2.4.1.5 Compliance with Shoreline Critical Areas Regulations
2.4.1.1 Consistency with Policies in the Act and Comprehensive Plan
Shoreline regulations are liberally construed to give full effect to the objectives and purposes for which
they have been enacted in accordance with RCW 90.58.900, Chapters 173-26 and 173-27 WAC and RMC
4-3-090.B.2.c. For context, the following provisions of the statute are relevant in interpreting objectives
and purposes.
RCW 90.58.020 Legislative findings — State policy enunciated — Use preference. [Part]
The legislature declares that the interest of all of the people shall be paramount in the
management of shorelines of statewide significance. The department, in adopting guidelines for
shorelines of statewide significance, and local government, in developing master programs for
shorelines of statewide significance, shall give preference to uses in the following order of
preference which:
(1) Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest;
(2) Preserve the natural character of the shoreline;
(3) Result in long term over short term benefit;
(4) Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline;
(5) Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines;
(6) Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline;
(7) Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or
necessary.
In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic
qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible
consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To this end uses
shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to
the natural environment, or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline.
Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those limited instances
when authorized, shall be given priority for single-family residences and their appurtenant
structures, ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks, marinas, piers,
and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-8 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the
shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial
numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state. Alterations of the natural condition
of the shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be recognized by the department. Shorelines
and shorelands of the state shall be appropriately classified and these classifications shall be
revised when circumstances warrant regardless of whether the change in circumstances occurs
through man-made causes or natural causes. Any areas resulting from alterations of the natural
condition of the shorelines and shorelands of the state no longer meeting the definition of
"shorelines of the state" shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter 90.58 RCW. [Emphasis
Added]
Similar polies are found in the Shoreline Management Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan:
Public Access Policies
Objective SH‐F. Increase public accessibility to shorelines and preserve and improve the natural
amenities.
Policy SH‐20. Public access should be provided consistent with the existing character of the
shoreline and consideration of opportunities and constraints for physical and
visual access, as well as consideration of ecological functions, as provided in
Policy SH‐31 Table of Public Access Objectives by Reach, and in conjunction with
the following policies.
Policy SH‐21. Public access to and along the water's edge should be available throughout
publicly owned shoreline areas although direct physical access to the water’s
edge may be restricted to protect shoreline ecological values. Public access shall
be provided over all public aquatic lands leased for private activity, consistent
with compatibility with water‐dependent uses.
Policy SH‐22. Public access from public streets shall be made available over public property
and may be acquired by easement or other means over intervening private
property.
Policy SH‐24. Public access to and along the water's edge should be located, designed, and
maintained in a manner that protects the natural environment and shoreline
ecological functions and is consistent with public safety as well as compatible
with water‐dependent uses. Preservation or improvement of the natural
processes shall be a basic consideration in the design of shoreline areas to
which public access is provided, including trail systems.
Policy SH‐26. Both passive and active public areas should be designed and provided.
Policy SH‐27. In order to encourage public use of the shoreline corridor, public parking should
be provided at frequent locations on public lands and rights of way and may be
required on private development.
Policy SH‐28. In planning for public access, emphasis should be placed on foot and bicycle
paths consistent with the Renton Bicycle and Trails Master Plan, rather than
roads, except in areas where public boat launching would be desirable.
Policy SH‐30. Development and management of public access should recognize the need to
address adverse impacts to adjacent private shoreline properties and should
recognize and be consistent with legal property rights of the owner. Just
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-9
compensation shall be provided to property owners for land acquired for public
use. Private access to the publicly owned shoreline corridor shall be provided to
owners of property contiguous to said corridor in common with the public.
Justification: The implementation of a Regional Trail System, as proposed in the Lake to Sound Trail,
Segment A, is consistent with the policies providing a use preference to shoreline recreational uses
and facilities that increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines and increase
recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline. These policies are subject to policies to
reserve the natural character of the shoreline; enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural
shorelines, and consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural
environment, which is a criteria in the approvals considered below.
2.4.1.2 SMP Use Regulations in RMC 4-3-090.E.
Table 4-3-090E1 Shoreline Use Table regulates the proposed trail in two provisions.
Public Hiking and Bicycle Trails, Over Land is a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use within the Natural
Environment. Footnote 1. adds the following: Provided that the use does not degrade the
ecological functions or natural character of the shoreline area.
Expansion of Existing Over-Water Trails is a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use within the Natural
Environment. Footnote 10. adds the following: No new over-water trails shall be allowed unless it
is part of the expansion of an existing over-water trail or over-water trail system. Such expansions
shall be considered a conditional use if allowed in the Public Access Requirements by Reach Table at
subsection D4f of this Section and if impacts are limited. [Reproduced below]
Justification: Shoreline Use Table
The proposed trail is allowed if it meets Conditional Use criteria.
The trail is an expansion of an existing trail insofar as the portion of the trail on City-owned
property has been used as a trail since the City acquired the property in the early 1990s.
Access to the trail is provided by sidewalks on the Monster Road bridge over the Black River,
which constitutes an existing over-water trail.
Compliance with Conditional Use criteria is discussed in multiple Subsections of this discussion.
Regulations for Trails are found in RMC 4-3-090.E.10,d Trails:
i. Trails that provide public access on or near the water shall be located, designed, and maintained in
a manner that protects the existing environment and shoreline ecological functions. Preservation
or improvement of the natural amenities shall be a basic consideration in the design of shoreline
trails.
ii. The location and design of trails shall create the minimum impact on adjacent property owners
including privacy and noise.
iii. Over-water structures may be provided for trails in cases where:
(a) Key trail links for local or regional trails must cross streams, wetlands, or other water bodies.
(b) For interpretive facilities.
(c) To protect sensitive riparian and wetland areas from the adverse impacts of at grade trails,
including soil compaction, erosion potential and impedance of surface and groundwater
movement.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-10 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
iv. Trail width and surface materials shall be appropriate for the context with narrow soft surface
trails in areas of high ecological sensitivity where the physical impacts of the trail and the number
of users should be minimized with wider hard-surfaced trails with higher use located in less
ecologically sensitive areas.
RMC 4-3-090.D.4.d. Design Criteria for Public Access Sites: Public access shall incorporate the following
location and design criteria:
i. Walkways or Trails Required in Vegetated Open Space: Public access on sites where vegetated
open space is provided along the shoreline shall consist of a public pedestrian walkway parallel
to the OHWM of the property. The walkway shall be buffered from sensitive ecological features,
may be set back from the water’s edge, and may provide limited and controlled access to
sensitive features and the water’s edge where appropriate. Fencing may be provided to control
damage to plants and other sensitive ecological features and where appropriate. Trails shall be
constructed of permeable materials and limited to four feet (4') to six feet (6') in width to
reduce impacts to ecologically sensitive resources.
iv. Resolution of Different Standards: Where City trail or transportation plans and development
standards specify dimensions that differ from those in subsections D4di, D4dii, or D4diii of this
Section, the standard that best serves public access, while recognizing constraints of protection
and enhancement of ecological functions, shall prevail.
v. Access Requirements Determined by Reach: A coordinated program for public access for specified
shoreline reaches is established in the Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Management Element,
Policy SH-31 Table of Public Access Objectives by Reach and in subsection D4f of this Section,
Table of Public Access Requirements by Reach:
(a) The City shall utilize the reach policies for public access as guidance in applying these
provisions to individual development sites.
(b) The City shall utilize the reach policies for public access as guidance in planning and
implementing public projects.
The referenced entry in the table reads:
Black River
/Springbrook A
Public physical access from a trail parallel to the water should be provided as
private lands redevelop. Expansion of public access in the Black River Riparian
Forest should occur only if consistent with ecological functions. A trail system is
present on the west side of the stream adjacent to the sewage treatment plant
and should be retained and possibly enhanced to connect to the Lake to Sound
Trail.
Justification: Development Standards for Trails
Trails are recognized as a desirable element for enhanced public access, subject primarily criteria
for protecting the existing environment and shoreline ecological functions which is addressed in
Subsection 7.4.1.3, No Net Loss and under individual Critical Areas, below.
The location of the trail is the perimeter of the Black River Riparian Forest, along an existing
maintenance road, which minimizes impacts to the existing environment and shoreline ecological
functions. The location of the trail does not create visual or noise impacts to adjacent property
owners. The trail alignment diverts higher speed trail users away from the narrow soft-surface to
the south that is used to view wildlife.
The trail meets the criteria for an overwater structure as an expansion of an existing trail insofar
as the portion of the trail on City-owned property has been used as a trail since the City acquired
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-11
the property in the early 1990s. Access to the trail is provided by sidewalks on the Monster Road
bridge over the Black River, which constitutes an existing over-water trail.
The provisions for permeable materials and width limited to 6 to 8 feet in areas of vegetated
open space is modified by the recognition in RMC 4-3-090.D.4.d.iv. that adopted city plans may
specify other dimensions that should prevail. In this case, the standards for a Regional Trail best
serves public access, while recognizing constraints of protection and enhancement of ecological
functions.
The policies for public access in different reaches is a guideline and not a directive. The criteria
for the proposed trail is to be considered in terms of consistency with ecological functions, which
is addressed in detail below. The trail referenced adjacent to the sewage treatment plant is the
Springbrook Trail and is separate from the Lake to Sound Regional Trail under consideration.
Split rail fencing is proposed on the south side of the trail through the riparian forest to
discourage foot traffic through adjacent sensitive areas.
2.4.1.3 SMP Regulations in RMC 4-3-090.D.2 No Net Loss
The following applies to all development within Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction:
2. Environmental Effects: a. No Net Loss of Ecological Functions:
i. No Net Loss Required: Shoreline use and development shall be carried out in a manner that
prevents or mitigates adverse impacts to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and processes
in all development and use. Permitted uses are designed and conducted to minimize, in so far as
practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment (RCW 90.58.020). Shoreline
ecological functions that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, fish and wildlife
habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. Shoreline processes that shall
be protected include, but are not limited to, water flow; erosion and accretion; infiltration;
groundwater recharge and discharge; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody
debris recruitment; organic matter input; nutrient and pathogen removal; and stream channel
formation/maintenance.
ii. Impact Evaluation Required: In assessing the potential for net loss of ecological functions or
processes, project-specific and cumulative impacts shall be considered and mitigated on- or off-
site.
iii. Evaluation of Mitigation Sequencing Required: An application for any permit or approval shall
demonstrate all reasonable efforts have been taken to provide sufficient mitigation such that the
activity does not result in net loss of ecological functions. Mitigation shall occur in the following
prioritized order:
(a) Avoiding the adverse impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action, or
moving the action.
(b) Minimizing adverse impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology and engineering, or by taking affirmative steps
to avoid or reduce adverse impacts.
(c) Rectifying the adverse impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment.
(d) Reducing or eliminating the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-12 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
(e) Compensating for the adverse impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing similar substitute
resources or environments and monitoring the adverse impact and taking appropriate
corrective measures.
Justification: Analysis of potential ecological impacts of the proposal is contained in the following
reports included in the application:
Critical Areas Study
Stream Report
Vegetation and Wildlife Report
Floodplain Study
These studies document that:
Impacts of the proposal are limited in magnitude because the route of the trail follows an
existing gravel roadway east of Monster Road and an existing informal pedestrian path and
roadway west of Monster Road. The impacts on vegetation and related elements of the
natural environment are limited because the existing trail corridor has previously disturbed
natural vegetation communities within the area affected by elements of the proposed trail.
Additional impervious surface will not have an adverse impact on receiving waters or nearby
wetlands due to stormwater management. The trail is a non-pollutant-generating surface.
The trail has been located and designed to minimize impacts of additional human use of the
trail corridor on affect wildlife in the vicinity. Construction activities likely to disturb nesting
herons will not be allowed near the Black River heron colony during sensitive periods. Areas
between the nesting colony and the trail will be planted with native trees and shrubs to
provide additional visual screening for herons.
Mitigation measures including wetland buffer restoration, plantings to further screen the
heron colony, and fencing and a variety of construction mitigation in each report and
summarized below will mitigate impacts to result in no-net loss of ecological functions.
2.4.1.4 Mitigation Sequence
The provisions of RMC 4-3-090.D.2.a.i iii require demonstration that all reasonable efforts have been
taken to provide sufficient mitigation such that the activity does not result in net loss of ecological
functions and requires that mitigation shall occur in the following prioritized order.
(a) Consideration of avoiding the adverse impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts
of an action, or moving the action has taken place through evaluation of alternatives including:
Justification: Alternatives have been evaluated in the development of the proposal and are depicted
in Figure 2-4:
Alternative 1. This alternative alignment would follow the Springbrook Trail to Grady Way
and then follow Grady Way west. This alignment would not continue across Interurban
Avenue because of the high traffic volumes and safety considerations at this intersection.
Instead, the trail would loop to the east to pick up the existing Interurban Trail which winds
its way to an existing safe undercrossing of Interurban Avenue. The only portion of this
alignment that would be separated from vehicular traffic is the stretch along the existing
Springbrook Trail. Grady Way is a major arterial with high traffic volumes. The existing
sidewalk along the north side of Grady Way is only 8 feet wide and is immediately adjacent to
the curb. This does not meet regional trail standards for width or separation for a two-way
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-13
multi-use trail in an urban area. The vehicular lane widths cannot be narrowed to
accommodate widening of the sidewalk, so widening must occur to the north. The widening
of the sidewalk from Springbrook Trail to Longacres Drive SW would require the removal of
mature street trees that screen the adjacent industrial uses from Grady Way and I-405. From
Longacres Drive SW to Interurban Boulevard, Grady Way is elevated. The estimated cost of
bridge structure widening is seven times the cost of the proposed alignment for Segment A.
In conclusion, Alternative 1 is not feasible and prudent due to cost and safety considerations.
(See Figure 2-4)
Alternative 2. Like Alternative 1, this alternative alignment would follow the Springbrook
Trail to Grady Way. Trail users would cross Grady Way via the existing traffic signal at
Oakesdale Avenue and then go under I-405 via an existing tunnel. Starting at SW 16th Street,
the trail would follow the existing street system to Longacres Way and cross under the rail
corridor via an existing undercrossing. However, the width of existing undercrossing is
constrained by the existing railroad bridge piers. As a result, trail users must either share the
road for a short distance, or modifications to the bridge structure would be required at
substantial cost and potential disruption to the heavy rail lines. In conclusion, Alternative 2 is
not feasible and prudent due to cost and safety considerations. (See Figure 2-4)
Alternative 3. This alternative would construct the proposed trail between Fort Dent Park
and Monster Road and utilize Monster Road SW and Oakesdale Avenue SW to SW 7th Street
at Naches Avenue SW. These streets are principal arterials with high traffic volumes. The
existing sidewalk along the south side of Monster Road from the Black River Bridge about one
quarter mile to Oakesdale Avenue is 4 to 6 feet wide and directly adjacent to the curb. On
Oakesdale Avenue the sidewalk is separated from the curb by a 4 to 6 foot wide landscape
area and is 4 to 6 feet wide. The width required for a regional trail combined with the
required width of separation cannot be met in the available areaa. The vehicular lane widths
cannot be narrowed to accommodate widening of the sidewalk, so construction of a trail to
the north on Monster Road and widening on Oakesdale Avenue would be required. To
provide adequate separation from the road, this would require the removal of mature trees
in the adjacent Black River Forest and would encroach on the parking lot of the Black River
Office Park for about 10,000 feet at Oakesdale Avenue SW and SW 7th Street. Alternative 3
would not provide the same benefits or safety of the preferred two-way multi-use trail on a
separate right-of-way.
Alternative 4. This alternative would construct the proposed trail between Fort Dent Park
and Monster Road and utilize an existing trail through the Black River Forest from the
Monster Road Bridge to the Springbrook Trail, then cross Springbrook Creek to SW 7th Street
and continue as a sidepath to Naches Avenue SW. The existing trail on the south side of the
Black River through Black River Forest is primarily a soft surface nature trail. It is located near
the river and is currently used to view the Great Blue Heron Rookery on the north side of the
river with limited intervening vegetation screening, as well as to view other wildlife and birds
that occur in this area. Development of a Regional Trail on this alignment would not only
increase the number, character and frequency of trail users and their associated visual and
noise impacts, but it would require the removal of numerous trees in close proximity to an
existing Heron colony and more extensive grading to create the necessary vertical and
horizontal geometry.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-14 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
(b) Minimizing adverse impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology and engineering, or by taking affirmative steps
to avoid or reduce adverse impacts.
(c) Rectifying the adverse impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
Justification: The proposal limits the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by
using appropriate technology and engineering, and by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce
adverse impacts by:
Alignment. The proposed trail follows the perimeter of the Black River Riparian Forest,
avoiding habitat fragmentation and disturbance within the central portion of the natural area.
Use of existing disturbed areas. The proposed trail follows existing paths, maintenance roads
and disturbed areas (see Section 1.3, Project Area and Setting) and uses an existing bridge
crossing of the Black River to minimize disturbance of adjacent, existing forest, significant
trees, wetlands and buffers, stream buffers, and the species that use these areas.
Strategic widening. In the Black River Riparian Forest, trail widening would occur toward the
perimeter, again to avoid the central portion of the natural area and the associated habitat.
Minimizing earthwork. In Fort Dent Park, where the topography is more variable, the trail
alignment was selected to follow existing topography to the extent possible and to balance
cuts and fills, reducing the need for retaining walls or large cut or fill areas.
Planting of trees. Where the trail runs adjacent to the Black River Riparian Forest, native trees
and shrubs will be planted along the south side of the trail to provide additional visual
screening of the trail from the central portion of the natural area to the south. As these plants
grow taller and more dense, they will reduce the potential for trail use to disturb nesting
herons. Plantings will be monitored to ensure establishment and long-term success.
Fencing. Fencing will be placed on the south side of the trail adjacent to the Black River
Riparian Forest in areas that appear inviting, to discourage people from accessing the central
portion of the natural area. Vegetation planted for visual screening will further discourage
incursions. Other wildlife viewing trails are provided on the south side of the forest.
Wayfinding signage at Naches Avenue SW, Oakesdale Avenue SW, and Monster Road will
describe the options.
The following measures would be implemented before and during trail construction to avoid
or minimize effects on vegetation and wildlife resources. These strategies would be
implemented along with others designed to avoid or minimize effects on other resources,
such as streams, wetlands, and soils. Those strategies would be expected to provide
additional protection to vegetation and wildlife resources within and adjacent to streams and
wetlands.
o Limiting construction activity to a relatively small area immediately adjacent to the
existing cleared area to minimize vegetation clearing and leave as much vegetation
undisturbed as possible.
o Preparing and implementing a revegetation plan that emphasizes the use of native
species.
o Where the proposed trail alignment runs adjacent to the Black River Riparian Forest,
replacing all cleared trees over six inches diameter with new seedlings in accordance with
the City of Renton’s regulatory requirements.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-15
o To minimize harm to migratory birds, conducting vegetation clearing and construction
activities outside the breeding season, which is typically considered to extend from March
15 through August 31.
o Preventing disturbance of nesting great blue herons and their young due to trail
construction and other noise-generating activities by implementing the following
measure:
Within 1,312 feet of the Black River heron nesting colony, conducting activities that
are likely to disturb nesting herons outside of sensitive periods (i.e., restrictions
would apply between January 15 and August 31).
Restricting activities would include major earthwork and the use of heavy equipment
and backup alarms. Construction activities that employ the use of hand tools would
not be restricted.
o If bald eagles construct a new nest within 660 feet of the trail alignment before
construction begins, additional measures, such as timing restrictions on construction
activities with the potential to disturb nesting eagles, will be implemented.
o All areas temporarily affected by construction would be restored to pre-construction
conditions and re-planted or seeded with native species.
(d) Reducing or eliminating the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action.
Justification: The mitigation measures described will be monitored, particularly the survival of plants
installed, and the effectiveness of wetland buffer mitigation and corrective action implemented to
assure that the specifications of the mitigation plan are met.
(e) Compensating for the adverse impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing similar substitute
resources or environments and monitoring the adverse impact and taking appropriate
corrective measures.
Justification: To compensate for ecological function adversely impacts
Habitat improvement and restoration will be implemented to mitigate project-related effects
on wetland buffers and stream buffers. The mitigation plan focuses on providing
compensatory mitigation measures for riparian buffers and wetland buffers at equal or
greater functions than would be affected by the project. Impacts to wetland buffers and
stream buffers are generally replaced at a ratio of 1:1. The Black River Riparian Forest falls
within the jurisdiction of the City of Renton’s Shoreline Master Program, which specifies a
replacement ratio of 1:1 for impacts to wetland buffers. The mitigation site would be planted
at a ratio of at least 1:1 to offset project impacts. The proposed mitigation site is located near
the proposed trail alignment but outside of the trail right-of-way, on land owned by the City
of Renton in the Black River Riparian Forest natural area. Mitigation would consist of planting,
or underplanting, in an area where existing buffer conditions are degraded. This type of
mitigation would offset the project’s impacts on buffer resources by maintaining or
enhancing those functions that support water quality and habitat for fish and wildlife.
Proposed enhancements would include removal of invasive vegetation, tilling of soil, addition
of organic soil amendments (where needed) and mulch, and planting of native vegetation.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-16 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
In addition to the habitat improvements described above, native trees and shrubs would be
planted along approximately 250 feet of the trail to provide additional visual screening
between the trail and the great blue heron nesting colony . These additional plantings would
be located west of the nesting colony, where views toward the colony are not already
obscured by existing vegetation. The plantings would consist of both evergreen and
deciduous trees to block views, as well as densely growing shrubs to discourage pedestrians
from venturing off the trail. Such plantings, combined with fence installation along the
southern edge of the alignment of the trail adjacent to the Black River Riparian Forest, are
expected to reduce the potential for disturbance.
2.4.1.5 Compliance with Shoreline Critical Areas Regulations
The attached Critical Areas Studies calculate impacts to critical areas and critical area buffers within
Shoreline jurisdiction.
Critical Areas Study
Stream and Lake Report
Vegetation and Wildlife Report
Floodplain Study
Wetlands
Wetlands with the SMP are governed by the provisions of RMC 4-3-090.D.2.d.
Wetlands are rated based on the criteria provided in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for
Western Washington, revised August 2004 (Ecology Publication No. 04-06-025). There are for categories
with varying buffers as indicated in the table below.
Wetland Buffer Widths
City of Renton
Rating
Buffer
Low Wildlife Function
(less than 20 points)
Moderate Wildlife
Function
(20-28 points)
High Wildlife Function
(29 or more points)
IV 50 50 50
III 75 125 150
II 100 150 225
I 125 150 225
Performance standards for trails within wetlands and wetland buffers are found in RMC 4-3-
090.D.2.d.ix.f and provides:
Recreational or Educational Activities: Outdoor recreational or educational activities which do not
significantly affect the function of the wetland or regulated buffer (including wildlife management or
viewing structures, outdoor scientific or interpretive facilities, trails, hunting blinds, etc.) may be
permitted within Category II, III, or IV wetlands or their buffers and within a Category I wetland
buffer if the following criteria are met:
(1) Trails shall not exceed four feet (4') in width and shall be surfaced with gravel or pervious
material, including boardwalks;
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-17
(2) The trail or facility is located in the outer fifty percent (50%) of the buffer area unless a
location closer to the wetland edge or within the wetland is required for interpretive
purposes;
(3) The trail or facility is constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes disturbance of
the wetland or buffer. Trails or facilities within wetlands shall be placed on an elevated
structure as an alternative to fill;
(4) Wetland mitigation in accordance with subsection D2dx of this Section.
Criteria (1) and (2) are addressed in the Variance discussion in Section 7.5, below
Impacts Summary
See the Critical Areas Study for a full discussion of Wetland Existing Conditions, Impacts and Mitigating
Measures.
No wetlands would be permanently or temporarily affected as a result of this project.
Some impacts on wetland buffers are unavoidable, as shown in the table below.
Wetland and Buffer Impacts
Wetland
City of Renton
Ratinga
Wetland Buffer
Perm. Impacts
acres
(square feet)
Temp. Impacts
acres
(square feet)
Perm. Impacts
acres
(square feet)
Temp. Impacts
acres
(square feet)
1/2 Complex II 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.27 (11,941) 0.07 (2,848)
3 IV 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.06 (2,695) 0.01 (600)
4 IV 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0)
5 III 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.14 (6,154) 0.02 (980)
6 III 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.01 (531) 0.02 (874)
7 III 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0)
BR II 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0)
Totalb 0.00 (0) 0.00 (0) 0.49 (21,321) 0.12 (5,302)
a Renton SMP (4-3-090.D.2.d.ii)
b Total acreage of impact was determined by converting the square footage of the total impact into acres and then
rounding to the nearest 0.01 acre. Total quantities include buffer impact areas that occur where wetland and stream
buffers overlap.
Perm. = Permanent, Temp. = Temporary
Mitigation
Proposed conceptual mitigation is detailed in the Critical Areas Report and includes enhancement of
approximately 0.68 acre of wetland buffer and 0.19 acre of stream buffer at Mitigation Site 1 to mitigate
the area of buffer displaced by the trail and enhancement of approximately 0.19 acre of stream buffer at
Mitigation Site 2 for ground improvements at bridge abutments.
At Mitigation Site 1, the proposed enhancement would include removal of invasive vegetation, tilling of
soil, addition of compost (where needed) and mulch, and planting of native vegetation. At Mitigation
Site 2, the proposed enhancement would include removal of invasive vegetation, rock and concrete
pieces would be removed, soil and mulch installed, and native vegetation planted. Mitigation would
consist of planting, or underplanting, in an area where existing riparian conditions are degraded. This
type of mitigation would offset the project’s impacts on stream resources by maintaining or enhancing
those riparian functions that support water quality and fish habitat. The riparian functions that would
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-18 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
benefit from mitigation include LWD recruitment, stream temperature regulation, bank stability, leaf
litter recruitment, and water quality functions. The goal of the mitigation effort is to augment the Black
River corridor by establishing native vegetation and enhancing buffer functions of the stream and
Wetland 7 in areas dominated by invasive species. These efforts would meld with previous and future
enhancement activities performed by others.
Other areas of wetland buffer would be enhanced in accordance with RMC 4-03-090.D.2.d.xii. to
maintain effective buffer conditions and functions where existing tree cover is less than a density of
twenty (20) trees per acre, and where existing vegetation is not sufficient to prevent viewing the trail
from within the buffer.
See the Critical Areas Study, Section 5, Mitigation for full details.
Justification: As indicated in the analysis above
Trails are recognized as an appropriate use, as long as they do not significantly affect the
function of the wetland or regulated buffer.
This trail corridor has been in existence at least since the 1960s as a gravel road. Any effects
on the functions of the wetland or buffer has taken place and may be considered permanent,
due to the length of time they have been present.
The addition of a paved surface and minor grading and retaining walls in some areas will not
significantly change the function of the affected wetlands and buffers.
The proposed mitigation outlined above addresses Criteria (3): The trail or facility is
constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes disturbance of the wetland or buffer.
The buffer impacts will be mitigated through enhancement of buffer areas.
Criteria (1) through (3) are addressed in the Variance discussion in Section 7.5, below.
Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Fish Habitat
Critical Area Regulations for Class 1 Fish Habitat Conservation Areas: Environments designated as
Natural or Urban Conservancy are considered Class 1 Fish Habitat Conservation Areas in the Shoreline
Master Program (SMC 4-3-090.D.2.c.iii.) Regulations for fish habitat conservation areas Class 1 Streams
and Lakes are contained within the development standards and use standards of the Shoreline Master
Program, including but not limited to subsection SMC 4-3-090.F.1 Vegetation Conservation, which
establishes vegetated buffers adjacent to water bodies.
The Vegetation Conservation Buffer for the Black River defined in Table 4-3-090D7a is 100 feet,
however reductions in the buffer are allowed by Shoreline Conditional Use Permit in SMC SMC 4-3-
090.F.1.d.iv(1).
The specific standards are discussed above in Subsection 7.3.2.2 SMP Use Regulations in RMC 4-3-090.E,
the same justification applies to steams as a Critical Area.
Impacts Summary
See the Critical Areas Study and Stream Study for a full discussion of Existing Conditions, Impacts and
Mitigating Measures.
It is anticipated that there would be no permanent impacts on streams.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-19
Temporary impacts are related to construction of the pedestrian bridge, which would take place
entirely above Ordinary High Water (OHW).
The project would result in 0.38 acre of permanent impacts and 0.10 acre of temporary impacts
on the Vegetation Conservation buffer of the Black River.
Additional stream buffer area will be impacted by the new pedestrian bridge.
Impacts to critical areas are minimized by locating the trail on an existing gravel maintenance
road and path around the perimeter of the Black River Riparian Forest. Additional methods
used for avoiding and minimizing impacts are documented in Section 5 of the Critical Areas
Study.
Onsite buffer enhancement is proposed for compensatory mitigation as outlined in Section 5 of
the Critical Areas Study. For impacts resulting from the pedestrian bridge, a mitigation area is
proposed between the Monster Road bridge and the pedestrian bridge on both sides of the
river.
Justification:
Trails are recognized as an appropriate use within stream buffers, as long as they do not
significantly affect the function of the wetland or regulated buffer.
This trail corridor has been in existence at least since the 1960s as a gravel road. Any effects
on the functions of the stream or buffer has taken place and may be considered permanent,
due to the length of time they have been present.
The provisions in stream buffers for permeable materials and width limited to 6 to 8 feet in
areas of vegetated open space is overridden by the recognition in RMC 4-3-090.D.4.d.iv. that
adopted city plans may specify dimensions, In this case, the standards for a Regional Trail
best serves public access, while recognizing constraints of protection and enhancement of
ecological functions.
The only facility to affect the stream directly is the pedestrian bridge which will be
constructed entirely outside of OHW and will include restoration of areas temporarily
disturbed.
The stream buffer area disturbed by addition of a paved surface and minor grading and
retaining walls in some areas will not significantly change the function of the affected stream
buffers. The proposed mitigation outlined maintains or improves stream buffer function.
Stream Vegetation Conservation areas between the trail and the stream will be enhanced by
restoration planting.
Critical Habitat
The Renton Critical Areas Regulations define Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas (FWCA) Critical
habitats in RMC 4-3-050 K..b.1 as “…identified by lists, categories and definitions of species promulgated
by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Non-game Data System Special Animal
Species) as identified in WAC 232-12-011; in the Priority Habitat and Species Program of the Washington
State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or by rules and regulations adopted currently or hereafter by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.”
For this area, species assessed include Great Blue Heron, Bald Eagle, Western Toad, Peregrine Falcon,
Pileated Woodpecker, and Townsend’s Big-eared Bat. See the Vegetation and Wildlife Discipline Report
for additional detail on resources, impacts and mitigation.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-20 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Great Blue Heron
WDFW’s management recommendations for great blue herons state that grading, construction, and
vegetation clearing should not occur within a nesting colony or its year-round buffer. As shown in
Figure 4-1 in the Vegetation and Wildlife Report, approximately 430 linear feet of the proposed trail
alignment falls within the year-round buffer for the Black River nesting colony (i.e., a 656-foot radius
from the outermost nests observed during field investigations; it should be borne in mind that future
nesting attempts could occur in locations closer to the proposed trail alignment). At its nearest point,
the trail would be approximately 600 feet from the nesting area.
Specific mitigation is discussed in the Vegetation and Wildlife Discipline Report and listed above in
Subsection 7.4.2 Mitigation Sequence
Bald Eagle
The nearest bald eagle nest location is more than 1,000 feet from the proposed trail alignment.
According to guidelines developed by the USFWS (2007), clearing, construction, and landscaping
activities more than 660 feet away from an active nest are unlikely to cause disturbance to nesting bald
eagles. Because the nearest nest is beyond this distance, trail construction would not be expected to
result in any disturbance of nesting bald eagles.
Based on recommendations from USFWS (2007), non-motorized recreational activities more than 330
feet from active nests are unlikely to disturb nesting bald eagles. The entire alignment is more than 330
feet from any current or historical bald eagle nest sites.
Western Toad
Trail construction in wetland buffers could affect the quality of breeding habitat for western toads by
modifications to wetland hydrology or water quality. The affected wetlands, however, may be too small
to offer sufficient breeding habitat. Western toads are more likely to breed in larger ponds in the study
area (Jones et al. 2005), none of which would be affected by trail construction. Wetland buffer
mitigation may result in habitat improvements, although not necessarily within the study area (see the
Wetland Discipline Report [Parametrix 2011a]).
Peregrine Falcon
No peregrine falcon nests have been documented within 5 miles of the project area, and no potentially
suitable nesting sites occur within 1 mile
Pileated Woodpecker
No large trees or snags that provide potential nesting or foraging sites for pileated woodpeckers would
be removed for trail construction. If any birds are present while construction activities are underway,
their breeding or feeding activities could be disrupted by increased levels of noise and human activity.
Such effects would be temporary and localized, however, and would not be expected to result in any
long-term effects.
Townsend’s Big-eared Bat
Nursery colonies of Townsend’s big-eared bats are not likely to be located in the area because no caves
or abandoned buildings occur in the study area, and the structures in the area are unlikely to provide
suitable roosting sites.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-21
Justification:
The most sensitive Critical Habitat in the area is the Great Blue Heron nesting colony located on
the north side of the Black River, the location of the trail, seasonal limits on construction and
enhancement by providing trees as a visual buffer will mitigate impacts.
Potential impacts of the proposed trail corridor are minimized because the existing roadway has
been in existence at least since the 1960s and has been used as a pedestrian trail since the city
acquired the land in the early 1990s, and the railroad and quarry to the north introduce regular
impacts such as noise.
The use as a Regional Trail will increase use. The location of the trail meets WDFW
recommendations for buffers. In addition, screening vegetation is proposed where existing
vegetated cover is less dense.
The proposed trail is projected to minimize impacts on Critical Species that use the area.
Conditional Use Criteria – Compatibility with Permitted Uses
This subsection addresses the following criteria:
RMC 4-9-190.I.5. b. Decision Criteria: Uses classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after
consideration and by meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other
permitted uses within that area. A conditional use permit may be granted subject to the
Administrator of the Department of Economic Development or designee determining compliance
with each of the following conditions:
i. The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area.
WAC 173-27-160 (1) (c) That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible
with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the
comprehensive plan and shoreline master program;
Permitted Uses
The most general discussion of permitted uses is found in RMC 9-03-090.C.1., the description of the
Natural Environment Overlay District:
a. Designation of the Natural Environment Overlay District: The objectives and criteria for the
designation of this district are located in the Shoreline Management Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
b. Application: The location of this district is found on the Shoreline Environment Overlay
Map, see subsection A6 of this Section, and shall include that portion of the north bank of
the Black River lying west of its confluence with Springbrook Creek.
c. Acceptable Activities and Uses: As listed in subsection E of this Section, Use Regulations.
The Comprehensive Plan contains the following provisions for the Shoreline Natural Environment
Overlay District
Objective: The objective in designating a natural environment is to protect and preserve unique and
fragile shoreline or wetland environments that are ecologically intact as close to their natural state as
possible. The natural environment is intended to provide areas of wildlife sanctuary and habitat
preservation.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-22 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Areas to be Designated as a Natural Environment: A Natural Area designation is assigned to shoreline
areas if any of the following characteristics apply:
The shoreline retains the majority of natural shoreline functions, as evidenced by the shoreline
configuration and the presence of native vegetation. Generally, but not necessarily, ecologically
intact shorelines are free of structural shoreline modifications, structures, and intensive human
uses.
Shoreline areas that provide valuable functions for the larger aquatic and terrestrial
environments, which could be lost or significantly reduced by human development.
The shoreline represents ecosystems that are of particular scientific and educational interest.
Shorelines with large areas of relatively undisturbed areas of wetlands.
Shorelines that support specific important wildlife habitat, such as heron rookeries.
The shoreline is unable to support new development, extractive uses, or physical modifications
or uses without significant adverse impacts to ecological functions.
Table 4-3-090E1 Shoreline Use Table includes the following permitted uses:
Aquaculture
Preservation and Enhancement of Natural Features or Ecological Processes
Low Intensity Scientific, Cultural, Historic, or Educational Use
Fish and Wildlife Resource Enhancement
Table 4-3-090E1 Shoreline Use Table includes the following conditional uses:
Parks, Neighborhood
Parks, Regional/Community
Passive Recreation
Public Hiking and Bicycle Trails, Over Land
Expansion of Existing Over-Water Trails
Structures for Floodway Management, Including Drainage or Storage and Pumping Facilities
Justification:
The development of a trail is consistent with the range of uses anticipated for the Natural
Environment Overlay District including parks and trails.
As discussed above, it is also consistent with the general polices in the act and the Comprehensive Plan
for increasing public access to the shoreline.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-23
As indicated above n the discussion of Critical Areas in Section 7.3.2.5, the proposal is not expected to
have an substantial impact on natural shoreline functions, or on valuable functions for the larger
aquatic and terrestrial environments, or on ecosystems that are of particular scientific and educational
interest, on undisturbed areas of wetlands (since the trail is within an areas currently disturbed), or on
important wildlife habitat, such as heron rookeries, and will meet the overall objective of preserving
unique and fragile shoreline or wetland environments that are ecologically intact as close to their
natural state as possible
1.1.1 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Use of Public Shorelines
This subsection addresses the following criteria:
RMC 4-9-190.I.5. b.ii. The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines.
WAC 173-27-160 (1) (b) That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public
shorelines;
Normal use of the site of the proposed trail includes:
Preservation of shoreline ecological processes and functions;
Flood control
Railroad rights-of-way
Public trail use
Public interpretive use
Justification:
The development of a trail is consistent with the range of public uses anticipated for the
Natural Environment Overlay District including parks and trails.
As discussed above, it is also consistent with the general polices in the act and the
Comprehensive Plan for increasing public access to the shoreline.
As indicated above n the discussion of Critical Areas in Section 7.3.2.5, the proposal is not
expected to have a substantial impact on natural shoreline functions, it will not adversely
affect the flood control use, and will enhance public interpretive use.
1.1.2 Conditional Use Criteria – Cumulative Impacts
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
WAC 173-27-160 (2) In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if conditional use
permits were granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the
total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and
shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
Justification:
Any additional requests for similar trails in the area would be required to meet the same
stringent criteria as this trail.
There are no other existing road corridors in the area that a trail system could to developed
within, therefore there are not likely to be cumulative impacts for a “like action.”
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-24 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
The King County and City trail plans designate no other regional trail corridors in the area.
1.1.3 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Interest
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
WAC 173-27-160 (1) (e) That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
The public interest is the sum-total of all the purposes the Shoreline Management Act and the Renton
Shoreline Master Program is designed to further.
Justification: As discussed above, the development of a trail is
Consistent with the purpose of providing public access to the shoreline
It will not have a substantial impact on natural shoreline functions, critical areas, public use of
the shoreline, the current flood control use, and will enhance public interpretive use.
2.5 Variance Criteria
Pursuant to RMC 4-9-190.I.7.5. Variances, the following general criteria must be met:
a. Purpose: Upon proper application, a substantial development permit may be granted which is at
variance with the criteria established in the Shoreline Master Program where, owing to special
conditions pertaining to the specific piece of property, the literal interpretation and strict
application of the criteria established in the Shoreline Master Program would cause undue and
unnecessary hardship or practical difficulties. [Emphasis Added]
Pursuant to WAC 173-27-170, the following general criteria must be met
The purpose of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional or
performance standards set forth in the applicable master program where there are extraordinary
circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict
implementation of the master program will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart
the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020. [Emphasis Added]
Variance is requested for the following provisions of the Shoreline Master program:
RMC 4-3-090.D.2.d.ix.f
(1) Trails shall not exceed four feet (4') in width and shall be surfaced with gravel or pervious material,
including boardwalks;
(2) The trail or facility is located in the outer fifty percent (50%) of the buffer area unless a location
closer to the wetland edge or within the wetland is required for interpretive purposes;
Variance Criteria – Exceptional or Unique Conditions
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
RMC 4-9-190.I.5.b.i. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject
property, or to the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to other properties on shorelines in
the same vicinity.
WAC 173-27-170 (2) (b) That the hardship described in (a) of this subsection is specifically related to the
property, and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-25
the application of the master program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's
own actions;
Justification: The unique, and exceptional conditions applying to the property, that do not apply to
other properties and do not result from the applicants actions include:
The proposed location of the trail is on a corridor that either has been used informally as a
public trail (the area west of Monster Road) or on a gravel road that was constructed prior to
the acquisition of the property by the City of Renton and has been used by the public as a trail
since that acquisition.
The trail corridor is crossed by the mainline of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union
Pacific railroads west of Monster Road which substantially impacts natural functions on this
portion of the corridor and renders additional impacts minor.
Potential impacts of the proposed trail east of Monster Road will not have a substantial
impact on natural shoreline functions because of the location of the BNSF to the north of the
site and the adjacent quarry use, which establishes current proximity impacts to natural
resources such as critical habitat on the site.
The trail is located as far from the Black River, existing wetlands, and the Great Blue Heron
nesting colony on the site as is practical, given the adjacent railroad and other uses.
Such conditions are unique to this area and are not generally present in other portions of the
city and will not set a precedent for other trail corridors.
Variance Criteria – Reasonable Use
This subsection addresses the following criteria:
RMC 4-9-190.I.7.5.b.ii. The variance permit is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties on shorelines in
the same vicinity.
WAC 173-27-170 (2) (a) That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set
forth in the applicable master program precludes, or significantly interferes with, reasonable use of the
property;
Justification: The imposition of
1. A four foot (4') width limit
2. A limit to gravel or pervious material, including boardwalks; and
3. A location in the outer fifty percent (50%) of the wetland buffer area
would deprive the public of enjoyment of the benefits of a regional trail corridor and interferes with
reasonable use of the property by:
Not recognizing the unique features of the site that make it especially suitable for a Regional
Trail from the point of view of connection with other elements of the trail corridor
Not recognizing the informal path as a public trail west of Monster Road and the gravel road
to the east that was constructed prior to the acquisition of the property by the City of Renton
and has been used by the public as a trail since that acquisition.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-26 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Not recognizing that the existing uses, including the BNSF and UP railroad mainlines west of
Monster Road and the existing gravel road to the east already has substantially impacts
natural functions of buffers and is currently in excess of the four (4) foot limit and is closer to
the wetland than the outer 50% of the buffer.
Not recognizing that the limit to pervious surface are not necessary for protection of wetland
function and also does not lead to additional impacts to other critical areas due to the small
impervious area proposed, the limited runoff and the large setbacks generally provided to
receiving surface waters.
Variance Criteria – Detrimental to Public Welfare or Cause Adverse
Impacts
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
RMC 4-9-190.I.5. b.
iii. The variance permit will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property on the shorelines in the same vicinity.
iv. The variance granted will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline
Master Program.
WAC 173-27-170 (2) (c) That the design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within
the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master
program and will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment;
Justification: As documented above in the following Conditional Use Criteria:
7.3.3 Conditional Use Criteria – Allowed Use, Consistency with Purpose and Regulations
7.3.4 Conditional Use Criteria – Compatibility with Permitted Uses
7.3.5 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Use of Public Shorelines
7.3.6 Conditional Use Criteria – Cumulative Impacts
7.3.7 Conditional Use Criteria – Public Interest
the design of the project is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Shoreline Management Act
and the Renton Shoreline Master Program, compatible with other authorized uses within the area
and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program and
will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment;
Variance Criteria – Special Privilege
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
WAC 173-27-170 (2) (d) That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by
the other properties in the area;
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-27
Justification: No other properties in this area:
Are especially suitable for a Regional Trail from the point of view of connection with other
elements of the trail corridor;
Have existing features that are currently in excess of the four (4) foot and are located closer to the
wetland than the outer 50% of the buffer.
Variance Criteria – Minimum Necessary
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
WAC 173-27-170 (2) (e) That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to afford relief; and
Justification: The standards for construction of the trail are the standards for Regional Trails adopted
by both the City of Renton and King County as well as the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and Washington State Department of Transportation.
Variance Criteria – Summary
This subsection addresses the following criterion:
RMC 4-9-190.I.5.b.v. The public welfare and interest will be preserved; if more harm will be done to the
area by granting the variance than would be done to the applicant by denying it, the variance shall be
denied, but each property owner shall be entitled to the reasonable use and development of his lands as
long as such use and development is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline
Management Act of 1971, and the provisions of the Shoreline Master Program.
WAC 173-27-170 (1) Variance permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the permit
would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant
must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances shall be shown and the public interest shall suffer
no substantial detrimental effect.
Justification: Granting the variance recognizes that
The trail width and location standards are not reasonably applicable to this specific case because
the wetland functions they are designed to accommodate do not presently exists because of the
long-standing presence of the existing gravel road which is wider than the four (4) foot trail limit
and is closer to the wetland than the outer 50% of the buffer.
The addition of impervious surface to the trail would not add impacts those already existing due
to the gravel road.
The purpose of the Shoreline Management Act in enhancing public access and Renton Shoreline
Policy Policy SH‐28 of providing emphasis on foot and bicycle paths consistent with the Renton
Bicycle and Trails Master Plan would not be fulfilled.
2.6 Other Shoreline Code Requirements
Parking
Parking Requirements are addressed by RMC 4-3-090.E.10.e.
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-28 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
i. When Allowed: Parking facilities in shorelines are not a preferred use and shall be allowed only as
necessary to serve an authorized primary use.
ii. Public Parking:
(a) In order to encourage public use of the shoreline, public parking is to be provided at frequent
locations on public streets, at shoreline viewpoints, and at trailheads.
(b) Public parking facilities shall be located as far as feasible from the shoreline unless parking
areas close to the water are essential to serve approved recreation and public access. In
general, only handicapped parking should be located near the land/water interface with most
other parking located within walking distance and outside of vegetation conservation buffers
provided in subsection F1 of this Section, Vegetation Conservation.
(c) Public parking facilities shall be designed and landscaped to minimize adverse impact upon
the shoreline and adjacent lands and upon the water view.
Compliance Public parking is currently available at Fort Dent Park in Tukwila, near the western
terminus of this trail segment. No new parking is proposed due to the sensitivity of the setting.
As a Regional Trail, users are expected to include:
Local users who live in walking distance of the trail and will access the trail by existing
pedestrian facilities
Users from local employment centers who will walk to the trail and park at existing
employment centers
Regional users of the trail who will access from residences
Regional users who will access from regional destination recreational centers such as Fort
Dent Park
The relatively small component of local users who will want to park near the proposed facility will be
adequately served the Fort Dent Park.
Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential
effects on the surrounding area.
Compliance The project will not generate additional traffic. The proposal is to provide a non-
motorized trail a part of a regional system adopted by King County, the City of Renton, and other
cities.
The regional trail system may reduce vehicular traffic to the extent that persons use the trail as an
alternative to vehicular transportation.
Some use of the trail as a destination by those primarily oriented to enjoyment of the Black River
Forest open space area is likely, however such users are already served by the existing trail. The
extent of use of the trail as a destination is not likely to change.
No adverse effects from surrounding areas are projected from use of the trail.
Non-Conforming Use
The following provisions of RMC 4-10-095 Shoreline Master Program Nonconforming Uses, Activities,
Structures, and Sties apply to the proposed development
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-29
F. Partial and Full Compliance, Alteration of an Existing Structure or Site
Major Alteration Expansion of
impervious surface
by more than 25%;
Install site improvements that protect the ecological
functions and processes of the shoreline, consisting
of either:
o Full compliance with Vegetation Conservation
provisions of RMC 4-3-090F1, Vegetation
Conservation, consisting of revegetation of a native
community of the full required* buffer, or 100% of
the area between an existing building and the
water’s edge if the full buffer cannot be planted, or
at least 10 ft., or
o An alternate mitigation proposal prepared by a
qualified professional and approved by the
Administrator of the Department of Community
and Economic Development or designee that
would provide at least equal protection of ecological
functions and processes as the full required*
setback and buffer.
Compliance This requirement is met by a revegetation plan for areas between the trail and OHWM
where the trail is within the 100 foot Vegetation Conservation Area of the Black River. See Stream
Discipline Report.
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) RailwaySW 7th StMonster Rd SW
6
8t
h
Oakesdale Ave SW
Ma
ul
e Av
e
SNaches Ave SWS 143rd St 80th Ave SI
n
t
e
r
u
r
b
a
n
A
v
e
SS 144th St
Beacon Coal Mine
B
N
S
F
S 143rd St
Martin Luther King Way S
Duwamish
River
G
re
e
n
RiverTrailGre
en
River CITY OFRENTONCITY OFTUKWILA
UNINC.KING COUNTY
Black RiverPump StationBlackRiver
EndProject
BeginProject
ProposedRetaining Wall
Proposed Culvert
ConcreteRecyclingPlant
Proposed Rest Area
Proposed Rest Area
Black RiverRiparian Forest
Fort Dent Parkand StarfireSports Complex
Waterworks Gardens
FosterGolf Links
0 600300Feet
Figure 1-1Vicinity Map
Project Area
LakeWashington
90
5
405
5
99
509
599
518
S EA T T L E
RE N T ON
B E L L E V UE
SEA TA C
TUKW ILA
Legend:
ProposedTrail Alignment
Existing Trail
City Boundary
Railroad
Parks and WDFWPriority Habitat AreasPath: U:\PSO\Projects\Clients\1521-KingCo\554-1521-084 L2ST\99Svcs\GIS\MapDocs\March2015\Vic-8x11fig_Apr2015.mxdParametrix Sources: King County, City of Renton, WDFW 2014, WSDOT.
Lake to Sound Trail --- Segment A
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-30 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Figure 2-1 Zoning Map Detail
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
April 2015 | 554-1521-084 2-31
Figure 2-2 Shoreline Master Program Detail
Lake to Sound Trail—Segment A
Permit Narrative and Justification
King County
2-32 April 2015 │ 554-1521-084
Figure 2-3 Renton Park and Trails Map Detail
Connect
to Green
River Trail
INTERURB
AN AVE
S
SW GR
A
D
Y
W
A
Y
SOU
T
H
C
E
N
T
E
R
B
L
V
D POWELL AVE SWW VALLEY HWYCHRISTENSEN RDANDOVER PARK WBlackRiverForest
BlackRiverForest
WaterworksGardensWaterworksGardens
IkawaParkIkawaPark
TukwilaParkTukwilaPark
Foster GolfLinksFoster GolfLinks
Fort DentParkFort DentPark
SW 7TH ST
F O R E S T T R A IL
F O R E S T T R A IL B
N
S
F R
AIL CORRIDOR
B
N
S
F R
AIL CORRIDOR
01,000
Scale in FeetMONSTER RD
SWMONSTER RD
SW61ST AVE61ST AVEOAKSDALE AVE
SWOAKSDALE AVE
SW
LONGACRES WAYLONGACRES WAY
SW 16TH STSW 16TH ST58TH AVE SGreen River TrailGreen River Trail
Beoing LongacresIndustrial ParkBoeing LongacresIndustrial Park
Interurban TrailInterurban TrailRai
l
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
rRai
l
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r EVA SEHCANEVA SEHCAN405
SouthcenterSouthcenter
Connect
to Street
System
Lake to
Sound
Trail
Lake to
Sound
Trail
Figure 2-4
Section 4f Alternatives
Lake to Sound Trail Segment A
Existing Trail
Proposed
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Existing Trail
ENGINEERING . PLANNING . ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
OFLAKE TO SOUND TRAIL
SEGMENT A
GREEN RIVER TRAIL TO NACHES AVE SW
47
DRAFT 411 108TH AVENUE N.E., SUITE 1800
BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004T. 425.458.6200 F. 425.458.6363www.parametrix.com
60% REVIEW SUBMITTAL
SMA1
FEATURES RELEVANT TO
SHORELINE JURISDICTION
ENGINEERING . PLANNING . ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
OFLAKE TO SOUND TRAIL
SEGMENT A
GREEN RIVER TRAIL TO NACHES AVE SW
47
DRAFT 411 108TH AVENUE N.E., SUITE 1800
BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004T. 425.458.6200 F. 425.458.6363www.parametrix.com
60% REVIEW SUBMITTAL
SMA2
FEATURES RELEVANT TO
SHORELINE JURISDICTION
ENGINEERING . PLANNING . ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
OFLAKE TO SOUND TRAIL
SEGMENT A
GREEN RIVER TRAIL TO NACHES AVE SW
47
DRAFT 411 108TH AVENUE N.E., SUITE 1800
BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004T. 425.458.6200 F. 425.458.6363www.parametrix.com
60% REVIEW SUBMITTAL
SMA3
FEATURES RELEVANT TO
SHORELINE JURISDICTION