Loading...
FWCP Chap 09 Natural Environment_201302271053506559CHAPTER NINE - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 9.0 INTRODUCTION Maintaining and improving the quality of the natural environment in Federal Way is central to the City's vision of the future. The quality of the City's hydrologic features, forested areas, and scenic vistas is one of the primary reasons that many families have chosen to live in Federal Way. Business people also make location decisions based, in some measure, on quality of life factors, and one might argue that the quality of the natural environment is important to the economic vitality of the City. Finally, maintaining the viability of the natural environment is prudent and cost effective public policy. If, for example, the City maintains or improves the natural drainage system and how it functions, it will save tax dollars by not having to build and maintain costly storm drainage facilities. The intent of this chapter, and the goals and policies it contains, is to guide future actions such that the quality of the natural environment is maintained or improved. State's Growth Management Act and Countywide Planning Policies The Growth Management Act (GMA) defines critical areas as wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas. Pursuant to the GMA (RCW 36.70A.060), the City amended its critical area regulations in 1993 to regulate development in environmentally sensitive areas. These regulations are contained in Title 19 of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC). The City refers to "critical areas" as "sensitive areas" in its ordinances and the two terms are used interchangeably in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP). The GMA also requires the protection of resource lands. Resource lands are defined as land related to resource -based industries, including productive timber, agriculture, fisheries, and mineral extraction. Since Federal Way does not have land used by resource -based industries, policies regarding these types of lands are intentionally absent from this chapter. Development of this chapter is based on the same premise adopted in the King County Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs) pertaining to the Natural Environment. CWPP FW-4 states in part, "Land use and development shall be regulated in a manner which respects fish and wildlife habitat in conjunction with natural features and functions, including air and water quality. Natural resources and the built environment shall be managed to protect, improve and sustain environmental quality while minimizing public and private costs. " FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment 9.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT GOALS AND POLICIES Environmental Stewardship Federal Way recognizes that the natural environment is an intrinsic part of the urban fabric for the following important reasons: • It provides opportunities for recreation; • It provides habitat for wildlife and plant life; • It is part of the City's surface water management system and water supply; • It creates a positive visual image and open space; • It supports economic development goals; and • It is cost effective public policy. The merits and costs of environmental actions must be weighed and balanced against other important demands, such as public safety and recreation, housing, public infrastructure, and economic development. Goal NEG1 To preserve the City's natural systems in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare, and to maintain the integrity of the natural environment. Policies The City's natural environment is composed of a wide variety of landforms, soils, watercourses, and vegetation. The City's terrain ranges from steep hills and ridgelines to plateaus and lakes. Soil types vary from loam in the lowlands to sand, gravel, and till in the uplands. Land use and development practices need to be compatible with this variety of environmental conditions. As a general rule, the City intends to protect the natural environment rather than try to overcome its limitations for development. NEP1 Protect and restore environmental quality through land use plans, surface water management plans and programs, comprehensive park plans, and development review. NEP2 Preserve and restore ecological functions, and enhance natural beauty, by encouraging community development patterns and site planning that maintains and complements natural landforms. NEP3 To the maximum extent practical, the City's future actions will be consistent with the goals and policies of this chapter of the FWCP. NEP4 The City should work in concert with internal departments, state, and regional agencies, as well as with neighboring jurisdictions and tribes, to protect sensitive areas and the City's natural environment. Revised 2002 IX - 2 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment NEPS To assist in evaluating existing and proposed environmental policy, the City should prepare inventories for each type of sensitive area to augment data received from other information sources. NEP6 The City encourages private donations of land or conservation easements for sensitive areas and their associated buffers. NEP7 The City may continue to require completion of environmental studies by qualified professionals to assess the impact of proposed development on sensitive areas. 9.2 WATER RESOURCES Water resources include: streams, lakes, frequently flooded areas, wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, and shorelines. The aquifers and aquifer recharge areas are the primary source for the community's drinking water. The streams and wetlands are an essential part of the City's stormwater drainage system that provides necessary flood and erosion control. The lakes and shorelines provide fish and wildlife habitat and valued places for recreation. To protect the value and function of each individual part, water resources must be managed as an integrated system. Use and modification of water resources and the surrounding terrestrial environment affects how the hydrologic cycle functions. The inappropriate alteration of water resources can cause detrimental impacts such as flooding, erosion, degradation of water quality, reduction in groundwater, and habitat loss. In order to minimize adverse impacts to water resources and to ensure their continued viability, the City promotes responsible land and water resource planning and use. The City will permit development in a manner that protects water quality and ensures continued ecological and hydrologic functioning of water resources. Protection should include maintenance of stream base flows, allowance of natural water level fluctuations in wetlands, aquifer recharge, and stream corridor habitat preservation. Due to the limited capacity of the underlying aquifers and increased water demand, the City also encourages groundwater conservation measures. In order to respond to RCW 36.70A.172, at the end of 2001 the City hired consultants to: • Evaluate key City regulations and programs to help identify potential Endangered Species Act (ESA) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) compliance issues and develop recommendations for addressing these issues. • Evaluate the City's proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects to determine if they are still viable or necessary, or need modifications to comply with ESA/NPDES requirements, and update the project cost estimates. Revised 2002 IX - 3 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment This study, which was completed in June 2002, evaluated the key City regulations and programs in terms of their potential impacts on salmonid habitat. The study did not identify any major ESA or NPDES compliance issues. However, the review did identify a number of areas where existing regulations or programs could be improved. The most significant recommendations for ESA improvements are associated with the Critical Areas -Wetlands Regulations, Critical Areas -Fish and Wildlife Habitat Regulations, the Stormwater/Site Development Standards, and the Stormwater Management Program. Upon direction from the City Council, staff will prepare code amendments or propose changes to programs in order to implement the recommendations from the study. Goal NEG2 Protect the public health and safety and prevent property damage by reducing surface water problems. Policies NEP8 The City shall continue to identify major capital projects that prevent or reduce flooding or property damage; minimize erosion and instability of streambeds, banks, and slopes; protect or improve water quality; and maintain or improve the reliability and integrity of the drainage system. The City shall implement projects based on priorities that are systematically identified using a rating guide approved by the City Council. NEP9 The City shall identify minor drainage system capital improvement projects, retention/detention system retrofit projects, lake and stream restoration/ rehabilitation projects, and water quality improvement projects; and shall use project prioritization procedure for each category of project. NEP10 The City will implement an effective and efficient operations and maintenance program for its stormwater facilities to assure that the surface water drainage systems are operated and maintained to provide satisfactory quality and flow controls. Standards for operations and maintenance will be established and will apply to public and private stormwater facilities. NEP11 The City shall own and maintain all elements of the storm drainage system in the right-of-way and in easements or tracts dedicated to, and accepted by, the City. Stormwater systems located on private property shall be the responsibility of the owner to maintain and improve. The City will not acquire or accept existing components of the stormwater conveyance system (through easements, ownership, or other property rights) except when needed for City construction projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) or annual Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). NEP12 The City shall respond to drainage -related emergencies and undertake emergency protective measures or projects on private property only as needed in the event of an imminent threat to public health, safety, or public resources (such as infrastructure, fisheries, and water quality). Revised 2002 IX - 4 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment NEP13 The City will continue to offer education and advice to all property owners with private drainage and related slope stability problems. NEP14 The City will fund sediment removal only in situations involving a threat to life, health, or dwellings, or public infrastructure from flooding or where the City has an existing legal obligation by easement or agreement. Any removal will be limited to that needed to alleviate such flooding or to fulfill the legal obligation. The City may provide non -financial support to any private or third party funded dredging projects that are found to be environmentally acceptable. NEP15 The City shall own and maintain all retention/detention (R/D) systems in the public right-of-way and in easements of residential plats dedicated to, and accepted by, the City. The City should not accept ownership and responsibility for new R/D systems (through easements or other property rights) unless all of the following conditions are met: 1. There is a public benefit. 2. An easement or property is offered by the property owner at no cost. 3. The system meets City standards. 4. There is access for City maintenance from the public right-of-way. 5. The City has adequate resources to maintain the system. 6. The system serves a residential plat/subdivision (rather than a short plat or commercial property). NEP16 During the project design process, the City shall consider the impact to private property due to City construction. When property disruption is unavoidable, the City shall restore the area to the pre-existing conditions to the extent practical. Where not practical, the City may compensate the owner for ornamental landscaping in lieu of restoration; compensation is limited to the reasonable replacement value of destroyed specimens in kind, but not in size. Consistent with state and local law, the City shall not install landscaping improvements that increase the value of private property unless that is compensation for property rights granted to the City or unless the primary purpose is to benefit the citywide drainage system. NEP17 The City shall develop and update surface water quality protection programs as needed and shall carry out those programs and use best management practices (BMP) in order to make progress toward meeting state and federal requirements and this plan's water quality and related resource goals. City surface water quality programs will include (but are not necessarily limited to): • Water quality studies and investigations. • A water quality response program, including enforcement • Education programs (including promoting source controls). • Preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of wetlands and streams. • Stormwater quality controls on new development and redevelopment. • An operation and maintenance program, including an inspection program to ensure private maintenance of private drainage systems. Revised 2002 IX - 5 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment • Capital projects to address identified water quality problems. • Participation in regional studies and in the development of regional, state, and federal surface water quality policy. NEP18 The City shall maintain regulations and standards to carry out the Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan's policy of restricting stormwater runoff from all new development and redevelopment in order to minimize the potential for flooding and stream bank erosion, and preserve and enhance habitat and sensitive areas. Water quality BMP shall be required for new development and redevelopment. City policies, regulations, and standards will meet the comprehensive stormwater program requirements of the Puget Sound Plan, and will comply with NPDES permit requirements as applicable. Aquifer Recharge Areas (Groundwater) Federal Way is dependent on groundwater as a primary source of drinking water. Although the Lakehaven Utility District has procured water from other purveyors, its main source is from four aquifer systems that underlie the City: the Redondo -Milton Channel Aquifer, the Mirror Lake Aquifer, the Federal Way Deep Aquifer, and the Eastern Upland Aquifer (Map IX-1, maps are located at the end of the chapter and were revised in 2007 as part of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments). The locations of wells in relationship to the aquifer systems are shown on Map IX-1A. Aquifer recharge areas are located in areas where permeable soil and rock materials are relatively close to the land surface and where there is an excess of water from precipitation. The Lakehaven Utility District notes that the precise extent of the aquifer recharge areas is uncertain. Typical activities associated with land development, such as clearing and grading, affects the natural hydrologic cycle. Historically, stormwater was managed in a way that conveyed it to natural water bodies as expediently as possible. All of these activities decrease the land's ability to absorb and retain water and increases the possibility of contamination. In addition to detrimentally affecting aquifer recharge potential, increased runoff rate and volume has a deleterious effect on stream channels, water quality, and in - stream habitat. The following CWPPs address aquifer recharge areas and are consistent with the City's policies. Countywide Planning Policies CA5 All jurisdictions shall adopt policies to protect the quality and quantity of groundwater where appropriate. CA6 Land use actions shall take into account impacts on aquifers determined to serve as water supplies. The depletion and degradation of aquifers needed for potable water supplies should be avoided or mitigated; otherwise a proven, feasible replacement source of water supply should be planned or developed to compensate for potential lost supplies. Revised 2002 IX - 6 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Map IX-2, Areas Susceptible to Groundwater Contamination, is a map produced by the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services and Seattle -King County Health Department as a result of the study entitled Mapping Aquifer Susceptibility to Contamination in King County. This study looked at three criteria: soils, surface geology, and depth to groundwater. Based on these criteria, areas were mapped as low, medium, or high susceptibility to contamination from activities occurring in the area. This information is the best available at this time and will be used along with other information on streams, wetlands, and wildlife habitat to determine appropriate zoning. Goal NEG3 To protect aquifer recharge areas. Policies NEP19 The City, in cooperation with Lakehaven Utility District, should identify and map aquifer recharge areas within the City and its potential annexation area. Such areas shall be subject to regulations to protect the integrity of identified aquifer recharge areas. NEP20 The City should encourage the retention of surface water runoff in wetlands, regional retention facilities, and detention ponds, or use other similar stormwater management techniques to promote aquifer recharge. NEP21 The City should establish land use and building controls to use stormwater infiltration wherever feasible, and to minimize the amount of impervious surface created by development. NEP22 While offering a contribution to groundwater recharge, the City recognizes that septic tank and drain field systems have a potentially adverse impact on groundwater quality within the aquifers. If adequate engineering solutions are available, the City may require connection to sanitary sewer service where poor soil conditions persist and/or sewer service is available. NEP23 The City will protect the quality and quantity of groundwater supplies by supporting water use conservation programs and adopting regulations to minimize water pollution. The effect of groundwater withdrawals and artificial recharge on streams, lakes, and wetlands within the Hylebos Creek and Lower Puget Sound drainage basins will be evaluated through coordination with the Lakehaven Utility District. Wellhead Protection Areas Because residents of the City relyies on groundwater for their drinking water, the City must take preventative measures to avoid contamination in areas surrounding well sites. In addition, the City and Lakehaven Utility District should work cooperatively to implement the state's Wellhead Protection Program and Section 1428 of the 1986 Amendments to the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act, which generally requires mapping Revised 2002 IX - 7 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment wellhead protection zones and establishing an interagency wellhead protection plan. The intent of the wellhead protection program is to be proactive and prevent contamination of groundwater used for drinking water. The objective of wellhead protection is to protect the health of people using groundwater supplies for drinking water. This is accomplished by providing management zones around public wells or wellfields to detect and manage potential sources of groundwater contamination. Another goal of the program is to promote awareness of special efforts to protect the groundwater and urge customers to take a proactive approach to protecting the source of the City's drinking water. In accordance with the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 246-290), water utilities in the State of Washington are required to update their Wellhead Protection Program every two years. At a minimum, the program should include the following elements: • A completed susceptibility assessment. • Delineated wellhead protection areas for each well, wellfield, or spring. • An inventory within each wellhead protection area of all potential sources of contamination that may pose a threat to the water bearing zone (aquifer) utilized by the well, spring, or wellfield. • Documentation that delineation and inventory findings have been distributed to required entities. • Contingency plans for providing alternate sources of drinking water in the event that contamination does occur. • Coordination with local emergency responders for appropriate spill/incident response measures. Pursuant to these policy elements, Lakehaven Utility District contracted Kennedy/Jenks Consultants to perform an update to its program and issued a report in August 2001. This process began by delineating and mapping wellhead protection areas around each of Lakehaven's 13 wells that provide drinking water to the area. The primary zones of wellhead protection are defined using a time of travel of groundwater criteria. The three principal zones are delineated using one, five, and ten year time of travel factors. Next, parcels within these wellhead protection areas were identified and ranked according to their land use, location within the well's capture zone, and possible susceptibility to contamination, which is shown in Map IX-3. This ranking was assigned based on interviews with property owners and tenants, windshield survey, field inspections, and review by Environmental Data Resources of the databases of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Ecology (DOE) for sites within the protection zones that may have had hazardous spills or other possible groundwater contamination. In addition, questionnaires were mailed to owners of parcels identified as having the potential to cause wellhead contamination. The parcels were then ranked as either a high, medium, or low risk, as defined below. High Risk Parcels — These parcels consist of businesses and land uses that have been identified as posing a high risk to the groundwater should a leak or spill of hazardous substances occur onsite. Examples include commercial gas stations, car repair shops, dry cleaners, buildings with hydraulic lifts, or businesses that use/store large amounts of chemicals or solvents. Revised 2002 IX - 8 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Medium Risk Parcels — These parcels consist of businesses and land uses that have been identified as posing a medium risk to the groundwater should a leak or spill of hazardous substances occur onsite. Examples include commercial properties that could potentially have a future tenant storing or using substances, or long-term parking for large machinery or trucks. Low Risk Parcels — These parcels consist of businesses and land uses that have been identified as posing a low risk to the groundwater should a leak or spill of hazardous substances occur onsite. These parcels are primarily residential properties and vacant land. A notification letter was sent to each high -risk parcel, indicating that the property has been listed as a high -risk parcel for this wellhead protection program update, and encouraging property owners and tenants to responsibly oversee operations at the parcel. Finally, the District notified the appropriate regulatory agencies about each parcel's presence within a defined wellhead protection area. The City will prepare wellhead protection regulations as part of its future work program to be performed through a process developed by a joint City/District Wellhead Protection Committee, as is required by current state regulations. The following CWPPs and City policies address wellhead protection. Countywide Planning Policies CA5(c) King County and groundwater purveyors including cities, special purpose districts, and others should jointly: (2) Develop a process by which land use jurisdictions will review, concur with and implement, as appropriate, purveyor Wellhead Protection Programs required by the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act. (3) Determine which portions of mapped recharge areas and Wellhead Protection Areas should be designated as critical and (4) Update critical areas maps as new information about recharge areas and Wellhead Protection Areas becomes available. Goal NEG4 Implement a local wellhead protection program to ensure a safe source of drinking water and to avoid the large financial impact of contaminated wells. Policies NEP24 The City will continue to work in conjunction with local water purveyors to delineate Wellhead Protection Areas for each well and wellfield as required and outlined by the state's Wellhead Protection program. NEP25 The City will continue to work with water purveyors to model and map Wellhead Protection Areas, as funds are budgeted for such modeling and mapping. Revised 2002 IX - 9 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment NEP26 The City will work with water purveyors, through a process developed by a joint City/District Wellhead Protection Committee, to conduct an inventory of all potential sources of groundwater contamination within the Wellhead Protection Areas and assess the potential for contamination. NEP27 The City should establish an interagency Wellhead Protection Committee to coordinate and implement a Wellhead Protection Plan, as is required by current state regulations. NEP28 The City will work with water purveyors, through a process developed by a joint City/District Wellhead Protection Committee, to develop a contingency plan for the provisions of alternate drinking water supplies in the event of well or wellfeld contamination, as funds are budgeted for such purpose. NEP29 The City should establish buffer zones of sufficient size to protect wellhead areas. Streams and Lakes (Surface Water) The City of Federal Way is located within the Hylebos Creek, Lower Puget Sound, and Mill Creek drainage basins. These basins contain an integrated system of lakes and streams that provide a natural drainage system for over 36 square miles of southwest King County and northeast Pierce County (Map IX-4). Due to rapid urbanization, this natural system has been altered and in many areas no longer provides its original function or habitat. The primary focus of the policies below is to restore the natural functions that the City's lakes and streams once provided. Moreover, the CWPPs and the City's policies below acknowledge that it is more cost effective to restore the natural system than it is to construct a man-made equivalent. Countywide Planning Policy CA15 All jurisdictions shall implement the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan to restore and protect the biological health and diversity of the Puget Sound Basin. Goal NEG5 Protect, restore, and enhance the City's lakes and streams. Policies NEP30 The City will seek to work cooperatively with King and Pierce County Surface Water Management Divisions, the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Washington Department of Ecology, and other affected jurisdictions and tribes to implement water quality management strategies and to comply with Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System regulations to address non -point pollution. Revised 2002 IX -10 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment NEP31 Surface water management facilities that use natural streams and lakes for storage should ensure that those natural features are not adversely impacted by their inclusion in the surface water system. NEP32 The City may regulate private development and public actions to protect water quality and to ensure adequate in -stream flow to protect fisheries, wildlife habitat, and recreation resources. NEP33 The City will seek to retain native vegetation within riparian corridors. New planting of vegetation with the approval from the City may be required where such revegetation will enhance the corridor's function. Consideration should be given to the removal of non-native invasive species. NEP34 Lakes should be protected and enhanced by proper management of watersheds and shorelines, by improvements in water quality, by removal of invasive plant species, and by restoration of fish and wildlife habitat. NEP35 The City should adopt stream definitions that are reflective of stream function and habitat. The definitions should make a distinction between manmade conveyance systems and natural streams. NEP36 The City should continue to restrict stream relocation projects, the placing of streams in culverts, and the crossing of streams for both public and private projects. Where applicable in stream corridors, the City should consider structures that are designed to promote fish migration and the propagation of wildlife habitat. NEP37 Erosion control measures shall be used for any work in or adjacent to stream or lake buffers. NEP38 Appropriate mitigation for detrimental impacts may be required for construction work within the buffer area associated with a stream channel or a lake. Furthermore, the City should work in cooperation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife through the Hydraulic Project Approval permit process for all development proposals that involve streams. NEP39 Essential public facilities and utilities may cross lakes or streams where no other feasible alternative exists. The amount of intrusion shall be the minimum necessary to complete the project. NEP40 For public access lakes, the City will take a lead role to develop and implement proactive comprehensive watershed and lake management plans and policies that are needed to identify and anticipate problems and prevent further deterioration, which could lead to costly lake restoration efforts in the future. Lake management plans identify problems, recommend solutions, and outline plans for implementation. The City will take an administrative role in assisting residents on private lakes to setup and run Lake Management Districts for the implementation of lake management plans. Revised 2002 IX -11 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Frequently Flooded Areas Frequently flooded areas are defined as, "...areas in the floodplain subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year including but not limited to, such areas as streams, lakes, and wetlands." Development in flood plains reduces the storage capacity and increases the amount of runoff. Increased runoff overtaxes both natural and man-made conveyance systems and leads to damage of public and private property. Currently, there are no frequently flooded areas recognized by the Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) within the City of Federal Way. However, there are areas that meet the City's definition of frequently flooded areas. The policies below have been adopted to address those areas. Countywide Planning Policy CA12 (b) Each jurisdiction's policies, regulations, and programs should effectively prevent new development and other actions from causing significant adverse impacts on major river flooding, erosion, and natural resources outside their jurisdiction. Goal NEG6 To prevent the loss of life and property in frequently flooded areas. Policies NEP41 In frequently flooded areas, the City should restrict the rate and quantity of surface water runoff to pre -development levels for all new development and redevelopment, in accordance with the current adopted technical design manual requirements. NEP42 Where feasible, the City shall protect and enhance natural flood storage and conveyance function of streams, lakes, and wetlands. Wetlands Wetlands are valuable natural resources. There are several types of wetlands in the City and each plays a valuable role in the hydrological system. Wetlands types include marshes, bogs, ponds, forested, and scrub -shrub wetlands. By storing floodwaters, wetlands reduce flooding and down stream erosion; trap and absorb sediments; and help protect water quality. Furthermore, wetlands discharge water to aquifers and streams and help serve to replenish groundwater and maintain base flows of surface water systems. In short, wetlands are productive biological systems providing rich habitat for fish and wildlife, and important storage capacity for the hydrologic system. Revised 2002 IX -12 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Federal Way has several regionally significant wetland areas. The largest can be found in and adjacent to the West Hylebos State Park, Dash Point State Park, Dumas Bay, and throughout Spring Valley. Other smaller wetlands also dot the landscape. While most of the City's wetlands have been identified both by private property owners and the City, undoubtedly there are other wetlands that have not yet been precisely located and mapped. The following CWPPs and City policies address the protection of wetlands. Countywide Planning Policies CAI Until the Washington State Department of Ecology adopts a manual for the delineation of wetlands pursuant to Section 11 of Chapter 382 of the Laws of 1995, jurisdictions shall have the option of using either the 1989 manual of the United States Army Corps of Engineers or the Corps' 1987 manual in conjunction with the Corps' Washington Regional Guidance. Once the Department of Ecology adopts its manual for the delineation of wetlands, all jurisdictions shall use such manual as it is initially adopted or thereafter amended. CA2 In the long term, all jurisdictions shall work to establish a single countywide classification system for wetlands. CA3 Within each basin, jurisdictions shall formulate their regulations and other non - regulatory methods to accomplish the following: protection of wetlands, assure no net -loss of wetland functions, and an increase of the quantity and quality of the wetlands. The top class wetlands shall be untouched. CA4 Implementation of wetland mitigation should be flexible enough to allow for protection of systems or corridors of connected wetlands. A tradeoff of small, isolated wetlands in exchange for a larger connected wetland system can achieve greater resource protection and reduce isolation and fragmentation of wetland habitat. Goal NEG7 Protect and enhance the functions and values of the City's wetlands. Policies NEP43 The City will protect its wetlands with an objective of no overall net -loss of functions or values. NEP44 The City shall, as a minimum standard, use the methodology in the March 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Department of Ecology Publication #96-94) as set forth in WAC 173-22-080, as it exists as of November 1, 1999, or as subsequently amended for identification and delineations of wetlands within the City. Revised 2002 IX -13 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment NEP45 The City will work with other jurisdictions, tribes, and citizen groups to establish wetland policies and a classification system for wetlands that allows for the designation of both regionally and locally unique wetlands. NEP46 The City will work with the Lakehaven Utility District to evaluate pumping rates within the Hylebos Creek and Lower Puget Sound drainage basin to establish the effect of groundwater withdrawal on streams, lakes, and wetlands. NEP47 The City will avoid the use of natural wetlands for use as public stormwater facilities whenever possible. If the use of a natural wetland is unavoidable, the functions/values of that wetland should be replaced to the extent that they are lost. Special care will be taken to avoid using more sensitive, and valuable wetlands for stormwater management. Wetlands will be protected from excessive flow quantities and poor water quality, especially more sensitive and valuable wetlands. When wetlands are used for stormwater purposes, the maintenance of those facilities will follow carefully evaluated guidelines that meet the maintenance needs but minimize the impact on the wetland. Restoration/enhancement activities in wetlands will also follow carefully evaluated guidance that will maximize the benefits to the wetland, and minimize the short- and long-term negative impacts of the activities. Regulations governing wetland management activities will promote restoration/enhancement activities. The City will evaluate allowing the use of wetland buffer areas for water quality treatment facilities, including constructed wetlands. The City should evaluate the application of wetland regulations to constructed wetlands, as defined in the Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan. Prior to 1999, all wetlands in the City were afforded a 100-foot uniform buffer regardless of wetland size or type. While this allowed for predictability, the guidelines did not provide flexibility nor did they reflect the varying degrees of wetland functions, values, and quality. In 1999, the City completed an inventory of wetlands within the City limits and Potential Annexation Area (PAA). Wetlands were mapped and classified using a three -tiered system. The inventory was used to help the City create policy and regulations that reflect local as well as regional conditions. In 1999, the City adopted amendments to the FWCC Section 22-1 and Chapter 22, Article XIV, "Environmentally Sensitive Areas." The City may permit urban development to cause the destruction of wetlands determined to be replaceable based on a variety of factors. In these situations, compensatory wetland mitigation, such as wetland creation, restoration, or enhancement, must be provided. The City recognizes that the elimination of certain wetlands in exchange for appropriate mitigation can contribute to the overall wetland system, and may in fact achieve better resource protection. Goal NEG8 Explore ways of mitigating wetland loss. Revised 2002 IX -14 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Policies NEP48 The City should develop a wetland mitigation -banking program. The plan will address restoration, creation, enhancement, monitoring, and contingency planning for the replacement or enhancement of wetlands. NEP49 Mitigation sites should replace or augment the wetland values to be lost as a result of a development proposal. Sites should be chosen that would contribute to an existing wetland system or, if feasible, restore an area that was historically a wetland. NEP50 All wetland functions should be considered in evaluating wetland mitigation proposals, including fish and wildlife habitat, flood storage, water quality, recreation, and educational opportunities. NEP51 The City will protect wetlands by maximizing infiltration opportunities and promoting the conservation of forest cover and native vegetation. NEP52 Wetlands created as a result of a surface or stormwater detention facility will not be considered wetlands for regulatory purposes. Shorelines The City of Federal Way adopted the King County Shoreline Management Program (Program) shortly after the City's incorporation. King County's program is a functional plan and was developed in compliance with the state's Shorelines Management Act. In 1999, the City adopted a new Shoreline Master Program (SMP) consistent with community values, land use and environmental protection, state law, and the policy direction of the Natural Environment and Land Use chapters of the FWCP. The program also recognizes the unique recreational and natural habitat of the City's shorelines. Starting in 2005, the City worked with the public, stakeholders, technical advisors, state agencies, and the tribes to develop an updated SMP. The updated Federal Way SMP was adopted 2011, with review and approval from the Washington State Department of Ecology. Policy NEP53 Keep abreast of proposed changes to the state's Shoreline Management Regulations and amend the City's Program in order to enhance the shoreline and protect salmon and other threatened or endangered species. Revised 2002 IX -15 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment 9.3 GEOLOGIC HAZARDOUS AREAS Geologically hazardous areas include: steep slope hazard, landslide and erosion hazard, and seismic hazard (liquefaction -prone) areas. WAC 365-195-200(9) defines geographically hazardous areas as, "...areas that because of their susceptibility to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events, are not suited to siting of commercial, residential, or industrial development consistent with public health or safety concerns." In Federal Way, geologically hazardous areas have been mapped along much of the Puget Sound shoreline and in more limited areas north of Steel Lake, and west and south of Hylebos State Park (Map IX-5). Landslide -Prone Areas represent a potential hazard to people and property. Inappropriate development activities may disturb the natural stability of soils, surficial geology, slopes, and hydrology to the point that mass wasting, erosion, high run off, and stream siltation may occur. There are many areas in Federal Way, particularly the high bluffs along Puget Sound that have high potential for landslide. These areas typically have slopes greater than 15 percent, springs or groundwater seepage, and highly permeable sand and gravel soils overlaying relatively impermeable silt and clay soils. Seismic Hazard Areas are characterized by low -density cohesionless soils in association with a shallow groundwater table. During an earthquake, these soils become highly unstable and are unable to adequately support structures. With appropriate construction techniques, such as soil compaction or pile construction, building owners can minimize the potential for damage to some extent. To identify seismically hazardous sites and recommend appropriate construction techniques typically requires the services of a qualified geotechnical engineer. Soil Erosion problems are typical in all areas of Federal Way. Generally, these problems are the result of improper or inappropriate grading and construction practices, and high volumes of rainfall. However, there are small areas of the City where the soils are so erosion sensitive that urban development is not appropriate because of the sensitivity of these soils to disturbance. Steep Slope Areas are typically found along the western portion of Federal Way, as the land ends in high banks above the Puget Sound shoreline. In addition, there are other isolated areas throughout the City. These hillsides are either naturally unstable, or susceptible to instability when disturbed. The following CWPP and the City policies address protection of geologically hazardous areas. Revised 2002 IX -16 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Countywide Planning Policy CA13 All jurisdictions shall regulate development on certain lands to protect public health, property, important ecological and hydrogeologic functions, and environmental quality, and to reduce public costs. The natural features of these lands include: a) Slopes with a grade greater than 40 percent; b) Severe landslide hazard areas; c) Erosion hazard areas; d) Mine hazard areas; and e) Seismic hazards. Regulations shall include, at a minimum, provisions for vegetation retention, seasonal clearing and grading limits, setbacks, and drainage and erosion controls. Goal NEG9 Adopt standards to ensure against the loss of both public and private property in geologically hazardous areas. Policies NEP54 Land uses on steep slopes should be designed to prevent property damage and environmental degradation, and to enhance open space and wildlife habitat. NEP55 As slope increases, development intensity, site coverage, and vegetation removal should decrease and thereby minimize drainage problems, soil erosion, siltation, and landslides. Slopes of 40 percent or more should be retained in a natural state, free of structures and other land surface modifications. NEP56 Landslide hazard areas should be free of development, unless the risks and adverse impacts associated with such development can be reduced to a negligible level. NEP57 In areas with severe seismic hazards, special building design and construction measures should be used to minimize the risk of structural damage, fire, and injury to occupants, and to prevent post -seismic collapse. NEP58 Prior to development in severe seismic hazard areas, the City may require special studies to evaluate seismic risks and to identify appropriate measures to reduce these risks. NEP59 The City should develop special regulations that address construction on or near marine bluffs of Puget Sound. Regulations should take into consideration landslide potential, drainage, and vegetation removal. NEP60 Proposals for development on or near marine bluffs should substantiate, either through design or adherence to special development regulations, that the development has less than a 25 percent chance of failing by collapsing, or becoming dangerous and/or uninhabitable due to slope movement within a 50 year time period. Revised 2002 IX -17 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment NEP61 Development along marine bluffs should take into consideration the unique habitat these areas provide by leaving as much native vegetation as possible, especially snags. 9.4 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are considered critical areas and are necessary for either resident animal species, or seasonal migratory animal species. These habitats are extremely important and, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that a given species will survive. Habitat conservation areas may include areas of species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and migration corridors. These also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alteration, such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands (Map IX-6). This chapter also recommends that the City complete the necessary studies to identify and map habitat conservation areas so that they can be protected. Significant habitat also exists in aquatic, wetland, and riparian areas and on steep slopes that are privately owned, but protected by development regulations. Linking public and private natural areas can provide food, shelter, and migration corridors for a healthy and sustainable population of salmon, songbirds, and other species. Urban landscaping, parks, and open space are valuable supplements to natural areas in terms of providing habitat for a wide variety of wildlife. The loss of natural wildlife habitat to urban development can be partially offset by landscaping that includes a variety of native plants, which provide food and shelter for wildlife. Countywide Planning Policies Through the following goals Federal Way sets out to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance fish and wildlife habitat areas. CA8 All jurisdictions shall identify critical fish and wildlife habitats and species and develop regulations that: a) Promote their protection and proper management; and b) Integrate native plant communities and wildlife with other land uses where possible. CA9 Natural drainage systems including associated riparian and shoreline habitat shall be maintained and enhanced to protect water quality, reduce public costs, protect fish and wildlife habitat, and prevent environmental degradation. Jurisdictions within shared basins shall coordinate regulations to manage basin and natural drainage systems which include provisions to: a) Protect the natural hydraulic and ecological functions of drainage systems, maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitat, and restore and maintain those natural functions; b) Control peak Revised 2002 IX -18 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment runoff rate and quantity of discharges from new development to approximate pre - development rates; and c) Preserve and protect resources and beneficial functions and values through maintenance of stable channels, adequate low flows, and reduction of future storm flows, erosion, and sedimentation. CA10 Jurisdictions shall maintain or enhance water quality through control of runoff and best management practices to maintain natural aquatic communities and beneficial uses. CA11 The Washington State Department of Fisheries and Wildlife and the Indian Tribes both manage fish and wildlife resources. However, local governments have authority for land use regulation. Jurisdictions shall coordinate land use planning and management of fish and wildlife resources with affected state agencies and the federally recognized Tribes. Goal NEG10 Preserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife habitat. Policies NEP62 As feasible, the City will conduct studies needed to identify and map critical fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and may re-evaluate existing regulations for the protection of these areas. NEP63 The City should manage aquatic and riparian (stream side) habitat in a way that minimizes its alteration in order to preserve and enhance its ability to sustain fish and wildlife. NEP64 The City should preserve and enhance native vegetation in riparian habitat wherever possible. NEP65 The City should encourage residents and businesses to use native plants in residential and commercial landscaping. NEP66 The City will protect wildlife corridors in the City owned open space where appropriate. These areas should use native plants that support native species of birds and animals where appropriate. NEP67 As feasible, the City will adopt and implement fish habitat conservation plans for the salmon runs in the Hylebos drainage, Lakota Creek, Joe's Creek, and any other identified salmon streams. These plans will include recommendations for improvements to the riparian corridor and provisions for adequate buffers adjacent to all proposed development. NEP68 The City should encourage informational and educational programs and activities dealing with the protection of wildlife. An example of such a program is the Backyard Wildlife Sanctuary program established by the state's Department of Fish and Wildlife. Revised 2002 IX -19 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment 9.5 AIR QUALITY Air quality, once a problem for other regions of the United States, is now a major problem in the Pacific Northwest. The preservation of clean air is essential to maintaining the quality of life enjoyed in this region. Air pollution in the Puget Sound Region is the result of increased vehicle emissions primarily from cars and trucks. Therefore, if this region is going to resolve its growing air pollution problem, it must develop a more efficient and less auto -oriented transportation system. The following CWPP and City policies are adopted to protect air quality. Countywide Planning Policy CA14 All jurisdictions, incoordination with the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency and the Puget Sound Regional Council, shall develop policies, methodologies, and standards that promote regional air quality, consistent with the Countywide Policy Plan. Goal NEG11 To protect air quality. Policies NEP68 Support state and federal air quality standards and the regulation of activities that emit air pollutants. NEP70 Encourage transportation demand management and alternatives to the single occupancy vehicle in order to reduce energy consumption, air, and water pollution. 9.6 NOISE Noise pollution can be harmful to the general public's health and welfare and has adversely affected the livability and comfort of neighborhoods within the City of Federal Way. Noise is primarily generated by: air traffic from Seattle -Tacoma International Airport (SeaTac); vehicle traffic; and construction activities. The City will need to continue its efforts at the regional and state level to mitigate the impacts associated with the SeaTac Airport. Revised 2002 IX - 20 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment Goal NEG12 Develop programs and/or regulations to address noise pollution in all areas of the City. Policies NEP71 The City should develop and adopt construction standards to mitigate noise generated by SeaTac Airport and Interstate 5, as well as other major arterials. NEP72 The City will evaluate potential noise impacts associated with non-residential uses and activities located in residential areas as part of the site plan review process. The City may adopt noise level standards for all non-residential uses. NEP73 The City will continue to work with the Port of Seattle to mitigate noise impacts within the 65ldn contour. In this effort, the City will work with the Port to field verify the results generated by the Integrated Noise Model. NEP74 The City will continue to work in concert with the Puget Sound Regional Council, Regional Commission on Airport Affairs, and the Airport Communities Coalition, or their successors or other entities, to resolve problems associated with the proposed expansion of SeaTac Airport. NEP75 In developing new roadway systems, the City will evaluate the noise impact on residential neighborhoods as appropriate in, or through, residential areas. 9.7 OPEN SPACE Trails and open space corridors form linkages between and within neighborhoods, commercial areas, and neighboring jurisdictions. Open space corridors also provide wildlife habitat, recreation areas, as well as visual and physical separation between land uses. In order to achieve an effective open space system, the City will work cooperatively with surrounding jurisdictions to construct a network of open space. Open space can include: environmentally sensitive areas, forests, pasture land, lakes, and waterways. Areas identified as open space in the Comprehensive Parks Plan may be purchased or otherwise protected from development by the City. Countywide Planning Policies CC7 All jurisdictions shall work cooperatively to identify and protect open space corridors of regional significance. Revised 2002 IX - 21 FWCP — Chapter Nine, Natural Environment CC8 Water bodies and rivers of the Puget Sound region form an important element of the open space system. Jurisdictions shall work to protect visual access to water bodies and rivers, and provide for physical access where appropriate. CC13 All jurisdictions shall develop coordinated level of service standards for the provision of parks and open space. Goal NEG13 Develop an open space network throughout the City and with adjacent jurisdictions. Policies NEP76 Open space is as important as wildlife habitat and should be linked with open space identified in the King County Open Space Plan. NEP77 The City should identify an open space plan and develop a program to acquire or accept donations of these areas for preservation. NEP78 The City should consider innovative ways of acquiring property for open space such as transfer of development rights and development incentives for set asides. 9.8 IMPLEMENTATION The implementation of the policies contained in this chapter will occur over a number of years and is dependent on resources available to the City and the community. The 1995 FWCP listed the following six -implementation strategies to be implemented within five years. Four of the six have been completed, one is in process, and the last (creation of aquifer recharge maps) still needs to be done: 1. Revise the City's wetland buffering requirement (Completed 1999). 2. Develop a new Shoreline Master Program to be consistent with the policies of this chapter and the Land Use chapter, community values, and state law (Completed 1999 and Updated 2011). Adopt a new definition of stream to distinguish between man-made conveyance systems and natural streams, requiring a definition change to the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Ordinance (In late 2001, the City hired a consultant to evaluate key City regulations, including the definition and classification of streams. This study, completed in June 2002, made certain recommendations that may be implemented upon direction by the City Council.) Revised 2002 IX - 22 FWCP —Chapter Nine, Natural Environment 4. Map wellhead protection zones (Completed in 2001 by Lakehaven Utility District.) 5. Inventory wetlands (Completed 1999). 6. Update aquifer recharge area maps. The City shall adopt a new stream definition at the time code amendments are necessary to implement the Endangered Species Act. Revised 2002 IX - 23 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Aquifers Natural Environment Element Legend: Federal Way City Limits Potential Annexation Area Aquifers ^* Deep Aquifer 00%/,3 Eastern Upland Aquifer #*%# Mirror Lake Aquifer Redondo/Milton Channel Aquifer Scale: 0 0.5 1 N Miles Map Revised: October, 2006. Source: Lakehaven Utility District N Federal Way MAP IX-1 Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Aquifers & Wellhead Capture Zones Natural Environment Element Legend: U Federal Way City Limits L ®s Potential Annexation Area Aquifers Deep Aquifer Eastern Upland Aquifer INe Mirror Lake Aquifer Redondo/Milton Channel Aquifer Wellhead Capture Zones 1 Year 10 Year 5 Year 100 Years Scale: 0 0.5 1 N Miles Map Revised: October, 2006. Source: Lakehaven Utility District A Federal Way MAP IX -IA Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Areas Susceptible to Groundwater Contamination Natural Environment Element Legend: 0 Federal Way City Limits L _ 1 Potential Annexation Area Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility: Low Susceptibility Medium Susceptibility High Susceptibility This map compiles existing geologic, soils and depth to groundwater information to estimate the location of areas where contamination may readily enter groundwater. Its purpose is to communicate the approximate location and area extend of geologic conditions in the greater Federal Way area favorable to the introduction of contaminants to groundwater. This map does not depict aquifer recharge areas. It is intended for planning purposes only and is not guaranteed to exhibit accurate information. Land use decisions should be based on site -specific data. Scale: 0 0.5 1 N %momil Miles Map Revised: October, 2006. Source: Lakehaven Utility District A Federal Way MAP IX-2 Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Wellhead Capture Zones Natural Environment Element Legend: Federal Way City Limits Potential Annexation Area Wellhead Capture Zones 1 Year 5 Year 10 Year 100 Years Scale: 0 0.5 1 N Miles Map Revised: October, 2006. Source: Lakehaven Utility District A Federal Way MAP IX-3 Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Surface Water Resources Natural Environment Element Legend: Q Federal Way City Limits L _ 1 Potential Annexation Area Wetlands (1998 City Survey) Streams (1998 City Survey) Lakes Scale: 0 0.5 1 N � Miles Map Revised: October, 2006, Source: City of Federal Way, King County V Federal Way MAP IX-4 Milton 161 Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. F fe 1 Edge The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Geologic Hazards Natural Environment Element Legend: 0 Federal Way City Limits L _ 1 Potential Annexation Area Erosion Hazard Area ® Landslide Hazard Areas Map Notes: Possible hazards based on ground slope are not indicated on this map. Source: King County Planning -Environmental Division Scale: 0 0.5 1 N � Miles Map Reformatted: October, 2006. Source: City of Federal way, King County A Federal Way MAP IX-5 Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Priority Habitats & Species Natural Environment Element Legend: 0 Federal Way City Limits L _ 1 Potential Annexation Area '\, Streams (1998 City Survey) ® Wetlands (1998 City Survey) Geoduck Habitat ® Crab Habitat r7 PHS Polygon Fish Species Distribution Smelt Habitat 'L Sandlance Habitat Scale: 0 0.5 1 N Miles Map Revised: October, 2006. Source: State of Washington Federal way MAP IX-6 Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy.