City of Burien
BURIEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
July 9, 2002
6:30 to 9:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
MEETING NOTES
Planning Commission Members Present: Mickey Conlin; Jon Newton; Robert Simpson-Clark; Bruce White
Absent: None Robert Pierce, chair; Gerald Robison; Len Boscarine; Douglas Rahn; Kirsti Weaver
Others Present: David Johanson, senior planner; Gerry Lindsay, recording secretary; Diane Hennessey and Nancy Job, Adolfson and Associates; Mark Greenig, EDAW; Jon Sondergaard, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Because a quorum was not present, the meeting was not officially called to order. Upon the call of the roll all commissioners were present the exception of Chair Pierce and Commissioners Robison, Boscarine, Rahn and Weaver.
A. Critical Areas Regulations
Scott Greenberg, planning director, said the process to review and possibly change the critical area regulations and policies as directed by state law will be coming before the commission soon. A team of consultants has been hired to assist in the work.
Diane Hennessey, a consultant with Adolfson and Associates, introduced Nancy Job, also with Adolfson and Associates, and Mark Greenig of EDAW, and Jon Sondergaard, a professional engineering geologist with Associated Earth Sciences.
Ms. Hennessey said the purpose of having critical areas regulations is to protect public health, safety and welfare. The difficulty is the need to balance the protection of property owner rights with protection of critical areas and public safety. Critical areas regulations are required by state law and the Growth Management Act.
Under the Growth Management Act, critical areas include wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, aquifer recharge areas, geologically hazardous areas, and frequently flooded areas. She explained that wetlands include areas of open water as well as areas that are only seasonally wet and have a predominance of wetlands vegetation.
The commissioners were shown a map indicating the locations of critical areas in Burien. She noted that Walker Creek is an important stream because it contains anadromous fish and because it feeds into Miller Creek. In addition to steep slopes, there are geologically hazardous areas, a geoduck and shellfish population, and eagle and great blue heron nesting areas. Salmon Creek has resident cutthroat but there is a major fish barrier preventing access; a long-term plan might include fisheries restoration efforts.
Commissioner Newton asked if consideration has been given to the new creek created by the landslide that occurred during the Nisqually earthquake. Jon Sondergaard said he had not seen the creek and assumed it was included in the recent landslide records. Commissioner Newton said the water volume running into Salmon Creek has trebled because of the new creek. The landslide left behind material some 12 to 15 feet deep. He said he has not seen salmon in the area but there are other fish, a few great blue herons, and osprey in the area. The area remains quite unstable.
Ms. Hennessey showed the commissioners photos of the stream in Seahurst Park, and other wetlands areas. She commented that wetlands and upland forest vegetation filter out pollution that would otherwise ultimately end up in the bodies of water. Such areas also provide water storage, which prevents major erosion and flooding events.
Ms. Hennessey said the state requirements call for all critical areas regulations to be updated to reflect best available science. Consideration must be given to the anadromous fishery, and a standard method must be used for delineating wetlands. Restoration of fisheries areas is encouraged; fish habitat enhancement projects should be exempted provided they are consistent with the critical areas regulations, the Shoreline Management Act, the Growth Management Act, and meet the best available science criteria.
The state required critical areas regulations back in 1990. In 1995 the requirement to include the best available science was added. The process allowed for the development of standards based on research, but those standards also could pass through a number of filters, including technologic feasibility, economic bearability, and political feasibility. The typical result for most areas in the Puget Sound area was something that was more politically based than science based. The Burien code, however, is more based on best available science, which puts the City ahead of the game. The new state regulations call for all codes to be based on best available science to protect the function and values of the critical areas.
The local legislative authorities are responsible for including best available science in the critical areas regulations. Qualified experts must be brought in to help determine what is the best available science. Best available science is in essence a body of literature that has grown over time and that is constantly being updated. The literature must be peer reviewed, must involve research methods that can be replicated, and must have conclusions that are logical and reasonable. The most important thing is the context and applicability to the local situation.
Commissioner Conlin asked who is charged with judging which references are credible. Ms. Hennessey said the Office of Community Development has come up with a reference list of citations of suggested credible references to be used as a base. State guidelines allow for departing from best available science so long as the reasons for the departure are clearly stated along with any potential risks to the critical areas.
Ms. Hennessey said the state rules call for using best available science in giving special consideration to all life stages of fisheries. The present critical areas code in Burien does an excellent job of prioritizing areas that most need protection and conservation. It offers an excellent assessment of what is on the ground, allowing for more of a focus on the priority areas such as Miller Creek and Walker Creek, both of which are anadromous fisheries areas.
If inadequate scientific information is used, there are a couple of ways the rules allow for that to be dealt with. One is to take a no-risk approach and place all critical areas under maximum protection. Another way is to develop an adaptive management approach, which is a process of moving toward a target and modifying plans as needed over time as new information is unearthed.
Ms. Hennessey said the consultant team will review the best available science documentation and review incentive programs in addition to regulations. The Office of Community Development has a model critical areas ordinance that will be reviewed as well; the Department of Ecology also has guidelines for protection of critical areas. The team will compare the current Burien code with the model ordinance and suggest revisions as necessary. Under the state guidelines, a record of best available science must be established; essentially that means all sources must be listed, along with the rationale for using any non-scientific approaches.
The consultant team will also be looking at the development review process with an eye on how long it takes to get through and whether it is fair and efficient. Steps will be taken to streamline the process. The public will be asked to comment on the current code as well as any proposals for change, and on what protection priorities should be established. The draft regulations must be reviewed and approved by the Office of Community Development and the Department of Ecology. Once that has been done, the revised regulations can be adopted.
Commissioner Newton asked if there are any significant populations of indicator species in Burien, either in the riparian or tidal areas. Ms. Hennessey said the geoduck is one. She said the Shoreline Management Act covers most of the shoreline areas, and the critical areas regulations are overlaid on the shoreline regulations. Shellfish may be dealt with more under shorelines than critical areas.
Ms. Hennessey said new technologies are being announced regularly. One of the latest is pervious concrete which has been found to work quite well for storm water infiltration. Studies have shown that runoff from impervious surfaces piped to retention ponds and released out of a directed area have negative effects on the hydrology of streams and wetlands. It may be advantageous to encourage in the revised code the use of such new technologies.
Mr. Sondergaard said geologic hazardous areas are areas that through a combination of topography, soils, water or manmade activity present a hazard. Typical geologic hazard areas target erosion, seismicity, volcanic hazard, coal mines and landslides. The main geologic hazard in the Burien area is landslides. Steep slopes by themselves are not necessarily a landslide hazard, but when combined with a lot of water or weak soils they are hazard areas. The landslide hazard criteria have been around and in use for quite awhile.
Mr. Sondergaard said the critical areas map for Burien shows the landslide hazard areas. The consultant team asked for and received records of reported landslides over the past 10 years, and those have been plotted on the map of the City; all of them lie within the identified landslide hazard areas. No map changes are anticipated.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Newton, Mr. Greenberg said only two of the landslides were know to be seismic related: Maplewild and Salmon Creek.
Mr. Sondergaard said seismic hazard areas are typically associated with liquefaction which is found in areas with granular soils that are saturated in loose condition.
Mr. Greenberg mentioned that one of the definitions of geologic hazard areas in the Burien code is slopes of 40 percent or greater. He said the mapped locations are based on aerial photos done in 1995. While it is not anticipated that the map will change dramatically, new planemetrics and 40 percent slope contours are being done by the consultant Walker and Associates.
Mr. Sondergaard explained that the purpose of aquifer recharge areas is the protect ground water quality and to assure sufficient recharge to the aquifer to keep a sufficient supply running. Aquifer recharge areas are identified based on the infiltration rate of the soil, the depth to the aquifer, and the amount of recharge, primarily through rainfall. One of the main criteria for identifying aquifer recharge is geology.
Mr. Sondergaard shared with the commissioners a map showing the location of different soil types, including recessional outwash, which is mainly sand and gravel deposited by glaciers; glacial till, or hardpan material that was deposited directly beneath the glacial ice; advance outwash, which is material deposited from rivers and streams that emanated from the front of the glaciers as they advanced; and much older materials deposited between the glacial periods that house the major aquifers. The commissioners were told that there are three main well fields serving the Burien area. The areas preliminarily identified as potential aquifer recharge protection areas were located for the commissioners on the map.
Mr. Sondergaard explained that the typical subsurface conditions in Burien have no need for an aquifer recharge areas. The recessional outwash that overlies the hardpan or till is a very permeable soil; water or contaminants that infiltrate to that level will not penetrate the layer, thus protecting the underlying aquifer. By the same token, there is little recharge to the aquifer through the material. The depth to the water table varies from 160 to 582 feet.
Commissioner Newton asked if there have been any ill effects observed in the area from the Tacoma smelter plume. Mr. Sondergaard said those contaminants are found primarily in the surface levels when found at all; they are quite immobile in water and as such do not infiltrate the recharge material.
Mr. Sondergaard noted that in some areas the advanced outwash has eroded to where it is exposed at the surface. Rainfall hitting those areas can directly penetrate to the aquifer without any intervening hardpan to stop it. The south end of Burien has some of those conditions.
Commissioner Conlin commented that in the south area of the city there are many homes on septic systems. He asked if that presented a problem. Mr. Sondergaard answered that where there are septic systems in use in areas where the hardpan has eroded away there could be some problems. Because the aquifer is generally quite deep, however, the problems are minimized.
Under Lake Burien there is a continually saturated zone where water slowly saturates the till and percolates into the material below. That is why there is a need to protect the areas around surface water bodies. The areas around water supply wells need protection as well in a pattern reflecting the flow direction of the groundwater toward the wells.
Mr. Greenberg commented that because some of the areas in need of protection may lie outside city boundaries, one of the steps will be to talk with neighboring jurisdictions to make sure everyone is on the same page and trying to handle the same situations in the same way.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Simpson-Clark, Mr. Sondergaard said he did not believe the intent of the regulations was to protect all individual domestic wells so much as it is to protect the major domestic water supply wells.
Pierce County has established aquifer recharge areas. Mr. Sondergaard said he reviewed its regulations to determine its approach. Typically there are certain activities exempt from the aquifer recharge protection regulations, including utilities, road installations, and additions to single family residences that only add a small percentage to the footprint of a house. Development within an aquifer recharge area is subject to two types of requirements: areas that require hydro-geologic assessment before the development is permitted; and areas that do not require hydro-geologic assessment. In the latter category are subdivisions of land; residential structures housing three or more units that use on-site septic; and commercial and industrial sites that do not handle, expose or use hazardous materials. Areas requiring hydro-geologic assessments include hazardous waste treatment, storage or disposal facilities; animal containment areas; and landfills.
The commissioners were shown a map indicating frequently flooded areas within the city. Mr. Sondergaard noted that such areas typically occur along streams, shorelines, lakes and topographically low areas. He said the currently identified areas are consistent with the FEMA insurance maps. The interim zoning code for Burien also addresses frequently flooded areas and includes a relatively detailed set of guidelines. Some areas of the code could stand to be streamlined to some degree.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark said it was his understanding that to some degree Burien can develop its own best science. For instance, if a steep slope is identified as a potential hazard, the City can by ordinance authorize a landowner to go out and get specific information necessary to make a determination regarding the development potential of the specific property and, if done in accordance with the appropriate scientific methods, the resulting information can be incorporated into the body of specific science used to make the decision.
Mr. Greenberg agreed and said that is already done. He said the critical areas map is used by the staff at the counter as a red flag map. When someone comes in seeking a permit for a property shown on the map, staff knows that they have some specific questions to ask. There have been a number of cases where the resulting information showed the mapping to be incorrect. The regulations must be based on best available science and be accepted by both the Department of Ecology and the Office of Community Development; where there are issues relative to Chinook salmon, the National Marine Fisheries Service must also bless the rules. In every instance, what is on the ground is what is used in determining the kind of critical area.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Newton, Mr. Greenberg said it would not be unreasonable to look at providing mitigation measures for seismic events in the code. He added that to some extent that has already been done. Mr. Sondergaard noted that anyone wanting to construct in a critical area must get a professional to write a report about the site, assessing the hazards, recommending buffers and setbacks, and possible mitigations.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark suggested that there is some degree of feedback involved. He said a count of the number of salmon in a creek compared year by year can help to determine whether current practices are effective.
Commissioner Conlin commented that no one wants to see the salmon or eagles lost, but at the same time someone who purchases a property should be assured of some use of the property over time. Mr. Sondergaard observed that there are reasonable use standards in place that guarantee some use of property. The regulations have proscribed setbacks and buffers, but those requirements can always be reduced if it can be shown with sufficient data that the full-size buffers are not required.
Ms. Hennessey added that the program to allow the transfer of development rights is one way property owners can realize use of their investments. The practice has worked well in a number of jurisdictions.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark commented that a required buffer is not always an unwanted thing; often the buffers are entirely consistent with what the property owner bought the property for.
Commenting on the fact that the commission had worked through all of the issues, Mr. Greenberg said the July 23 meeting would not be necessary. He said staff would try to have some draft code language available for the August 13 commission meeting. If the commission is ready, a public hearing could be slated for August 27. The commission could then make its recommendation to the City Council on September 10 or 24.
Since the quorum-less meeting was not officially called to order, there was no official adjournment.
Approved
/s/ Robert Pierce, chair
Planning Commission
/s/ Scott Greenberg, director
Community Development Department