2021-05-13 Agenda PacketSpokane
Va11ey
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Regular Meeting Agenda
City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.
May 13, 2021 6:00 p.m.
1. PLEASE NOTE: Meetings are being held electronically in response to Governor Inslee's
March 24, 2020 Proclamation concerning our recent State of Emergency, which waives and
suspends the requirement to hold in -person meetings and provides options for the public to
attend remotely.
2. Public wishin,2 to make comments will need to email planning amspokanevalley.ora prior to
4:00 pm the day of'the meeting in order to be to speak during the comments period during
the meeting. Comments can also be emailed. Send an email to_planningaspokanevalley.ory
and comments will be read into the record or distributed to the Commission members
through email.
3. LINK TO ZOOM MEETING INFORMATION:
https://spokaneval ley.zoom.us/i/93950793161
One tap mobile
US: +13462487799„93950793161# or+16699006833„93950793161#
Dial by your location
US: +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
Meeting ID: 939 5079 3161
4. CALL TO ORDER
5. ROLL CALL
6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 22, 2021
8. COMMISSION REPORTS
9. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
10. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda.
11. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
a. Findings Of Fact: Shoreline Master Plan
12. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
13. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers — City Hall
April 22, 2021
I. Planning Commission Vice -Chair Bob McKinley called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
The meeting was held remotely via ZOOM meeting.
II. Administrative Assistant Taylor Dillard took roll and the following members and staff were
present:
Fred Beaulac
Karl Granrath
Walt Haneke
Bob McKinley, absent
Nancy Miller
Paul Rieckers
Sherri Robinson
Erik Lamb, City Attorney
Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Chaz Bates, Senior Planner
Taylor Dillard, Administrative Assistant
There was a consensus from the Planning Commission to excuse Chairman McKinley
from the meeting.
III. AGENDA: Commissioner Beaulac moved to approve the April 22, 2021 meeting agenda as
presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against
and the motion passed.
IV. MINUTES: Commissioner Haneke moved to approve the April 8, 2021 minutes as
presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against
and the motion passed.
V. COMMISSION REPORTS: There were no Planning Commission reports.
VI. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Building Official Jenny Nickerson reminded the Planning
Commission of a webinar to be held on Saturday April 24, 2021 regarding Roberts Rules Of
Order (Mastering the Meeting).
VII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.
VIII. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
a. Findings Of Fact: Housing Action Plan
Senior Planner Chaz Bates presented the Findings of Fact for the Housing Action Plan
(HAP) for approval. He stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
the proposed HAP at the April 8, 2021 meeting. After receiving public testimony, the
Planning Commission moved and voted 7-0 to forward the HAP to City Council with a
04-22-2021 Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2 of 2
recommendation of approval. He explained that the approval of the Findings of Fact will
formalize the recommendations that were made at the public hearing.
Commissioner Haneke moved to approve the Planning Commission Findings of Fact for
the Housing Action Plan as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion
was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed.
IX. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Miller commented that legislation regarding
condominiums is headed to the Governor's office for approval.
X. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Haneke moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:11 p.m.
There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against, and the
motion passed.
Bob McKinley, Chair Date signed
Marianne Lemons, Secretary
2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action
Meeting Date: May 13, 2021
Item: Check all that apply ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ study session ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2021 Shoreline Master Program Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Shoreline Management Act (SMA) under RCW 90.58, Washington Administrative
Code (WAC) 173-26-090, SVMC 17.80.150 and 19.30.040.
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTION: Study session on February 25, 2021; public hearing March 11, 2021.
BACKGROUND: The Shoreline Master Program (SMP) is the City's official document to guide development along the
Spokane River and Shelly Lake. Finalized in 2015, the SMP includes goals and polices which are adopted by reference in
the Comprehensive Plan and regulations related to shoreline development that can be found in Chapter 21.50 of the Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC).
The City is undertaking a periodic review of its SMP, as required by the Washington State Shoreline Management Act
(SMA), RCW 90.58.080. The SMA requires that the SMP be reviewed and revised, if needed, by June 30, 2021. The review
ensures the SMP stays current with changes in laws and rules.
In 2020, the City hired the consultant firm The Watershed Company to conduct the periodic review. Because the SMP was
recently adopted in 2015 after an extensive multi -year public process, the scope of the 2021 periodic review is limited to
changes required to stay current with laws and rules. A summary of the changes to laws and rules and their impacts to the
City's SMP regulations can be found in the Gap Analysis completed as part of the 2021 periodic review.
Overall, the SMP was found to be consistent with changes in local and state laws. A majority of the changes are minor and
include items such as exemptions, definitions, and administrative procedures. A noteworthy required change was identified
relating to the critical area regulations within shoreline jurisdiction. These regulations need to be updated to be consistent
with state law and the City's adopted critical area regulations.
On February 12, 2021, the City issued a notice of the public hearing stating that the City was accepting public comments
for 30-days. The City also published all the draft documents on the SMP project webpage and notified the public of their
availability.
On February 25, 2021, an overview of the proposed SMP amendments and a summary of the adoption process was provided
to the Planning Commission. On March 11, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the purpose of
taking public testimony on the proposed amendments.
After the public hearing on March 11, the public hearing was closed, except to allow written comments to be submitted by
close of business on Friday, March 12.
On March 25, 2021, the Planning Commission reviewed all public comments and deliberated on the proposed SMP
amendments. After deliberations, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended to the City Council that the draft
SMP amendments be adopted as presented. Tonight, the Planning Commission will formalize their recommendation by
forwarding the attached findings to the City Council.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to forward the findings and recommendations to the City Council for
the 2021 Shoreline Master Program update.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Findings and Recommendations for the 2021 Shoreline Master Program Update
2. Final Draft Gap Analysis
3. Final Draft Amendments Chapter 21.50
RPCA Findings and Recommendations for 2021 Shoreline Master Program Update Page 1 of 1
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR
2021 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE
May 13, 2021
A. Background:
The City has completed the periodic review of its Shoreline Master Program (SMP), as required by the
Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA), RCW 90.58.080. The SMA requires that the SMP
be reviewed and revised, if needed, every eight years. This periodic update is required to be complete by
June 30, 2021. The review ensures the SMP stays current with changes in laws and rules, remains
consistent with other City plans and regulations, and is responsive to changed circumstances, new
information and improved data.
B. Findings:
1. The City initiated a SMP periodic review in 2020.
2. RCW 90.58, WAC 173-26-090, Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.150 and 19.30.040
set forth goals, policies and procedures to guide the development and adoption of the City's periodic
review of the SMP.
3. In 2015, the City adopted a comprehensive update of its SMP after an extensive multi -year public
process.
4. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.080(4)(a), the scope of the 2021 periodic review was limited to changes
required to stay current with changes in laws and rules.
5. The Gap Analysis completed as part of the 2021 periodic review analyzed the changes required to
maintain consistency with changes in laws and rule and overall the SMP was found to be consistent.
Minor changes were recommended.
6. The changes to the SMP regulations include items such as exemptions, definitions, administrative
procedures, and updates to critical area regulations within shoreline jurisdiction.
7. On February 12, 2021, a SEPA Determination of Non -significance (DNS) was issued determining the
adoption of the Draft SMP to be a non -project action that does not have a probable significant adverse
impact on the environment.
8. On February 12, 2021, the City issued a notice of the public hearing stating that the City was accepting
public comments for 30-days. The notice provided met all state and local requirements.
9. On February 12, 2021, the City published to the SMP project webpage all draft documents and review
materials for the periodic review of the SMP.
10. On February 25, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a study session where the proposed SMP
amendments were presented and discussed.
11. On March 11, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the purpose of taking
public testimony on the proposed amendments. No public testimony was received during the hearing.
At the conclusion of the public hearing the Planning Commission continued to allow written comment
on the draft SMP amendments until 5:00 PM March 12, 2021. One written public comment was
received.
12. On March 25 2021, the Planning Commission reviewed all public comments and deliberated on the
proposed SMP amendments. After deliberations, the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended to the City Council that the draft SMP amendments be adopted as presented.
Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission
For the 2021 Shoreline Master Program Update
Page 1 of 2
C. Conclusions
1. The Planning Commission finds compliance with SVMC 17.80.150(F) for the Draft SMP
amendments.
a. The draft SMP amendments are consistent with the following policy and goal of the Spokane
Valley Comprehensive Plan:
H-P2 Adopt development regulations that expand housing choices by allowing innovative housing
types including tiny homes, accessory dwelling units, pre -fabricated homes, co -housing,
cottage housing, and other housing types.
NR-G3 Ensure that Critical Areas and Shoreline Master Program regulations are based on best
available science and are consistent with required environmental policy.
b. The draft SMP amendments bear a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and
protection of the environment: The proposed amendments to the SMP were identified after a
review of changes to laws and rules. The proposed amendments implement changes to local and
state laws and rules including best available science for wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas. The proposed amendments maintain the vision and goals adopted in the SMP
and Comprehensive Plan.
2. The draft SMP amendments are in compliance with RCW 90.58, WAC 173-26, Washington State
Shoreline Management Planning Guidelines.
3. The proposed updates to the SMP are necessary to maintain consistency with changes to local and
state laws and rules. The proposed text amendments fulfill the City's obligations under state law to
review and revise the SMP.
D. Recommendations
1. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the 2021 Shoreline
Master Program update.
Approved this 13th day of May, 2021
Robert McKinley, Chairman
ATTEST
Marianne Lemons, Planning Commission Secretary
Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission
For the 2021 Shoreline Master Program Update
Page 2 of 2
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Gap Analysis
Prepared on behalf of:
-v 00,00
MI&ne
jValley
City of Spokane Valley
10210 E. Sprague Ave.
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Prepared by:
T 1 I [-
WATERSHED
CO I'ANY
750 Sixth Street South
Kirkland. WA 98033
p 425.822.5242
f 425.827.8136
watershedco.com
The Watershed Company Reference Number:
190827
Table of Contents
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................ 1
2. State Laws, Rules & Implementation Gap Analysis................................................................ 2
3. Other Local Plans and Development Regulations Gap Analysis ............................................. 2
List of Tables
Table 3-1. Summary of potential gaps in consistency between the SMP and other local plans
and development regulations....................................................................................... 2
Attachments
Attachment A: Periodic Review Checklist
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Gap Analysis
1. Introduction
The Watershed Company
April 26, 2021
In accordance with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, local jurisdictions with
"Shorelines of the State" are required to conduct a periodic review of their Shoreline Master
Programs (SMPs) (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-26-090). The periodic review is
intended to keep SMPs current with amendments to state laws, changes to local plans and
regulations, changes in local circumstances, and new or improved data and information.
The City of Spokane Valley (City) adopted its current SMP on December 15, 2015 (Ordinance
No. 15-024). Shorelines of the State in the City include Shelley Lake and the Spokane River.
The current SMP outlines goals and policies for shorelines in the City and establishes
regulations for their development (codified in Spokane Valley Municipal Code [SVMC] Chapter
21.50). The current SMP includes regulations for critical areas in shoreline jurisdiction (SVMC
21.50.460—.560).
As a first step in the periodic review process, the City's current SMP was reviewed by City staff
and consultants. The purpose of this SMP Periodic Review Gap Analysis is to present a
summary of the review and inform updates to the SMP. This document is organized into the
following sections:
Section 2, in conjunction with Attachment A, presents the findings of a review for gaps
in consistency between the SMP and state laws, rules and implementation guidance.
• Section 3 presents the findings of a review for gaps in consistency between the SMP and
other local plans and development regulations.
This document includes tables that identify potential revision actions. Where potential revision
actions are identified, they are classified as follows:
• "Mandatory" indicates revisions that are required for consistency with state laws.
• "Recommended" indicates revisions that improve consistency with state laws, but are
not strictly required.
• "Optional" indicates revisions that amend the SMP in accordance with state laws, but
that are not necessarily required or recommended for consistency with state laws.
• "No action necessary" indicates the SMP as written is sufficient and no change is
needed at this time.
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review The Watershed Company
Gap Analysis April 26, 2021
?. State Laws, RUIeS & Implementation Gap Analysis
The Washington State Department of Ecology's Periodic Review Checklist summarizes recent
amendments to state laws, rules and implementation guidance that may trigger the need for
local SMP amendments during periodic reviews. A completed version of the Periodic Review
Checklist is appended to this document as Attachment A.
Overall, the SMP was found to be consistent with changes in local and state laws. A majority of
the changes are minor and include items such as exemptions, definitions, and administrative
procedures. A noteworthy required change was identified relating to the critical area
regulations within shoreline jurisdiction. These regulations need to be updated to be consistent
with state law and the City's adopted critical area regulations.
Other Local Plans & Development RegUlations Gap
The SMP was reviewed for gaps in consistency with other local plans and development
regulations, including the zoning code. In general, the review found no major inconsistencies,
but did reveal one area where the SMP might be amended to better reflect the priorities of the
Comprehensive Plan. Table 3-1 summarizes a potential gap in consistency between the SMP
and the Comprehensive Plan.
Table 3-1. Summary of potential gaps in consistency between the SMP and other local plans and
development regulations.
No.
Topic
Review
Action
1
Permitting for
SVMC 21.50.370.B.6 requires a
Amend Table 21.50-1, Shoreline
Accessory Dwelling
Shoreline Substantial
Uses, as well as SVMC
Units (ADUs)
Development Permit for ADUs,
21.50.370, to allow accessory
whereas new single-family
dwelling units as part of a
residences require a shoreline
shoreline exemption, consistent
exemption per WAC 173-27-
with WAC 173-27-040(2)(g).
040(2)(g). The 2017
Comprehensive Plan Housing
Element encourages additional
affordable housing options such
as ADUs. The additional
procedural requirements for a
Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit compared to
a shoreline exemption may be a
disincentive to ADU applications.
2
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Attachment A Periodic Review Checklist
The Watershed Company
April 26, 2021
Attachment A: Periodic Review Checklist
The periodic review checklist summarizes amendments to state law, rules and applicable updated
guidance adopted between 2007 and 2019 that may triggerthe need for local SMP amendments during
periodic reviews. Per guidance from the Department of Ecology, the city completed the periodic review
checklist to document review considerations and determine if local amendments are needed to
maintain compliance, see WAC 173-26-090(3)(b)(i).
To ease review and track potential amendments, the draft amendments to the city's SMP have been
cross-referenced with the row of the checklist below. For each proposed amendment there is a
comment bubble that references the row in the checklist. For example, the proposed amendment at
21.50.020 D. has the comment "Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2017c", which means the proposed
amendment was in response to a change made in 2017 at row c.
Prepared By
Jurisdiction
Date
Alex Capron, The Watershed
Company
City of Spokane Valley
2/9/2021
Row
a.
b
Summary of change
OFM adjusted the cost threshold
for building freshwater docks
The Legislature removed the
requirement for a shoreline
permit for disposal of dredged
materials at Dredged Material
Management Program sites
(applies to 9 jurisdictions)
Review
SVMC 21.50.110.G includes
outdated cost threshold for
freshwater docks and does
not fully align with the
language in WAC 173-27-040
or RCW 90.58.030(3).
There are no DIVIIVIP sites in
City limits. Therefore, this
legislative amendment does
not apply.
c. The Legislature added restoring There are no saltwater
native kelp, eelgrass beds and shorelines in City limits.
native oysters as fish habitat Therefore, this legislative
enhancement projects. amendment does not apply.
Action
Reference the current cost
threshold, in addition to WAC
173-27-040 to ensure the SMP
always reflects the most
current exemption language.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Attachment A Periodic Review Checklist
Row Summary of change
201i
a.
b.
C.
OFM adjusted the cost threshold
for substantial development to
$7,047.
Ecology permit rules clarified the
definition of "development"
does not include dismantling or
removing structures.
Ecology adopted rules clarifying
exceptions to local review under
the SMA.
d. Ecology amended rules clarifying
permit filing procedures
consistent with a 2011 statute.
e. Ecology amended forestry use
regulations to clarify that forest
practices that only involves
timber cutting are not SMA
"developments" and do not
require SDPs.
f. Ecology clarified the SMA does
not apply to lands under
exclusive federal jurisdiction
Review
SVMC 21.50.110.A includes
outdated cost threshold for
substantial development,
though it references RCW
90.58.030 and the Office of
Financial Management for
automatic cost threshold
updates.
The Watershed Company
April 26, 2021
Action
Reference current cost
threshold under SVMC
21.50.110.A. In addition,
include, "WAC 173-27-040 and
RCW 90.58.030(3), or as
amended" under SVMC
21.50.110 to ensure the SMP
will reflect the most current
exemption language.
Definition of "Development" Modify the definition of
(Appendix Al, Definitions) "Development" to be
does not clarify that removing consistent with Ecology's
structures does not constitute example definition.
"development."
SVMC 21.50.020.1) indicates
that remedial actions are
exempt from procedural
requirements of the SMP.
The SMP does not include
specific guidance on permit
filing procedures.
Forestry uses are prohibited
by the current SMP (Table
21.50-1: Shoreline Uses,
within SVMC 21.50.190,
Shoreline Uses Table).
No federal lands exist within
City shoreline jurisdiction.
Reference the exceptions in
WAC 173-27-044 and -045 at
SVMC 21.50.020.D.
Add specific guidance on
permit filing procedures to
SVMC 21.50.050.13.9
consistent with Ecology
example language.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
K
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Attachment A Periodic Review Checklist
Row
g
h.
Summary of change
Ecology clarified "default"
provisions for nonconforming
uses and development.
Ecology adopted rule
amendments to clarify the scope
and process for conducting
periodic reviews.
Ecology adopted a new rule
creating an optional SMP
amendment process that allows
for a shared local/state public
comment period.
Review
The SMP contains its own
provisions regarding
nonconforming uses,
structures and lots under
SVMC 21.50.150. SMP
Appendix A-1, Definitions,
includes definitions of
"Nonconforming structure"
and "Nonconforming use," but
not for "Nonconforming lot."
The SMP does not include
procedures for periodic
reviews, nor is required.
The SMP does not include
procedures for the optional
amendment process, nor is
required.
The Watershed Company
April 26, 2021
Action
Add a definition for
"nonconforming lot"
consistent with Ecology's
example language.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
j. Submittal to Ecology of proposed The SMP does not include No action necessary.
SMP amendments. procedures for submittal to
Ecology of proposed SMP
amendments.
a.
b.
The Legislature created a new
shoreline permit exemption for
retrofitting existing structure to
comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Ecology updated wetlands
critical areas guidance including
implementation guidance for the
2014 wetlands rating system.
SVMC 21.50.110 does not
include this exemption.
The SMP references the 2004
wetlands rating system and
does not include the most
recent wetland critical areas
guidance.
Reference WAC 173-27-040
and RCW 90.58.030(3) to
ensure the SMP always
reflects the most current
exemption language.
Add this exemption to SVMC
21.50.110.
Update the SMP wetland
regulations in SVMC 21.50.520
to reference the 2014 wetland
rating system.
3
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review The Watershed Company
Attachment A Periodic Review Checklist April 26, 2021
Row Summary of change Review Action
2015
Note: SMP Locally Adopted December
a. The Legislature adopted a 90-day The SMP does not No action necessary.
target for local review of acknowledge WSDOT review
Washington State Department of timelines, nor is it required to.
Transportation (WSDOT)
projects.
a.
a.
a.
b.
C.
The Legislature created a new
definition and policy for floating
on -water residences legally
established before 7/1/2014.
The Legislature amended the
SMA to clarify SMP appeal
procedures.
Ecology adopted a rule requiring
that wetlands be delineated in
accordance with the approved
federal wetland delineation
manual.
Ecology adopted rules for new
commercial geoduck
aquaculture.
The Legislature created a new
definition and policy for floating
homes permitted or legally
established prior to January 1,
2011.
The City does not have any
floating on -water residences,
nor does the SMP allow them
per SVMC 21.50.370.B.4.
SMP does not contain specific
steps or language for
appealing amendments, nor is
it required to.
The SMP, as well as the
Citywide critical areas
regulations in SVMC Chapter
21.40, Critical Areas, require
the use of the current
approved federal wetland
delineation manual.
There are no saltwater
shorelines in City limits.
Therefore, this legislative
amendment does not apply.
Not applicable. The City does
not have any floating homes,
nor does the SMP allow them
per SVMC 21.50.370.B.4.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
4
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Attachment A Periodic Review Checklist
Row
d.
a.
a.
Summary of change
The Legislature authorizing a new
option to classify existing
structures as conforming.
The Legislature adopted Growth
Management Act (GMA) —
Shoreline Management Act
(SMA) clarifications.
The Legislature created new
"relief' procedures for instances
in which a shoreline restoration
project within a UGA creates a
shift in Ordinary High -Water
Mark.
b. Ecology adopted a rule for
certifying wetland mitigation
banks.
c. The Legislature added moratoria
authority and procedures to the
SMA.
2007
a. The Legislature clarified options
for defining "floodway" as either
the area that has been
established in FEMA maps, or the
floodway criteria set in the SMA.
Review
The SMP does not classify
existing structures as
conforming, nor is it required
to. Maintenance and repair of
existing structures is allowed.
Alterations to existing
structures that do not
increase nonconformity are
also allowed under SVMC
21.50.150. B.4.
The SMP critical area
regulations in SVMC 21.50.460
through 21.50.560 do not
reflect the GMA - SMA
clarifications.
The SMP does not include or
reference the relief criteria or
procedures in WAC 173-27-
215.
The SMP, as well as the
Citywide critical areas
regulations in SVMC Chapter
21.40, Critical Areas, address
wetland mitigation banks.
SMP does not reference
moratoria authority. The City
can rely on statute for
moratoria authority and
procedures.
The Watershed Company
April 26, 2021
Action
No action necessary.
Update the SMP to reflect the
GMA — SMA clarifications.
Reference the relief criteria
and procedures in WAC 173-
27-215.
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
"Floodway" is not defined in No action necessary.
the SMP. However,
"floodway" is defined in SVMC
Appendix A consistent with
the FEMA definition.
ril
City of Spokane Valley SMP Periodic Review
Attachment A Periodic Review Checklist
Row Summary of change
Review
b. Ecology amended rules to clarify
The list of shoreline
that comprehensively updated
jurisdictional areas is located
SMPs shall include a list and map
under SVMC 21.50.020.13 and
of streams and lakes that are in
Appendix B, Figure 51 of the
shoreline jurisdiction.
adopted Comprehensive Plan
includes streams and lakes
within the shoreline
jurisdiction.
c. Ecology's rule listing statutory
This exemption is included at
exemptions from the
SVMC 21.50.110.0.
requirement for an SDP was
amended to include fish habitat
enhancement projects that
conform to the provisions of
RCW 77.55.181.
The Watershed Company
April 26, 2021
Action
No action necessary.
No action necessary.
1.1
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Chapter 4 - CHAPTER 21.50 - SHORELINE REGULATIONS
Article I. Shoreline Permits, Procedures, and Administration
21.50.010 Applicability, Shoreline Permits, and Exemptions
To be authorized, all uses and development activities in shorelines shall comply with the City of
Spokane Valley's (City) Shoreline Master Program (SMP) and the Shoreline Management Act
(SMA) pursuant to RCW 90.58.140(1). All regulations applied within the shoreline shall be
liberally construed to give full effect to the objectives and purposes for which they have been
enacted.
21.50.020 Applicability
A. The SMP shall apply to all shorelands, shorelines, and waters within the City that fall
under the jurisdiction of chapter 90.58 RCW. The Shoreline Designations Map is shown
in Appendix A. These include:
1. Lands extending 200 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of waters
that fall under the jurisdiction of chapter 90.58 RCW, in all directions as
measured on a horizontal plane;
2. Floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward 200 feet from such
floodways;
3. Critical areas within the shoreline and their associated buffer areas; and
4. Lakes that are subject to the provisions of the SMP, as may be amended.
B. Maps depicting the extent of shoreline jurisdiction and shoreline designations are for
guidance only. They are to be used in conjunction with best available science, field
investigations, and on -site surveys to accurately establish the location and extent of the
shoreline jurisdiction when a project is proposed. All areas meeting the definition of a
shoreline or a Shoreline of Statewide Significance, whether mapped or not, are subject
to the provisions of the SMP. Within the City, Shelley Lake is considered a Shoreline of
the State and is subject to the provisions of the SMP. The Spokane River is further
identified as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance.
C. The SMP shall apply to every person, individual, firm, partnership, association,
organization, corporation, local or state governmental agency, public or municipal
corporation, or other non-federal entity that develops, owns, leases, or administers
lands, critical areas, or waters that fall under the jurisdiction of the SMA.
D. -
N
Commented [ACI : Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2017c
E. Development may require a shoreline permit in addition to other approvals required from
the City, state, and federal agencies.
F. The SMP shall apply whether the proposed development or activity is exempt from a
shoreline permit or not.
G. Definitions relevant to the SMP are set forth in Appendix A-1. If any conflict occurs
between the definitions found in Appendix A-1, and Appendix A, the definition provided
in Appendix A-1 shall govern.
Pagc I of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
H. When the provisions set forth in SVMC 21.50 conflict with other provisions of the SMP or
with federal or state regulations, those which provide more substantive protection to the
shoreline shall apply.
21.50.030 Administrative Authority and Responsibility
A. The City Manager 4as-designated
horeline administrator, who shall carry out the
provisions of the SMP and who shall have the authority to act upon the following
matters:
1. Interpretation, enforcement, and administration of the SMP;
2. Modifications or revisions to approved shoreline permits as provided in the SMP;
and
3. Requests for Letters of Exemption.
B. The sifesteF shall ensure compliance with the provisions of the SMP for all
shoreline permits and approvals processed by the City pursuant to SVMC 21.50.100,
21.50.110, 21.50.130, and 21.50.140.
C. The 0irester shall document all project review actions in the shoreline
jurisdiction in order to periodically evaluate the cumulative effects of authorized
development on shoreline conditions, pursuant to WAC 173-26-191(2)(a)(iii)(D).
The Direstef shall consult with Ecology to ensure that any formal written
interpretations are consistent with the purpose and intent of chapter 90.58 RCW and the
applicable guidelines of chapter 173-26 and 173-27 WAC.
21.50.040 Types of Shoreline Permits
Developments and uses within the shoreline jurisdiction may be authorized through one or more
of the following:
A. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, pursuant to SVMC 21.50.100, for substantial
development.
B. Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to SVMC 21.50.130, for projects identified in
SVMC 21.50.190 or uses not specified in the SMP.
C. Letters of Exemption, pursuant to SVMC 21.50.120, for projects or activities meeting the
criteria of RCW 90.58.030(3)(e) and WAC 173-27-040(2).
D. Shoreline Variance, pursuant to SVMC 21.50.140.
21.50.050 Development Authorization Review Procedure
A. Complete development applications and appeals shall be processed pursuant to SVMC
17.80 Permit Processing Procedures, SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and with any specific
process requirements provided in SVMC 21.50 including:
1. Submittals;
2. Completeness review;
3. Notices;
Hearings;
Decisions; and
Appeals.
The following procedures shall also apply to development authorizations within the
shoreline jurisdiction:
Page 2 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
1. The public comment period for Shoreline Substantial Development Permits shall
be 30 days, pursuant to WAC 173-27-110.
2. The public comment period for limited utility extensions and shoreline
stabilization measures for bulkheads to protect a single-family residence and its
appurtenant structures shall be 20 days, pursuant to WAC 173-27-120.
3. For limited utility extensions and bulkheads for a single-family residence, a
decision shall be issued within 21 days from the last day of the comment period,
pursuant to WAC 173-27-120.
4. The effective date of a shoreline permit shall conform to WAC 173-27-090 and
shall be the latter of the permit date, or the date of final action on subsequent
appeals of the shoreline permit, if any, unless the Applicant notifies the shoreline
administrator of delays in other necessary construction permits.
5. The expiration dates for a shoreline permit pertaining to the start and completion
of construction, and the extension of deadlines for those dates shall conform to
WAC 173-27-090 and are:
a. Construction shall be started within two years of the effective date of the
shoreline permit;
b. Construction shall be completed within five years of the effective date of
the shoreline permit;
C. A single one-year extension of the deadlines may be granted at the
discretion of the D eGief ; and
d. The Pirester may set alternative permit expiration dates as a
condition of the shoreline permit if just cause exists.
6 The decision and the application materials shall be sent to Ecology after the local
decision and any local appeal procedures have been completed, pursuant to
WAC 173-27-130.
7. For Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, Ecology shall file the permit
without additional action pursuant to WAC 173-27-130.
8. For Shoreline Conditional Use permits and Variance decisions, Ecology shall
issue a decision within 30 days of the date of filing, pursuant to WAC 173-27-130
and WAC 173-27-200.
9. The appeal period to the Shorelines Hearings Board of an Ecology action shall
be 21 days from the date of filing
a. -for a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit_; er-the issue date
�Fafiaase: = decision
b. Fc: Per~ or Var,anice. the date that
Jelir iditional Use Permit or Variance is
C. :nultar,eousi.d !nailed ,
c i_ iiicnal Use Permit or'variance :o �oloov: the
-iun or : ie 31u .!i Use Perr is
FCOntn ---ted [AC2]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2017d
10. The Shorelines Hearings Board will follow the rules governing that body, _ — — ----
pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW.
C. Development applications shall be reviewed for conformance with SVMC 21.50.180
through 21.50.560.
Page 3 of82
City oJSpokanne Valley Shoreline Master Program
21.50.060 Authorization Decisions - Basis for Action
A. Approval or denial of any development or use within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be
based upon the following:
1. Danger to life and property that would likely occur as a result of the project;
2. Compatibility of the project with the critical area features on, adjacent to, or near
the property, shoreline values and ecological functions, and public access and
navigation;
3. Conformance with the applicable development standards in SVMC 21.50;
4. Requirements of other applicable local, state, or federal permits or
authorizations;
5. Adequacy of the information provided by the Applicant or available to the
1)ireGtOF:. ; and
6. Ability of the project to satisfy the purpose and intent of the SMP.
B. Based upon the project evaluation, the Direstef shall take one of the
following actions:
1. Approve the development or use;
2. Approve the development or use with conditions, pursuant to SVMC 21.50.070;
or
3. Deny the development or use.
C. The decision by the Mestef on the development or use shall include
written findings and conclusions stating the reasons upon which the decision is based.
21.50.070 Conditions of Approval
When approving any development or use, the Direster may impose conditions to:
A. Accomplish the purpose and intent of the SMP;
B. Eliminate or mitigate any negative impacts of the project on critical areas, and on
shoreline functions;
C. Restore important resource features that have been degraded or lost on the project site;
D. Protect designated critical areas and shoreline jurisdiction from damaging and
incompatible development; or
E. Ensure compliance with specific development standards in SVMC 21.50.
21.50.080 Prohibited Activities and Uses
The following activities and uses are prohibited in all shoreline designations and are not eligible
for a shoreline permit, including a Conditional Use or Shoreline Variance. See Table 21.50-1
and Table 21.50-2.
A. Uses not allowed in the underlying zoning district;
B. Discharge of solid wastes, liquid wastes, untreated effluents, or other potentially harmful
materials;
C. Solid waste or hazardous waste landfills;
D. Speculative fill;
Page 4 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Prograin
E. Dredging or dredge material disposal in wetlands;
F. Dredging or dredge material disposal to construct land canals or small basins for boat
moorage or launching, water ski landings, swimming holes, or other recreational
activities;
G. Commercial timber harvest or other forest practices;
H. Agriculture and aquaculture;
I. Non water -oriented Industrial Uses and Mining; and
J. The construction of breakwaters, jetties, groins, or weirs.
21.50.090 Minor Activities Allowed Without a Shoreline Permit or Letter of Exemption
The SMP applies to the following activities, however, they are allowed without a shoreline permit
or Letter of Exemption:
A. Maintenance of existing landscaping (including paths and trails) or gardens within the
shoreline, including a regulated critical area or its buffer. Examples include mowing
lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops, pruning, and planting of non-
invasive ornamental vegetation or indigenous native species to maintain the general
condition and extent of such areas. Removing trees and shrubs within a buffer is not
considered a maintenance activity. See SVMC 21.50.260 for regulations regarding
vegetation removal. Excavation, filling, and construction of new landscaping features
are not considered a maintenance activity and may require a shoreline permit or letter of
exemption.
B. Minor maintenance and/or repair of lawfully established structures that do not involve
additional construction, earthwork, or clearing. Examples include painting, trim or facing
replacement, re -roofing, etc. Construction or replacement of structural elements is not
covered in this provision, but may be covered under an exemption in SVMC
21.50.110(B).
C. Cleaning canals, ditches, drains, wasteways, etc. without expanding their original
configuration is not considered additional earthwork, as long as the cleared materials are
placed outside the shoreline jurisdiction, wetlands, and buffers.
D. Creation of unimproved private trails that do not cross streams or wetlands and which
are less than two feet wide and do not involve placement of fill or grubbing of vegetation.
E. Planting of native vegetation.
F. Noxious weed control outside of buffers pursuant to SVMC 21.50.110(M) except for area
wide vegetation removal/grubbing.
G. Noxious weed control within vegetative buffers, if the criteria listed below is met. Control
methods not meeting these criteria may still apply for a restoration exemption, or other
authorization as applicable:
1. Hand removal/spraying of individual plants only; and
2. No area -wide vegetation removal/grubbing.
Page 5 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
H. Pruning, thinning, or dead or hazardous tree removal pursuant to SVMC 21.50.260(C).
21.50.100 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Required
A. Classification Criteria - A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required for any
substantial development unless the use or development is specifically exempt pursuant
to SVMC 21.50.090 or 21.50.110.
B. Process - Shoreline Substantial Development Permits shall be processed as a Type II
review pursuant to SVMC 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures, subject to the
exceptions set forth in SVMC 21.50.050.
C. Decision Criteria - A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit may be issued when all
applicable requirements of the SMA, WAC 173-27, and the SMP have been met.
21.50.110 Exemptions from Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
The activities listed below I I are - - - COmmented [MD3]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2019a, 2M17.
exempt from the requirement to obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit--pursaaa4
These activities still require a letter of exemption and may require a
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, Shoreline Variance, or other development permits from the
City or other agencies.
If any part of a proposed development is not eligible for a Letter of Exemption, then a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit is required for the entire proposed development project.
Exemptions shall be construed narrowly. Only those developments that meet the precise terms
of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemptions from the Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit.
A. Any development of which the total cost or fair market value does not exceed
_ 554113 or as adjusted by the State Office of Financial Management, if such
development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or
Shorelines of the State. For purposes of determining whether or not a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit is required, the total cost or fair market value shall be
based on the value of development as defined in RCW 90.58.030(24(Gj. The total cost
or fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any
donated, contributed, or found labor, equipment, or materials.
B. Normal maintenance or repair of existing legally -established structures or developments,
including damage by accident, fire, or elements.
1. Normal maintenance includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or
cessation from a lawfully established condition.
2. Normal repair means to restore a development to a state comparable to its
original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration,
location, and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or
partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to the
shoreline resource or environment.
3. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where
such replacement is:
a. The common method of repair for the type of structure or development
and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the
original structure or development including but not limited to its size,
shape, configuration, location, and external appearance; and
Page 6 of 82
Commented [AC4]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2017a
Commented [AC5]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2017a
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
b. The replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline
resources or environment.
C. Construction of a normal protective bulkhead common to residential lots:
1. A normal protective bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural
developments installed at or near, and parallel to, the OHWM for the sole
purpose of protecting an existing residence and appurtenant structures from loss
or damage by erosion.
2. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if constructed for the purpose of
creating dry land. When a vertical or near vertical wall is being constructed or
reconstructed, not more than one cubic yard of fill per one foot of wall may be
used as backfill.
3. When an existing bulkhead is being repaired by construction of a vertical wall
fronting the existing wall, it shall be constructed no further waterward of the
existing bulkhead than is necessary for construction of new footings. When a
bulkhead has deteriorated such that an OHWM has been established by the
presence and action of water landward of the bulkhead then the replacement
bulkhead must be located at or near the actual OHWM.
4. Beach nourishment and bioengineered erosion control projects may be
considered a normal protective bulkhead when any structural elements are
consistent with the above requirements and when the project has been approved
by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW).
D. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements.
An "emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the
environment that requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full
compliance with Chapter 21.50.
1. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent
protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective
structures are deemed by the Director to be the appropriate means to address
the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation the new
structure shall be removed or any permit that would have been required, absent
an emergency, pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW, WAC 173-27, or the SMP, shall
be obtained.
2. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies and requirements
of chapter 90.58 RCW and the SMP. As a general matter, flooding or other
seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur but that are not imminent
are not an emergency.
E. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor
buoys.
F. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single-family
residence or appurtenance for their own use or for the use of their family, which
residence does not exceed a height of 35 feet above average grade level, and which
meets all requirements of the City, other than requirements imposed pursuant to chapter
90.58 RCW. Construction authorized under this subsection shall be located landward of
the OHWM.
G. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for
the private non-commercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single -
Page 7 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
family or multiple -family residence. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for
watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities, or other
appurtenances. This exception applies when the fair market value of the dock does not
exceed $2&996 ror dog:= -~ _ do.4s , -
-sser square roofac� _ ��'
as amende,i
oc .: 'ive vears of c.
the suLsea
C but subsequent P-e-nstruGtion hAViR9 a fair market value eXGeeding $
H. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or
other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an
irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including
return flow and artificially stored ground water from the irrigation of lands.
I. The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands, when such marking does
not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water.
J. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities
existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a
part of an agricultural drainage or diking system.
K. Any project with a State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council certification from the
governor pursuant to RCW 80.50,
L. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an
application for development authorization under this chapter, if:
1. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of surface waters;
2. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including
but not limited to fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic
values;
3. The activity does not involve the installation of any structure, and upon
completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are
restored to conditions existing before the activity; and
4. The Applicant first posts a performance surety acceptable to the City to ensure
that the site is restored to pre-existing conditions.
M. Removing or controlling aquatic noxious weeds, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through
the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control published
by the Department of Agriculture or Ecology jointly with other state agencies under RCW
43.21 C.
N. Watershed restoration projects as defined in WAC 173.27.040(2)(o). The Director shall
determine if the project is substantially consistent with the SMP and notify the Applicant
of such determination by letter.
Page 8 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
O. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish
passage as reviewed by WDFW and all of the following apply:
1. The project has been approved in writing by the WDFW;
2. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the WDFW pursuant to
chapter 77.55 RCW; and
3. The Director has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the SMP and
shall notify the Applicant of such determination by letter.
21.50.120 Letter of Exemption
A. The proponent of an activity exempt from a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
shall apply for a Letter of Exemption. All activities exempt from the requirement for a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall use reasonable methods to avoid
impacts to critical areas within the shoreline jurisdiction. Being exempt from the
requirements for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit does not give authority to
degrade a critical area, or shoreline, or ignore risk from natural hazards.
B. The Dwrpr#p Ishall review the Letter of Exemption request to verify
compliance with the SMP and shall approve or deny such Letter of Exemption.
C. If a Letter of Exemption is issued, it shall be sent to Ecology, the Applicant, and a copy
retained by the City.
D. A Letter of Exemption may contain conditions and/or mitigating conditions of approval to
achieve consistency and compliance with the provisions of the SMP and the SMA.
E. A denial of a Letter of Exemption shall be in writing and shall list the reason(s) for the
denial.
21.50.130 Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
A. Classification Criteria - Shoreline conditional uses are those uses within the shoreline
jurisdiction identified in Table 21.50-1 Shoreline Use Table, which require a Shoreline
Conditional Use Permit.
B. Unclassified uses not specifically identified in Table 21.50-1 may be authorized through
a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, provided the Applicant can demonstrate consistency
with the requirements of SVMC 21.50.
C. Process - A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be processed as a Type II review
pursuant to SVMC 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures. The Direster; -
shall be the final authority for the City, whose recommendation is then forwarded to
Ecology. Ecology shall have final approval authority pursuant to WAC 173-27-200.
D. Decision Criteria - The Difestef 's decision on a conditional use shall be
based upon the criteria set forth in SVMC 19.150.030 and 21.50.060 Conditions and
Requirements, together with the criteria established below. The Applicant shall
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the DirPcAnr : that the development meets
all of the following criteria:
1. The use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020;
2. The use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines;
3. The use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other permitted
uses in the area;
Page 9 of 82
Cily of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
The use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment
designation in which it is located; and
The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
E. Consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like
actions in the area. For example, if Shoreline Conditional Use Permits were granted for
other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist for similar uses and
impacts, the total cumulative effect 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.
The burden of proving that the project is consistent with the applicable criteria shall be
upon the Applicant.
21.50.140 Shoreline Variance
A. The purpose of a Shoreline Variance is to grant relief to specific bulk or dimensional
requirements set forth in SVMC 21.50 where extraordinary or unique circumstances
exist relating to the property such that the strict implementation of the standards would
impose unnecessary hardships on the Applicant, or thwart the policies set forth in the
SMA and the SMP.
B. When a development or use is proposed that does not meet requirements of the bulk,
dimensional, and/or performance standards of the SMP, such development may only be
authorized by approval of a Shoreline Variance, even if the development or use does not
require a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit.
C. Process - A Shoreline Variance shall be processed as a Type II review pursuant to
SVMC 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures. Each request for a Shoreline Variance
shall be considered separately and prior to any decision on a development application.
Any decision to approve or conditionally approve the development will include and
specifically cite only those variances approved for inclusion with the project.
D. When a Shoreline Variance is requested, the DiFeGtO I shall be the final
authority for the City. The DiFectar . ' 's determination shall be provided to
Ecology for review. Ecology shall have final approval authority of Shoreline Variances
pursuant to RCW 90.58.140(10).
E. Decision Criteria - To qualify for a Shoreline Variance, the following shall be required:
1. Demonstrate compliance with the criteria established in SVMC 21.50.060
Authorization Decisions - Basis for Action.
2. A Shoreline Variance request for a development or use located landward of the
OHWM, or landward of any wetland shall cite the specific standard or condition
from which relief is requested and be accompanied by evidence that
demonstrates the variance is consistent with all of the items below:
a. That the strict application of a standard precludes, or significantly
interferes with, reasonable use of the property;
b. That the hardship described in subsection (a) is specifically related to the
property, and is a result of unique natural or physical conditions, such as
irregular lot shape, size, or natural features which do not allow compliance
with the standard. The site constraint shall not be the result of a deed
Page 10 of 82
City c fSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
restriction, a lack of knowledge of requirements involved when the property
was acquired, or other actions resulting from the proponent's own actions;
C. The project is generally compatible with other permitted or authorized uses
in the project area, with uses planned for the area under the
Comprehensive Plan and the SMP, and will not cause adverse impacts to
the area;
d. The requested variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege
not enjoyed by other properties in the area, and the variance is the
minimum necessary to afford the requested relief; and
e. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
A Shoreline Variance request for a development or use located waterward of the
OHWM, or within any wetland shall cite the specific standard or condition from
which relief is requested and be accompanied by evidence that demonstrates the
variance is consistent with all of the items below:
a. That the strict application of a standard would preclude all reasonable use
of the property;
b. That the proposal is consistent with the criteria established under
subsection (2)(b) through (e) of this section; and
C. That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be
adversely affected.
In the granting of any Shoreline Variance, consideration shall be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for like variances in the area. For
example, if Shoreline 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 the SMA and SMP and shall not cause
substantial adverse impacts to the shoreline environment.
The burden of proving that a proposed variance meets the criteria of the SMP and WAC
173-27-170 shall be on the Applicant. Absence of such proof shall be a basis for denial
of the application.
21.50.150 Nonconforming Development
A. Classification Criteria — A use, structure, appurtenant structure, or lot is nonconforming if
it was legally established but is inconsistent with a subsequently adopted regulation or
regulations. Lawful uses, structures, appurtenant structures, and lots that are deemed
nonconforming are subject to the provision of this section.
Process and Decision Criteria
1. Decisions on projects that require review under this section shall be made
pursuant to SVMC 21.50.060 Authorization Decisions - Basis for Action and the
following criteria.
2. Legal nonconforming uses and structures shall be allowed to continue with no
additional requirements except as otherwise addressed in this section.
3. Nonconforming Uses.
a. Additional development of any property on which a nonconforming use
exists shall require that all new uses conform to the SMP.
b. Intensification or expansion of nonconforming uses that will not result in
an increase of nonconformity shall be allowed and will be processed
under these nonconforming provisions as a Type II review, pursuant to
SVMC Title 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures.
Page 11 of82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Master program
C. Change of ownership, tenancy, or management of a nonconforming use
shall not affect its nonconforming status provided that the use does not
change or intensify.
d. If a nonconforming use is converted to a conforming use, a
nonconforming use may not be resumed.
e. Conversion from one nonconforming use to another may only be
approved through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit pursuant to SVMC
21.50.130(E) if the following additional criteria are met:
i. The property is located within a residential or conservancy
shoreline environment;
ii. The replacement use is either of a similar intensity to the previous
nonconforming use, or is more conforming with the intent of the
applicable Shoreline Environment Policies; and
iii. The impacts to the shoreline ecological functions from the existing
use are reduced by changing the use.
f. When the operation of a nonconforming use is discontinued or
abandoned for a period of 12 consecutive months, the nonconforming use
rights shall expire and the future use of such property shall meet all
current applicable regulations of the SMP.
g. If a conforming building housing a nonconforming use is damaged, the
use may be resumed at the time the building is repaired, provided a
permit application for the restoration is received by the City within 12
months following said damage.
h. Normal maintenance and repair of a structure housing a nonconforming
use may be permitted provided all work is consistent with the provisions
of the SMP.
i. Legally established residences are considered conforming uses.
Nonconforming Structures.
a. A nonconforming structure may be maintained or repaired, provided such
improvements do not increase the nonconformity of such structure and
are consistent with the remaining provisions of the SMP.
b. Alterations to legal nonconforming structures that:
i. Will result in an increase of nonconformity to the structures,
including expanding within the buffer, may be allowed under a
Shoreline Variance pursuant to SVMC 21.50.140; or
ii Do not increase the existing nonconformity and will otherwise
conform to all other provisions of SVMC 21.50 are allowed without
additional review.
C. A nonconforming structure that is moved any distance within the shoreline
jurisdiction shall be brought into conformance with the SMP.
d. A damaged nonconforming structure may be reconstructed or replaced,
regardless of the amount of damage if:
i. The rebuilt structure or portion of structure does not expand or
modify the original footprint or height of the damaged structure
unless:
(1). The expansion or modification does not increase
the degree of nonconformity with the current
regulations; and
(2). The reconstructed or restored structure will not
cause additional adverse effects to adjacent
properties or the shoreline environment;
Page 12 oj82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
ii. It is not relocated except to increase conformity or to increase
ecological function, in which case the structure shall be located in
the least environmentally damaging location possible;
iii. The permit application to restore the development is made within
12 months of the date the damage occurred; and
iv. Any residential structures, including multi -family structures, may
be reconstructed up to the size, placement, and density that
existed prior to the damage, so long as other provisions of the
SMP are met.
Nonconforming Lots. Legally established nonconforming, undeveloped lots
located landward of the OHWM are buildable, provided that all new structures or
additions to structures on any nonconforming lot must meet all setback, height,
and other construction requirements of the SMP and the SMA.
21.50.160 Minor Revisions to Approved Uses or Developments
A. Classification Criteria - Minor revisions to a project that have been approved under a
shoreline permit are allowed in certain circumstances.
1. Changes that are not substantive are not required to obtain a revision and may
be allowed as part of the original shoreline permit. Examples include, but are not
limited to, minor changes in facility orientation or location, minor changes in
structural design that do not change the height or increase ground floor area, and
minor accessory structures such as equipment covers or small sheds near the
main structure.
2. Substantive changes are those that materially alter the project in a manner that
relates to its conformance with the shoreline permit and SMP requirements.
Such changes may be approved as a minor revision if:
a. The Direster determines that the proposed revision and all
previous revisions are within the scope and intent of the original shoreline
permit;
b. The use authorized with the original shoreline permit does not change;
C. The project revision does not cause additional significant adverse
environmental impacts;
d. No new structures are proposed; and
e. The criteria in SVMC 21.50.160(A)(3) are met.
3. Substantive changes shall comply with the following to be approved as a minor
revision:
a. No additional over -water construction shall be involved, except that pier,
dock, or swimming float construction may be increased by 10 percent
from the provisions of the original shoreline permit;
b. Lot coverage and height approved with the original shoreline permit may
be increased a maximum of 10 percent if the proposed revisions do not
exceed the requirements for height or lot coverage pursuant to SVMC
21.50.220 Dimensional Standards and SVMC Title 19 Zoning
Regulations; and
C. Landscaping may be added to a project without necessitating an
application for a new shoreline permit if the landscaping is consistent with
permit conditions (if any) and SVMC 21.50.
Substantive changes which cannot meet these requirements shall require a new
shoreline permit. Any additional shoreline permit shall be processed under the
applicable terms of this chapter.
Page 13 oj82
CUy ojSpokane !Valley Shoreline Master Program
Process - Requests for minor revisions to existing shoreline permits shall be processed
as a Type I review, pursuant to SVMC Title 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures.
Parties of record to the original shoreline permit shall be notified of the request for
revision, although a comment period is not required. A minor revision for a project within
shoreline jurisdiction shall follow state filing, appeal, and approval standards pursuant to
WAC 173-27-100 Revisions to Permits.
C. Decision Criteria - Decisions on minor revisions shall be pursuant to SVMC 21.50.060
Authorization Decisions — Basis for Action.
21.50.170 Enforcement
A. Enforcement of the SMP, including the provisions of SVMC 21.50, shall be pursuant to
SVMC 17.100. Nothing herein or within SVMC 17.100 shall be construed to require
enforcement of the SMP and SVMC 21.50 in a particular manner or to restrict the
discretion of the Direstef in determining how and when to enforce the SMP
and SVMC 21.50; provided all enforcement shall be consistent with the policies of the
SMP and SVMC 21.50.
B. Upon a determination that a violation of the SMP, including SVMC 21.50, has occurred,
no further development may be authorized unless and until compliance with any
applicable shoreline and development permit or process conditions and requirements of
SVMC 21.50 have been achieved to the satisfaction of the Direstar
C. For violations affecting a critical area, the party(s) responsible for the violation and the
owner shall meet the following minimum performance standards to achieve the
restoration requirements, as applicable:
1. A restoration plan shall be prepared and address the following:
a. Restoration of historical structural and functional values, including water
quality and habitat functions;
b. Ensure that replacement soils will be viable for planting and will not create
a less fertile growing conditions;
C. Replacement of native vegetation within the critical area, and buffers with
native vegetation that replicates the vegetation historically found on the
site in species types, sizes, and densities;
d. Replication of the historic functions and values at the location of the
alteration;
e. Annual performance monitoring reports demonstrating compliance with
mitigation plan requirements shall be submitted for a minimum two-year
period; and
f. As -built drawings and other information demonstrating compliance with
other applicable provisions of the SMP shall be submitted.
2. The following additional performance standards shall be met for restoration of
frequently flooded areas and geological hazards and be included in the
restoration plan:
a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the pre -
development hazard;
b. Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated;
and
C. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation
sufficient to minimize the hazard.
Page 14 of81
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
The Direste. may, at the violator's expense, consult with a Qualified
Professional to determine if the plan meets the requirements of the SMP.
Inadequate plans shall be returned to the violator for revision and resubmittal.
Article II. Shoreline Regulations
21.50.180 General provisions
A. General Regulations.
1. Regulations in SVMC 21.50.180 through 21.50.290 are in addition to the specific
use regulations in SVMC 21.50.300 through 21.50.450 and other adopted rules,
including but not limited to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, the Spokane
Valley Comprehensive Plan, the Spokane Valley Street Standards, and the
Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual, as adopted or amended.
2. All permitted and exempt projects within the shoreline jurisdiction shall ensure
that the no net loss of ecological functions standard is met. SVMC 21.50.210 No
Net Loss and Mitigation Sequencing and SVMC 21.50.260 Shoreline Vegetation
Conservation contain appropriate methods to achieve no net loss of shoreline
ecological function. The City may also condition project dimensions, location of
project components on the site, intensity of use, screening, parking requirements,
and setbacks, as deemed appropriate.
3. All shoreline uses and modifications shall obtain all necessary permits from the
appropriate local, state, and federal agencies and shall operate in compliance
with all permit requirements.
4. Deviations from regulations may be granted through a Shoreline Variance, which
requires approval by both the City and Ecology. Shoreline modifications listed in
Table 21.50-2 as "prohibited" are not eligible for consideration as a Shoreline
Variance.
5. New projects, including the subdivision of land and related construction of single-
family residences, are prohibited when the use or development requires
structural flood hazard reduction or other structural stabilization measures within
the shoreline to support the proposed or future development.
6. When a proposal contains two or more use activities, including accessory uses,
the most restrictive use category shall apply to the entire proposal.
7. Structures, uses, and activities shall be designed and managed to minimize
blocking, reducing, or adversely interfering with the public's visual access to the
water and the shorelines from public lands which are within the shoreline
jurisdiction and excluding public roads.
8. Structures and sites shall be designed with landscaping, vegetated buffers,
exterior materials, and lighting that are aesthetically compatible with the shoreline
environment.
9. When a study is required to comply with SVMC 21.50, it shall be performed by
Qualified Professional registered in the State of Washington.
10. All clearing and grading activities shall comply with SVMC 24.50 Land Disturbing
Activities. Adherence to the following is required during project construction:
a. Materials adequate to immediately correct emergency erosion situations
shall be maintained on site;
b. All debris, overburden, and other waste materials from construction shall
be disposed of in such a manner so as to prevent their entry into a water
body. Such materials from construction shall not be stored or disposed of
on or adjacent to Shorelines of the State;
Page 15 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
The shoreline buffer shall be clearly marked on the ground prior to and
during construction activities to avoid impacts to the buffer; and
Infrastructure used in, on, or over the water shall be constructed using
materials that do not contaminate the water or interfere with navigation.
The City may consult with agencies with expertise or jurisdiction over the resources
during the review of any permit or process to assist with analysis and identification of
appropriate performance measures that adequately safeguard shoreline and critical
areas.
C. The Direster may consult with a Qualified Professional to review a critical
areas report when City staff lack the resources or expertise to review these materials.
The City may require the Applicant to pay for or reimburse the City for the consultant
fees.
21.50.190 Shoreline Uses Table
A. Uses and activities are categorized within each shoreline environment as allowed,
permitted, conditional use, or prohibited, as defined in this section. This priority system
determines the applicable permit or process, administrative requirements, and allows
activities that are compatible with each shoreline designation. Procedures and criteria
for obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Letter of Exemption,
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, and Shoreline Variance are set forth in SVMC
21.50.040. These uses shall also meet the requirements of SVMC Title 19 Zoning
Regulations.
The following terms shall be used in conjunction with Shoreline Use and Modification
Tables provided in SVMC 21.50.190 and SVMC 21.50.200.
Allowed Use: These are uses that are exempt from the shoreline permit review process
and do not require submittal of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit or
Letter of Exemption application. Projects or uses shall be reviewed to ensure
that all requirements contained in SVMC 21.50 are met. Building permit
applications or site plans are the general method of review.
Permitted Use: These are uses which are preferable and meet the policies of the
particular shoreline environment designation. They require submittal of a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit or a Letter of Exemption application.
An exemption is subject to an administrative approval process; a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit requires public notice, comment periods, and
filing with Ecology.
Conditional Use: A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is intended to allow for flexibility
and the exercise of judgment in the application of regulations in a manner
consistent with the policies of the SMA and the SMP.
Prohibited: These are uses which are viewed as inconsistent with the definition, policies,
or intent of the shoreline environmental designation. For the purposes of the
SMP, these uses are considered inappropriate and are not authorized under any
permit or process.
Table 21.50-1 - Shoreline Uses, below, shall be used to determine the permit or process
required for specific shoreline uses and activities within the shoreline jurisdiction.
Page 16 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
Tahle 91 An-1 - Shnrclinc 11—
m
is
'p
-p
f0
f0
N
V1
p
C
U
o
Uu'
Ea
c
= t
m
o`c.
f°
orr
m
mal
SHORELINE USES
m l
U) l
>
> 1
a
Agricultural Activities
A uaculture
Boating Facilities (Including
launches, ramps, public/commercial
docks, and private docks serving more
than four residences)
N/A
P
C
'
Commercial Use
Water -dependent
Pz
P2
C
Water -related and water -enjoyment
P2
P2
C
Non water -oriented
P2,3
Forest Practices
Industrial Use
Water -dependent
P
C
Water -related and water -enjoyment
P
Non water -oriented
P3
In -stream Structures
As part of a fish habitat
enhancement project
N/A
P
P
P
P
Other
N/A
P
P
P
Mining
Parking Facilities
Asa prims use
As an accesso /seconds use
P
P
P
C
Recreational Use
Water -dependent
P
P
P
P
P
Water -related and water -enjoyment
P
P
P
P
P
Non water -oriented
P
P
P
C"
C
Trails and walkways
P
P
P
C5
P
Residential Use
Single-family
A
A
A
A
Single-family residential
accessory uses and structures
A
A
A
A
Multi -family
P
P
P
Private docks serving one to four
single-family residences
N/A
P
P
P
Accessory Dwelling Units
R _
R ,
'Q
R.-
Transportation Facilities
Page 17 of 81
Commented [AC6]: Gap Analysis, Table 3-1, N1
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline A4aster Program
New circulation routes related to
permitted shoreline activities
P
P
C
C
Expansion of existing
circulations stems
P
P
P
P
New, reconstructed, or maintenance of
bridges, trail, or rail crossings
P
P
P
P
P
Public Facilities and Utilities
Public facilities
C
C
C
C
Utilities and utility crossings
C
C
C
C
C
Routine maintenance of existing
utility corridor and infrastructure
A6
A6
A6
P7
A6
KEY: A= Allowed N= rermittea u= conamonai use CfianK= rruniuneu rvir,- iIIur
Applicable
Notes:
For Boating Facilities within the aquatic environment, the adjacent upland environment as set
forth on the City Environment Designation Map shall govern (i.e., if the aquatic environment is
adjacent to Shoreline Residential - Waterfront designated shorelines, the use would be
permitted).
2 Commercial uses are allowed in the Shoreline Residential - Upland, Shoreline Residential -
Waterfront and Urban Conservancy Environments only if the underlying zoning of the property is
Mixed Use Center.
3 Permitted only if the applicable criteria in SVMC 21.50.320(B)(1) or 21.50.330(B)(1) are met.
"Non water -oriented recreation uses are prohibited in Urban Conservation - High Quality
Shorelines except limited public uses that have minimal or low impact on shoreline ecological
functions, such as the Centennial Trail and appropriately -scaled day use areas which may be
allowed through a Conditional Use Permit.
5 Modifications, improvements, or additions to the Centennial Trail are permitted in the Urban
Conservancy - High Quality Environment.
6 A Letter of Exemption is required if the maintenance activity involves any ground disturbing
activity.
7A Letter of Exemption is required.
21.50.200 Shoreline Modification Activities Table
Table 21.50-2, Shoreline Modification Activities, below, shall be used to determine whether a
specific shoreline modification is allowed in a shoreline environment. Shoreline modifications may
be permitted, approved as a conditional use, or prohibited, pursuant to SVMC 21.50.190.
Shoreline modifications shall also meet the requirements of SVMC Title 19 Zoning Regulations.
Page 18 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Table 21.50-2: Shoreline Modifiratinn Artivitiac
m
m
d
y
c
c
o
N
;0
(n
M
�
R
it a
N
fY
a) F+
Q' C
N
U)
(D t'
En f6
ca
O
C
C
c
Y
U
UU'
L
L)
SHORELINE MODIFICATION
N@
00 �
a)C
= 3
0
C
.01
p
ACTIVITY
to i
i
>
> i
Shoreline/Slope Stabilization
Structural, such as bulkheads
P
P
Nonstructural, such as soil
bioen ineerin
P
P
P
'
Piers and Docks
Piers
N/A
P
C
Viewing Platforms
P
P
P
Docks
N/A
P
C
'
Dredging and Fill
Dredging
C
C
C
C
Fill
C
C
C
C
Shoreline Habitat and Natural
Systems Enhancement Projects
P
P
P
P
P
Groins and Weirs
N/A
C
C
C
r%tr: i— rermittea c= uonaitionai use blank= Prohibited N/A= Not Applicable
' For these uses within the aquatic environment, the adjacent upland environment as set forth
on the Environment Designation Map shall govern (i.e., if the aquatic environment is adjacent to
Shoreline Residential - Waterfront designated shorelines, "hard" shoreline stabilization
measures would be allowed by Shoreline Substantial Development Permit).
21.50.210 No Net Loss and Mitigation Sequencing
A. Applicability. This section applies to all shoreline activities, uses, development, and
modifications, including those that are exempt from a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit.
Standards.
1. All projects shall result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. The
requirement for no net loss may be met through project design, construction, and
operations. Additionally, this standard may be achieved by following the
mitigation sequencing pursuant to SVMC 21.50.210(B)(4) and SVMC 21.50.260
Shoreline Vegetation Conservation. The City may condition project dimensions,
location of project components on the site, intensity of use, screening, parking
requirements, and setbacks, as deemed appropriate to achieve no net loss of
shoreline ecological function.
2. Required mitigation shall not exceed the level necessary to ensure that the
proposed use or development will ensure no net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
Page 19 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Mitigation sequencing pursuant to SVMC 21.50.210(B)(4) is required when
specified in these regulations or for projects that:
a. Involve shoreline modifications;
b. Request a buffer or setback reduction pursuant to SVMC 21.50.230
Shoreline Buffers and Building Setbacks;
C. Are located within a wetland or its buffer; or
d. Will have significant probable adverse environmental impacts that must
be avoided or mitigated.
Mitigation measures shall be applied in the following order:
a. Avoid the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action;
b. Minimize impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology;
C. Rectify the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment;
d. Reduce or eliminate the impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations;
e. Compensate for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing
substitute resources or environments; and
f. Monitor the impact and the compensation projects and take appropriate
corrective measures, as needed.
21.50.220 Height Limit Standards
A. Applicability. This section applies to all new or redeveloped primary and residential
accessory structures.
Standards.
1. The maximum height limit for all new or redeveloped primary structures shall be
35 feet.
2. The maximum height limit for single-family residential accessory or appurtenant
structures shall be 25 feet.
3. These height limit standards may be altered through a Shoreline Variance
pursuant to SVMC 21.50.140.
21.50.230 Shoreline Buffers and Building Setbacks
A. Applicability. This section applies to all new construction, new and expanded uses, and
modifications. Shoreline buffers are shown on the City Shoreline Buffer Map in
Appendix A-2 Shoreline Buffers.
Standards.
1. Unless otherwise specified in SVMC 21.50, buffers shall be maintained in
predominantly natural, undisturbed, undeveloped, and vegetated condition.
2. The shoreline buffer shall be clearly marked on the ground prior to and during
construction activities to avoid impacts to the buffer.
3. Shoreline buffers for new and expanded uses may be reduced up to 25 percent
by the 9iresteF_ - if the buffer widths have not been reduced or
modified by any other prior action and one or more of the following conditions
apply:
a. Adherence of the buffer width would not allow reasonable use;
b. The buffer contains variations in sensitivity to ecological impacts due to
existing physical characteristics; i.e. the buffer varies in slope, soils, or
Page 20 of 82
City afSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
vegetation. This shall be supported by a Habitat Management Plan
developed in conformance with SVMC 21.50.540( E—)(_2)_; or
C. Where shoreline restoration is proposed consistent with the City's
Restoration Plan.
Building Setback from the shoreline buffer shall be as shown in Table 21.50-3:
Table 21.50-3 Buffer Building Setharkc
Environment
Urban
Urban
Shoreline
Shoreline
Conservancy
Conservancy —
Residential -
Residential -
High Quality
Upland
Waterfront
Setback
10 foot
15 foot
0 foot'
0 foot'
A 15-toot building setback trom the shoreline buffer shall be required for any
subdivision, binding site plan, or planned residential development in the
Shoreline Residential — Upland and Shoreline Residential — Waterfront
designations.
Front, rear, and side setbacks and lot coverage shall conform to the
SVMC Title 19, Zoning Regulations.
21.50.240 Flood Hazard Reduction
A. Applicability. This section applies to development proposals:
1. Intended to reduce flood damage or hazard;
2. To construct temporary or permanent shoreline modifications or structures within
the regulated floodplains or floodways; or
3. That may increase flood hazards.
Standards.
1. All proposals shall conform to SVMC 21.30 Floodplain Regulation, SVMC
21.50.340, In -stream Structures and SVMC 21.50.410 Shoreline Modifications.
2. The following uses and activities may be allowed within the floodplain or
floodway:
a. Actions or projects that protect or restore the ecosystem -wide processes
and/or ecological functions;
b. New bridges, utility lines, and other public utility and transportation
structures, with appropriate mitigation, where no other feasible alternative
exists;
C. Repair and maintenance of an existing legal structure, utility corridor, or
transportation structure, provided that such actions do not increase flood
hazards to other uses;
d. Modifications, expansions, or additions to an existing legal use; and
e. Measures to reduce shoreline erosion.
3. Natural in -stream features such as snags, uprooted trees, or stumps shall be left
in place unless an engineered assessment demonstrates that they are causing
bank erosion or higher flood stages.
21.50.250 Public Access
A. Applicability. This section applies to all new projects by public and private entities.
Standards.
Page 21 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
1. Public access shall be consistent with the City's SMP Public Access Plan.
2. Public access may only be required as a condition of approval of a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit or Conditional Use Permit to the extent allowed
by law and in a manner consistent with the City's Public Access Plan, and only in
the following circumstances:
a. The use or development is a public project; or
b. The project is a private use or development and one of the following
conditions exists:
i. The project impacts, interferes with, blocks, discourages, or
eliminates existing access;
ii. The project increases or creates demand for public access that is
not met by existing opportunities or facilities; or
iii. The project impacts or interferes with public use of waters subject
to the Public Trust Doctrine.
3. Public access shall not be required for activities qualifying for a letter of
exemption or new single-family residential development of four or fewer units.
4. All developments, including shoreline permits or letter of exemption applications,
which require or propose public access shall include a narrative that identifies:
a. Impacts to existing access, including encroachment, increased traffic, and
added populations;
b. The access needs of the development consistent with those described for
similar projects in the Public Access Plan, Section Four; and
C. The proposed location, type, and size of the public access.
5. When public access is required pursuant to SVMC 21.50.250(B)(2)(b), the City
shall impose permit conditions requiring public access that are roughly
proportional to the impacts caused or the demand created by the proposed use
or development.
6. Prior to requiring public access as a condition of approval of any shoreline permit
or letter of exemption pursuant to SVMC 21.50.250(B)(2)(b), the Directef
shall determine and make written findings of fact stating that the use or
development satisfies any of the conditions in SVMC 21.50.250(B)(2)(b) and that
any public access required is roughly proportional to the impacts caused or the
demand created by the proposed use or development.
7. When public access is required or proposed, the following shall apply:
a. Mitigation sequencing shall be required to mitigate adverse impacts
resulting from the public access.
b. Visual access to the shoreline may be established if any vegetation
removal is pursuant to SVMC 21.50.260 Shoreline Vegetation
Conservation.
C. Public access sites shall be connected to the nearest public street or
other public access point.
d. Future trails on private property, including trail extensions and new
access points, shall incorporate enhancement and restoration measures
and be contained within a recorded easement.
e. Required public access sites shall be fully developed and available for
public use at the time of occupancy or use of the project or activity.
f. Public and private entities may establish user regulations, including hours
of operation, usage by animals or motorized vehicles, and prohibited
activities, such as camping, open fires, or skateboarding. Such
restrictions may be approved by the Director-ity Pvianaaer as part of the
permit review process.
Page 22 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Public access improvements shall include provisions for disabled and
physically impaired persons where reasonably feasible.
Signage associated with public access shall be pursuant to SVMC
21.50.380 Signs and Outdoor Lighting, and SVMC 22.110 Sign
Regulations.
21.50.260 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation
A. Applicability. Vegetation conservation measures are required for all projects that
propose vegetation removal.
Standards.
1. A vegetation management plan shall be submitted for projects that propose to
remove either of the following within the shoreline jurisdiction:
a. One or more mature native trees greater than 12 inches in diameter at
chest height; or
b. More than 10 square feet of native shrubs and/or native ground cover at
any one time by clearing, grading, cutting, burning, chemical means, or
other activities.
2. When required, a vegetation management plan shall contain the following:
a. A site plan showing:
i. The distribution of existing plant communities in the area proposed
for clearing and/or grading;
ii. Areas to be preserved;
iii. Areas to be cleared; and
iv. Trees to be removed.
b. A description of the vegetative condition of the site that addresses the
following:
i. Plant species;
ii. Plant density;
iii. Any natural or man-made disturbances;
iv. Overhanging vegetation;
V. The functions served by the existing plant community (e.g., fish
and wildlife habitat values, slope stabilization); and
vi. The presence and distribution of noxious weeds.
C. A landscape plan showing:
i. Proposed landscaping, including the species, distribution, and
density of plants; the plan should be pursuant to SVMC
21.50.260(B)(3)(b), if applicable; and
ii. Any pathways or non -vegetated portions, and the materials
proposed.
3. Projects that propose to remove native vegetation within a shoreline buffer shall
meet the following standards:
a. The Applicant must demonstrate to the DireGtG 's
satisfaction that the proposed vegetation removal is consistent with
SVMC 21.50.210 No Net Loss and Mitigation Sequencing, and that
avoidance is not feasible;
b. Vegetation shall be replaced per the following:
i. 1:1 area ratio for herbaceous vegetation;
ii. 2:1 stem ratio for shrubs and saplings; and
Page 23 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
iii. 3:1 ratio for trees greater than 12 inches diameter at breast height
or 2:1 ratio if tree stock is five years old or greater. For native
trees greater than 16 inches diameter at breast height,
replacement tree stock shall be at least five years old;
c. All removed native plants shall be replaced with native vegetation;
removed ornamental plants may be replaced with similar species;
J. Applicant shall submit a vegetation management plan consistent with
SVMC 21.50.260(B)(2) that demonstrates compliance with the standards
of SVMC 21.50.260(B)(3); and
Projects that propose a pathway or trail in the shoreline buffer shall meet
the additional following standards:
i. Pathways and trails that are roughly parallel to the OHWM may be
allowed if:
(1) It is a public non -motorized multi -use equestrian or
pedestrian/bike trail;
(2) It is located at the landward edge of the shoreline buffer
with the following exceptions:
(a) When physical constraints, public safety concerns,
or public ownership limitations merit otherwise; or
(b) When the trail will make use of an existing
constructed grade such as those formed by an
abandoned rail grade, road, or utility.
ii. Pathways, trails, and river crossings that are perpendicular to the
water, and lead to the OHWM, shall be sited in a location that has
the least impact to shoreline ecological functions with mitigation
sequencing pursuant to SVMC 21.50.210. Previously altered or
disturbed locations shall be preferred.
iii. All pathways and trails shall be located, constructed, and
maintained so as to avoid, to the maximum extent possible,
removal and other impacts to perennial native vegetation,
including trees, standing snags, forbs, grasses, and shrubs,
consistent with the vegetation management plan.
iv. Alternatives to impervious paving should be considered and are
encouraged.
V. Total trail width, inclusive of shoulders, shall be the minimum
width necessary to achieve the intended use and shall not exceed
14 feet.
vi. Disturbed areas (outside of the designated trail and trail
shoulders) shall be re -vegetated with native vegetation consistent
with the vegetation management plan.
vii. Public, non -motorized multi -use equestrian pedestrian/bike trails
shall only be allowed in the shoreline buffer for the Urban
Conservancy -High Quality environment designation to connect to
or from (in phases or otherwise) an existing regional multi -use
non -motorized trail and only pursuant to SVMC 21.50.260(B).
viii. Encroachments in the buffer allowed by the exceptions listed
above shall be the minimum necessary to provide for the
permitted use.
A performance surety may be required as a condition of shoreline permit
approval to ensure compliance with the SMP. The performance surety shall be
Page 24 of 82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
substantially in the same form and for the same coverage as provided for in the
City's Street Standards as adopted or amended.
Projects that require a critical areas report pursuant to SVMC 21.50.490 shall
incorporate any specific vegetation conservation measures identified in the
critical areas reports for the identified critical areas. Any application of
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, or other chemicals proposed in conjunction with
the vegetation removal or management activities shall be addressed by the
report.
C. Minor vegetation conservation activities allowed without a shoreline permit or letter of
exemption.
1. Pruning and thinning of trees or vegetation on public or private land for
maintenance, safety, forest health, and view protection if the criteria listed below
are met:
a. No native vegetation is removed, including thinning;
b. Pruning of native vegetation shall not exceed 30 percent of a tree's limbs.
Tree topping shall not occur;
C. Native shrubs shall not be pruned to a height less than six feet;
d. Pruning any vegetation waterward of the OHWM is prohibited; and
e. Pruning of any vegetation and thinning activities associated with non-
native plants shall ensure the continued survival of vegetation.
Whenever possible, pruning and thinning activities conducted to maintain or
create views shall be limited to areas dominated with non-native vegetation and
invasive species. Pruning and thinning on public land to establish a view for
adjacent properties shall be prohibited unless written approval from the
Washington State Parks Riverside Area Manager is given.
2. Pruning and thinning within a utility corridor by the utility service provider of both
native and non-native trees and vegetation shall be allowed when the following
criteria are met:
a. Reasonable measures to reduce the adverse effects of the activity are
implemented; and
b. No net loss of buffer functions and values occur.
Dead or hazardous trees within the shoreline buffer that pose a threat to public
safety or a risk of damage to private or public property may be removed if a letter
from a certified arborist or Qualified Professional is submitted that confirms the
tree is dead or is hazardous and includes:
a. Removal techniques;
b. Procedures for protecting the surrounding area; and
C. Replacement of native trees, if applicable. Where possible, hazard trees
within the shoreline buffer shall be turned into snags.
21.50.270 Water Quality, Stormwater, and Non -Point Pollution
A. Applicability. This section applies to all projects that add any pollution -generating
impervious surfaces. This standard supersedes the regulatory threshold specified in the
Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual, which is applicable outside the shoreline
jurisdiction.
B. Regulations.
1. All activities shall comply with the SVMC 22.150 Stormwater Management
Regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency's Underground Injection
Page 25 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Masser Program
Control program, the Eastern Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
requirements, applicable total maximum daily loads laws and regulations, and
other water cleanup plans.
Use of chemicals for commercial or industrial activities shall be pursuant to
SVMC 21.50.530(C).
Herbicides, fungicides, fertilizers, and pesticides shall not be applied within 25
feet of a water body, except by a Qualified Professional in accordance with state
and federal laws.
21.50.280 Archaeological and Historic Resources
A. Applicability. This section applies to:
1. Projects with archaeological and historic resources on site that are either
recorded at the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic
Preservation (DAHP), or Spokane County;
2. Projects where archaeological and historical resources have been inadvertently
uncovered; or
3. Permit applications that contain a ground -disturbing component.
Standards.
1. Archaeological sites are subject to chapter 27.44 RCW Indian Graves and
Records and chapter 27.53 RCW Archaeological Sites and Records.
Development or uses that may impact such sites shall comply with WAC 25-48
as well as the regulations of this section.
2. A cultural resources site survey or assessment prepared by a Qualified
Professional is required for all shoreline permit applications that contain a
ground -disturbing component if the proposal meets the criteria below, which may
be determined through review of Spokane County and/or DAHP resources:
a. The project is on property known to contain archaeological, historic, or
cultural resources; or
b. The project is in an area mapped as having the potential for the presence
of archaeological, historic, or cultural resources.
3. When required, the cultural resources site survey or assessment shall:
a. Use standard procedures and methods to assess the potential for
presence of archaeological, historic, or cultural resources that could be
impacted by the project;
b. Provide appropriate recommendations for protecting and preserving the
archaeological, historical, or cultural resources;
C. Make an inventory of buildings or structures over 50 years in age located
within the project area in a DAHP Historic Property Inventory Database
entry; and
d. Record archaeological sites located within the project area on DAHP
Archaeological Site Inventory Forms.
4. When required, the cultural resources site survey or assessment shall be
circulated to DAHP and affected tribe(s). The Direster ,- shall
consider comments from DAHP and affected tribe(s) prior to approval of the
survey or assessment. Based on the cultural resources site survey or
assessment, the application may be conditioned to ensure that such resources
are protected.
5. If archaeological, historic, or cultural resources are inadvertently discovered or
uncovered during excavation, the Applicant shall immediately stop work on that
portion of the project site and notify the City. The Applicant may be required to
Page 26 of82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
prepare a cultural resources site survey or assessment pursuant to SVMC
21.50.280(B)(3), after coordinating with DAHP.
21.50.290 Gravel Pits
A. Applicability. This section applies to existing and active gravel pit operations including
but not limited to known gravel pits located at 2010 North Sullivan Road and 220 North
Thierman Road.
B. Standards. Active gravel pits are not regulated as Shorelines of the State until
reclamation is complete and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources
terminates the Surface Mine Reclamation Permit. Proposed subsequent use of mined
property shall be consistent with the provisions of the Urban Conservancy Environment
unless a different environmental designation is established through an amendment
pursuant to WAC 173-26-201.
21.50.300 Specific Shoreline Use Regulations
Applicability. The regulations in SVMC 21.50.300 through 21.50.450 apply to specific common
uses and types of development to the extent they occur within the shoreline jurisdiction.
21.50.310 Boating Facilities
A. Applicability. This section applies to new and existing boating facilities.
Standards.
1. Boating facilities shall:
a. Be allowed only for water -dependent uses or for public access;
b. Be limited to the minimum size and height necessary to achieve the
intended purpose of the facility; and
C. Incorporate measures for cleanup of accidental spills of contaminants.
2. Public boating facilities shall be located only at sites identified in the Public
Access Plan.
3. All new boating facilities shall incorporate public access when required by the
Public Access Plan and SVMC 21.50.250 herein.
4. New launch ramps shall be approved only if public access is provided to public
waters which are not adequately served by existing access facilities because of
location or capacity. Documentation of need shall be required from the Applicant
prior to approval pursuant to SVMC 21.50.250 Public Access.
5. Existing boating facilities may be maintained and repaired pursuant to SVMC
21.50, provided the size is not increased.
6. In addition to the regulations above, boating facilities shall comply with SVMC
21.50.320 Commercial Use, SMVC 21.50.360 Recreational Development and
Use, and SVMC 21.50.430 Piers and Docks, as applicable.
21.50.320 Commercial Use
A. Applicability. This section applies to all commercial uses.
Standards.
1. New non water -oriented commercial uses shall be prohibited, except within the
Urban Conservancy Environment, where such uses may be permitted if:
Page 27 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
a. The use is part of a mixed -use project that includes water -dependent
uses; and
b. Provides a significant public benefit, such as public access or ecological
restoration; or
The site is physically separated from the shoreline by another parcel or
public right-of-way.
New commercial uses shall comply with the following criteria:
a. Windows, breezeways, and common areas should be oriented towards
the shoreline or recreational amenities on the site;
b. Buildings should provide at least one main entry that orients toward the
shoreline, not including a service entry;
C. Architectural features that reduce scale shall be incorporated, such as
pitched roofs, offsets, angled facets, and recesses;
d. Building surfaces on or adjacent to the water shall employ materials that
minimize reflected light;
e. Building mechanical equipment, noise generating systems, vents, utility
cabinets, and small scale service elements shall be incorporated into
building architectural features, such as pitched roofs. Where it is not
possible to incorporate into architectural features, a landscaping screen
consistent with SVMC 22.70.030(C) shall be utilized;
f. Screening and buffering, or other visual screen consistent with the
building exterior material and colors, shall be provided that conceals view
of such equipment from the shoreline;
g. Commercial uses shall be screened from any adjacent residential uses by
providing a Type I -Full Screening Buffer pursuant to SVMC 22.70
Fencing, Screening, and Landscaping;
h. Landscaping within the shoreline setback area shall incorporate native
plant materials;
i. Loading docks and maintenance facilities shall be located away from the
shoreline to minimize visual, noise, or physical impacts on the site, street,
adjacent public open spaces, and adjacent properties; and
j. A site plan and landscaping plan shall be submitted showing all the
applicable items listed in SVMC 21.50.320(B)(2).
Commercial wireless communication facilities shall not be allowed within the
shoreline jurisdiction.
Home occupations shall be allowed within the Shoreline Residential - Upland and
Shoreline Residential - Waterfront designations pursuant to SVMC 19.40.140
Home Occupations.
21.50.330 Industrial Use
A. Applicability. This section applies to all new Industrial uses, including uses involved i
processing, manufacturing, assembly, and storage of finished or semi -finished goods
and food products.
Standards.
1. New non water -oriented industrial uses shall be prohibited, except within the
Urban Conservancy Environment, where such uses may be permitted if the use
is part of a mixed -use project that includes water -dependent use and:
Page 28 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
a. Provides a significant public benefit such as providing public access and
ecological restoration; or
b. The site is physically separated from the shoreline by another parcel or
public right-of-way.
Industrial development shall be located, designed, constructed, and operated to
avoid visual impacts to users of the Spokane River and Centennial Trail.
New industrial uses shall comply with the requirements of SVMC 21.50.320(B)(2)
and (3).
Noise associated with operations or equipment, including volume, repetitive
sound, or beat, shall be muffled or otherwise controlled so that it is not audible at
a distance over 30 feet from the landward boundary of a buffer.
21.50.340 In -Stream Structures
A. Applicability. This section applies to all projects proposing in -stream structures.
Standards.
1. In -stream structures shall conform with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, WDFW, SVMC 21.50.240 Flood Hazard Reduction, SVMC
21.50.270 Water Quality, Stormwater and Non -Point Pollution, SVMC 21.50.410
General Regulations for Specific Shoreline Modifications, and any other
applicable federal, state, and local requirements.
2. In -stream structures shall provide for the protection and preservation of
ecosystem -wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural resources pursuant
to WAC 173-26-241(3)(g).
21.50.350 Parking Facilities
A. Applicability. This section applies to all new parking facilities.
Regulations.
1. A parking facility is permitted only if:
a. It directly serves a permitted shoreline use, including the Centennial Trail,
direct river access, and use areas; and
b. It is not the primary use; for example, it cannot be a stand-alone parking
facility.
2. Parking facilities serving individual buildings within the shoreline jurisdiction shall
be located:
a. Landward from the principal building being served; or
b. Within or beneath a structure.
3. Parking facilities shall be screened from the shoreline and less intense adjacent
land uses by providing a Type I - Full Screening Buffer pursuant to SVMC
22.70.030(B) Fencing, Screening, and Landscaping. A majority of the plant
materials proposed to meet the vegetation mix requirements shall be native
plants.
4. Parking shall be pursuant to SVMC 22.50 Off -Street Parking and Loading
Standards.
5. Private projects, excluding single-family residential projects, which include public
access features shall dedicate parking stalls for public use that are in addition to
the number of parking stalls necessary to serve the proposed development
pursuant to SVMC 22.50 Off -Street Parking and Loading Standards:
a. Projects shall provide and dedicate additional parking for public use.
Applicants shall either use a presumptive standard of one additional
Page 29 of 82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Masser Program
space for public parking for every 25 parking spaces required to serve the
proposed development or provide an assessment of public access need
which supports a different ratio. Any proposal to change from this
presumptive standard shall be approved by the Direstef _ - ,
which approval shall be based upon the unique factual circumstances of
the development and surrounding shoreline uses;
Spaces that are dedicated for public use shall be marked with appropriate
signage; and
Stalls dedicated for public use shall be near the public access point.
21.50.360 Recreational Development and Use
A. Applicability. This section applies to public and commercial shoreline recreational
facilities and uses, including but not limited to trails, viewing platforms, swimming areas,
boating facilities, docks, and piers.
Standards.
1. Non water -oriented recreation uses are prohibited in Urban Conservation - High
Quality Shorelines except limited public uses that have minimal or low impact on
shoreline ecological functions, such as the Centennial Trail and appropriately -
scaled day use areas.
2. Water -oriented recreational structures, limited to boat launches, ramps, public
docks or piers, commercial docks or piers, and private docks serving more than
four residences may be allowed waterward of the shoreline buffer and setback.
3. Water -oriented recreational structures, limited to access routes, boat and
equipment storage, viewing platforms, amenities such as benches, picnic tables
and similar facilities for water enjoyment uses, including those related to the
Centennial Trail shall be allowed within the shoreline buffer and setback area
provided:
a. Structures are located outside of an Urban Conservancy - High Quality
area;
b. Structures are not located in, on, or over water; and
C. Structure height limit is less than 15 feet.
4. All recreational development shall provide:
a. Non -motorized and pedestrian access to the shoreline pursuant to SVMC
21,50.250 Public Access;
b. Landscaping, fencing, or signage designed to prevent trespassing onto
adjacent properties;
C. Signs indicating public right of access to shoreline areas, installed and
maintained in conspicuous locations at the point of access and the
entrance; and
d. Buffering of such development and uses from incompatible adjacent land
uses pursuant to SVMC 22.70.030 Screening and Buffering, and Table
22.70-2 - Buffers Required by Type, as applicable.
5. Recreational development and uses shall be pursuant to SVMC 21.50.310
Boating Facilities, SVMC 21.50.320 Commercial Use, and SVMC 21.50.430
Piers and Docks, as applicable.
21.50.370 Residential Development and Use
A. Applicability.
1. This section applies to single-family and multi -family structures, lots, and parcels.
Page 30 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Residential uses also include ei m accessory uses Commented [AC7] Gap Analysis, Table 31, 41
and structures normally associated with residential uses including, but not limited
to, garages, sheds, decks, driveways, fences, swimming pools, hot tubs, saunas,
and tennis courts.
Clearing, grading, and utilities work associated with residential use are subject to
the regulations established for those activities.
Standards.
1. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is not required for construction by
an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single-family residence, provided,
any such construction of a single-family residence and all accessory structures
meet the requirements of the SMP.
2. Residential development, including single-family structures, shall be required to
control erosion during construction. Removal of vegetation shall be minimized
and any areas disturbed shall be restored to prevent erosion and other impacts
to shoreline ecological functions pursuant to SVMC 21.50.260.
3. New residential development, including accessory uses and structures, shall be
sited in a manner to avoid the need for structural improvements that protect such
structures and uses from steep slopes and shorelines vulnerable to erosion,
including bluff walls and other stabilization structures.
4. New over -water residences and floating homes are prohibited.
5. New single-family residential accessory structures, excluding accessory dwelling
units, may be located waterward of the shoreline setback provided that all of the
following criteria are met:
a. The combined building footprint of all accessory structures does not
exceed 10 percent of the lot area;
b. Structures are located outside of critical areas, their associated buffers,
and the shoreline buffer; and
C. Structures are set no closer than five feet to any side or rear property line.
6. New attached or detached accessory dwelling units shall:
a. Be located landward of the shoreline buffer and outside of all critical
areas and their buffers;_
b. Be pursuant to SVMC 19.40.100 Accessory Dwelling Unit _�d
6. oota'^ ^ S e.er.,e Substantial DevelOpMeRt o it Commented[AC8]: Gap Analysis, Table 31, H1
7. New residential developments of four or more lots shall comply with the following
requirements:
a. The shoreline buffer shall be shown on the plat and permanently marked
on the ground with methods approved by the DireGter
b. A site plan shall be provided in conjunction with the building permit
application showing the project elements described in SVMC
21.50.370(B)(3); and
C. Provide a project narrative describing how the project elements are being
met.
8. Exterior lighting associated with single-family residences, such as pathway
lighting and lighting directed at landscaping features, is permitted within the
setback area so long as it is directed away from the shoreline.
9. Recorded plats shall include language that states that pursuant to SVMC
21.50.230, use and development within the defined shoreline buffer area is
prohibited. Title notices shall be recorded with each newly created parcel with
the restrictive language.
Page 31 of82
City ofSpokaae Malley Shoreline Master Program
10. New fences shall meet the requirements of SVMC 22.70 Fencing, Screening and
Landscaping.
11. Fences are prohibited in the following areas:
a. Shoreline buffers;
b. Critical areas; and
c. Waterward of the OHWM.
21.50.380 Signs and Outdoor Lighting
A. Applicability. This section applies to any commercial, industrial, or advertising sign
directing attention to a business, professional service, community site, facility, or
entertainment conducted or sold, and all outdoor lighting, except those associated with
residential use and public street lighting.
Standards.
1. All signs shall comply with SVMC 22.110 Sign Regulations; variances from these
regulations may be granted pursuant to SVMC 21.50.140 Shoreline Variances.
2. Signage, including kiosks and directional signage to commercial uses or
recreation areas, related to, or along, the Centennial Trail, is allowed without a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit provided:
a. Signage is consistent with the SMP, the City's Parks and Recreation
Master Plan, and any applicable master plan of Washington State Parks;
and
b. Signage proposed within a buffer area shall not:
i. Exceed 15 square feet in area;
ii. Exceed six feet in height;
iii. Be illuminated unless warranted by safety factors; and
iv. A building permit is obtained, if required.
3. Outdoor lighting shall comply with SVMC 22.60 Outdoor Lighting Standards.
4. New permanent outdoor lighting is prohibited within the shoreline buffer.
5. Pedestrian -oriented lighting along walkways and paths shall be allowed within
the shoreline setback area if:
a. The purpose of the light is safety;
b. Lighting structure height is not greater than 12 feet; and
C. Lighting fixtures are downward directed and fully shielded.
6. All outdoor lighting shall be oriented away from the shoreline and adjacent uses
using directional lighting or shielding.
21.50.390 Transportation Facilities
A. Applicability. This section applies to structures and developments that aid in land, air,
and water surface movement of people, goods, and services. They include roads and
highways, bridges, bikeways, heliports, rail, and other related facilities. Trails are
addressed in SVMC 21.50.250 Public Access.
B. Standards.
1. New road and bridge construction and expansion of existing roads and bridges
shall only be located within the shoreline jurisdiction upon approval by the
t3iresieF when deemed necessary for the good of the community, or
when deemed related to, and necessary to support permitted shoreline activities.
2. When allowed, transportation facilities shall be:
Page 32 of 81
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Masier Program
a. Consistent with an approved private project or applicable City plans,
including the City's Transportation Improvement Plan, Public Access Plan
and Restoration Plan;
b. Located on the landward side of existing structures or uses; and
C. Be designed to minimize clearing, grading, and alteration of natural
features. Roadway and driveway alignment should follow natural
contours and minimize width.
To the extent consistent with federal jurisdiction, new rail lines and corridors or
expansion of existing rail lines and corridors shall be allowed only for the purpose
of connecting to existing rail lines or rights -of -way. New rail lines, including
bridges, shall be constructed within existing rail corridors or rights -of -way.
To the extent consistent with federal jurisdiction, new rail lines shall be
constructed so that they do not compromise the public's ability to access the
shoreline safely.
21.50.400 Public Facilities and Utilities
A. Applicability. This section applies to all public facilities and utilities. This section does
not apply to on -site utility features serving a primary use, such as water, sewer, or gas
lines to a development or residence. These utility features are considered "service
utilities" and shall be considered part of the primary use.
Regulations.
1. New public facilities and utilities may only be allowed pursuant to Shoreline
Conditional Use permit and if they meet the following conditions:
a. Address conflicts with present and planned land and shoreline uses
through site design or configuration, buffers, aesthetics, or other methods;
and
b. Identify the need to site within shoreline jurisdiction and why it is not
possible to locate outside of the shoreline jurisdiction.
2. New wastewater and stormwater outfalls shall not be allowed.
3. Routine maintenance, replacement, and minor upgrades of existing utilities shall
be allowed; provided that if the activity involves ground disturbance or is located
in the Urban Conservancy - High Quality Environment, then such maintenance,
replacement, and minor upgrades shall only be allowed by Letter of Exemption.
If existing high -quality vegetated areas, as noted in the Shoreline Inventory and
Analysis, are disturbed by maintenance activities in Urban Conservancy - High
Quality designated shorelines, mitigation pursuant to SVMC 21.50.210 No Net
Loss and Mitigation Sequencing, shall be required.
4. Transmission facilities for the conveyance of services, such as power lines,
cables, and pipelines, should be located outside of the shoreline jurisdiction.
5. New utility corridors shall be prohibited within the Urban Conservation — High
Quality Environment.
6. New over -water utility crossings are allowed within existing utility corridors.
7. New or expanded service utilities shall:
a. Be located underground, unless placement underground results in more
damage to the shoreline area;
b. Utilize low impact, low profile design, and construction methods; and
C. Restore any areas disturbed to pre -project configurations, replant with
native species, and maintain until the newly planted area is established.
8. Stormwater pipe systems shall not be allowed within the shoreline buffer.
Page 33 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
21.50.410 General Regulations for Specific Shoreline Modifications
A. Applicability. SVMC 21.50.410 through 21.50.450 apply to all shoreline modifications.
Shoreline modification activities are structures, including in -stream structures, or actions
that modify the physical configuration or qualities of the shoreline area.
General shoreline modification standards.
1. All shoreline modification applications shall also comply with:
a. SVMC 21.30 Floodplain Regulations;
b. SVMC 24.50 Land Disturbing Activities; and
C. Integrated Streambank Protection Guidelines (WDFW, Ecology and
Transportation, 2003 as adopted or amended).
2. All shoreline modification activities shall ensure that the no net loss of ecological
function standard is met.
3. Structural shoreline modifications within the regulated floodplain, geologically
hazardous areas, and in -stream shall only be allowed where it can be
demonstrated that nonstructural measures are not feasible or the proposed
activities are necessary to:
a. Support or protect a legally existing shoreline use or primary structure
that is in danger of loss or substantial damage;
b. Reconfigure the shoreline or channel bed for an allowed water -dependent
use; or
C. Provide for shoreline mitigation or enhancement purposes.
4. All shoreline modifications within the regulated floodplain and in -stream, with the
exception of docks proposed on the Spokane River that are located west of the
City of Millwood, shall provide the following:
a. Site suitability analysis that justifies the proposed structure;
b. A Habitat Management Plan prepared by a Qualified Professional that
describes:
i. The anticipated effects of the project on fish and wildlife habitat
and migration areas;
ii. Provisions for protecting in -stream resources during construction
and operation; and
iii. Measures to compensate for impacts to resources that cannot be
avoided.
C. An engineering analysis which evaluates and addresses:
i. The stability of the structure for the required design frequency;
ii. Changes in base flood elevation, floodplain width, and flow
velocity;
iii. The potential for blocking or redirecting the flow which could lead
to erosion of other shoreline properties or create an adverse
impact to shoreline resources and uses;
iv. Methods for maintaining the natural transport of sediment and
bedload materials;
V. Protection of water quality, public access, and recreation; and
vi. Maintenance requirements.
21.50.420 Shoreline/Slope Stabilization
A. Applicability. This section applies to shoreline modification activities for shoreline and
slope stabilization projects, including structural and nonstructural measures.
Page 34 of82
Cily of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Standards.
1. Nonstructural measures are the preferred method for slope and shoreline
stabilization.
2. Nonstructural measures may include building setbacks, relocation of the
structure to be protected, groundwater management, and planning and
regulatory measures to avoid the need for structural stabilization.
3. Structural stabilization measures may include hard surfaces such as concrete
bulkheads or less rigid materials, such as vegetation, biotechnical vegetation
measures, and riprap-type stabilization.
4. New structural shoreline modifications require a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit.
5. New structural stabilization measures may be allowed under the following
circumstances:
To protect existing primary structures, public facilities and utilities, and the
Centennial Trail. Prior to approval, a geotechnical investigation shall:
i. Demonstrate that the structure is in danger from shoreline erosion
by currents or waves; and
ii. Evaluate on -site drainage and address drainage problems away
from the shoreline.
b. To protect new non water -dependent uses from erosion, when all of the
following apply:
i. The erosion is not being caused by upland conditions;
ii. Nonstructural measures are neither feasible nor sufficient;
iii. An engineering or scientific analysis demonstrates that damage is
caused by natural processes; and
iv. The stabilization structure shall incorporate native vegetation and
comply with the mitigation sequencing in SVMC 21.50.210 No Net
Loss and Mitigation Sequencing.
C. To protect water -dependent development from erosion when all of the
following apply:
i. The erosion is not being caused by upland conditions;
ii. Nonstructural measures are neither feasible nor sufficient; and
iii. The need to protect primary structures from damage due to
erosion is demonstrated through a geotechnical report.
d. To protect restoration and remediation projects when all of the following
apply:
i. The project is conducted pursuant to chapter 70.105D RCW
Model Toxics Control Act; and
ii. Nonstructural measures are neither feasible nor sufficient.
Unless otherwise exempt from shoreline permit requirements, replacement of an
existing shoreline stabilization structure may be approved with a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit, provided the structure remains in the same
location and the outer dimension changes by 10 percent or less. However, a
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required if existing shoreline
stabilization measures are relocated or the outer dimension changes by more
than 10 percent.
All new or replaced structural shoreline stabilization measures shall provide:
a. Design plans showing the limits of construction, access to the
construction area, details, and cross sections of the proposed stabilization
measure, erosion and sediment controls, and re -vegetation of the project
area; and
Page 35 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
b. An engineered report that addresses the purpose of the repair,
engineering assumption, and engineering calculations to size the
stabilization measure.
A replacement structure shall not encroach waterward of the OHWM, unless all
of the following apply:
a. For residences occupied or constructed prior to January 1, 1992;
b. There are overriding safety or environmental concerns;
C. The replacement structure shall abut the existing shoreline stabilization
structure; and
d. The Department of Natural Resources has approved, if applicable, the
proposed project if it is on state-owned aquatic lands.
21.50.430 Piers and Docks
A. Applicability. This section applies to the construction or expansion of piers and docks
constructed waterward of the OHWM.
Standards.
1. Piers and docks designed for pleasure craft only, and for the private
noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and
multi -family residences, shall require a Letter of Exemption. Any other dock or
pier permitted under the SMP requires a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit.
2. Piers and docks serving more than four residences and public or commercial
piers and docks shall comply with SVMC 21.50.310 Boating Facilities. Public or
commercial piers and docks shall comply with SVMC 21.50.360 Recreational
Development and Uses.
3. New piers and docks shall only be allowed for water -dependent uses or public
access. A dock associated with a single-family residence and designed and
intended as a facility for access to watercraft is a water -dependent use.
4. New piers and docks shall be the minimum size necessary based upon a needs
analysis provided by the Applicant. However, the size shall not exceed 55 feet in
length measured perpendicularly from the OHWM. Total deck area shall not
exceed 320 square feet.
5. The City may require modifications to the configuration of piers and docks to
protect navigation, public use, or ecological functions.
6. Wood treated with toxic compounds shall not be used for decking or for in -water
components.
7. Existing legally established docks, piers, or viewing platforms may be repaired or
replaced in accordance with the regulations of the SMP, provided the size of the
existing structure is not increased.
8. Piers and docks proposed on the Spokane River and located east of the City of
Millwood shall comply with SVMC 21.50.410(B)(4) and the following additional
criteria:
a. The site suitability analysis shall demonstrate that:
i. The river conditions in the proposed location of the dock, including
depth and flow conditions, will accommodate the proposed dock
and its use; and
ii. Any design to address river conditions will not interfere with or
adversely affect navigability.
b. The Habitat Management Plan for any such docks shall demonstrate that
the proposed dock will not result in a net loss of ecological functions, and
Page 36 of82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
shall include an analysis of the cumulative impact of additional requests
for like actions in the area.
A new pier or dock accessory to residential development- within the shoreline
located east of the City of Millwood, and west of the Centennial Trail Pedestrian
Bridge, shall provide joint use or community dock facilities, when feasible, rather
than allowing individual docks for each residence. Application materials shall
include documentation of the applicant's efforts to explore feasibility of and
interest in a joint use dock with owners of any residential lots immediately
adjacent to the applicant's sites. Such documentation may include copies of
certified letters sent to owners of the immediately adjacent properties listed on
title. Any proposal for a joint use dock shall include in the application materials a
legally enforceable joint use agreement or other legal instrument, notice of which
must be recorded against title of the properties sharing the dock prior to dock
construction. The joint use agreement shall, at a minimum, address the
following:
a. Apportionment of construction and maintenance expenses;
b. Easements and liability agreements; and
C. Use restrictions.
21.50.440 Dredging and Fill
A. Applicability. This section applies to shoreline modification activities for projects or uses
proposing dredging, dredge material disposal, or fill waterward of the OHWM.
B. Regulations.
1. Dredging and dredge material disposal is prohibited unless associated with a
comprehensive flood management solution, an environmental cleanup plan, a
habitat restoration, fish enhancement project, or when considered suitable under,
and conducted in accordance with, the Dredged Material Management Program
of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. These projects
require a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit.
2. Fill shall be allowed only when necessary to support the following uses (a
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is required unless stated otherwise):
a. Water -dependent uses;
b. Public access;
C. Cleanup and disposal of contaminated sediments as part of an
interagency environmental cleanup plan; these proposals may be exempt
from a shoreline permit of any type by the Model Toxics Control Act;
d. Expansion or alteration of transportation facilities. These proposals shall
also demonstrate that alternatives to fill are not feasible and require a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit;
e. A mitigation action; and
f. An environmental restoration or enhancement project.
21.50.450 Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects
A. Applicability. This section applies to all shoreline habitat and natural system
enhancement projects.
B. Standards.
1. Shoreline habitat and natural systems enhancement projects are encouraged.
These projects shall:
Page 37 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
a. Obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit or a Letter of
Exemption;
b. Demonstrate that the main project purpose is enhancing or restoring the
shoreline natural character and ecological functions by establishing the
restoration needs and priorities; and
C. Implement the restoration plan developed pursuant to WAC 173-26-
201(2)(0 and with applicable federal and state permit provisions.
xl use
;ban
i,-27-21 L __ Commented[MD9]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2009a
Article III. Shoreline Critical Areas Regulations
21.50.460 General - Shoreline Critical Areas Regulations - Applicability
A. SVMC 21.50.460 through 21.50.560 apply to critical areas and their buffers that are
completely within the shoreline jurisdiction as well as critical areas and their buffers
located within, but extending beyond the mapped shoreline jurisdiction boundary.
Regulated critical areas include: wetlands, Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARAs),
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs), geologically hazardous areas,
and frequently flooded areas, pursuant to WAC 173-26-221(2) and (3), and WAC 365-
196-485.
B. This section applies to all uses, activities, and structures within the shoreline jurisdiction
of the City, whether or not a shoreline permit or other authorization is required. No
person, company, agency, or other entity shall alter a critical area or its associated buffer
within the shoreline jurisdiction except as consistent with the purposes and requirements
of the SMP.
21.50.470 Maps and Inventories
A. The approximate location and extent of known critical areas are depicted on the Critical
Areas and Priority Habitats Map updated and maintained by the Community
Development Department. The Critical Areas and Priority Habitats Map is a reference
tool, not an official designation or delineation. The exact location of a critical area
boundary shall be determined through field investigation by a Qualified Professional.
In addition to the Critical Areas and Priority Habitats Map, City staff may review
additional reference materials to determine whether a proposed development has the
potential to affect a critical area within the shoreline jurisdiction. Reference materials
may include, but are not limited to the following as adopted or amended:
1. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey for Spokane
County, Washington, 2012;
2. USGS 7.5 Minute Series Digital Elevation Model;
3. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Spokane County, Washington and
Incorporated Areas, July 6, 2010;
4. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory;
5. Aerial photos;
6. WDFW Priority Habitats and Species and Wildlife Heritage Maps and Data; and
7. City critical area designation maps.
21.50.480 Exemptions from Critical Area Review and Reporting Requirements
Page 38 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
A. Activities exempt from critical area review and reporting requirements shall ensure no
net loss of shoreline ecological functions pursuant to SVMC 21.50.210. Exempt
activities shall be conducted consistent with performance standards identified in SVMC
21.50.180 through 21.50.450, including mitigation sequencing.
Any incidental damage to or alteration of a critical area or their buffers resulting from
exempt activities shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced at the expense of the
responsible party within one growing season.
The following activities are exempt from critical area review and reporting requirements:
1. Conservation or enhancement of native vegetation.
2. Outdoor recreational activities which do not involve disturbance of the resource
or site area, including fishing, hunting, bird watching, hiking, horseback riding,
bicycling, and natural trail use.
3. Education, scientific research, and surveying.
4. Normal and routine maintenance and repair of:
a. Legally -constructed existing irrigation and drainage ditches, utility lines
and right-of-way, and appurtenances;
b. Facilities within an existing right-of-way and existing serviceable
structures or improved areas, not including expansion, change in
character or scope, or construction of a maintenance road. The
exemption includes the necessary vegetation management that keeps the
existing right-of-way clear from hazard trees; and
C. State or City parks, including noxious weed control and removal of hazard
trees where the potential for harm to humans exists.
5. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the
elements.
6. Routine maintenance, repair, and minor modifications (such as construction of a
balcony or second story) of existing structures where the modification does not
extend the structure further into or adversely impact the functions of the critical
area.
7. In Category III or IV wetlands only, stormwater dispersion outfalls and bioinfiltration
swales located within the outer 25 percent of the buffer provided that no other
location is feasible.
21.50.490 Critical Area Review
A. All clearing, uses, modifications, or development activities within a shoreline critical area
or its buffer shall be subject to review under SVMC 21.50 unless specifically exempted
under SVMC 21.50.480.
B. Applicant shall identify in the application materials the presence of any known or
suspected critical areas on or within 200 feet of the property line.
C. If the proposed project is within or adjacent to a critical area, or is likely to create a net
loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain a critical area, the City shall:
1. Require and review a critical area report for each applicable critical area; and
2. Determine if the proposed project adequately addresses and mitigates impacts to
the critical area and is consistent with the requirements of the SMP.
21.50.500 Critical Area Report Requirements for all Critical Areas
Page 39 of82
City ojSpokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
A. When required by SVMC 21.50.490(C), the Applicant shall submit a critical area report
subject to the requirements of this section and any additional reporting requirements for
each critical area, as applicable.
B. Critical area reports for two or more types of critical areas shall meet the report
requirements for each relevant type of critical area.
C. All critical area assessments, investigations, and reports shall be completed by a
Qualified Professional.
D. At a minimum, all critical area reports shall contain the following:
1. The name and contact information of the Applicant, a description of the proposal,
and identification of the permit(s) requested;
2. The dates, names, and qualifications of the persons preparing the report and
documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site;
3. A statement from the Qualified Professional certifying that the report meets the
critical area requirements;
4. A description of the nature, density, and intensity of the proposed use or activity
in sufficient detail to allow analysis of such proposal upon identified critical area;
5. List of all references used and all assumptions made and relied upon;
6. A scaled site plan showing:
a. Critical areas and their buffers;
b. Ordinary high water mark;
C. Proposed and existing structures and related infrastructure;
d. Clearing and grading limits;
e. Impervious surfaces;
f. Location of temporary and/or permanent construction signage and
fencing to protect critical areas and their buffers;
g. Topographic contours at two foot intervals;
h. Fill and material storage locations;
i. Proposed and existing drainage facilities and stormwater flow arrows; and
j. Title, date, scale, north arrow, and legend;
7. Identification and characterization of all critical areas, water bodies, and critical
areas associated with buffers located on site, adjacent to, and within 200 feet of
proposed project areas. If buffers for two contiguous critical areas overlap (such
as buffers for a stream and a wetland), the wider buffer shall apply;
8. A mitigation plan which contains a description of the application of mitigation
sequencing and offsetting of impacts pursuant to SVMC 21.50.210 No Net Loss
and Mitigation Sequencing;
9. Erosion and sediment control plan and drainage plan, as applicable for
conformance with SVMC 24.50;
10. Cost estimate for required mitigation when a financial surety is required pursuant
to SVMC 21.50.510;
11. A discussion of the performance standards applicable to the critical area and
proposed activity; and
12. Monitoring plan pursuant to SVMC 21.50.510(D) when mitigation is required.
The SiFester may modify the required contents or the scope of the required
critical area report to adequately evaluate the potential impacts and required mitigation.
This may include requiring more or less information and addressing only that part of a
site affected by a development proposal.
Page 40 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
21.50.510 Mitigation
A. Applicants shall follow the mitigation sequencing put forth in SVMC 21.50.210 No Net
Loss Mitigation and Sequencing.
All impacts to critical areas and their buffers likely to result in a net loss of shoreline
ecological functions necessary to sustain the critical area shall be mitigated consistent
with appropriate state and federal guidelines.
Unless specifically addressed in specific critical area sections, compensatory mitigation
may be provided by any of the following means, in order of preference:
1. Except as provided in SVMC 21.50.510(C)(2)(a), adverse critical area impacts
shall be mitigated on or contiguous to the development site through resource
expansion, enhancement, protection, or restoration.
2. Off -site mitigation.
a. Off -site mitigation may be allowed if an Applicant demonstrates that
mitigation on or contiguous to the development proposal site cannot be
achieved and that off -site mitigation will achieve equivalent or greater
ecological functions.
b. When off -site mitigation is authorized, priority shall be given to the
following locations within the same drainage sub -basin as the project site:
i. Mitigation banking sites and resource mitigation reserves.
ii. Private mitigation sites that are established in compliance with the
requirements of SVMC 21.50.510(C)(2) and approved by the
OfrestG
iii. Offsite mitigation consistent with Selecting Wetland Mitigation
Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Eastern Washington)
(Publication #10-06-07, Olympia, WA, November 2010 as adopted
or amended).
C. The Direstn shall maintain a list of known sites available for
use for off -site mitigation projects.
3. Title notices shall be recorded against the affected parcels for on -site mitigation,
and easements shall be recorded for off -site mitigation, to avoid impacts from
future development or alteration to the function of the mitigation. The mitigation
site shall be permanently preserved.
D. Monitoring.
1. The Applicant shall monitor the performance of any required mitigation and
submit performance monitoring reports, as specified in the applicable permit
conditions.
2. When required, the monitoring plan shall:
a. Demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the SMP and specific
permits and approvals;
b. Describe the objectives and methods for monitoring and quantifying;
C. Provide results with an estimate of statistical precision;
d. Identify the length of monitoring and reporting requirements;
e. Recommend management actions based upon the monitoring results;
and
f. Address the length of the mitigation consistent with the following:
Page 41 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Mitigation monitoring shall be required for a minimum of two years
for temporary impact restoration and up to 10 years for
compensatory mitigation; and
If the mitigation objectives are not obtained within the initial
monitoring period, the Applicant shall remain responsible for
restoration of the natural values and functions until the mitigation
goals agreed to in the mitigation plan are achieved.
Sureties.
1. Performance and maintenance sureties shall be required from all private persons
and entities required to provide mitigation and a maintenance plan.
2. The performance surety shall be in substantially the same form as provided for in
the City's Street Standards as adopted or amended.
3. A performance surety shall be submitted prior to issuance of a Shoreline
Substantial Development, Conditional Use Permit, or Grading Permit. The surety
shall include costs to cover for construction and vegetation, annual maintenance
for a five-year period, and a 25 percent contingency fee.
4. The performance surety shall be released when the following conditions have
been met:
a. The installation of the required mitigation is approved by the City; and
b. The Applicant has submitted a warranty surety pursuant to SVMC
21.50.510(E)(5).
5. All projects with required mitigation shall submit a warranty surety to ensure the
success of the mitigation project before certificate of occupancy, final plat
approval, or as required by the City. The warranty surety shall be for 40 percent
of the total mitigation construction and planting costs and annual maintenance/
monitoring for five years, including but not limited to: costs for the maintenance
and replacement of dead or dying plant materials; failures due to site preparation,
plant materials, construction materials; installation oversight, monitoring,
reporting, and contingency actions expected through the end of the required
monitoring period.
6. The warranty surety shall remain in effect for five years from the release of the
performance surety or a timeframe as otherwise determined by the tDireGt8F_
The Applicant shall have a Qualified Professional inspect the
mitigation site within 30 days of the expiration of the warranty. Any deficiencies
noted shall be repaired prior to the release of the surety. If the inspection is not
conducted and/or the deficiencies are not repaired, the warranty surety shall be
renewed by the Applicant until all deficiencies are corrected. The City shall
conduct an inspection prior to releasing the warranty surety.
7. If any deficiencies identified while the warranty surety is in effect are not
corrected in the time frame specified by the 9irester , the City may
choose to conduct the necessary repairs. The City shall then either invoice the
Applicant or collect from the surety for all costs for the related work, plus a $500
administrative fee.
The Direster:; : may approve alternative mitigation provided such mitigation is
based on the most current, accurate, and complete scientific or technical information
available and provides an equivalent or better level of protection of shoreline ecological
functions than would be provided by the strict application of the SVMC 21.50. The
piresterCity Manager shall consider the following for approval of an alternative mitigation
proposal:
Page 42 of 82
City afSpokane Valley Shoreline ANfaver Program
The Applicant proposes creating or enhancing a larger system of natural areas
and open space in lieu of preserving many individual habitat areas.
There is clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the proposed
site.
The approved plan contains clear and measurable standards for achieving
compliance with the specific provisions of the plan.
21.50.520 Wetlands - Shoreline Critical Area Regulations
A. i+
''+ nh'n adja +
1�I'„aa�h.I..�,-Th'-r-r,ts-seat+ea-applies-� Ta;'.-��>;es-aad�tfasti+�e� ,
to weNaad&4es� &peGifGa4y---xe
8 ABesigffatiOR,delineation-and-classi€isatfaq-.
1. 1Aletlands are these areas
ditiGRSWetlands ge44eFa4y4PG4ude,ot- mited tG,
cho begs, PGRds, d 'I Fea de
those ^ +mF91aI . cal^nde inteRti9FIally n ^+ d fterni RoP. etl2nd SfteS, iRGIUd{Rg,
bad Ret limits aSS NAPCI-Swales, Ga ;n,'s,
deteRtion €asilitieS:astewaiestrea pe-ameR+t+es, o
these-wetlandS Greateda$o Iculy !, 1 9 on thatv.,L-re„tents^ ^n„ GFeated
+tgrp ;;Pti ,f p! wetlands intend frAm non wpflanrl -q fe .nitro^+e
th hands
thFoagha field 'n estig@tiGFI by g Qua (i DF^i^
1987- f CeFps o�Fng;^ti2rsWetlands Belineati M;-AAanaak an,+ +ham e-R—e ,,al
Supplement to The Corps of €Rg l-I- ,T,_yn��tland4DeliaeatieR Manual. Arid West
Region4September-2-008) Wetiand-delineatioRS are-valid-for-f+ve-rears-after
WhiGh theCity Shall deterFl#rie-whether;; M"iSiGFI GF additiORal G&sessmeP44s
neoessafy,
the �GG!e eel d +' SySteR; as set F rfh' the \n/ h' + State tnl +I .d
R2tiRg System for Cg 4 r; 1'Q//-.ShnP
November291-8 as-adopted-eramended) The-wetland-Gategeries--aFe geReraliy
dofn�_Ri L-dd ^c fel�rloo-
a Qategn J \ 1 /can of 7Ng
9 4GF \; W fl .ds that peFfGr
�
f inrtinns Von el�lT#e o+� rlv rc thpgp th;;t.
9. 'A pp m of+lr - +n .d.o+_, ham..,.,, +F'`^......6e+ wetlands;
_ _ ••S-that
aFe 'hltnlg '+h' a h I'f +'
mpg ^eer er , GF
id. PFGvi de a high IPVP1 Affi-IR.rtie.n..
b. SategeFy P (sGeFes betweeR 51 69 po+RtS)€eFested vie+lands in toe
G. nategan i i III (EG S betNeen 30 Sn points); \nl +I rl ♦h + h
mndv. tp Io RI Af furlAtiAns. T4-.- � et Ql ndS ^.@ hppn distilphp-d ...
Page 43 of 81
Commented [CBIO]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2016b,
2010a.
The Wetland regulations in the SMP are being replaced with the
Citys existing Wetland regulations from SVMC 21.40.020 through
.025.
For readability, the change is shown as deleting and replacing the
entire section.
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
1 + IPVPI Af i t'and are eftenheavily disturbed but have
snl t'ARd ra;'n Geten �pgEJj€j jgpg-
T�hla'-1--rn A• WAtlan[i--Rtiffpr Rprmir4lmPR}S
Wetland
Category
Standard
th
Buffer Width
Additional
Idtli-if
Weth ocnnree
_5 u
2, e�itat
1 -G1
Additional
$kJtfeilAf{dtia-1#
snletla hc noree
i� 29 Matiltat
points
Additional
Ruff�«.r %Afidtki_it
Welland dd Scores
}38 Habitat
Points
409--feet
A4445-feet
1�.d.d�_ 4-5 feet
Add 75 feet
754eet
Arlrl�_R�94e_4ZG feet
A.d.dr_��G feet
11r1.d 7a��e_e_rfee;
60 feet
I Add-30 feet
Add 60 feels feet
WA
404eet
I WA
WA
WA
4.Ilrrp;;-V;__.d buffer widths.
YIfV I' 4 d 6R Table 21.50
5 are P19t' 1 terl then -the
A
+e d;; d h ffer ,ei'rl+h,'TTable
h. R ff 'rlth be qRGFeased
21.50 n he *RGFeased by 33
peFGeRt
n Gase_hy_Gase1 a when the
may
V� VI rJ ' used by a I.,..+'_'. _.___.
GutstandiRg habitat for these SpeGiL---;
';es. The buffer h
p f AI *n the nr't'nal areas
al speGmeS listed by the federal
OF ha al nec+'n ec+'nn
ld h rl i d by the Qualified
rep4Ft,.
Page 44 of 81
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
T;IhIP 21 cn c Raa-Brad Anpp zntrac tnlUli l f f tnnotl�r d�
{31SYkfr�•$A62
ReWireEI-Measure f.,4o--.n� mpaGtS
t- eise
- LOGate aGt,:r't..j r that/
ise
from
Rest., ,,.
Wet{aAA
If..r nterl nh-,nen n t'a h ff
....
'th t'
vegetal Ga-plaAtj igs-adj a n+ #„ n
i
•—Fer�t+u}�eat�pnor�4e rel t
:,AFiOFis
heavilyvegetated A h ff # 'F*,�*T*od
� r .
c
Pstp bl#ehlic #' r nts limitiuseng f
150 feet ofyietl..na
. Apply integrated PeSt-MaAag-ement
teTL. adjaGeRt
'v
st4sidec within
Ghee Mi G21 Use
. Route all ntre.,ted-PuA
d-while
@ASUiiR^y--,r":o41�n�ri--rc�Q+ rle...-, 4..ec.c_re_vre.�
De4mf;+ nYhgtan 14,d .doom ater�v.'�
. PFP'.'ent eh"nnel'zed-flGw4#a4 d'restl.r
4t4eS
enters the
bUff49F
. infiltrate nr treat de4-.' d disperse
info buffer
,.�pc�v-ovnc-r
Aew FaAe#iFea}fFApeNn
-n l n . ! wAs
Pets aAEt-h umaA--d+StLlFb 4Ge
,
themy
fer this
area
Bust
Ico hest m� em 4 a #' tA
GARtFM' d1irt
uRdiStUFbed
S4hat-afe
69AAeGt19AS
Ve jet2#Gn--2ttef,�
PFeteGt and FRaintaiR r
't'
RativenlaRt
buffers
Page 45 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Page 46 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
a Impasta re e
Fat4e- _r_n:Fed ;n Table'Ji f:h C h`!.....
�ar_frzT.
NOV.,
—_-- _---------- - - -
.._ - - -
b. jmpaG,fG_tG_buffers shell he mitigated at a 4A FatiG. n I f II vegetated
bu#eF-afeas will be ,.nghO_d :.. ,,,:+
dfi ewa}s a areas sh„a be-exG4Aedfrnm
e a +idoti:+" methGd de eteped by the tiRgCFed,'ts and
jRal Rep tjGR #14 na 015 August 201 a + a
eramended�
�. Wetland MotiQatiGR banks.
A. Cred+ts-€rem-a-wetland-mitjgatien-baRk-may-be-appreued-as-e#-s+te
+wit+gatiert der-anavajdabte-impacts- e+llands„-,he :
I. The ba Rk rn ram. isrf f ed URdestateTl
I1I. Then e.d USA Of ....,d t-; ,S GG_RSil,t..,,t ..ih-r,ih terms Rd
Uvrld,tions of the-ert:Ferd heRk iRS*..........t.
b. Aenle nt raties f., GtS g haRk a ditS shall be GGRSiSteRt
with repl2GemeRt ratio epe 'F d in the rFF d hank ' + +
6 crpdits fr., er+'f erl ,. +I-. rl mitigatiGR h L may be .d +
GGMpPorte fer ertc lernted ,. -th' the YiF d in the
6ei3'F d bank i+ + I the f the b i
may O RGludePertjeRS-of .,, e th An Ane -,rl h-, f
..�.. d,U, , .e.�..,-nor
pare
a VVe
rriterip and qhp,Agq how thp idpntified wetland + d R.+ a
fYRG ignS-Vt4tl F,�e�U. nmp�.d fer by ., FGh-, a of the Gredits.
�. De-
aF)cesign of wetiaR eGtS shall he _ .et. fer its
IandSG P96itiGR. QempeRsatGry 't' ti shall
ll Fesult ' the ti
e++'r. of the site
Page 47 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
6 C ^ h c wetland ;dPRtofied GR site,(Jj # to di within 200 Font of the
project -site, provide:
i-peen, 'ram. ed buffet s
(4) Wetlaadd ranee;
_ (2) 4J d Fph'a G'aSS*fiGaflGnj
(4) On_site-wetland-acreage; and
NAtp- The-ah hall he bayed OR ea+:re wet!@ -Rd GOrnpiexes, float
eRly the rtiG . Se 4 th ern __edl n _ ert 64e_
^TvrrPT`. .. r.. ..p_
Ili C t' + f aGFeage and h da Fer the ntir etlmd adea
wherer#'GRS f the #Iaadl eXtendl off citej
Af hpb;t;;t-eemeflts7
V.0 'I d't' based eR it assessrneRt and co'1 s
4RfOrmatier aild
Th F II F a+' hall be prGv/ded tn+he vfent r. o'bl�
a
a+ rpnditi9R e#
#/ tl # (if they n be legally GGessed);
(2) Fs+' a4 d water depths within the we+landh and
(3) Estimated hydFapeFied patterns -hA-;Pd AR Visual GUeS (e.g.,
algal mate d:f4 I'n a fleedl do brie tG+
d „nlOpMen+ alto t d i a RG development alternat\,a
Page 48 of82
A.
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
'In pssn;ent of the m babl t„ to theme 4.�;ARdg Rna�„a huffeffor-S
i An ect'matie of ArrpRges f' i V tl a a h ff
hased op the field delineation;
ii. Im. aGt asseGiated ith t'
the prsjesti led
III. Iry pa --tea f 9
f. A desUipti ,moo of hew =r,tiUgat'� Wasapplied PUFSY@-Rt
SVMG 21 sn 240 No nle4 I
A a'c of m'tigat'n m asures pFo ea to pFesep,p v st"4
Wet4A4S-and Festore aR�' .. tlz�andS-t„ahatwere-deg Faded by the GurFeRt
prepesed4aftd-4se aet4*,
h. Methods to pretest-and eaha^oe OR Site ;;hhj` na;vetIgnd f nAt'
j ner.,eetea , et!2Rdiss and . '. 'real h Uffer/c\ fnr ORSiteYetlu ,d
as well,as aff off eEt-S4te;
ii. n reeG f prep G&e4_4rfpaots4o_we#an s-apcV9F buffers-{iacla�de
square feGtage esti ate
iii. PFepv$ed-stermwatep maRageRient fadit -`,..and Gu#pto for the
develepn? nt, ^I^I diRg StlMated a,pasAf� tr me the
13u#ers-o�kai areasi and
J n m'tigatie plan if Feq a
i,iri �� �n �n_i dein:�at r� of wetland � =-
nal I' Meld In � n
=,lr Is
a shall be :: - 1 pursu oov
n the Washinator >ting aystafr
rc:colo^v Purl J30. or as ar.-,
Ecc'c' ,s - initions and meth oca
dG ,: c, nkinc rJ scores based on fur
�s_ ,Vetland cateaorie5 are defined as follows:
ateoor✓ I: perform functions at very hiah levels as evidenced by
scorina between 22 and 27 points on Ecoloov's wetland ratino
system: includes alkali wetlands. boas. and forests with stands of
aspen.
IL Category II: provide high levels of some functions. with a ratino
score between 19 and 21 ooints: difficult. though not imoossible
to replace: includes forested wetlands in the floodplains of rivers
Page 49 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
mature and old-ciro%%4h forested vietlands over one -quarter acre in
ernal pools_
- =1 of functions �viti, _
an be adeouately re:,
unctions
n1ocr:
able 21.50-4: Wetland Imoact intensitv Cateaories
mi)actIntensity
:ateaory (Imoact Tvoes of Land Use
rom Proposed
,hanae in Land Use)
Page 50 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Hiah Inoact
»inercial industrial, and institutional
^ri21 r,;;�re than one unitlacre)
acreation (golf courses. ball fields. etc.)
Berate Impact
ne unitiacre or less)
ensiiv active ocen space barks with biking
r vJith access/maintenance road
pen space i hiking. bird -watching. etc)
.Sta nria rri Wnr In nfl R: Iffor Wirlthc
ii Irn Buffer Width fin feet)
'Aoderate Impact
Hiah Impact
250
�Il
InCI-ease in Siandard v Vidio.
i. If the land =,- ,cent . end has a 'r
percent a; = th :m buffer -
1I Be .gender one and one
-,,.tend to the uocer bra':.
aradient is less than 30 perce - 20
ceroenciis;lar to t1nd -
d. Reduction standard arrJ -
i Thy-i:andard ends euuced to
the next. lower i_ 'dth ; c: hiah to
moderate). or redu.:= no more titan 25 oercenr if.
(11 A relatively bed vegetative corridor of at least 100
feet in width > -d between the wetland and anv
other oriorit,, and the corridor is oreserved by
means of ea__ covenant or
12) A.11 measures id :limed in Table 21.50-6 are taken to
minimize the imcact of anv cr000sed land use.
Tahla 91 5f1-li• Wotlanrl Irnnart ivlinin�i��;inn ;1 i7oacr.�o
Disturbance
Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights
• Direct lights away from wetland.
Page 51 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Disturbance Reauired Measures to Minimize Imoacts
l loise I_ocate activity venerates noise awav rrom
=viand ,J
..'Ith native
n heavv
10
:Pateiy
--.- _card
r i :r-functicrina
-o;tat o the well
ac, -ceased adiaceri tj ioe lo::ar-ionina or less
ser, .-ive portion:
(2) The total area of the buffer after averaaina is eaual to the
area reauired without averaaina: and
Page 52 of 81
City ojSpokone Valley Shoreline Master Program
(3) The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either
75 oercent of the standard buffer width.
D. Sions and fencino.
1. Temcorary
a. The oute ::,meter or .wetland buffers and the clearino limits shall fenced
to ensure no uncut"on_ed intnlsi n will occur d_lnnn construction.
cina _ used �i 'installed to -=1v orevent
Clio I'
nstallation of oerr
eC'ua L
=d at an Inlet, al r 3i=- -
lot or
matal
-
aoainst tiie crops
The siars s1,911 ba .
d Perm;
�e a'.stalled and maim
buffe ,,n s
zina animals are o _ _
on sit-
- Fencinc shall ;:
a manner that minimi-es iinoacts to the
wetland and a__--_ :
--id desinned to not interfere with species
miaration. ineludm.:
- lals shall not be made or
treated with
-
Yet!an;j 'viitioation.
t iAitlaation Patios.
Imoacts resulting fror.• ait ration to v. small be mitiiated usino tha
ratios soecifed be:o
T�hlo ')I Z;r1-7- WN Ilona A,-,
;:iteoory of
Creation or
Reestablishment
Rehabilitation
Enhancement
Wetland
-::eoory 1
4.1
S 1
- -i D ry I I
3.1
6 1
-;ory III
2:1
4.1
,eaory IV
1.5:
3:1
Page 53 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
' Refer to Wetland Niitioation in Olashinaton State Part I ,Aaencv
Policies and Guidance- tEcoloav Publication No 06-06-01 la. Nlarch
2006) for further information on ,vetland creation reestablishment.
�:iabilitation. and enhancement
i;. Imoacts to buffers shall be mitiaated a: a t ! vegetated bursar
areas may be included in mitigation calculation,=I!o;✓ays
driv=:vays. and other mowed or develcoed area> .! ided from
area calculations.
may
and
`ne terms and
anlz. ;s shall be
;crisis a certified bank
instrument.
i!. Credits a cerrfied wetland m:a,icn anl.: m=.d
conicin),- a locate,: n
invent - a.=a of
;ortiens _!recent drainage
credits out of
_ wank must be
wad a Cw✓. `NDF';'-_,oloav
IV hen ao,)l,, a for a vieflan...-i bank or fee -in -lieu oroararr.
the aonlicant shall oreoare a wetland mitioation bank credit use olan
Page 54 of 81
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
that documents consistency with these criteria and shows how the
identified wetland type and associated functions will be
compensated for by purchase of the credits
3. Design.
a. Desian of wetland mitioation oroiects shall be aoorooriate for its
landscape oosition. Comoensatory mitigation shall result in the creation
restoration. or enhancement of a wetland that matches the aeomorohic
settina of the site.
b. The desian of = , -_ rla that has a cir'
hvdrooec a'on than t be
iustified if monstrated na c nor arity of the
wetland t,, -�.
Timina.
Ons �o;iicensa`ory
'_irb wetlands
�ted prior. , and impacts
noleted ini nediately followina
aed to
r_ a de; on whet =s a
Coi;;ueliina swritten _)r the delay from a
aualified s 'h= "3t
tea•
Be a ii.. r ce of n ;bIic
Additional critical area report reauirementz for .:etlands. In addition to the r HC21 area
report reauirements in SVMC 21.50.5L, - :oor, l in.; rving
1. Documentation of anv fieldv. - _ ri mi`ed to
field data sheets for deline _: Dn as
hvdroloaic data:
2. A description of the methcc: _ used to conduct the wetland delineations
function assessmentsor imps . alvses including references
3. For each wetland identified on si:z adiacent to and within 200 feet of the oroject
site. orovide:
a. Required buffers:
b. Wetland rating. hvdroceomorohic classification Cowardin classification of
vegetation communities. on -site wetland acreage and ecological function
of the wetland and 'buffer based on a professional survey from the field
delineation. All assessments shall be based on entire wetland
complexes. not only the oortion present on the or000sed project site
C. Estimates of acreaae and boundary for the entire wetland area where
oortions of the wetland extend off site
d. Descriotion of habitat elements:
e. Soil conditions based on site assessment and soil survev information and
f. To the extent possible. hydrologic information such as location and
condition of inlet/outlets (if thev can be legally accessed) estimated water
depths within the wetland and estimated hvdroperiod patterns based on
visual cues (e.a . algal mats. drift lines. flood debris)
Page» rj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
descriotlon of the orocosed actions ana SUIV2V and an BnaIVSiS -
>rn=tives, includina a no-deve!ooment alternative
1e orobable imoacts to -the vie lands and bulfu
..omant inci.dina
-reaaes of imoacts to wetlands an
�y nt!1 anticipated hvdrooeno,! :�I!e tin, v
eley l
constr-;c:
Nall Shall include
1 shdli conlorr,l
21.50.530 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas - Shoreline Critical Area Regulations
A. Applicability. This section applies to the following developments and uses when
proposed within designated CARAs:
1. Underground and aboveground storage tanks;
2. Vehicle repair and service uses, including automobile washers;
3. Chemical treatment, storage, and disposal facilities;
4. Hazardous waste generating uses;
Page 56 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Masler program
5. Injection wells, not including Class V or injection wells for stormwater
management;
6. Junk and salvage yards;
7. On -site sewage systems;
8. Solid waste handling and recycling facilities;
9. Surface mines;
10. Uses of hazardous substances, other than household chemicals for domestic
applications;
11. Projects having the potential to adversely impact groundwater; and
12. Work within a wellhead protection area.
B. Designation and classification.
1. CARAs are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for
potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(2). CARAs have prevailing
geologic conditions associated with infiltration rates that create a high potential
for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to the
replenishment of ground water.
2. Aquifer recharge areas are rated as having a high, moderate, or low susceptibility
based on a scientific analysis of soils, hydraulic conductivity, annual rainfall, the
depth to aquifers, the importance of the vadose zone, and wellhead protection
information. The entire shoreline jurisdiction, as well as the entire City, is
identified as a high susceptibility CARA.
C. Performance standards.
The uses listed in Table 21.50-_7- shall be conditioned as necessary to protect CARAs in
accordance with the applicable state and federal regulations.
Table 21.50-_ . Statutes, Regulations, and Guidance
Pertaining to Ground Water Imnactinn Activitips
Activity
Statute — Regulation — Guidance
Above Ground Storage Tanks
WAC 173-303-640
WAC 173-216; Best Management Practices
Manual for Vehicle and Equipment Washwater
Automobile Washers
Dischar es Q-R-95-056
Below Ground Storage Tanks
WAC 173-360
Chemical Treatment Storage and Disposal
Facilities
WAC 173-303-300
Hazardous Waste Generator (Boat Repair
Shops, Biological Research Facility, Dry
Cleaners, Furniture Stripping, Motor Vehicle
Service Garages, Photographic Processing,
Printing and Publishing Shops, etc.)
WAC 173-303-300
Injection Wells
40 CFR Parts 144 and 146;WAC 173-218
Vehicle and Metal Recycles — A Guide for
Implementing the Industrial Stormwater
Junk Yards and Salvage Yards
General NPDES Permit Requirements 94-146
On -Site Sewage Systems (Large Scale
WAC 246-272B
On -Site Sewage Systems (< 14,500
gal/day)
WAC 246-272A, Local Health Ordinances
Page 57 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Activity
Statute — Regulation — Guidance
Solid Waste Handling and Recycling
Facilities
WAC 173-304
Surface Mining
WAC 332-18
Additional performance standards for storage tanks that store hazardous substances or
waste.
All storage tanks shall:
1. Comply with Title 24 SVMC Building Code and fire department requirements;
2. Use material in the construction or lining of the tank that is compatible with the
substance to be stored;
3. Not allow the release of a hazardous substance to the ground, groundwater, or
surface water;
4. Prevent releases due to corrosion or structural failure for the operational life of
the tank; and
5. Be protected against corrosion and constructed of noncorrosive material or steel
clad with a noncorrosive material.
All new underground storage tanks shall include a built-in secondary containment
system that prevents the release or threatened release of any stored substances.
All new aboveground storage tanks shall include a secondary containment structure and
meet either of the criteria below:
1. If the secondary containment is built into the tank structure, the tank shall be
placed over a sealed impervious pad surrounded with a dike. The impervious
pad/dike shall be sized to contain the 10-year storm if exposed to the weather; or
2. If the tank is single walled, the tank shall be placed over a sealed impervious pad
surrounded with a dike. The impervious pad/dike shall have the capacity to
contain 110 percent of the largest tank plus the 10-year storm if exposed to the
weather.
Additional performance standards for vehicle repair and servicing. Vehicle repair and
servicing must be conducted over impermeable pads and within a covered structure
capable of withstanding normally expected weather conditions.
G. Additional standards for chemical storage.
1. All chemicals used shall be stored in a manner that protects them from weather.
Secondary containment shall be provided. On -site disposal of any critical
material or hazardous waste shall be prohibited.
2. All developments and uses shall provide a narrative and plan to show how
development complies with the regulations and performance standards in SVMC
21.50.530(C-F), or prepare a hydrogeological assessment in accordance with
SVMC 21.50.530(H).
3. Proposed developments and uses that are unable to satisfy the performance
standards in SVMC 21.50.530(C-F), shall submit a hydrogeological assessment
report.
H. In addition to the critical area report requirements in SVMC 21.50.500, hydrogeological
assessments shall include:
Page 58 of82
City ofSpokrme Malley Shoreline Marrer Program
1. Available geologic and hydrogeological characteristics of the site, including
groundwater depth, flow direction, gradient, and permeability of the unsaturated
zone;
2. Discussion of the effects of the proposed project on groundwater quality and
quantity;
3. A spill plan that identifies equipment and/or structures that could fail, resulting it
an impact. Spill plans shall include provisions for regular inspection, repair,
replacement of structures and equipment that could fail, and mitigation and
cleanup in the event of a spill; and
4. Best management practices proposed to be utilized.
21.50.540 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas - Shoreline Critical Area
Regulations
B. Bestgnat4OR
I. 1 Re anaram-e FGR-habitat, -md
+he ,a+or,; and Iand , d ath the C L- C\ e AIHC; TheCity
., �.rS Gf theS944Ganh the Chr,rerne R ffer establ'�hn, hpd in
'n
Ctrnnr 24 Gn 230 ^^a the geta en ^ _ _SN4.11C21 50 Zan
' +el:ia, egaFdless of
a al ideRtifiGatien, e h Feby desigRated t=U/H A
a nr ^ .,.,here state or f d ^l desigRated eRd@Rgered, +h d
SeasitiVe-speeieS have a$FimaFy-asseeiatea;
b. State Fea-s aSSae ated with state stat + eGies, as
ideRtlfied by the VVSIDF\nr .,Rd are updated peFio4Gal4 ari4
G-Mate-natural-aFea-presewesand-natural-resource GoRservatieR-aFeas
Nat , QI_aFea pFeserves-and Ratural FeseurGe GeFiservatiORRa,eas are
desigRa+ed in C 111.11` 21.50.540(13)(2), eXGePt aGGeFdaRGe with
tYt�tfrsen+iAR Rparra_Fffero
shall -be FequiFed�Rly-feF- W�16As-described-uRdef�V C 21.59-540( R4,e -GludiRg
f„ H bitatc R, ffein Fe en+^ Shall he baS .A! OR thP FenAFFiW P.RiIntionsn�f the
ef-the`7C\AT_ Mon_(` n
1. GeReral.
a. A G\nn..IrA FR hempropesedthehabitat-of
the mitigatioR PF6pese'a `3oes .RAt G,ecte a Ret lGS6 Gf+he quantitative and
F= -1 n
h NG plant, Wildlife r fish SpeGies t iRdigeROUS + the FegiGn shall h
IRtrAdflGed '^+., F=WH(`A nlegs Ruthpriizerl h tat s d I
, �aTpeFRfft
bitat Gerridors e referred to miRi ize the
ir.elatiR effe^+^ of de„ele., ' OR h-,hi+atareAs
d. Vegetati ^.
diStUfbed GRl„ as minimallyF;eGessaFy for the rh el. n+ d
Page 59 of 82
Commented [CS11]: Gap Analysis Attachment A, 2010a.
The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area regulations in the SMP are
being replaced with the City's existing Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Area regulations from SVMC 21.40.030 through .036.
For readability, the change is shown as deleting and replacing the
entire section.
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
. otheF eMat' s availablP'Afhpn it is niv then
_ ofyenetat'on that a absolutely
Giea ed, and _hall be r_ _ _grman vegetation
posBible
Thp ;;Ad rhAFt rubdW Pion of 1;;Rd shall GGMPIY Wit- thP
following provisions;
II. 1 a rl 4h at' Innated partially within
each-new--[ot- -elated outside of the habitat-seaseafatiara-area-er
its bufffer, and
III A �Feadr1 utilities seFViRg the pFepesal may he permitte4j
'4h' th FIAM(`A _ d @SSGGiated bLlff48FS GRIY if the
ar"hr
flntc,c��,.,n�•�i ReS that Fl Ffea
sible e alte, i gat', exists and when
f The pFej ieany--pG eF}tiat
6n;paGts. GGRditiGAS may .._!ude, but aFe net limited to the
following
Establishment of h ffe�- zo�aone-r,
Fequiren;eRtS for re vegetation of distuted aFeas with native
Pla'Tj
the
people and�eF domeStiGated animals—,
FV I ' '+ +' f to the habitat d6lFiRg GFqtiGal times of 4h
yeaF
-F passing-te-pretest-Witdti€e-and-deter aaaat#eriaedassess',
t D dfEation 6f ^!tor part of the regU ,'- _ + a e o fw�o_„_s„h and
II C I f n nstr nt'naGtiVities.
a ;le dove re state
or-federal--endangered,threatenert or set �enS'+ive-spesies-#rave-a-primary
ass()GiatiGR without state anti fordo
cner��',re
b. Apprev;; -f -a#eratian-sf�and era
G. Bald a le ha�ta+ hall b + oterl nnn� ____istent With_ .
an
i 1nrA(` 737 12 292 \A/ h' t State Bald Eagle Droten+inn RwleSL
and
permit ebtai nrl from the I ISFAIS
, ndneniteFln
24 9n Gnnrov2
i Mitigatien cites shall he Innaterh
i�. RiMiZa t ore nlat'n ee ffeo Sof deyelopme t OR habitat areas; and
Page 60 of81
City t fSpokane Valley Shoreline Muster Program
b. Wthin the same aquatis.ecesysEem as the-FAA44GA,-42+siafked-
2. efe-aesessafy,-a-pem,aneaimeaRs-ef irr+ga,'^^ shall be iRstalled„e
Fpftigatian plaRtiRgs. The de6l'gR shall meet the SpeGifiG Reedsof f�parro n�nQ
shFub steppe yenget2tion Pi id be-pfepa rgionur-ul ;.nd%8f
pe 2FGhiteGt.
2. Mitiq@fiGR shall he installed no Inter than the next n aGGRafter
GC)FnpletiGR of site improvements, Iales&-ethepNise appr�rl�rte,4;,,re61gF
4. PAit�yat'n sit cos shall hshall he Red toe a that the mitigat'n Rd
maaage etp @R ab eGtivesa;rSU66eSSfUl.
5. N4-;;;RtenanGe—,4a as to rent'fy problems ORGlude r o s_
asReeded ejjm} naNea e€ eades+fable plaaEs, PfsEest+AR Of Shrl I an''Q-small t^II +roes
#MM Gempetitiea-b"rasses-aad-#erkaseaas-plaa#s-and4epairaR44eplaeemeRt
of any dead Plants
6. RlantiRg,areas skullh-P rnp-int@ined sethey have less thy R 29 PeFGeRtRon
Rati'd&iRV26iVe Plant GAVPF GPnqiSfiRg of exot'n nd/or'nvasive speGies. F=xGtiG-
and iRvasive SpeGleS iRGlude aRy speGies n the state ROXiG61S weed list, eF
GAn-Jdered a nexious or pFeblem weed by the Natural Gonseneat'nn C. .
8epartm 8R dfStH6t
7 he-App dermaRGe-Gf-�u#ed mitigatisa aad
s6Lbm, o f ^a" +s to the City nG�uRsistent with the follo-,+PgL
a. Amiggat'n}�An sitter shall hem n'tnred fort �ss_
b. MAni;aring opens shall be submitted by a Qualif-pd Pr fnssieaa;;
—i. one yeaF after mit•nnt n nstallatiGRj
ii. Three yeaFs after mitigatiAn insta4at4Gnand
iii Five years after m't'natie nstallat'n
G. The Qualified D�_fnfnnalh all ierify ,.�t+et4er theme GAR d'tinnc of •�nPpf�Val
and . FGVi�as ,Rth o�fish n �r.���.�arl wildlife rn enageeT^' mer}t-and-mR-
itiga#9 plari
have been satisfied.
d. Mitigataea-plaating-stfwiva{-skull-be4GO-persent#er the first-year;and-,and
percent-te g.
Page 61 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Of @GGess to habitat fV SPASeRat--Fe area;
l r,Ste of de elo nt and n at'n Gf
V. no"spaGej
Signs rnaFking-habitats-or-habftat-buffer areas;
Use of In... 'mPaGt develOpMeRt teGhRiques.,
Rnanrrled Aped plat bgRd'n site plan GF planned nit
yE. rnnSen,atOO ,-.tin ants; and
X6 edioation--or-sonveyanse-e"ge-ofa apaFian babitat-area-tea
d. A surnmapy of nnnc, ltat'e with a hah*tat biologist with the 1A DRAt If the
habitat management plan Rds m'togat o nI„ federa4
noted threatened o endangered speGies, migFatory waterfbwl
management plan and- the nts shall he of ldpdQa�_ai�,«�,�cn thethe
f"nal r ort The rl'reator shall have the authority ten a habitat
rnanagement nla
This section i:; a..
designated fish and wildlife
buffers-
S. Desionation. All areas meeting one cr ::vino criteria. reaardless of any
formal identification. are hereby design; - —
1. The shoreline buffer as mapped by the Citv. which protects riparian habitat, and
the waters and land underneath the Spokane River are FWHCAs. The Citv protects
Page 62 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
shoreline functions of these throuah the Shoreline Buffer established in SVMC 2 1,50 230
and the veaetation conservation standards in SVMC 21.50.230.
2- Areas where the following species and/or habitats have a orimary association.
a. Federally desier:ited endanaered and,!hraatened species. The U.S.
Fish and `. Ice (USFVVS1 lational Nlarine Fisheries
Service s -�sulted for :i is status.
Mate -des ated endanaered -ad. and sensitive species
oursuant to'VAC 232-12-014 (state endanaered soecies) and VVAC 232-
'12-01 1 state th,==tened and sensitive species). The WDFW maintains
the r i ; and shy -sulted for current listina status.
city habitats and areas _ state oriority species.
=bitats and species IPHS _red by the `WDFW. Prioritv
os �r.,ended from ti;- Cit.
_!e %vetlan-:
,abit-:
=: da:a is inci
(;lag
:ar
tzmopr --De amenities .i o distinguish
es ninii _ -
arn::
DNR.
Waters of th= = as f ti e si_=.: lakes. avers. ponds. streams.
ndarc - vaters. s=i n:i -p ,(her surface vvaters and
- :-,,,ivaina wetlands. witfr e state of
sified in WAC 222 J d ? classifications are as
- jeans all waters. kable width. as
as "shorelines of the sta : haotz 90 52
he rules oromuloated oursuan;
ar,odical'- , . fated areas of thes
have me_. flows averaoino = -)c n,e:_ _[ oer s
F s seaments c ral waters otner than Tvoe S
=ys 7pm the bankfoh, .:I;;ths of defiled channels and
nundated areas of their associated wetlands. or within lakes
pan _ having a surface area of one-half acre or
-ter and which in anv case contain fish habitat
.OF are Ji-- the following four categories:
i. _ V!:. i_ , verted for domestic use by more than 10
residenaai or cameina units or by a public accommodation facility
licensed to serve more than 10 oersons. vrhere such diversion is
determined by the Citv to be a valid acorooriation of water and the
only practical water source for such users. Such waters shall be
considered to be Tvpe F water upstream from the point of such
Page 63 of 82
City ofSpokate Valley Shoreline Master Program
diversion for 1 500 feet or until the drainaae area is reduced by 50
percent. whichever is less.
ii Waters that are diverted for use by federal. state. tribal. or private
fish hatcheries - .,raters s��,a" ;__ --, ��,�,J Tvue F water
uastream from 1,, of,-;. includina
tributaries. if t _. -,ificar earn uate,
quality. The ,' ellou, the
reauiremer- - -
- Tenter 31 iiatu a
- -.inc! _
o. State iMatuni - - - awes and Natural Resource Conservation Areas. Natural
area creserves and natural resource conservation areas are defined established.
,� manaaed by the DNR.
eas of Rare Plant Soecies and High Quality Ecosystems Llreas of rare slant
scecies and high quality ecosystems are identified by the DNR through the Natural
Heritage Proaram
Page 64 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
o Lands designated on state. regional. or local aovernnne:it aaencv olans (e.a. Darks
or transportation) as useful or essential for oreservina connections between habitat
blocks and open spaces.
C. Habitat Buffers and Riparian Manaaement Zones.
I. Buffers to protect state- or federally designated sensitive wildlife FWHCAs shall
be based on the recommendations of a FWHCA critical area reoort prepared by
a oualified Drofessional Dursuant to SVMC 21.50.540(F). Habitat buffers shall
not exceed 100 horizontal `eet from the edoe of the
2 Riparian Manaaeme- Vaters of the Stag
a. Des! a .,acement zcn.
wate s described in
mews perpendicular to the ordinary fui'
charm , rlidth boundary of a delineate -I 17_ :vi ;i
summarized as follmvs:
Table 21.540-9. Riparian Management _ones Buffer Widths
Ification
RMZ Width
J - "ie
See SV', C
:hall be retained or m:- - natural condition, and
within Pi',! > - ar.s - - �3 as feasible to provide
shad ,tat. and , funci s for the associated
stream.
ii. Where activities are or000sed within a =I measures
shall be soecified in a habitat manage av include
but are npt
(1) Fe illainino
yea=ration.
t2r Non-nativeinoxious + ren,,oyal and maintenanc : Formatted: Font: (Default)Mat
and/or
(3) Enhancement of RN1Z throuoh olantino of native
vegetation.
iii. Pr000sed oedestrianrbike trails shall demonstrate thouah best
available science that the location and width of the trail minimizes
anv adverse impacts on habitat and that measures to reduce
effects durina construction are imolemented.
iv. Off -road motorized vehicle use in riparian management zones is
prohibited.
Page 65 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
D. Performance standards. All development and uses shall be prohibited vilthin FWHCAs
-rd U,> er exceot when thev are in accordance with this subsection iSVMC
as A FVVHCA buffer may be the cr000sed alteration of
or the rritiantlon cr000sed does r = a net loss or the
quantitative and i -;lioreline ecological ;unctions necessary to sustain
2. species not indigenous to the region small be introduced
3 - - — --
- Cw -=�'19' ifpni peCpiB
ce alloy
threatener or sers;::
,s nave a oninar,
s�ate and federal consult
d approval from
S. resoectively
of land or activiti��—
1HC. having a
c;aiion .yith state or fecierall: -
-:�aiened. or
species shall not occur prior to consudatior; . the WDFVV.
Page 66 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
C. Bald eaale habitat shall be protected consistent with the federal Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Miaratory Bird Treaty Act which may
reauire coordination with the USFWS.
I and wildlife habitat mitigation.
';Nhen necessary. fish ar.9 `.vildlife habitat mitigation shall be documented in a
habitat management c — ',',AC 21.50.541Fi(1 1
':+litigation site
Prefe n,ous functio. ah :,rs that
minim ' development on hab and
lr �Jitnl em as the FV'./HC_ -
` for the .. • 3 io ensure
ub-
aoeto:ic i e pal or
=;)e architect. iaation
cludina steal em:.
ne:. -
oiher.:l ;:roro. .v
paint_., sure the. e mitigation and
`ss ;
acti:: to rectify r r�Iude
aorous -,des = olants;
bs a dp v ar - nd
;Cea: nd reolac
olamst
p Areas ororosad for mitication shall be maintained sic rhe, i- more
than - rt to= ant cover consisting c•� asive
spe:,ies -s on the state noxicu, no Reaw. -:: 1. 9 1 1 .shall monitor the oerform= of anv reauired
and submit oeifom.,,ance monitorina reocrts annualiv to the City
;litiaatioo sites for a period of time aocrooriate to the
grope -=d in a habitat manaaement olan
oreoara ofassional.
b. At the end of ;r o ring period. the aualified orofesa small be
reauired !c a; the conditions of approval and ciavisions in the
habitat ma .: , -t ❑Ian nave been satisfied.
INllflaatlon ola small be 100 percent for the first year and 80
percent for eacn a t year.
d. If the final annual rnomi a report cleariv demonstrates that the site has
achieved all goals and ehiectives set forth in the aooroved habitat
manaaement olan. the aoolicant shall be released from additional
mitigation obligations. If however. nerformance obiectives are not met
additional maintenance. adaptive manaaement and performance
monitorina shall be required until all obiectives are met.
Additional critical area report reauirements for F4I/HCAs.
Page 67 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
1 Reoort Contents In addition to the critical area report reautrements in SViMC
21.50.50'1 ~�NHCA reccrts Tail Include:
a. - - _ - ._iina'
I D-3taileu s:eSi;of vegetation an and adlacent to the DI olect
area:
ii. Identification of anv suecies of local imoortance. PHS. or
enda,ioere-1 Ih--Ptenej sensitive, or cendlna':e soecles that have
on :_; the project
i=.l 01% :'J the use
-- ;),-In'l 7 71at,i', and
nroc�'
eabh
,
U }J�
-
w not i1
= - _ -n activities.
5) Qlii_oeyelupment and preservation of oxen
space.
(6) Sians markina habitats or habitat buffer areas.
(7) Use of low impact development technioues:
(8) Recorded deed. slat. binding site clan or planned unit
development covenant. condition. or restriction legally
establishina a riparian FWHCA for subject orooerty:
Page 68 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
(9) Conservation or preservation easements: and
(10) Dedication or conveyance of title of a riparian habitat area
to a public entitv for the ouroose of conservation
iv. A summary of consultation with the WDFW. If the habitat
management plan recommends mitigation involving federally
listed threatened or endancered soecies. miaratory waterfowl. or
wetlands the USFlNS shall receive a coov of the draft habitat
mange. :- their i - ;omments shall be included in
the fina reuor 94eetiaF r,7 v lvlanaaer shall have the authoritv
to approve hale; gen,ent plans or reouire additional
information.
Conditions established by an acorov ed habitai grog=r ,-n' olar, shall be
included as a condition of aooroval oe,
21.50.550 Geologically Hazardous Areas - Shoreline Critical Area Regulations
A. Applicability.
1. This section applies to all uses, activities, and structures within designated
geologically hazardous areas.
2. Applications for development within the shoreline jurisdiction shall identify if it is
located within a geohazard area as designated on the City Critical Areas and
Priority Habitats Map. The 9irestef may require additional
information based on the criteria in SVMC 21.50.550 to identify unmapped
geohazards if application material and/or a site visit indicate the potential for
geohazard.
Designation and classification.
1. Areas susceptible to erosion, sliding earthquake, or other geological events are
designated geologically hazardous areas in accordance with WAC 365-190-120,
Geologically Hazardous Areas.
2. Categories.
a. Erosion hazard areas are identified by the NRCS as having a "moderate
to severe," "severe," or "very severe" rill and inter -rill erosion hazard.
Erosion hazard areas also include areas with slopes greater than 15
percent.
b. Landslide hazard areas are subject to landslides based on a combination
of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. They include areas
susceptible because of any combination of bedrock, soil, slope, slope
aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors and include the following:
i. Areas of historic failures, including:
(1) Areas delineated by the NRCS as having a significant
limitation for building site development; and
(2) Areas designated as quaternary slumps, earthflows,
mudflows, lahars, or landslides on maps published by the
United States Geological Survey or WDNR;
ii. Areas with all of the following characteristics:
(1) Slopes steeper than 15 percent;
(2) Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively
permeable sediment overlying a relatively impermeable
sediment or bedrock; and
(3) Springs or groundwater seepage;
Page 69 of 82
City of Spokane valley Shoreline Master Program
iii. Areas that have shown movement during the holocene epoch
(from 10,000 years ago to the present) or which are underlain or
covered by mass wastage debris of this epoch;
iv. Slopes that are parallel or subparallel to planes of weakness (such
as bedding planes, joint systems, and fault planes) in subsurface
materials;
V. Slopes having gradients steeper than 80 percent subject to rock
fall during seismic shaking;
vi. Areas potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision,
stream bank erosion, and undercutting by wave action, including
stream channel migration zones;
vii. Areas that show evidence of, or are at risk from snow avalanches;
viii. Areas located in a canyon or on an active alluvial fan, presently or
potentially subject to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic
flooding; and
ix. Any area with a slope of 40 percent or steeper and with a vertical
relief of 10 or more feet except areas composed of bedrock. A
slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top and measured
by averaging the inclination over at least 10 feet of vertical relief.
Seismic hazard areas are subject to severe risk of damage as a result of
earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement or
subsidence, soil liquefaction, or surface faulting. One indicator of
potential for future earthquake damage is a record of past earthquake
damage.
C. Standards applicable to all geologic hazard areas.
1. Any development or uses proposed within 50 feet of a geologic hazard area shall
prepare a critical areas report satisfying the general critical area report
requirements in SVMC 21.50.500 and the additional standards for Geologic
Hazard Areas in SVMC 21.50.550(E).
2. Development or uses within geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers
shall only be allowed when the proposed development or use:
a. Does not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent
properties beyond pre -development conditions;
b. Does not adversely impact other critical areas;
C. Is designed so that the hazard is eliminated or mitigated to a level equal
to or less than pre -development conditions; and
d. Is determined to be safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by
a Qualified Professional.
3. New development that requires structural shoreline stabilization over the life of
the development is prohibited, except in instances where:
a. Stabilization is necessary to protect allowed uses consistent with SVMC
21.50.420(B)(5);
b. No alternative locations are available;
C. Shoreline modifications do not negatively affect other critical areas
pursuant to SVMC 21.50.460; and
d. Stabilization measures conform to WAC 173-26-231, Shoreline
Modifications.
D. Standards applicable to erosion and landslide hazard areas.
Page 70 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
1. Development within an Erosion or Landslide Hazard Area and/or buffer shall be
designed to meet the following basic requirements unless it can be demonstrated
that an alternative design that deviates from one or more of these standards
provides greater long-term slope stability while meeting all other provisions of the
SMP. The requirement for long-term slope stability shall exclude designs that
require regular and periodic maintenance to maintain their level of function:
a. Development shall not decrease the factor of safety for landslide
occurrences below the limits of 1.5 for static conditions and 1.2 for
dynamic conditions. Analysis of dynamic conditions shall be based on a
minimum horizontal acceleration as established by the Uniform Building
Code as adopted or amended;
b. Structures and improvements shall be clustered to avoid geologically
hazardous areas and other critical areas;
C. Structures and improvements shall minimize alterations to the natural
contour of the slope and foundations shall be tiered where possible to
conform to existing topography;
d. Structures and improvements shall be located to preserve the most
critical portion of the site and its natural landforms and vegetation;
e. The proposed development shall not result in greater risk or a need for
increased buffers on neighboring properties;
f. The use of retaining walls that allow the maintenance of existing natural
slope area is preferred over graded artificial slopes; and
g. Development shall be designed to minimize impervious lot coverage.
2. Buffers from all edges of Erosion or Landslide Hazard Areas.
a. The minimum buffer shall be equal to the height of the slope or 50 feet,
whichever is greater.
b. The buffer may be reduced to a minimum of 10 feet when a Qualified
Professional demonstrates that the reduction will adequately protect the
proposed development, adjacent developments and uses, and the subject
critical area.
C. The buffer may be increased where the Direstef determines
a larger buffer is necessary to prevent risk of damage to proposed and
existing development.
3. Removal of vegetation from an Erosion or Landslide Hazard Area and/or buffer
shall be prohibited unless as part of an approved alteration plan consistent with
SVMC 21.50.260 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation.
4. New utility lines and pipes shall be permitted only when the Applicant
demonstrates that no other practical alternative is available. The line or pipe
shall be located above ground and properly anchored and/or designed so that it
will continue to function in the event of an underlying slide.
5. Stormwater conveyance shall be allowed only when the pipe design includes a
high -density polyethylene pipe with fuse -welded joints, or similar product that is
technically equal or superior.
6. New point discharges from drainage facilities and roof drains onto or upstream
from Erosion or Landslide Hazard Areas shall be prohibited except as follows:
a. If it is conveyed via continuous storm pipe downslope to a point where
there are no erosion hazards areas downstream from the discharge;
b. If it is discharged at flow durations matching pre -developed conditions,
with adequate energy dissipation, into existing channels that previously
conveyed stormwater runoff in the pre -developed state; or
Page 71 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
C. If it is dispersed or discharged upslope of the steep slope onto a low -
gradient undisturbed buffer demonstrated to be adequate to infiltrate all
surface and stormwater runoff, and where it can be demonstrated that
such discharge will not increase the saturation of the slope.
Division of land in Erosion or Landslide Hazard Areas and associated buffers is
subject to the following:
a. Land that is located wholly within a designated Erosion or Landslide
Hazard Area or an associated buffer shall not be subdivided.
b. Land that is located partially within a designated Erosion or Landslide
Hazard Area or an associated buffer may be subdivided, provided that
each resulting lot has sufficient buildable area outside of the Erosion or
Landslide Hazard Area and buffer to accommodate reasonable
development without impacting the critical area or requiring structural
stabilization consistent with SVMC 21.50.180(B)(5) General Provisions.
C. Access roads and utilities may be permitted within an Erosion or
Landslide Hazard Area and associated buffers if the City determines that
no other feasible alternative exists.
On -site sewage disposal systems, including drain fields, shall be prohibited within
Erosion or Landslide Hazard Areas and associated buffers.
Additional critical areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas reports.
In addition to the critical area report requirements in SVMC 21.50.500, geologically
hazardous area reports shall include:
1. A site plan showing the following:
a. The location of springs, seeps, or other surface expressions of
groundwater on or within 200 feet of the project area or that have
potential to be affected by the proposal;
b. The topography, in two -foot contours, of the project area and all hazard
areas addressed in the report; and
C. The following additional information for a proposal impacting an Erosion
Hazard or Landslide Hazard Area:
i. The height of slope, slope gradient, and cross section of the
project area;
ii. Stormwater runoff disposal location and flow patterns; and
iii. The location and description of surface water runoff.
2. A geotechnical study that addresses the geologic characteristics and engineering
properties of the soils, sediments, and/or rock of the project area and potentially
affected adjacent properties, including:
a. A description of the surface and subsurface geology, hydrology, soils, and
vegetation found in the project area and in all hazard areas addressed in
the report;
b. A detailed overview of the field investigations; published data and
references; data and conclusions from past assessments of the site; and
site specific measurements, test, investigations, or studies that support
the identification of geologically hazardous areas;
C. Site history regarding landslides, erosion, and prior grading;
d. A description of the vulnerability of the site to seismic and other geologic
events;
e. Proposals impacting an Erosion or Landslide Hazard Area shall include
the following additional information:
i. A description of the extent and type of vegetative cover;
Page 72 oj82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
ii. An estimate of load capacity including surface and groundwater
conditions, public and private sewage disposal systems, fills and
excavations, and all structural development;
iii. An estimate of slope stability and the effect construction and
placement of structures will have on the slope over the estimated
life of the structure;
iv. An estimate of the bluff retreat rate that recognizes and reflects
potential catastrophic events such as seismic activity or a 100
year storm event;
V. Consideration of the run -out hazard of landslide debris and/or the
impacts of landslide run -out on down slope properties;
vi. A study of slope stability including an analysis of proposed angles
of cut and fill, and site grading;
vii. Recommendations for building limitations, structural foundations,
and an estimate of foundation settlement; and
viii. An analysis of proposed surface and subsurface drainage, and the
vulnerability of the site to erosion;
f. A detailed description of the project, its relationship to the geologic
hazard(s), and its potential impact upon the hazard area, the subject
property, and affected adjacent properties;
g. Recommendations for the minimum no -disturbance buffer and minimum
building setback from any geologic hazard based upon the geotechnical
analysis;
h. A mitigation plan addressing how the activity maintains or reduces the
pre-existing level of risk to the site and adjacent properties on a long-term
basis (equal to or exceeding the projected lifespan of the activity or
occupation);
i. Proposals impacting an Erosion or Landslide Hazard Area shall include
the following additional information:
i. An erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with
requirements set forth in SVMC 22.150 Stormwater Management
Regulations; and
ii. Drainage plan for the collection, transport, treatment, discharge,
and recycle of water;
j. Location and methods of drainage, surface water management, locations
and methods of erosion control, a vegetation management and replanting
plan, or other means for maintaining long-term soil stability; and
k. A plan and schedule to monitor stormwater runoff discharges from the
site shall be included if there is a significant risk of damage to
downstream receiving waters due to:
i. Potential erosion from the site;
ii. The size of the project; or
iii. The proximity to or the sensitivity of the receiving waters.
A geotechnical report, prepared within the last five years for a specific site, and
where the proposed land use activity and surrounding site conditions are
unchanged, may be incorporated into the required critical area report. The
Applicant shall submit a geotechnical assessment detailing any changed
environmental conditions associated with the site.
21.50.560 Frequently Flooded Areas - Shoreline Critical Area Regulations
Page 73 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Masier Program
A. Incorporation and applicability. SVMC 21.30 Floodplain Regulations are incorporated by
reference herein and apply to all uses, activities, and structures within frequently flooded
areas.
Additional critical areas report requirements for frequently flooded areas. In addition to
the critical area report requirements in SVMC 21.50.500, critical area reports for
frequently flooded areas shall include:
1. A site plan showing:
a. All areas of a special flood hazard within 200 feet of the project area, as
indicated on the flood insurance map(s);
b. Floodplain (100-year flood elevation), 10- and 50-year flood elevations,
floodway, other critical areas, buffers, and shoreline areas; and
C. Elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures, and
the level to which any nonresidential structure has been flood proofed.
Alterations of natural watercourses shall be avoided, if feasible. If
unavoidable, the critical area report shall include:
i. A description of and plan showing the extent to which a
watercourse will be altered or relocated;
ii. A maintenance plan that provides maintenance practices for the
altered or relocated portion of the watercourse to ensure that the
flood carrying capacity is not diminished and downstream or
upstream properties are not impacted; and
iii. A description of how the proposed watercourse alteration
complies with the requirements of FWHCAs, the SMP, and other
applicable state or federal permit requirements.
Page 74 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Appendix A-1 Shoreline Master Program Definitions
A. General Provisions.
The definitions provided herein are supplemental to the definitions provided in Appendix A and
only apply for use with the City's SMP, including chapter 21.50 Spokane Valley Municipal Code
(SVMC). Solely for purposes of the City's SMP, if a conflict exists between these definitions and
definitions in Appendix A, the definitions in Appendix A-1 shall govern. The definition of any word
or phrase not listed in Appendix A-1 which is ambiguous when administering the SMP shall be
defined by the City's Community Development Director, or his/her designee, from the following
sources in the order listed:
1. Any City of Spokane Valley resolution, ordinance, code, or regulation;
2. Any statute or regulation of the State of Washington;
3. Legal definitions from the Hearings Board, from Washington common law, or the
most recently adopted Black's Law Dictionary; or
4. The most recently -adopted Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary.
B. Definitions.
Accessory or appurtenant structures: A structure that is necessarily connected to the use and
enjoyment of a single-family residence, including garages, sheds, decks, driveways, utilities,
fences, swimming pools, hot tubs, saunas, tennis courts, installation of a septic tank and
drainfield, and grading which does not exceed 250 cubic yards and does not involve placement
of fill in any wetland or waterward of the OHWM.
Agricultural activities: Relating to the science or art of cultivating soil or producing crops to be
used or consumed directly or indirectly by man or livestock, or raising of livestock. The term has
the full meaning as set forth in WAC 173-26-020(3)(a) as adopted or amended.
Amendment: A revision, update, addition, deletion, and/or reenactment to an existing SMP.
Applicant: A person who files an application for permit under the SMP and may be the owner of
the land on which the proposed activity would be located, a contract purchaser, or the authorized
agent of such a person.
Aquaculture: The culture or farming of fish, shellfish, or other aquatic plants and animals.
Associated wetlands: Those wetlands (see "Wetlands" definition) that are in proximity to and
either influence, or are influenced by, a lake or stream subject to the SMA.
Average grade level: The average of the natural or existing topography of the portion of the lot,
parcel, or tract of real property which will be directly under the proposed building or structure;
provided that in case of structures to be built overwater, average grade level shall be the elevation
of OHWM. Calculation of the average grade level shall be made by averaging the elevations at
the center of all exterior walls of the proposed building or structure.
Best Management Practices (BMPs): Site -specific design strategies, techniques, technologies,
conservation and maintenance practices, or systems of practices and management measures
that minimize adverse impacts from the development or use of a site.
Bioengineering: Project designs or construction methods which use living plant material or a
combination of living plant material and natural or synthetic materials to establish a complex root
grid within the bank which is resistant to erosion, provides bank stability, and promotes a healthy
riparian environment. Bioengineering approaches may include use of wood structures or clean
angular rock to provide stability.
Page 75 of S2
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master program
Boating facilities: Boating facilities include boat launches, ramps, public docks, commercial
docks, and private docks serving more than four residences, together with accessory uses such
as Americans with Disabilities Act -compliant access routes, boat and equipment storage, user
amenities such as benches and picnic tables, and restroom facilities.
Buffer or Shoreline buffer: The horizontal distance from the OHWM or critical area which is
established to preserve shoreline or critical area functions by limiting or restricting development.
See Appendix A-2, Shoreline Buffers Map. Permitted development and activities within buffers
depend on the type of critical area or resource land the buffer is protecting.
Clearing: The destruction or removal of ground cover, shrubs, and trees including, but not limited
to, root material removal and/or topsoil removal.
Commercial uses: Those uses that are involved in wholesale, retail, service, and business trade.
Examples of commercial uses include restaurants, offices, and retail shops.
Conditional use: A use, project, or substantial development which is classified as a conditional
use or is not classified within the SMP.
Degrade: To impair with respect to some physical or environmental property or to reduce in
structure or function.
Development: A use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures; dredging;
drilling; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; bulkheading; driving of piling; placing of
obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal
public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to the SMA at any stage of water
level. — -- -- - --- --
- - Commented [AC12]: Attachment A, 2017b
Development regulations: The controls placed on development or land uses by the City,
including, but not limited to, zoning ordinances, building codes, critical areas ordinances, all
portions of the SMP other than goals and policies approved or adopted under chapter 90.58 RCW,
planned unit development ordinances, subdivision ordinances, and binding site plan ordinances
together with any amendments thereto.
Dock: A floating platform over water used for moorage of recreational or commercial watercraft.
Dredging: The removal of sediment, earth, or gravel from the bottom of a body of water, for the
deepening of navigational channels, to mine the sediment materials, to restore water bodies, for
flood control, or for cleanup of polluted sediments.
Ecological functions or Shoreline functions: The work performed or role played by the
physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of the aquatic
and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem.
Ecology: Washington State Department of Ecology.
Ecosystem -wide process: The suite of naturally occurring physical and geologic processes of
erosion, transport, and deposition; and specific chemical processes that shape landforms within
a specific shoreline ecosystem and determine both the types of habitat and the associated
ecological functions.
Enhancement: Alteration of an existing resource to improve its ecological function without
degrading other existing functions.
Exemption or Exempt development: Exempt developments are those set forth in WAC 173-
27-040 and RCW 90.58.030(3)(e), RCW 90.58.140(9), RCW 90.58.147, RCW 90.58.355, and
RCW 90.58.515. See also "Shoreline exemption, letter of'.
Page 76 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Feasible: An action, such as a project, mitigation measure, or preservation requirement, which
meets all of the following conditions:
1. The action can be accomplished with technologies and methods that have been
used in the past in similar circumstances, or studies or tests have demonstrated
in similar circumstances that such approaches are currently available and likely
to achieve the intended results;
2. The action provides a reasonable likelihood of achieving its intended purpose;
3. The action does not physically preclude achieving the project's intended legal
use; and
4. In cases where the SMP requires certain actions unless they are infeasible, the
burden of proving infeasibility is on the applicant. In determining an action's
infeasibility, the City may weigh the action's relative public costs and public
benefits, considered in the short- and long-term time frames.
Fill: The addition of soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, earth retaining structure, or other material
to an area waterward of the OHWM, in wetlands, or on shorelands in a manner that raises the
elevation or creates dry land. Depositing topsoil in a dry upland area for landscaping purposes is
not considered a fill.
Flood hazard reduction: Measures taken to reduce flood damage or hazards. Flood hazard
reduction measures may consist of nonstructural measures, such as setbacks, land use controls,
wetland restoration, dike removal, use relocation, biotechnical measures, and stormwater
management programs, and of structural measures, such as dikes, levees, revetments,
floodwalls, channel realignment, and elevation of structures consistent with the National Flood
Insurance Program.
Footprint: That area defined by the outside face of the exterior walls of a structure.
Forest practices: Any activity relating to growing, harvesting, or processing timber, including,
but not limited to, uses defined in RCW 76.09.020.
Grading: The movement or redistribution of the soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, or other
material on a site in a manner that alters the natural contour of the land.
Habitat: The place or type of site where a plant or animal lives and grows.
Habitat enhancement: Actions performed within an existing shoreline, critical area, or buffer to
intentionally increase or augment one or more ecological functions or values, such as increasing
aquatic and riparian plant diversity or cover, increasing structural complexity, installing
environmentally compatible erosion controls, or removing non -indigenous plant or animal species.
Hearings Board: The Shoreline Hearings Board established by the SMA.
Height: Height is measured from average grade level to the highest point of a structure; provided
that television antennas, chimneys, and similar appurtenances shall not be used in calculating
height; provided further that temporary construction equipment is excluded from this calculation.
In -stream structure: A structure placed by humans within a stream or river waterward of the
OHWM that either causes or has the potential to cause water impoundment or cause the
diversion, obstruction, or modification of water flow. In -stream structures may include those for
hydroelectric generation, irrigation, water supply, flood control, transportation, utility service
transmission, fish habitat enhancement, recreation, or other purpose.
Industrial uses: Facilities for processing, manufacturing, fabrication, assembly, and storage of
finished or semi -finished products.
Page 77 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Afasver Program
Landward: To, or towards, the land in a direction away from a water body.
May: The action is acceptable, provided it conforms to the provisions of this SMP.
Mining: The removal of sand, gravel, soil, minerals, and other earth materials for commercial
and other uses.
Mitigation or Mitigation sequencing: To avoid, minimize, or compensate for adverse impacts.
Native: For the purposes of this SMP, "native" means a plant or animal species that naturally
occurs in Spokane County, or occurred in Spokane County at the time of Euro-American
exploration and settlement, beginning in the early 1911 century.
No net loss: The standard for protection of shoreline ecological functions established in RCW
36.70A.480 as adopted or amended, and as that standard is interpreted on an on -going basis by
courts, the Growth Management Hearings Board, or the Hearings Board. The concept of "no net
loss" as used herein, recognizes that any use or development has potential or actual, short-term
or long-term impacts which may diminish ecological function and that through application of
appropriate development standards and employment of mitigation measures in accordance with
mitigation sequencing, those impacts will be addressed in a manner necessary to assure that the
end result will not cumulatively diminish the shoreline resources and values as they currently
exist. Where uses or development that impact ecological functions are necessary to achieve
other objectives of RCW 90.58.020, the no net loss standard protects to the greatest extent
feasible existing ecological functions and favors avoidance of new impacts to habitat and
ecological functions before implementing other measures designed to achieve no net loss of
ecological functions.
Nonconforming structure: A structure within the -shoreline which was lawfully
constructed or established within the application process prior to the effective date of the SMA or
the SMP, or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards
of the SMP. Commented [AC131: Attachment A, 2017g
Nonconforming use: A shoreline use which was lawfully established or established within the
application process prior to the effective date of the SMA or the SMP, or amendments thereto,
but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the SMP.
Non water -oriented uses: Any uses that are not water -dependent, water -related, or water -
enjoyment as defined by the SMP.
Off -site mitigation: To replace wetlands or other shoreline environmental resources away from
the site on which a resource has been impacted by an activity.
Ordinary high water mark (OHWM): The mark that will be found by examining the bed and
banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and
so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of
the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may
naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by
the City, provided that in any area where the OHWM cannot be found, the OHWM adjoining
freshwater shall be the line of mean high water.
Pier: A fixed platform over water used for moorage of recreational or commercial watercraft
Page 78 of 82
City of Spokane Malley Shoreline Muster Program
Priority habitats and species: Habitats and species designated by the Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife as requiring protective measures for their survival due to population status,
sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational, commercial, or tribal importance. Priority
species include State Endangered, Threatened, Sensitive, and Candidate species; animal
aggregations (such as bat colonies) considered vulnerable; and species of recreational,
commercial, or tribal importance that are vulnerable. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
maintains maps of known locations of priority habitats and species in Washington State.
Provisions: Policies, regulations, standards, guideline criteria, or environment designations.
Public access: The ability of the general public to reach, touch, and enjoy the water's edge, to
travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations.
Public facilities: Facilities and structures, operated for public purpose and benefit, including, but
not limited to, solid waste handling and disposal, water transmission lines, sewage treatment
facilities and mains, power generating and transfer facilities, gas distribution lines and storage
facilities, stormwater mains, and wastewater treatment facilities.
Qualified professional: A person who, in the opinion of the Director, has appropriate education,
training and experience in the applicable field to generate a report or study required in this SMP.
1. For reports related to wetlands, this means a certified professional wetland
scientist or a non -certified professional wetland scientist with a minimum of five
years' experience in the field of wetland science and with experience preparing
wetland reports.
2. For reports related to critical aquifer recharge areas, this means a
hydrogeologist, geologist, or engineer, who is licensed in the State of
Washington and has experience preparing hydrogeologic assessments.
3. For reports related to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas this means a
biologist with experience preparing reports for the relevant type of habitat.
4. For reports related to geologically hazardous areas this means a geotechnical
engineer or geologist, licensed in the State of Washington, with experience
analyzing geologic, hydrologic, and ground water flow systems.
5. For reports related to frequently flooded areas this means a hydrologist or
engineer, licensed in the State of Washington with experience in preparing flood
hazard assessments.
6. For reports related to cultural and archaeological resources and historic
preservation, this means a professional archaeologist or historic preservation
professional.
RCW: Revised Code of Washington.
Recreational use: Commercial and public facilities designed and used to provide recreational
opportunities to the public.
Residential use: Uses for residential purpose.
Restore, restoration, or ecological restoration: The reestablishment or upgrading of impaired
ecological shoreline processes or functions. This may be accomplished through measures
including, but not limited to, revegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline structures, and removal
or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not imply a requirement for returning the
shoreline area to aboriginal or pre -European settlement conditions.
Page 79 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Masler Program
Riparian area: The interface area between land and a river or stream. The area includes plant
and wildlife habitats and communities along the river margins and banks.
Setback or shoreline setback: The minimum required distance between a structure and the
shoreline buffer that is to remain free of structures.
Shall: An action that is mandatory and not discretionary.
Shorelands or shoreland areas: Those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all directions
as measured on a horizontal plane from the OHWM; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas
landward 200 feet from such floodways; and all wetlands associated with the streams and lakes
which are subject to the provisions of the SMA and the SMP; all of which will be designated as to
location by Ecology.
Shoreline exemption, letter of: Documentation provided by the City that proposed development
qualifies as an Exempt Development (as that term is defined herein) and that the proposed
development is consistent with chapter 21.50 SVMC and other local and state requirements,
including the State Environmental Policy Act as adopted or amended when applicable.
Shoreline jurisdiction and shoreline areas: All "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands".
Shoreline Management Act (SMA): The Shoreline Management Act of 1971 as set forth in
chapter 90.58 RCW as adopted or amended.
Shoreline Master Program (SMP): The comprehensive use plan applicable to the shorelines of
the state within the City, including the use regulations, together with maps, goals and policies,
and standards developed in accordance with the policies enunciated in RCW 90.58.020.
Shoreline modifications: Those actions that modify the physical configuration or qualities of the
shoreline area, usually through the construction of a physical element such as a dike, breakwater,
pier, weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline structure. They can include other
actions, such as clearing, grading, or application of chemicals.
Shoreline permit(s): Means any substantial development, variance, conditional use permit, or
revision authorized under chapter 21.50 SVMC and chapter 90.58 RCW.
Shoreline stabilization: Actions taken to prevent or mitigate erosion impacts to property or
structures caused by shoreline processes such as currents, floods, or wind action. Shoreline
stabilization includes, but is not limited to, structural armoring approaches such as bulkheads,
bulkhead alternatives, and nonstructural approaches such as bioengineering.
Shoreline substantial development permit: A permit required by the SMP for substantial
development within the shoreline jurisdiction.
Shorelines: All of the water areas of the state, including reservoirs, and their associated
shorelands, together with the lands underlying them, except (a) shorelines of statewide
significance; (b) shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual
flow is 20 cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream
segments; and (c) shorelines on lakes less than 20 acres in size and wetlands associated with
such small lakes.
Shorelines of statewide significance: Has the meaning as set forth in RCW 90.58.030(2)(f) as
adopted or amended.
Shorelines of the state: The total of all "shorelines' and "shorelines of statewide significance"
within the state.
Should: An action which is required unless there is a demonstrated, compelling reason based
on policy of the SMA and the SMP, against taking the action.
Page 80 of82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Hasler Program
Substantial development: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds
$6,416, or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or
shorelines of the state. The current thresholds will be adjusted for inflation by the State Office of
Financial Management every five years, beginning from July 1, 2007.
Temporary impact: Impacts to a critical area that are less than one year and expected to be
restored following construction.
Transportation facilities: Facilities consisting of the means and equipment necessary for the
movement of passengers or goods.
Upland: Generally described as the dry land area above and landward of the OHWM.
Utilities: Services and facilities that produce, convey, store or process power, gas, sewage,
water, stormwater, communications, oil, and waste.
Variance: A process to grant relief from the specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards
through submission of a shoreline variance. A variance is not a means to change the allowed
use of a shoreline.
Viewing platform: A platform located landward of the OHWM used for viewing pleasure.
WAC: Washington Administrative Code.
Water -dependent use: A use or portion of a use which cannot exist in a location that is not
adjacent to the water and which is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its
operations.
Water -enjoyment use: A recreational use or other use that facilitates public access to the
shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use; or a use that provides for recreational use or
aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for a substantial number of people as a general characteristic
of the use and which through location, design, and operation ensures the public's ability to enjoy
the physical and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. In order to qualify as a water -enjoyment use,
the use must be open to the general public and the shoreline -oriented space within the project
must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use that fosters shoreline enjoyment.
Water -oriented use: A use that is water -dependent, water -related, or water -enjoyment, or a
combination of such uses.
Water quality: The physical characteristics of water within the shoreline jurisdiction, including
water quantity, hydrological, physical, chemical, aesthetic, recreation -related, and biological
characteristics.
Water quantity: The flow rate and/or flow volume of stormwater or surface water. Where used
in the SMP, the term "water quantity" refers to uses and/or structures regulated under the SMP
affecting water quantity, such as impermeable surfaces and stormwater handling practices.
Water quantity, for purposes of the SMP, does not mean the withdrawal of groundwater or
diversion of surface water pursuant to RCW 90.03.250 through 90.03.340.
Water -related use: A use or portion of a use which is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront
location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location because:
1. The use has a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival
or shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or
2. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water -dependent uses
and the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive
and/or more convenient.
Page 81 of 82
City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program
Wetlands: Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those
artificial wetlands intentionally created from non -wetland sites, including, but not limited to,
irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater
treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1,
1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway.
Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non -wetland areas to
mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
Page 82 of 82
PC ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
As of May 6, 2021
***Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative and subject to change***
To: Commission & Staff
From: PC Secretary Marianne Lemons by direction of John Hohman, Deputy City Manager
Re: Schedule for Upcoming Commission Meetings
May 27
Administrative Report: Tiny Home regulations (Jenny Nickerson)
Study Session: CTA-202 1 -000 1: Title 19 batch amendments (Marty Palaniuk)
June 10
Public Hearing: CTA-2021-0001: Title 19 batch amendments (Marty Palaniuk)
June 24
Study Session: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Mike Basinger/Chaz Bates)
Findings of Fact: CTA-2021-0001: Title 19 batch amendments (Marty Palaniuk)
July 8
Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Mike Basinger/Chaz Bates)
July 22
Study Session: CTA-2021-0002: Heavy/industrial vehicle uses in mixed -use zones (tentative)
August 12
Findings of Fact: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Mike Basinger/Chaz Bates)
August 26
Upcoming issues/topics:
Floodplain regulations update (SVMC 21.30)
CIP program overview
Draft Advance Agenda 5/6/2021 Page 1 of 1