Chapter 20.20


20.20.001    Purpose.

20.20.005    General goals and policies.

20.20.010    Economic development element.

20.20.015    Shoreline public access element.

20.20.020    Recreation element.

20.20.025    Circulation element.

20.20.030    Land use element.

20.20.035    Conservation element.

20.20.040    Historic, cultural, scientific, and educational element.

20.20.045    Flood prevention and minimization element.

20.20.050    Restoration element.

20.20.001 Purpose.

The shoreline master program goals and policies of this chapter reflect the aspirations and concerns that Burien citizens and stakeholders expressed about the city’s shorelines during community and shoreline advisory committee meetings. These goal and policy statements, along with the shoreline land use map, are the foundation for specific guidelines concerning how to regulate and manage activities occurring within the city’s shoreline jurisdiction.

The goals and policies of this element apply to all water bodies and shorelands that meet the definitions set forth in RCW 90.58.030 (Definitions and concepts) unless otherwise specifically stated in the goal or policy. Burien’s shorelines include those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward 200 feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes, and tidal waters. Water bodies in Burien that meet the applicable definitions include Puget Sound waterward to mid channel and Lake Burien. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.005 General goals and policies.

Goal ALL: Develop, implement, and maintain a shoreline master program that results in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes, balances public and private interests in the shoreline, and considers other relevant programs.

(1) Policy ALL 1. The shoreline master program shall result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes.

(2) Policy ALL 2. Regulation and management of Burien’s shorelines should be guided by ongoing and comprehensive science.

(3) Policy ALL 3. The city should be proactive in managing activities within the shoreline jurisdiction.

(4) Policy ALL 4. Implement an adaptive management approach to respond to changes and to ensure continued effectiveness.

(5) Policy ALL 5. The shoreline master program should balance private use and enjoyment of tidelands and adjacent lands with the greater public benefit that shorelines provide, while recognizing the rights of individuals to use and develop private property in a manner consistent with city and other applicable regulations.

(6) Policy ALL 6. When shoreline master program regulations are developed and applied, they should consider site-specific characteristics.

(7) Policy ALL 7. Regulation and management of the city’s shorelines should be coordinated with relevant local, state, federal, and other programs. Such programs include, but are not limited to, those administered by: city of Seattle, city of Normandy Park, city of SeaTac, King County, Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Puget Sound Partnership, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Muckleshoot Tribe, Puyallup Tribe, and Water Resource Inventory Area 9.

(8) Policy ALL 8. Consider an incentive base system to encourage redevelopment projects to comply with accepted shoreline best management practices and standards. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.010 Economic development element.

Goal ED: Ensure healthy, orderly economic growth by allowing those economic activities which will be an asset to the local economy and which result in the least possible adverse effect on the quality of the shoreline and surrounding environment.

(1) Policy ED 1. Protect the beauty and function of the natural environment to maintain a community where people want to live and work.

(2) Policy ED 2. Promote actions ensuring a clean and attractive community. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.015 Shoreline public access element.

Goal PA: Increase and enhance public access to shoreline areas, consistent with the natural shoreline character, private property rights, and public safety.

(1) Policy PA 1. Developments, uses, and activities on or near the shoreline should not impair or detract from public access to the water.

(2) Policy PA 2. Publicly owned shorelines should be limited to water-dependent or public recreational uses, otherwise such shorelines should remain protected open space.

(3) Policy PA 3. Public access to the city’s shorelines should be designed to provide for public safety and to minimize potential impacts to private property and individual privacy rights.

(4) Policy PA 4. Public access should be provided as close as possible to the water’s edge with no net loss of shoreline ecological function and without adversely impacting private property rights and personal privacy rights. Public access should be designed for handicapped and physically impaired persons.

(5) Policy PA 5. The city should seek opportunities to develop new public access areas in locations dispersed throughout the shoreline.

(6) Policy PA 6. The vacation or sale of street ends, other public rights-of-way and tax title properties that abut shoreline areas shall be prohibited except as provided for in RCW 35.79.035 (Streets – Vacation). The city should protect these areas for public access and public viewpoints.

(7) Policy PA 7. Waterfront street ends should be recognized as:

(a) An important community resource that provides visual and physical access to the Puget Sound;

(b) Special use parks which serve the community, yet fit and support the character of the surrounding neighborhoods;

(c) A destination resource, where limited facilities and enhancements are provided.

(8) Policy PA 8. The city should manage and develop waterfront street ends by:

(a) Supporting their use by residents citywide, yet ensuring that the street ends and their supporting facilities are developed at a level or capacity which is appropriate to the neighborhood character, promotes safety, protects private property rights and individual privacy, and is consistent with city risk management practices;

(b) Ensuring that public parking is available and limited to a level appropriate to the capacity of the public access site, and is harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood;

(c) Ensuring that the waterfront street ends are preserved and maintained with limited enhancements, such as places to sit or rest which fit in with the natural environment of the area;

(d) Installing signs that indicate the public’s right of access, the rules of use, and penalties for misuse;

(e) Installing limited trail improvements and enhancements to allow access to the water;

(f) Protecting adjacent private property including but not limited to protecting individual privacy rights and ensuring public safety; and

(g) Developing a street ends plan that promotes waterfront access and public safety.

(9) Policy PA 9. Waterfront street ends or other shoreline access should be planned in conjunction with the affected neighborhoods. However, the broader community should be notified during the public notification process.

(10) Policy PA 10. The city should disseminate information that identifies all locations for public access to the shorelines.

(11) Policy PA 11. The public’s visual access to the city’s shorelines from streets, paths, trails and designated viewing areas should be conserved and enhanced.

(12) Policy PA 12. Public views from the shoreline upland areas should be enhanced and conserved, while recognizing that enhancement of views should not be necessarily construed to mean removal of vegetation.

(13) Policy PA 13. Promote a coordinated system of connected pathways, sidewalks, passageways between buildings, beach walks, and shoreline access points that increase the amount and diversity of opportunities for walking and chances for personal discoveries. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.020 Recreation element.

Goal REC: Develop a well-maintained, interconnected system of multi-functional parks, recreation facilities, and open spaces that: is attractive, safe, and accessible for all geographic regions and population segments within the city; supports the community’s well-established neighborhoods and small town atmosphere; protects private property rights and results in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes.

(1) Policy REC 1. Recreation facilities in the shoreline area should be restricted to those dependent upon a shoreline location, or those benefiting from a shoreline or in-water location that are in the public interest.

(2) Policy REC 2. Recreational developments should be located, designed and operated to be compatible with, and minimize adverse impacts on, environmental quality and valuable natural features as well as on adjacent surrounding land and water uses. Favorable consideration should be given to proposals which complement their environment and surrounding land and water uses, and result in no net loss of ecological functions.

(3) Policy REC 3. Public information and education programs should be developed and implemented to help ensure that the public is aware of park regulations and private property rights, and to prevent the abuse of the shoreline and its natural ecological system.

(4) Policy REC 4. The city shall plan to provide, in coordination with other agencies, a range of park facilities that serve a variety of recreational and open space purposes. Such planning should use the following designations and guidelines to provide such diversity:

(a) Mini or Pocket Park.

(i) Use Description. Passive recreation or specialized facilities that may serve a concentrated or limited population such as children or senior citizens.

(ii) Service Area. Approximately one-third of a mile radius.

(iii) Size. No minimum to approximately one acre.

(iv) Desirable Characteristics. These parks should be in close proximity to dwellings and/or other centers of activity. Mini parks should be designed for intensive use and should be accessible and visible from surrounding area.

(v) Examples. In Burien these types of parks are primarily private parks consisting of beach access for adjacent subdivisions, view appreciation areas (bench or platform), picnic tables and trees in a small area, children’s play area, game tables, or planted areas.

(vi) Other Considerations. Since maintenance costs of these smaller parks are high relative to their service areas, few jurisdictions are able to meet the desired quantity. This type of park is most suitable to provide unique local needs, such as shore access, or as a consideration in the design of new development. The city should seek a variety of means for financing and maintaining mini parks, including considering opportunities for community stewardship and grant or private funding.

(b) Regional Parks.

(i) Use Description. Areas of natural or ornamental quality for outdoor recreation such as picnicking, boating, beach activities, swimming, and trails. Such parks may contain special amenities, facilities or features that attract people from throughout the surrounding region. Such facilities require extensive on-site parking and good access by automobile.

(ii) Service Area. Approximately one-half to one hour driving time.

(iii) Size. Approximately 90 acres.

(iv) Desirable Characteristics. Contiguous to or encompassing significant natural resources.

(v) Examples. Seahurst Park.

(c) Special Use Park.

(i) Use Description. Specialized or single-purpose recreational activities such as walking and bicycle trails, street ends, or areas that preserve buildings, sites or features of historical significance.

(ii) Service Area. Variable.

(iii) Size. Depends on nature of facility.

(iv) Desirable Characteristics. Compatibility with adjacent facilities and uses.

(v) Examples. Examples within Burien shoreline consist primarily of designated viewpoints and historical markers, and waterfront street ends (including those at SW 170th Pl., SW 163rd Pl., and at the intersection of Maplewild Ave. SW and SW 172nd St.).

(d) Conservancy Park.

(i) Use Description. Conservancy parks are formally designated public resource areas. In such parks the primary management objectives are protection and management of historical, cultural and natural resources, including fish and wildlife habitat areas, and may include appropriate passive recreational activities.

(ii) Service Area. None.

(iii) Size. As appropriate for the resource.

(iv) Desirable Characteristics. As appropriate for the resource.

(v) Examples. Currently Salmon Creek Ravine is most appropriately classified in this category although its feasibility for including other types of park activities consistent with its character should be evaluated. This category would also apply to any significant formally designated land, protected wetlands or steep slope areas by private or public means.

(5) Policy REC 5. Access for motorized vessels should be discouraged at Seahurst Park. Access for nonmotorized craft should be considered if access for such craft can be provided in an environmentally sensitive manner.

(6) Policy REC 6. Where appropriate, recreational developments should make adequate provisions for:

(a) Vehicular and pedestrian access, both on site and off site;

(b) Proper water supply and sewage waste disposal methods;

(c) Security and fire protection;

(d) The prevention of overflow and trespass onto adjacent properties, including but not limited to landscaping, fencing and posting of property; and

(e) Buffering of such development from adjacent private property or natural area.

(7) Policy REC 7. Trails and pathways on steep shoreline bluffs should be located, designed and maintained to protect bank stability without the need for shoreline armoring.

(8) Policy REC 8. Mooring buoys, in general, are beneficial in enabling increased recreational opportunities. However, the city should ensure that their possible negative effects on physical and visual environments are avoided.

(9) Policy REC 9. Artificial marine life habitats should be encouraged in order to provide increased aquatic life for recreation. Such habitats should be constructed in areas of low habitat diversity and in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

(10) Policy REC 10. The linkage of shoreline parks, recreation areas and public access points with linear systems, such as hiking paths, bicycle paths, easements and/or scenic drives, should be encouraged.

(11) Policy REC 11. Development of recreational facility along city shorelines should implement low-impact development techniques whenever feasible. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.025 Circulation element.

Goal CI: Provide safe, reasonable, and adequate circulation systems in the shoreline area that will have the least possible adverse effect on unique or fragile shoreline features and existing ecological systems, while contributing to the functional and visual enhancement of the shoreline.

(1) Policy CI 1. Minimize impacts to the topography and other natural characteristics of the shoreline by appropriately locating transportation routes. New roadways for vehicle circulation should be located outside of or minimized within the shoreline area.

(2) Policy CI 2. Cross Puget Sound bridges should be prohibited within the Burien shoreline jurisdiction.

(3) Policy CI 3. Provide and/or enhance physical and visual public access along shoreline public roads and trails when appropriate given topography, views, natural features, and surrounding land uses.

(4) Policy CI 4. Public transit systems should provide service to designated public parks within the city.

(5) Policy CI 5. Wherever practicable, safe pedestrian and bicycle movement on and off roadways in the shoreline area should be encouraged as a means of personal transportation and recreation.

(6) Policy CI 6. Parking in shoreline areas should directly serve a permitted shoreline use. Parking developed for public access points should be limited to the number of spaces consistent with the capacity of those public access points and is harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood.

(7) Policy CI 7. Parking facilities should be located and designed to minimize adverse impacts, including those related to: storm water runoff; water quality; visual qualities; public access; and vegetation and habitat maintenance.

(8) Policy CI 8. Parking should be planned to achieve optimum use. Where possible, parking should serve more than one use.

(9) Policy CI 9. Utilities are necessary to serve shoreline uses and shall be properly installed so as to protect the shoreline and water from contamination and degradation.

(10) Policy CI 10. Utility facilities and rights-of-way should be located outside of the shoreline area to the maximum extent possible. When utility lines require a shoreline location, they should be placed underground.

(11) Policy CI 11. Utility facilities should be designed and located in a manner which preserves the natural landscape and shoreline ecology and minimizes conflicts with present and planned land uses.

(12) Policy CI 12. Parking for non-water-dependent uses should be located as far away as feasible from shorelines. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.030 Land use element.

Goal USE: Provide functional and attractive shoreline uses that are appropriate in scale, configuration, and location, and are sensitive to and do not degrade habitat and ecological systems and other shoreline resources.

(1) Policy USE 1. The shoreline master program shall govern the development of all designated shorelines of the city. Lands adjacent to these areas shall be managed in a manner consistent with the shoreline master program.

(2) Policy USE 2. The city will strive to ensure that basic community values are reflected in the city’s land use and decision making processes, while recognizing the rights of individuals to use and develop private property in a manner consistent with city regulations.

(3) Policy USE 3. Ensure the appropriate location, design, and operation of all activities, development, and redevelopment in the shoreline.

(4) Policy USE 4. Incentives should be available to encourage the removal and/or reduction of nonconformances.

(5) Policy USE 5. If feasible, septic systems should be connected to the sanitary sewer system where connections are available.

(6) Policy USE 6. Any existing single-family lot that was legally subdivided or legally created prior to enactment of subdivision statutes prior to incorporation or annexation shall be considered a legally conforming lot for building purposes, providing the size of the lot was not reduced by more than 50 percent through acquisition for public purposes, and on such lots new homes may be built and existing houses may be expanded and remodeled; provided, that applicable setbacks, lot coverage, critical area restrictions, design review requirements (if any), height limits and other applicable regulations in the zoning code are met.

(7) Policy USE 7. When determining buildable lot size for residential development, the area of a lot covered by water (including but not limited to lakes or the Puget Sound) shall not be included in the calculation.

(8) Policy USE 8. The planned densities for single-family development should encourage a lower development potential in areas with development constraints.

(9) Policy USE 9. The low density residential neighborhood designation will provide for low density residential development. Development within this designation includes existing neighborhoods that are zoned for four units net per acre or less.

(a) Allowed Uses and Description. The low density residential neighborhood designation allows single-family residential uses and their accessory uses at a density of four units per net acre or less, due to the constraints posed by critical areas. This policy may be implemented by more than one zoning category, based on the ability of the land and public facilities to support development. Development standards, for such items as impervious surfaces, streetscapes, sidewalks and storm water drainage, may vary within each zoning category based on the existing character of the area.

(b) Designation Criteria. Properties designated low density residential neighborhood should reflect the following criteria:

(i) The area is already generally characterized by single-family residential development at four units per acre or less;

(ii) Relative to other residential areas within the city, the area is characterized by lower intensity development as shown on Map LU-2 of the comprehensive plan;

(iii) The land is designated as a potential landslide hazard area, steep slope area, or wetland on the city of Burien’s critical areas map;

(iv) The existing and planned public facilities for the area cannot adequately support a higher density; and

(v) The area is subject to existing impacts from high levels of airport-related noise.

(10) Policy USE 10. Clustering of housing units may be allowed on lots designated for residential development that contain steep slopes and are located adjacent to an urban environment.

(11) Policy USE 11. As slope increases, development intensity, site coverage, and vegetation removal should decrease and thereby minimize the potential for drainage problems, soil erosion, siltation and landslides. Slopes of 40 percent or greater should be retained in a natural state, free of structures and other land surface modifications.

(a) Single-family homes and detached single-family garages on existing legally established lots are exempted from this restriction; provided, that:

(i) The application of this restriction would deny any appropriate use of this property;

(ii) There is no other appropriate economic use with less impact;

(iii) The proposed development does not pose a threat to public health, safety or welfare on or off the development site;

(iv) Any alterations permitted to the critical area shall be the minimum necessary to allow for economic use of the property;

(v) An analysis of soils, footings and foundations, and drainage be prepared by qualified professionals, certifying that the proposed activity is safe and will not adversely affect the steep slope hazard area or buffer;

(vi) There are adequate plans, as determined by the city, for storm water and vegetation management;

(vii) It is the applicant’s responsibility to show that these provisions are met through an appropriate mechanism such as, or similar to, the SEPA process.

(b) Short plats or other divisions of an existing legal lot shall only be approved if all resulting lots are buildable under this restriction.

(c) It is the applicant’s responsibility to show that these provisions are met through an appropriate mechanism such as, or similar to, the SEPA process.

(12) Policy USE 12. The city should prohibit development on areas prone to erosion and landslide hazards. Further, the city should restrict development on potentially unstable land to ensure public safety and conformity with existing natural constraints, unless the risks and adverse impacts associated with such development can be appropriately mitigated.

(13) Policy USE 13. Land uses on steep slopes should be designed to prevent property damage and environmental degradation, and to enhance open space and wildlife habitat.

(14) Policy USE 14. Where there is a high probability of erosion, grading should be kept to a minimum and disturbed vegetation should be restored as soon as feasible. In all cases, the city shall require appropriate site design and construction measures to control erosion and sedimentation.

(15) Policy USE 15. The city should have development standards that promote the siting of new structures such that they will not require shoreline stabilization and protective measures in the future.

(16) Policy USE 16. Shoreline stabilization and protective measures should be limited in number and extent. The use of “soft” stabilization and protective measures, such as vegetation, is preferred over the use of “hard” measures, such as concrete bulkheads.

(17) Policy USE 17. Encourage joint-use activities in proposed shoreline developments.

(18) Policy USE 18. Wakes generated by vessels operating in the shoreline area should be minimized in order to reduce adverse impacts on the shoreline environment.

(19) Policy USE 19. Limit use of pesticides and herbicides within shoreline jurisdiction.

(20) Policy USE 20. Development should be designed to minimize impacts to both views of the shoreline and views from the water. Building orientation, height and the creation of view corridors shall be considered in site and structure design. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.035 Conservation element.

Goal CON: Preserve and enhance shoreline natural resources in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare; maintain the integrity of the natural environment; and preserve the quality of life in Burien.

(1) Policy CON 1. Protect critical areas and shoreline ecological processes and functions through regulatory and nonregulatory means. Protection may include acquisition of key properties, regulation of development, and incentives to encourage ecologically sound design.

(2) Policy CON 2. The city shall ensure that uses and development in shoreline areas are compatible with the shoreline environments designated in this shoreline master program. Adherence to these designations will ensure that sensitive habitat, ecological systems, and other shoreline resources are protected.

(3) Policy CON 3. The city of Burien’s critical areas map shall be used as a reference for identifying the city’s critical areas. Other unmapped critical areas do exist throughout the city. Any site containing critical areas within shoreline jurisdiction is subject to the special development regulations and conditions found in this shoreline master program.

(4) Policy CON 4. Development should be directed toward areas where their adverse impacts on critical areas can be minimized.

(5) Policy CON 5. New development or redevelopment should avoid or mitigate additional loss of shoreline ecological functions. Developments should be encouraged to improve ecological functions and restore riparian buffers.

(6) Policy CON 6. The city shall maintain a system of development regulations and a permitting system to prevent the destruction of critical areas. Development regulations should at a minimum address wetland protection, aquifer recharge areas important for potable water, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas.

(7) Policy CON 7. The city shall require permit review approval before any activity or construction is allowed to occur in, adjacent to, or impact a critical area.

(8) Policy CON 8. The city shall develop land use regulations to buffer critical areas from the impacts of adjacent land uses.

(9) Policy CON 9. The city requires the use of best available science for protecting critical areas within the community pursuant to the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A.172(1) (Critical Areas).

(10) Policy CON 10. The city should provide education and technical assistance on low-impact development techniques.

(11) Policy CON 11. Provide public outreach and education about shoreline ecological functions and processes, and engage the public in stewardship and enhancement activities.

(12) Policy CON 12. Encourage minimizing the amount of impervious surfaces in new development through the use of appropriate low-impact development techniques and removing paved areas or using retrofit options in existing developments, where applicable, to minimize runoff.

(13) Policy CON 13. The city shall consider the impacts of new development on water quality as part of its environmental review process and require where appropriate any mitigation measures.

(14) Policy CON 14. Educate the public on water quality issues and impacts of storm water flow.

(15) Policy CON 15. Educate individuals and households about different ways to reduce pollution.

(16) Policy CON 16. If no feasible alternative exists, a limited amount of development may occur on wetlands and floodplains. In these instances, a broad range of site planning techniques should be explored to minimize impacts on these critical areas.

(17) Policy CON 17. All wetland functions should be considered in evaluating wetland mitigation proposals, including fish and wildlife habitat, flood storage, water quality, recreation, educational opportunities, and aesthetics.

(18) Policy CON 18. The city will protect wetlands by maximizing infiltration opportunities and promoting the conservation of forest cover and native vegetation.

(19) Policy CON 19. Mitigation for any adverse impacts on wetlands shall be provided in the same basin within which the impacts occur.

(20) Policy CON 20. The city shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of land, wildlife and vegetative resources as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Such mitigation may involve the retention of significant habitats.

(21) Policy CON 21. The city shall encourage an increase in tree canopies through the addition and the preservation of existing vegetation and use of landscaping as an integral part of development plans.

(22) Policy CON 22. The city should require development proposals to include nonstructural measures to stabilize soils, hillsides, bluffs and ravine sidewalls and to promote wildlife habitat by removing invasive vegetation and retaining or restoring native vegetation.

(23) Policy CON 23. The city should consider developing policies that balance the removal of vegetation to preserve and enhance views with the need to retain vegetation to promote slope stability and open space.

(24) Policy CON 24. Enhance riparian vegetation to improve shoreline ecological functions and processes where possible.

(25) Policy CON 25. The city should maintain and enhance existing species and habitat diversity including fish and wildlife habitat that supports the greatest diversity of native species.

(26) Policy CON 26. All development activities shall be located, designed, constructed and managed to avoid disturbance of adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources, including spawning, nesting, rearing and habitat areas and migratory routes.

(27) Policy CON 27. Fish and wildlife habitat should be protected, conserved and enhanced, including:

(a) Habitats for species which have been identified as endangered, threatened, or sensitive by the state or federal government;

(b) Priority species and habitats listed in the adopted King County comprehensive plan, October 2008, as amended;

(c) Shellfish areas;

(d) Kelp and eelgrass beds;

(e) Herring and smelt spawning areas; and

(f) Wildlife habitat networks designated by the city.

(28) Policy CON 28. Fish and wildlife should be maintained through conservation and enhancement of terrestrial, air and aquatic habitats.

(29) Policy CON 29. The city should ensure that habitat networks throughout the city are designated and mapped. The network should be of sufficient width to protect habitat and dispersal zones for small mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and birds. These networks should be protected through incentives, regulation and other appropriate mechanisms. Site planning should be coordinated during development review to ensure that connections are made or maintained amongst segments of the network.

(30) Policy CON 30. Native plant communities and wildlife habitats shall be integrated with other land uses where possible. Development shall protect wildlife habitat through site design and landscaping. Landscaping, screening, or vegetated buffers required during development review shall retain, salvage and/or reestablish native vegetation whenever feasible. Development within or adjacent to wildlife habitat networks shall incorporate design techniques that protect and enhance wildlife habitat values.

(31) Policy CON 31. The city shall promote voluntary wildlife enhancement projects which buffer and expand existing wildlife habitat, through educational and incentive programs for individuals and businesses.

(32) Policy CON 32. The city shall seek to retain as open space those areas that provide essential habitat for any rare, threatened or endangered plant or wildlife species.

(33) Policy CON 33. The city should maintain, protect and enhance greenbelts, riparian corridors and wildlife habitat corridors so that the extent and intensity of the built environment is balanced by these natural features.

(34) Policy CON 34. The city shall work with property owners to encourage nonpurchase options such as conservation easements, current use easements, and development covenants to preserve open space and greenbelts within the city’s neighborhoods. The city should also accept donations of properties where public access is anticipated or planned. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.040 Historic, cultural, scientific, and educational element.

Goal HCSE: Identify, protect, preserve, and restore buildings, sites, and areas in the shoreline having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational value for educational purposes, scientific endeavors, and enjoyment by the general public.

(1) Policy HCSE 1. The city should protect buildings, sites, and areas in the shoreline having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational value through designation, acquisition by purchase or gift, and incentives for preservation.

(2) Policy HCSE 2. Ensure that properties having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational value are protected from undue adverse impacts associated with public or private uses and activities.

(3) Policy HCSE 3. The city should consider developing and implementing measures which preserve trees of historical significance.

(4) Policy HCSE 4. Encourage educational projects and programs, including signage, that foster a greater appreciation of the importance of buildings, sites, and areas in the shoreline having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational value, as well as of shoreline management and environmental conservation. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.045 Flood prevention and minimization element.

Goal FLD: Prevent and minimize flood damage to public and private property by locating development away from flood-prone areas and by protecting and restoring shoreline ecological functions and processes.

(1) Policy FLD 1. Discourage new development in shoreline areas that would be harmed by flood conditions, or which would create or intensify flood hazard impacts on other properties.

(2) Policy FLD 2. The capacity of natural drainage courses shall not be diminished by development or other activities.

(3) Policy FLD 3. New structural flood hazard reduction measures shall only be allowed where demonstrated to be necessary, and when nonstructural methods are infeasible and mitigation is accomplished. New structural flood reduction measures shall be located landward of associated wetlands and buffer areas, except where no alternative exists as documented in a geotechnical analysis.

(4) Policy FLD 4. Monitor sea level rise and accordingly adjust development standards and building setbacks to minimize flooding potential. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]

20.20.050 Restoration element.

Goal REST: Restore areas which are ecologically degraded to the greatest extent feasible while maintaining appropriate use of the shoreline.

(1) Policy REST 1. Promote restoration actions that are doable, practical, and effective.

(2) Policy REST 2. The city shall be a good steward of public lands and should integrate restoration and/or enhancement of fish and wildlife habitats into capital improvement projects whenever feasible.

(3) Policy REST 3. Establish incentives that provide opportunities for new development or redevelopment activities in the shoreline to restore impaired ecological functions and processes. Incentives might include, but are not limited to: flexible development standards (e.g., setbacks, height limits, lot coverage), reduced or waiver of permit fees, and tax relief.

(4) Policy REST 4. The city shall promote voluntary shoreline enhancement projects through educational and incentive programs for individuals and organizations.

(5) Policy REST 5. The city should implement the restoration plan associated with this shoreline master program.

(6) Policy REST 6. Improve natural stream and shoreline conditions to an environmental quality level that supports the return and continuation of salmon runs and eliminates fish blockages.

(7) Policy REST 7. Stream banks and stream channels should be maintained or restored to their natural condition wherever such conditions or opportunities exist.

(8) Policy REST 8. Increase availability of large woody debris and opportunities for recruitment in the nearshore zone.

(9) Policy REST 9. Restore degraded shoreline areas with native species.

(10) Policy REST 10. The city should investigate partnerships with local environmental groups, city, state or county agencies, or tribes to implement projects and conduct follow-up monitoring and reporting. [Ord. 581 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]