08-01-12 bainbridge island smp meeting 5

7/31/2019 08-01-12 Bainbridge Island SMP Meeting 5

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/08-01-12-bainbridge-island-smp-meeting-5 1/15

City of Bainbridge Island

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

MEMORANDUM

TO: City Council

FROM: Libby Hudson, Long Range Planning Manager Ryan Ericson, Associate Planner

DATE: July 27, 2012

RE: SMP Update – Council Study Session #5, August 1, 2012

Purpose of the Meeting

Shoreline Stabilization – Focus on repair and replacement of existing bulkheads and other

stabilization structures.

Overwater Structures – Focus on repair and replacement of existing docks and other overwater structures.

Actions requested at this meeting are preliminary approval of the following sections:

o Shoreline Stabilization, Section 6.2

o Overwater Structures, Section 6.3



What are Shoreline Modifications?

The City’s existing Shoreline Master Program distinguishes between shoreline uses and shorelinemodifications, as encouraged by the state Guidelines. Shoreline modifications include construction of

physical elements along the shoreline (such as bulkheads, dikes, breakwater, dredged basins, fill, docks), and

also actions such as grading or significant vegetation removal. Shoreline modifications are usually associatedwith a shoreline use; for example, a shoreline fill may be required to support development of a ferry terminal.

During the Planning Commission review of the SMP Update, two shoreline modification topics were of high

interest to the public: the repair and replacement of existing bulkheads (shoreline stabilization) and repair and replacement of existing docks (overwater structures). This memo briefly discusses the state guidance for managing these types of shoreline modifications. The memo also summarizes the Planning Commission’srecommendations related to regulating new shoreline modifications and repairing or replacing existing

modifications, with a focus on bulkheads and docks.

State Guidance for Shoreline Modifications

The Guidelines provide principles for managing shoreline modifications, which must be implemented as partof a local master program [WAC 173-231(2)], including:

Allowing structural modifications only where there is a demonstrated need to support or protect a

primary structure or legally existing use that is in danger of loss or substantial damage OR for

mitigation or enhancement purposes;Reducing the adverse effects of shoreline modifications, and limiting the extent and number;

Allowing shoreline modifications only when appropriate to the specific shoreline and environmental

condition;

Assuring that the shoreline modification does not result in a net loss of ecological functions;

Giving preference to shoreline modifications that have a lesser impact on ecological functions;



Similar to the requirement for new shoreline stabilization structures, the Guidelines require that replacementof existing shoreline stabilization structures such as bulkheads, must demonstrate that the structure is needed

to protect an existing principal building or principal use from erosion caused by current, tidal action or

waves. This need must be demonstrated through a geotechnical report [WAC 173-26-231(3)(C)]. TheGuidelines are silent on the repair of stabilization structures.

Planning Commission Recommendation – Shoreline Stabilization

The SMP Update includes amendments to the sections related to General Shoreline Modifications(Section 6.1) and Shoreline Stabilization (Section 6.2), formerly known in the 1996 SMP as “Armoring

(Revetments and Bulkheads)”. New goals and policies are included to meet the state Guidelines, in

addition to amendments to the regulations. New provisions address the requirement to demonstrate needfor new or replacement bulkheads, and clarify the distinction between replacement and repair, as

follows:

Prohibited types and location of shoreline stabilization – A new section clarifies what types of shoreline

stabilization are prohibited and where. This includes prohibiting shoreline stabilization in shoreline

areas along feeder bluffs or in an accretion shore form or other areas with sensitive processes, except

that in some cases, stabilization measures may be allowed to protect a primary single family structure or essential public or transportation facility. New structural stabilization is also prohibited to protect a

vacant platted residential lot. [Section 6.2.4(4)].

New shoreline stabilization – In order to construct new shoreline stabilization, a geotechnical report

must demonstrate that the primary structure is in danger from erosion caused by current, tidal action or waves, within 3 years. As part of the geotechnical analysis, the proponent must examine and implement

alternatives to structural stabilization in a preferred order: moving from nonstructural means (such as



requirement for a shoreline conditional use permit for a new bulkhead/revetment when there is no

adjacent shoreline stabilization within 100 feet.

Topic 2: Overwater Structures

Overwater structures includes piers, docks and floats.

State GuidanceThe state Guidelines require local jurisdictions to address overwater structures within the local program and

specify that new piers, docks and floats are only allowed for water-dependent uses1 or public access, and

must:

Avoid or minimize ecological impacts;

Be restricted to the minimum size necessary for the intended use; and

Minimize impacts to navigation, public views, and fish and wildlife passage through design anddevelopment location.

The Guidelines also state that local programs should:

Allow docks only when the applicant demonstrates the need to support the intended water-dependentuse; and

Allow new residential developments of two or more dwellings to provide joint-use or community

docks rather than individual docks.

The Guidelines are silent on existing dock repair and replacement beyond the provisions described above.

Planning Commission Recommendation The amendments to the SMP for the Overwater Structures section include revising policies and regulations tomeet the state Guidelines while retaining many of the existing provisions that regulate new piers, docks and

floats and prohibit certain overwater structures



extent possible and there is no change or increase in the dock area or location. In some cases theconfiguration may be altered if the alteration reduces the existing impact to the environment.

Additional Background Information

The City Council may also find the following documents helpful in reviewing the meeting topics:

ETAC Technical Framework: Stabilization, September 29, 2011

Department of Ecology SMP Handbook

o Frequently Asked Questions: Marine Shoreline Armoring and Puget Sound

o Focus on Shoreline Armoring : Healthy Shorelines Equal a Healthy Puget Sound

o Piers, Docks, and Other Structures

Attachments

A: Shoreline Stabilization and Overwater Structures Matrix

http://www.ci.bainbridge-isl.wa.us/documents/pln/etac/shorelinestabilization.pdf



https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1006003.html





http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/shorelines/smp/handbook/pdf/Piers_docks_guidance_1-10-11.pdf








T O P I C

#

SMP DraftSec. # 1996 SMP

City of Bainbridge Island Shoreline Master Program UpdatePlanning Commission Recommendation

Attachment A

Reason/ Applicable State Re

Shoreline Master Program Update - 2012 Council Meeting #5 August 1, 2012

Planning Commission Recommendation Summary Table – High Interest Topics: Shoreline Modification and Overwater Structures – Meet

This Table includes a summary of the applicable existing provisions of the Shoreline Master Program by topic, compared to the Planning Commission draft recommendation for amendments to the Program. This summary does norecommended amendments to the SMP.

Instructions on How to Use This Table

T O P I C

#

SMP DraftSec. # 1996 SMP SMP Update – Planning Commission Recommendation Reason/ Applicable State Re

M a t r i x I t e m #

D

r a f t S M P ( c l e a n )

S e c t i o n #

Summary of existing provisions in the current Program. Section number included in parenthesis.

Related items grouped when possible.

Action Revisions are defined by the following descriptive words:

Retained

Deleted

Modified (combined; broadened)

Added/ New

Summary of Provisions(what is new or different) At end of the summary, the citation from the draft SMP is included and, as applicable the number from theConsistency Analysis conducted by consultant (ICF #).

Summary includes the reason tproposed action:

Eliminate code conflict

Reduce redundancy or Consoprovisions

Clarify code provision

Allow flexibility in applying sta

Maintain code consistency

Summary of State Provisions:

Required (shall/should-must ddemonstrated otherwise)

Meets intent (of WAC/RCW o

Optional (WAC or other leaveprogram)

Not allowed (by WAC or othe

Silent (WAC/RCW or other)



T O P I C

#



Attachment A



High Interest Topic #1: Repair and Replace Shoreline Stabilization – City Council Meeting #5 – August 1, 2012

Section 6.2 1996 SMP – Section V. C Shoreline Armoring Draft SMP Section 6.2Renamed Shoreline Stabilization

Reorganized by Prohibited/Repair/Replacement/New/Submittal

Provides a sequence to determine type of shoreline stabilization technique, giving preference to softer solutions.

Requires a geotechnical report demonstrating a need for new and r eplacement shoreline stabilization

Prohibits development of stabilization in sensitive areas, single family residences excludedRequires mitigation of impacts

Shoreline Stabilization Policies

1 6.2.3 Shoreline armoring should not be constructed waterward of feeder bluffs Modified by changing armoring to shoreline stabilization. [6.2.3(9)] Maintain consistency

2 6.2.3 No specific policy Added policy to require a demonstrated need for new shoreline stabilization for primary uses, publicimprovements, or lawfully constructed structures.[6.2.3(4)]

Clarify code provision Meets intent of:WAC 173-26-231(2)(a)WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(B)

3 6.2.3 No specific policy Added policy to require a demonstrated need for replacement of existing shoreline stabilization for primaryuses, public improvements, or lawfully constructed structures.[6.2.3(5)]

Clarify code provision Meets intent of:WAC 173-26-231(2)(a)WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(C)

Shoreline Stabilization Regulations

1 6.2.4 Shoreline hardening shall not be located on shorelines where:

geo-hydraulic or biological process are sensitive; or

in critical shoreline areas such as: feeder bluffs, marsh/wetlands, or accretion shores

Modified to exclude single family residences and change name to stabilizationProhibitedShoreline Stabilization (except for proposals to protect a primary single family residence or essential public or transportation facility) on shores where valuable geo-hydraulic or biological process are sensitive or in criticalshoreline areas such as feeder bluffs, marshes, wetlands, or accretion shore forms. [6.2.4(4)]

Allow FlexibilityMeets intent of:RCW 90.58.100(6)WAC 173-26-221(2)(ii)(C)&(D)

WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(E)2 6.2.5 No specific regulation exists Added to provide a matrix of type of shoreline permit required [6.2.5(2)] Clarify code provision

Silent

3 6.2.7 No specific regulation exists Added to define repair.Repair of existing structural stabilization shall be repaired when;

Failing, damaged stabilization may be repaired up to 50% of the linear length, greater than 50%considered a replacement

Require mitigation in accordance with 4.1.2

Repair considered cumulative with no more than 50% within a five year period. [6.2.7(2)]

Clarify code provisionSilent on definition of repair May not meet intent of:WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(C) def"Replacement"

4 6.2.8.2 Revetments and bulkheads may be allowed only when evidence is presentedwhich conclusively demonstrates that the following exists:Serious wave erosion threatens existing development or land.

Modified for clarity to provide a numeric threshold for a geotechnical report to demonstrate a need for newshoreline stabilization, provide a provision for minimum distance which does not need a geotechnical report.

A geotechnical report demonstrates a need to protect the primary structure and primary appurtenances fromdanger of loss or substantial damage within 3 years due to shoreline erosion,(b) above, in the absence of hardstabilization, expect when the existing primary single family residence is within 10 feet of the OHWM.[6.2.8.2(1)]

Clarify code provisionMeets intent of:WAC 173-26-231(2)(a)WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(B)WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(D)

5 6.2.8.1 Revetments and bulkheads may be allowed only when evidence is presented

which conclusively demonstrates that the following exists:Serious wave erosion threatens existing development or land.

Modified for clarity to provide a numeric threshold for a geotechnical report to demonstrate a need f or existing

shoreline stabilization, provide a provision for minimum distance which does not need a geotechnical report.

A geotechnical report demonstrates a need to protect the primary structure and primary appurtenances fromdanger of loss or substantial damage within 5 years due to shoreline erosion,(b) above, in the absence of hardstabilization, expect when the existing primary single family residence is within 10 feet of theOHWM.[6.2.8.1(1)]

Clarify code provisionMeets intent of:WAC 173-26-231(2)(a)WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(iii)(C)



T O P I C

#



Attachment A



Shoreline Stabilization - Other changes

Policies

1 6.2.3 The use of armored structural revetments should be limited to situationswhere it is demonstrated that non structural solutions, such as bioengineeringor combination of will not provided sufficient shoreline stabilization

Modified to provide clarity by separating ideas.Discourage shoreline stabilization, particularly hard structural stabilization through application of appropriateshoreline use designations, development standards and public education [6.2.3(1)]

Clarify of code provisionMeets intent of WAC 173-26-231

Required WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)

Modified to provide clarity by separating ideas.Preference is given to types of shoreline stabilization that have a lesser impact on ecological functions and

processes. To protect these functions a sequence of alternatives should be considered. [6.2.3(6)]Modified to provide clarity by separating ideasEncourage non-structural stabilization through non-regulatory methods. Methods should include incentiveprograms to utilize low impact development techniques, shoreline restoration, or technical assistance toshoreline property owners. [6.2.3(12)]

2 6.2.3 Because of the potential impact to littoral longshore drift system bulkheadconstruction should be discouraged, unless nonstructural solutions or revetments are not feasible.

Modified to include mitigation language, affects of shoreline erosion including upland sources, and look at thesystem holistically.Design, locate, and construct new or replacement shoreline stabilization to minimize and mitigate adverseimpacts, and evaluate affects of shoreline erosion (including upland erosion) and beach dynamics (such assediment conveyance and ecological relationships). [6.2.3(2)]

Clarify code provision.Meets intent of WAC 173-26-221Required:WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)(II)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(E)

3 6.2.3 Shoreline armoring should be designed, improved, and maintained to providepublic access whenever possible.

Modified language to include restoration and defined which stabilization projects would require public access.Ensure publicly financed or subsidized shoreline erosion control measures do not restrict appropriate publicaccess, unless determined to be infeasible for health and safety. W here feasible incorporate restoration andpublic access improvements. [6.2.3(8)]

Clarify code provisionRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

4 6.2.3 Shoreline armoring should not be constructed waterward of feeder bluffs Modified language to include appropriate terminology.Shoreline stabilization should not be constructed waterward of feeder bluffs. [6.2.3(9]

Maintain consistency.Meets intent of WAC 173-26-221

5 6.2.3 Neighboring property owners should be encouraged to coordinate planning of shoreline armoring to avoid impact to down current properties.

Modified language to include appropriate terminology.Encourage neighboring property owners to coordinate development of shoreline stabilization for an entire drift

sector or shoreline reach, to avoid erosion of down drift properties and address ecological, geo-hydraulicprocesses, sediment conveyance and beach management. [6.2.3(10)]

Maintain consistency.

Meets intent of WAC 173-26-22

6 6.2.3 No specific policy Added. Design and locate new development, including creation of new lots, in a manner that prevents the need for shoreline stabilization.[ 6.2.3(3)]

Clarify code provisionRequired:WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(A)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)

7 6.2.3 No specific policy Added.Structural shoreline stabilization should be permitted only when it has been demonstrated that shorelinestabilization is necessary for protection of primary structures, primary uses or public improvements and it canbe demonstrated that no alternative has less impact on the environment. [6.2.3(4)]

Maintain code consistencyRequired:WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)(I)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)(II)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)(III)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)(Iv)

8 6.2.3 No specific policy Added. Existing "hard" shoreline stabilization structures may be replaced if there is a demonstrated need to protectprinciple uses or structures from erosion and the replacement structure design, location, size, and constructionassures no net loss of ecological function. [6.2.3(5)]

Maintain code consistency Required WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

9 6.2.3 No specific policy Added.

Materials used should be selected for long term durability ease of maintenance, compatibility with local shorefeatures including aesthesis values and flexibility of future uses. [6.2.3.(7)]


Meet intent of:RCW 90.58.020RCW 90.58.100WAC 173-26-221(2)(b)(v)WAC 173-26-221(4)(b)(iii)

10 6.2.3 No specific policy Added to encourage removal of non serviceable structures from the shoreline.Where feasible ineffective structures should be removed and shoreline functions restored consistent with thepriorities of the restoration plan. [6.2.3(11)]

Clarify code provisionOptionalMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221



T O P I C

#



Attachment A



11 6.2.3 No specific policy Added to encourage stabilization projects to incorporate restoration opportunities.Shoreline Stabilization should incorporate beach restoration or enhancement in accordance with the restorationprovisions. [6.2.3(13)]

Clarify code provisionOptionalMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221

Regulations

1 6.2.4 Gabions (wire mesh filled with concrete or rocks) are prohibited in bulkheadconstruction

Modified to prohibit vertical, concave and flat faced str ucturesProhibit gabions, groins, vertical, concave and flat (hard) f aced structures (not including near vertical rock riprap bulkhead) in shoreline stabilization construction. [6.2.4(1)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221

2 6.2.4 Revetments and bulkheads shall be prohibited for any purpose if they will

cause significant shoreline erosion or beach starvation

Modified to prohibit revetments for use other than for public projects.

Revetments for any purpose unless part of a public facilities project. [6.2.4(2)]


Meets intent of WAC 173-26-2213 6.2.4 Construction of shoreline armoring for the purpose of retaining landfill or

creating dry land unless it is proposed in conjunction with a water dependantuse or public use

Modified to add commercial/industrial to water dependant and deleted armoring.Prohibit construction of bulkhead, revetment, or other structure for the purpose of retaining landfill or creatingdry land; unless proposed in conjunction with a commercial/industrial water dependent use or public use.[6.2.4(3)]

Clarify code provisionRequired WAC 173-23-241(3)(c)

4 6.2.4 Bulkheads and revetments to protect a platted lot where no structure presentlyexists shall be permitted with an SSDP where property is threatened asdemonstrated in a geotechnical report.

Modified to prohibit shoreline stabilization of vacant land and primary or essential accessory structures not indanger from erosion.Prohibit use of hard structural stabilization to protect a vacant platted lot or to protect a developed lot where aprimary structure or essential accessory structure is not in danger from erosion as demonstrated through ageotechnical report.[6.2.4(5)]

Clarify code provisionMeets intent: of WAC 173-26-22Required WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

5 6.2.4 Evidence of professional design of proposed protective structures is required if it is determined that are uncertainties such as;b. Potential effect on adjacent property.

Modified to prohibit shoreline stabilization if significant impacts occur on adjacent or down current properties.Prohibit stabilization that would cause significant impacts to adjacent or down current properties.[6.2.4(6)]

Clarify code provisionRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)Meets intent of WAC 173-26-221

6 6.2.5 No specific regulation Added to clarify that all stabilization projects must all meet provisions in other sections. All shoreline stabilization proposals must meet provisions of Shoreline Modifications 6.1 and assure no netloss of ecological functions.[6.2.5(1)]

Clarify code provisionRequiredWAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(C)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(E)

7 6.2.6 Shoreline armoring shall not be approved in known are suspect midden site Modified by changing armoring to stabilization. [6.2.6(1)] Maintain code consistencySilent

8 6.2.6 Shoreline hardening (revetments and bulkheads) shall be permitted wherelocal physical conditions are suitable for such alterations.

Deleted redundant.

9 6.2.6 On all shorelines armoring structures shall be located landward of OHWM,landward of protective berms, and generally parallel to the shorelineexceptions:

Accretion shoreforms shall be setback 25 from OHWM

Bluff or bank shorelines where no other armoring structures areadjacent as close to the bank as feasible. However a revetment mayextend waterward to permit adequate run-up to dissipate wave energy.

Revetments and bulkheads shall tie in flush with existing bulkheadsexcept where the bulkheads extend waterward of OHWM or toe of bank.

Modified for consistency; deleted (a) and added (c) provisions of soft treatment stabilization.

On all shorelines, structural stabilization structures shall be located landward of the OHWM or landward of protective berms (artificial or natural), and generally parallel to the shoreline except:

a. On high bluffs where no other armoring stabilization structures are adjoining, such structures shallbe as close to OHWM. A revetment may extend waterward only the minimum necessary to dissipatewave energy.b. Shoreline stabilization shall tie in flush with existing stabilization bulkheads on adjoining properties,except when the action will create dry landc. Soft-treatment stabilization may be permitted waterward of the OHWM if the stabilization measuresprovide restoration of shoreline ecological functions. [6.2.6(2)]

Clarify code provisionRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)Meets intent of WAC 173-26-221

10 6.2.6 No specific regulation Added for flexibility to allow reconstruction of a nonconforming bulkhead in same location.Replacement structures may be located in the same location if relocation landward of OWHM is demonstrated to be infeasible to the satisfaction of the Administrator. [6.2.6(3)]

Allow flexibilityRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

11 6.2.6 Natural materials and processes shall be utilized to the maximum extent

possible.

Modified to use appropriate terminology.

Soft-treatment stabilization shall be used to the maximum extent feasible.[6.2.6(5)]


Required WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)12 6.2.6 No specific regulation exists Added to clarify hard stabilization should occur only on the portion of the property to protect primary structures

or essential accessory structures. Hard structural stabilization, including those portions of hybrids, shall be limited to thePortion or portions of the site where necessary. [6.2.6(6)


13 6.2.6 No specific regulation exists Added for flexibility in shoreline stabilization designWhen allowed on feeder bluffs, hard structural stabilization, including those portions of hybrid structures shall be located landward of the OHWM. [6.2.6(7)]




T O P I C

#



Attachment A



14 6.2.6 No specific regulation exists Added to clarify location of structure behind OHWM.Hard structural stabilization, including those portions of hybrid structures located in ashoreline area that does not include a f eeder bluff, shall be located landward of theordinary high water mark and shall f ollow the natural contours of the shoreline; unless itis found to be infeasible to locate the entire hard structural stabilization landward.[6.2.6(8)]

Clarify code provisionMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221

15 6.2.6 Stairs or other permitted upland structures may be built into a revetment, butshall not extend waterward of it.

Modified to include all hard armoring.Stairs or other permitted upland structures may tie into existing hard structural stabilization, but shall notextend waterward of it, unless it is found to the satisfaction of the Administrator to be infeasible to locate theentire stairway landward. [6.2.6(10)]

Clarify code provisionOptional

16 6.2.6 Overwater structures may tie into existing hard structural stabilization. Retained. [6.2.6(11)] Clarify code provisionRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

17 6.2.6 Adequate toe protection to ensure stability without relying on additional rip ap. Modified to include all shoreline stabilization .Shoreline stabilization shall be designed to provide adequate toe protection to ensure f uture mitigation or hardstructural stabilization measures are not required. [6.2.6(12)]


18 6.2.7 No specific regulation exists Added for consistency to promote soft treatment.The City shall allow repair of soft-treatment stabilization.[6.2.7(1)

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(ii)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(E)

19 6.2.7 No specific regulation exists Added to define repair of structure.Repair of existing structural stabilization shall be allowed when:

a. repaired is up to 50% of the linear length.b. Repairs may require mitigation pursuantc. Repair applications shall be considered with cumulative approvals of each successive applicationwithin a five year period. [6.2.7(2)]

Allow flexibilityMay not meet WAC 173-26-221(Definition of "Replacement" - connew structure perform as an existwhich can no longer adequately spurpose.

20 6.2.8 Revetments and bulkheads may be approved provided that all alternativeshave proven infeasible (use relocation, use redesign, nonstructural shorelineoptions).

Modified for clarity in promoting non-structural and soft treatment.When evaluating the need for new, expanded or replacement structural stabilizationmeasures, the applicant to shall provide an analysis of the following:

a. No action (allow the shoreline to retreat without intervention).b. Non-structural measures such as vegetation enhancement or addressing uplanddrainage concerns.c. Increase building setbacks and/or relocate structures to a feasible location and/or elevate the structures.d. Implement flexible/natural materials and methods, beach nourishment, protectiveberms, bioengineered stabilization or other soft-treatment measures.e. Hybrid structure.f. Exclusively hard stabilization materials. [6.2.8(1)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(ii)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(E)

21 6.2.8 No specific regulation exists Added to clarify holistic approach to analyzing shoreline stabilization measures. Analysis for these alternatives shall be included with each replacement or new structural stabilizationapplication including a description of cost, maintenance needs and success in protecting the primary structure.[6.2.8(2)]

Clarify code provisionMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(ii)WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(E)

22 6.2.8.1 Revetments and bulkhead may be allowed only when evidence is presentedwhich conclusively demonstrates that the following conditions exists:

a. Serious wave erosion threatens an existing development

Added to clarify demonstrated need. [6.2.8.1(1)]Replacement of existing structural stabilization is allowed when all t he following apply:

a. The replacement is located landward of OHWM; andb. The danger of loss or substantial damage from shoreline erosion is caused by tidalaction, current, and waves and such has been identified through a geotechnical report except asprovided in subsection (b), below

c. A geotechnical report demonstrates a need to protect the primary structure andprimary appurtenance from danger of loss or substantial damage within five (5)years due to shoreline erosion,

(b)i. An existing primary single family residence residential structure locatedwithin ten (10) feet or less from the OHWM; or ii. An existing primary single family residence residential structure locatedwithin ten (10) feet or less from the top of a high bluff

d. The replacement structure is designed, located, sized and constructed to assure no




T O P I C

#



Attachment A



net loss of ecological functions.e. Replacement structures may encroach waterward of the OHWM f or soft-treatment stabilization thatprovide restoration of ecological functions.f. Hard structural shoreline stabilization, including those portions of hybrid structures, is limited to t hezone of impacts for protecting a primary structure and its primary appurtenances (See Section 7.0 for definition of 'zone of impact.')

23 6.2.8.1 No specific regulation exists Added for flexibility of using existing report.Where a geotechnical report confirms a need to prevent potential damage to a primary structure, but the needis not as immediate as five (5) years, the report may be used to justify more immediate authorization to protect

against erosion using soft-treatment stabilization or hybrid structural measures. [6.2.8.1(2)]


24 6.2.8.1 No specific regulation exists Added for consistency with WAC.Hard structural stabilization shall not encroach waterward of the OHWM or waterwardof the existing shoreline stabilization measure unless the primary structure was constructed prior to January 1,1992, and there is overriding safety or environmental concerns if the stabilization measure is moved landwardof the OHWM. I n such cases, the replacement structure shall abut the existing shoreline stabilization structure. All other replacement structures shall be located at or landward of the existing shoreline stabilization structure.[6.2.8.1(3)]

Maintain code consistencyRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

25 6.2.8.2 Revetments and bulkhead may be allowed only when evidence is presentedwhich conclusively demonstrates that the following conditions exists:a. Serious wave erosion threatens an existing development

Added to clarify demonstrated need. [6.2.8.2.1)]Replacement of existing structural stabilization is allowed when all t he following apply:

a. The replacement is located landward of OHWM; andb. The danger of loss or substantial damage from shoreline erosion is caused by tidalaction, current, and waves and such has been identified through a geotechnical report except asprovided in subsection (b), belowc. A geotechnical report demonstrates a need to protect the primary structure andprimary appurtenance from danger of loss or substantial damage within five (5)years due to shoreline erosion,

(b)i. An existing primary single family residence residential structure locatedwithin ten (10) feet or less from the OHWM; or

ii. An existing primary single family residence residential structure locatedwithin ten (10) feet or less from the top of a high bluff

d. The replacement structure is designed, located, sized and constructed to assure no net loss of ecological functions.e. Replacement structures may encroach waterward of the OHWM for soft-treatment stabilization thatprovide restoration of ecological functions.f. Hard structural shoreline stabilization, including those portions of hybrid structures, is limited to thezone of impacts for protecting a primary structure and its primary appurtenances (See Section 7.0 for definition of 'zone of impact.')

Clarify code provisionRequired;WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(B)

WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)(iii)(D)

26 6.2.8.2 No specific regulation exists Added for flexibility of using existing report .Where a geotechnical report confirms a need to prevent potential damage to a residential primary structure,but the need is not as immediate as three years, the report may be used to justify more immediateauthorization to protect against erosion using soft-treatment structural measures. [6.2.8.2(2)]

Maintain code consistencyRequired WAC 173-26-221(3)(a)

27 6.2.9 No specific regulation exists Added for consistency with WAC Guidelines.Land subdivision shall be designed to assure future development will not require shoreline stabilization for thenext 100 years as demonstrated by a geotechnical report. [6.2.9]


28 6.2.10 No specific regulation exists Added for clarity on materials to be submitted for review.In addition to the general submittal requirements for all applications specified in BIMC

Section 2.16.020(H), the following shall be submitted to the City including those applications where no primarystructure exists. [6.2.10]


Meets intent of WAC 173-26-221

29 6.2.11 No specific regulation exists Added for clarity on materials to be submitted for review.In addition to the general submittal requirements for all applications specified in BIMC Section2.16.020(H) and Section 6.2.10, above, the following shall be submitted with applications for repairs [6.2.11]




T O P I C

#



Attachment A



High Interest Topic #2: Repair and Replace Overwater Structures – City Council Meeting #5 – August , 2012

Section 6.3 1996 SMP Section VI, F. Piers, Docks and Floats Draft SMP Section 6.3 Overwater Structures

Renamed Overwater Structures

Added prohibited section to group similar provisions

Regulates piers, docks, mooring buoys and r ecreational floatso Locationo Designo Construction Materials

Policies

1 6.3.3 Piers, floats, and docks should be sited and designed to minimize possibleadverse environmental impacts, including potential impacts on littoral drift,sand movement, water circulation and fish and wildlife habitat.

Modified to include no net loss provision and ensure that piers, floats and docks meet the following: [6.3.3(3)]

Designed for use and character of shoreline

Prohibited in locations with critical physical limitations

Designed to maintain safety

Designed and maintained to mitigate adverse impacts by:o Limiting pier and float width;o Providing for light penetration;o Configured to minimize shading;o Prohibit structures on top of piers and floats;o Provide mechanism s that prevent floats from r esting on tidelands;o Encapsulating material; ando Using a site-specific span distance to impacts to critical habitat.

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of:WAC 173-26-221(2)(a)WAC 173-26-221(2)(b)(iv)&(v)WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(ii)(B)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)

Regulations

1 4.2.1.9 No specific regulation Added to address change in material standards as industry design guidelines are updated.Nonconforming docks and floats may be repaired and replaced and shall comply with this Program'srequirements for materials and standards to the extent practicable.[4.2.1.9(1)]


2 6.3. No specific regulations Added to meet intent of W AC GuidelinesOverwater Structures are prohibited at locations where critical physical limitations exist, Bainbridge IslandShoreline Master Program such as shallow, sloping bottoms; areas of f requent high wind, wave, or currentexposure as depicted by charts, isometric maps, or other technical sources; or areas with high levels of accretion; or geological hazardous areas (outside of harbors) and and/or feeder bluffs, except when specificallyallowed in Section 4.2.4, Public Access or Section 5.3, Boating Facilities.[6.3.4(2)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of:WAC 173-26-221(2)(a)WAC 173-26-221(2)(b)(iv)&(v)WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(ii)(B)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)

Overwater Structures - Other Changes

Policies

1 6.3.3 Multiple-use and expansion of existing conforming piers, docks, and floatsshould be encouraged over the addition and/or proliferation of new facilities.Join-use facilities are preferred over new, single-use piers, docks, and f loats.

Retained. [6.3.3(1)]Maintain code consistencyRequired 173-26-231(3)(b)

2 6.3.3 Mooring buoys are encouraged in preference to either piers or docks. Modified to encourage buoys, minimize impact and include no net loss provisions. [6.3.3(2)]OptionalMeets intent of 173-26-231 (2)(b

3 6.3.3 Proponents of commercial pier, float, and dock projects are encouraged toprovide for public docking, launching, and recreational access.

Retained. [6.3.3(4)] Maintain code consistencyRequired 173-26-241(3)(c)

4 6.3.3 Local programs and coordinated efforts among private and/or public agenciesshould be initiated to develop new public access docks, and to remove or

Modified to encourage public dock at appropriate road ends. [6.3.3(5)] Allow flexibilityMeets intent of



T O P I C

#



Attachment A



repair failing, hazardous, or nonfunctioning piers and docks and restore suchfacilities and/or shore resources to a natural and/or safe condition.

WAC 173-26-221(4)(b)WAC 173-26-221(4)(c)WAC 173-26-221(4)(d)(i)

5 6.3.3 Use of natural, nonreflective materials in pier and dock construction should beencouraged. When plastics and other non-biodegradable materials are used,precautions should be taken to ensure their containment.

Modified to encourage the use of natural materials in pier and dock construction; prohibit chemical woodtreatments, such as creosote or pentachlorophenol; and connect to Section 4.1.6, Water Quality andStormwater Management. [6.3.3(6)]

Allow flexibilityMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221

6 6.3.3 No specific policy Added. Promote boat owners and operators use of best m anagement practices for maintenance of boats andoverwater structure. [6.3.3(7)]

Allow flexibilityMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(4)(d)(v)

WAC 173-26-221(6)(b) 7 6.3.3 The development of new docks and piers shall be prohibited in Blakely

Harbor except:a. Two community docksb. One dock for dinghy access during daylight hours

Retained. [6.3.3(8)] Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-221(4)(d)(v)

Regulations

1 6.3.4 Prohibit piers and docks in the Natural and Aquatic Conservancydesignations; and prohibit mooring buoys offshore from the Naturalenvironment.

Modified to allow two mooring buoys per parcel for public access when upland property is owned by a publicentity; to allow joint-use docks in Priority Aquatic Category B. [6.3.4(1)]

Allow flexibilityMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(4)(b)WAC 173-26-221(4)(c)

2 6.3.4 No specific regulation Added. Prohibit new docks and piers within Murden Cove as shown on the ShorelineDesignation Map. [6.3.4(4)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-221(4)(d)(v)

3 6.3.4 New boat houses and new covered moorage on either existing or new piersor docks

Retained. [6.3.4(5)]

4 6.3.4 No specific regulation Added to meet USACE recommendations that restrict the use of hydraulic water jets to remove piling. [6.3.4(6)] Clarify code provisionSilent

Meets intent of WAC 173-26-201(2)(c)

5 6.3.4 Use of arsenate compounds or creosote-treated members Retained. [6.3.4(7)] Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-221(6)(b)

6 6.3.4 Over-water field applications of paint, preservative treatment, or other chemical compounds, except in accordance with best management practicesset forth in the Boating Facility section of the Master Program or whenallowed by a current NPDES permit from Department of Ecology.

Modified to address Washington Department of Transportation comment that use of over-water fieldapplications of paint, preservative treatment, or other chemical compounds is prohibited, except in accordancewith best management practices set forth in the Boating Facility section of the Master Program or when allowedby a current NPDES permit f rom Department of Ecology. [6.3.4(8)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(6)(b)WAC 173-26-241(3)(c)(vi)

7 6.3.5 Bulk storage for gasoline, oil and other petroleum products for any use or purpose is prohibited on piers and docks. Bulk storage means nonportablestorage in fixed tanks.

Retained. [6.3.4(9)] Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-221(6)(b)WAC 173-26-241(3)(c)(vi)

8 6.3.5 Mooring buoys are a preferred use over docks, where feasible. Retained. [6.3.5(2) Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)

9 6.3.5 Piers and docks shall be located and designed to minimize interference withthe use of navigable waters; Piers and docks may be limited in length or prohibited, where necessary, to protect navigation, public use, or habitatvalues.

Modified to combine two regulations that require the design and location of piers and docks to minimizeinterference with navigation, including limiting the length or prohibited, as necessary. [6.3.5(3)]

ConsolidatedMeets intent of WAC 173-26-211(5)(c)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)



T O P I C

#



Attachment A



10 6.3.5 If a bulkhead-like base is proposed for a fixed pier or dock where there is net-positive littoral drift (accretion beach), the base shall be built landward of theordinary high water mark or protective berms.

Modified to require the base to meet the requirements of Section 6.2 for shoreline stabilization. [6.3.5(4)]Maintain code consistencyRequired WAC 173-26-231(3)(a)(

11 6.3.5 Structures on piers and docks shall be strictly limited in size and height toavoid impacting shoreline views

Retained. [6.3.5(5)] Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of RCW 90.58.020WAC 173-26-221(4)(b)(iii)WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-241(3)(c)

12 6.3.5 Piers and docks shall require a building permit and shall meet standards setby the building official.

Modified to address Washington Department of Transportation comment to allow ferry terminal construction tomeet other standards than those set by building official. [6.3.5(6)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of WAC 173-26-241(

13 6.3.5 Lighting shall be the minimum necessary, or as required by the Coast Guard,to locate dock at night, and minimize glare

Modified to require that lighting meet other appropriate standards of the code (BIMC) or requirements of theCoast Guard. [6.3.5(7)]

Maintain code consistencyRequired BIMC 18Meets intent of 173-26-241(3)(c

14 6.3.5 No specific regulation Added. Allow mitigation standards required by USACE permit process to meet the Section 4.1.2,Environmental Impacts requirements. [6.3.5.(8)]

Allow flexibilitySilent

15 6.3.6 No specific regulation Added. Defined single use dock (pier, ramp, float, and one boat lift) and allowed an additional boat lifts for joint-use docks (one additional per dwelling unit). [6.3.6(1)]

Clarify code provisionSilent

16 6.3.6 When plastic or other non-biodegradable materials are used in float, pier, or dock construction, precautions shall be taken to ensure their containment

Retained. [6.3.6(2)] Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-221(6)(b)WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)

17 6.3.5 Overhead wiring or plumbing prohibited on piers and docks Retained. [6.3.6(3)] Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)

18 6.3.7.1-6.3.7.3

Pilings must be structurally sound

Plies, floats, or other members in direct contact shall not be treated,with biocides. Untreated products should be used in areas of lowflushing. When toxic material is allowed should be limited to thosedemonstrated to have the least adverse effect. Used creosote pilingspreferred.

All docks shall include stops to get floats off the bottom

Modified to include specific regulations for three subcomponents of a dock: Piling, Pier, and Float. Theregulations are modeled from USACE regulations to protect ecological function. [6.3.7.1-6.3.7.3]

Piling - Prescribes design standards including: install minimum necessary, type of material anddistance between piling.

Pier - Prescribes design standards including: width, percent functional grating,

Float - Prescribes design standards including: width, length, percent functional grating, float stops, t ypeof floatation.

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)WAC 173-26-231(2)(g)

19 6.3.7.6 Size:a. Maximum length and width of pier or dock shall be minimumnecessaryb. Length shall not extend beyond the average length of two nearestadjacent docks or the distance necessary to obtain a depth of 4 feetat ELW, or the line navigation.

Modified to define the residential dock limitations using the depth at mean lower-low water (9 feet MLLW) or the length existing docks within 500 feet; I ncluded the Harbor Structure Limit line and attached a mapdescribing the location (Appendix E). [6.3.7.6(2)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)WAC 173-26-241(3)(c)

20 6.3.7.6 Side-yard setback of 10 feet required for docks. Retained. [6.3.7.6(3)] Maintain code consistencySilent

21 6.3.7.6 Community docks shall include no more than one moorage space per dwelling unit.

Retained. [6.3.7.6(4)] Maintain code consistencySilent

22 6.3.7.7 Mooring buoys for commercial use require a CUP. Retained. [6.3.7.7(2)] Maintain code consistencySilent

23 6.3.7.7 Owners of waterfront property are permitted to install one (1) mooring buoyper waterfront lot or (1) per owner in community[WAC 332-30-148(3) or itssuccessor]

Modified to allow properties with at least 200 linear feet of shoreline additional moorage on a case-by-casebasis as determined by the DNR [WAC 332-30-148(3) or its successor]. [6.3.7.7(3)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)

24 6.3.7.8 No specific regulation Added. Require restriction of mooring buoys within 100 feet of shellfish closure areas (pursuant of W ashingtonHealth Department orders). [6.3.7.8(1)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)

25 6.3.7.8 Buoys shall be located offshore no farther than the construction limit line, in Modified to allow mooring buoys: Maintain code consistency



T O P I C

#



Attachment A



Eagle Harbor, elsewhere not more than two hundred (200) feet beyondextreme low tide, the -18 feet MLLW depth contour, or the line of navigation,whichever is closer to shore.

within the Open Water Moorage and Anchorage Areas (allowed waterward of Eagle Harbor ConstructionLimit Line);

offshore at a minimum depth of 9 feet MLLW with a standard single mid line float;

offshore at a reduced minimum depth for an alternate system approved by the Administrator:o No farther than the Harbor Structure Limit Line shown in Appendix E;o Not more than two hundred (200) f eet beyond extreme low tide, the -18 feet MLLW depth contour, or

the line of navigation, whichever is appropriate. [6.3.7.8.(6)]

Meets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)WAC 173-26-241(3)(c)

26 6.3.7.8 Recreational floats shall be located as close to shore as possible, and no

further than:a. Eagle Harbor construction limit lineb. A distance to obtain four feet draft and ELW; or line of navigation

Added. for code consistency

Recreational floats shall be located as close to shore as possible. They shall be located no farther waterwardthan the following limits:

b. No farther than the Harbor Structure Limit Line shown in Appendix E [6.3.7.8(7)(b)]


Meets intent of: WAC 173-26-221(4)(d)(v)WAC 173-26-231(2)(b)WAC 173-26-231(2)(d)

27 6.3.7.8 All recreational floats shall include float stops Added. for flexibility a device or system other than a float stop approved by the Administrator All recreational floats shall include stops, or device or system approved by the Administrator, which serve to keep the floats off the bottom of tidelands at low tide, seeSection 6.3.7.3.1 Float Stop Regulations.[6.3.7.8(10)]

Maintain code consistencyMeets intent of: WAC 173-26-231(3)(b)

28 6.3.8 Proposal for piers or docks shall include, at a minimum, the following:a. Description of structureb. Ownership of shorelands and tidelands with 300 feetc. Proposed location of piers, docks, floats relative to property lines,OHWM, depth contour extreme low tide, construction limit line.d. Location and description of docks on adjacent propertiese. Agreements for cooperative use

Added. Included new submittal requirements to align with WAC guidelines and agency protocol. [6.3.8]

Mitigation plan as required, and shall comply with provisions in the Section 4.1.2,Environmental Impact and Section 4.1.3, Vegetation Management. [6.3.8(2)]

Eelgrass and Macro Algae survey, including an analysis of upper intertidal obligatevegetation, completed within two years of project construction and conducted asdescribed in the WDFW guidelines for Eelgrass and Macro Algae surveys[6.3.8(3)]

Modified to require submittal plans include contours at two-foot interval for a 25 feet distance to the right, left,and end of proposed structure, as measured from projects center line[6.3.8(4)(d)]Deleted. Eliminated unnecessary submittal reqquirements that the Cit y can obtain from the GIS system.

Clarify code provisions Silent

08-01-12 bainbridge island smp meeting 5

Documents