The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAttachment D Code Interpretations Docket_2020_1002_clnShoreline Master Program Docket/Code Interpretations Jefferson County staff have identified a series of changes to improve interpretation and application of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). This list is preliminary and subject to change. SMP Docket – Preliminary Num Staff Tracking Docket Request JCC Section Proposed Action 1 Non-conforming uses/development clarification 18.25.660 Clarify with revised definition of nonconforming in Article II,18.25.100. 2 SMP/Critical Area clarification 18.25.270(4)(a)(i) This subsection was intended to mean that critical area regulations in Chapter 18.22 are to be used, but where there are discrepancies (such as those pertaining to buffers, nonconforming development, etc.), then the SMP prevails. Clarify how the SMP subsections pertaining to critical areas interact with critical area regulations in Chapter 18.22. 3 Shoreline Designations for State Parks Review all shoreline designations for State Parks considering designation (conservancy or natural) and shoreline access for conditions and revise where warranted. 4 References subsection (3)(c), but reference for interference should be (4)(c). 18.25.440(4)(d) Change reference to (3)(c) to (4)(c)(i) 5 JCC 18.25.630(18) & (19) should be in 18.25.620 as (7) and (8) 18.25.620 & .630 Move subsections (18) & (19) of 18.25.630 to 18.25.620 and re-number as subsections (7) & (8) 6 Parcel #921000001 on Indian Island is State DNR Land, but does not have a shoreline designation. Appears to have been lumped in with N/A for Federal Exempt Lands. Review and revise where warranted. Consider Periodic Review Checklist and laws regarding federal lands to extent applicable. 8 Clarify that west end rivers are aquatic below OHWM 18.25.210(3) Review and revise where warranted. 9 Definition of Shoreline of Statewide Significance are duplicates in JCC 18.25.100(19)(w)(i) and (ii). JC 18.25.100(19)(vii) refers to both (i)and (ii), should ensure the correct subsections are reflected. JCC 18.25.100(19)(w)(i),(ii) and (iv) and JCC 18.25.240 Delete subsection 18.25.100(w)(ii) and re-number subsequent subsections. Delete reference to (ii) in subsection (vii) (to be new subsection (vi) after re-numbering). Shorelines of statewide significance should be verbatim from WAC 9 Definition of Shoreline of Statewide Significance are duplicates in JCC 18.25.100(19)(w)(i) and (ii). JC 18.25.100(19)(vii) refers to both (i)and (ii), should ensure the correct subsections are reflected. JCC 18.25.100(19)(w)(i),(ii) and (iv) and JCC 18.25.240 Delete subsection 18.25.100(w)(ii) and re-number subsequent subsections. Delete reference to (ii) in subsection (vii) (to be new subsection (vi) after re-numbering). Shorelines of statewide significance should be verbatim from WAC 12 Aquaculture: clarify when a SDP is needed. 18.25.440(4)(e): 'not' is consistent with (4)(c) and reference change from (1)(b) to say (4)(b) Review in concert with SMP Periodic Review Checklist. Consider deleting reference to (1) from (4)e to just read (b). Delete text "or conditional use permit (CUP)" 17 Revise nonconforming lot definition from "…minimum lot size…" to "minimum lot depth…", and check how it is used relative to the modest home provision and the common line buffer. 18.25.100(14)(h), and possibly 18.25.270(5)(a) and (b) Clarify with revised definition of nonconforming in Article II,18.25.100. Change the text "size" to "depth." Incorporate Code Interpretation regarding non-conforming lot if warranted. 19 Clarify that the applicant must demonstrate erosion from wave energy to approve soft shore stabilization; also, revise policies to include soft shore stabilization. Add soft shore stabilization regulations. 18.25.410 Geotechnical report should suffice. 20 Revise watershed restoration exemptions to be consistent with state law. Exemptions 15 and 17 are definitions, not exemptions. Clarify that exemption 16 has no shoreline permitting fee, per RCW 90.58.515. 18.25.560(15), (16), and (17) Revise 18.25.560 Exemptions to consolidate subsections (15), (16) & (17). 21 Specify report requirements for NNL; consider referencing requirements for CAO report requirements in 18.22. 18.25.270 Approach is under review. 23 Clarify area included in 25% increase for both in-water and above OHWM development. 18.25.440((4)(b)(i) Add text, "This applies to both in-water and above OHWM development." 23 Clarify area included in 25% increase for both in-water and above OHWM development. 18.25.440((4)(b)(i) Add text, "This applies to both in-water and above OHWM development." 24 JCC 18.25.410(5)(iii) has wrong code reference to flood regulations. JCC 18.25.410(5)(iii) Change text reference in JCC 18.25.410(5)(c)(iii) from "JCC 18.30.070" to "JCC 15.15." 25 Review if text should reference fewer than 4 residential lots as it would otherwise be inconsistent. JCC 18.25.410(6)(h) Change text reference in JCC 18.25.410(6)(h) from "more" to "less." 28 Provide guidance on requirements and/or evaluating aesthetic reports. Add text to 18.25.440(6)(b) "including what views in the vicinity would be altered or obstructed and propose measures to reduce impacts," after "aesthetic qualities of the shoreline." 31 Why is section is silent on notices for Type II permits, but spells out process on Type I and III permits? JCC 18.25.650 Add text "II &" to 18.25.650(1)(b) "Type III project permit…". Permit procedures should reference other processes in UDC and not duplicate or create new. 32 Side yard setback language is confusing. SMP does not establish side yard setbacks, and JCC 18.30 does not identify side yard setbacks based off of zoning which makes it confusing for in water. JCC 18.25.300(2)(b) Replace text in 18.25.300(2)(b), "Five feet of the total required side yard setbacks may be provided on one side and the balance on the other side," with, "The standard side yard setback is five feet." Review for consistency with zoning. 35 Unclear if C(a) permit and SSDP requires a Type III process. What is the process for stand-alone SSDP (yes use, but SSDP required)? JCC 18.25.620 JCC 18.25.620(3) & (4) are clear that C(a) and C(d) are processed as Type IIs. Add new subsection that SDPs shall be processed as a Type I permit. Delete text "substantial development permits and," from 18.25.620(2). Re-number existing subsections to include new subsection. 41 Consider adding in definitions in for waterward and lateral as associated with implementing code language. JCC 18.25.100 Add definition under 18.25.100(12) for "Lateral," to define expansion in relation to the OHWM. 42 Provide clarification on vegetation maintenance requirements and how it is applicable to clearing for new development, such as a single family residence, or just for views. JCC 18.25.310 Delete "new" from 18.25.310(2)(d). 42 Provide clarification on vegetation maintenance requirements and how it is applicable to clearing for new development, such as a single family residence, or just for views. JCC 18.25.310 Delete "new" from 18.25.310(2)(d). 45 Revise CASP from a Type III to a Type I process and when it is used in shoreline jurisdiction - current language is awkward. JCC 18.25.270(4)(l) Replace text of last sentence in 18.25.270(4)(l) to read, "such buffer modification shall require a Type I Substantial Development Permit (SDP).” Address consistency with CAO. 46 Clarify if non-conforming lateral expansion is a C(a) or a C(d) JCC 18.25.660(9) Replace text in 18.25.660(9) that reads, "with a Conditional Use Permit," to read," with a Type I Substantial Development Permit (SDP)" 47 Non-conforming expansion: change foundation walls to roof line to (8) and (10), and consider adding similar roof line language to (9). JCC 18.25.660 Revise text in 18.25.660(8)(b) that reads, "beyond the existing structures' foundation walls," to read, " beyond the structures' legally permitted development footprint." Add revised text above to 18.25.660(9), and revise same to 18.25.660(10)(a). 49 Clarify that expansions to existing residential development can use the modest home provisions; not just new SFR development. JCC 18.25.270(5) Delete the text "New" under 18.25.270(5)(a). 50 Clarify if an unclassified conditional use is a C, C(a), or C(d). If it is determined to be a C (i.e., Type III), then the CUP definition in JCC 18.25.100(3)(q) needs to be revised. If there is no C (Type III) in the shoreline regulations, that should be clarified in JCC 18.25.600. JCC 18.25.600; possibly, JCC 18.25.100(3)(q) Revise text in 18.25.600 that reads, "may be authorized as conditional uses…" to read, "may be authorized as a Discretionary Conditional Use "C(d)" permit, provided…" 51 Need to add a definition for "active use" within the shoreline buffer. JCC 18.25.270(4)(i) Create definition for "active use" in 18.25.100(1) 52 Revise to say …common-line buffer, if applicable... JCC 18.25.270(5)(a)(iii) Addition text to 18.25.270(5)(a)(iii) to read,"common-line buffer, if applicable; and" 56 Change reference from 3(c) to 4(c) (page 18-168.26) JCC 18.25.440(4)(d) Replace "(3)" in 18.25.440(4)(d) to "(4)." 64 These two sections contradict each other. If new beach access is prohibited in marine feeder bluffs, why would it be allowed if the project is shown not to adversely affect? Possibly the intent is to allow these structures on feeder bluffs if geotech says there is no adverse impact. 340(2) is too restrictive. JCC 18.25.340(2) and (4)(j) Redefine "feeder bluff" under 18.25.100(6)(d). Delete subsections 18.25.340(2) and (4)(d)(ii). Revisit the prohibitions for feeder bluffs. 65 Clarify if all streams requires a 150-foot buffer in all shoreline environments or if it is only those identified as "shorelines" in 90.58 RCW (>20cfs) JCC 18.25.270(4)e(iii) Shoreline buffers apply to S type streams only. Add text to 18.25.270(4)(e)(iii) to read "Stream/River (flows greater than20 cubic feet per second) Shores." 67 Maintenance trimming seems to only be allowed for "new" shoreline uses. Should also extend to existing uses. JCC 18.25.310(2)(d) Delete the text "new" under 18.25.310(2)(d). 68 Exempt ADU's as appurtenances. JCC 18.25.560 and Appurtenance definitions Add the text "Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)," to 18.25.100(1)(aa). City of Bonney Lake is doing this for example. 70 JCC 18.25.660(8)(9) planting plan needs to be more explicit re: if a habitat management plan by a biologist is required. JCC 18.25.660(8) & (9) Change text "planting plan" in subsections 18.25.660(8) & (9) to "Habitat Management Plan."