The city planning department released this “Frequently Asked Questions” yesterday to try to resolve some confusion/concerns regarding the Shoreline Master Program.
____________________________
City of Renton Shoreline Master Program
Common Concerns FAQ
Why is the City updating its Shoreline Master Program (SMP) in the first place?
The City’s existing Shoreline Master Program has been in place since the 1970s when the state legislature passed the Shoreline Management Act. A few years ago, the state adopted new shoreline guidelines and mandated that all cities and counties update their Shoreline Master Programs. The City was required to adopt an updated SMP by December 1, 2009. However, due to interest and concern by the public, the City has delayed adoption to allow for additional public input and City Council deliberation.
Are Renton’s proposed regulations more restrictive than other communities on Lake Washington?
In a memo to Council dated May 11, 2010, Renton’s proposed rules were compared to other Lake Washington jurisdictions on three sample issues. These issues were chosen because they have received the most public comment from Lake Washington property owners. Despites some differences in how communities approach these issues, the table clearly shows that Renton is about the same, or slightly less restrictive, than the other Lake Washington jurisdictions. Mercer Island, which has proposed rules notably less restrictive than most jurisdictions, has received notice from the Department of Ecology that the setback/buffer and dock standards are unacceptable and would not be approved as written. It is also important to note that the Bellevue rules are based on rules that the City of Bellevue has had in place for several years. Those rules have not resulted in the types of problems that Renton residents have expressed concern about in regards to the SMP – such as loss of property values or inability to maintain properties. Of course, many of these jurisdictions are still in the process of developing their SMP updates and the information that was gathered at the time is subject to change.
What are Renton’s proposed buffer and setback requirements?
The proposed standard setback citywide is 100 feet. The proposed buffer city-wide is 100 feet. This is a baseline minimum standard across jurisdictions. After listening to public comment, and amending the proposal multiple times, the Planning Commission recommended that a sliding scale setback and buffer (illustrated in the table on the next page) be adopted for single-family property owners. This proposal represents a reduction for all single-family property owners, the setback representing approximately
Sliding Scale for Single-Family Properties Proposed April 7, 2010 |
||
Lot Depth |
Setback |
Buffer |
> 180 ft. |
60 ft. |
25 ft. |
130-180 ft. |
45 ft. |
20 ft. |
100-130 ft. |
35 ft. |
15 ft. |
< 100 ft. |
25 ft. |
10 ft. |
30% of the lot depth, and the buffer representing about 20% of the minimum setback area. This also minimizes the number of properties that will become non-conforming under the proposed SMP.
Is there any way to reduce my setback and buffer requirements?
Technically, the only way to reduce the setback and buffer requirements is to develop a water-dependent use. A water-dependent use is a use in which location on or near the water is necessary for its operation (such as a port, ferry terminal, or marina). However, other types of developments may modify the 100 ft. buffer requirement through a proposed provision called buffer averaging. With buffer averaging, the amount of land set aside as shoreline buffer remains the same, but there is flexibility in how the buffer is applied. One area of the property may have a larger buffer, with a corresponding smaller buffer in another location. This allows some flexibility in site configuration and can be applied administratively. If a development cannot meet its required setback and buffer requirements, a variance may be used to modify the requirements. Variances are another tool that allow flexibility for properties subject to site constraints.
What will happen to homes that become non-conforming under the new rules?
Typically, the biggest problem with a home being declared to be non-conforming is that it cannot be expanded or enlarged. A non-conforming home may be maintained and repaired and enjoyed as-is into perpetuity. Non-conforming homes are able to be insured, to get loans or refinance, and to be rebuilt if they are destroyed by fire. In addition, the proposed SMP allows non-conforming shoreline properties to be expanded if improvements are made to the shore area, such as planting vegetation or installing light–penetrating materials on an existing dock. In this way, the burden on non-conformity is actually less for shoreline property owners than any other property owner in Renton. They would have options for expansion where non-shoreline owners do not. For more information about the provisions that would allow non-conforming homes to expand, please see the Waterfront Homes FAQ at www.shoreline.rentonwa.gov. Another interesting fact about non-conformity is that if you look at the shoreline setback requirements in the Renton Municipal Code today, 42% of the single-family properties on Lake Washington are already non-conforming. If the proposed setback rules are put into place, 57% of the properties would be non-conforming.
What happens to my house if it burns down?
If a house burns down it may be rebuilt on the same foot print it currently has.
Can bulkheads be repaired or replaced?
The proposed rules do not limit the repair or replacement of existing bulkheads. There has been confusion on this issue because of proposed rules regarding a change of use (for example, a change from industrial to commercial use) or if a non-conforming property expands its footprint by more than 500 square feet, the property owner would be required to justify that the bulkhead is necessary (see the following page for a discussion on how this necessity may be demonstrated). Most applications will not trigger the provisions that require a review of the bulkhead. The rules determining bulkhead necessity are firmly established in the state shoreline rules. If a bulkhead is needed, it may continue to be repaired or replaced. If removing a bulkhead will cause more environmental damage than it will fix, it may be kept. Some more information is available about this in the Shoreline Stabilization FAQ, available on the project website at: www.shoreline.rentonwa.gov.
What must be done to demonstrate that a bulkhead is needed?
Property owners may submit a geotechnical report along with their proposal that analyzes whether a bulkhead could be removed or altered to result in less environmental impact. The proposed SMP includes a hierarchy of preferred shoreline stabilization methods (see below). This process allows someone who needs protection of their home or business to get it, but also allows for the reduction of some of the environmental impacts associated with bulkheads over the long-term, based on each site’s unique characteristics.
Shoreline stabilization hierarchy- in order of preference:
1. No bulkhead
2. Soft stabilization – such as plantings to prevent erosion, or construction of a sloping beach
3. Hard bulkhead at the buffer line, with soft options near the shore
4. Mix of hard bulkhead and soft options – such as a cove with hard bulkhead on either side
5. Hard bulkhead
Are there rewards or incentives for removing bulkheads?
There is no formal incentive system for removing bulkheads. However, for properties that are able to do so, there are benefits to the environment and the property owner. Removal of a bulkhead and restoration of the shoreline typically creates a naturally sloping beach which can be safer, more usable for recreation and entertaining, and more attractive to people and wildlife than bulkhead conditions. A properly designed and engineered bulkhead removal and shore restoration should not damage adjoining property, and there are several solutions for protecting property from the wave action and erosion that is caused by adjacent bulkheads. If you are interested, more information about this is available in the document: Green Shorelines: Bulkhead Alternatives for a Healthier Lake Washington www.seattle.gov/dpd/greenshorelines.
Why does the SMP propose limiting dock sizes?
The SMP guidelines require that the City’s SMP limit docks in number and extent because they have impacts on ecological functions and create safe havens for salmonid predators. The US Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”), which is one of the many permitting agencies on Lake Washington, developed guidance for the construction of docks with limited environmental impacts. Those standards are called the RGP-3, and the Corps and other federal agencies use them in their permitting operations. Renton’s SMP proposes standards that are consistent with the RGP-3, which meets our obligations to limit the extent of docks under the SMP guidelines. By establishing a standard that is consistent with the Corps, the City is hoping to provide better customer service. Renton applicants should not have to go through a long and costly approval process with the City, only to have to go back and resubmit because what is allowed under Renton’s rules is not acceptable by other agencies. For more information on proposed dock standards, please see the Piers and Docks FAQ at www.shoreline.rentonwa.gov.
Can existing docks be repaired and replaced?
Existing docks may be repaired and significant portions may be replaced, but the proposed rules do set a threshold in which the repair of a dock is so great that it is considered a full replacement. In the proposed rules, 100% of the surface materials of a dock may be replaced, and 50% of the pilings (or pilings, floats and other support materials for floating docks) may be repaired or replaced. If the repair exceeds that amount, the resulting dock is considered a full replacement. New or fully replaced docks must comply with the rules in place for new docks, which includes size restrictions. These rules were proposed to allow all normal and routine maintenance to occur on existing docks.
Does single-family residential get special treatment that has not been extended to commercial and industrial properties?
Single-family residential uses do get a special treatment because under the Shoreline Management Act, single-family homes are considered a “priority” use and get special consideration. Renton’s proposal allows for special consideration for waterfront homes, by providing a reduced setback for existing homes, and recognizing the right of a single-family home to have a dock. Such allowances are not otherwise allowed except for water-dependent uses (such as ports, ferry terminals, marinas).
Why does the SMP propose limiting height?
The state law specifically limits height to 35 ft. to avoid blocking views of the water from surrounding single-family homes. Heights above 35 ft. may be allowed if there is an overriding public interest to be served by allowing taller buildings. However, this is not the only guideline on height within the shoreline, since state law also directs the City in at least six different places to consider height limitations, aesthetic considerations, and the ability of the public to view the shoreline in its SMP. The issue of height policy alternatives was discussed and reviewed extensively by the Planning Commission. As a result, the proposal allows a height of 35 ft. in the shoreline areas with two exceptions. Throughout the City, however, single-family homes are only allowed to be 30 ft. in height. The proposed SMP limits single-family height at 30 ft. to be consistent with this citywide standard. In high-intensity areas (most of the rest of Renton’s existing developed shoreline) the proposed height standard provides a gradual transition between the shoreline area and non-shoreline area on a property. That standard limits height to 35 ft. at the edge of the buffer/setback and allows height to be increased gradually, potentially up to the maximum allowed in the zone. The diagram to the left shows how the height standard would work.
OHWM**
Setback/Buffer Line
End of Shoreline Jurisdiction
35 ft.
Maximum Height in Zoning
Model of Allowed Height Increases
Is it fair and lawful to require public access for new development?
Public access to the shorelines is an important goal of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA). Public access is only required for new development. In the SMP guidelines, public or community access is required for any subdivision that creates five lots or more. Recently the Planning and Development Committee has discussed requiring community access only for short plats creating less than ten lots, and public access being required for larger plats only. This would be a minor change to the Planning Commission’s proposal.
Public access for other types of new development, especially for new non-water-oriented development, may be required. In this case, the SMP guidelines are very explicit. New non-water-oriented development (such as apartment buildings, hotels, office parks, retail stores) is prohibited in shoreline jurisdiction unless it provides a public benefit consistent with the SMA, such as ecological restoration or public access. If a commercial property owner decides they wish to redevelop a shoreline property, they have several options: 1) develop the property with a water-oriented use; 2) develop the property as a non-water-oriented use with the shoreline restored or enhanced along the length of the waterfront; 3) develop the property as a non-water-oriented use with public access along the length of the waterfront; 4) a combination of options two and three. In this case, public access becomes one of the ways that a shoreline property owner can expand their options for the use and development of the property.
Do you have other questions or concerns?
Contact project manager Erika Conkling at 425-430-6578 or shoreline@rentonwa.gov. Also, check out the SMP project website at www.shoreline.rentonwa.gov.
What!?!?!
It looks like the city it letting developers off the hook for public access!! All they have to do is “restore the waterline” instead of giving access.
So… if you’re a developer what will you do: Make a nice path and allow public access, or toss a few rotten trees on the shoreline.
In addition, small developers only have to give the development itself access.
….
The City already dropped the ball to make Paul Alan have public access, and now they’re doing it again.