Final_Chapter_11CHAPTER ELEVEN
SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
11.0 PURPOSE AND RESPONSIBILITY__________________________ 1
11.1 SHORELINE JURISDICTION _______________________________ 2
11.2 COMPLIANCE IN FEDERAL WAY __________________________ 3
11.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT __________________________________ 3
11.4 RELATIONSHIP TO CITY CODE ___________________________ 4
11.5 SHORELINE USE ELEMENT _______________________________ 5
11.6 PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION ELEMENT ____________ 12
11.7 CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION ELEMENT __________ 16
11.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ELEMENT _______ 21
11.9 CIRCULATION ELEMENT ________________________________ 21
11.10 SHORELINE ENVIRONMENTS ____________________________ 23
Intent _______________________________________________________ 23
Shoreline Residential_________________________________________ 24
Urban Conservancy __________________________________________ 24
Natural _____________________________________________________ 25
Map
Federal Way Shoreline Management Plan – Federal Way and its
Potential Annexation Area
This page intentionally left blank.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-1
11.0 PURPOSE AND RESPONSIBILITY
Washington’s Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW (SMA), was passed by
the State Legislature in 1971 and adopted by the public in a referendum. The SMA was
created in response to a growing concern among residents of the state that serious and
permanent damage was being done to shorelines by unplanned and uncoordinated
development. The goal of the SMA is, “…to prevent the inherent harm in an
uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state’s shorelines.” The overarching
SMA policy is to manage shorelines of the state by planning for and supporting
reasonable and appropriate uses while protecting against adverse impacts to public health,
the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life.
The primary responsibility for administering the SMA is assigned to local governments
through the mechanism of Shoreline Master Programs (SMP), adopted under guidelines
established by the Washington State Department of Ecology (“Ecology”). The Ecology
guidelines (WAC 173-26) establish goals, policies, and standards. Local SMPs contain
goals and policies, maps, regulations and development standards, and permitting
procedures consistent with the SMA and Ecology guidelines. The SMP is required to
protect shorelines as a statewide resource while also being tailored to the specific
conditions and needs of individual communities. The SMP is also meant to be a
comprehensive vision of how the shoreline area will be used and developed over time.
According to Substitute Senate Bill (SSB) 6012, passed by the 2003 Washington State
Legislature, cities within King County are required to amend their local SMPs consistent
with Ecology’s revised guidelines. The required update process also provides cities with
an opportunity to incorporate the changes in the physical shoreline conditions (including
annexations) and integrate current technical and scientific information into the SMP.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-2
At the time of incorporation in 1990, the City of Federal Way (“City”) adopted King
County’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City developed and adopted its own
SMP in 1998 that integrated the SMP into the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan
(FWCP). In 1999, the City adopted associated development regulations for the shoreline.
As of January 2005, newly annexed areas included the eastern shore of North Lake and
the northwestern shore of Lake Killarney. All of the lakes within the City’s potential
annexation area (PAA) are governed by county shoreline regulations.
The goals and policies contained in the SMP are incorporated into the FWCP within this
Shoreline Master Program chapter. Development regulations contained in the SMP are
incorporated in the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 15, Shoreline Management.
11.1 SHORELINE JURISDICTION
Under the SMA, the shoreline jurisdiction includes waters that have been designated as
“shorelines of statewide significance” or “shorelines of the state” and adjacent lands or
“shorelands.” Shoreline jurisdiction includes all the designated water bodies and the land
underlying them, plus their associated shorelands, which includes land extending
landward for two hundred feet in all directions from the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM), floodways, and contiguous floodplain areas landward 200 from those
floodways, and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes, and tidal
waters subject to the SMA.
These designations were established in 1972, and are described in the SMA (RCW
90.58.030[2]). Generally, “shorelines of statewide significance” include portions of Puget
Sound and other marine waterbodies; rivers west of the Cascade Range that have a mean
annual flow of 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) or greater; rivers east of the Cascade
Range that have a mean annual flow of 200 cfs or greater; and freshwater lakes with a
surface area of 1,000 acres or more. “Shorelines of the state” are generally described as
all marine shorelines and shorelines of all other streams or rivers having a mean annual
flow of 20 cfs or greater and lakes with a surface area greater than 20 acres.
The shoreline jurisdiction within the city limits of the City of Federal Way encompasses
approximately 16.9 miles of shoreline. It includes all of the Puget Sound shoreline in
Federal Way (about 4.8 miles), including areas waterward of the OHWM which extend to
the line of extreme low tide. Approximately 12.1 miles of shoreline are found along
freshwater lakes. The lakes currently within the city limits are:
Steel Lake
The northwestern shore of Lake Killarney
North Lake
There are no rivers or streams meeting the definition of “shorelines of the state” within the
City or its annexation area. However, streams such as Joe’s Creek and Lakota Creek
discharge to the Puget Sound shoreline. The mouths of these streams and the upstream
extent of tidal influence are considered under shoreline jurisdiction because of their
association with the Puget Sound shoreline. Five freshwater lake shorelines are located in
the City’s PAA and are included in this master program update; these include Star Lake,
Lake Dolloff, Lake Geneva, the remaining portion of Lake Killarney, and Five Mile Lake.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-3
The portions of Puget Sound within the city limits waterward of the line of extreme low
tide are defined as “shorelines of statewide significance” (RCW 90.58.030[2][e][iii]).
Under the SMA, the shoreline area to be regulated under the City’s SMP must include
marine waters, lakes, and shorelands, defined as the upland area within 200 feet of the
OHWM, as well as any associated wetlands (RCW 90.58.030). The shoreline jurisdiction
of the City of Federal Way is shown in Map XI-1 (maps are at the end of the chapter).
11.2 COMPLIANCE IN FEDERAL WAY
The SMA establishes a cooperative program of shoreline management between local
government and the state. The state’s primary role is to support local government and
provide assistance, as well as reviewing some shoreline permits and reviewing and
approving amendments to local SMPs. The SMA requires three primary tasks to be
fulfilled by local governments:
1. Compilation of a comprehensive inventory that includes a survey of natural
characteristics, present land uses, and patterns of property ownership;
2. Development of a master program to provide an objective guide for
regulating the use of shorelines, consistent with the SMA (RCW 90.58)
and its provisions, including the SMP guidelines (Chapter 173-26 WAC)
and shoreline permitting and enforcement procedures (Chapter 173-27
WAC); and
3. Administration of a shoreline permit system for proposed substantial
development and regulated uses in designated water bodies and on their
associated shorelands.
In compliance with the first requirement of the SMA, the City completed a
comprehensive inventory of natural characteristics, functions and values of resources,
existing land use, and ownership patterns along the City’s shorelines (Section 2 of the
Shoreline Master Program – Shoreline Inventory). This inventory was completed in
August 2006 and finalized in June 2007.
The second requirement of the SMA was met by the City with the help of local citizens
and stakeholders, who assisted in developing goals and policies, which form the
foundation for the SMP.
11.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
To conduct the SMP update, City staff and ESA Adolfson prepared draft components of
the City’s SMP, worked with a Citizen’s Advisory Committee (CAC), sought review
from a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and presented findings to the Planning
Commission and the City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC). At the
start of the project in February 2006, a Public Participation Plan was developed and used
as a guide during the SMP update. A public Open House was held on June 7, 2006, to
introduce the process to the public and shoreline residents. The Open House was
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-4
advertised with direct mailings to all shoreline owners as well as public notices on the
City’s website. Six meetings were held with the CAC between July and December 2006.
Citizen comment was integrated into the shoreline inventory, shoreline environment
designations, and goals & policies section of the SMP. Technical documents were routed
to the TAC, including Ecology staff, for review and comment. Other agencies involved in
the process included Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington
Department of Natural Resources, King County, neighboring cities, and the Tribes.
Three meetings were held with the Planning
Commission to present findings and discuss
recommendations. The Planning Commission
meetings were held on February 14, March 28,
and April 4, 2007. A public hearing was held
during the April 4, 2007 meeting.
Approximately 20 citizens testified either at the
public hearing or during public testimony
during the March 28th Planning Commission
meeting. Additional public comment was taken and response given during the LUTC
meeting on May 21, 2007. The City Council passed the SMP by resolution on June 5, 2007.
In July of 2007, the Council-approved SMP was submitted to Ecology for review and
comment. The City of Federal Way received official Ecology review comments in January
2009. City staff, ESA Adolfson, and Ecology staff worked collaboratively to prepare draft
revisions to the SMP that responded to the official Ecology comments. Former members
of the SMP CAC, TAC, shoreline property owners, public agencies, and other parties of
interest were notified of the availability of the revised SMP documents. On August 4,
2010, a public information meeting was conducted to discuss the revisions to the SMP. On
August 25, 2010, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed
revisions to the SMP and forwarded a recommendation to approve the proposed revisions.
The LUTC considered the revisions on October 5, 2010, and forwarded a recommendation
to approve the proposed revisions with a few minor modifications. The City Council
passed the revised SMP by resolution on October 19, 2010.
A programmatic environmental checklist was prepared for the SMP Update. Pursuant to
the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City’s SEPA Official issued a
Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on March 31, 2007. The public comment
period was open on the DNS for approximately 30 days. The appeal period expired on
April 28, 2007.
11.4 RELATIONSHIP TO CITY CODE
The set of shoreline goals and policies in this chapter provide the foundation and
framework on which the balance of the master program has been based. The policies
contained herein are enforced through FWRC Title 15, “Shoreline Management,” and any
other applicable sections of the FWRC. Article II of FWRC Chapter 15.05 includes all of
the shoreline regulations that enforce the goals and policies of the SMP. The following is a
list of the primary subsections of Chapter 15.05, Article II. These sections are listed here
to illustrate how the SMP goals and policies are linked to the regulatory document.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-5
FWRC Chapter 15.05 (Shoreline Management), Article II (Shoreline Regulation):
15.05.040 – General development standards. Provides standards consistent with the
Conservation and Restoration, Historic and Cultural Resources, and Public Access
and Recreation elements of this Chapter. This section of Article II adopts Critical
Areas and Flood Damage Reduction regulations (as Chapter 15.10 and Chapter 15.15
of Title 15).
15.05.050 – Shoreline modifications. Provides standards specific to shoreline
modifications consistent with the Shoreline Use and Conservation and Restoration
elements of this Chapter.
15.05.060 – Environment designations. Introduces the system of environment
designations, consistent with the Shoreline Environments section of this Chapter.
15.05.070 – Summary of Uses, Approval Criteria and Process. Provides a graphical
summary of the use and development regulations detailed in other sections of Article II.
15.05.080 – Shoreline residential environment. Provides regulations specific to the
shoreline residential environment, consistent with the goals and policies for the
shoreline residential environment within this Chapter.
15.05.090 – Urban conservancy environment. Provides regulations specific to the
urban conservancy environment, consistent with the goals and policies for the urban
conservancy environment within this Chapter.
15.05.100 – Natural environment. Provides regulations specific to the natural
environment, consistent with the goals and policies for the natural environment
within this Chapter.
11.5 SHORELINE USE ELEMENT
This element addresses the distribution, location, and extent of use of shorelines and
adjacent areas for housing, recreation, transportation, office, public buildings, utilities,
education, and other uses. The shorelines in Federal Way are more widely used for
residential purposes than for any other use. Much of the undeveloped shoreline is
privately owned, subdivided into small lots, and zoned to permit residential development.
Goal
SMPG1 Shoreline areas shall permit a variety of development types in accordance
with the FWRC, FWCP, and Shoreline Master Plan designations. Designs,
densities, and locations for all allowed uses and developments should
consider physical and natural features of the shoreline and prevent a net loss
of shoreline ecological functions.
Policies
SMPP1 Shoreline land and water areas particularly suited for specific and appropriate
uses should be designated and reserved for such uses.
SMPP2 Shoreline land and water uses should satisfy the economic, social, and
physical needs of the regional population, but should not lead to a net loss of
ecological functions in the shoreline areas.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-6
SMPP3 Like or compatible shoreline uses should be clustered or distributed in a
rational manner, rather than allowed to develop haphazardly.
SMPP4 Multiple uses of shoreline should be encouraged where location and
integration of compatible uses or activities are feasible.
SMPP5 Shoreline ecological functions should be protected from uses or activities
that will have an adverse effect on them.
SMPP6 Non-residential uses or activities that are not shoreline dependent should be
encouraged to locate or relocate away from the shoreline.
SMPP7 Federal Way should consider the goals, objectives, and policies of the SMP
in all land use management decisions regarding the use or development of
adjacent uplands where such use or development may have an adverse effect
on designated shorelines.
SMPP8 Development should be regulated accordingly in shoreline areas known to
contain development hazards or which would adversely impact designated
critical areas as identified in FWRC Title 15.
a. All development should be prohibited within the 100-year floodplain,
except single-family residential and water-dependent or water-related uses.
b. All development should be prohibited in shoreline areas of severe or very
severe landslide hazard.
c. All development should be regulated in shoreline areas with slopes of 40
percent or greater.
d. Shoreline areas containing other potential hazards (e.g., geological
conditions, unstable subsurface conditions, erosion hazards, or
groundwater or seepage problems) should be regulated as necessary to
avoid unsafe development and disturbance of sensitive areas.
SMPP9 Promote respect of private property rights while implementing SMA
requirements.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-7
Goal
SMPG2 Residential use of shoreline areas should be continued and encouraged in
areas that have not been designated as Natural environments by the SMP,
allowing a variety of housing types. New development or redevelopment of
residential uses should cause no net loss of shoreline ecological function as
identified in the SMP’s Shoreline Inventory Characterization and Analysis.
Policies
SMPP10 Residential developments should be designed to achieve no net loss of
shoreline ecological functions and minimize interference with visual and
physical access. Unavoidable impacts to the shoreline environment from
residential development should be mitigated to assure no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions.
a. Residential development in designated critical areas or their
associated buffers should be regulated as required by the City’s
SMP regulations.
b. Residential development on piers or over water is
prohibited.
c. Landfill for residential development that reduces water
surface or floodplain capacity shall not be permitted.
d. In residential developments, the water’s edge should be
kept free of buildings and fences.
e. Development standards should require the retention of
natural shoreline vegetation and other natural features of the
landscape to the greatest extent possible during site
development and construction.
SMPP11 Residential use of shorelines should not displace or encroach upon areas that
have existing or are designated as supporting water-dependent shoreline uses.
SMPP12 Residential densities should be determined with regard for the physical
capabilities of the shoreline areas and public services requirements and
include the following considerations:
a. Subdivisions and new development should be designed to adequately
protect aesthetic characteristics of the water and shoreline environment.
b. New residential development should only be allowed in those shoreline
areas where the provision for sewage disposal and drainage ways are of
such a standard that adjoining water bodies would not be adversely
affected by pollution or siltation.
c. Residential development along shorelines should be setback from the
ordinary high water mark far enough to make unnecessary such
protective measures as filling, bulk heading, construction groins, or
jetties, or substantial re-grading of the site.
d. Residential developments should be designed to enhance the appearance
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-8
of the shoreline and not substantially interfere with the views from public
property or access to the water.
e. The shoreline ecosystems, processes, and functions identified in the
Shoreline Inventory and Characterization should be considered when
determining standards for residential development patterns within the
shoreline environment.
SMPP13 Residential subdivisions in shoreline areas should provide public pedestrian
access to the shorelines within the development in accordance with the public
access and recreation element of this master program.
SMPP14 Developers of recreational projects such as summer homes, cabins,
campgrounds, and similar facilities should satisfactorily demonstrate:
a. The suitability of the site to accommodate the proposed development
without adversely affecting the shoreline environment and water resources.
b. Adequate provisions for all necessary utilities, including refuse disposal.
Goal
SMPG3 Shoreline areas designated by the FWCP and the SMP to allow for
commercial development shall permit a variety of commercial and office park
development types. New development or expansion of existing commercial and
office uses should result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
Policies
SMPP15 Consideration should be made of the effect a structure will have on scenic
value, and when feasible, should include opportunities for public access to
shoreline areas.
SMPP16 Commercial and office structures and ancillary facilities that are not
shoreline dependent or water-oriented should be setback from the water’s
edge and designed to avoid adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions.
SMPP17 The use of porous materials and other low impact development design
alternatives should be encouraged for paved areas to allow water to penetrate
and percolate into the soil. Use of holding systems should be encouraged to
control the runoff rate from parking lots and rooftops.
SMPP18 Commercial and office development located within shoreline areas should be
constructed to withstand normal rain and flooding conditions without
contributing pollution to the watercourse or shoreline. State and local best
management practices should be implemented to protect the natural shoreline
environment from impacts associated with stormwater runoff.
SMPP19 Commercial and office development that is not water-dependent should
provide a buffer zone of native vegetation for erosion control.
SMPP20 Commercial aquaculture activities should be prohibited.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-9
Goal
SMPG4 Regional and subregional utility facilities, including communications, (radio,
TV, and telephone), energy distribution (petroleum products, natural gas,
and electricity), water, sanitary sewers, and storm sewers should not be
allowed in shoreline areas unless there is no alternative location. Design,
location, construction, and maintenance of utility facilities must comply with
the requirements of SMP regulations and other federal, state, and local laws,
and result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
Policies
SMPP21 Utilities that could allow for growth should not be extended into or along
shorelines without prior approval of such extension by the appropriate land
use authority.
SMPP22 Utilities located in shoreline environments inappropriate for development
should not make service available to those areas.
SMPP23 In developed shorelines not served by utilities, utility construction should be
encouraged to locate where it can be shown that water quality will be
maintained or improved.
SMPP24 Federal Way should be consulted prior to, or at the time of, application for
construction of regional utility facilities to be located in or along shorelines.
SMPP25 Utility corridors crossing shorelines should be encouraged to consolidate and
concentrate or share rights-of-way where:
a. Public access or view corridors would be improved.
b. Concentration or sharing would not hinder the ability of the utility
systems to be installed, operated, or maintained safely.
c. Water quality would be as good as or better than if separate corridors
were present.
SMPP26 Public access should be encouraged where rights-of-way for regional utility
facilities cross shorelines in the City, and where public safety and facility
security would not be compromised.
SMPP27 New utility facilities should be located so as to not require extensive
shoreline protection nor to restrict water flow, circulation, or navigation.
SMPP28 New utility facilities and rights-of-way should be located to preserve the
natural landscape and minimize conflicts with present and planned uses of
the land on which they are located.
SMPP29 New utility facilities and rights-of-way should be located and designed to
minimize detrimental visual impacts from the water and adjacent uplands.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-10
SMPP30 New freestanding personal wireless service facilities are prohibited from
locating within the shoreline environment.
Goal
SMPG5 Limit shoreline stabilization—which includes any action taken to reduce
adverse impacts caused by current, flood, wake, or wave action—including
the use of bank stabilization, rip rap, and bulk heading, to that which is
necessary to protect existing improvements.
Policies
SMPP31 Shoreline stabilization should be allowed only if it is clearly demonstrated
that shoreline protection is necessary to protect existing improvements.
SMPP32 Structural solutions to reduce shoreline erosion should be allowed only after
it is demonstrated that nonstructural solutions, such as bioengineering or soft-
shore armoring, would not be able to protect existing development.
SMPP33 Planning of shoreline stabilization should encompass sizable stretches of lake
or marine shorelines. This planning should consider off-site erosion, accretion,
or flood damage that might occur as a result of shoreline protection structures
or activities.
SMPP34 Shoreline stabilization on marine and lake shorelines should not be used as a
means of creating new or newly developable land.
SMPP35 Shoreline stabilization structures should allow passage of ground and surface
waters into the main water body.
SMPP36 Shoreline stabilization should not reduce the volume and storage capacity of
streams and adjacent wetlands or flood plains.
SMPP37 Whenever shoreline stabilization is needed, bioengineered alternatives such as
natural berms and erosion control vegetation plans should be favored over hard
surfaced structural alternatives such as concrete bulkheads and sheet piles.
SMPP38 The burden of proof for the need for shoreline stabilization to protect existing
developments or proposed redevelopments rests on the applicant.
SMPP39 Shoreline stabilization activities that may necessitate new or increased
shoreline protection on the same or other affected properties where there has
been no previous need for protection should not be allowed.
SMPP40 New development shall be designed and located so as not to require shoreline
stabilization.
SMPP41 Areas of significance in the spawning, nesting, rearing, or residency of
aquatic and terrestrial biota should be given special consideration in review
of proposed shoreline stabilization activities.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-11
SMPP42 Shoreline stabilization activities should be discouraged in areas where they
would disrupt natural feeder bluffs processes important for maintaining
beaches.
Goal
SMPG6 Docks and moorages should be allowed when associated with residential,
recreational, or other public facilities. The design, location, and construction
of any dock, pier, or moorage should avoid, to the greatest extent possible,
adverse effects on shoreline ecological functions.
Policies
SMPP43 Open pile construction should be preferred where there is significant littoral
drift, where scenic values will not be impaired, and where minimal alteration
to the shoreline and minimal damage to aquatic resources can be assured.
SMPP44 Piers, floats, and docks should be prohibited or permitted as a conditional use
where conflicts with recreational boaters and other recreational water
activities would create public safety hazards.
SMPP45 Where new docks are allowed, new residential development of two or more
dwellings should be required to provide joint use or community dock
facilities, when feasible, rather than allow individual docks for each residence.
SMPP46 Temporary moorages should be permitted for vessels used in the construction
of shoreline facilities. The design and construction of such moorages shall be
such that upon termination of the project, aquatic habitat can be returned to
original condition within one year at no cost to the environment or the public.
SMPP47 Shoreline structures that are abandoned or structurally unsafe should be
removed.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-12
SMPP48 Docks, buoys, and other moorages should only be authorized after
consideration of:
a. The effect such structures have on wildlife and aquatic life, water
quality, unique and fragile areas, submerged lands, and shoreline
vegetation.
b. The effect such structures have on navigation, recreational and
commercial boating, shoreline access, and scenic and aesthetic values.
c. The effect such structures have on water circulation, sediment
movement, and littoral drift.
SMPP49 Moorage buoys should be preferred over moorage piles on all tidal waters.
11.6 PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
This element addresses the preservation and expansion of all types of public access and
recreational opportunities through programs of acquisition, development, and various
means of less-than-fee acquisition.
Goal
SMPG7 Increase public access to and enjoyment of shoreline areas through
improvements to physical access on publicly owned lands and improved
visual access, provided that private rights, public safety, and shoreline
ecological functions remain intact.
Policies
SMPP50 Development of public access should respect and protect private rights that
are held on shoreline property.
SMPP51 Public access should be maintained and regulated.
a. Public access should be policed and improved consistent with intensity of
use.
b. Provisions to restrict access as to nature, time, number of people, and
area may be appropriate for public pedestrian easements and other public
access areas where there are spawning grounds, fragile aquatic life
habitats, or potential hazards for pedestrian safety.
SMPP52 Design of access should provide for the public health, safety, and enjoyment.
a. Appropriate signs should be used to designate publicly owned shorelines.
b. Pedestrian and non-motorized physical and visual access to the shoreline
should be encouraged.
c. Public access to and along the water’s edge should be made available in
publicly owned shorelines in a manner that protects shoreline ecological
functions.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-13
SMPP53 Acquisition and development of new shoreline public access locations should
be consistent with overall parks and open space planning goals and policies.
a. Acquisition and development of shoreline properties should be consistent
with criteria and standards as part of an overall park and open space
master plan.
b. Where appropriate, utility and transportation rights-of-way on the
shoreline should be made available for public access and use, consistent
with the shoreline use and circulation element policies.
c. Where appropriate, publicly-owned street ends that abut the shoreline
should be retained and/or reclaimed for public access, consistent with the
circulation element policies.
d. Shoreline recreational facilities and other public access points should be
connected by trails, bicycle pathways, and other access links where
possible.
SMPP54 Public access should be provided in new shoreline developments.
a. Incentives should be used to encourage private property owners to
provide public shoreline access.
b. Public pedestrian easements should be considered in future land use
authorizations, and in the case of projects along lakes, streams, ponds, and
marine lands, whenever shoreline features are appropriate for public use.
Shorelines of the City characterized by the following should be
considered for pedestrian easements:
1. Areas of significant, historical, geological, and/or biological
features and landmarks.
2. Areas presently being legally used, or historically having been
legally used, by the public along the shoreline for access.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-14
3. Where public funds have been expended on or related to shoreline
developments.
SMPP55 Shorelines in the City should be available to all people for passive use, visual
access, and enjoyment.
a. The City should preserve and provide publicly accessible viewpoints,
lookouts, and vistas of shorelines.
b. New developments should minimize visual and physical obstruction of
the water from adjacent roads and public properties.
SMPP56 Physical and/or visual access to the water should use steep slopes, view points
from bluffs, stream valleys, and features of special interest where it is possible
to place pathways consistent with public safety and without requiring
extensive flood or erosion protection.
Goal
SMPG8 Provide additional shoreline dependent and water oriented recreation
opportunities that are diverse, convenient, and adequate for the regional
population, and that will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
Policies
SMPP57 Areas containing special shoreline recreation qualities not easily duplicated
should be available for public use and enjoyment.
a. Opportunities should be provided for the public to understand natural
shoreline processes and experience natural resource features.
b. Public viewing and interpretation should be encouraged at or near
governmental shoreline facilities when consistent with security and
public safety.
SMPP58 Shoreline recreational use and development should enhance environmental
quality with minimal adverse effect to natural resources.
a. Stretches of relatively inaccessible and unspoiled shoreline should be
available and designated as low intensity or passive recreational use
areas with minimal development. Service facilities such as footpaths,
periphery parking, and adequate sanitary facilities should only be located
where appropriate, considering both public safety and preservation of
shoreline ecological functions.
b. Beaches and other predominantly undeveloped shorelines currently
utilized for recreational purposes should be available and designated as
medium intensity recreational use areas to be free from expansive
development; intensity of use should respect and protect the natural
qualities of the area.
c. Small or linear portions of the shoreline suitable for recreational
purposes should be available and designated as transitional use areas that
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-15
allow for variable intensities of use, which may include vista points,
pedestrian walkways, water entry points, and access from the water;
utilizing stream floodplains, street ends, steep slopes, and shoreline areas
adjacent to waterfront roads.
d. At suitable locations, shorelines should be made available and designated
as high intensive use areas that provide for a wide variety of recreational
activities.
e. Overall design and development in shoreline recreational areas should be
sensitive to the physical site characteristics and be consistent with the
level of use in the area concerned.
f. Recreation areas and ancillary facilities on or adjacent to the shoreline
should have adequate surveillance and maintenance.
g. Non-water oriented recreational facility development should be setback
from the water’s edge, except where appropriate in high intensive
shoreline use areas.
SMPP59 The provision of adequate public shoreline recreation lands should be based
on an acquisition plan that is consistent with overall goals for enhancing
public access to the City’s shorelines.
SMPP60 Existing buildings that enhance the character of the shoreline should be
incorporated into recreation areas wherever possible.
SMPP61 A balanced variety of recreational opportunities should be provided for
people of different ages, health, family status, and financial ability.
a. Shoreline recreation areas should provide opportunities for different use
intensities ranging from low (solitude) to high (many people).
b. Opportunities for shoreline recreational experiences should include
developing access that accommodates a range of differences in people’s
physical mobility, capabilities, and skill levels.
c. Recreational development should meet the demands of population
growth consistent with the carrying capacity of the land and water
resources.
Goal
SMPG9 Recreational experiences that depend on, or utilize, the shoreline (including:
harvesting activities of fish, shellfish, fowl, minerals, and driftwood; various
forms of boating, swimming, and utilization of shoreline pathways; and
watching or recording activities, such as photography, painting, or the
viewing of water dependent activities) shall be encouraged within parks and
other public access areas, given they do not result in a net loss of shoreline
ecological functions and are allowed uses under state and local regulations.
Policies
SMPP62 Underwater parks should be extensions of shoreline parks, and whenever
possible, be created or enhanced by artificial reefs where natural conditions
or aquatic life could be observed with minimal interference.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-16
SMPP63 During storm events, hazardous conditions, or emergencies, temporary use of
public recreational shoreline areas by boaters should be allowed.
SMPP64 Prime fishing areas should be given priority for recreational use.
SMPP65 Recreational shellfish harvesting should be allowed on public beaches
subject to rules, regulations, and periodic closures by Washington
Department of Health and/or Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
SMPP66 Boating activities that increase shore erosion should be discouraged.
SMPP67 Effective interpretation should be provided to raise the quality of visitor
experiences and provide an understanding of aquatic and shoreline resource.
11.7 CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION ELEMENT
This element promotes and encourages the conservation of natural shoreline resources
and shoreline ecological functions, considering but not limited to, such characteristics as
scenic vistas, parks and open space, fish and wildlife habitat, beaches, feeder bluffs,
estuaries, and other valuable natural or aesthetic features. Additionally, this element
promotes and encourages restoration of shoreline functions and ecological processes that
have been impaired as a result of past development activities.
Goal
SMPG10 Preserve and protect the ecological functions of intact natural shorelines and
ecologically sensitive shorelines as outlined within the shoreline inventory
and characterization.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-17
Policies
SMPP68 Manage designated critical areas in the shoreline—such as critical aquifer
recharge areas and wellhead protection areas, frequently flooded areas,
geologically hazardous areas, regulated wetlands, and streams—according to
measures provided in this SMP. These include shoreline environment
designations, allowed uses, development standards and regulations, and
mitigation for unavoidable impacts. They should also be consistent with the
policies contained in FWCP Chapter 9, “Natural Environment.”
SMPP69 Develop standards, buffers, and mitigation requirements for designated
critical areas in the shoreline consistent with city-wide regulations.
Goal
SMPG11 Assure preservation of unique and non-renewable natural resources and
assure conservation of renewable natural resources for the benefit of existing
and future generations and the public interest.
Policies
SMPP70 All new development and activity in or adjacent to shoreline areas should be
designed, constructed, and operated as to avoid significant adverse impacts to
ground or surface water quality. Use of state and local best management
practices and guidance should be implemented to avoid significant adverse
impacts to water quality.
SMPP71 Shorelines that are of unique or valuable natural character should be
considered for acquisition. Subsequent management of such areas should
protect or enhance shoreline ecological functions.
SMPP72 Protection and conservation of vegetation within shoreline areas should be
managed through implementation of setback, clearing and grading, and
mitigation standards for development activity.
SMPP73 Resource conservation should be an integral part of shoreline planning. All
future shoreline development should be planned, designed, and sited to
minimize adverse impact upon the natural shoreline environment and
ecological functions.
SMPP74 Scenic and aesthetic qualities and ecological functions of shorelines should
be recognized and preserved as valuable resources.
a. When appropriate, natural flora and fauna should be preserved.
b. In shoreline areas, the natural topography should not be substantially
altered.
c. Shoreline structures should be sited and designed to minimize view
obstruction and should be visually compatible with the shoreline
character.
d. Wildlife and aquatic habitats, including spawning grounds, should be
protected.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-18
SMPP75 Resources should be managed to enhance the environment and prevent a net
loss of shoreline ecological functions.
a. Shoreline in-water and over-water activities and development should be
planned, constructed, and operated to minimize adverse effects on the
natural processes of the shoreline, and should maintain or enhance the
quality of air, soil, natural vegetation, and water on the shoreline.
b. Use or activity which substantially degrades the natural resources or
ecological functions of the shoreline should not be allowed without
mitigation as required by SMP regulations and FWRC Title 14,
“Environmental Policy.”
SMPP76 Critical salmonid habitats, including saltwater and freshwater habitat used by
Pacific salmonid species, support valuable recreational and commercial
fisheries and should be protected for their importance to the aquatic
ecosystem, as well as state and local economies.
a. Non-water-dependent and non-water-related uses, activities, structures,
and landfills should not be located in critical salmonid habitats.
b. Where uses, activities, structures, and landfills must locate in critical
salmonid habitats, impacts on these areas should be lessened to the
maximum extent possible. Significant unavoidable impacts should be
mitigated by creating in-kind replacement habitat near the project where
feasible. Where in-kind replacement mitigation is not feasible,
rehabilitation of out-of-kind or off-site degraded habitat should be required.
Mitigation proposals should be developed in consultation with the City, the
State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and any affected Indian Nations.
c. Development that is outside critical salmonid habitats that has the
potential to significantly affect said habitats should be located and
designed as to not create significant negative impacts to said habitats.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-19
d. Whenever feasible, bioengineering should be used as the bank protection
technique for all streams considered to have critical salmonid habitat.
e. Whenever feasible, open pile bridges should be used for all water
crossings over areas considered critical salmonid habitat.
f. Impervious surfaces should be minimized in upland developments to
reduce stormwater runoff peaks. Structures and uses creating significant
impervious surfaces should include stormwater detention systems to
reduce stormwater runoff peaks.
g. The discharge of silt and sediments into waterways shall be minimized
during in-water and upland construction.
h. Adopt-A-Stream programs and similar efforts to rehabilitate critical
salmonid habitats should be encouraged.
i. Fishery enhancement projects should be encouraged where they will not
significantly interfere with other beneficial uses.
j. Project proponents should contact the Habitat Division of the State
Department of Fish and Wildlife and affected Indian Nations early in the
development process to determine if the proposal will occur in or
adjacent to critical salmonid habitat.
k. When reviewing permits for uses, activities, and structures proposed in,
over, or adjacent to marine waters, streams, wetlands, ponds connected to
streams, or any other shoreline area, City staff should contact the Habitat
Division of the State Department of Fish and Wildlife to determine if the
proposal will occur in or affect any adjacent critical habitats. Staff should
also contact affected Indian Nations.
SMPP77 Use the City’s established permit tracking program to periodically evaluate the
effectiveness of the SMP for achieving no net loss of shoreline ecological
functions with respect to shoreline permitting and exemptions. Prepare an
evaluation report every seven years when the SMP is required to be updated
under RCW 90.58.080(4).
Goal
SMPG12 Develop regional solutions with other jurisdictions, tribes, and interested
parties to resolve the challenge of protecting shoreline ecological functions,
while also managing shoreline developments.
Policies
SMPP78 Continue work with the State, King County, Watershed Resource Inventory
Area (WRIA) 9 Steering Committee, and other governmental and non-
governmental organizations to explore how local governments can contribute
to the preservation and restoration of ecological processes and shoreline
functions.
SMPP79 Continue work with the WRIA 9 forum to restore shoreline habitats and
seasonal ranges that support listed endangered and threatened species, as well
as other anadromous fisheries.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-20
Goal
SMPG13 Pursue projects to restore and enhance shoreline habitats and processes on
publicly owned lands.
Policies
SMPP80 Prioritize enhancement and restoration efforts at public parks and open space
lands.
SMPP81 Work with owners of other publicly-owned land, such as Washington State
Parks, to encourage restoration and enhancement projects, including funding
strategies.
SMPP82 Work with the public and other interested parties to prioritize restoration
opportunities identified in Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report
and SMP Restoration Plan.
SMPP83 Promote vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds and
nonnative species to avoid adverse impacts to hydrology, and to reduce the
hazard of slope failures or accelerated erosion.
SMPP84 Develop a program to implement restoration projects, including funding
strategies.
SMPP85 Monitor and adaptively manage restoration projects.
Goal
SMPG14 Encourage voluntary restoration projects on private property in degraded
shoreline environments.
Policies
SMPP86 Create incentives that will make it economically or otherwise attractive for
development proposals to integrate shoreline ecological restoration into
development projects.
SMPP87 Encourage protection, enhancement, or restoration of native riparian
vegetation through incentives and non-regulatory programs.
SMPP88 Promote bioengineering and/or soft engineering alternative design
approaches to shoreline stabilization and provide technical guidance to
shoreline landowners.
SMPP89 Establish public education materials to provide shoreline landowners
technical assistance about the benefits of native vegetation plantings.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-21
Goal
SMPG15 Provide ample opportunity for the public to learn about the ecological
aspects and community values of the City’s shorelines.
Policies
SMPP90 Explore opportunities with other educational organizations and agencies to
develop an on-going program of shoreline education for all ages.
SMPP91 Identify areas where kiosks and interpretative signs can enhance the
educational experience of users of the shoreline.
SMPP92 Develop strategies to fund identified educational and interpretive projects.
11.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ELEMENT
This element addresses identification and preservation of historic and cultural resources
that are located in or associated with Federal Way’s shorelines. Such resources may
include historic structures or buildings, historic use or activities in the shoreline, and
archaeological resources.
Goal
SMPG16 Identify, protect, preserve, and restore important archaeological, historical,
and cultural sites located in or associated with Federal Way’s shorelines for
scientific and educational purposes.
Policies
SMPP93 Manage cultural and historic resources in the shoreline consistent with city-
wide policies for treatment of such resources in the FWCP.
SMPP94 Recognize that shoreline areas are of moderate to high probability for
archaeological resources and require appropriate review and site
investigation for proposed development or modifications.
11.9 CIRCULATION ELEMENT
This element deals with the location and extent of existing and proposed thoroughfares,
transportation routes, and other public facilities; and coordinating those facilities with
shoreline uses.
Goal
SMPG17 Circulation systems in shoreline areas should be limited to those that are
shoreline dependent or would serve shoreline dependent uses, or those that must
pass through shoreline areas. The environment shall be protected from any
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-22
significant adverse effects of circulation systems required in shoreline areas.
Policies
SMPP95 New surface transportation development should be designed to provide the
best possible service with the least possible infringement upon shoreline areas.
a. New transportation facilities and improvements to existing facilities that
substantially increase levels of air, noise, odor, visual, or water pollution
should be discouraged, unless benefits of the facility outweigh costs.
b. Transportation corridors should be designed to harmonize with the
topography and other natural characteristics of the shoreline through
which they traverse.
c. New surface transportation facilities in shoreline areas should be set back
from the ordinary high water mark far enough to make unnecessary such
protective measures as rip-rap or other bank stabilization, landfill,
bulkheads, groins, jetties, or substantial site regrade.
d. New transportation facilities crossing lakes, streams, wetlands, or other
critical areas should be encouraged to locate in existing corridors, except
where any adverse impact can be minimized by selecting an alternate
corridor.
e. Shoreline circulation systems should be adaptable to changes in
technology.
SMPP96 Circulation systems should be located and attractively designed so as not to
unnecessarily or unreasonably pollute the physical environment, or reduce
the benefits people derive from their property.
a. Motorized vehicular traffic on beaches and other natural shoreline areas
shall be prohibited.
b. Transportation facilities providing access to shoreline developments
should be planned and designed in scale and character with the use
proposed.
c. New transportation facilities should minimize total impervious surface
area by generally being oriented perpendicular to the shoreline where
topographic conditions will allow.
SMPP97 Circulation systems should be designed to enhance aesthetic experiences
through creating shoreline vista and access points and encouraging
alternative modes of transportation.
SMPP98 New transportation developments in shoreline areas should provide turnout
areas for scenic stops and off road rest areas where the topography, view, and
natural features warrant, consistent with the public access and recreation
policies.
SMPP99 Shoreline roadway corridors with unique or historic significance, or of great
aesthetic quality, should be retained and maintained for those characteristics.
SMPP100 Shoreline circulation routes should provide for non-motorized means of
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-23
travel and should incorporate multimodal provisions where public safety can
be assured.
SMPP101 The existing system of pedestrian ways, bikeways, and equestrian ways in
the City should be extended to provide safe access to public parks located on
the shoreline.
SMPP102 Shoreline roadways should have a high priority for arterial beautification funds.
SMPP103 Regionally significant pedestrian and bicycle facilities and amenities along
shoreline circulation routes should be pursued in partnership with other
agencies.
SMPP104 Pedestrian access should be built where access to public shorelines is desirable
and has been cut off by linear transportation corridors. New linear facilities
should enable pedestrian access to public shorelines where access is desirable.
SMPP105 Transportation and utility facilities should be encouraged to coordinate joint
use of rights-of-way and to consolidate crossings of water bodies when doing
so can minimize adverse impact to the shoreline.
11.10 SHORELINE ENVIRONMENTS
Intent
In order to more effectively implement the goals, objectives, and policies of this master
program and the SMA, the shorelines of the state within Federal Way have been
categorized into three separate environment designations. The purpose of these
designations is to differentiate between areas whose geographical features, ecological
functions, and existing development pattern imply differing objectives regarding their
management, use, and future development.
Each environment represents a particular emphasis in the type of uses and the extent of
development that should occur within it. The system is designed to encourage uses in each
environment, which enhance the character of the environment while at the same time
requiring reasonable standards and restrictions on development so that the character of the
environment is not destroyed.
The determination as to which designation should be given to any specific shoreline area
has been based on, and is reflective of, the existing development pattern; the biophysical
capabilities and limitations of the land; and the goals and aspirations of the local citizenry.
Each environment designation includes: (1) a purpose statement which clarifies the
meaning and intent of the designation; (2) criteria to be used as a basis for classifying a
specific shoreline area with that environment designation; and (3) detailed management
policies designed to guide management decisions and development consistent with the
character of the environment.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-24
Shoreline Residential
Purpose
The purpose of the “Shoreline Residential” environment is to accommodate residential
development and appurtenant structures that are consistent with SMP Guidelines—WAC
173-26-211(5)(f). An additional purpose is to provide appropriate public access and
recreational uses.
Criteria
The Shoreline Residential environment designation is assigned to shoreline areas inside
the City of Federal Way and the City’s Potential Annexation Area (PAA) if the areas are
predominantly single-family or multi-family residential development, or are planned and
platted for residential development.
Management Policies
1. Residential uses shall be the primary use. Development and redevelopment activities
shall be focused within already developed areas.
2. Standards shall be developed and implemented for density or minimum frontage
width, setbacks, lot coverage limitations, buffers, shoreline stabilization, vegetation
conservation, critical area protection, and water quality. These standards shall ensure
that new development does not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or
further degrade other shoreline values, taking into account the environmental
limitations and sensitivity of the shoreline area, the level of infrastructure and
services available, and other comprehensive planning considerations.
3. Multi-family and multi-lot residential and recreational developments shall provide
public access and joint use for community recreational facilities.
4. All residential development shall occur in a manner consistent with the policies listed
under SMPG2 of the shoreline use element.
Urban Conservancy
Purpose
The purpose of the “Urban Conservancy” environment is to protect and restore ecological
functions of open space, flood plain, and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban
and developed settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses.
Criteria
The Urban Conservancy environment designation is assigned to shoreline areas
appropriate and planned for development that are compatible with maintaining or restoring
the ecological functions of the area that are not generally suitable for water-dependent
high-intensity uses. The Urban Conservancy environment is applied to shorelines if any of
the following characteristics apply:
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-25
1. They have open space, flood plain, or other sensitive areas that should not be more
intensively developed;
2. They have potential for ecological restoration;
3. They retain important ecological functions, even though partially developed; or
4. They have the potential for development that is compatible with ecological restoration.
Management Policies
1. Residential, recreational, commercial, and public facility uses should be allowed,
provided they preserve the natural character of the area or promote preservation of open
space, flood plain, bluffs, or sensitive lands either directly or over the long term. Water -
oriented uses should be given priority over non-water-oriented uses. For shoreline areas
adjacent to commercially navigable waters, water-dependent uses should be given
highest priority. Uses that result in restoration of ecological functions should be allowed
if the use is otherwise compatible with the purpose of the environment and the setting.
2. Standards should be developed and implemented for management of environmentally
sensitive or designated critical areas to ensure that new development does not result
in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, or further degrade other shoreline
values. Development standards should be developed and implemented for density or
minimum frontage width, setbacks, lot coverage limitations, buffers, shoreline
stabilization, vegetation conservation, critical area protection, and water quality.
3. Public access and public recreation objectives should be implemented whenever
feasible and significant ecological impacts can be mitigated.
4. To enhance the waterfront and ensure maximum public use, commercial or office
facilities should be designed to permit pedestrian waterfront activities consistent with
public safety, security, and protection of shoreline ecological functions.
5. Aesthetic considerations should be actively promoted by means of sign control regulations,
architectural design standards, landscaping requirements, and other such means.
Natural
Purpose
The purpose of the “Natural” environment is to protect those shoreline areas that are
relatively free of human influence, or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline
functions intolerant of human use. These systems require that only very low intensity
uses be allowed in order to maintain the ecological functions and ecosystem-wide
processes. Consistent with the policies of the designation, the City of Federal Way should
include planning for restoration of degraded shorelines within this environment.
FWCP – Chapter Eleven, Shoreline Master Program
2011 XI-26
Criteria
A Natural environment designation should be assigned to shoreline areas if any of the
following characteristics apply: (A) the shoreline is ecologically intact and therefore,
currently performing an important, irreplaceable function or ecosystem-wide process that
would be damaged by human activity; (B) the shoreline is considered to represent
ecosystems and geologic types that are of particular scientific and educational interest; or
(C) the shoreline is unable to support new development or uses without significant
adverse impacts to ecological functions or risk to human safety.
Management Policies
1. Any use that would substantially degrade the ecological functions or natural character
of the shoreline area shall not be allowed.
2. The following new uses shall not be allowed in the Natural environment:
• Commercial uses;
• Industrial uses;
• Non-water-oriented recreation; and
• Roads, utility corridors, and parking areas that can be located outside of the
Natural designated shorelines.
3. Single-family residential development may be allowed as a conditional use if the
density and intensity of such use is limited as necessary to protect ecological
functions and be consistent with the purpose of the environment.
4. Scientific, historical, cultural, educational research uses, and low-intensity water-
oriented recreational access uses may be allowed provided that no significant
ecological impact on the area will result.
5. New development or significant vegetation removal that would reduce the capability
of vegetation to perform normal ecological functions should not be allowed. Do not
allow the subdivision of property in a configuration that, to achieve its intended
purpose, will require significant vegetation removal or shoreline modification that
adversely impacts ecological functions. That is, each new parcel must be able to
support its intended development without significant ecological impacts to the
shoreline ecological functions.