The Washington State Shoreline Management Act (also referred to in this document as SMA or the Act) was passed by the legislature in 1971 and adopted by a vote of Washington’s citizens in a 1972 referendum (RCW 90.58). The goal of the Shoreline Management Act is "to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state’s shorelines." The Act also recognizes that "shorelines are among the most valuable and fragile" of the state’s resources.
The Act provides for the management and protection of the state’s shoreline resources by requiring planning for their reasonable and appropriate use. The area regulated under the Act includes lands within two hundred (200) feet of designated shorelines as well as certain wetlands, river deltas, floodways and floodplains associated with such shorelines.
The SMA establishes a balance of authority between local and state governments. Cities and counties have the primary review responsibility for development along their shorelines, and the state (through the Washington State Department of Ecology) has authority to review local master programs and local shoreline development permit decisions.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) applies to all 39 counties and more than 200 cities in Washington State that have "shorelines of the state" (RCW 90.58.030(2)) within their jurisdictional boundaries. Shorelines of the state include:
All marine waters;
Streams with greater than twenty cubic feet per second (20 cfs) mean annual flow;
Lakes twenty (20) acres or larger;
Upland areas called shorelands that extend two hundred (200) feet landward, in all directions on a horizontal plane, from the edge of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of these waters; and
The following areas when they are associated with one of the above:
Wetlands and river deltas; and
Floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred (200) feet from such floodways.
The Act recognizes that certain waters are so important to citizens that they necessitate a special status for classification and protection. These are "shorelines of statewide significance." The Act lists the following criteria for defining "shorelines of statewide significance" in Eastern Washington:
Any [natural rivers or segments thereof] east of the crest of the Cascade range downstream of a point where the annual flow is measured at two hundred cubic feet per second or more, or those portions of rivers east of the crest of the Cascade range downstream from the first three hundred square miles of drainage area, whichever is longer. (RCW 90.58.030(2)(f)(v)(B))
All or portions of the following water bodies in Kittitas County are shorelines of statewide significance:
Cle Elum River
Columbia River
Kachess River
Little Naches River
Teanaway River
Yakima River
Priest Rapids Dam Reservoir
Wanapum Dam Reservoir
Cle Elum Lake
Keechelus Lake
Kachess Lake
In Kittitas County, shoreline jurisdiction includes: all shorelines of the state; upland areas (shorelands) within two hundred (200) feet of the ordinary high water mark of those waters; associated wetlands and river deltas; and floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred (200) feet from such floodways. A set of shoreline environment designation maps depicting the updated jurisdictional areas are included as Appendix A to this SMP. Shoreline environment designation descriptions are included in Appendix B. Depictions of the shoreline jurisdiction boundaries are for information purposes only and need to be confirmed in the field.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The purpose and intent of this SMP is to:
1. 
To promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the community by providing long range, comprehensive policies and effective, reasonable regulations for development and use of shorelines within Kittitas County;
2. 
To manage shorelines in a positive, effective and equitable manner;
3. 
To assume and carry out the County’s responsibilities established by the Act; and
4. 
To implement RCW 90.58.020 for shorelines of the state:
It is the policy of the state to provide for the management of the shorelines of the state by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses. This policy is designed to insure the development of these shorelines in a manner which, while allowing for limited reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will promote and enhance the public interest. This policy contemplates protecting against adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto.
The legislature declares that the interest of all of the people shall be paramount in the management of shorelines of statewide significance. The department, in adopting guidelines for shorelines of statewide significance, and local government, in developing master programs for shorelines of statewide significance, shall give preference to uses in the following order of preference which:
1.
Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest;
2.
Preserve the natural character of the shoreline;
3.
Result in long term over short term benefit;
4.
Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline;
5.
Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines;
6.
Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline;
7.
Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary.
In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for single family residences, ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks, marinas, piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state, and other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state.
Permitted uses in the shorelines of the state shall be designed and conducted in a manner to minimize, insofar as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment of the shoreline area and any interference with the public's use the water.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
This Document shall be known and may be cited as the "Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program." This document may be referred to herein as the "Program," "Master Program," "Shoreline Master Program," or "SMP." Definitions referenced from WAC 173-26-020 are provided in Chapter 2, including "may", "must", "shall", and "should" which have specific meaning for implementation of the Shoreline Management Act.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Public information and outreach. Kittitas County conducted the periodic review process consistent with the requirements of RCW 90.58.080 and WAC 173-26-090. Kittitas County prepared a public participation plan that identified specific objectives, key stakeholders, and timelines for public participation activities.
2. 
Regional shoreline master program website. A web page was developed and hosted on the Kittitas County website to share information about the regional SMP update process and to provide opportunities for the public to submit comments and input. The webpage contained a range of information and documentation related to the development of the SMP update process including:
background materials
public participation plan and process timeline
frequently asked questions
information on how to participate in the process
community visioning questionnaire
information on advisory committees
meeting materials and summaries
key contacts
The webpage was kept current and maintained throughout the duration of the update.
3. 
Public participation opportunities. Due to Covid-19 social distancing requirements, Kittitas County was unable to host traditional open houses and public forums. In lieu of these public participation opportunities, Kittitas County used the SMP website to distribute information regarding draft versions of the SMP, background information related to the SMP update, and comment period timelines. Kittitas County accepted comments throughout the entire SMP update process, and also provided three distinct comment periods. Kittitas County published notices out for the SEPA Environmental Determination of Non-Significance, a joint public hearing held with the Department of Ecology, and a Board of County Commissioner public hearing before final adoption. These notices were sent to all RSS registered email addresses with Kittitas County and stakeholders. Kittitas County also sent out four press releases to news media, all RSS registered email addresses with Kittitas County, and stakeholders. The notices and press releases were also added to the SMP website.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021)
The Growth Management Act (GMA) defines shoreline master program policies as a part of the local comprehensive plan:
For shorelines of the state, the goals and policies of the shoreline management act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 are added as one of the goals of this chapter as set forth in RCW 36.70A 020. . . . The goals and policies of a shoreline master program for a county or city approved under RCW Chapter 90.58 shall be considered an element of the county or city's comprehensive plan. All other portions of the shoreline master program for a county or city adopted under RCW Chapter 90.58, including use regulations, shall be considered a part of the county or city's development regulations. (RCW 36.70A.480(1))
Counties and cities that plan under the GMA are required, under RCW 36.70A, to ensure that there is internal consistency between the comprehensive plan elements, future land use plan, and implementing development regulations (including master programs. The GMA also calls for coordination and consistency of comprehensive plans among local jurisdictions:
The comprehensive plan of each county or city that is adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040 shall be coordinated with, and consistent with, the comprehensive plans adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040 of other counties or cities with which the county or city has, in part, common borders or related regional issues. (RCW 36.70A.100)
This SMP update has been developed to comply with the GMA requirements for internal consistency with each jurisdiction’s comprehensive plan and implementing regulations as well as to ensure coordination and consistency between the County, Cities and Town.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016; Ord. 2021-006, 2021)
1. 
Unless specifically exempted below, all proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to the intent and requirements of RCW Chapter 90.58, the Shoreline Management Act, and this Program whether or not a permit or other form of authorization is required. See Section 1.2 for the definition of shoreline jurisdiction; Chapter 7 for permit procedures; and Chapter 2 for definitions of uses, activities, and development.
2. 
The following activities are not considered "development" for the purpose of this SMP:
a. 
Interior building improvements that do not change the use or occupancy;
b. 
Exterior building maintenance activities, including painting and roofing, that do not expand the existing footprint of the structure;
c. 
Routine landscape maintenance of established, ornamental landscaping, such as lawn mowing, pruning and weeding; and
d. 
Maintenance of the following existing facilities that does not expand the affected area: septic tanks (routine cleaning), wells, and individual utility service connections.
3. 
Development on non-federal land is subject to this SMP and must obtain a shoreline permit, even if it is leased, rented, etc. to the federal government, unless the state has ceded regulatory authority by statute.
4. 
Federal lands include, but are not limited to, national forests, national parks, national wilderness areas, and lands owned by the Federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The following subsections shall guide the determination of SMP applicability on federal lands:
a. 
Federal development on federally owned land is not required to obtain a shoreline permit, unless otherwise required by law, but shall be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with this master program;
b. 
Non-federal activities, uses and development on federally owned land are subject to this SMP and must obtain a shoreline permit;
5. 
As recognized by RCW 90.58.350, the provisions of this SMP shall not affect treaty rights of Indian Nations or tribes.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The following principles, in conjunction with the policy statements of RCW 90.58.020, establish the foundation for the goals, policies and regulations of this Program:
1. 
Any inconsistencies between this Program and the Act must be resolved in accordance with the Act.
2. 
The policies of this Program may be achieved by diverse means including, but not limited to: regulation of development; acquisition of lands and/or easements by purchase or gift; public facility and park planning; watershed planning; voluntary salmon recovery projects; and incentive programs.
3. 
Regulation of private property to implement Program goals must be consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations including, but not limited to: civil rights guaranteed by the U.S. and state constitutions, recent federal and state case law, and state statutes.
4. 
Regulatory or administrative actions contained herein must not unconstitutionally infringe on private property rights or result in an unconstitutional taking of private property.
5. 
The waters of the state are owned by the citizens of the state. The property rights accrued to the citizens of the state must not be infringed upon by activities that denigrate the value of this ownership interest.
6. 
The regulatory provisions of this Program are limited to shorelines of the state, whereas the planning functions of this Program may extend beyond the designated shoreline boundaries.
7. 
The policies and regulations established by the Shoreline Master Program must be integrated and coordinated with those policies and rules of the comprehensive plans and development regulations adopted by the participating jurisdictions under the GMA.
8. 
Protecting the shoreline environment is an essential statewide policy goal, consistent with other policy goals. Permitted and/or exempt development, actions taken prior to the Act’s adoption, and/or unregulated activities can impair shoreline ecological processes and functions. This Program protects the shoreline ecology from such impairments in the following ways:
a. 
By using a process that identifies, inventories, and ensures meaningful understanding of current and potential ecological functions provided by affected shorelines.
b. 
By including policies, regulations, and incentives designed to ensure all development, including permit-exempt development, will not cause a net loss of shoreline ecological function.
c. 
By including regulations and incentives designed to restore impaired ecological functions where such functions have been identified, consistent with the Restoration Plan dated April 2014.
d. 
By including policies and regulations to address cumulative impacts, including the cumulative effect of exempt development, and by fairly allocating the burden of addressing such impacts among development opportunities.
e. 
By including policies and regulations that coordinate shoreline management while protecting private property rights, consistent with the public interest.
9. 
In light of other relevant local, state, and federal regulatory and non-regulatory programs, the County will balance the policy goals of this Program to the extent consistent with the policies of the Act and these governing principles, and modify this Program to reflect changing circumstances.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
Shall any chapter, section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Program be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Program.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)