The purpose of this Shoreline Management Program is to provide for the administration and management of uses and development within the shoreline jurisdiction in a manner consistent with RCW 90.58, the Shoreline Management Act, and other rules and guidelines adopted by the Washington State Department of Ecology.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Generally. Except when specifically exempted by statute, all proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to RCW Chapter 90.58, the Shoreline Management Act, and this master program. No substantial development shall be undertaken on shorelines of the state without first obtaining a permit. See also KCC § 17B.01.070 Applicability.
2. 
Agricultural activities on agricultural lands. Nothing in this title shall require modification of or limit agricultural activities occurring on agricultural lands. However, new agricultural activities on land not meeting the definition of agricultural land, conversion of agricultural lands to other uses, and development not meeting the definition of agricultural activities are subject to the provisions of this title.
3. 
Prior development. The provisions of WAC 173-27-070 shall apply to substantial development undertaken prior to the effective date of the Act.
4. 
Nonconformance.
a. 
Applicability.
i. 
The following provisions apply to lots, structures and uses lawfully established prior to the effective date of this master program, or amendments thereto, which do not conform to the current regulations or standards of this program.
ii. 
The following provisions do not apply to lots, structures or uses that were unlawfully established.
b. 
Nonconforming lots.
i. 
An undeveloped lot, tract, parcel, site, or division of land located landward of the ordinary high water mark which was established in accordance with local and state subdivision requirements prior to the effective date of this master program but which does not conform to the present lot size standards may be developed as permitted by the land use regulations of the local government so long as such development conforms to all other requirements of the applicable master program and the Act.
c. 
Nonconforming structures.
i. 
Nonconforming structures may be maintained, repaired, renovated, and remodeled, provided such activity does not enlarge or expand the structure.
ii. 
Nonconforming structures may be enlarged or expanded provided that said enlargement does not increase the extent of nonconformity by further encroaching upon or extending into areas where construction would not be allowed for new development.
iii. 
Enlarging or expanding a nonconforming non-residential structure in a manner that increases the extent of nonconformity requires a variance.
iv. 
Enlarging or expanding nonconforming residential structures used for a conforming use in a manner that increases the extent of nonconformity may be allowed if the change is consistent with the provisions of this Program and demonstrates no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
v. 
Nonconforming single-family residences may increase their height within the existing structural footprint up to maximum of thirty-five (35) feet without requiring a variance.
vi. 
A nonconforming structure which is moved any distance must be brought into conformance with this Program and the Act.
vii. 
Damaged nonconforming structures outside frequently flooded areas may be reconstructed to those configurations existing immediately prior to the time the development was damaged. Reconstruction of nonconforming development located in frequently flooded areas shall comply with reconstruction regulations contained within the Kittitas County Flood Prevention Ordinance (KCC Chapter 14.08– December 2014).
d. 
Nonconforming uses.
i. 
Nonconforming uses may be continued consistent with their lawfully established scale and range of uses.
ii. 
A structure which is being or has been used for a nonconforming use may be used for a different nonconforming use only upon the approval of a conditional use permit. In addition to the conditional use permit criteria of KCC § 17B.07.060(3), a conditional use permit for a change in a nonconforming use may be approved only upon a finding that:
a. 
No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical because of the configuration of the structure and/or the property;
b. 
The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the Act and this Program and as compatible with the uses in the area as the pre-existing use;
c. 
The use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose;
d. 
The structure(s) associated with the nonconforming use shall not be expanded in a manner that increases the extent of the non-conformity, including encroachment into areas such as setbacks, and any critical areas and/or associated buffers where new structures, use, or development would not be allowed;
e. 
The shoreline buffer and vegetation conservation standards of this Program are met (see KCC § 17B.05.050);
f. 
The change in use, remodel, or expansion will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and/or processes;
g. 
Uses which are specifically prohibited or which would thwart the intent of the Act or this Program shall not be authorized; and
h. 
Conditions necessary to assure that the use will not become a nuisance, or a hazard have been attached to the permit.
e. 
Redevelopment of nonconforming rights-of-way and associated transportation structures, such as railroad trestles, may be permitted for purposes of facilitating the development of public trails and/or public shoreline access; provided, that such redevelopment shall be otherwise consistent with the provisions of this Program, including, but not limited to, the provisions for public access and no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes, except as provided for in KCC § 17B.07.030 of this chapter.
f. 
If a nonagricultural nonconforming use is discontinued for twelve (12) consecutive months or for twelve (12) months during any two-(2)-year period, the nonconforming rights shall expire, and any subsequent use shall be conforming.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
General provisions.
a. 
Only those uses and developments that meet the precise terms of one (1) or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the substantial development permit process.
b. 
An exemption from the substantial development permit process is not an exemption from compliance with the Act or Master Program or from any other regulatory requirements.
c. 
The burden of proof that a development or use is exempt from the permit process is on the applicant.
d. 
If any part of a proposed use or development is not eligible for exemption, then a substantial development permit is required for the entire proposal.
e. 
Conditions may be attached to the approval of exempted uses or developments as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Act and the Master Program.
2. 
Developments exempt from shoreline substantial development permitting process. Subject to the general provisions above, exempt activities include those set forth in WAC 173-27-040(2) and RCW 90.58.030, as amended:
a. 
Any use or development of which the total cost or fair market value, whichever is higher, does not exceed seven thousand forty seven dollars($7,047), if such use or development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this subsection will be adjusted for inflation by the office of financial management every five (5) years, according to WAC 173-27-040(2)(a). For purposes of determining whether or not a permit is required, the total cost or fair market value shall be based on the value of development that is occurring on shorelines of the state as defined in RCW 90.58.030(2)(c) . The total cost or fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any donated, contributed or found labor, equipment or materials.
b. 
Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition including, but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to shoreline resource or environment. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development including, but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment.
c. 
Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. A "normal protective" bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural developments installed at or near, and parallel to, the OHWM for the sole purpose of protecting an existing single-family residence and appurtenant structures from loss or damage by erosion. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if constructed for the purpose of creating dry land. When a vertical or near vertical wall is being constructed or reconstructed, not more than one (1) cubic yard of fill per one (1) foot of wall may be used as backfill. When an existing bulkhead is being repaired by construction of a vertical wall fronting the existing wall, it shall be constructed no further waterward of the existing bulkhead than is necessary for construction of new footings. When a bulkhead has deteriorated such that an OHWM has been established by the presence and action of water landward of the bulkhead, then the replacement bulkhead must be located at or near the actual OHWM. Bioengineered erosion control projects may be considered a normal protective bulkhead when any structural elements are consistent with the above requirements and when the project has been approved by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
d. 
Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. An "emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full compliance with this chapter. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective structures are deemed by the Administrator to be the appropriate means to address the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation the new structure shall be removed or any permit which would have been required, absent the emergency, obtained, pursuant to RCW Chapter 90.58 and this Master Program. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of RCW Chapter 90.58 and this Master Program. As a general matter, flooding or other seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur but that are not imminent are not an emergency.
e. 
Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, construction of a barn or similar agricultural structure, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including, but not limited to, head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. Provided that a feedlot of any size; all processing plants; other activities of a commercial nature; alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation; shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations. See definition of "feedlot" at KCC § 17B.02.235.
f. 
Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys.
g. 
Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for their own use or for the use of their family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the County, other than requirements imposed pursuant to RCW Chapter 90.58. "Single-family residence" means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one (1) family including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal appurtenance. An "appurtenance" is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single-family residence and is located landward of the OHWM and the perimeter of a wetland. Normal appurtenances include a garage, deck, driveway, utilities, fences, installation of a septic tank and drainfield, and grading which does not exceed two hundred fifty (250) cubic yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the OHWM. Construction authorized under this exemption shall be located landward of the OHWM.
h. 
Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only for the private non-commercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single-family and multi-family residences. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities or other appurtenances. This exception applies if either:
i. 
In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500); or
ii. 
In fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed:
a. 
Twenty-two thousand five hundred dollars ($22,500) for docks that are constructed to replace existing docks, are of equal or lesser square footage than the existing dock being replaced, or
b. 
Eleven thousand two hundred dollars ($11,200) for all other docks constructed in fresh waters. Eleven thousand two hundred dollars ($11,200) for all other docks constructed in fresh waters.
However, if subsequent construction occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, and the combined fair market value of the subsequent and prior construction exceeds the amount specified above, the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the purposes of this chapter.
i. 
Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters including return flow and artificially stored groundwater from the irrigation of lands.
j. 
The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water.
k. 
Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system.
l. 
Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to RCW Chapter 80.50.
m. 
Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under WAC 173-27-040(2), when all of the following conditions are met:
i. 
The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters;
ii. 
The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not limited to, fish; wildlife; fish or wildlife habitat; water quality; and aesthetic values;
iii. 
The activity does not involve the installation of any structure, and upon completion of the activity, the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; and
iv. 
A private entity seeking development authorization under this Section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions.
n. 
The process of removing or controlling aquatic noxious weeds, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the Washington State Department of Agriculture or the Washington State Department of Ecology jointly with other state agencies under RCW Chapter 43.21C; recommended under RCW Chapter 43.21C.
o. 
Watershed restoration projects as defined herein. The County shall review the projects for consistency with the Shoreline Master Program in an expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along with any conditions within forty-five (45) days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption from the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this Section.
i. 
"Watershed restoration project" means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities:
a. 
A project that involves less than ten (10) miles of stream reach, in which less than twenty-five (25) cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings;
b. 
A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or
c. 
A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state; provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than two hundred (200) square feet in floor area and is located above the OHWM of the stream.
ii. 
"Watershed restoration plan" means a plan, developed or sponsored by the Washington State Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology, Natural Resources, and Transportation (WSDOT); a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority; a city; a county; or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area, or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to RCW Chapter 43.21C, the state Environmental Policy Act.
p. 
The external or internal retrofitting of an existing structure with the exclusive purpose of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.) or to otherwise provide physical access to the structure by individuals with disabilities.
q. 
A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply:
i. 
The project has been approved in writing by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife;
ii. 
The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to RCW Chapter 77.55; and
iii. 
The County determines that the project is substantially consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. The County shall make such determination in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent.
iv. 
Fish habitat enhancement projects that conform to the provisions of RCW 77.55.181 are determined to be consistent with local shoreline Master Programs, as follows:
a. 
In order to receive the permit review and approval process created in this Section, a fish habitat enhancement project must meet the criteria under q.iv(a)(1) and (2) in this subsection:
1. 
A fish habitat enhancement project must be a project to accomplish one or more of the following tasks:
i. 
Elimination of human-made fish passage barriers, including culvert repair and replacement, and fish passage barrier removal projects that comply with the forest practices rules, as the term “forest practices rules” is defined by RCW 76.09.020; or
ii. 
Restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank employing the principle of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or
iii. 
Placement of woody debris or other instream structures that benefit naturally reproducing fish stocks; or
iv. 
The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife shall develop size or scale threshold tests to determine if projects accomplishing any of these tasks should be evaluated under the process created in this Section or under other project review and approval processes. A project proposal shall not be reviewed under the process created in this Section if the Washington State Department of Ecology determines that the scale of the project raises concerns regarding public health and safety.
2. 
A fish habitat enhancement project must be approved in one of the following ways:
i. 
By the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to RCW Chapter 77.95 or 77.100;
ii. 
By the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan as provided in RCW Chapter 89.08;
iii. 
By the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife as a WDFW-sponsored fish habitat enhancement or restoration project;
iv. 
Through the review and approval process for the Jobs for the Environment Program;
v. 
Through the review and approval process for conservation district-sponsored projects, where the project complies with design standards established by the Conservation Commission through interagency agreement with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Natural Resource Conservation Service;
vi. 
Through a formal grant program established by the Legislature or the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife for fish habitat enhancement or restoration; and
vii. 
Through the Department of Transportation’s environmental retrofit program as a stand-alone fish passage barrier correction project; and
viii. 
Through a local, state, or federally approved fish barrier removal grant program designed to assist local governments in implementing stand-alone fish passage barrier corrections; and
ix. 
By a city or county for a stand-alone fish passage barrier correction project funded by the city of county; and
x. 
Through the approval process established for forest practices hydraulic projects in chapter 76.08 RCW.
b. 
Fish habitat enhancement projects meeting the criteria of p.iv(a) of this subsection are expected to result in beneficial impacts to the environment. Decisions pertaining to fish habitat enhancement projects meeting the criteria of p.iv(a) of this subsection and being reviewed and approved according to the provisions of this Section are not subject to the requirements of RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) .
c. 
A hydraulic project approval (HPA) permit is required for projects that meet the criteria of p.iv(a) of this subsection and are being reviewed and approved under this Section. An applicant shall use a joint aquatic resource permit (JARPA) application form developed by the Office of Regulatory Assistance to apply for approval under this chapter. On the same day, the applicant shall provide copies of the completed application form to the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and to each appropriate local government agency. Local governments shall accept the application as notice of the proposed project. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife shall provide a fifteen-(15)-day comment period during which it will receive comments regarding environmental impacts. Within forty-five (45) days, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife shall either issue a permit, with or without conditions, deny approval, or make a determination that the review and approval process created by this Section is not appropriate for the proposed project. WDFW shall base this determination on identification during the comment period of adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated by the conditioning of a permit. If WDFW determines that the review and approval process created by this Section is not appropriate for the proposed project, WDFW shall notify the applicant and the appropriate local governments of its determination. The applicant may reapply for approval of the project under other review and approval processes. Any person aggrieved by the approval, denial, conditioning, or modification of a permit under this Section may formally appeal the decision to the Hydraulic Appeals Board pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
d. 
The County may not require permits or charge fees for fish habitat enhancement projects that meet the criteria of p.iv(a) of this subsection and that are reviewed and approved according to the provisions of this Section.
3. 
Developments not required to obtain shoreline permits or local reviews.
a. 
Requirements to obtain a Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, letter of exemption; or other review to implement the Shoreline Management Act do not apply to the following:
i. 
Remedial actions. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person conducting a remedial action at a facility pursuant to a consent decree, order, or agreed order issued pursuant to Chapter 70.105D RCW, or to the Department of Ecology when it conducts a remedial action under Chapter 70.105D.
ii. 
Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person installing site improvements for storm water treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a national pollutant discharge elimination system storm water general permit.
iii. 
WSDOT facility maintenance and safety improvements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.356, Washington State Department of Transportation projects and activities meeting the conditions of RCW 90.58.356 are not required to obtain a Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, letter of exemption, or other local review.
iv. 
Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045.
v. 
Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to Chapter 80.50 RCW.
4. 
Letter of exemption.
a. 
General. A letter of exemption is required for all requests for exemption from a shoreline substantial development permit to ensure the proposal complies with the regulations of this SMP, except for emergency development pursuant to WAC 173-27-040(2)(d) and those uses and developments specifically allowed without a letter of exemption in KCC § 17B.05.050(B).
b. 
Application. Any person claiming exemption from the substantial development permit requirements shall submit an application for such an exemption in the manner prescribed by the Shoreline Administrator. Applications shall include, at a minimum: a summary of the proposed development project; identification of the specific exemption provisions from WAC 173-27-040 that applies to the proposal; and a description of how the proposal will comply with the applicable policies and regulations of this Shoreline Master Program.
c. 
Letter of exemption. Kittitas County shall prepare a letter of exemption, addressed to the applicant and the Washington State Department of Ecology, whenever a proposal is determined to be exempt from the substantial development permit requirements. The letter of exemption must indicate the specific exemption provision from WAC 173-27-040 that is applicable to the proposal and provide a summary of the consistency of the proposal with the regulations of this title.
d. 
Watershed restoration projects. This Section applies to a letter of exemption for a watershed restoration project pursuant to WAC 173-27-040 or subject to one or more of the following federal permits: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 10 permit under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (generally applicable to any project occurring on or over navigable waters); or Section 404 permit under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (generally applicable to any project which may involve discharge of dredge or fill material to any water or wetland area).
i. 
The letter of exemption must indicate the specific exemption provision from WAC 173-27-040 that is applicable to the proposal and provide a summary of the consistency of the proposal with the regulations of this SMP.
ii. 
Watershed restorations projects must be reviewed in an expeditious manner and an exemption decision, together with any conditions, must be issued within forty-five (45) days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this Section.
5. 
Programmatic statements of exemption.
a. 
Applicability. Programmatic statements of exemption may be issued for activities exempt under the provisions of KCC § 17B.07.030(2) above that:
i. 
Are repetitive and part of a maintenance program or other similar program;
ii. 
Have the same or similar identifiable impacts each time the activity is repeated at all sites covered by the programmatic statement of exemption; and
iii. 
Are suitable to having standard conditions that will apply to any and all sites.
b. 
Conditions. A programmatic statement of exemption shall not be issued until appropriate conditions, if needed, are developed and approved. Conditions shall apply uniformly to each activity authorized and all locations covered by the programmatic statement of exemption. Conditions may include specifications for the frequency, method and contents of periodic status reports.
c. 
Revisions. The programmatic statement of exemption may be modified or withdrawn if the Shoreline Administrator determines that:
i. 
The programmatic statement of exemption or activities authorized under the statement of exemption no longer comply with law;
ii. 
The programmatic statement of exemption does not provide adequate regulation of the activity;
iii. 
The conditions or the manner in which the conditions are implemented are not adequate to protect against the impacts resulting from the activity.
d. 
Expiration. Programmatic exemptions shall expire five (5) years after the date of issuance if a shorter expiration period is not specified in the exemption approval.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Substantial development permits: All substantial development undertaken on shorelines of the state requires a permit to ensure consistency with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the Master Program.
2. 
Variances: The purpose of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the applicable Master Program where there are extraordinary circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of the Master Program will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020. When a use or development is proposed that does not comply with the bulk, dimensional and performance standards of the Master Program, such use or development can only be authorized by approval of a variance.
3. 
Conditional uses: The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide a system within the Master Program which allows flexibility in the application of use regulations in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. Uses which are classified or set forth in the applicable Master Program as conditional uses may be authorized with a conditional use permit. Other uses which are not classified or set forth in the applicable Master Program may be authorized as conditional uses provided the applicant can demonstrate consistency with the requirements of this Section and the requirements for conditional uses contained in the Master Program. Uses which are specifically prohibited by the Master Program may not be authorized as conditional uses.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Administrator: The Administrator or his/her designee shall have the authority to review and approve, deny, or approve with conditions, applications for the following:
a. 
Letters of exemption;
b. 
Shoreline substantial development permits;
c. 
Revisions to substantial development permits; and
d. 
Requests for timing extensions.
2. 
Hearing Examiner: The Hearing Examiner or his/her designee shall have the authority to review and make initial local County approval, denial, or approval with conditions for the following:
a. 
Shoreline conditional use permits; and
b. 
Shoreline variances.
3. 
Board of County Commissioners: The Board of County Commissioners or their designee shall have the authority to:
a. 
Review and approve, deny, or approve with conditions, applications for shoreline substantial development permits that are included in consolidated permit applications that are subject to Board review and action.
b. 
Review and make initial local County approval, denial, or approval with conditions for shoreline conditional use permits and shoreline variances that are in consolidated permit applications that are subject to Board review and action.
c. 
Acquire lands and easements within shorelines of the state by purchase, lease, or gift, either alone or in concert with other governmental entities, when necessary to achieve implementation of the Master Program;
d. 
Accept grants, contributions, and appropriations from any agency, public or private, or individual for the purposes of the Master Program;
e. 
Appoint advisory committees to assist in carrying out the purposes of the Master Program;
f. 
Contract for professional or technical services required by the Master Program which cannot be performed by its employees;
g. 
Adopt moratoria or other interim official controls necessary to implement SMP, in accordance with RCW 90.58.590 as amended; and
h. 
Take other actions as deemed appropriate.
4. 
Washington State Department of Ecology: The Washington State Department of Ecology shall be responsible for the final approval, denial, or approval with conditions for the following:
a. 
Shoreline conditional use permits and revisions to same; and
b. 
Shoreline variances and revisions to same.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
All development permits. As provided in KCC § 17B.06.020, no permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of more than thirty-five (35) feet above average grade level on shorelines of the state that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines unless overriding considerations of the public interest will be served.
2. 
Substantial development permits. A substantial development permit shall be granted only when the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
a. 
That the proposal is consistent with the policies and procedures in RCW Chapter 90.58 and WAC Chapter 173-27;
b. 
That the proposal is consistent with the policies and procedures of the Master Program; and
c. 
That the proposal has been appropriately conditioned where necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Act and the local Master Program.
3. 
Conditional use permits. Uses which are classified are set forth in the Table at KCC § 17B.04.090-1 as conditional uses, or unclassified uses not specifically prohibited, may be authorized as a conditional use provided that the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
a. 
That the proposed use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the Master Program;
b. 
That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines;
c. 
That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and SMP;
d. 
That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located;
e. 
That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect;
f. 
That if conditional use permits were granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the cumulative impact of such uses would remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
g. 
That the proposed use has been appropriately conditioned to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and to assure consistency of the project with the Act and the local Master Program.
h. 
When converting from one nonconforming use to a different nonconforming use, the applicant must demonstrate that no reasonable alternative conforming use is practical and that the proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the Act and the Master Program and as compatible with the uses in the area as the pre-existing use.
4. 
Variance.
a. 
General provisions. Variance permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances shall be shown, and the public interest shall suffer no substantial detrimental effect. Variances from the use regulations of the Master Program are prohibited.
b. 
Review criteria for all variances. Variance permits for uses and/or development that will be located landward of the OHWM and/or landward of any wetland may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
i. 
That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the applicable Master Program precludes, or significantly interferes with, reasonable use of the property;
ii. 
That the hardship is specifically related to the property, and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of the Master Program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions;
iii. 
That the design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and SMP and will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment;
iv. 
That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by the other properties in the area;
v. 
That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to afford relief;
vi. 
That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect; and
vii. 
That the cumulative impact of additional requests for variances in the area where similar circumstances exist would not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
c. 
Additional review criteria for variances waterward of the OHWM. In addition to the criteria established under KCC § 17B.07.060(4)(b) above, applicants for variance permits for uses and/or development that will be located waterward of the OHWM must also demonstrate:
i. 
That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the applicable Master Program precludes all reasonable use of the property; and
ii. 
That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Generally. The general procedural requirements of the County shall apply to shoreline permits except where this chapter is more restrictive or specific, in which case the provision of this chapter shall apply.
2. 
Complete application. The Administrator shall issue a determination of completeness, upon finding that the following required information has been submitted with an application for a substantial development, conditional use, or variance permit:
a. 
A site development plan consisting of maps and elevation drawings, drawn to an appropriate scale to depict clearly all required information, photographs and text which shall include:
i. 
The boundary of the parcel(s) of land upon which the use or development is proposed;
ii. 
The OHWM of all water bodies located adjacent to or within the boundary of the project. This may be an approximate location provided, that for any use or development where a determination of consistency with the applicable regulations requires a precise location of the OHWM, the mark shall be located precisely and the biological and hydrological basis for the location as indicated on the plans shall be included in the development plan. Where the OHWM is neither adjacent to or within the boundary of the project, the plan shall indicate the distance and direction to the nearest OHWM of a shoreline;
iii. 
Existing and proposed land contours. The contours shall be at intervals sufficient to accurately determine the existing character of the property and the extent of proposed change to the land that is necessary for the use or development. Areas within the boundary that will not be altered by the use or development may be indicated as such and contours approximated for that area;
iv. 
A delineation of all wetland areas that will be altered or used as a part of the proposal;
v. 
A general indication of the character of vegetation found on the site;
vi. 
The dimensions and locations of all existing and proposed structures and improvements including, but not limited to: buildings, paved or graveled areas; roads; utilities; septic tanks and drainfields; material stockpiles or surcharge; and stormwater management facilities;
vii. 
Where applicable, scaled elevation drawings of all proposed structures including location of the OWHM;
viii. 
Where applicable, a landscaping plan for the project;
ix. 
Where applicable, plans for use and development of areas on or off the site as mitigation for impacts associated with the proposed project shall be included and contain information consistent with the requirements of this Section;
x. 
Quantity, source, and composition of any fill material that is placed on the site whether temporary or permanent;
xi. 
Quantity, composition, and destination of any excavated or dredged material;
xii. 
A vicinity map showing the relationship of the property and proposed use or development to roads, utilities, and existing uses and developments on adjacent properties;
xiii. 
Where applicable, a depiction of the impacts to views from existing residential uses and public areas; and
xiv. 
On all Variance Permit applications, the plans shall clearly indicate where use and/or development could occur without approval of a variance, the physical features and circumstances on the property that provide a basis for the request, and the location of adjacent structures and uses.
3. 
Concurrent submittals. When a substantial development permit and a conditional use or variance permit are required for a proposal, the submittal on the permits shall be made concurrently.
4. 
Notice.
a. 
Required. The Administrator shall notify the public, the Washington State Department of Ecology, the Yakama Nation, other agencies with jurisdiction as well as individuals and organizations that have requested notice in writing of applications for a shoreline management substantial development, conditional use, or variance permit.
b. 
Timing. Notice of application shall be provided within fourteen (14) days after the determination of completeness.
c. 
When an open record hearing is required. If an open record pre-decision hearing is required for the requested project permits, the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen (15) days prior to the open record hearing.
d. 
Contents. The notice shall include:
i. 
The date of application; the date of the notice of completion for the application; and the date of the notice of application;
ii. 
A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested;
iii. 
The identification of other permits not included in the application to the extent known by the local government;
iv. 
The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing the notice of application, such as a land use bulletin, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed;
v. 
A statement of the public comment period, which shall be not less than thirty (30) days following the date of notice of application, and statements of the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and any appeal rights. A local government may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open record pre-decision hearing, if any, or, if no open record pre-decision hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit;
vi. 
The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable and scheduled at the date of notice of the application;
vii. 
A statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been made at the time of notice, of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and of consistency; and
viii. 
Any other information determined appropriate by the local government.
e. 
Method. The notification system shall assure that notice to the general public and property owners in the vicinity of such application is given by at least one of the following methods:
i. 
Mailing of the notice to the latest recorded real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within at least five hundred (500) feet of the boundary of the property upon which the use or development is proposed; or
ii. 
Posting of the notice in a conspicuous manner on the property upon which the project is to be undertaken.
5. 
Review and decision. The appropriate review authority identified in KCC § 17B.07.050 shall review applications for compliance with review criteria in KCC § 17B.07.060 and either approve, deny, or approve with conditions. In the case of shoreline conditional use and variance permits, the decision shall serve as a recommendation to the Washington State Department of Ecology, which is responsible for the final decision on shoreline conditional use permits and variances.
6. 
Submittal to the Washington State Department of Ecology:
a. 
After all local permit administrative appeals or reconsideration periods are complete, and the permit documents amended to incorporate any resulting changes, Kittitas County will mail the permit using return receipt requested mail to the Department of Ecology regional office and the Office of the Attorney General. Projects that require both Conditional Use Permits and or Variances shall be mailed simultaneously with any Substantial Development Permits for the project
i. 
The permit and documentation of the final local decision will be mailed together with the complete permit application; a findings and conclusions letter; a permit data form (cover sheet); and applicable SEPA documents.
ii. 
Consistent with RCW 90.58.140(6), the state’s Shorelines Hearing Board twenty-one day appeal period starts with the date of filing, which is defined below:
1. 
For projects that only require a Substantial Development Permit: the date that Ecology receives Kittitas County’s decision.
2. 
For a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or Variance: the date that Ecology’s decision on the CUP or Variance is transmitted to the applicant and Kittitas County.
3. 
For SDPs simultaneously mailed with a CUP or Variance to Ecology: the date that Ecology’s decision on the CUP or Variance is transmitted to the applicant and Kittitas County.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying, or rescinding of a permit on shorelines of the state may seek review from the shorelines hearings board by filing a petition for review within twenty-one (21) days of the date of filing of the decision, pursuant to RCW 90.58.180.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Applicability. The time requirements of this Section shall apply to all Substantial Development Permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a Variance or Conditional Use Permit.
2. 
Effective date. The effective date of a Substantial Development Permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6).
3. 
Commencement. Construction activities associated with a shoreline permit are not authorized and shall not begin until twenty-one (21) days from the date of filing or until all review proceedings initiated within twenty-one (21) days from the date of such filing have been terminated. Construction activities, or the use or activity where no construction activities are involved, shall be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a Substantial Development Permit.
4. 
Expiration. Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five (5) years after the effective date of a shoreline permit, unless extended in accordance with the provisions below.
5. 
Extension. The Administrator may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one (1) year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record on the shoreline permit and to the Washington State Department of Ecology.
6. 
Exclusions. The time periods in this Section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the proposal, including all reasonably related administrative or legal actions on any such permits or approvals.
7. 
Flexibility. Upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of the project proposed and consistent with the policy and provisions of the master program and RCW 90.58, the County may adopt different time limits from those set forth in this subsection as part of action on a Substantial Development Permit.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Applicability.
a. 
Substantive changes. A permit revision is required whenever the applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms, or conditions of a project from that which is approved in the permit. Changes are substantive if they materially alter the project in a manner that relates to its conformance to the terms and conditions of the permit, the Master Program and/or the policies and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58). Changes which are not substantive in effect do not require approval of a revision.
b. 
Substantial development. If the proposed change, or the sum of the proposed revisions and any previously approved revisions, constitutes substantial development then the applicant is not eligible for the revision process and shall be required to apply for a new permit.
2. 
Submittal requirements. An applicant seeking to revise a permit shall submit detailed plans and text describing the proposed changes to the Administrator.
3. 
Review criteria and findings. The Administrator may approve a revision when the proposed changes are within the scope and intent of the original permit and are consistent with the applicable Master Program and the Act. At a minimum, Administrator must find:
a. 
No additional over-water construction is involved except that pier, dock, or float construction may be increased by five hundred (500) square feet or ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit, whichever is less;
b. 
Ground area coverage and height may be increased a maximum of ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit;
c. 
The revised permit does not authorize development to exceed height, lot coverage, setback, or any other requirements of the applicable Master Program except as authorized under a variance granted as the original permit or a part thereof;
d. 
Additional or revised landscaping is consistent with any conditions attached to the original permit and with the applicable Master Program;
e. 
The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed; and
f. 
No adverse environmental impact will be caused by the project revision.
4. 
Timing and limitations. Revisions to permits may be authorized after original permit authorization has expired. However, such revisions shall be limited to authorization of changes which are consistent with this Section and which would not require a shoreline permit for the development or change. This subsection shall not be used to extend the time requirements or to authorize substantial development beyond the time limits of the original permit.
5. 
Notice. Notice of the revision approval shall be given to parties of record on the original permit and to the Washington State Department of Ecology.
6. 
Effective date. The revised permit is effective immediately upon final decision by the Administrator or, when appropriate, upon final action by the Washington State Department of Ecology.
7. 
Appeals.
a. 
Timing. Appeals shall be in accordance with RCW 90.58.180 and shall be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of receipt of the local government's action on a substantial development permit revision by the Washington State Department of Ecology or, for revisions to conditional use permits or variances, the date Ecology's final decision is transmitted to local government and the applicant.
b. 
Grounds. Appeals shall be based only upon contentions of noncompliance with the provisions of WAC 173-27-100.
c. 
Construction during appeal period. Construction undertaken pursuant to that portion of a revised permit not authorized under the original permit is at the applicant's own risk until the expiration of the appeals deadline.
d. 
Impact of appeal on original permit. If an appeal is successful in proving that a revision is not within the scope and intent of the original permit, the decision shall have no bearing on the original permit.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
As provided for in RCW 90.58.900, the Act is exempted from the rule of strict construction. The Act and this Program shall be liberally construed to give full effect to the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies for which the Act and this Program were enacted and adopted, respectively.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
Chapter 173-27 WAC contains enforcement regulations, including authority for the County to issue regulatory orders to enforce the SMA and the SMP. Upon a determination that there has been a violation of any provision of the County’s shoreline regulations, the County may pursue code enforcement and penalties in accordance with the provisions of KCC Title 18, Code Enforcement.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Applicability. This Section applies to comprehensive Shoreline Master Program updates as well as limited SMP amendments that may be necessary from time to time to comply with state and federal laws and implementing rules, address newly annexed shorelines, improve consistency with the Act’s goals and policies, or correct errors or omissions. All Master Program amendments shall be processed pursuant to the procedural requirements of WAC 173-26-010 through 173-26-160 and RCW 90.58.090.
2. 
Initiation of amendments.
a. 
By elected or appointed officials. The Board of County Commissioners or Planning Commission may initiate an amendment to this Program according to the procedures prescribed in WAC 173-26-100.
b. 
By the public. Any person may petition the Board of County Commissioners or Planning Commission to amend this Program. Petitions shall specify the changes requested and any and all reasons, therefore. The Board of County Commissioners or Planning Commission may schedule a public hearing on said petition(s) if it deems the proposed amendment would make this Program more consistent with the Act or more equitable in its application to persons or property due to changed conditions in an area.
c. 
As the result of annual review. The Administrator shall submit an annual report reviewing the effectiveness of the Program in achieving its stated purpose, goals, and objectives as well as any proposed amendments deemed necessary to increase its effectiveness or equity. If said report contains proposed amendments, the Board of County Commissioners may schedule a public hearing to consider such matter.
3. 
Notice. Notice of a public hearing shall be published in one or more newspapers of general circulation in the area in which the hearing is to be held. The notice shall include: a reference to the authority under which the action is proposed; a statement or summary of the proposed changes to the Master Program; the date, time and location of the hearing; the manner in which interested persons may present their views; and reference to the availability of the draft proposal for public inspection at the Kittitas County Community Development Department.
4. 
Consultations.
a. 
The local government shall consult with and solicit the comments of any persons, groups, federal, state, regional, or local agency, and tribes having interests or responsibilities relating to the shorelines or any special expertise with respect to any environmental impact.
b. 
Adjacent local governments with jurisdiction over common shorelines of that state shall be included in the consultation process.
c. 
The local government shall solicit comments on the draft proposal from the Washington State Departments of Ecology and Commerce at least sixty (60) days prior to final local approval.
5. 
Coordination. The County shall coordinate with the participating jurisdictions and verify concurrence with or denial of the proposal. The amendments of concurring jurisdictions shall be processed together.
6. 
Hearing. The County shall conduct at least one (1) public hearing to consider the draft proposal.
7. 
Washington State Department of Ecology Approval. Washington State Department of Ecology approval is required pursuant to RCW 90.58.090.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)