All uses and developments within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act shall be planned and carried out in a manner that is consistent with the shoreline master program and the policies of the Act as required by RCW 90.58.140(1), regardless of whether a shoreline permit, statement of exemption, shoreline variance, or shoreline conditional use permit is required. The reviewing official shall assure compliance with the provisions of the shoreline master program for all permits and approvals processed by the city.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Regulation of private property to implement program goals and regulations such as public access and protection of ecological functions must be consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations. These include, but are not limited to, property rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution, applicable federal and state case law, and state statutes, such as RCW 34.05.328, 43.21C.060, and Chapter 82.02 RCW.
Shoreline regulations shall apply as an overlay and in addition to development regulations, including but not limited to zoning, environmental regulations, development standards, subdivision regulations, and other regulations established by the city.
A. 
Allowed uses shall be limited by the general policies and specific regulations regarding use preferences for water-dependent and water-oriented uses. Allowed uses may be specified and limited in specific shoreline permits. In the case of nonconforming development, the use provisions of this code shall be applied to any change of use, including occupancy permits.
B. 
In the event of any conflict between shoreline policies and regulations and any other regulations of the city, shoreline policies and regulations shall prevail unless other regulations provide greater protection of the shoreline natural environment and aquatic habitat.
C. 
All regulations applied within the shoreline shall be liberally construed to give full effect to the objectives and purposes for which they have been enacted. Shoreline master program policies, found in the city's comprehensive plan, establish intent for the shoreline regulations in addition to Chapter 90.58 RCW and WAC Title 173, Chapters 173-26 and 173-27 WAC.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
In addition to the provisions of Chapter 20.12 PMC, the following provisions shall apply within SMA jurisdiction:
Continuation, nonconforming uses, defined herein to include structures and improvements which were legal upon their initiation, but do not conform to development regulations subsequently enacted, or those of a zoning district to which they are subsequently placed, or the allowed uses or performance standards of the SMP, may continue only if the nonconforming use:
A. 
Is not enlarged or extended in a manner which:
1. 
Increases or reinforces its degree of nonconformity;
2. 
Results in enlargement of the building footprint or impervious area in a critical area buffer that extends further toward the water unless necessary to meet minimum standards of life-safety codes; or
3. 
Results in net loss of ecological functions;
B. 
Is not physically changed other than normal and necessary operation, maintenance, and repairs not exceeding 50 percent of the assessed valuation of the building or structure;
C. 
Is kept in good repair and is not a safety hazard; and
D. 
Has never ceased for a continuous period of 180 days or more.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A. 
Exceptions to Local Review under SMA. Requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review conducted by the city to implement the SMA do not apply to the following projects for which there is no local review:
1. 
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 RCW (also see WAC 173-27-044).
2. 
Boatyard improvements to meet NPDES permit requirements. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.355, any person installing site improvements for stormwater treatment in an existing boatyard facility to meet requirements of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System stormwater general permit (also see WAC 173-27-044).
3. 
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 (also see WAC 173-27-044).
4. 
Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045.
5. 
Projects authorized through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, pursuant to Chapter 80.50 RCW and WAC 173-27-045.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A substantial development permit shall be required for all proposed use and development of shorelines unless the proposal is specifically exempt pursuant to RCW 90.58.030(3)(e) and WAC 173-27-040. The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of this master program and are exempt from obtaining a shoreline substantial development permit (SSDP); provided, that any additional exemptions established by legislative amendment of the statute shall constitute exemptions without amendment to this code. An exemption from an SSDP is not an exemption from compliance with the Act, the applicable provisions of this shoreline master program, or from any other regulatory requirements.
A. 
Projects Valued at $7,047 or Less. Any development of which the total cost or fair market value does not exceed $7,047, if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state.
B. 
Maintenance and Repair. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements.
1. 
"Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition.
2. 
"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 the shoreline resource or environment.
3. 
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. 
Emergency Construction. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements.
1. 
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 for full compliance with the shoreline master program.
2. 
Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective structures are deemed 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 an emergency, pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, Chapter 17-27 WAC or this shoreline program, shall be obtained.
3. 
All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of Chapter 90.58 RCW and the shoreline master program.
4. 
In general, flooding or other seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur, but that are not imminent, are not an emergency.
D. 
Agricultural Construction or Practices. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures, including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. 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.
E. 
Construction of Single-Family Residence and Accessory Buildings. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of 30 feet above average grade level as defined in WAC 173-27-030, and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this section.
1. 
"Single-family residence" means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one 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.
2. 
Construction authorized under this exemption shall be located landward of the OHWM.
F. 
Construction of Noncommercial Docks. Construction of a dock, including a community dock designed for pleasure craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multifamily residences.
This exception applies if:
1. 
The fair market value of the dock does not exceed $22,500 for docks that are constructed to replace existing docks, and of equal or lesser square footage than the existing dock being replaced; or $11,200 for all other docks constructed in fresh waters; however, if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding $2,500 occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall require a substantial development permit; and
2. 
A dock is a landing and moorage facility for watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities, or other appurtenances.
G. 
Construction Authorized by the Coast Guard. Construction or modification, by or under the authority of the Coast Guard or a designated port management authority, of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys.
H. 
Operation, Maintenance, or Construction Related to Irrigation. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater for the irrigation of lands.
I. 
Marking of Property Lines on State-Owned Lands. The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands when such marking does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface of the water.
J. 
Operation and Maintenance of Agricultural Drainage or Dikes. 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.
K. 
Activities Necessary for Permit Application. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisites to preparation of an application for development authorization under the shoreline master program, if:
1. 
The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters;
2. 
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;
3. 
The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity;
4. 
A private entity seeking development authorization under the shoreline master program first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the director to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and
5. 
The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550.
L. 
Removal or Control of Noxious Weeds. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, 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 Department of Agriculture or the Department of Ecology jointly with other state agencies under Chapter 43.21C RCW.
M. 
Watershed Restoration Projects. Watershed restoration projects as defined below:
1. 
"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 10 miles of stream reach, in which less than 25 cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil are 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.
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 in-stream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project is less than 200 square feet in floor area and is located above the OHWM of the stream.
2. 
"Watershed restoration plan" means a plan developed or sponsored by a state department, a federally recognized Indian tribe, a city, a county, or a conservation district, for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act. The watershed restoration plan generally contains 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.
N. 
Projects to Improve Fish and Wildlife Passage or Habitat. A public or private project, the primary purpose of which is to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply:
1. 
The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife as necessary for the improvement of the habitat or passage and appropriately designed and sited to accomplish the intended purpose.
2. 
The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to RCW 77.55.181.
3. 
The director has determined that the project is consistent with this master program.
O. 
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.
P. 
All of the above exemptions are subject to the following regulations:
1. 
Exemptions shall be construed narrowly. Only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemptions from the substantial development permit process.
2. 
The burden of proof that a development or use is exempt is on the applicant/proponent of the exempt development action.
3. 
If any part of a proposed development is not eligible for exemption, then a substantial development permit is required for the entire project.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A. 
Any person claiming exemption from the permit requirements of this master program as a result of the exemptions specified in this chapter shall make application for an exemption certificate to the director in the manner prescribed by the city.
B. 
Any development which occurs within the regulated shorelines of the state, whether it requires a permit or not, must be consistent with the intent of the state law.
C. 
The city may attach conditions to the approval of exempted developments and/or uses as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline Management Act and the shoreline master program.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Prior to approval of any land division, such as short subdivisions, long plats, and boundary line adjustments within shoreline jurisdiction, the reviewing official shall document compliance with bulk and dimensional standards as well as policies and regulations of the shoreline master program and attach appropriate conditions and/or mitigating measures to such approvals to ensure the design, development activities, and future use associated with such lands are consistent with the shoreline master program.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
In order to approve any development within SMP jurisdiction, the reviewing official must find that a proposal is consistent with the following criteria:
A. 
All regulations of the shoreline master program appropriate to the shoreline designation and the type of use or development proposed shall be met, except those bulk and dimensional standards that have been modified by approval of a shoreline variance.
B. 
All policies of the shoreline master program appropriate to the shoreline area designation and the type of use or development activity proposed shall be considered and substantial compliance demonstrated, except those bulk and dimensional standards that have been modified by approval of a shoreline variance. A reasonable proposal that cannot fully conform to these policies may be permitted, provided it is demonstrated to the reviewing official that the proposal is clearly consistent with the overall goals, objectives and intent of the shoreline master program.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
All permits or statements of exemption issued for development or use within shoreline jurisdiction shall include written findings prepared by the reviewing official, including compliance with bulk and dimensional standards and policies and regulations of the shoreline master program. The reviewing official may attach conditions to the approval of exempt developments and/or uses as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Act and the program.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
For all development within shoreline jurisdiction, the building official shall not issue a building permit for such development until compliance with the shoreline master program has been documented. If a shoreline substantial development permit is required, no permit shall be issued until all comment and appeal periods have expired. Any permit issued by the building official for such development shall be subject to the same terms and conditions that apply to the shoreline permit.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The city may grant relief from shoreline master program development standards and use regulations when the following apply:
A. 
A shoreline restoration project causes, or would cause, a landward shift in the ordinary high water mark, resulting in the following:
1. 
Land that had not been regulated under this chapter prior to construction of the restoration project is brought under shoreline jurisdiction; or
2. 
Additional regulatory requirements apply due to a landward shift in required shoreline buffers or other regulations of the applicable shoreline master program; and
3. 
Application of shoreline master program regulations would preclude or interfere with use of the property permitted by local development regulations, thus presenting a hardship to the project proponent.
B. 
The proposed relief meets all of the following criteria:
1. 
The proposed relief is the minimum necessary to relieve the hardship.
2. 
After granting the proposed relief, there is net environmental benefit from the restoration project.
3. 
Granting the proposed relief is consistent with the objectives of the shoreline restoration project and consistent with the shoreline master program.
4. 
Where a shoreline restoration project is created as mitigation to obtain a development permit, the project proponent required to perform the mitigation is not eligible for relief under this section.
C. 
The application for relief must be submitted to the Department of Ecology for written approval or disapproval. This review must occur during the Department's normal review of a shoreline substantial development permit, conditional use permit, or variance. If no such permit is required, then the Department shall conduct its review when the local government provides a copy of a complete application and all supporting information necessary to conduct the review.
1. 
Except as otherwise provided in subsection D of this section, the Department of Ecology shall provide at least 20 days' notice to parties that have indicated interest to the Department in reviewing applications for relief under this section, and post the notice onto their website.
2. 
The Department shall act within 30 calendar days of close of the public notice period, or within 30 days of receipt of the proposal from the local government if additional public notice is not required.
D. 
The public notice requirements of subsection C of this section do not apply if the relevant shoreline restoration project was included in a shoreline master program or shoreline restoration plan as defined in WAC 173-26-201, as follows:
1. 
The restoration plan has been approved by the department under applicable shoreline master program guidelines; and
2. 
The shoreline restoration project is specifically identified in the shoreline master program or restoration plan or is located along a shoreline reach identified in the shoreline master program or restoration plan as appropriate for granting relief from shoreline regulations; and
3. 
The shoreline master program or restoration plan includes policies addressing the nature of the relief and why, when, and how it would be applied.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A. 
Shoreline permits shall be processed in accordance with the applicable procedures of PMC Title 16, Land Use and Environmental Procedures.
B. 
No shoreline development shall be undertaken on shorelines of the city without first obtaining a permit or approval, whether or not a substantial development permit is required.
C. 
When appropriate due to the type of critical areas, habitat, or species present, or project area conditions, the reviewing official may require the applicant to prepare or fund analyses or activities conducted by third party or parties selected by the reviewing official and paid for by the applicant. Analyses and/or activities conducted under this subsection include, but are not limited to:
1. 
Evaluation by an independent qualified professional of the applicant's analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate; and
2. 
A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, or the local Native American Indian tribe or other appropriate agency; and/or
3. 
Analysis of detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and adjacent or abutting to the site.
D. 
Public Notice. Three copies of a notice of development application shall be posted prominently on the property concerned and in conspicuous public places within 300 feet thereof. The notice of development application shall also be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the boundaries of the subject property, exclusive of rights-of-way.
E. 
Standard Public Comment Time. Each notice of development application shall include a statement that persons desiring to present their views with regard to said application may submit these in writing or notify the community development department in writing of their interest within 14 days from the date of the notice of application.
F. 
Special Public Comment Time. Notice of development application for a substantial development permit regarding a limited utility extension as defined in RCW 90.58.140(11)(b) or for the construction of a bulkhead or other measures to protect a single-family residence and its appurtenant structures from shoreline erosion shall include a 14-day comment period. Such notification or submission of views to the director shall entitle those persons to a copy of the action taken on the application.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Should the applicable reviewer find that any application does not substantially comply with criteria imposed by the master program and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, he/she may deny such application or attach any terms or condition which he/she deems suitable and reasonable to affect the purpose and objectives of this master program.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The director may require the applicant to post a surety device in favor of the city to assure full compliance with any terms and conditions imposed on any shoreline permit. Said surety device shall be in an amount to reasonably assure the city that any deferred improvement will be carried out within the time stipulated and in accordance with approved plans.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The objective of a conditional use provision is to provide more control and flexibility for implementing the regulations of the master program. With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of allowed uses can be expanded.
A. 
Decision Criteria. Uses classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after consideration and by meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses within that area. A conditional use permit may be granted subject to the hearing examiner determining compliance with each of the following conditions:
1. 
The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area.
2. 
The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines.
3. 
Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the city's master program.
4. 
The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the city's master program.
5. 
The use meets the conditional use criteria in WAC 173-27-160.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A development may be granted which is at variance with the criteria established in the SMP where, owing to special conditions pertaining to the specific piece of property, the literal interpretation and strict application of the criteria established in the SMP would cause undue and unnecessary hardship or practical difficulties. A variance may be required for a use that does not require a substantial development permit but which may not be approved because it does not comply with the provisions of the SMP.
A. 
Decision Criteria. The fact that the applicant might make a greater profit by using his property in a manner contrary to the intent of the master program is not, by itself, sufficient reason for a variance. The hearing examiner must find each of the following:
1. 
Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject property, or to the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity.
2. 
The variance permit is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity.
3. 
The variance permit will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property on the shorelines in the same vicinity.
4. 
The variance granted will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this master program.
5. 
The public welfare and interest will be preserved. If more harm will be done to the area by granting the variance than would be done to the applicant by denying it, the variance shall be denied, but each property owner shall be entitled to the reasonable use and development of his lands as long as such use and development is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and the provisions of this master program.
6. 
The proposal meets the variance criteria in WAC 173-27-170.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A. 
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 authorized under the shoreline master program.
B. 
No construction pursuant to such permit shall begin or be authorized and no building, grading or other construction permits or use permits shall be issued by the city until 21 days from the date a substantial development permit was filed with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General, or until all review proceedings are completed as were initiated within the 21 days of the date of filing. Filing shall occur in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130.
C. 
No permits and construction pursuant to a conditional use permit or variance shall begin or be authorized until 21 days from the date of notification of approval by the Department of Ecology, or until all review proceedings are completed as were initiated within the 21 days of the date of filing. Filing shall occur in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130.
D. 
Unless a different time period is specified in the shoreline permit as authorized by RCW 90.58.143, construction activities, or a use or activity for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this master program, must be commenced within two years of the effective date of a shoreline permit, or the shoreline permit shall terminate and a new permit shall be necessary. However, the director may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors if a request for extension has been filed with the city before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. Construction activities or commencement of construction means that construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be approved and completed.
E. 
A permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of no more than five years after the effective date of a shoreline permit, unless a longer period has been specified pursuant to RCW 90.58.143 and subsection F of this section. If an applicant files a request for an extension prior to expiration of the shoreline permit, the director shall review the permit and upon a showing of good cause may authorize a single extension of the shoreline permit for a period of up to one year. Otherwise said permit shall terminate. Notice of the proposed permit extension shall be given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. To maintain the validity of a shoreline permit, it is the applicant's responsibility to maintain valid construction permits in accordance with adopted building codes.
F. 
If it is determined that standard time requirements of subsections D and E of this section should not be applied, the hearing examiner, upon a finding of good cause, may establish shorter time limits; provided, that as a part of action on a conditional use or variance permit the approval of the Department of Ecology shall be required. "Good cause" means that the time limits established are reasonably related to the time actually necessary to perform the development on the ground and complete the project that is being permitted.
G. 
For purposes of determining the life of a shoreline permit, the effective date of a substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of appeals or legal actions, or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed.
H. 
It is the responsibility of the applicant to inform the director of the pendency of other permit applications filed with agencies other than the city, and of any related administrative or legal actions on any permit or approval. If no notice of the pendency of other permits or approvals is given to the city prior to the expiration date established by the shoreline permit or the provisions of this section, the expiration of a permit shall be based on the effective date of the shoreline permit.
I. 
If the granting of a shoreline permit by the city is appealed to the Shoreline Hearings Board, and the Shoreline Hearings Board has approved the granting of the permit, and an appeal for judicial review of the Shoreline Hearings Board decision is filed, construction authorization may occur subject to the conditions, time periods, and other provisions of RCW 90.58.140(5)(b).
J. 
After all local permit administrative appeals or reconsideration periods are complete and the permit documents are amended to incorporate any resulting changes, the city 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.
1. 
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.
2. 
Consistent with RCW 90.58.140(6), the state's Shorelines Hearings Board 21-day appeal period starts with the date of filing, which is defined below:
a. 
For projects that only require a substantial development permit: the date that Ecology receives the city's decision.
b. 
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 city.
c. 
For SDPs simultaneously mailed with a CUP or VAR to Ecology: the date that Ecology's decision on the CUP or variance is transmitted to the applicant and the city.
K. 
Special Procedures for WSDOT Projects.
1. 
Permit Review Time for Projects on a State Highway. Pursuant to RCW 47.01.485, the Legislature established a target of 90 days' review time for local governments.
2. 
Optional Process Allowing Construction to Commence 21 Days after Date of Filing. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.140, Washington State Department of Transportation projects that address significant public safety risks may begin 21 days after the date of filing if all components of the project will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Any ruling on an application for a substantial development permit under authority of this master program, whether it is an approval or denial, shall, with the transmittal of the ruling to the applicant, be filed concurrently with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General by the director. Filing shall occur in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying, or rescinding of a permit on shorelines of the state pursuant to RCW 90.58.140 may seek review from the Shorelines Hearings Board by filing a petition for review within 21 days of the date of receipt of the decision as provided for in RCW 90.58.140(6).
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
All provisions of this master program shall be enforced by the director. For such purposes, the director or his duly authorized representative shall have the power of a police officer.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A. 
Any shoreline permit issued under the terms of this master program may be rescinded or suspended upon a finding that a permittee has not complied with conditions of the permit.
B. 
Such rescission and/or modification of an issued permit shall be initiated by serving written notice of noncompliance on the permittee, which shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the address listed on the application or to such other address as the applicant or permittee may have advised the city; or such notice may be served on the applicant or permittee in person or his agent in the same manner as service of summons as provided by law.
C. 
Before any such permit can be rescinded, a public hearing shall be held by the hearing examiner. Notice of the public hearing shall be made in accordance with PMC § 16.30.050. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be the final decision of the city on all rescinded applications. A written decision shall be transmitted to the Department of Ecology, the Attorney General's office, the applicant, and such other departments or boards of the city as are affected thereby and the legislative body of the city.
D. 
The Department of Ecology may petition the Shoreline Hearings Board for a rescission of the permit if the department is of the opinion that the noncompliance continues to exist 30 days after the date of the notice, and the local government has taken no action to rescind the permit, as provided by RCW 90.58.140(8).
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
A. 
Every person violating any of the provisions of this master program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall be punishable under conviction by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 90 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and each day's violation shall constitute a separate punishable offense.
B. 
The city attorney may bring such injunctive, declaratory, or other actions as are necessary to insure that no uses are made of the shorelines of the state within the city's jurisdiction which are in conflict with the provisions and programs of this master program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and to otherwise enforce provisions of this title and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971.
C. 
Any person subject to the regulatory program of this master program who violates any provision of this master program or the provisions of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. The city attorney shall bring suit for damages under this subsection on behalf of the city. Private persons shall have the right to bring suit for damages under this subsection on their own behalf and on behalf of all persons similarly situated. If liability has been established for the cost of restoring an area affected by violation, the court shall make provision to assure that restoration will be accomplished within a reasonable time at the expense of the violator. In addition to such relief, including monetary damages, the court in its discretion may award attorney's fees and costs of the suit to the prevailing party.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The city council may adopt moratoria or other interim official controls as necessary and appropriate to implement the provisions of the Shoreline Management Act. Prior to adopting such moratorium or other interim official controls, the city council shall:
A. 
Hold a public hearing on the moratorium or control within 60 days of adoption;
B. 
Adopt detailed findings of fact that include, but are not limited to, justifications for the proposed or adopted actions and explanations of the desired and likely outcomes; and
C. 
Notify the Department of Ecology of the moratorium or control immediately after its adoption. The notification must specify the time, place, and date of any public hearing held.
Said moratorium or other official control shall provide that all lawfully existing uses, structures, or other development shall continue to be deemed lawful conforming uses and may continue to be maintained, repaired, and redeveloped, so long as the use is not expanded, under the terms of the land use and shoreline rules and regulations in place at the time of the moratorium.
Said moratorium or control adopted under this section may be effective for up to six months if a detailed work plan for remedying the issues and circumstances necessitating the moratorium or control is developed and made available for public review. A moratorium or control may be renewed for two six-month periods if the city council complies with this section before each renewal.
If a moratorium or control is in effect on the date a proposed master program or amendment is submitted to the Department of Ecology, the moratorium or control must remain in effect until the Department's final action under RCW 90.58.090; however, the moratorium expires six months after the date of submittal if the Department has not taken final action.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The director is authorized to adopt such rules as are necessary and appropriate to implement this chapter. The director may prepare and require the use of such forms as are necessary to its administration.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The provisions of the shoreline master program use regulations or the shoreline environment map may be amended as provided for in RCW 90.58.120 and 90.58.200 and Chapter 173-26 WAC. Amendments shall be processed in accordance with one of the following procedures:
A. 
Standard local process for approving/amending shoreline master programs, WAC 173-26-100.
B. 
Optional joint review process for amending shoreline master programs, WAC 173-26-104.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Adoption of an amendment to the official controls shall be adopted by the city council by ordinance after a public hearing and report by the planning commission in accordance with the procedural requirements of Chapter 16.80 PMC.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
The shoreline use regulations or map amendments thereto may be initiated by:
A. 
The adoption of a motion by the city council requesting the planning commission to set a matter for hearing and recommendation.
B. 
The adoption of a motion by the planning commission.
C. 
Application of one or more owners of property affected by the proposal.
D. 
A department or agency of the city or governmental entity.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Proponents for shoreline environment map redesignations (i.e., amendments to the shoreline environment designation map) shall bear the burden of proof for demonstrating consistency with the shoreline environment criteria of the master program, Chapter 173-26 WAC, and the goals and policies of the city of Pacific comprehensive plan.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)
Subsequent to final action by the council adopting or amending the shoreline master program or official control, said master program, official control, or amendment thereto shall be submitted to the Department of Ecology for approval. No such master program, official control, or amendment thereto shall become effective until approval by the Department of Ecology is obtained pursuant to RCW 90.58.90. Master programs or amendments thereto are effective 14 days after Ecology's approval letter.
(Ord. 2002 § 4 (Exh. B), 2019)