The town of Yarrow Point shoreline master program, dated April 3, 2013, and amended through required periodic review in 2017, and adopted on July 9, 2019, or as further amended, and attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full, is hereby adopted as the shoreline master program for the town of Yarrow Point as required by Chapter 90.58 RCW. The town of Yarrow Point shoreline master program shall hereinafter be referred to as the town SMP ("SMP") within this chapter and where referenced in the YPMC.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
Natural. The natural designation is assigned to shoreline areas that are ecologically intact; of particular scientific and educational interest; unable to support new development or uses without significant ecological impacts or risk to human safety; important for conservation and recovery of priority species; provide habitat for federal or state ESA listed species; and/or have unique recreational or scenic value that would be degraded by human development.
B. 
Shoreline Residential. The shoreline residential designation is assigned to shoreline areas that are predominantly single-family or multifamily residential development or are planned and platted for residential development.
C. 
Urban Conservancy. Urban conservancy areas are publicly owned, and include the NE 47th Street Road End Beach and the NE 42nd Street Road End hand-held boat launch area.
D. 
Aquatic. The aquatic designation encompasses Lake Washington contained within the Yarrow Point town limits, waterward of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM).
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
No developments or uses shall be undertaken on the shorelines of the town of Yarrow Point except those that are consistent with the policies of this chapter and, after adoption or approval, as appropriate, the applicable guidelines, regulations, or the town SMP. No substantial development or use shall be undertaken on the shorelines of the town of Yarrow Point without first obtaining a permit from the town. No exempt development activities or use as defined in YPMC § 19.02.080 shall be undertaken without first acquiring a letter of exemption from the town planner or his/her designee. When development is proposed consistent with the limited exceptions in WAC 173-27-044, such development shall not require review or permit approval under this chapter and the town SMP. Nothing in this chapter shall authorize the issuance of a permit contrary to the laws of Washington State.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
"Nonconforming use or development" means a shoreline use or development which was lawfully constructed or established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or this chapter, or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards within the town SMP.
B. 
Structures that were legally established and are used for a conforming use, but which are nonconforming with regard to setbacks, buffers or yards; area; bulk; height or density, may be maintained and repaired and 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 or use would not be allowed for new development or uses.
C. 
Uses and developments that were legally established and are nonconforming with regard to the use regulations of the town SMP may continue as legal nonconforming uses. Such uses shall not be enlarged or expanded, except that nonconforming single-family dwelling units that are located landward of the ordinary high water mark may be enlarged or expanded in conformance with applicable bulk and dimensional standards by the addition of space to the main structure or by the addition of normal appurtenances as defined in WAC 173-27-240(2)(g) upon approval of a shoreline conditional use permit.
D. 
A use which is listed as a conditional use, but which existed prior to adoption of the town SMP or any relevant amendment, and for which a conditional use permit has not been obtained, shall be considered a nonconforming use. A use which is listed as a conditional use, but which existed prior to the applicability of the town SMP to the site, and for which a conditional use permit has not been obtained, shall be considered a nonconforming use.
E. 
A structure for which a variance has been issued shall be considered a legal nonconforming structure and the requirements of this section and the town SMP shall apply as they apply to preexisting nonconformities.
F. 
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. A conditional use permit may be approved only upon a finding that:
1. 
No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical; and
2. 
The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the Act and the town SMP and as compatible with the uses in the area as the preexisting use. In addition, such conditions may be attached to the permit as are deemed necessary to assure compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the town SMP and the Act, and to assure that the use will not become a nuisance or a hazard.
G. 
A nonconforming structure which is moved any distance must be brought into conformance with the town SMP and the Act.
H. 
If a nonconforming development is damaged to an extent not exceeding 75 percent of the replacement cost of the original development, it may be reconstructed to those configurations existing immediately prior to the time the development was damaged; provided, that application is made for the permits necessary to restore the development within six months of the date the damage occurred, all permits are obtained and the restoration is completed within two years of permit issuance.
I. 
If a nonconforming use is discontinued for 12 consecutive months or for 12 months during any two-year period, the nonconforming rights shall expire and any subsequent use shall be conforming. A use authorized pursuant to subsection F of this section shall be considered a conforming use for purposes of this section.
J. 
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 the Act or the town SMP, but which does not conform to the present lot size standards, may be developed if permitted by other land use regulations of the town of Yarrow Point and so long as such development conforms to all other requirements of the town SMP and the Act.
K. 
These standards are consistent with the nonconforming standards contained in Chapter B(13) of the town SMP.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
Requirements to obtain a substantial development permit, conditional use permit, variance, letter of exemption, or other review to implement the Act do not apply to the following:
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.
2. 
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.
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.
4. 
Projects consistent with an environmental excellence program agreement pursuant to RCW 90.58.045.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
Application and Interpretation of Exemptions.
1. 
The town shall narrowly construe exemptions. Only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions in the definition for substantial development found in Appendix B(5) of the town SMP, or those exemptions or exceptions listed in WAC 173-27-040, and/or Chapter 90.58 RCW may be granted exemption from the substantial development permit process.
2. 
An exemption from the substantial development permit process is not an exemption from compliance with the Act or the town SMP, or from any other regulatory or municipal requirements. All uses and developments must be consistent with the policies and provisions of the town SMP and the Act. A development or use, either listed as a conditional use in the town SMP or an unlisted use, must obtain a conditional use permit even though the development or use does not require a substantial development permit. When a proposed development or use does not comply with the bulk, dimensional and performance standards of the town SMP, such development or use shall require a variance.
3. 
The burden of proof that a development or use is exempt from the shoreline permit process is on the applicant; as such, a written request for exemption shall be submitted to the community development department, with the proposed development application, in conformance with this section.
4. 
If any part of a proposed development is not eligible for an exemption, then a substantial development permit is required for the entire proposed development project.
5. 
The town of Yarrow Point may attach conditions to the approval of exempted developments and/or uses, as necessary, to assure consistency of the project with the Act and the town SMP.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
All persons desiring a shoreline permit or any other approval required by the town SMP shall make application by paying a fee as set out in the town's fees resolution and filing an application with the town.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
Applications for permits and approvals shall be made on forms prescribed by the town, and shall contain the name and address of the applicant, a description of the development, the location of the development, and any other information deemed necessary.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
Requests for a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline variance or a shoreline conditional use permit require review by the town hearing examiner. The hearing examiner's decision is final and may include conditions as necessary to meet town SMP policies and standards. The hearing examiner shall have the authority to hear and make findings, conclusions, and recommendations on shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline conditional use permits and shoreline variances. The town shall submit all issued decisions to the Department of Ecology for its approval or disapproval. All applicants shall prove that a proposed development or use is consistent with the town SMP as well as the requirements of this chapter.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
Upon receipt of an application for a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline variance or shoreline conditional use permit, the town shall cause notice of the application to be published, at least once, in a newspaper of general circulation within the town. The second notice shall be published not less than 30 days prior to action by the town. The town shall also cause notice of the application to be mailed to each property owner of record within 500 feet of the proposed development. The date of the mailing shall not be less than seven days in advance of the department action.
B. 
Upon completion of review of the proposed shoreline permit by the town, the town shall schedule a public hearing at the next available hearing date, in front of the hearing examiner, to consider the shoreline substantial development, the shoreline variance or shoreline conditional use permit application.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
A substantial development permit shall be granted only when the development proposed is consistent with:
1. 
The policies and procedures of the Shoreline Management Act;
2. 
The provisions of this regulation; and
3. 
The approved master program.
B. 
The town of Yarrow Point may attach conditions to the approval of permits as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline Management Act and the town SMP.
C. 
The hearing examiner's decision shall become final and the permit shall be issued upon the terms and conditions prescribed, if no appeal is filed. The hearing examiner's decision shall be filed with the Department of Ecology. In the event the hearing examiner determines the use or development is inconsistent with the above criteria, the application shall be denied.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
The town shall adopt provisions for conditional use and variance permits, consistent with Chapter 6 of the town SMP, to ensure that the strict interpretation of the town SMP will not create unnecessary hardships or thwart the policies of this title or the Shoreline Management Act.
A. 
Shoreline Conditional Use Permits. The hearing examiner shall have the authority to hear and make findings, conclusions, and decisions on shoreline conditional use permits. The hearing examiner shall have the authority to grant, in appropriate cases and subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, shoreline conditional use permits. The town shall submit all issued conditional use permits to the Department of Ecology for its approval or disapproval. The criteria for granting conditional use permits are the following:
1. 
Uses classified in the town SMP as conditional uses may be authorized, provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
a. 
That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of the Shoreline Management Act and the policies of the town SMP.
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 will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area.
d. 
That the proposed use will cause no unreasonably adverse effects to the shoreline environment designation in which it is to be located.
e. 
That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
2. 
Other uses which are not classified or set forth in the town SMP may be authorized as conditional uses; provided, that the applicant can demonstrate, in addition to the criteria set forth in subsections (A)(1) and (A)(3) of this section, that extraordinary circumstances preclude reasonable use of the property in a manner consistent with the use regulations of the town SMP.
3. 
In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests or like actions in the area.
4. 
Uses specifically prohibited by the town SMP may not be authorized pursuant to either subsection (A)(1) or (A)(3) of this section.
B. 
Shoreline Variances. The hearing examiner shall have the authority to hear and make findings, conclusions, and decisions on shoreline variances. The hearing examiner shall have authority to grant variances from the substantive requirements of the town SMP. The purpose of a variance is strictly limited to granting relief to specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in the town SMP where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the properties, such that the strict implementation of the town SMP would impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the policies set forth in the Shoreline Management Act. The town shall submit all issued variances to the Department of Ecology for final approval or disapproval. The criteria for granting variances shall be consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and include the following:
1. 
Variances should be granted in a circumstance where denial of the permit will not thwart the policy enumerated in the Shoreline Management Act or the town SMP. In all instances, extraordinary circumstances shall be shown, and the public interest shall suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
2. 
Variances for development that will be located landward of the ordinary high water mark may be authorized, provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
a. 
That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional, or performance standards as set forth in the town SMP precludes or significantly interferes with a reasonable permitted use of the property.
b. 
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, in the application of the town SMP and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions.
c. 
That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted activities in the area and not cause adverse effects to adjacent properties or the shoreline environment designation.
d. 
That the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief.
e. 
That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
3. 
Variances for development that will be located waterward of the ordinary high water mark may be authorized, provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the criteria specified above; and provided, that the applicant can demonstrate that the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected by the granting of the variance.
4. 
In granting of all variances, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests or like actions in the area.
5. 
Variances from the use regulations of the town SMP are prohibited.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
Appeals of shoreline permit decisions and decisions on shoreline permit revisions, letters of exemption and other approvals required by the town SMP shall be heard in accordance with RCW 90.58.180.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
No one who is issued a permit hereunder shall be authorized to commence construction until  21 days have elapsed from the date that the permit is filed with the Washington State Department of Ecology for substantial development permits. For shoreline conditional use and variance permits, construction shall not commence until 21 days after the Department of Ecology has made its decision regarding the permit or until all review proceedings are terminated, if such proceedings were initiated within said 21-day period. All permits shall be submitted to the Department of Ecology for filing consistent with WAC 173-27-130.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
The time requirements of this section shall apply to all substantial development, variance or conditional use permits authorized by this chapter.
B. 
Construction activities shall commence, or, where no construction activities are involved, the use or activity shall commence, within two years of the effective date of a shoreline permit. The hearing examiner 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 before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record.
C. 
Authorization to conduct construction activities, pursuant to the approved shoreline permit, shall terminate five years after the effective date of a shoreline permit. The hearing examiner 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 before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and to the Department of Ecology.
D. 
Consistent with RCW 90.58.140(6), the effective date of a shoreline permit shall be the date of filing with the Department of Ecology or the date of decision by the Department of Ecology for conditional use permits and variances. This excludes time for which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to appeals, legal actions or the need to obtain other permits and approvals for the development.
E. 
Revisions to permits lawfully extended under subsections B and C of this section and in accordance with the provisions of YPMC § 19.02.180 (WAC 173-27-100) may be authorized after original permit authorization has expired; provided, that this procedure shall not be used to extend the original permit time requirements or to authorize substantial development after the time limits of the original permit.
F. 
The town of Yarrow Point shall notify the Department of Ecology of any change to the effective date of a permit, and explain the basis for approving the change in writing. Any change to the time limits of a permit, except an extension under subsections B and C of this section, and except as authorized by RCW 90.58.143, shall require a new permit application.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A permit revision is required whenever the applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms, or conditions of an approved 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, or compliance with the town SMP. Changes which are not substantive in effect may not require approval of a revision; however, the community development department must be notified and review the proposed revision to determine if the revision is substantive or not.
A. 
When an applicant seeks to revise a substantial development, conditional use, or variance permit, town staff shall request from the applicant detailed plans and text describing the proposed changes in the permit.
1. 
If the town planner determines that the proposed changes are within the scope and intent of the original permit, the town may approve the revision, provided it is consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and the town SMP.
2. 
"Within the scope and intent of the original permit" means the following:
a. 
No additional over- or in-water construction will be involved.
b. 
Lot coverage and height may be increased a maximum of 10 percent from provisions of the original permit; provided, that revisions involving new structures not shown on the original site plan shall require a new permit.
c. 
The revised permit does not authorize development to exceed height, lot coverage, setback, or any other requirements of the town SMP, except as authorized under a variance granted by 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 town SMP.
e. 
The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed.
f. 
The project revision will cause no adverse environmental impact.
3. 
The town planner may authorize revisions to shoreline permits after the original permit authorization has expired under RCW 90.58.143. The purpose of such revisions shall be limited to authorization of changes which are consistent with this section and which would not require a permit for the development or change proposed under the terms of Chapter 90.58 RCW and the town SMP. If the proposed change constitutes substantial development, then a new permit is required; provided, this subsection shall not be used to extend the time requirements or to authorize substantial development beyond the time limits of the original permit.
4. 
If the revision, or the sum of the revision and any previously approved revisions, will violate the criteria specified above, the town shall require the applicant to apply for a new substantial development, conditional use, or variance permit in the manner provided for herein.
5. 
The town shall file with the Department of Ecology the revision approval, including the revised site plans and text consistent with the provisions of WAC 173-27-180 as necessary to clearly indicate the authorized changes, and the final ruling on consistency with this section. In addition, the town shall notify parties of record of their action.
6. 
If the revision to the original permit involves a conditional use or variance, the town shall submit the revision to the Department of Ecology for final approval, approval with conditions, or denial. The Department of Ecology shall render and transmit to the town and the applicant its final decision within 15 days of receipt of the submittal from the town. The town shall notify parties of record of the Department of Ecology's final decision.
7. 
The revised permit is effective immediately upon final decision by the town or, when appropriate under subsection (A)(6) of this section, upon final action by the Department of Ecology.
8. 
Appeals shall be in accordance with RCW 90.58.180 and shall be filed within 21 days from the date of receipt of the town's action by the Department of Ecology or, when appropriate under subsection (A)(6) of this section, the date the Department of Ecology's final decision is transmitted to the town and the applicant. Appeals shall be based only upon contentions of noncompliance with the provisions of subsection (A)(2) of this section. 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. 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. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
The town planner shall have the authority to immediately stop any work under a permit, which the town planner believes, in good faith, is not in compliance with the permit or any other actions in violation of the town SMP. Upon issuance of such a stop order, the permittee shall immediately cease and desist such portion of the development which is ordered stopped, but may continue working on the other portions of the development. As soon as it is practical thereafter, a hearing will be held before the hearing examiner to determine whether the conditions of the permit were violated and, if so, whether to cancel the permit or determine what other action should be taken.
Notice of hearing shall be in the form and manner prescribed in YPMC § 14.04.060.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)
A. 
Any permit issued hereunder may be revoked by the hearing examiner upon a finding that a permittee has not complied with the conditions of a permit, subject, however, to a hearing as hereinafter provided.
B. 
Before such permit is revoked by the hearing examiner, the town shall set a date for a public hearing following the public notice requirements of YPMC § 14.04.060, to determine whether the permittee has violated the conditions of the permit.
(Ord. 770 § 2 (Att. A), 2025)