[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Cuasta, io,@e rv, FINAL REPORT GEMENT GRANT COASTAL ZONE MANA CONTRACT NO. G77-017B (1960) CITY OF SEATTLE 4 C W it jiiml -j Af 11,I ri Ty AT J@ 91 F I N A L R E P 0 R T COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT GRANT CONTRACT NO. 306-5B City of Seattle COASTAL ZONE Property of CSC Library INFORMATION CENTER U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA C0ASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON,SC- 29405-24 13 CZIC COLLECTION to the Office of Coastal Zone Management. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Shorelands Division Department of Ecology State of Washington by the Environmental Management Division Department of community Development City of Seattle June 1977 CZM 306 5B Fina 1 Report INTRODUCTION This final report for Washington Coastal Zone Management grant con-tract No. 306-5B for the City of Seattle coversa period of thirteen months,,from June 1, 1976 to June 30, 1977. Purpose The purpose of the project was toimprove implementation of the Shoreline Master Program, by providing funds for process- ing shoreline applications and by developing information by which to monitor and evaluate both the management and pro- visions of the Shoreline Master Program. Analysis of data on compliance, shoreline land use, and shore- line permits provides a management tool for monitoring and evaluating how the Master Program works. Workshops and training sessions were designed to improve permit processing and to provide essential background inform- ation for persons involved with permit review, design or decision-making in City shoreline area projects. The Speaker's Kit provides similar information presented for community councils and other groups. The compendium of construction standards will assist in evaluating applications and will also beuseful to applicants. Printing of the Shoreline Master Program and its map are intended to extend the distribution and coverage of the Shore- line Master Program. Finally, the official maps prepared earlier were updated to reflect later decisions by the City Council. Report organization .The report is organized according to the elements in the contract and in that order. A description.of the work element is followed by a copy of the work product. For the official map update, before and after prints are included.as an example. For the speaker's kit, the general text @n.d list of slides (but not the slides themselves) are included. These are available on loan, of course. Introduction (continued) Project Team The persons basically responsible for the work in each element are listed below. The lead person is named first, followed @by others who participated in the project. Overall grant management was by Rosemary Horwood.underRobert F..Hintz, Division Director. Element Lead person; others 1. Compliance Ed Schein,'Jan Lutz 2. Permit Processing Paul Edgar, Hermia Ip, Mark Schlosser, Janeen Smith 3. Permit Analysis John Crull, David Woodruff 4. Construction Standards Michael Bonoff; Claudia Denney, Graphics 5. Workshops Janeen Smith, Jan Lutz, Wolf Bauer 6. Land Use Study John Crull, Venerando, deGuzman 7. Shoreline Master Program Rosemary Horwood, John Crull, Claudia Denney,@Dawn Whitworth 8. Shoreline Map John Crull 9. Update Official Maps John.Crull 10. Clerical Olga Stiffler -2- summary of Project There were nine separate but relati:@d elements in this project. All of them supported the completion of the Seattle Master Pr_Qgram and its administration. Adoption of the Master Program occurred.during the grant period. Some of the elements provide a framework for monitoring the administration and the effective- ness of the SIMP. Element 1 laid the foundation for, set up procedures and.began inspections and enforcement.. Element 2 involved.support of permit processing. Element 3 coded and automated shoreline permit data and analyzed the five years data available.. Element 4, the Design and Construction Standards Compendium gathered data and produced a short handbook.providing the basic information for policy analysis. Element 5, Workshops and Training of City Personnel, provided information to City staff involved in work relating to shore- lines. Element 6, Land Use Data, provides essential base data for analysis of the shorelines in terms of human activities. Elements 7 and 8 provided wide distribution of copies of the Seattle Master Program and accompanying map, for general public use.. Element 9 involved correction and undating of the official shoreline maps to agree with Council decisions. Summary of Contacts with Other Agencies The nature of the work program was such that extensive contacts with other agencies were not necessary. However, during the preparation of the Design and Construction Standards Compendium, Element 4, a contacts seeking information were made with the following: 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle 2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Central Region 3.@ U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife 4. University of Washington, Instutute for Marine Studies :5. Washington State Department of Fisheries 6. Washington State Department of Game 7. Washington State Department of Ecology 3. Port of Seattle 9. City of Seattle Building Department 10. City of Seattle Engineering Department The Workshops and Training Sessions, Element 5, involved contacts with City.Departments of Building, Engineering and Parks. Element 6, Land Use, and Element 3, Information System, involved contacts with the University of Washington Urban Data Center and the City of Seattle Office of Management and Budget Management Information System. In addition, the Licenses and Fire Depart- ments were closely involved in data collection. Finally, frequent contacts were made with the Washington State Department of Ecology. ABSTRACT CoastaL Zone Management Project- Washington Title: Element 1 - Compliance Author; Ed Schein and Rosemary Horwood Subject: Compliance Date. June 1977 Local Planning Agency:Department of Community Development Source of copies: Same DOE Contract Number: G 77-017B (1960) Number of Pages: 36 Abstract: The following report describes the record keeping procedures, filing, inspection and check-back MW : s s systems in effect since March, 1977. It also docu- 061607 ments the number of inspections and violations. The time has been too short for final disposition of more than a few cases. None have gone as far as judicial procedures.. Lake Union was selected as the point of beginning because work during the summer of 1976 had shown that there were significant violations in that area. In addition, a great number and variety of permits had been issued for the area, so that it offers-good case study possibilities. ABSTRACT Coastal Zone Management Project - Washington Title Element 2 Permit Processing, Improvements Author Rosemary Horwood Subj ec Shoreline Permit Processing Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency: Department of Community.Development Sourceof copies: Same DOE Contract Number: G 77-017B (1960) Number of Pages: 2 Abstract: Shoreline Permit application processing is a major activity of the Division, and this report MW: s s summarizes the work. Nearly 100 permits were 061607 received and processed during the year; two were appealed. A wide variety of uses are pro- posed by applicants from residential to indus- trial uses; permits are.tabulated by value and number received per month. ABSTRACT Coastal Zone Management Project - Washington Title: Element 3 Permit Record Analysis Author: Rosemary Horwood and John Crull Subject: Shoreline Permit Data Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency: 'Department of Community Development Same DOE Contract Number: G 77-017B (1960) Number of Pages: Abstract: Analysis of the nearly'400 permits processed from 1971 to December 31,'1976, has provided a MW:ss large amount of data by which to evaluate the 061607 Shoreline Management Proqram and to provide factual information for policy development and amendment of the Master Program. Virtually all in-formation provided on.the application was automated and qeocoded so that computer produced maps of the data could be made. ABSTRACT Coastal Zone Management Project - Washington Title Element 4 Shoreline Structures, Design& Con- struction Standards Compendium Author: Michael Bonoff Subject: Standards for construction in the intertidal zone. Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency-. Department of Community Development Source of copies: Same DOE Contract. Number: G 77-017B (1960) Number of Pages: Abstract: This report contains aglossary and an annotated bibliography of sources of construction data in MW: s s addition to sketches presenting basic construction 061607 principles with correct and incorrect methods of construction in the intertidal area, A 3 S 9 T-0 Coastal Zone Management Project @Iashington Title: Element 5 Workshops, Training of City.Personnel Author: Rosemary Horwood Subject: Training.of personnel for application intake and for management of public works on shorelines. Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency: Department of Community Development Source of copies-: Same G 77-017B (1960) DOE Contract Number: Number of Pages: 1 + 1 + 50 Abstract: With the completion of-, the Seattle Shoreline Master Program, implementation became a top prior- MW:ss ity. several groups need to be well informed about 061607 the Program in order to assure optimum operation of the regulations and the achievement of shore- line goals. Intake personnel, public works (Parks .-,and Engineering) and the general public were the target groups. A different kind of material was prepared -for each group. Training sessions were held for Building Department personnel involved with application intake. A workshop seminar was held for other City personnel. A Speaker's Kit with text and slides was prepared for community group use. AB) S, CT Coastal Zone Managemen@t_ Pro-;ect 'Vlashington Title: Element 6 Land Use Study of Shorelines Author: Rosemary Horwood and John Crull SubIject: Analysis of shorelineland use related to Shore- line Master Program. Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency: Department of Community Development Source of Copies: Same DOE Contract Number: G 77-017B (1960) Numbaer of Pages: 30 Abstract: There had been no time'for a detailed study of land use prior to development of the Seattle MW:ss Master Program, so it had to be written in the absence of detailed information about the numbers, types and characteristics of shoreline uses. This automated study of over 1200 separate establish- ments provides detailed-information on type of activity, location, age of structure, auxiliary uses, name and address of firm. The data are geocoded so that mapped data may be produced. Maps indicate a'strong degree of clustering of symbolic uses in certain locations. A detailed methodology, prepared by John'Crull, @is available. ST"T Coastal Zone Management Project Washi.ngton Title: Element 7 Shoreline Master Program Author: City Council/Department of Community Development Subject: Text of shoreline regulations adopted by City Council and approved by DOE. D a -t- e June 1977 Local Planning Agency: Department of Community Development Source 0.1c copic,,@s: Same DOE Contract Number: G 77-017B (1960) Number of Pages: xxiv, 85, map Abstract: This is the text of the adopted and approved regu- lations developed from the.Citizens' Advisory Committee recommendations through Council hearings 061607 and review by the Department of Ecology. The Citizens' Advisory Committe goals and policies -and-definitions are also included, as well as a small scale map showing shorelines of statewide Significance. A copy of the map,-which is the subject of.Element 8, was slipped into each copy distributed. All public and institutional libraries, all community and interest groups and professional groups were sent @copies. In addition, copies are available to the public. ABSTRACT Coastal Zone Management Project - Washington Title: Element 8 Shoreline Environment Map A u t- h o John Crull Subject: Location of shoreline environments regulating uses and activities of Seattle shorelines. Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency: Department of Community Development Source of Copies: Same DOE Contract Number: 77-015B (1960) Number of Pages: 1, folded Abstract: This map was printed separately from the text so that it could be used as a ready reference or as MW:ss a wall map. It is in color and.designed for easy 061607 reading. A copy was slipped into each Master Program. Coastal Zone 14anagement Pro-I ec- Title: Element 9 Update, Correct O-Lcficial Maps Author: John Crull Subject: Updating of official maps to reflect text changes by City Council Date: June 1977 Local Planning Agency: Department of Community Development Source cf Copies: Same DOE Contract Number: G 77-017B (1960) Nu-Taber of Pages: 6 Abstract: The official maps prepared under the previous grant required changes because Council reviewed MW:ss and changed a number of shoreline designations 0.61607 after the maps had been prepared. Several examples of such changes, with before and after copies, are appended. Element 1 CZM 306 5B Final Report Element 1 -.COMPLIANCE Introduction The original grant amount of $4,500 was intended to cover field checking, methods and legal steps. A preliminary survey done as part of this Project revealed a highviolation rate. It was clear that establishing a compliance function would be of greater long-term value than further study, in that field checking might as well be focussed on enforcement as. well as further study. The compliance function could use legal procedures that are already established in the Building Department, and their inspection methods could readily be adapted to the Shoreline Master Program. The Period of compliancework has been from March through June, but is expected to continue into thd next grant period .,until January 1, 1978. It must be recognized that this compliance function does not cover shoreline exemptions which are granted by the Building Department as part of the intake'process. Records-of the' exemptions granted are not available.. And, as yet, we do not have a good method of finding violators wn o.have'simply neglected to apply for permits, including the clients of the silent piledriver." The following report describes the record-keeping procedures, filing, inspection, and check-back systems. It also docu- ments the number of inspections and thd violations. The time. has beqn too short for final disposition of more than a few cases. None have gone as far as judicial proceddres. Lake Union was selected as the point of beginning because previous work.had shown that there was a high rate.of viol- ations in that area. In addition, a great numbekand variety.. of permits have been issued for thelarea so that,it offers good case study possibilities. CZM 306 5B Final Report Work to Date The goal of the Shoreline Compliance Manager is not restricted to finalizing individual permits and checking for violations. He is concerned about overall effects of permits issued, successes or failures of master program requirements, and con- tinuous monitoring of the results of shoreline management. As of June 23, 1977, 53 Shoreline Management Act permits have been reviewed. From this total, 8 projects have not been started, 9 projects are in progress, 23 projects have been completed, and on 13 projects a site inspection has not been completed. out of this total, 17 have final approvals, two are in violation, and four are being looked at. So far, most completed projects are in compliance, maybe because of the vigilance of the community in the area inspected (the East and North shore of Lake Union). Watching for violators without permits will be the most difficult task and will only be successful with experience within the various shoreline areas of the city. Therefore an.observant community 'will continue to be the most effective group to spot violators of the Seattle Shorelines Master Program. @? fn'ooit'@ tot V .4 it fe it I rewi- t -1 6-1 @ A 01.1 VALLE'�P ST2tsT COMMANNCE. tY ' 5VMEIAMF, COMFOANC9 MANAC-mr-It. nCA'vTL5 6UIL-VINOr VV'M'rMF_NT:: M)@ flo, !ElnN r C I- r In m .rol F-C. SIT6 vr-_'5cF_lpllotq(:S) T_ A mr -fin nt.of Buildings Depai e I Vic .1WAVrrd Petty. P E. Sup@,kniendent es Uhlmhn, Mayor a molircy C-ON01:1 I o N%@ VIOLPM110 -or_sc Pi P -r 10 " (@J_ N ; . " A I a 0 1 ft - -44 ...14 1. FECqATUP FVCVCAcc-tSS. a. A i7A rn" ro 4.1-il -76 -Or -C MH f-Y rV _Nr z. mswjA4 sc"e"" Arrgavw PLAA's 4-,-NOSCVXfT4Tf-V_ FAIMA4 I Ifet VAULZ __9 . IF C@T DArCr- 2. s sr soosiac .5 'F r*-.% i r v Dtic r<7@") 6A zr_ DO, 4. L^W%AftAr- -PRVPrATY 11401! EmA 5r?,Lcs mAt4cep rAr't_-wq- VU15LIC Acr-rSS T7f',/L. 5% "It tC- AC4451 Sld.NO C. M CVjtA ro C (WILL BE IN 5Y jom e I ;I 07.t4o sw&jihx roe fVDWC A-ccr_S5 >1 A LL, A JqJ77 I )A I I, , V -mr-V 1,+00 AM. . p CaTliance 2nd InS camtn'l ViOl6ti paction -Oject Violat-ton Pro ecL p:L C&Oletecl/ r' --Aclclrcss (r,) date d Descript@on Conations in, A roval 6cscri tion I- P rw- ft bu%5 @Zl A .5Z Vg, ;z )4' 417/11 MAPPA I`OrZ'40 4[p t/lir An OA For '".f OT$ &01 A'"s - 104- AS "A Or %I CA& 1. A-VPO I / Vi, r 1)fuw; a oft L pLAor Owe tr r4-XV0V,4!E P 0 7 % W tvTwm AJ, '10 A CFC-MO9 WAX, 5-.0(ncAl ATf-rr' "t avju r "J6" 0 0 0 -7 -7 p --,A LIA. Z5C 104 .74 0 .'1 .(PLj/Ejo '7r IV, :@M?. a) M r--,f t; a-caro L- A M 40 yf 1-tPPAO (./A L@ tower" Jr- 0094TICN tj c C44-1 P I-) AMW&.'ro AIR- @@@lola a dcscr@ :@4 of@s 00 - Violation/', @iolation Cmpliance 2nd Imspection Criminal a,rner -Adda-Icss Project Uo -n, Project in Proaress App date Dcscrip Conatiom, al descriptio (s) s c a FA Mv I r4v FFWIPC AV-&-X e;I OTI-pur N @.Fw AY 1+171-7-7 a*ieLVrr- Vf IV rt rsmo OPRDVA Ipol Ffq(" oc*- F-A F-0 I E- VJ 7 9 V- I L S rem I T- /JOT L/ y- E. .1 Nce-n t j Lr r AM Our 110d -1-0 C m ccr4t -rr HAAiv-ACr0f-Jf-x-. JWZ- 112-177 :r6,1 P- V I lr-- (,UA -tD jp6E AM FILMY' 4.s IA@ 4 CM PUA N4J. f-77 Wv@@/&jrjj tWN M- -VAtD NO r[VrOS 'TAVXAJ eqolpmr, pVm(7iW- AT,Fk(-1& WIV- JAISrr-f-T Cy", ON FCmtmCAU-1( P 13r-10 e A) :5nmr-r -wAv. a 0_-*f4rz?-.1"1.vF, om v5e prsflmir Foa, -o ;4vr smoz MZU1 r VMS A fI @Jjr wC@ F i "Roma dill Nab (ZOOO CXmcr AddrCSS Project Project Camlianoe 2nd Inspection -Caltoletecl/ Violation/@ Violation -scri ss Ecasccl Dc pUan -Conations in I roare A roval --- description(s) date s r-A I f,7V I r (ZIN(rlt. ;?No sxq "ONE -@r @ (L?,4 UE r-- 00016 P. CiM f;-,: UCAT r_- Wpm To r-LoArmrr -lAYLOr- 21016 1 FA-1 f-Vfr--Iv AVE M. C-Cm.;T-. sMence- rzr-Mov'r- /Mff Coil 41 1' AM -N tc@,@"rrO- P41 .1- 1,v'A'vr' A,ac'm "Ge"s r@'JrEJFZ-fA-JvY, i@r e- @IOU4,e"r, I K. .87 1X-M-D - Al C49M P O&Cr, 7D AIM 1,L) AUE C A5AO0,Ve, /Vor C0114PLe 0 IN CC M PQ6 PIA TO oo FA I p- v) r-- wAvr-.F-- )cvAl 0- '77 C014ptxTr. 1 1) lev 7014/J. to A-PP90c.IAL . ...... COM lXlA'VCC- p;r A. U)I@ covrr. OF-ki ------ J Wove- L EvAur- FAI Nt , 11 /0( z 1557) It PAW01L 110L.YE Mr fK@Zle0oqr @[Cllvficr 110M.P-S IN I 4@15T- FLMTJAv,(fo"C )-r @,@ @@-4 7 10 2%,N4Y 4 (fill) 1 1 Pu r-w lJ141T7 0-@ APPM A L-, CA) SMTSLLf -3F- -/JLQ- A"O C emid r6 V,A e-AVA ecAl,"MOcil 1-1/ z/-7 7 Ivor @,L-A' @?,3-70 J---;JIRl1lr@tL1Ave- F, Nt*?r-, 0,V Ly CPCA "Oj@r 1,v enq pi) 0 g g 4 W, 5 C -@400CAC-r- :S'PA C'C-: 57-4 1 iZ 0 15 W F . 2-1 1g)OZ. Vr- c4m.;r. 4. s ro*..iy -1 F4 it V/ r u) 4 ur- r upir 4ff. ixi-yw. 1/4 COM PL) A04X tbcw Ir WN.% -g Oprv 4LLCkJ- Z111r.: 17&1,9,CP5 47@qT, T r - fmn L,. it rl r] 7 r7 /VO/VP- 4 OAA C4D RA N L Vi 6, I-V /-I rP- 6f->PRCVA er px-6mvenivr rwfg.y Owc py a t ac --cron St. in I More" "Oros"" Cx m C r Adctrcss Project Project Coffpleted/ Violation/' Violation Comli'ance 2nd Inspection CrImI-ml." s c r o n ConcUtions jyj P)--oqrcss Approval dcscript CAI vA t C- -,c -iion (s) date Z cox5rttx r- m vp - p6j5 - - 11 . . . . - 4. Xm"011r, r-t-,r- 2 0 11 OVA,-ftA (5 nw-pi's C"S RIPgAto 11 -t5. f [email protected](- e7cv) I'D Ale DrXJ5 Op- AM= -pom 2 5D) e v, f 0 -Y'D PZX) yd 5. OJAN-e 0 TO gif Ofu SW IODrf- dr, cvw5 7-nicr Opwreer ")6 ........ .. . ?rDe 2.@J 7 @@I pmrp, .5 C " r DOC& -t.- 6F QW-4c -p- eF a 6F 6CI*. IN X6 .5r,094 rlOAI 2 @ //C X4 /A; IIfA)(. :55-El AAIrS Clt-' 00 6p wrw Cesax'I've, ::7Dq4o:w:,f MO, 'WA&Ary Ovpzf&t@. CV116rp- Ur- r Slf C- 0 AVIv1:5 om Ar-7' *r1YZOUA-L- / 71 e /,V CO/4 P L /J'V CI- -@3 5 6 A D. A 0 v P,-)rl A Do TO Imm cr lAryYVI-r. @I[O(_4-flOQ 1. NO SMA frtm i r rar- -11(ol77 7, :- --J 2. /IV z, No 13 wx-rxre m i r Mt AM, &Jb C'Er Op Ina XCU4 y FCACA- r-uy)r ew S. Sipe C rr- I @15,- M@ AV F&rtlft 409117 W Nr L'@-A) OLD Agz I VN46; y 5/117/1-7 (p PUZ V Ovrwr-W mcrOfi OrWrIv 161 fl, 'Al 5rr,3/r4K 7,cr. Frotq f Y, pwary twa &X VICAV C'MRIVOR- !mom melon go m WAILK Lh4h; AMA @.4jst* _ _ t-VK @)JIUKG- WU 1-0@ U v A 1 F,4 t F W V 8. P- 0 -'I'l K r- e 'r A V V N U V- F,@ZT.MIT COMPLIANICE. -VrnjOF-P-L1Nr-COMPL1hNGt- MANAcim Fral 0 r4 te-j- bV- -V r tmvp rs-s Seattle a r rrr-MCCT OCSCF-IPTION Departniept of Buildifigs, :r Wishington @8 104. 0. 11rod Pot 503 Muniripal ly, P.E. Suporintondow 4D V@, 0 MIS UhIma IQ n. mayor 0 0 P P-00 J r-r- IC-0 t4 01 01 > NT 01 VC5CK1 PTIO Nsa Ck IOL Iq -71-)4 crrY 0 r 5 ["N-)T L F@ 1,Af'FFa/A1- 0 r- WLA@JO P15FO:7A L ZiTM 93 Y VC-P S/ 171 ALL15WA L.VNION 14.A(,r"vAt. 4op 5F-wc-R. pp-OTL5,6Tjvtj up, r--s fcDm k=. U 1*4 1 V- tAj 1, 1 U V, WAI L- K - U4 W lo A @,k-A 11 Vir OfIVKt@#.AN ro MANOY4t;, tyle-N f r A 19VIE-W- rUHP-tA AN (,3,1 6)3-rr-eri-AVtNUV- IT COMPLIANCS -. W V101EELINM COMPLIANCE M6qACrr rk s m 0. a w N FF: Irt L C 5 3 15 C irm lNe'reCTION :31M-l 'S TioN Ire P 0 beattle r rcu cc Department of Build' altla. Washington 98104. l(rod Potty, P. 503 Municipal Budding.St, Suporintondon( JE s Uhlman Mayor ba -r to t4,5 s. V 10 L INNT W4 U ox 04 > 11 Wj Er-,r c@o t4 v i a IDIESCitJ P TIO Nlfq (3 8VLX eCME- r, (",)gWWC.p A"m t 5 'A. .3 TIS!5 v I Z -3 r/mrmw 6vr- 2. "Tow( (-rrie-C. FCOM r'lloprLIAir, ro A"k) p4t-4 ?@!-D(T, Wn r.3A-,rtlrA)T q-;UPrAer. #\Will& 5vir-HrA17. r/"PVIfl6r r-Or- rizoviog;, fufnirs couar -%P/i,<,r, A-r t4wCORILIEF 7(@@ -4 Fuciiivv W. wrzir,@n- I.FROvislotisr-m CONTPOL d0F 61L 5TN 71 rlZr-'Tr-r-ArtArNT Rf-qtj,ZC-(7 er-.r 3133 r-AIF"Vl r::.W AVS, F- M F-Tr. D'o yS t-F_ M Prmovc PLACrV VFLAPJP Isusire-r 4 ovrR-JVATr.R PAINT,.5ii,-r.c '51to T Te) pr pj;.j %T ernt, r.5 U P@ Y v Ce-, < 0 v F r7 f D'Pe' V-S T V, rt- /rjA I R- 4,:nvoirlomo vmr-Aapwa IN P- r-- A1) 0 tJ tJ C e- 11 P, r I E P- WO COONTION!-:, 5T79/11 305C)4- T-v"mrsm Mr- E. <'0Nr->TQUCT E7 ,CA-r r- F.V-/% I STOmy PUPLCY ArARTmt-vr pirit.y -3C)Z) Pt-,rT-. Of: ALL- 'TLIFr.5 pLArjtFo Mltj,mUM or- s Fr. IS HWAY c:@; F20t-% -rtDr- 15CIUER@3 LCS45 jtioti,4 10 r-r. .@JIZ117 S4,oo frot-@rzmAr@i 6vr. r-_, P-'71!-,L0loU 'nPUr-r-ACE UNL5.5.5 lmF0vsIIbLr-- -ro V, r- LO C'^ T F- . "SIU15 FLAw wG13) PiPtritic. 5ML 0 @j 6 C@ C 14 Oil V*@%-Oll vr @Vfjlum- e,t1r_ I p I ",1 1 4_4 1- 144 VVIN 'NUE@ -AVL L PF-vEL0PffiFHT PF-VtA%T COMVWANCF@ ZY @;UOIIMLINM COM PLI wr 5 IT [email protected] ON SNI P% .11?0. 0W?)r-1F/1-r-s.5rp- z I-re. iwsrecrjoN Seattle -vi a j-4 '4 -A -p y Department of Buildings 7) 1.- -J@ 4E - -4 J@ v ion 28 1 OA 503 Muniripal Building, Scat!ln. Washing Wos Uhlman. Mayor l1red Polly, P.E. Suporintondow x 0 Via M 0@ P R-0.) r-c--t C@0 H V I T 10 N 15' . 9 - I., - *cftl P TIO Nin 2 x < V 101-rhTll ON VZT, 'T %J@ N&J E@- tLE. Norl)ILAK.r. WAY pr.Vri-or mer -. @,mvi f,F. I0 Er, 007-tiALL, rATjI rZoAp ir :, r, rL, r- V Trr, IrDMAN 152 N 0 1:1- ZA F-71 ALTFQ- @,APD ro r-,)( In T 'TAVr- r P.T, v vc- t:5 t45- f,101ZIMLAY-f-WAY Cc>@r7l;ztv'T-Tt'vo 'ro r r ticlsT s rAc r, hvPVtIcfJAI- WArF-I0w-(: cF -:13rA I I LF- 1. Prv-i)rcoqE-q5 rf4A5a.L 011JILY. Nb r (ICO-1-100 Nr-- "C7V-`TflL'\" WAI ?-, OILscrAr-iv1t)z5 dr- Li4t Pr-VICC5 Af4 P. I Al %-Tr P c,12?,?-rTT?Ue--r 21-A?JC. 110AVIvAy TO FWMO'Jr@ POLW-TAFJ?5, rlWM MDAOI@Ay r I TbQ0 DFZAIW^4r,,E PRICK TO PJ'5CllAIMf- IN'rO L A Y- r;,, rLA/Vr-Q MEDIA0 L,@Ajr5 AT @50Alr_ ifIFr_r_-.v)r T 1@ It If" 8 l"I f-Avrr.@ r5!jroLo CP, Fc)I- rp fr cz rV(Y FICYCLr- IFArl--Ir- -T. LANr-S 10171pi, -E. t-f Avr-'61 A k"' vI' N. -NCRT@ @IAKrl VAY (2 SU'i@,-@TNN'ttAL PEYeLOPMeMT rr--RM%T COMFLIAMCF@ -.rY,5t)or-iwNr- compuhocc mANAcrr SMN NO. 0WN5s/Lrssra .. ..... 5 ivl@. Wsrec.TiON V. 27'dj@ VI f r1cu r-r- 7PC P T (ON W Department of Buildings A IK 503 Municipal Ouild!nq. Spal.*Ie, 'Nashi nglon 08104. ad Potty, PI, Suporint ondo ni N lit] 0 WO."'i Uhlman. Mayor og 0 0 x < PCIScFti P TIO t4n FR-0JEC-1 COMINTION15 0 tAT I ON 2- vi VP 19 7 Y or -@@7r- 'Tr t, r- AION,155- N. N0/Z7;ILI)<r.' WA-( C6AISI'IZlJ(:r IJAI 11@,rllll (T. E/) PRO tIlDr, PU&-IC, IJC66:5-, -To FZOA7- zln /V. IV,-., rmIL41-Ir /1//)Y CON51k VC r 20r> r f'. re oA -r (1/7C. v j3 Y P r-06CIT 6001.)C? YI)O@T ALI- VC/40LIFION CV/V.5rrj)C.T)0AJ CLV5 r-NIEP-IAA:@r Wqmr- @5jqou 2321 M. wrilv,4;@r R r- b V I L 12 4 rry irw@ P-xif@,ri"c7 MAF@-IIVI AIDIVr-- ON:5-7p tic, 7 17'5 5WLE tl,;'I)P-WA PRO v /'0 F- /15 Jlr-iv P'qxx/'Ver- -5r;g,-Is X W@Y-h UNION WUH eavy op wATeK - LAq* Pmm W--@,A.P-TMaNI OF CCOLCPCx%f J.@q* FOR CI1jVXFLIt,4 F- MA"hric-, MC-N*T VYAy @>oo ur-eT-AVICNUZ. SUF@TPATIAU PEYEL 2091@)) n 4:;?WASHT PIMPAIT COMPLIANCe 7r,-4 A, !SmNwo. Owt,115r,11-rn3cs s ITp- vmsrcc-rION I i r S i ril., CTION "'re NZ., Seattle ION X Department of Buildings 503 Muniripal Budding.SnimIc'. Washington e8104. It;, A ilad Polly. P.E. Suporintondon! s.- w a ),) %. 0 1 '[email protected] @Yv AC 0 W03 Uhimin Mayor 04 0 1 5 "@ T to 2 X A -ckI p Tic) mm X ak PR-0.3rIcIr CION01 N 1,4 > V 10 LNt I ON 15cf, t 46 1 T r or srA-vf (,r.- 17/1 1-7@, c:rfyClr- -5.rATYLr, 10 F-I 111- f*@ r -r, V Id-, tx r ^ L@ t: r U", vpo rm, %m- ------- ------- 41 -X- --x vjj@N;Jty@loh) M,@WVAI- C, A@j 0r-- -'r, @t/Ay r i cA vp, i -F@ A ITF 0 1 -rop- rifir ---- - -------- YOur City. Seattle Department Operating Instruction Subject-.. Number SHORELINE DISTRICT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION Effective Supersedes Approved: Department: 1 2 BUIIDING Page of 1.0 PURPOSE: 1.1 To provide a systematic procedure for the inspection and followup of shoreline management permits to assure compliance with conditions imposed under the Shoreline Master Program. 2.0 ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED: 2.1 Building Department, Code Enforcement Division. 3.0 REFERENCES: 3.1 Department OperatingInstruction for Enforcement of Code violations. 3.2 Depaprtment Operating Instruction 800-I-3203. 3.3 Seattle Shoreline Master Program. 3.4 Zoning Ordinance 86300 as amended. 4.0 POLICY: 4.1 It shall be the policy of the department to inspect and followup on any violations of conditions -placed on shoreline permits. 5.0 DEFINITIONS-: N/A 6.0 RESPONSIBILITY: 6.1 It shall be the responsibility of the Shoreline Compliance Manager to assure that this procedure is implemented. 6.2 It shall be the responsibility of the.Code Compliance Officer to take any necessary legal action. .7.0 PROCEDURE: 7.1 'The Shoreline compliance Manager shall review all shoreline permits that have been issued to date and group them by location for puroses of efficient- inspection. CS BL DG D E P T. OPER/ INSTR NO. PAGE OF 2 7.2 A file shall be set up for each permit by address to a cross reference by permit number. 7.3 Enter project information on Department of Ecology log prior to inspection. 7.4 Make field inspection, take photos (entering information on photograph.. log), and check for compliance with the approved shoreline plans. 7.5 Enter appropriate information in Department Ecologv log and on the Inspector's Report form in the shoreline compliance Management file. -7.6 Developed photos are to be dated, address noted, name of inspector. on the back of each individual photo, and filed. 7.7 If the project is in compliance, this shall be noted on the log and in the individual file. 7.8 if not, the Shoreline compliance Manager shall follow the procedure for the enforcement of Code Violations. and continue to follow up through the procedure for the preparation and filing of the criminal complaint and summons; if voluntary compliance is not achieved. 7.9 Every three months, the Department of Ecology log shall be forwarded to the Department of Community Development. 8.0 APPENDIX: 8.1 Letter of notification. 8.2 Department of Ecology log sheet 8.3 Photo log sheet. 8.4 Report of Inspector Form 8.1 Letter of Notification Seattle Department of Buildings RE: The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the property at is in violation.of the City of Seattle Shoreline Master Proram, Ordinance 86300 as amended Section You may clear this violation, thereby avoiding criminal charges, by completing the following corrective measures: on 19 a reinspection of the property will be made, and. if the violation has been corrected at that time no legal action will be taken against you. However, if the violation remains-uncorrected when resinspection is made, a criminal complaint will be filed, and you will be summoned to appear in Municipal Court. if you need assistance or additional information to complete the corrections, you may call Mr. Edward W. Schein, Coastal Zone Manager, Department of Co ",.unity Development, 625-4541 between 7:30 AM and' 8:30 or from 3:00 PH to 3:30 PM. on any Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. Very truly yours, ALFRED PETTY, P.E. .Superintendent of Buildings by EDWARD W. SCHEIN Coastal Zone Manager EWS:kao 2- BODY Of WATE F. - LAW2 AftFA DEMItTMeN-T Of r.COLCNGry 1.00c FOV. i5HORSLI114M MAWAeM MENT ZZ SUP3*TAANTiAL PF-VrzLMMF-NT PIMMIT COMPLIANCS ZY 54101MLIMM COMPLIANCE MANACrM s.Mp''N 6. 0wr45x/LX'55rs INSPEr-rioN Seattle in 0 2 u fA0JZr-T Pr'=IU?Tt0N w dr z Department of Buildings 5 49E 2i 5o3 municjpal Buitoog, Soawe.,Navington 98104,' d Polly, RE, SUPOrWaildoni X@. pi 0 Uhlman, M cz FROJEc'I COROITION15 4.>. VI Lb.T%oN vrscr-i (@2ti-l wos 130@ -15M A AP.VP- ws 14- Ic 3N .Irt 10 Ptioro Locw-.!@w REPORT OF INSPECTOR-. PERMIT No. Date of Visit Made by REMARKS 5.82 BC 42 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REPORT HOW FILES ARE SET UP INDEX TO FILE DRAWER NUMBER ONE 1. Department of Ecology Log (SMA's logged in by water body, general location on water body, and address) 2. Current Inspection Area Cards & Lists (from DCD card files used to locate ALL SMA's within area) 3. New Permits to Inspect (issued from May, 1977 on --,also see Folder 8) 4. Potential Violations to Check (reported by other departments or the public) 5. Inspection Complete-Update DOE Log (usually logged in immedi- ately after return from,day of site inspections) 6. Projects in compliance, waiting for photos (photos not developed yet) 7. Additional Site Inspection Necessary (e.g., inspect from water) 8. Check with Other Departments (after site inspection to clarify SMA conditions) 9. Check Building Department Permit & Plans (after site inspection to clarify SMA conditions. 10. Re-file(SMA shoreline compliance information to be re-filed in DCD master SMA files) 11. Uncompleted Projects to Reinspect (filed by water body and re- inspected in approximately 6 months) 12. First Notice Violations (first letter sent to owner listing violations and compliance date) 13. Second Notice Violations (second letter sent to owner listing violations and extended compliance.date). 14. Applicants Questioning Violations (for quick reference when phone calls expected) 15. Criminal Complaint/Summons Issued (violations have not been corrected by extended compliance date) 16. Shoreline Compliance'Tally (Number of SMA',.s reviewed; status: not started, in Progress, completed; and final action: approval, violation) CZM 306 5B Final Report Compliance Records The following pages are examples of the records for one case. The system is parallel to the Building Department compliance ,record system, thus providing for efficient administration procedures as well as adequate legal records. List of Forms 1. Standard Operating Procedure and Appendix (Section 8), including: 8.1 Letter of notification 8.2 Department of Ecology log sheet 8.3 Photo log sheet 8.4 Report of inspector form 2. Inspector's Report, SMA Inspection File 3. Shoreline permit 4. Cover letter for shoreline permit 5. Building permit record for address .6. Building permit for construction pursuant to shoreline permit 7.a, 7.b Inspection, photographs and identification 8. Vicinity map and Parking plan 9. Moorage plan 10. Photographs taken prior to permit PROCESS USED TO CHECK COMPLIANCE OF SPECIFIC SHORELINE PERMIT SMA 278 2727 Fairview Avenue E. .1. Review all SMA permits along east shore of Lake Union and begin DOE log sheet for 1.600-3099 Fairview Avenue E. (1) Use DCD multiple reference card files to triple check all possible SMA permits in area. 2., Review SPIA 278 and fill out DOE log including project conditions (1) that must be carried out. 2b Review Shoreline Master Program sections applicable to this develop- ment, and include any conditions on DOE log. 2c Check "Potential Violations" folder for additional sites to check. 3. Obtain copy of SMP permit and attached letters or reports stating background information on conditions imposed. (Check file folder on "New Permits Received") (3) (4) 3b Pull approved site plans and any photos from file for use during site inspection. Attach to blank inspector's report and SMA permit copy. 4. Siteinspect all projects on this log sheet (using log sheet copy as easy (9) (10) reference for conditions imposed (1) including 2727 Fairview Avenue E.; take photos of project showing progress in areaswhere conditions have been imposed. 5. Make notes on inspector's report of observations regarding conditions imposed, number of photos taken, and any.questions- that must be answered. (2) 6. Try to talk with owner, contractor, or resident at site to state. purpose of site inspection, and record name and comments re- ceived. (2) 7. Use Photo log to record each location and description of photo, date, SMA No. and address. (7a) 8. After returning to office, immediately update original sheet of DOE log. (1) 9. Place Inspector's report and attached SMA permit, plans and old photos in folder marked "Check Building Department permit and plans." File 9 (11) 9b When photos are developed, transfer photo log information to back of-photo, sign and place with inspection information. (7b) 10. After reviewing plans at Building Department, call owner to let him know where project is currently not in compliance, so he will have a chance to comply before project is compiete. 11. Record owner's answers to each condition required. (2) 12. Place inspection information in folder marked "Uncompleted Proj- ec ts to Reinspect" for checking within 6 months. File-11 (11Y Process used to check compliance of specific Shoreline Permit SMA 273 (continued) 13. Enter SMA 278 inspection results in "Shoreline Compliance Tally" folder. File 16 (11) REPORT OF INSPECTOR 2727 Fairview Ave. E. permit no 278 Date of visit made by Remarks 4/28/77 EWS Parking area photographed (5 photos) Gravelled, but no fencing or new trees. Hedge exists on s. & W-low hedge on North Property line, but doesn't screen at this time. 5/12/77 EWS No view obscuring fence for parking lot exists. Tood 2 photos of car parked in lot. Appears to be in same spot as before. Talked with Jessup's office staff-278 not finished, Electrical permit not applied for yet. One 42' sailboat moored W. of pier (stall 27) 22 boats moored at present 3 photos taken 10 photos taken total 5/18/77 EWS Check bldg. permits to see if certificate of occupancy has been issued. Look to see if parking landscaping revised. 6/9/77 EWS #565491 (bldg. permit#)plans say landscape plan in DCD files. (Notation by Rosemary Horwood 8/20/76) Permit not finaled but does not include floating pier. No landscape plans in bldg. Dept SAA files 6/15/77 EWS Landscape plan zerox in DCD SMA files show 8 trees & 4' high fence on N., S., &W. sides & gravel drain basin and tiles along W. prop. line called Jessup's office (owner_ 322-2121 will call back Jessup called- I reviewed each condition with him . His response: 1. Sailboats only 35' - all interior moorages much less-very rarely exterior stalls might have over 35' for stopover only. Not for permanent moorage. 2. No resident use of moorage-he assumes this means live aboards & he is enforcing this condition even though personally opposed to 3.Encourage tenants to use access. parking lot see attached lease agreement clause to be sent. 4. View obscuring fence for parking lot-surrounding residents, especially on N. want Laurel hedge rather than fence. 5. Landscaping for parking lot-trees will be installed at same time as those at 3132 Fairview ave E. office bldg. by same owner. 6. Material or equip. for oil-spill cleanup provided-existing floats completely trap all floating materials from leaving area (W.or N.) sign with phone number to call if oil spilled (for cleanup) service) will be place on office outside wall. 7. No turbidity or construction or demolition bebris noticed during inspection. 8. Gravel drain basin (drywell) with tiles along W. prop. line of access. parking lot was installed & working well in heavy rains. check for compliance in 6 months CITY OF SEATTLE DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JAN 16 1976 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. PERMIT NO. SMA 278 CITY OF SEATTLE PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT Application no. SMA 278 datet received 6/26/75 date approved 1/14/76 pursuant to section 14, chapter 286, Laws of 1971, ex. sess., and section 4 of ordinance # 100423. a permit is hereby granted to : Owner: The Hamlin Pier company address: c/o J.A. Jessup, AIA, Architect, 2727 Fairview ave. E Seattle, WA 98102 Applicant: James A. Jessup, AIA, Architect Address: 2727 Fairview Ave, E. Seattle , WA 98102 Construct pier extension with finger piers providing new moorage spaces for 31 boats. The pier will provide electrical and water hookups for each moorage. Parking will be provided for 20 cars. upon the following property: 2727 Fairview ave. E. Seattle, king county, washington. Development pursuant to this permit shall be undertaker pursuant to the following terms and conditions: SEE ATTACHED LETTER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. This permit is granted pursuant to section 4 of ordinance #100423 and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state or local statutes, ordiances or regula- tions applicable to this project. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 9 of ordianance #100423 and Section 14 (7) of the shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any condition hereof. Construction pursuant to this permit will not begin or be authorized until forty-five (45) days from the date of final approval and grant of the permit by the superintendent of Buildings or until all review proceedings initiated within forty-five days from the date of final approval by the City have been terminated. January 14, 1976 superintendent of buildings (date) Furthur conditions of this permit: YOUR SEATTLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Paul E. S. Schel Director Wes Uhlman, Mayor January 14, 1976 Mr. Alfred Petty, P.E. Superintendent of Buildings City of Seattle Subject: SMA #278 Dear Mr. Petty: Pursuant to Ordinance 100423, we have reviewed Application No. 278, filed by James A. Jessup for a Substantial. Development Permit to construct a pier extension and moorage for 31 boats at 2727 Fair-- view Avenue E., Seattle. In accordance with provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act, we have examined possible environmental effects and prepared a Declaration of No Significant impact for the project (copy attached). The finding of no significant impact is based in part upon the applicant's representation that the moorage will be re--. stricted to sailboats only, generally no longer than 35 feet;that residential use of the proposed moorage will not be permitted; and that moorage tenants will be encouraged to utilize the upland accessory parking lot. We haVe determined that the proposed development is consistent with the provisions of the Shorelines Master Program and Section 4 of Ordinance 100423. We therefore authorize the granting of a Substantial Development Permit for work described in SMA 278 and attached approved plans, subject to the following conditions: (1) That a view-obscuring fence be provided on those boundar- ies of the parking area adjoining residential structures;, (2) That a parking plan incorporating landscaping be submitted to the Department of Community Development for approval prior to issuance of a Building Permit; (3) That materials or equipment for cleanup.of minor oil spills be provided.- city of seattle-Department of community development, 506 cherry street seattle washington 98104 (206) 583-2730 Mr. Alfred Petty, Page 2 SMA #278 (4) That floating construction or demolition debris be re- moved from the water; and (5) That work be carried on in a. manner to minimize water quality problems such as turbidity. very truly yours, Paul E. S. Schell Director PESS:os 3V ard #4 LOT 3 - -ff= SLK; .4@ wris* ADD. Lake UniA S,orelands CITy OF SMATTK-'@_': i;@Ro_C 17PAGE @NUM-6@R 7 DEPARTMENT OF GUILDINGS1 BUILDING - USE PER@,Ali=m 2 a9 00 RECEIPT NUMBER AMOUNT NOT VAUD UNLESIS SIGNED BY FILING FEE SUPERINTENDENT OF BUILDIN8 &5411 PECEIPT NUMBER AMOUNT PERMIT FEE S7@`VTE LeA66 e_Avos ALIT, At 72 i=41RV1etiiJ` AV,!Z-- E" in Lot Block- (Number) (street) 0( uQ to _SFbqC- L-44-3 JD 5 Addition. Lot is-x--Alley No if Volvo Lif it QYZ-2 /J Clark N@ Plans Fil.d Zoni,* Bldg. Dept. Value 'y Occupancy Certificate Required NO Occupancy and Group Occupant Load No. Stories Basements No. D-ell,ng L)nits Bldg. $us Total Area Lot has Reached PAoximum Coverage J_/. 'V Add Type constr. Alter Width of Sireets Yes NO Permission is hereby given to do the following described worl@ according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Seattle. DR) I/E LES - FOR PZ-Q!qMIAJ (7 PIE7? Is 3! F'lRog aX:r1AJ6UJSt2@-@_,S* AS P- - 6-0 @D -0 5654-91 2-5 _.Q,4?j ;7 011 Aq,@ STARTING CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT IS PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT Ownatr_14AMCiN Pie72_ C-0 -Address 5AMG '@'- 2- P h. -2-/- Contractor Ph. I have read the conditions of this permit and I agree that I Struct. Engin will do the work described above in conformance with the rchitect ads and t pproved A -Ph. Building C plant. Address Signed (Owner) Application made nt Permit issued 19-@@'.SUPERINTENDENT@F@U@DINGS. By Additional Permits APP20VAL OF 0 @11 III CITY DEPTS. CONWCTOR'5 ILICENSE NO. Are Required for: ElftTrIcol ISHA -76- @-n Boller Furnace El"ator Sign or Billboard in YF3 I (DO 2- -7 Grading Wrecking Plumbing FlornsiWo LIct ntarisoo Oil Burner S.E.P.A. ACTION Use of Public Areas Curb or Walk Craning Senover Catagorical Worksheet Strw Grades Exemption Filed Roof Area Water CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MUST BE ISSUED PER SEC. 306 BEFORE PREMISES ARE OCCUPIED Apyp 71 Afr L-Wo@;W)Aje r @n I QD e?4244'<.j4E M A; V,, -r-W j @ - ac, AA jo 3,11,17.7 was Ilk i7 sk! W. 59,lwo, it Kn@ Ji@ kA 7,0 Nj 15MA '2-7e- !Z'7,?,7 FAl9Vl5WAV5--IE-.41Za1-@-j TeFm- 7t *AA 77 1 ,y 7 VI zy VIEW, 4+ [email protected] uAj 2 2-72 7 F1114II(EW AV cv EZ E, opgopSel?l bilp Ajo7-S ON E 'Pti 94:ao Co'A R. 42(24t3l] 7 F20PA52rl Ll E FkCI14 AIXI C-OkAM: Ws-MV-1u, Vj iij E. VUAO f ao% L OT 'DEC) -40 ul' W Q 4PI b\ o ol Aft 0 1 Cuo RE @--M` a Mums I IMP I.-MARREW9 gg@ IRE Rog MM M-, @M-M-SINEZ:R_ IL L."L J rL Won :ism @e j, 3,.- A@ z@,pt ;a fit MR oFt 9-S-0111 !jwa-g NM-74 P, N. W M-4 Iwo Ok@ MRS, Element 2 . - , 1@ CZM 306 - 5B' Final Report Page No. Element 2 - REPORT ON PERMIT PROCESSING Introduction During the 13 months reporting time, action was taken on 96 shoreline development permits. Of these, 90 received favorable approval, two were denied, and four withdrawn. Twenty-seven revisions were given to projects that had previously received approval. During the year, 96 permit applications were received. There were 26 permit applications on hand at the beginning and 25 on hand on the closing date of this period. Two permits required Environmental Impact Statements. One, for Chiyoda Chemical, is complete. The Pier 69 project is awaiting the completion of the Final EIS, the Draft being completed. The remaining permits required Declarations of Non-Significance, most. of which were written by staff. Three remaining permits also required variances. One was granted, one denial has been appealed, and one is in process with no decision to date. Two permits have been challenged through appeals to the Shorelines Hearings Board. The Rock appeal involving.a single family resi- dence was decided in favor of the Department. Another appeal on a large Condominium (Salant) is'to be heard this summer. Four appeals have been made to the City's Hearing Examiner in oppos- ition to the Department's SEPA determination. of the three heard, all decisions have concurred with the Department's findings. The permits continue to involve a wide spectrum of uses. Moorages and residential buildings continue to be frequent. Houseboat .remodeling,,restaurant, marine terminal and marine-oriented facil- ities are other uses that are commonly sought. Problems have been varied. The lack of parking and the difficulty of providing more spaces on the Central Waterfront and along Lake Union has continued to require zoning variances. An up- .dated policy is being requested of the Office of Policy Planning to address this matter. Recent newspaper accounts have made the new air service to Victoria operating from Lake Union a hot topic. At this time a shoreline permit has not been applied for although that intention was stated by the operators of Air West Canada in a recent letter. The newness of the Shoreline Program and resultant interpreta- tions has continued to be a problem in reviewing applications. There are many "vagrant" proposals that don't fit the mold en- visioned.by the Program. However, this is not uncommon with new legislation or programs. The attached tables show permits by value and number received by month over the past year. Element 2 (continued) Value of Permits approved, withdrawn and denied: 1976 June $ 788,200 ($800,000) (Withdrawn) July 1,261,800 3,000) (Denied), August 1,138,600 September 15,050,800 October 403,000 November 5,360,000 25,000) (Withdrawn) December 2,735,250 1977 January 3,395,000 February 2,820,283 March 1,160,000 ( 480,000) .(Withdrawn) April 6,440,000 May 577,000 ( 50,000) (Denied) June 808,000 GRAND TOTAL APPROVED: $41,937,133 Total Denied 53,000 Total Withdrawn 1,305,000 Current (unfinished) 261035,205 Permits Received: 1976 June' .5 July 5 August 2 September 11 October 10 November 8 December 8 1977 January 5 February 8 March 11 April 7@ May 6. June 7 The total value of permits processed during the past 13 months is $46,821,253. During the past two quarters, the value has been $15,400,000, which represents a decline from the first two qu.arters of the grant period. L Eleme-nt 3 11 CZM 306 5B Final Report Page No. Element 3 SHORELIl.,'".1E PERMIT A'NALYSIS: A MANAGEMENT TOOL Introduction Purpose: The major purposes of this study were to determine a) what the permit- records show with reference to meeting the goals of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shorelines Management Act, and b) how the shoreline program itself and the management of permits may be improved. In brief, we are investigating whether the permit system of shoreline management is working toward the goals envisione(T by the Citizens Committee and the City Coun- cil. Also, means of improving management of the permit system aside from its substantive considerations may be revealed by study of how.the permit system has worked. To chart progress requires a concept of measures and values, together with appropriate data. The data base available was the permit file for nearly 400 permits issued from.late 1971 until December 1976, a little more than five years. This was automated and geocoded so that maps, cross tabulations, bar charts and straight printout were all available. An annual update, adding data for subsequent years, will provide an increasingly useful barometer of change and reliable and consistent evaluation techniques. Measures: Obviously the best measures of shoreline management are related to the goals of the State Act and the Seattle Shoreline Master Program. Is management in fact progress- ing toward those goals? If not, either management is not performing well or according to the mandate, or, the tools given to management are not sufficient to achieve the goals set by the public and the legislature, or the goals themselves may not be ach 4evable. We have assumed that, at the least, some progress toward the official goals could be made under the permit system. Study of the data could, however, prove ot-her,@-,Tise. Goals as a Bas-is for Program_Evaluation State Shoreline Management goals are contained in. the Act; local goals are contained in Resolution 25173@ The Citizens Committee which wrote the Shoreline Goals and Policies did not prioritize L their goals, nor did the Council @.,7hen they adopted them, so that Element 3 (continued) we must assume them to be equal in value. Furthermore, it must be recoc@nized that many of the adopted goals and policies can not- be implemented with the single, and limited tool at hand, ess.en-, -have selected those tially the pe mit system. Therefore, we 'goals which can readily be quan -IC-ified and which have some poten- tial for partial implementation through the'limited and largely passive strategy of processing applications for shoreline permits. With respect to administration, an obvious but incomplete measure is the time required for processing permits. * This has the really major disadvantage that quality of review and decision-making is ignored completely. Par@e -ofthe purpose of this work has been to seek other means of evaluation that may provide better measures of goal achievement. The .table on the following page lists selected goals and evaluative measures which can be developed from the per- mit data. Following the table are findings and conclusions from the permit data. A series of maps showing locations of permits by various characteristics is appended. Element 3 continued In the table below, shoreline goals are listed with measures which are available through the permit and land use data. Goal Measure' 1. Increase water dependent a) Compare permits for water- uses. dependent uses with total, by year. b) Compare water dependent uses on shoreline. c) Compare location of water dependent uses/land use/permits. 2. Increase public access Compare total number of permits to shoreline. providing public access by year;. compare number of private permits providing public access by year. 3. Increase recreation List permits providing access, and open space. open space by year. List increase in public access points. 4. Preserve views. List permits providing view corri- dor. 5. Limit land fill and List and locate,permits requiring bulkheading fill, bulkheading by year. 6. Encourage compatibi-e Compare permitted uses with uses. adjacent property,uses. -3- C'Z11,4 306 5-D Pinal Report Water Dependency Four categories and the number of permits for each are: Water-dependent, with public access 86 Water-dependent, without public access 179 Non-water-dependent, with public access .22 Non-wa-ter-dependent, without public access 108 It appears that attention to public access has been lacking in the case of non-water-dependent permits. However, the public access requirement did not begin until late in 1974, and about two-thirds of the permits were on upland sites from which there is no direct access to water from the site. Less than half the permits are for uses classified as non-water-dependent. However, the definitionsf both State and local, assume that Port of Seattle permits are all water-dependent and that single-family residences are water- , @dependent. When adjustments are made for these two categories the proportions change. Uses/Activities The first.thing that is apparent is the range and variety o f activi- ties for which permits are requested on the shoreline. The three- digit.code of uses was modified from the Standard Industrial Code (SIC), and has 140 categories,each of which occurs at least once in the permit files. However, the land use code for the Land Use Study, Element 6, is more detailed, using four digits with some 300 different types of activity, each of which also occurs at least once on the Seattle shoreline. Both current and proposed uses were recorded from the permit applications. About hali -the properties had more than one current use; up to five such uses were.recorded on a single site. Permits Received by Zone and Year Compared Tbrith Length of Shoreline by Zone Permits were tabulated by zone and year of receipt. The overall percentages show over half the permits in M. IG and 1H zones for all years. Those zones have about 41% of water frontage. Single- family residence zone permits accounted for 15.7% of the Permits, although 45.6% of the shoreline is so zoned. This figure is some- what skewed because parks and some other uses frequently are zoned single family. Conditional Uses and Variances In the five vears of data, only five conditional uses and five variances were rep ,orted on different permits. Three of these,,, permits required both a conditional use and a variance.. Permits by Zone Of the 395 permits, by far the largest a verage percentage (59%) are in 1.1. IG and Ilizones, largely because much of the shoreline is so zoned. Permits for the M zone have tended to increase.,over the five year period, while 1G and IH zone permits have remained relatively,stable. Single family residential zone permits aver- age 15.7%, all other residential 10%, totaling about a sixth of the total. In 1972, however, residential zone permits were 36.5% of the total. That year also saw the largest number of applications. The year 1977 (.which is not included in the data) may be equal to or-slightly greater than the 1972 total, if the present. rate continues. Other Permits Required Action requiring ashoreline permit frequently also requires other permits. Up to 10 additional permits theoretically could be re- quired for wproposed development. Actually, most shoreline actions tend to require only one or two additional permits, typi- cally a buildinq permit and a Corps of Engineers permit for in or over water. Six is the maximumn number of auxiliary permits we have recorded, and that only once. The types of other permits are, for the City: demolition, building, dredging, grading, fill, and zoning; for the State: DOE and Game; for the Federal level: the Army Corps of Engineers, EPA, and Fisheries. A few cases could also require Coast Guard approval if navigational aids are involved. Note on Other Uses of Permit Data The time consuming hand calculation of elapsed t-':_-,,e between the date an application is receivedland:the date of action could be included in the annual update. The time saved would amourl, t to ,more -,,--',-.an 2-days work each year at a cost of a fe@,',' cents in machine time. A hjy-product will be compa--rison between process- ing times for permits of different cost, type, ownership or loca- tion. Another use of the data is for inspection and compliance. The present system of chronological permit filing requires a great deal of time to locate permits in the same v_icinity. A printout by address will provide an automatic listing and quick comparison for any given area, as well as an inspection route for the compli- ance officer. Permit Data (continued) If the permit record also included inspection time and dates, an. annual evaluation of the inspector's productivity would be gener- ated. 'Purpose of Permit In general, the uses pro-posed in a permit application tend'toward greater intensity but somewhat less diversification than the-cur- rent land use activities on the site. The purpose of about 70% of all permits is repair, upgrading or expansion of existing facil- ities. About 30% represent major change of use. Of these, one- third, or 10% of all permits, were for undeveloped land. Where more than one use existed or was Proposed, they tend to be closely related, as for examole, boat sales, moorage and repair. Dredg- ing was the subject of 15 permits, landfill 36. Both were usually linked to other actions., Repairs were a major purpose during 1976, although seldom listed in earlier permits. Upgrading single- family residence waterfront facilities by bulkheading and piers accounted for slightly over 10% of permits, while a change of use from single to multiple residence was the purpose of 3% of the permits. Access Only 19% of all permits provided any sort of public access. flow- ever, water-dependent uses, particularly port/industrial permits, are exempt from the public access requirement, as are single- family and duplex or triplex residences. These taken together.con- stitute about half of all permits7 furthermore, the access require- ment was not begun until 1975. Nevertheless, the amount of public access provided is low and does not appear to have furthered the SMP Goals. Applicant-Property Relationship Most frequently, (53% of the time), the applicant is the owner of the proPerty. In 29% of the cases, however, an architect or other agent does the application work. Lessees and contract purchasers are least- likely to be applicants, with a Combined total- of. 12'.4% of all nier-mits. Element 6 con-@Einued I@Iapoed Permit Data The attached co@oies 6-f ma-os are made from a cathrode ray tube display of permit data show selected permit data with reference to the street address location of the permit. -Map 1 - All Permits Map 1 shows all per-m-1-ts. The "addresses" for Carkeek, Discovery, Green Lake and Magnuson (Sand Point) Parks are inland, as is the University of Washington, because the assiqned geographic coord4- nates are related to the entire park or campus. The high,decTree of clustering for all permits is partly due to a variety of factors, such as: a) BN ownership along Puget Sound north@of Golden Gardens b) Park lands along Lake Washington at Madrona, and.Lesch.i and Seward Park areas c) University of Washington ownership along the north side of Portage Bay and on Union Bay. These ownerships largely preclude further development in those areas. Clustering also indicates strong demand for space in specific areas .which have certain locational advantages. Map 2 - Permits with Shoreline Access or viewpoint These are highly patterned and relatively few in number. Maps 3a, b, c - Time Series/Water-dependendy 'These maps show permits by whether or not the uses are water depend- ent. The non-water dependent permits predominate in every year.- Conclusions from Permit Data The data provide for the first time accurate detail on the clien- tele 'the rate, the range of activities, the purposes and the lo- cations of shoreline development since the Shoreline Act became effective. These figures make it possible to predict, within.reasonable ranges, the most likely types of development, rate of applica4--ion, and loca-@- tion of per-mits; and given the same conditions, what directions shoreline development can be expected to talke. When compared with land use data, new shoreline development since the Act tends to be slightly more oriented toward water dependent uses. Except for 1974, -the pace of development has seen a gradual increase. When the 1977 data are added, the increase will be more evident. T'he permit system does not appear to have had much effect on shore- line development, alt-houah when we are able to study shoreline build- ing permits issued prior to the Act, we may be more certain. There- -Eore, if the goals promulgated by the citizens and the Council are to be met, other means of achieving them should be considered. + L-L SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 ALLPERMITS SHORELINE PERMITS 1971-1976 PERMITS WITH + - BEACH ACCESS x - WATERFRONT VIEWPOINT 0 - ELEVATED VIEWPOINT + + + .SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1971 AND 1972 PERMITS - FIRST ACTION. + - GRANTED X - DENIED GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS + SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 PERMITS - FIRST ACTION + - GRANTED x - DENIED GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS Lf SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1974 PERMITS - FIRST ACTION + GRANTED x - DENIED A GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1975 PE R M ITS - F I RST ACTI ON + - GRANTED x - DENIED GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS th 4r + SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1976 PERMITS - FIRST ACTION + - GRANTED x - DENIED GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS + SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 1976 1971 AND 1972 PERMITS - OVER WATER - ON LAND BOTH SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1973 PERMITS 0 - OVER WATER + - ON LAND - BOTH r7= SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1974 PERMITS. 0 - -OVER WATER + - ON LAND - BOTH + SHORELINE PERMITS 1971-1976 1976-PERMITS 0 - OVER WATER + - ONLAND A - BOTH 4-1 0 4- SHORELINE PERMITS 1971-1976 1971 AND 1972 PERMITS + WATER DEPENDENT 0 NON-WATER DEPENDENT + SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1973 PERMITS + WATER DEPENDENT 0 NON-WATER DEPENDENT SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1974 PERMITS + - WATER DEPENDENT 0 - NON-WATER DEPENDENT SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1975 PERMITS + - WATER DEPENDENT 0 NON-WATER DEPENDENT SHORELINE PERMITS 1971 - 1976 1976 PERMITS, + WATER DEPENDENT 0- NON-WATER DEPENDENT Element 4 SHORELINE STRUCTURES DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS COMPENDIUM City of Seattle Department of Community Development Environmental Management Division The preparation of this report was funded in part bya grant from the Office of Coastal Zone Management through the Washington State ,Department of Ecology. 'June 1977 Acknowledgements All the material contained in the Shoreline Structures Design and Construction Standards Compendium is from existing sources noted in the Bibliography. The Army Corps of Engin- eers have produced a great deal of research in the field of coastal engineering. One Corps publication, Help Yourself, contains very useful illustrations which were used extensively in the Shoreline Structure section. Credit for this work is given on the ShorelineStructure Outline by source number. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section page Introduction 3 Compendium 4 Shoreline Structures. 7 Glossary of Terms Relating to shoreline Structures Annotated Bibliography of Technical Sources 9 Appendix 36 2 Introduction The Compendium has been developed in four related sections as a con- venient reference tool to provide information standards and guide- lines for the construction and maintenance of shoreline structures. it Will require revision as new standards are developed and as new construction techniques evolve. The Bibliography has been coded to allow cross reference in the Com- pendium tables and the classification section, between standards and. protective structures, and between regulatory agencies and standard- setting organizations in the field. The capital letters identify the source of the publication and.the number indicates its position within the source listing. For example, B-3 is the reference titled Groins - An Annotated Bibliography, whose source is the Army Corps of Engineers. Letters A-J are reserved for federal agencies, K-R for state agencies, S-V for local agencies, while the letter WAs reserved for iDrivate standard.-setting organizations. The Glossary has been developed for classification of.structures and to define -terms used in the Shoreline Structure section. Each defined tern is referenced to its source in the Bibliography. In some cases, -more than one definition is provided for a given term clarifi- wnere ovsr1a.,p'*c-_-_g but slightly different meanings provide cat-1-n.. -_nle Clossary has been limited to those terms which 4 -0 directly pe----.a shoreline structures; glossaries for the general ie d of !--vdr@ coastal engineering are much more extensive. _=uctur es section provides illustrations of common 4ng structures. The selection of protective '7 - - t_ake into account -t-he env@ -o-nmental character istic' s of. any specific location.. Environmentally sensitive areas such as beaches, estuar-Les, bluffs, flood plains, and areas of soil insta- _y should be avoided, not only because they play a significant of the ecological system, but also because the cost or original con.st-_-u,c';"on plus the cost of upkeep is far more expensive than on ,Ore tab*Ie sit- S4 In most cases, construction in high energy zones requiring massive 'enses against wind and wave action interferes with.the structural deL geohyd.raulic Process and results in unsightly and expensive con- struction which may be destroyed long before its cost can be justi- fied. In addition to presenting standard solutions to shoreline protec- *L.ion problems, an attempt has been made to encourage the selection oil environmentally compatible solutions. Site selection should take into account the existence of active erosion and accretion processes along the Puget Sound shoreline. Although most of the Seattle shoreline has been bulkheaded., inspection shows that con- tinuing and increasingly expensive repairs and replacements are required for most sites. In areas like Magnolia, both the struc- tures and their defensive bulkheads have had to be abandoned. The key to successful construc-LL-.ion on waterfront sites is the selection of shoreline structures which will be working with these forces rather than against them. SHORELINE STRUCTURE CLASSIFICATION Revetment Alonq Shoreline Shoreline Thilkhea(9/Spawall Protective Structures 'Jetty Extending Into Water Groin Breakwater Shoreline. Structures Outfall/Intake @Pier, Connected Wharf. To Shoreline Quay 1'4oorincr & Transfer Struc. Buoy lNot Connected Dolphin A simple classification of shoreline struttures has been devised based on the definitions in the glossary. Structures with similar functions or similar position in relation to the shoreline have been grouped together. It should be recognized that many shoreline uses utilize, a combination of structures. Forexample, a marina is composed of docks, dolphins, a breakwater and possibly a type of revetment on shore. The classification should be viewed as the organization of basic components used in construction@for shoreline activities. Compendium Table A Shoreline Structures-and Sources of Standards Protective Structures Coded Sources from Bibliography Alonq Shoreline Revetment B-1, -2, -7,.-9, -100, -13; E-1; K-1; M-3;S-l, @2; W-6 Bulkhead/Seawall A-1; B-1, -2, -5, -6, -10, -12 -13; D-1; C-1; E-1; K-1; M-1, -2; N-1; S-1, -2;.Iq-2, -4, -5, -6, -8 Extendino. into! Water Jettv B-1, -2, -10, -13; K-1; M-3; S-1; W-6 Groin B-1, -2, -3, -6, -10, -13; M-3; S-1; W-5, -6 Bre Na- - ter B-1, -2, -8, -10 13; E-2; K-1; M-3; S-1; W-601 -9 a T'Z-ansfer Structures ' Con- .-.-ected to Shore Outfalls./Intake M-3; S-1; W-1, -6 Pier A-1; B-5, -6, -12, -13; C-1; D-1; M-3; S-1;, W-5, -6, -7, -9, -10, -11, -13 Wharf A-1; D-1; S-2; W-6, -11, -13 Quay A-1; D-1; S-1; W-06, -13 Dock A-1, B-5, -6; C-1; D-1-1 M-3; N-1; S-1; W-4.,- -5, -6, -7, -9, -10, -11, -13 Not connected to Shore Buoy B-12, S-1;@W-6 Dolphins B-5, -6, -12;, C-1; M-3; S-1; W-4, -5, -6, -7, -9, -10j, -12 Compendium,Table B Agencies or Standard Setting Otganizations/Shoreline Structures. e 7Y 0 0 Federal Coast Guard x x x x x Army Corps x x x x x x x -X Fish & wildlife x x x x Dept. of Navy x x x x x N4 01@A x x S t a, te C a 1 W x x X X ashinaton x Fisheries amn e x x x x x x x x x x x C Of x x x x x x x x x x x xr P r i v a t e A.P.W.A. x A.S.C.E. x x A. I T.C x x x x A. S T. M. x x x x x x x x x x x x A.W.P.A. x x X- A.W.P.I. x x N.A.E. & B.M. x x x x N.F.P.A. x x x P.C.A. x- U. B. C'. x x x x *See Bibliography for full name of agencies' and organizations. SHORELINE STRUCTURES Outline and Illustration Reference Structures Illus. Source Type of Structure. Illustrated Number. Number Shoreline Protective Structures A Revetments Stone 1 B-13 Gabion 2 B-13 Grout filled bag 3 B-13 B Seawalls 'Wood sheetpile 4 B-13 Steel sheetpile 5 B-13 Precast Concrete Slab 6 B-13 C Beach Accretion.Devices Offshore Breakwaters 7 B-13 Impermeable Groins 8 B-13 D Construction Alternatives a) Revetments Gabion Revetment 9 B-13 Stone Revetment 10 B-13 Stone/Marsh Plant Revetment 11 Grout Filled Bag Revetment 12 B-13 Offshore Breakwaters 13 B-13 b)Beach Accretion Impermeable Groins 14 B-13 Devices c) Seawalls Heavv-duty Timber Crib 15 B-13 Heavy-duty Timber & Mesh Crib 16 B-13 Steel or Timber Bulkheads 17 B-13 d) Tires Floating Tire BreakwAter 18 E-2 e) Relocation Houses, 19 B-13 E Construction & Maintenance Guidelines, Rules 1 6 F Improper Solutions, Debris 20 B-13 Single Stone Layer Revetment 21 B-13 Floating Log Bulkhead 22 B-13 Sloping Concrete Bulkhead 23 B-13 Sandbag Revetment (fresh water) 24 B-13 Concrete Blocks 25 B-13- Boat Mooring Structures A Buoys Mooring Buoy in Tidal Waters 26 B-12 B Marinas Dimensional Criteria 27 B-5 Fixed Pier 28 B-5 Floating Pier-,Water Ballast 29 B-5, Floating Pier-Foam 30 B-5 SHORELINE PROTECTIVE STRUCTURES REVETMENTS STONE When erosion is occuring on a natural shoreline, stone revetment is the preferred method of shore protection, it is economical and suitable for all types of erosion problems when stone is available in sufficient size and quality. The key design considerations are the dimensions, foundation treatment. and stone size. Construction is not complicated and no special equipment, other than a crane and trucks are needed. Notes 1) Slope should be compacted and graded to 1:2 or flatter. 2) Place a gravel, small rock, filter blanket and/or woven filter cloth on the prepared slope. 3) Place rock carefully with a crane, rock should have a three-point bearing. 4) Insure rock sizes are well mixed. Larger and smaller rock should not be visibly segregated. Maintenance requirements This structure is subject to displacement The effectiveness of the structure will be impaired by thinning of the protective layer or settling of the structure. Restoration of the rock slope protection to the designed top elevation, equivalent thickness and reduction of voids in the facing should be accomplished when needed. The list of materials and general costs information is given in the following tabulation. Gabion A gabion is a steel wire mean basket available commercially. Revetments can be constructed from stone filled gabions by groups of individuals without special construction equipment. Gabion structures can be built to any height required. A step design is suggested to reduce wave runup. The manufacuter's instructions should be followed closely. The structure should res on an 18" thick gibion mattress to protect against scour. This type of construction is applicable to all shore-protection problems. Notes:1) Gabions can be filled with any stone material larger than the mesh. 2) Gabion structures maintain their strength even if the foundation settles somewhat. 3) You should stagger the joints between baskets the same way you stagger the joints between courses in a brick wall to make a stronger structure. 4) You would be wise to anchor the seaward end of the mattress with large stone or anchor screws 5) your mattress should extend out as far from the toe as one and one-half times the design depth. Maintenance The life of gabion protection depends on the durability of the wire, Replace broken wires with galvanized or plastic coated wire. The baskets occasionally are moved during severe storms, but can often be replaced after the storm Such movement indicates foundation failure or scour at the toe. Repair all storm damage as quickly as possible. 8 GROUT FILLED Large grout filled nylon bags (20'x 1.6") may be used to protect eroding shorelines. This type of structure is adaptable to all types of slopes. Bags should be placed parallel. to the shore with reinforcing bars installed both vertically and horizontally as shown in the section below. This type of structure may be applicable where access is limited and rock is not readily available. No special material is needed other than the bags and construction is not complicated. A grout pump is required to fill the bags Prices in the table below were computed with the asumption that ready-mix grout will be used by a concrete mixer could be substituted at the site. Maintenance Requirements Remedial work on the type of structure is not easily accomplished. Special attention should be given to toe protection. Uneven settlement or undermining might cause fracture or collapse. If excessive scour causes toe stone to settle more material should be added. This type of structure is readily adaptable to add- on construction, Additional structure height can be easily accomplished if necessary. SEAWALLS WOOD SHEET PILE Timber walls are constructed of plank sheeting with round piles. They consist of two rows of 3 inch plank sheeting and a row of round piling with heavy horizontal walls between the planks and the piling. They must be tied back to anchor piling. The most common cause of failure of sea walls is undermining a material from the action of the toe of the structure. resulting in inadequate penetration of piling The pressure of the soil and water on the back side can then tip the structure. The tie-backs provide additional strength to resist this force. Timber bulkheads also require possitive toe protection. The piling and sheeting are driven with the aid of a jet from a small pump. The use of this design is controlled by sub-surface foundation conditions. It is suitable for sand or sand and gravel shores where the sand deposit is 12-15 feet below the bottom. Wooden structures must be securely fastened together with bolts. 9 STEEL SHEET PILE A steel bulkheed serves to armor the bank. The fact must be designed to absorbe all wave energy. Severe scour occurs at the bulkhead line. The sheeting depends upon penetration and tie backs for its stability. The structural design of sheet piling is highly specialized and not subject to standard plans. For this reason the service of a qualified engineer is essential Key design considerations are foundation conditions, penetration of the piling, height and alignment, and scour protection, Sufficient access must be available for pile driving equipment. Piles should be carefully located as shown on the drawings and driven in a plumb position, each pile interlocked with adjoining piles for its entire length, so as to form a continuous diaphragm, throughout the lengh of each run of wall. The contractor should drive all piles as true to lines as practicable and should provide suitable temporary walls or guide structures to insure that the piles are driven in correct alignment. PRECAST CONCRETE SLAB Hardened shore protection with a vertical seaward face may be installed in a relatively short time by using precase concrete slabs jetted into place or driven with a vibratory or impact hammer. A concrete cap is usually cast on top of the slabs to serve both as a structural tie and to improve the finished appearance. Tie-backs are usually needed to prevent the wall from tipping seaward. Also, adequate penetration of the piles or slabs into the sea bottom is necessary to prevent the toe from sliding seaward. If wave action occurs against the vertical face, Scour erosion at the toe of the wall may be expected. The wave energy breaking against the vertical face is deflected both upward and downward. The downward component of the deflected wave scours the sea bottom at the toe of the wall. Hardened toe protection may be required to prevent toe failure. 10 BEACH ACCRETION DEVICES OFFSHORE BREAKWATERS Offshore breakwaters are a method of shroe protection for flat or moderate offshore slopes. The design wave is based on water depth 50 feet seaward of the structure. Offshore breakwaters cn be constructed of any material capable of withstanding the wave energies iminging on them, including stone, gabions, steel, wood, and concrete shapes. A toe protection blanket is essential. Offshore breakwaters may be low structures to allos passage of wave energy or they can be high structures to completely block waves. They should be built in shallow water nearshore for reasons of economy. They can be continous for long distances or segmented with passages between them to allow exchange of water. caution. offshore breakwaters interfere with shore processes; their use demands extreme caution to preclude major downdrift erosion. Consider then only in areas of substanial sand movement. Make them low so they will be overtopped by waves during storms. Offshore breakwaters are difficult and expensive to maintain. IMPERMEABLE GROINS Protection of the shoreline by groins assumes sand is available and moving along the shoreline. Groins can have the undesirable effect of damaging downdrift shores. The layout of groins is very important. Groins should be kept low, only one foot above the expected high water, and shore, terminating at the 3 foot depth. Groins must be protected from flanking by tying them well into the bank. The maximum length of groins should not exceed 100 feet. If possible groins should be artifically nourished by placing sand on the updrift side of each groin. Caution. groins are shore protectin structures that interfere with shore processes and entrap beach materials. Their use demands extreme caution to preclude major downdrift erosion. Consider them only in areas of substantial sand movement. Make them low so they will be overtopped by waves during storms. Groins should be constructed in stages, starting at the extreme downdrift end of the area to be protected. Study the effects of the single groin carefully before completing the layout of the groin field. 11 CONSTRUCTION ALTERNATIVES REVETMENTS GABION REVETMENT ADVANTAGES No special construction equipment required, rated best do-it-yourself type of protection. Flexible, easily repaired after storm damage. Low first cost, if do-it-yourself project. DISADVANTAGES Subject to rusting and deterioration unless wire baskets are plastic coated. Limites used and access to beach. Moderate maintenance costs, Reduces prodcutivity fo intertidal area. STONE REVETMENT ADVANTAGES Most effect structure for absorbing wave energy. Flexible- not weakened by slight movements. Natural rough surface reduces wave runup. Lends itself to stage construction. Easily repaired-low maintenance cost. The preferred method of protection when rock is readily available at a low cost. DISADVANTAGES Heavy equipment required for construction. Limits use and access to beach. Reduces productivity of the intertidal area. Moderately, high first cost difficult to construct where access is limited. STONE/MARSH VEGETATION ADVANTAGES Same as stone revetment. Provides productive habitat in intertidal ara. Preferred method of protection in low energy zones. DISADVANTAGES Vegetation must be planted on 3:1 slope or flatter combination can only be used in low energy zone. GROUT FILLED REVETMENT ADVANTAGES Moderate first cost. Adaptable to stage construction. DISADVANTAGES More subject to carastrophic failure if the toe is undermined. Reduces productivity of the intertidal area. 12 BEACH ACCRETION DEVICES OFFSHORE BREAKWATERS ADVANTAGES Resulting beach protects upland areas and provides recreational benefit. Moderate first cost and low maintenance cost. DISADVANATAGES Extremely complex coastal engineering design problem Qualified coastal engineering services are essential. Groins rarely function structly as inteneded. Areasa downdrift will probably experience erosion. Unsuitable in areas of low littoral drift. (Sand movement) subject to flanking, must be securely tied into bluff. IMPERMEABLE GROINS ADVANTAGES Beneficial effect can extend over a considerable length of shoreline. Maintains or enhances recreational value of a beach. The structure is not subject to flanking-it can be built in seperate reaches. Gabions can be constructed on shore and transported to site by ordinary earth moving equipment. Tends to build a natural beach between the breatwater and the shore. DISADVANTAGES May modeify beachline and cause erosion in downdraft areas. Structure is subject to foundation and scout failures, floating plant and heavy equipment may be required for construction. Gabions may be damaged by floating ice or logs, Extremely difficult to repair. SEAWALLS ADVANTAGES Lends itself to protecting short reaches can be constructed of materials that are readily available. Structure is easily repaired. DISADVANTAGES Strucutural integrity depends upon adequate toe protection. Vertical walls induce severe scour at their base. Limits use and access to beach, Reduces productivity of the intertidal area. 13 STEEL OR TIMBER BULKHEADS ADVANTAGES Provides substantial protection. Maintains shoreline in fixed position. Low maintenance cost. Materials are readily available. DISADVANTAGES Structural integrity depends upon adequate toe protection. Vertical walls induce severe scour at their base. High first cost. Pile driving requires special skill and heavy construction equipment. Complex engineering design problem. Limits access and use of beach. Reduces porductivity of the intertidal area. FLOATING TIRE BREAKWATER ADVANTAGES Very low construction cost, easy to build. May be used where surface-to-bottom breakwater are not feasible. Simple mooring arrangement, easy maintenance. Provide wave suppression without impeding todal and current flow. Minimum safety hazard to colliding boats. Provide floating habitat for fish. DISADVANTAGES No long term perforamnce data available. Short lifespan, Effective only for small waves low profile above water. HOUSING RELOCATION Relocation is an alternative that can not be overemphasized. Erosion is a natural geologic process that is extremely difficult to stop. The alternatives to build shore protection or to relocate must be weighed against the consequence of failure. Depending on the type of structure you might consider, it may cost the same to relocate as it would to build shore protection. Should a protective structure fail, then your investment in the structure is lost and your home or cottage is still in danger. ADVANTAGES It is permanent, in the long run it is the best method of protection, Adaptable to short reaches of shoreline. Can be accomplished by the individual through contract with a house mover. DISADVANTAGES Special skills and equipment required. Area must be available for relocation of the house. Does not stop erosion. 14 CONSTRUCTIONAND tying your works directly into the bluff. Check for signs of MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES. failure such as movement of the ends and erosion at the end RULE 1 of the structure. The illustration below shows the result of PROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTION not constructing wingwalls and tying the ends of the FOR THE TOE OF THE STRUCTUE s.tructure into the bluff. SOTHAT IT WILL NOT BE UNDERMINED. EXISTiNG SLOPE f RC:,@ N@@T TYINC@ 7- BL"L- L G AN LAR :..FILL HIGH WATER F-LIAE O@ 5,EEI N-G 5--- Without--. vvill,-_ CHECK FOR SIGNS OF FAILURE MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR PROCEDURE Most failures of shore protection works result from "toe the ends and tie s-'ructure failure", or erosion under the lowest part of the structure. Place additional material at Failure of the bulkhead can be prevented with adequate toe directly back into the bluff. protection. Toe protection must be substantial enough to prevent theoriginal ground under it from washing through the toe protection blanket, and extend far enough seaward RULE 3 of the s-tructure to prevent underminind. Check for signs of CHECK FOUNDATION COIND!TIONS. failure such as movement of the wall, erosion behind or at the toe, or at the end of the structure. @ILURE RESULTS STONE @FILL UIE V-E.T TE S@CWOUR W. G@(C)UND L.E scoup CONTINUE ROCK FILL LINDc",' CRIB FOR FOUNDATION MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR PROCEDURE CHECK FOR SIGNS OF FA@LURE Re-establish support by underpinning, tie,backs, systems of 1 anchor piling, walers and tie rods. Place larger stone or Soft -foundation material rnay result in excessive se-niement rock-filled mattress at toe or structure to prevent scour. of the structure. Soft underlayers may allow all or part of Backfill where necessary. structure to slide. Check for settlement, and excessive displacement. Hydrostatic pressure due to groundwater seepage may cause movement of some types of RULE 2 SECURE BOTH ENDS OF THE SHORE impermeable walls. PROTECTION WORKS AGAINST FLANKING. LAKEWARD 0ISPLACEMENTr-'_.__ I'AlL.11E R-ULTI. FR ASOFT SEAV'-L@ @00 UNDATIONW,47ER;@'@ RESULT OF EXCESSIVE SETTLEMENT WINGIN LL WNGWALL CHECK FOR SIGNS OF FAILURE MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR PROCEDURE U. Erosion will.continue adjacent to your works. If an existing Re-establish support by construction underpinning, structure has been flanked, such as the one shown below, foundation protection and backfilling. If the structure was correct it by placing additional material at the ends and impermeable such as a steel wall add or reopen weep holes. 15 RULE 4 USE MATERIAL THAT IS HEAVY AND DENSE ENOUGHT THAT WAVE WILL NOT MOVE INDIVIDUAL PIECES OF THE PROTECTION CHECK FOR SIGNS OF FAILURE. A cause of common failure is to use undersized material; waves have tremendous power and can move a lot of meterial in a short time. Small stones or pieces of concrete, will be moved around and carried away by small waves. Larger waves will do it even faster. The bank revetment below was constructed, of undersized stone that was carried down the slope by large waves. Excessive settlement,. increase in voids, loss of filter material, erosion behind ,or at the end of the structure can result due to the use of small stone layers. Filter material may be required between underlying ground and the protective material. MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR PROCEDURE Place additional stone at toe, restore to original elevation, section, and thickness, reduce excessive void ratio, back fill behind structure, extensive upgrading in size of material may be required. RULE 5 BUILD REVETMENT HIGH ENOUGH THAT WAVES CANNOT OVERTOP IT (SPRAY OVERTOPPING IS ALL RIGHT, BUT NOT WAVES). CHECK FOR SIGNS OF FAILURE Many failures have happened because the structure was not built high enough and erosion could then continue behind the structure as if were not there. Check for broken wire, excessive movement, and erosion behind aor at ends of structure. MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR PROCEDURE Restore to higher elevation, back fill structure, add filter cloth, and splash arpon. RULE 6 MAKE SURE THAT VOIDS BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL PICES OF PROTECTION MATERIAL ARE SMALL ENOUGH THAT UNDERLYING MATERIAL IS NOT WASHED OUT BY WAVES CHECK FOR SIGNS OF FAILURE A filter material such as woven plastic filter cloth must be placed on a highly erodible embankment to prevent the fine material from washing through the voids in the structure. The protection material must be thick enough to make a long passage for dissipation of wave energy prior to reaching the underlying materials. In the case below woven plastic filter cloth was not indcluded. As a result fine bluff material was washed out by waves. MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR PROCEDURE Rebuild to original elevation, use at least two layers of stone, use a stone filter or woven plastic filter cloth, fill behind structure. 16 IMPROPER SOLUTIONS Each of these improper solutions violates two or more construction guidelines. Can,, you teli which construction guidelines, each of these examples violates and how the structures will fail? Answers are provided under each, illustration. DEBRIS SLOPING CONCRETE BULKHEAD ell UG 23 NIOLATES RULES 1, 2,3, and 6 VIOLATES RULES I and 2 i:SINGLE STONE -SANDBAG REVETMENT LAYER REVETMENT .. ft.1016.10-0 21 -24 :VIO'LATES RULES 1, 4 and 6 MOLATES RULES 1, 21, 4 and 5 KH EAD CONC R ETE BLOCKS FLOATING LOG BUL JI- ij K, .22 25 VI0.1LATES RULES 1, 2, 4,5, and 6 VIOLATES RULES. 1, 2,. anci-5 @@SANDI 17 BOAT MOORING STRUCTURES BUOYS The general public is authorized to install mooring buoys for private use in tidal waters within the geographical boundaries of the Seattle District, Corps of Engineers by a general permit (no. 071-OYB-1-003686). The installation of buoys is subject to conditions contained in the permit including: A buoy cannot interfere with navigation or orderly harvest of commercial food fish or shellfish resources. A buoy cannot restrict the movement of vessels using existing facilities or engaged in commercial fishing at key net fishing locations. Work in nevigable waters should minimize water quality degradation and any other adverse impact of the work on fish, wildlife and natural environmental values. Another lines shall be weighted or made with nonfloating, material. MARINAS Slip Dimensions The most common slip arrangement is a series of piers or headwalks extending perpendicular to the bulkhead to a pierhead line, with finger piers extending at right angles from the headwalk on either side. For power craft, widths of fairways between finger ends are usually 1.75 to 2 times the length of the longest slips served, while for sailboats with width is 2 to 2.5 times the slip length. A graph from the National Association of Engine and Boat Manufacturers current catalog data shows average beam width and maximum depths of keels for various lenghts of craft. The graph also shows suggested average widths for right-angle slips where the actual dimensions of craft to be berthed are not known. Where basin configuration or curtailment of water space dictates a need for skewed slips, the slip spacing must be calculated, allowing about 1.5 feet of clearance on each side between hull and finger for boats up to 35 feet in length and 2 feet of clearance for longer craft. With the increase of houseboats and multihulled craft, it may be advisable to provide a number of extra-wide slips, depending on past experience record and projected needs of the area. Widths of headwalks and finger peirs vary from one region to another. The average headwalk width is about 8 feet, with a range of about 5 to 16 feet. The wider headwalks usually have some width for bearing-pole risers, locker boxes, firefighting equipment, and utility lines. The narrower piers often have all obstructions moved to knees at the junctions of finger piers. Extra-wide headwalks are usually in fixed-pier installations because of the higher cost of floating construction. Long, fixed headwalks can also serve as roadways for service vehicles. Boarding fingers for single-boat slips are usually about 3 feet wide, normally the minimum allowed for floating DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA FOR BERTHED CRAFT Construction because of the instability of narrower floats. For this reason, floating fingers longer than 35 feet are usually 4 feet wide. In doubit-boat slip construction, a finger width of 4 feet is common for all slip lenghts, A compromise system of alternating full width and narrow fingers (about 12 inches) is used in some areas. 18 FIXED-PIER STRUCTURES Sgtructural design criteria for fixed-timber headwalks and fingers are presented in source no W9 All timber used for construction should be treated to avoid damage by dry rot and living organisms. This source and the American Society of Civil Engineers (1969) present data on timber treatment. The American wood preserver's Association (1971), Standard C-1, describes the treatment processes. Materials used, and results of preservative treatment for wood products by various preservatives applied by the pressure process AWPA Standard C-18 extends the coverage of Standard C-1 to include th specific requirements for pressure-treated piles and timbers used in marine construction. These standards are updated periodically to include the latest techniques and materials; hence, only the current editions should be used, Because of possible failure due to undetected weekness in the wood, all deck planking should of nominal 2-inch thickness and not less than 6 inches in width. Galvanized nails and hardware should be used. Deck nailing should penetrate the supporting timbers at least 3 inches so the nails will not pull up under repeated flexure caused by passing traffic Creosoted piles that project above deck level should be protected with batterns of some protective sheathing. Metal framework berthing structures are generally too costly to fabricate commercially available basic components, But several systems have been developed that use factory-built components for easy filed installation, Most are of tubular and pressed-steel construction with either stamped metal or timber plank decks. Bottom conditions in the berthing basin must be checked to determine if the anticipated loading will cause settlement or if the deptsh in the basin are too great for the system. Most prefabricated systems are for small individual docks along a lakefront or riverfront and are not normally suitable for large installations. In areas where timber is scarce or costly, reinforced concrete construction is frequently used to fixed-level berthing systems. The structural design criteria are similar to timber construction except that connections and fastening devices are different and the dead load to be supported is greater. However lightweight concretes are sometimes used in stringers and ______ to reduce the dead load (see Figure 28). If enough concrete cover on the reinforcing steel is not provided, cracking and spalling from rust swells may result. As for bulkhead constructin, ali concrete in a saltwater environment should have 3 inches of concrete covering all stee. reinforcement. This amount of cover may be infufficeint if care is not exercised in placing and vibrating the concreta. With a properly designed mix and careful placement, a good dense concrete can be obtained to outlast almost any type of construction. Floating Pier Structures Where water levels do not fluctuate more than 2 feet, the berthing docks and slips are almost universally of fixed construction. If the normal range is between 2 and 5 feet, the use of a floating system is optional. Where water levels fluctuate more then 5 feet, a floating system is mandatory. The cost of a floating system is usually greater than a fixed system. but the difficulty in keeping boats properly tied and the inconvenience of boarding or leaving boats during extreme low water often justify the choice of a floating system. A successful floating dock system has the best possible combination of flotation units and structural system. Numerous floats have been used, and most oare described in source no W9, and American Society of civil Engineers (1969). The most successful are the foams such as extruded polystyrene(styrofoam), expanded-pellet plystyrene, and foamed plyurethane, Although foam floats have been used extensively without any surface protection they attract berthing systems. THe structural design criteria are similar to timber construction except that connections and fastening devices are different and the dead load to be supported is greater. However lightweight concretes area sometimes used in stringers and ________ to reduce the dead load (see figure 28). If enough concrete cover on the reinforcing steel is not provided, cracking and spalling from rust swells may result. As for bulkhead construction, ali concrete in a saltwater environment should have 3 inches of concrete covering all steel reinforcement. This amount of cover may be infufficient if care is not exercised in placing and vibrating the concrete. With a properly designed mix and careful placement, a good dense concrete can be obtained to outlast almost any type of construction. Floating Pier Structures Where water levels do not fluctuate more than 2 feet, the berthing docks and slips are almost universally of fixed construciton. If the normal range is between 2 and 5 feet, the use of a floating system is optional. Where water levels fluctuate more than 5 feet, a flaoting system is mandatory. The cost of a floating system is usually greater than a fixed system, but the difficulty in keeping boats properly tied and the inconvenience of boarding or leaving boats during extreme low water often justify the choice of a floating system. A successful floating dock system has the best possible combination of flotation units and structural system. Numerous floats have been used, and most are described in Source no. W9, and American Society of Civil Engineers (1969). The most successful are the foams such as extruded polystyrene (styrofoam), expanded-pellet polystyrene, and foamed polyurethane, Although foam floats have been used extensively without any surface protection, they attract marine growth and living organism. Some external protection is applied to all foam floats, especially in seawater. This protection may be a spray coat of polyvinyl-acetate emulsion or dense polyurethane, a fiberglass and resin application, a plaster coating, or concrete encasement of the foam. Polyurethane foam is more costly than polystyrene foam, but is sometimes preferred because it cal easily be "foamed" into a mold without expensive processing. Also, it is naturally hydrocarbon-resistant, Two types are available , but only one is nonabsorbent-the monocellular variety, which should always be specified. Like polystyrene, it should have protective covering for marina use. Care msut be used in selecting coatings to ensure compatibility with the base foam. Polyester resins cannot be used with polystyrene, but will bond well with polyurethane. Polyvinyl-acetate emulsion and dense polyurethane may be applied directly to polystyrene foam which makes a fairly tough coating. Epoxy glues should be 19 used to bond separate boards of plystyrene foam; epoxy-bonded protective coatings may be used with either foam. If the additional protection of a fiberglass and resin application is desired over polystyrene, an epoxy coating compatible with the resin must be first applied. Most of the hollow shell floats arynow being replaced with foam-filled shells. Few shell-type floats are being manufactured without a foam core or some kind. Problems with leakage, internal condensation of moisture, and vandalism(mainly bullet punctures) are the reasons for this change. Fiberglass shells are still the most common of the thin shell types, but foam fillers are often provided. Tubular metal floats for freshwater use are now nearly all foam-filled. They are particularly serviceable in areas where ice formation and heavy floating debris aryproblems. Monolithic concrete shell and deck units and now almost universally coast around foam cores. One type of floating constructiothat appears very promising is the fiberglas or plastic-coated shell with a molded foam core over which a reinforced concrete deck is poured (figure 29). the edge beam and the crossbeam and tie rod system in this construction make the units exceptionally strong. if the concrete is properly mixed and placed. Although topheavy, there is no danger for a headwalk with finger piers of this construction to turn over. The extra weight and stiffness of the concrete deck add an element of inertia under pedestrian traffic that makes it approximately equal to the monolithic concrete shell-and-deck float in stability. However, the extra weigth of concrete or part-concrete floating units places a severe stress on the unit connecting stringers and on the finger headwalk connections under moderate wave or surge conditions. For this reason, heavy floating systems should be installed only in well protected basins. Lightweight floating docks tend to be Bouncy and, for this reason are often rejected in favor of the heavier types, One thin shelled float __berately leaves a pocket of unfilled space below the form core. After __unching, these pockets fill with water through small holes punched in the bottom of the shells. The trapped water moves with the float, adding measurably to its interia without increasing the load on the supporting foam. The result is less the load on the supporting foam. The result is less bounciness with no increase in the deadweight of the floating components before launching. 20 Glossary of Terms Relating to Shoreline Structures NOTE: Each definition has been referenced to the source in the Bibliography. Backshore The part of.the shore covered by water during exceptional storms only; the zone of the shore* lying between the foreshore, a'nd coastline and acted upon by waves only during severe storms.. ( -3) W Backwash The seaward return of the water following the uprush of the waves. (W-3) Bank The cont-inuous marginalong a river or stream where all upland vegetation ceases. The elevation of land which confines waters, of' a strearm to their natural channel in their normal course.of flow. (W-31 Beach The.belLt or zone along the shore usually with a gentle slope occupied by unconsolidated material, moving toward the water, sand or shc.--e drift. The zone from the waterline to,the line - permanent vegetation. (W-3) 0@ Beach Accretion. The gradual- bui-Iding up of a beach by wave actiono D,e_r_m Tne-nea-r-ly horizontal formation along the beach caused by the_ deposit of material under theinfluence of waves. '(W-3) Bitt A double post fitting to which mooring lines from vessels are attached. (D-1) Bollard A single post.fitting to,which mooringjines from vessels are attached. (D-1), Boom A structure, usually floating, of timber or logs chained end. to end, used to keep floating material away from an-intake, dam or other structure. (W- 3) Breakwater An offshore barrier, sometimes connected with the shore at one.or both ends, to break the force of waves and which. affords shelter to shipping and marine structures. It may be a natural formation, or constructed of large loose rock, piling.: or concrete blocks. (W-3) A structure protecting a shore area,. harboranchorage or basin from waves. (B-4, B-5) Bulkhead A structure of wood, stone or concrete erected along the shores of water bodies to arrest wave action or along steep 0-t- embankments to control erosion. (W-3) 21 Bulkhead - Boundary structures that separate land from water by a vertical retaining wall. The vertical timber piles are con- nected to an anchor system by steel tie rods. (B-6) A structure or partition to retain or prevent sliding of the land. A secondary purpose is to-protect the upland against damage from wave action. (B-4, B-5) See Seawalls. Bulkhead.Wall - A retaining wall of timber, stone, concrete, steel or other material built along or parallel to navigable waters. (W_ 11) Buoy A float, especially a floating object moored.to the bottom, to mark a channel, anchor, shoal, rock. (W-.3) Camel Floats placed between a vessel and.pier, or between vessels, designed to distribute wind and current forces acting on the vessel. (D-1) Channel - (1) The deep portion of A river or waterway where the main current f.Lows; (2) The part of a body of water deep enough to be used for navigation through an area otherwise too shallow for na-,,,_-, (W-3) Cleat A fitting having two diverging horizontal arms to wnich moor.,ng lines from vessels. are attached. (D-1) A"i;r --e for an artificial or natural duct, either term Cr .1-or conveying water or other fluids. (W-3) rest - '11 I-ae, s:-am..it or highest point of a wave; (2) The highest@ elevaltion --eached by flood waters flowing in a channel. (W-3) An ooen-frame structure loaded with earth or stone.ballast to ac as a baffle in bank protection (K-1) A struct=e composed of frames of timber laid horizontally upon.one another, or of timbers built up as in the walls of.a.@ log cabIn. (W-3) Crib, submerge A water works intake built of masonry, timber or metal and restifig on the bed of a waterway, with its topbelow normal water.level, to protect,the exposed ends of intake pipes. (W-3) Culvert A closed conduit for the free passage of surface drain-. age water under a highwayrailroad., canal or other embankment. (W-3) Current - That portion of a stream of-water which is moving with a velocity much greater than the average or in which the progress of the water is principally concentrated. (W-3) Current, littoral - A current that moves along the shore in a direction parallel to the shoreline. (W-3) 22 Current, rip A strong surface current of short duration.flowing L outward from the shore. It usually appears as a visible band of, agitated water and is the return movement of water piled up on the shore by incoming waves and wLnd. Frequently called rip tide. (W-3) Current, tidal A current brought about or caused by the tidal forces; the periodic horizontal movement of water accompan Iying -the rise and fall of the tide due to the tide-producing forces.. (W-3) Datum, sea level A determination of mean sea.level that has been adopted as a standard datum for heights. .(W-3) Dock A natural open or artificial enclosed basin in which vessels may remain afloat when moored to a wharf or pier. (W-11) --A fixed or floating decked structure against which a boat may be berthed either temporarily or indefinitely.. (B-5) See Pier. The piers for the reception of vessels. (W-3) Dock, self docking - A floating dock con.structed in sections so that any section can be unbolted and lifted up on the remainder for repair and maintenance. (W-3) Dolphin - A group of piles driven close together in water and tied together so that the group is capable of wilt hstandinglateral forces.from vessels and other floating objects. (11-3) A cluster of battered pilings joined at the top. (B-5) NOTE: The term "battered" refers to the placing of pilings at a slight angle from the perpendicular. A cluster of piles. (B-4) Drift, shore - Material, usually sand or small pebbles, carried along- the shoreline by shore or littoral currents or waves. (W-3)... Erosion, beach -The retrogression of the shoreline of large lakes and coastal waters caused by wave action, shore currents, or natural causes other than subsidence. (W-3) Facing - The outer layer of slope revettiment. (K-1) Fender - A device or framed system placed against the edge of a pier or cloc'sl-@ to take ithe impact from berthing or berthed vessel (D-1) Fill - The volume of material to be added. (W-3) Foreshore - The sloping part of a beach between the high water and low water marks. (W-3), 23 Gabion A connected system of wicker or -metal cages filled with brusIn or rocks and used for slope protection of stabilization. (B-5) 4 k't Groin - A bank or shore nrotection structure in the form of a barr-Ler oblique to primary mo-tion of water, designed to control movement of bed material. (K-1) A breakwater or structure constructed across a beach control or interrupt the movement of sediment along the shore. (S-1) A shore protective structure (usually perpendicular to shore) @to trap sedimentary material or to retard erosion of the shore. (B-3) _(British, Groyne) A shore protection structure built (usually perpendicular to the shoreline) to trap littoral drift or retard erosion of the shore. (B-4) Fingerlike barrier structures built perpendicular to the shoreline for extending and maintaining a protective beach. (B-6) Long, low fingerlike structures that jut out from the s hore. (E-4) Groin, Attracting - A groin which attracts the current towards itself and fixes the deep channel close to itself. (W-3) Groin, Permeable A groin with openings large enough to permit pass- age of appreciable quantities of littoral drift. (B-4) Groin, Repelling - A groin which pushes the current away from it. (W-3) Grout - A fluid mixture of cement and water or of cement, sand and water. (W-3) Harbor, Jetty A harbor created or formed bv construction of jetties. (W-3) Headwall A wall of stone, metal, concrete or wood at the end of a culvert or drain to serve one or all of.the following purposes: protect fill from scour or undermining, increase hydraulic efficiency of conduit, divert direction of f.lo-.Iq, or to serve as a retaining wall. (W-3) Inlet The upstream end of any structure through which water may flow; an entrance. (W- 3) Intake -The place where water enters a conduit or other structure. (W-3) Jetty - An artificial barrier used to change the natural littoral drift to protect inlet entrances from clogging by excess sedi-.. ment or to improve a harbor area. (S-1) 24 Jetty (1) On oPen seaCoasts, a st'f-ucture extending -'into a body of water and designed to prevent shoaling of a channel by littoral materials and to direct and confine the stream., of tidal flow. Jetties are built at the mouth of a river or tidal inlet to help nell; (2)(Bri-ish usage)Jetty is deepen and stabilize a chan Synonyintious with "wharf" or "pier." (B-4, B-5) Line, Bulkhead - A line in a river or harbor defining the channel- ward limit of strudtures. (W-3) Mesh Woven wire or other filaments used alone as revetment, or as a retainer or container of masses of gravel or cobble. (K-1) Outfall - Discharge or point of discharge of a culvert or other closed conduit. (K-1) - The point, location or structure where sewage or drainage, discharges from a sewer, drain or other.conduit. (W-3) ,Outlet - Downstream opening or discharge end of a pipe, culvert, sewer or canal. (W-3) Overflow - Any device or structure over or through which any excess water or sewage beyond the capacity of the conduit or container is allowed to flow or waste. (W-3) Parapet - A low wall built along the edge of a structure as on a seawall or quay. (B-4) Pier - A structure extending into the-water for use as a landing place or Promenade or to protect or form a harbor. (S-1) A structure of greater length than width, and projecting from shore into navigable waters so that vessels may be moored alongside for loading and unloading or for storage. (W-11). Substructure - A portion of a pier or wharf below and including deck a) Pile and deck type: deck supported on piles. b) Block and bridge type:.deck supported by blocks of masonr-,,", concrete with bridges or arches constructed on andbetween the blocks. c) Solid fill type: deck supported by solid,fill or earthand confined bv bulkhead. Superstructure - That portion of a pier or wharf above the dec'K. (W_ 11) Astructure, usually of open construction, extending out into the water from the shore, to serve as a landing place, a recre- ational facility, etc. rather than to afford coastal protection. In the Great Lakes, a term sometimes improperly applied toL jetties. (3-4) See Wharf. 25 Pier, Fender -'Any construction adjacent to a 7,,iharf, pier, slipwali or other structure to Drevent contact and damage to vessel or structure. (W-3) p 4 S4011 I-er, ringer rintinor exten _L from a primary pier. (S-1) Acomparatively smaller pier structure attached (usually perpendicular) to the headwall of a multi-slip, pier; usually provided to facilitate access to the berthed craft.-.-(3-5) Pile A long, heavy timber or section or- concrete or metal to be driven or jetted into the earth or seabed to serve as a support or protection. (B-4) A long, slender stake or structural element of timber, con-, crete, or steel which is driven, jetted, or otherwise embedded on end into the ground for the purpose of supporting a load, or of compacting the soil. (W-3) Pile, Anchor - Piles driven on the land side of a bulkhead or pier to which the bulkhead or pier is anchored or tied by rods, cables, chains or other devices. (W-3) Piling, Sheet Interlocking members of wood, steel, concrete subj ect to lateral pressure, driven individually to form an obstruction to percolation, to prevent movement of material, for cofferdams, seawalls, stabilization of foundations, etc. (W-3) A pile with a generally slender flat cross-section to be driven into the ground or sea-bed and meshed or interlocked with like members to form a diaphragm, wall,. or bulkhead. (B-5), Quay - (pronounced KEY) - A stretch of paved bank, or a solid artificial landing place parallel to the navigable waterway, for use in loading and unload 4ng vessels. (B-4) L NOTE.-Quays are frequently used for recreational purposes also. Revetment - A facing of stone, concrete built to protect a scarp, emb@i_nkment or shore structure against.erosion by wave action or currents. (B-4, 3-5) A light armor facing of blocks, rock,s, or other hard material on the natural sloping shore. They can consist of pre- cast concrete, stones, nylon bags filled with cement grout or gabions. (E-1) R 4 @p-rap - A foundation 'or sustaining wall of stones olaced in the water or on an embankment to prevent erosion. (S-1) A layer facing or protective mound.of stones randomly placed to prevent erosion, scour., or sloughing of a structure or-erabankment. (B-4, B-5) Broken stone or boulders placed compactly or irregularly on dams, levees, dikes, etc. for protection of earth surfaces L L-resses, against the action of waves or currents; brush or pole matt or brush and stone, or other similar materials used for protec- tion. (vil - 3) 26 Rubble ]Loose, angular and water-worn stones along a beach. (W-3) Rubble Mound - A mound of random-shaped stones protected with a cover layer of selected stones or specially shaped concrete armor units. (-B-5) Scour - Removal of underwater materials by waves and currents,__.,.., especially at the base or toe of a shore structure. (B-4) Scour, Suction - Scour at the toe of banks caused by the impact and suction of translation waves created bv movement of boats or by tidal action. (W-3) Seawalls Protective retaining structures that occupy an advanced position along a shoreline or barrier to wave attack. Seawalls. are not clearly distinguishable from bulkheads. (B-6) 1) A vertical face of either precast concrete slabs, or steel or wood sheet piles driven into the sea bottom to secure the toe. The top is secured by anchor rods connecting the wall to anchors placed back a safe distance landward. 2) A massive freestanding gravity structure with curved, vertical or inclined faces designed to withstand the full force of the oncoming waves. (E-4) Seepage - The slow movement of water through small cracks, pores, interstices, etc. in the surface of unsaturated material into or out of a body of surface or subsurface water. (W-3) Shore - The corridor-o-f- ground bordering any body of water,which is alternately exposed, or covered by the tides and/or waves. A shore of unconsolidated.material is usually called a,beach. (W-3) Slip - The space between piers which is entered and occupied by ships. (W-3) A berthing space between two finger piers.* (B-5) Slooe -'The inclination or gradient from the horizontal of a line t 4 or surface. The degree of inclina -Lon is usually expressed as a ratio, such as 2:1, indicating two units of,horizontal di-stance to one unit of rise. (W-3) Stone - Large natural masses of stone are generally called rocks; small o__r quarried masses are called stones7 and the-finer kinds, gravel or sand. (W-3) Structure Something constructed or built, as a bu-ilding or pier. (W-3) Ttaining Wall A wall or jett-y to direct current flow. (B-4) Wall,.Cutoff - A thin wall or footing e xtend-ing downward, under-, or around -the head wall to provide resistance to seepage (W- 3) 27 'Vall, Reve-1-7ment A wall constructed along the toe of an embank- L ment -to protect the slope against erosion. (W-3) Wing - (1) A -lateral wall constructed in connection with a spillway or outlet to confine and direct the flow or to retain and prevent erosion; (2) An extension of an abutment wall to, retain the adjacent earth. (W-3) Water,.hich - The maximum height reached by each rising tide. (W-3) Wate mear, high The mean height of -tidal high waters at a particu- lar point over a period of time to such length that increasing., its length does not appreciably change this mean. For tidal waters, the cycle of change covers a period of 19 years,.a,nca mean high water is defined as the average of the high waters over a 19-year period. (W-3) Water, low, mean low - Defined as the opposite in the extreme to water, high and water, mean high. (W-3) Water, navigable - Any stream, lake, arm of the sea, or other natural body of water which is actually navigable in fact and which by itself or by its'connections with other waters, for a period of time to be of commercial value, is of. sufficient capacity to float watercraft for the purposes of coruuerce, trade, transportation or pleasure; .or any waters which have been declared navigable.by the Congress of the United States. (W-3). Waterway (1) Any body of waterf other than the open sea, which is or can be used by boats as a means of travel. (2) Any natural or.artificial channel or depression in the surface of the earth. which provides a course for water flowing either continuously or intermittently. (W-3) We ep An opening formed during construction in retaining walls, aprons, canal linings, foundations to,permit drainage of water collecting behind and beneath such structures to reduce hydIro- static head. (W-3) Hole in wall, invert, apron, lining or any other solid structure to relieve pressure of groundwater. (K-1) U41t Wharf - A structure having a platform b _L along and parallel to navigable-waters so that vessels may be moored alongside.for loading-and unloading, or for storage. "Pier" and "wharf" are interchangeable (W-11) For vessels to receive and discharge cargo, passenger.s stores and fuel. (W-3) Works, head - A general term applied to all the structures', devices, etc, located art the head or diversion point of a conduit or canal. The term is practically synony-mous with. diversion works; an intake heading. (W-3) Works, intake - Structures at the location where water is taken. f -rom a sour.--e of supPly into a conduit for transportation to other locations. 011,,@, - 3) 28 Annotated Bibliography of Technical Sources for Shoreline St-ructures Federal Government v"ode Coast Guard, Engineering Division, Seattle District, Federal. Office Building, 915 2nd Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 A-1 Civil Engineering Handbook, CG 251 The manual contains design criteria for the following struc- tures: piers, wharves, cargo handling facilities (bins, bunkers, cranes), seawalls, bulkheads, quay walls,.seaplane facilities, ferry terminals and small boat piers. Updated 1977, 1000 + pages. Coast Guard, Deepwater Ports Project, office of Marine Environ- ment and Systems, Washington, D. C. 20590 A-2 Proposed Environmental Review Criteria for Deepwater Ports. The Deep@Vater Port Act of 1974 requires the Secretary of Transportation to establish review criteria which are out- lined in this publication. 1975, 14 pages. Army Corps of Engineers, Federal Center South, 4735 E. Marginal Way, Seattle, WA 98124 Loan copies of the following sources are available through the District Library. Free copies may be obtained by writing the Coastal Engineering Research Center (C.E.R.C.), Kingman Building, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.22060. B-1 Shore Protection Manual, Volumes I, II and III The Manual contains guidelines and techniques for functional and structural design for shore protection works. Volume I describes the physical environment in the coastalzone in- cluding an introduction into coastal engineering, the mechanics of wave motion, water and wave predictions.and the littoral process. Volume II contains design parameters -C TJI -Lor coastal engineering problems. Volume contains four appendixes including a glossary. 1973, 1,170 pages. B-2 Shore Protection Planning and Design (C.E.R.C.), Technical Report No.----,! rt"".i,:2- engineering aspects of coastal process and design of offshore and shore protecting structures. This renort has been largely replaced by the Shore Protection Manual. 1966. B-3 Groins - An Annotated Bibliography, C.E. R.C. , Misc. Paper No. 1-72 463 information articles with auth-or index, title index, and source description are contained in the bibliography. 1972, 250 pages. 29 Fe@_Ieral Govern-ment (continued) C, Army Corps of Engineers Glossary of Coastal Engineering Ters, C.E.R.C., @isc. a- o 2@ - 7 2 . This glossary is contained in the Shore Protection Manual described above. 1972, 55 pages with illustrations and photographs. B-5 Small Craft Harbors: Design, Construction and Operation, C.E.R.C., Special Report No. 2. The report was prepared to assist engineers and operators in the design and construction of small craft harbors. It contains analytical data on marinas, docks, and design standards. 1974, 375 pages with illustrations and photo- graphs. B-6 Design Methods of Treated Timber Structures for Shore, Beach. and Marina Construction, C.E.R.C. The report contains designs for timber bulkheads, seawalls, groins,.finger piers, and-wave barriers for marinas. 1976, 39 pages with illustrations. B-7 Survey of Coastal Development Types, C.E.R.C., Misc. Report No. 76-7. .-Presented are a review of 25 selected revetment types, a t des procedure for revetmen ign which includes identifica- tion of controlling site conditions, comparative co st analyses method and an example problem. 1976. Waterways Experiment Station, P.O. Box 631, Vicksburg, miss. 39180 B-8 Hydraulic Characteristics of mobile Breakwaters Composed of Tires or Spheres, Technical Report H-68-2, 1968. B-9 Development of Design Criteria and Acceptance Specifications for Plastic Filter Cloths, Technical Report S-72-7, 1972. B-10 Shore Protection Guidelines, National Shoreline Study. The reoort contains a general discussion c.f beach prote--- tion from t-he forces of the sea and manmade effects on t-Ine shore. 1971, 59 -pages with 37 photographs and illustrations_ B-11 Bibliography on Tidal Hydraulics, C-ommittee on Tidal Hydraulics, Report No. 2, SuDplement 7. The'bibliography contains 670 reierences, all of wh-ich are available on loan, within the continental United States, from the Library Branch, Waterways.Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers, P.O. Box 631, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180. ......... .. 30 Federal Government (continued) Code Army Corps of Engineers (continued) is divided into the fol'i The annotated documenL_ -Lowing sec- tions: Theoretical, Sedimentation, Salinity, Contamination, Regulation and Improvement, Laboratory Experiments, Surveys and Instruments, Basic Physical Data. 1975, 236 -pages. B-12 Permit Procedures, Seattle District This booklet explains permit procedures for applicants with sample drawings for mooring buoys, bulkhead/fill, pier and dredging. 1972, 22 pages. B-13 Help Yourself, North Central Division, 546.South Clark: Street, Chicago, Ill. 60604. "Help Yourself" is a public information pamphlet which presents Great Lake shoreline simplified problems and solutions. It contains standard designs, sample specifications, construction and maintenance guidelines. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2625 Parkmount Lane S.W., Olympia, WA, 98502 C-1 'Guidelines on Proposals Affecting Fish and Wildlife,, Federal Register, Monda-v Dec. 1, 1975. Part IV. Guidelines contain policy on docks, ports, piers, marinas, seawalls, and criteria for permit review. Department of Navy, Bureau of.Yards and: Docks. D-1 Design Manual - Waterfront Operational Facilities, DM-25 DM 25, one of a series of 40 manuals, contains design criteria for government piers, wharves, cargo handling facilities, seawalls, bulkheads, quaywalls and other waterfront operational facilities. (See Coast Guard Civil.Engineering Handbook.) Glossary. 1971, 130 pages with illustrations. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Sea- grant (NOAA) Florida University, Marine Advisory Program., G0222 !AcCarty Hall., Gainesville, Florida 32611. E-1 Seawall and Reveitment Effec-'C-i-veness, Cost and Cons -'.--ru-- ion Waterfront- owners reference guide to the types of shore pro@,tecticn structures that are commonly available and the relative costs of each. 1975, 70 pages with illus- trations. AN& Federal Government Code National 0ceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (continued). University of Rhode island, Marine Advisory Service Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882 E-2 How to Build a Floating.Scrap Tire Breakwater. The pamphlet gives details of tire construction, advan- tages and disadvantages. 1975, 15 pages with illustra- tions and photographs. State Government Code California Department of public Works, Division of Highways, Box 1499, Sacremento, California 95307 Bank & Shore Protection in California Highway Practice. The manual, produced by the Bank Protection Committee, reviews design principles and construction procedures for streams, rivers, lakes, tidal basins, desert wash locations and open coast conditions. Glossary. 1970, 423 pages with 443 illustrations and photographs. Georgia Department of Natural Resources? 270 Washington Street S.W., Atlanta Georgia 30334 Handbook: Building in the Coastal Environment The handbook provides on-site guidelines for making development compatible with coastal resources in the planning design, construction and buying/selling phases. 1975, 115 pages with illustrations. Washington State Department of Fisheries, General Administra- tion Blvd., Olympia, Washington 98504. M-1 Criteria for the Design of Bulkheads, Landfills and Marinas Criteria by geographical area has been established for permit review of construction in all tidal waters. 1971, 12 page's witth Illustrations. m-2 Bulkhead Criteria for Surf Smelt Spawning Beaches Specific,criteria for surf smelt has been established to supplement the general-criteria above. 1974, 8 pages with illustrations. M-3 Standard Provisions Policy for Hydraulics Project Approval' The Directors of Fisheries and Game have adopted a policy that the referenced general and technical provsions will be made part of Hydraulics Project Approvals. whenever State Government (continued) Code Washington State Departments of Fisheries & Game (continued) -3 these provisions are applicable. The policy is applied to work involving conduit crossing, removal of logs and/ or log jams, channel realignment, gravel.removal in spawning areas, culvert installation in fish passage areas, bank protection, bridge construction,.concrete piers, pile driving, landfill marina construction, storm drainage and sewage outfall pond construction in anad,- ronous waters, dam removal and flood control diking- 1971, 37 pages with 5 illustrations. Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, MS LD-11, Olympia, Washington 98504 N-l' Environmental Health Guidelines for Marina Development and 0 p e r aIC 10 n These Guidelines assist agencies in reviewing and developers in preparing plans for new marina facilities. The guidelines cover marina location, water supply, restroom facilities, sewage disposal, sewage pump-out facilities, solid waste collection, bulkheads and land- fills, electric wiring and equipment. 1974, 6 pages. City of Seattle Department of Community Development, 306 Cherry Street, Seattle Washington 98104 S-1 Seattle Shoreline Master Program The Master Program restricts the placement of structures a:long the shoreline and places general conditions upon the itted. desi n of shoreline structures where they are perm 9 S-2 Seattle Marine Shore-Resource Analysis Basic guidelines in the placement of shoreline structures in respect to the geo-hydraulic shore Drocess. 1977, 41 pages withillust-rations. 33 Private Organizations Code American Public Works Association 1 *Standard Specifications for Municipal Public Works Cori- struction Standard specifications for street layout., sanitary sewers, storm drains, water distribution systems are provided.. 1976, 590 pages with 75 standard plans. American Society of Civil Engineers W-2 Anchored Bulkheads, Transactions of the AXCE, Vol. 119, 1954, pp 1243-1324. W-3 Nomenclature for Hydraulics, Manuals & Reports on Engineer- ing Practice, No. 43. An extensive glossary of terms associated with hydraulics. 1962, 498 pages. w-4 Small-Craft Harbors, Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 50, 1969. American Institute of Timber Construction w-5 *Timber Construction Manual, 2nd Edition, Wiley, New York, 1966. American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM), 1916 Race. Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103 W-6 *Applicable ASTM Standards, 1971. American Wood Preserver's Association, AWPA, Suite 628, 1625 Eye Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 W-7 Standards of the AWPA C-1 & C-18, 1971. American Wood-Preserver's Institute (AWPI) W-8 Bulkheads: Design andConstruction, AWPI Technical Guidelines for Pressure Treated Wood, Parts I, II and III, Washington, D. C. 1970. National Assocation of Engine & Boat Manufacturers, Inc. Greenwich, conn. W-9 Marinas Recommendations for Design, Construction and Main- tenance, 1961. 'Loan copies are available at the Municipal Reference Library, Municipal Building, 600 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104. Pr-Lvate Orcranizations (contin-Lied) Code National Associat-ion of Engine Boat Manufacturers, Inc. (continued) i-10 Marine operations & Service, 1967 National Fire Protection Association, 60 Batterymarch St., Boston, Mass. W-11 Piers and Wharves Standards for the construction.and protection of exist- ing pi-ers of combustible materials when automatic, sprinklers can not be installed. 1975. Portland Cement Association, Chicago, Illinois W-12 Small Boat Launching Ramps Information on properties of concret-e when used for boat launching ramps from the Water Resources Bureau. 1965. International Conference of Building officials, Vol. 1, 1970 W-13 *Uniform Building Code Standards, Standards include some marine structures such as wharves and docks. Vol. 1, 1970. Miscellaneous W-14 Subject Guide to Government Reference Books Sally,Wynkoop, Libraries Unlimited. A general orient- ation guide to the most important reference books published by the Government Printing OfficeY 1972, 276 pages. T *..oan copies are available at the Municipal Reference Library, unicipal Building, 600 Fifth Avenue, S-attle, 14A 98104. 35 Appendix S.@,JIPLE SPTE,1-_IF__'1C:,%TION1S - (B-13) He--re are some sample government specifications covering -,-the work illustrated in '-his compendium. SITE WORX This work consists of performing all excavation and backfilling. All work shall be conducted in a manner to orevent damage to the structures which are to remain and to maintain or improve the aesthetics and ecology of the site. STONE PROTECTION The work required consists of furnishing and placing stone as indi- L cated on the drawings and herein. Surplus material ot her than stone shall be placed aaainst the toe stone, as directed. All stone required shall be produced from quarries approved by the owner. FOU2,1DATION PREPARATION Areas on which cover stones and toe stones are to be placed shall be trimmed and dressed as needed to provide stable bedding and so. that the stones.may be placed within the allowable tolerances from the neat lines. Where cover stone areas are below the reauired depth, they shall be.brought to grade by.filling with core stone. To the extent practicable, the larger sizes of core stone shall be placed in the upper surface of the core stone. LIMITING DIMENSIONS Cover stone and toe stone shall be in pieces generally compact in shape and as nea rly cubical as possible with the least dimension of any stone being not less than one-third its greatest dimension. Stone shall consist of a well-graded mixture of sizes that will form a compact mass in place. The mixture shall be well graded within t--he limits of maximum and minimum as s@:)ecified on the draw- ings. Where space is available andthe required work does not per- mii@ thhe inclusion of the larger sizes of stone, these sizes shall M4 be omitted-from the _@_Xture. PLACE-MENT- Stone shall be placed by equipment suitable for handling material of the sizes required. The cover stone shall be placed a minim-do. of two layers thick. Stones shall be placed by means of a bracket or strip. End du-n-ping will not be permitted., Stone shall not be dropped from a height greater than three feeL_ GRJADES Cover stone and toe stone shall be placed to the grades (neat lines)- shown on the drawings within a tolerance of 0.5 foot above grade and 0.5 foot below grade, measured perpendicular to the neat line-s. The 'one protection.shall be built to,at least intention is that the sU the neat lines, the outer surfaces shall be reasonably even and pre- sent a uniform an-pearance and that extreme ranges in tolerance will not be allow,@@,d in surfaces of adjacent stones. 36 PIl"I"NG; STEEL SHEET L Shop drawings shall be submi tted -to the owner for his approval. C'ontractor shall furnish t-wo cert-ified copies of` all mill reports cove-ring the chemical and physical properties o` @1`he steel used in _40 the work- Steel for sheet piling shall conform to the requirements of ASTM Standard A 328. Piles, including special fabricated sections, shall be of the types indicated on the drawings and shall be of a design such that when in place they will be continuously interlocked throughout their entire length. All piles shall be provided with standard handling holes located approximately four inches belo,1-1 the top of the pile. Each steel pile shall be free from any ],,@inks and shall not possess camber, twist, or warp of a degree which will, in any manner, pre- vent easy and ready driving of a pile. The interlock of each pile shall be straight throughout its entire length a:-d shall be of such shape and dimensions as will permit free and easy -threading. PILING TIMBER Wood piles shall conform to Federal Specification 1tUll-P-371, Type I, Class B, rough-peeled subject to further limitation in this Section of the specifications. The pile shall be treated in accordance with Federal Specification TT-W-571 with cresote by the pressure process. -The wood piles shall be treated to refusal with a minimum cresote content of ten pounds per cubic,foot. The Contractor shall make provisions for treating in the field, all cuts, holes and abrasions in the cresoted piles. Abrasions and cuts in the piles All."Mr shall be'given.two brush coats of the cresote followed by a heavy coat of tar paint. The ler!gths of-piles shall be 'as called for on -'the drawings. To provide for "heading" and cutting off square., after driving, piles'shall be driven within one foot ofthe depths specified. PLACING AND DRIVING PILING Driving-equipment shall be a size and type required to drive piling to the required penetration without serious damage to the pile. Piledriving leads shall be marked soas to facilit-ate counting of the blows. A protecting pile cap of approved design shall be employed in driving, when required, to prevent da-maue to the tops of the piles. Spliced piles shall not be used. .All piles shalll,be. driven to the penetration 4cable to do so called for where pract- without. damage to -the piles. QUALITY CONTROL The contractor shall establish and maintain a auality control sys- tem for all operations Performed under this contract to assure compliance with contract re 'quirements and maintain records of his quality control for all operations Performed. J- IRP I LF 1-1 Element 5 I 9 I I I CZM 306 5B Final Report Element 5 WORKSHOPS AND TRAINING SESSIONS Introduction New legislation requires that many people learn about it: those who administer it, those who must apply for permits, as in the case of the SMP, and those who are not directly affected but who may have concerns about the effects of the new regulations. As the Shoreline Master Program took shape and was used as a guide for permits, it became clear that special training was needed for'the intake of shorelines permit applications in the.Building. Department. For other departments which have, like the Parks Department, responsibilities for maintaining shorelines, or the Engineering Department which has utilities on or close to shore- lines, special knowledge of a different kind is essential. The project was in three parts, a series of training sessions for Building Department personnel, a one-day work shop for other departments, and a "speaker's kit" consisting of.text and slides, for community groups. The three types of information which were produced and the target audiences were: a. Training for permit intake Building Department personnel b. Training workshop for other Building, Engineering, City personnel and Parks Department C. Speaker's Kit General public The training for permit intake consisted of a series of necess- arily short sessions during the workday, detailing specific.in- take procedures for a variety of, cases. An outline of the material. presented for each session is appended. Thesessions were held in July and August, 1976, and were scheduled for early morning when other Building Department personnel could handle the duties of the trainees. To meet the manaaement needs of the Parks and Engineering Depart- ments, a workshop presenting Wolf Bauer's material was arranged in June, 1977. It was attended by approximately 30 selected personnel from the Engineering, Parks, and Community Development Departments. The session ran more than five hours.and covered in detail the specific management problems of the marine shorelines of Seattle. Copies of the report prepared by Mr. Bauer as another element of this grant were sent to participants for reference in their work. Also based on Mr. Bauerls material is the Speaker's Kit providing- a brief text for use with slides illustrating various shoreline problems and situations characteristic of SeattlTa. The slides are not included but are described.and correlated with the appro- priate text. The text of the Speaker's Kit is attached. The slides are avail- able on a loan basis. SHORELINES WORKSHOPS outline Session I Explaining the permit process ,.-Applicability of Shoreline Management Act -Shoreline permit requirement -Relation to,other permit requirements -Relation to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) -Required forms and instructions -Filing the application -Timing -Public involvement Session II Accepting applications -The applicant manual -Preapplication conferences -Checking applications What information? How much? what quality? -Notice -Fees -Special circumstances Shoreline conditional uses Shoreline variances -Revisions Session III Exemptions -Locating the Shoreline District -Identification of exempt developments -Requirement of consistency with Seattle Shoreline Master Program -Exemption process -Shoreline variance for exempt development Session IV - Interpreting the SSMP -Use- categories (water dependency) -Shoreline environments- purpose- permitted uses/activities -Bulk regulations -Relation.to underlying zoning -General prohibitions or criteria Session V - Special problems, -Floating homes -Signs -Single family residences -Piersand bulkheads ,-Maintenance and repair activities Session VI Open CZM 306 5B 'Final Report YOUR SHORELINES AND YOU GRAPHICS Introduction This presentation is about Seattle's'beaches, what is happening to them and why it is important to you. We're gradually losing our Slides showing publi beaches; and many private owners are problem areas experiencing problems with bulkheads.and sea- on beaches: walls. Yet we could save and even improve Lincoln Park' .and enlarge our public beaches by proper Golden Gardens management. magnolia and West Point The Shoreline Management Act and the Seattle Carkeek Park Master Program do not really control the shorelines; they provide a permit system for change of use but do not prevent mis- management. You may ask, "Why should I be concerned? I don't own any Seattle waterfront." But you do. If you live in Seattle, you own a share of the 24.7 miles of public waterfront in parks as well as a share of the more than 11 Slide of map miles of port areas that you also own and showing public .support but can't use or even see. of course ownership on you also own shares of County and State shorelines waterfront in other places, in common with .other taxpayers of the County and State.. When you own something, you have to take care of it. Taking care of what we own when it is shorelines is a complicated problem. .We have a-lot to learn about shorelines, especially when large bodies of water are involved. We should be concerned that if our waterfront ownership is to keep its value it must be taken care of so. that we don't literally -lose it. GRAPHICS Why be concerned about shorelines? Because the shoreline is: -The visible meeting of our familiar land/air ecological systen, and thecompletely different Shot of Shoreline ecological system of the.undersea world; -The beginning.of one special kind of recreation area, reaching from here to the rest of the Sailboat world;, -The total of another area, covered by water part of the time, dry land part of the time- Low-tide shot the special habitat of the intertidal zone; -A source of food-particularly proteins- Fish in market. the most highly productive area of earth; -An important transportation mode, for many generations the most significantV so..that special laws have for centuries provided Freighter @for.the special public rights we know of as the rights of navigation, the public trust? and"the freedom of the seas." -An ecologically and physically fragile re- source area, easily damaged or destroyed, extremely difficult to restore; -An almost fatally attractive living area- Housing at north end of providing view and desirable-location; Fort Lawton -An attractive area for industrial uses. Harbor Island Why be-concerned about shorelines? Beca.us@e only 14% of the total city salt- Shot of map highlighting water shoreline Is "natural." 11natural" shoreline. 86%-ha-s been bulkheaded or sea-walled or riprapped for industrial use, and isn't Shots of sheet piling attractive even i-f-we could get close to riprap on R. R. it, which, for the most part, we can't. Public- access to the publicly owned tide- lands and water is an important goal of the Shorelines Program, but is limited in parts of Seattle. 0@ GRAPHICS Why be concerned about shorelines? Because we Shot showing erosion are losing what beaches we have. Why? Because man-made structures built in ignorance are destroying the attractiveness Ugly shot and usability of our shorelines.. What's the problem? We've looked at shorelines and the area on both sides as if it was a kind of cake we could divide up into a lot of square Shot of plat into water pieces. The idea was, you fill in the (South end of Magnolia) water to make land, and then you make money selling off the new land in neat lots. Lots of people have, and still do. Legal requirements for platting have been- written and administered as. if there were no shoreline, as if you could move it around whenever and wherever you wanted to, without recognizing the dynamic effects of.water. This is:the source of many problems, and very expensive problems to boot. Because water- front land is so desirable it is very expen- sive and it gets cut up.into very.small Shot of plat with narrow pieces so that private individuals who can lots afford to buy land on shorelines want to use every inch, to the water's edge, and maybe 'push the water back, just a little by build- ing very close to the natural shoreline or a little over and then trying to protect the house or ter-race or the pool with bulkheads .and the-beach with groins. But, as we how know, this-works only in the short run, and building a fort against the sea is a losing game in the long run. Physically,.-the sea works as a geohydrAulic system. The word 'geohydraulic" comes from 11geo,' meaning earth, and hydraulic meaning Shot of high tide, water. The area where the water and land Shot of -low tide, same meet is where water and land interact on each location other in predictable@ways; thus we use the term geohydraulic for the interaction and, the.effects.. We are looking at a dual system-land and water, and water is the opposite of land in many ways. We must recognize that water can not be treated in the same way that we treat land. On tidal waters, the shoreline changes continually; on lakes seasonally. GRAPHICS But much more than a simple location change of a line is involved. On a natural beach, tidal action, wind and current carry sand and gravel from place to place along the beach, building up here, removing there, build- ing in one season, cutting.away in another. season. Wind may pick up sand carried by water and return it to where it started. How- ever, the beach has two important character- (a) A constant need for new material, and (b) An optimum shape, the result of wind Shot of Bauer diagram. and currents, which is shown in the diagram. What we think of as "the beach" is the fore- shore, and is only one part of the total shoreline system that all has to work to- gether if the shoreline is to be relatively stable. -Another part is the feeder bluff Shot of Bauer diagram which.provides beach nourishment in the form of gravel, sand and clay. Along the shore from bluff to the beach it feeds is the drift sector. In Seattle most of these bluffs are cut off from the beaches they once nourished. The berm is probably the most sensitive part Shot of Bauer diagram of the entire shoreline system, because it is what maintains a stable beach. The berm is nature's natural erosion control system. If you pave it with concrete, cut it away, Shot of Bauer diagram of build over it, or cut it off from the feeder drif t sector bluffs, or otherwise take away its shape and porous gravel character, you will eventually lose the very qualities you wanted in that location, and lots of your money is lost, literally washed out to sea. Sometimes all it takes is a single winter storm; sometimes it'sa matter of years. Eventually the Aerial sea wins. You may.not realize that all our beaches ar-e, slowly -eroding over a period of years. Thus, you can see that a land approach to the shoreline that does not respect the total drift sector system has been an expensive mistake. We can't go back to the beginning, but we should begin to get our management in ,tune with the geohydraulics of the shore, legally and administratively, and realize that the shoreline is too valuable a resource to let it beabused. GRAPHICS Let's lookat a few of the obvious and non- scientific differences between the land/air we live in and the water/land system of the shoreline. Air never really stops but gets thinner as you get farther out into space. Land continues under the.sea. The sea has definite boundaries; it stops at the top of the wave and as it reaches the land under- neath or the shoreline. Most-of the flora and the creatures of the sea have completely different life support systems that permit them to live success- fully in the water and prevent them from liv- ing outside the water. We and our fellow creatures are the opposite. Air is so light that we are scarcely aware of it.. Water is so heavy that it drags at our feet as we wade, yet forces our bodies to float if we are immersed. For some creatures, water is the analog of air it flows through them as air through us -- but with at least one difference that the, water is often supplying food. Though both air and water flow in similar waysi their behavior results.in vastly differ- ent results to land forms and man-made structures on the shorelines. There's where we've failed to recognize the crucial differ- ences that the'shoreline is the meeting place, the interface of two systems, each working on and modifying the other at that ever shifting line we call the shoreline. GRAPHICS The Master Program as a Management Tool ,The State Shoreline Management Act delegates shoreline management to local government but only.provides one tool. That tool, the shore- line permit system, is based on a master pro- gram, which is very much like the zoning Shot of application code. The City, that is DCD, literally can brochure do nothing about the shoreline until someone applies for a shoreline permit. Therefore, we* can not expect really creative shoreline management from the Shoreline Master Program because the mandate isn't there. Many other agencies also have duties or powers to use to regulate the use of water and shores; for navigation, for structures Shot of Coast Guard built in, on or over water, for leasing and . regulations use'of submerged s *tate tidelands, for water Corps regulations quality, for discharge of materials into EPA water, for Port activities. :There is some Building Department overlap, and there are some.gaps. Just as possession is nine points of the law, owner- ship or control of access are,important powers.affecting management of a resource. 'What do we do when wetechnicians begin to see that we are losing the resource we are expected to manage? What do we do when we don't own it? Or when there is no way Ito provide for much needed restoration before it is too late? In,Seattle, two public agencies, the Port and the Park Board, have active.management powers, but only for the shorelines in parks and Port development. The only other large shoreline owner is a private company, the Burlington Northern. In these areas, there is a direct responsi- ility and the power to manage the shoreline productively and not.destructively. Yet none of them have treated the shoreline as a dual systemokland and water working as a system, but only as land with an en- croaching water area to be pushed off or defended against. We shouldn't write off our urban beaches. They are a prime resource and could be a.far greater resource, a great recreation area, for the 80 to 90% of us who do not own boats, or who like to go to the beach anyhow. They provide an immediately available recre- ation and scenic resource that is an inte- gral part of the city, a people attractant. Shot of erosion of bulk- that very few other cities have. We could heads be the North American Rio! But, first we need (Lincoln Park, north end to save the beaches. Discovery Park west of, Lawtonwood) SEATTLE MARINE SHORE-RESOURCE ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY OVERVIEW Wolf Bauer for the CITY OF SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1977 This report was funded in part by a Section 306 Coastal Zone Management grant through the Washington State Department of Ecology- TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LETTER OF SUBMITTAL INTRODUCTION . . ... . . . . . . . POTENTIALS FOR PUBLIC BEACH REHABILITATION CARKEEK PARK . . . .. . . . . 4 GOLDEN GARDENS (MEADOW POINT.) 5 DISCOVERY PARK (NORTH BEACH) 8 DISCOVERY PARK (SOUTH BEACH) 8 MYRTLE EDWARDS PARK . . . . . . . 10 ALKI BEACH . . . . . L 0 11TIVIAN P AR K 12 LINCOLN PARK (NORTH BEACH) . . . . 13 LINCOLN PARK (SOUTH BEACH) 14 SEOLA BEACH . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 16 CONCLUDING STATEMENT 16 APPENDED TEXT BEACH.COMPONENTS, CLASSIFICATION, SYSTEMS A--l BEACH CLASSES .. . . . . A-1 DRIFT SECTOR SYSTEM . . . . . . .. . . . A-2 RESOURCE.VALUES OF ACCRETION SHOREFOP14S . . . . A-4 BASIC SHOREFORMS . . . . A-4 THE ACCRETION SHOREFORM AS A RECREATIONAL SOURCE A-6 THE ACCRETION SHOREFORIM AS A BIOL.OGICAL RESOURCE A-7 THE ACCRETION SHOREFORM AS AN ECONOMIC RESOURCE A-8, CRITICAL PATH OF THE BULKHEAD ING SYNDROM. A-11 BULKHEAD TYPES AND FUNCTIONS A-13 RIPRAP BULKHEADS AND REVETMENTS A-14 GABION-TYPE BULKHEADS A-15 -BULKHEADING ON EROSION SHORES . . . . .. . . A-16 BULKHEADING ON ACCRETION BEACHES . . . A-18 .BEACH ENHANCEMENT VERSUS DEFENSE A-20 BERMHEADS" VERSUS BULKHEADS A-22 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A-25 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE 1 MEADOW POINT DRIFT-ROSE . . . . . . &.1 FIGURE 2 WILLIAMS POINT DRIFT-ROSE. 14.1 FIGURE 3 POTENTIAL CLASS I BEACH SITES (TOP.MAP). 16.1 ..FIGURE 1A THE PHYSICAL SHORE SYSTEM A-1.1 FIGURE 2A THE SHORE-PROCESS CORRIDOR A-1.2 FIGURE 3A SHORE ZONES AND BOUNDARIES . . . . . A-1.3 FIGURE 4.A BEACH CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . A-1.4 FIGURE 5A DRIFT SECTORS A-1.5 FIGURE 6A INLAND,COAST ACCRETION SHOREFORMS .A-4.1 FIGURE 7A ACCRETION SHOREFORM ENVIRONMENTS .A-6.1 FIGURE 8A GEOHYDRAULIC UPPER-FORESHORE ZONE .A-11.1 FIGURE 9A RIPRAP ENVIRONMENT A-14.1 FIGURE 10A SHORE EROSION PROGRESSION A-16.1 FIGURE 11A BULKHEADED BLUFF-SHORE EROSION . . . A-16.2 FIGURE 12A BULKHEAD,DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT A-16.2 FIGURE 13A DYNAMIC SHORE SYSTEM . . . . . . .A-20.1 @FIGURE 14A BIRCH BAY BEACH ENHANCEMENT PROPOSAL .A-23.1. WOLF BAUER P. E. 5622 Seaview Avenue N.W. Seatle Washington 98107 USA. CONSULTING ENGINEER Telephone (206) 783-2119 May 25, 1977 CITY OF SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 306 CHERRY Street SEATTLE 98104 Att Rosemary Horwood Senior Planner Letter of Submittal RE: MARINE SHORE-RESOURCE ANALYSIS Preliminary overview 'Public Beach status & Enhancement Potentials Gentlemen: The attached rePort and, appended text is in, response to your request for a preliminary analysis of the marine shore resources and public beaches in terms of their use limitations and potentials. Lack of time precluded a more comrehensive evaluation. of the total shoreline. It is homed, however, that this overview, as well as the earlier 5-hour phot-documenta- tion presented to city staff members on May 13th, will serve your purpose to become at a aquaited with this important city resource in, terms, of' future management policies and programs, Respectfully yours, Wolf Bauer P.E. Shore-Resource consultant W3: g MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN WITHIN THE GEO-HYDRAULIC SHORE-PROCESS SYSTEM -------------------------------------------------------------------------- SEATTLE SHORE-RESOURCE ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY OVERVIEW ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf Bauer P.E. Shore-Resource Consultant INTRODUCTION This shore resource overview is written in the form of a. position paper that focuses, at,this point of the study, pri- marily on the status, limitations, and potentials of public recreational beaches within Seattle's coastline. one can hardly speak of any naturally,operating "Drift,'' Sector" systems along this coastal reach of Puget Sound between Everett and Tacoma, sectors within which one or more receding "Feeder Bluffs" supplies beach building and main- tenance materials longshore to accretion drift terminals. Prior to the extensive railroad and other private and public shore revetting and bulkheading, such Drift Sec@_ors once operated along all 'of the City shoreline bluffs, building hooked spits and barrier berms against Piper Creek, into Smith Cove, and along Duwamish estuarine marshes, as well, as the more robust points and Class I beaches at Brace and, e_ n I n s u 1 aa tWest Williams Points, around t-he tip o f Al ki Point, and _@-Ieado@,7 Point at Golden Gardens. The marine shores within the municipal boundaries of the City of Seattle comprise about 253-@ miles, not including the East and West Waterways at the mouth of.the Duwamish River. Of this reach of Puget Sound coastline, less than 14% re- mains as moderately intruded and natural beach waterfront, whileabout 86% is altered and impacted-by bulkheading, rip- rapping, structures, and defense wo.rkslin various stages of disrepair. In terms of my beach shore classification-system (adopted by the City under the Shoreline.Management.Act for inventory purposes), only about 2@2-%,of the shores are Class I dry berm beaches with'backshore above highest.tide, while 2% are Class II marginal, and 13@% are Class III wet erosion- al beaches with no walkable highest-tide foreshorei, (See Beach Classification diagrams and definitions in appended text.) The glacial till materials making up the bluff moraines along the Seattle shoreline are high in sands.. 'Slits, and clays, and thus relatively low in gravel. This situation. has brought about a basic shortage of stable accretion shoreforms such .as points, spits, hooks, and barrier berms, all containing high-priority Class I recreational beaches. While the'2,000 miles, of Washington's inland and strait shores contain-only, about 5% otc such natural accretion beaches, it is'particularly -2- unfortunate that nature short-changed the coast of greatest. population density wi h those gravels that produce the porous storm-berms and accretio n shoreforms containing dry beaches with backshore environments. (See text on accretion. shoreform and.Class I beach resource values.) This situation has been further aggravated by uniformed and ill-considered upper foreshore bulkheading and filling over some of these original storm-protective berms, thus down- "grading former Class II and,Class I to erosional Class III beaches that now have to be."maintained" with increasing costs, and their artificially created backshore fills.and pavings "defended" against erosion. Much of present beach erosion also has its origin in the extensive private'bulk- heading and groining updrift from such public beaches, cut- ting off and slowing down the former supply of sand and gravel.. A city that prides itself on.its extensive water- ways and so-called recreational marine beaches has squandered what little dry backshore beaches it had as its geologic heritage, and reduced the original 20% to 2@2'%- Only 1/8th of this high priority resource-now remains, assigning only 1/16th of an inch of Class I beach to each backup Seattle citizen. -3- POTENTIAL FOR PUBLIC BEACH REHABILITATION OR ENHANCEMENT ------------------------------------------- --------------- CARKEEK PARK Only a tiny Class I dry berm beach remains as part of the upper foreshore of Pipers Creek delta. This fluvial cone.would normally act as an impact bafflefor both southand north-drifting beach material from nearby "feeder bluffs." Construction of the railroad ."Chinese Wall" bulkhead has largely deactivated these bluffs in terms of beach supply sand and gravel, as has bedload sediment from a meander-restricted Pipers Creek. Thus we have.a.material-starved and shrinking beach which at,high tide cannot take care of more than fifty*people without over- crowding. Beach scale should be related to park scale, especially in view of the unique and high priority combination of beach and stream channel that is so attractive.to visitors, and. particularly to children. No recreational environment hasa higher "use" value than that of a meandering small beach creek "messing with" can disturb and affect, or that no amount of that needs maintenance or other protection. Such a rare child creek beach habitat combination operates in happy compatibility at Picnic Point, Meadowdale, and Seahurst Park. Because.of the delta foreshore platform, there _J shere at Carkeek an outstanding opportun.ity to devel op an adequ ately sized Class I beach and natural shorescape. The creek resource can be ideally adapted to conform in geohydraulic balance with the marine shore svstem. while this repo rt isnot concerned wit h beach design recommendations, it might nevertheless be noted that probably no money.expended for this purpose at Car- keep Park could possibly produce greater @Dublic benefits an investment that can be staged as a Pa -as-you-go beach -.y enhancement program. .MEADOW POINT Meadow Point, despite.its, past. GOLDEN GARDENS PARK history of commercial utilization,, remains, nevertheless, the onlynatural looking accretion-type shoreform within Seattle's coastline. Thus a few hundred yards of berm beach in over twenty-five miles of shores is all that maybe called representative of such recreational beaches, with their driftwood bac.kshores and dune-grass environment s-. The geohydraulic berm-maintenance system operating at Meadow Point is partially supplemented by a geopneumatic system 'cre a mini-dune -habitat in the southern accretion. sector atinli of the Point. Small perennial and seasonal springs from the Sunset Hill aquifer a 1so supply the Point at both north and south ends. C@4 ,Cr A nui-c@ber o4l' Droblems are a f- f e this --ref-ious shore resource of Seattle, not the least of,which are those arising from an apparent lack of understanding as to the importance of the resources and the nature of the systems that produce., them here. For example,-dumping massive riprap and rubble@ piles onto the southern accretion.pocket represents not'only@ an insult to the esthetics.of a lovely crescent sweep of sandy beach, but, what is worse, such dumping can not and will not prevent erosion here, if that is its purpose. Filling and bulldozing a pond and cattail marsh that has existed at the northeast corner for many years makes the result of fresh water input from the hillside seem equally short sighted and heavy- handed. Parks should be designed around their resources, not over them, and even the red-winged blackbirds that once returned to this habitat each year were part of the public heritage. For example, the dune system seems to operate -more or less without control or direction, but its function could well.be part ofE the beach park design. there are, furthermore,.some basic geohydraulic problems associated with the beach system, itself. As can be seen from the drift-rose diagram, and as noted by ob.servations over the Past twenty-five years, the net- drift along the north beach is sou,thwesterly.to thesouth beach, even thoughthere is periodic return transport of sand to the north pocket (and partially by.wind.transport.). S s Ref9ddio Effird) MEADO W r: ETC. H F RE w irt '00 01 W6LF BAUM Norther 1 -,,7 sro_rms tend to ero(de the nortti bank near the pond, as well as the tight and non-porous fill material underlying. the dunegrass backshore of the point s apex. This unnatural condition prevents wave swash from building a porous gravel berm, that can act as a flexible storm buffer for the dunegrass habi- tat. Since the point does not receive beach maintenance materials by longshore drift from either the north or south, following the appearance of railroad and street bulkheads, this. shoreform is slowly losing,ground, as the finer fractions of. sediments reach-the near and off-shore without volumetric make- up along the beach. Without going into site specifics, Meadow Point, like Carkeek Park beach, is also in a starvation phase., In view.of its great popularity, and because it represents a one-of-a-kind endangered specie in Seattle's shore zone, this beach and en- vironment should also be enhanced,and redesigned to reach its inherent potential as a functional,.esthetict and.recreational resource. Among basic needs here could be enhancement and con- trol of the rare dune system; upper foreshore and backshore rehabilitation to a properly functioning natural storm-berm system around the erosional apex of the point; a possible ex- tension and realignment of the north.beach northward perhaps a hundred yards to prevent further backshore recession, and-t6 provideadditional dry beach environment to.th.is limited city- park; and perhaps.evaluating the various opportunities.that, the local ground water flows provide for rehabilitating and enlarging the nearly buried freshwater pond, and a possible tie- in with a future marsh-pond in the present storm-surge basin on the central Scotch Broom meadow. -7- DISCOVERY PARK The erosional Class III beach just west NORTH BEACH. of lower Salmon Bay and Lawton Woods repre- ''sentsa short reach of typical Puget Sound sea-b,luff environ- ,ment. Here bluff recession is active with considerable sluffing and sliding along areas of impervious' clay-silt beds and water seepage slippage planes. @The bluffs are typically low in gravel, and there.is thus little beach'drift sediment covering the wave-cut.for.e.s,hore shelf above high tide. Two imposing glacial erractics, and some large boulders in the mid and lower foreshore attest to bluff recession progress? while lending wilderness character to this beach environment. In view of its park status, no structures or paving should be sited near the to p rims in order to forestall temptation to, ,defend such arbitrary areas with useless bluff-toe revetting along this reach, defense works that have already degraded the privatelsector to the east. The riprap fill-boundary of the Metro site at the west end of this reach could be utilized as an anchoring groin for the establishment of a.short Class I pocket beach at this location for high-tiderecreational beach use and access. DISCOVERY PARK only a generalized statement can be made in SOUTH BEACH this condensed overview, as to the many, alternative approaches to shore resource development and manage-. ment in this.city sector., Although the major bluff beach environment is'intact and untouched, the beach system itself has suffered considerable change in.terms of reduced upper -8- f-oreshore driLt-belt- loading and-drift passage betl@_ween. Smith Cove and West Point Light. Especially is this true southeast 01 the Light where the ill-considered foreshore installation of a riprapped sewage lagoon hasobliterated what was once an' outstanding Class I berm beach. Not only has a rare heritage resource.been buried here under shorescape-despoiling rubble,_ but this structure. continues to exert negative effects in contributing to an increasing erosion phase around West Point Light, while its southeast pocket acts as a dri.ftlog trap that will continue to mess.up and cover what little dry beach remains in this,park. If this foreshore seawall enclosure is to remain (for whatever park or Metro use), then it would be advisable to realign the norther-most bluff beach so that a robust gravel berm:can be curbed from the outer south corner of the Metro seawall@ south- easterly to the end of the present Class II beach where. it meets the protruding bluff buttress that makes up the base complex of the overlying cliff. This would create a much- needed major dry.berm beach (with dune grass plantinq@and beach-park picnic facilities) for Discovery Park. It would not only be stable at this orientation, but would cease to act as a driftlog eddy trap. The Magnolia Bluff reach between Discovery Park and Smith Cove represents a variously intruded Class III erosion shore,- mostly bulkheaded. A narrower foreshore@and nearshore shelf creates here a higher wave-energy zone. Variable bluff.cor-po-' -9- S11-oln and wa-er -able effect-s have resulted in spotty insta- bility ofthis bluff. Haphazard defense works, past and present, have left here a sorry mess of-storm litter near un- tenable dwellings, or their former sites. There are, however, yet some beach park possibilities between Magnolia Park and the Coast Guard, property at Smith' Cove. MYRTLE EDWARDS.PARK There exists here both aneed, as well as an exciting 'challenge in, terms of, creating a natural and scenic.Puget Sound driftwood and dune- grass beach facing out into Elliott Bay. Such a basic addition to this bare -,oark area would be.ok particular significan ce not only as an adjunct to the shore habitat displays at the nearby aquarium, but just inthe uniqueness of its existence in the. downtown area of abusy harbor. Despite some shortcomings of the nearshore bathymetry for stable dry beach development, namely the relatively' steep nearshore profile, the possible use of subtidal sills, and the, fact that one or two embayment-beaches can be oriented to the local wave refraftion patterns., make such a development practical,,and at a modest investment cost., _10- ALIKI BEACH The 11,000 J`t. long reach of shoreline.between. Duwamish Head and Alki Point light is made up of a number of distinct beach shores.. Beginning at the small.. bulkheaded vista park at the Head, a rubble-covered.and bulk- headed Class III. beach extends southwesterlyl.along Alki Avenue for 6000 ft. (54.6%), followed by 1,500 ft. of Class L bathing beach (13.6%), 2,500 ft. Of bulkheaded Class III park beach (22..7,%),. and ending with 1,000 ft. of housing bulkhead and Coast Guard riprap, beach at the lighthouse (1.1%). Thus Alki bathing beach represents only 1% of,Seatt-le's.marine shoreline covered in this analysis. The relatively broad intertidal foreshore shelf widens grau ally from Alki Point to Duwamish Head. Orientation to both wind waves and boat traffic wakes is such as to produce rela- tively balanced longshore drifting of sand, there being no gravel available to build.a stable storm-berm backshore., Under,these geohydraulic conditions it would be feasible to create a major above-tide recreational beach attached in the north.to the, vista park at Duwamish Head. Unlike the profile. situation at the Lincoln Park south beach, where the.paved high- level shore walk can be replaced with a lower level.beach bermf the Alki Avenue ro&dway is fixed to its present bulkhead and retaining wall. This will necessitate a.future walkable back- shore berm to be below the street level. Here, however, a zi will create a backshore that then serves porous gravel berr as a sto-1--m-ti-de bufiffer-.to.the concrete.bulkhead, obviating the riprap rubble *now despoilingthis segment of pu blic shore- line. (Some of this rock could be utilized for groin core con-, struction since the convex shoreline near Duwamish Head will. require more than one beach anchor out to the MHHW tideline.) The final goal and result of creating a new driftwood-dunegrass backshore environment will be that of,providing typical Puget Sound beach experience as a counter to the artificiality of rubble and concrete now,domihating the West-Seattle seascape. LOWMAN PARK The present concrete and masonry bulkhead projects into a flat upper foreshore that is devoid of a protective sand and gravel drift-berm., This situ- ation is a result of bulkheaded feeder bluffs and banks on each side. The bulkhead is thus subject to undercutting, and the s.t.-ructure is exposed to drift-log battering during high-tide periods. This Class III wet beach is part of a broad foreshore shelf upon which an accretion-type point might-be built over the uppe-- foreshore. Such a point shoreform. with both northwest and southwest-facing shores could be, designed with a hidden backbone of porous cobble. Depending on the length of shore- line to be enhanced, short side-groins with,flat, unobtrusive slopes may be neededto, retain a stable backshore that can. serve as both storm buffer and recreational dry beach to this -12- irtini park. Some pri-Vati-eproperties on each s'Lde o fthe park would have-to be included in the overall beach design, as would also the stormwater outfall extension.. LINCOLN PARK Little remains of the Class I beaches that. NORTH SHORE must formerly have made up the tip of Williams Point. Only about 300 ft. of the immediate north beach retains a gravel storm berm with narrow backshore of driftwood and dune- 'grass partially impacted by a low concrete retaining wall. Northerly storm waves refract with minimum drift-angle upon this berm beach., while the southerly storms allow only low- energy refractedtwaves to operate.a slow northeasterly-drift,, hence its generally stable condition,,and Class I status. The bulkheaded point in front of Evans Pool, like the Lowman Park bulkhead, juts well into the upper foreshore and is thus programmed for erosion and driftlog,attack., -The former porous and flexible storm berm has been replaced with an unyielding, non.-porous structure and paving that is incompatible with a geohydraulic@system that has operated here for@thousands of, years. A number of alternative beach rehabilitation approaches are also possible here, but they depend on an overall.program, of south beach restoration. Asid from the short,reach of Class I beach that shows a typically steep accretion shore profile in the upper foreshore.. drift beit, the rema ining north shore-grades from Class II to _13- C'Iass !II intruded beaches. The nolrthernmos@ e-nd oF-this crescent bay,beach is eroding because it receives little drift gravel from the bulkheaded-shores on either side, and,, because its backshore is made up of@,thetight and non-porous pathway fill that allows'full storm wave-swash to pull the material seaward. The drift-rose diagram shows'a northeast net drift effect, which makes this north-end beach (non- 14 bulkheaded segment) a good.candidate for rea gnment and en- hancement to a stable accretion beach. LINCOLN PARK Bulkhead. intrusion into the gravel-starved SOUTH BEACH foreshore of this reach has exposed this poorly sited and designed structure to considerable deterior- ati.on from both driftlog battering and toe undercutting. The combination of concrete-bulkhead and asphalt paving sited over this wet Class III erosionbeach represents a shocking and dismal example of beach park design avisual blight that even the lovely Madrona flubb-fringe can not overcome. As illustrated by the.Williams Point drift-rose diagram, the south beach net drift-effect is northwesterly,. The change in. shore orientation of this curving.bay-beach, however, produces' anodal or drift reversing point near,the southeast end of the park, one in which wave refraction from south winds tends to move sand into the accretion pocket next to the ferry dock. D R 1 P @r (Less Keliaetiaki effe&) WILLIAMS '410009 .. . . ...... ...... ..... ............. N V EL - These geohydraulic conditions are thus. favorable -for creating Ap a fairly stable Class.I dry beach in that portion of the park. It is not the purpose of this preliminary overview to recom- mend specific-correction orenhancement policies, or design- specifics, but rather to evaluate the beach and beach-process status in terms of an overall rehabilitation. programl to .Point out local potentials and limitations for these projects. At.Lincoln Park there is an early heed to resolve the bulkhead erosion situation. Here, however, bigger is not better,. especially when it should be a.matter of correcting the basic. mistakes of the past, rather than prolonging and enlarging -them by even more costly "defense works.". In-the final analysis, all the expensive bulkheading and its costly annual maintenance only protect a 3" layer of asphalt thathas no business sub stituting for a backshore beach. Both technical and economic feasibility await only a recognition of the fact that.one of, the largest shoreside gravel,pits'on Puget,Sound Is located just a few miles away on Maury Island. It may: be a time for. understanding.that "bermheads". could,.in. many.--in-stancds, replace bulkheads, and that we might begin to correct some of the inequity of a situation where an unpopulated area possesses.gravelso much needed by the starved beaches populous on the.east side of Puget Sound. -15- SEOLA BEACH Several hundred yards of nat-ural bluff shore remain just north of the southern city boundary. Most of this shore is Class II beach with marginal sand and gravel drift-berm along the,.Itoe of-the Madrona-tree- covered bluff. A little over-.a hundred-yards of the northend of this unintruded natural beach can be classified as Class I bluff-offset berm beach. Here a tree-covered bermcreates a narrow backshore environment,.one that could be developed into, a shady and unique beach park shorescape... CONCLUDING STATEMENT The foregoing publi'c-beach overview represents a preliminary analysis of the geohydraulic shore status, and the many poten- tials-for beach enhancement along Seattle's critically in- truded marine shoreline. It is meant to serve as an initial eye opener to the.inherent shortcomings in those shore-proces envix-onyments, which create and maintain Class Iaccretion beaches. This overview report.and new approach to:a very old problem is intended to serve as a catalyst for the rehabilitation and enlargement of one.of this city's greatest public resources. -16- ov, @o tcpcc. ny nyrr i @ro N 0 R T;-I I INCH MI LES ly 13, 40 180 "T, to 20 ca". L 'Owl, 4AN T 0 Lj i if cl TY LIMITS L;j 61@ -1 77-- Z_ 1HYMETRIC SOU,%C;@j@_S FOOT INTERVALS '"'RAPH-IC HEIGHTS '@7 A F P E 'N D ED T EX APPENDEX ----------------------------- BEACH COMPONENTS,CLASSIFICATION, ADN SYSTEMS WOLF BAUER Of the four basic types of shores, narely rockY,Beach, marshy, and estuarine, the beach type is the most prevelant in this area. The zones and components of beaches are illustrated, in this area. Beaches may be classified into three major classes according to the existance or absence of a backshore above mean higher-high water. They can be further differentiated as to whether they are natural (unimpaired) or intruded (impaired). This classification is shown in Figure 4A Ulike ocean beaches which are primarily sand that is easily eroded during storms Puget Sound and inland Strait beaches are composed of sand and gravel derived principally from the erosion of'glacial moraine bluffs making up the shorelands. Here it is exactly the presence of gravel that usually provides the proper material porosity for berm building during storm con- ditions, and thus accounts for above-tide driftwood beaches with vegetated dune-grass backshores. (see Figure 13A illustrating the swash-current cycle that is responsible for over 80% of all geo- hydraulic beach action along our shores.) CIASS I BEACHES are accretional or rollback dry beaches, the back- shore of which is only wettad under extreme tide and wave conditions. These beaches are usually the accretion terra- nals of their Drift-Sectors, and. as such are components of points, spits, tombolos, as-well as the various bluff-offset, and bay or marsh-barrier shoreforms. (See Figure 7A, Accretion-beach Enviroments) Text and illustrations are excepts from a future "shore-Resource Manual"' and are furnished as a preouclication courtesy by the author. T E P H Y S I C A L s H 0 R E SYSTEIM L =4 E 3 A,,D Z 0 N E, 3 C 0 A ST L D, ME HIGH TIM-1 UCE nz. LOW TLIDE-LINE H.T. L.T. .777,77 OFFSHOM SHOM (Sub-tidal) (Inter-tidal) (Fringe-ticlali EROSION 31,11.01E COASTLINE WAVE-CUT SHELF H.T. L.T. t@ 7 OFFSHOIE FO FE 3 Ho RE A C C P3 77 ONT SHOFE LAGOON STO"Z4 3ERM Y.A P BAR \4k 0.11--`@SHOES -Q-A CK S HO RE :10 SHOFE FC FV) HC 7.- BACK CO1l3_TMJOR A INITION: THAT EARTH - WATER DIFFUSION ZONE WFIA*JTRkDDLE3 THE EXTF01, JE SURGE, MlITS OF RIVER.INE, E3TUARl,NE, AND MARINE WATEERS, I14CLUDLiG THOSE ADJACENT TERRESTIAL AND AQUATIC FRI@TIGES THAT Cl-,' DI- RECTLY AFFECT, OR THAT ARE AFFECTED BY, THE PREVAILING GEOHYDRAULIC A.ND GEOPIUUMATIC SYSTEE-S. Km 16. ?-A CORM g& 0"'* THE SHORE P".' u ZONAL HORIZONS VERTICAL ZONES RIVER I IN'E ESTUARINE MARINE ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT EWIRONNENT TERREST)AL VALLEY B A y C 0 A-5 FRINGE. FRINGE: FRINGE FRING E: w STORM -TIDE PLAIM 0 SURGEPLAIN FLOODWAY z: <1 Ln cn 13ACKSHORE .4 I;j FRINGE SURGE UPPER MARSH _j < CL ca ca ZONE 0 !9 LOWER MARSH o FLOODWAY 0 in FORE51-10RE uJ ui TIDAL FLAT cy- (1% + Ye MP14) -J cc 0 LL a U. 2 TIDAL CHAHNEL5 AGLUAT I C MAIN CHANNEL MAIN D15TRIBUTARIES 'NEAR5HORE -TO DEFTH SELOW tlLLW K, I N S F_ THAL-WEG BAY OFF5HORF- < @@ MAX. WAV t L E ti CT-H WOLV BALIER MARINE- 5HORE ZONES ApiD SOUNDARIES PIC. 3A. PROC E .55 ,GEOHYDRAULIC RIDOR +S,H.0 RE COR > S-Y_5TE.N54l--- GEOPNEUMATIC AQUATIC., TERRE'S-r)AL TERRES11AL FRINGE@ J, r SURGE Z 0 r-4 F_ OFFSHORE HEARSHORE FORE 5HOPF- BACKSHORE UPSHORE UPLAND Ln UP.5HbRE I UPLAND 100-YeAft 4-ie -c 'COASTLIHIE" (EROSION SHORE) 0 STORM-TiR,t-,,.@ioo-YEAR) lJJ HIGHES-T-TIDE.' MHHW I I 00 VIHW CORDINA;1V HIGH TIDF_) BERM OR FOREDUrim Ca M5L REAL Ul MLW RESOURCE MLLW ESTATF. LOWEST-TIDE miIii04VT DEPIH "CONYWHi' COASILINE i> 4_ W" k A I li"I ut, OPEN SMA ItqLAtiD SEA < Ln NZAR- (ACCRE110H 5WORe) 514ORe TIDELAND5 UPLA I'l D 5 < I N HER HAVIGAR11LITY OFF- OUTElk ui z: 5HORE I I HARFADA AP 'SHORELAIlDS :3 LEA 1. WvLANI):@' @5140R@ _j ZOO' (Iq7I AV) U.S. TERRITORIAL ILF, CAvAOIAN CROWN FORSSHORE W01-F BAUER 0 L CL,"SSIFICA"1110"', 16, 4A 6o-1j; 111 354- INTRUDED (SHORE PROC-ESS @! .`-ESCURCE IM.IRLED) 1@kTUIPAL SHORES _5 STO',t,-TIDE BACK-SHORE STOR14-TIDE RACK-SHORS (HISK-ZCNE) Berm Ba rm Mean Higher Hi@rh Tide `7@7 14e an Higher'High Tide -1-;Lf WAViSU CLASS I cc ation CLASS @Iccretion _4 @Z, Little or no ]lay Be rm H. T. CLA CLASS ma rpi-na I niform or @:h Clay Content H. T. 0 r Clay'- tnt L Evo 5i on CLASS CLASS III Evo 5i on ro io IF DRIFT SEr-rom AN INTEGRATED AND INDEPENDENTLY OPERATING EROSION TRAN9PORT - A CCRE TION., BE A CH SYSTEM SEPARATED FROM ADJA.CENT $HOP25 OR SECTORS BY NATURAL OR ARTIFICIAL BOUNDARIESI,OA 13Y. SHORE D1R8CTION CHANGES9 JEACH SYSTEM CONTAINING QNE OR MORE MATERIAL SOURCES (FEEDER BLUFFS) SUPPLYING ONE OR MORE INTEP1WIATE AND/OR TERMINAL ACCRETION SHOREFORMS. .-Surge -Plain.-:. A k, -M arsh Z_ RRIER'BEACH TOM Cc ..0.8 arsh- L )n ind Old ars I-, III Spii, 00 V) POINT Not wind and drift direction TOR D 11 SECTOR A L SECTOR B I SECTOR C SEC I N N E D R I F T S E C T 0 R - R Storm Only Foreshore only N o Drift-Pasgago Drift-passage Drift-F6ssage 0 U,T F, R D R I FT 9 E C T 0 R 1, :as:s:a ]Ce 1.1 H 0 R ETIDPMODIFIED) RG. SA RRIER A- CLASS 11 BEACHES are marginal erosion beaches, usually at the foot of g ravel- con taining banks and bluffs that supply the upper foreshore with a fairly heavy drift berm, but without creating a stable and dry backshore zone above MHHW level. CLASS III BEACHES are erosional beaches under banks and bluffs that are generally low in gravel and high in clay, and where the bluff too and upper foreshore is wave-cut below MHHW level with minimum beach material cover to protect the foreshore shelf. This beach classification system developed for easy public recognition and use, one that would not require a scientific know- ledge or determination oil beach geo-morphology. It is simply based on the presence_, absence, or marginal extent of a walkable dry backshore berm under coincident high tide and wave conditions. AWL THE DRIFT-SECTOR SYSTEM It is not the purpose of this beach system review to present a full text on the many components and variations of shore processes and shore- forms. Suffice it- to describe the Drift-Sector as an integrated and independently operating erosion-transport-accretion beach system up to many miles in length, and separated from adjacent shores or Drift Sectors by natural or artificial boundaries. Each Drift-sector is made up of four basic elements. (See Figure 5A) 1. FEED SOURCE: The most prevelant beach cover and berm building material source are the beach bluffs or cliffs, or the banks of marine terraces. Wherever they are in an active operating state, they are hereafter referred to as "Feeder Bluffs". * Text and illustrations of beach-process systems excerpts from a future "Shore-Resource Manual", and are furnished here as a pre- publication courtesy by the author. A FEED SOURCE (Continued) The rate at which beaches are nourished from feeder bluffs depends on their composition and the hydraulic energy level of the bluff reach,. Orientation to a long wave fetch, and a low clay-content bluff composition results in a high and uniform rate of bluff recession and beach feeding. Non- uniform composition or stratification of clay, sand, and gravel may bring about erratic cave-ins and sluffing due to weakness planes or multi-level water tables. When the bluff has a uniformly distributed clay content, its quarry face is near vertical, and its operating rate is slow and steady. 2. DRIFTWAY: The primary drift belt of. longshore material move-. ment lies within the lower backshore and upper foreshore zone, and the driftway is thus the corridor which connects the feeder bluff with its accretion terminal shoreform. The drift cover on any driftway reach may be sparse or thick, and it may either be size-classified or well mixed depending on the relative bluff feed rate versus the wave-angle transport rate. While sand is moved at all levels of the intertidal foreshore, gravel is invariably transported along the prevailing daily high tide level in the upper forshore. Cobbles may move only during high wave action, and boulders will move occasionally under driftwood. impacts.Fine silt generally remains on the lower foreshore, along with clay-size materials that eventually reach a non- returnable level in the offshore. 3. ACCRETION TERMINALS: Longshore and littoral drift movement takes place in reversing cycles with the wind changes, and thus more than one accretion shoreform may be in its path, or form a terminal dumping area within any one Drift-Sector. Normally, however, prevailing winds create a net effect in one direction over Una years, with a distinct down-drift terminus. Such accreted deposits are shoreforms such as spits and hooks, open or closed points, single or dual-berm tombolos, as well as bay and marsh (and estuarine) barrier-berm beaches. 4. SECTOR BOUNDARIES: In referring to Figure 5A, it can be seen that each independent Drift-Sector is separated from the adjacent shore or other Sector by a drift gap or barrier. These boundaries are quite absolute when they represent natural deep-water rock promontories and rock spurs, or artificial deepwater bulkheads, jetties, or groins. Leak or overlap boundaries are those which may be storm breached, or where considerable sand may drift to another sector in the lower foreshore or offshore. Such inter-sector material movement may, occur across low tombolo bars and berms during storm tides, low-profile groins, or upper foreshore bulkheads. Sector boundaries also overlap, at times, where prevailing drift is split by a headland dividing adjacent Sectors with large variation in beach orientation. R E S 0 U R C E V A L U E S ---------- - --------------- 0 F A C C R E T I 0 N S H 0 R E F 0 R M S --------- - -------------- - - --------- - - B A S I C S H 0 R E F 0 R M S Accretion shoreforms are physiographic and bio-habitat entities representing the down-drift accretion terminals of their re- spective Drift-Sectors. Their physical backbones consist of gravel berms in the higher energy zones, and of sand and finer gravel material in the more wind-protected areas. These... primary berms making up the windward shore of the shoreforms represent our -major Class I recreational beaches which, in turn act as protective sea and storm dikes to the dependent bio- habitat lagoons capillary tide-channels, marshes, and older marsh-meadows in. their lea. Practically all inland-marine shoreforms may be classified under four basic headings: SPITS (and HOOKS): are wave-built and tide-current controlled narrow sand and gravel deposits extending parallel to, or curving out from shore, - characterized by a wave-built beach berm on the seaward side, and a marshy inside shore, unless sufficient lagoon or bay fetch exists for building a moderate inside berm beach as well. POINTS: are law-profile shoreline promontories of more or less triangular shape, with the landward baseline forming the coastline, and the apex extending seaward. Points are invariably- located at some direction break of the shoreline, and they may be over the wave-cut shelf remnant of a headland bluff, or represent a last- phase accretional deposit that had its beginnings in converging spits, the closing of a hooked spit, the talus of a former coastal Aide area, or they may form on 'a straight coastline over a low profile tombolo-effect area. Thus points are always in various stages of development. They are characterized by the dike-like berm that storm-tides have heaped along and above the high tideline WATERWAYS - -.5HORE-FORMS -.Fl A. @I.NLAND" COA5T REGION (GLACIAL) p -7. FP 6TH i E DT Ep Lc > TOMBOLO (51 Fl- =m FF, P R 1 1) J Ei @1) I -Y (oLc-o<Er-)'), 'E'5TLJAP E T - B R F, I E .......... C- LAS -5 --T, BERM -BEACH OF ACCRE710H SHOREFORMS WOLF EAUER of the two converging beaches, and which driftwood and dune-grass covered berms enclose a central inter-tidal lagoon, brackish pond, marsh, or an older high-marsh meadow. BARRIER BEACHES: are accretion shoreforms of sand and gravel that have been ceposited, like storm barriers, in front of shoreline - indented former bays and bights, estuaries, or bluff-offsets by longshore drift from feeder bluff headlands - characterized by a storm-tide berm. above high tide acting as dike ard seawall to the backshore bluff-shelf, meadow, marsh, lagoon, or stream-mouth tidal surgeplain. TOMBOLOS: are causeway-like accretion spits connecting an offshore rock or island. with the main shore. Inland-marine tombolos may fox by either one or both of two mechanisms where longshore drift is slowed down by wave attanuation from an offshore-foreshore drift is and thereby accumulates within the wave-shadow beach area - or where outside wave refraction around such an object produces con- verging shore waves between the object and the drift belt. When tombolos reach maturity they constitute an accretion terminal for each side of the Drift-Sector they have managed to divide. Depending on the orientation to prevailing winds, as well as the fetch exposure of each side, a tombolo may have two Class I berm, beaches, or one side may be more sheltered to produce a marshy shore and lagoon. (Single or Dual-Beach Tombolo) (Refer also to Figure 6A) All! THE ACCRETIONN - SHOREFORM AS A RECREATIONAL RESOURCE Recreational shoreline experience on Puget Sound has many facets, some of which a re basic to all watorfront activities$ while others are peculiar to certain shoreforms as and local con- ditions. Recreational shore use also changes with the weather, the tide level, and the seasons. Shore appreciation is further tied to individual tastes, interests, and sense of values. Thus-, erosional beaches with their high cliff buffer zones, especially the most common Class II,type, possess varied scenic and recre- ational values to an increasing number of peoples They are often the most inaccessible wilderness-type shore environments in our midst, and the seabluf f s themselves present a dramatic showcase of glacial: geology as well as' biologic habitat.' It. is -never- theless possible to assign overall recreational priorities to certain beaches and shoreforms in-terms of quantitative consi- a derations that land themselves to rating and-comparisons with a minim= of bias. 1. UNQUENESS. In the inland-marine waterways, accretion beaches and,shoreforms represent only a small fraction of total shoreline, less than five percent -- and a significant portion of these has, and is being converted to erosion-type shores by improper bulk- heading developments and shore disturbances. 2. ACCESSIBILITY: A second priority factor is that of overall access to a dependable drys above-tide berm and walkable backshore even under most wave-action conditions. Points, spits, and tombolos also offer protected water access by virtue of their dual-shore systems 3. PRESERVATION TIME: A third priority factor is that of remaining time in terms of heritage pre servation. Accessibility and flat topo- graphy have made them prime targets for real estate. .-That still remains has now become a truly endangered shore -species. A major plus-factor of Class I beaches, as compared to the more common erosional seabluff shores, is that of backshore use-potential. All -three types of beaches have intertidal we t fore shores with tide- regulated walkability, clamming opportunities, and similar uses. However, the accretion beach has in addition of, to this. foreshore com- monality a dry driftwood berm with dune grass and flowering vegeta- tion, a 24-hour beach environment without-tidal interruptions. As the high tides and wind waves take possession of the wet and narrow. erosion snores, such activities as camping, social driftwood fires and especially dry sand and gravel picnicking and sun bathing become increasingly marginal. It is especially in areas of high-frequency beach visitation that the remaining Class I dry beaches and associated environments will be ever more sought after and valued. ----------- lW'URCE POI NT OF 0, r@ G I N --------------- F E E DER BLUFW 11 T ----------- -- B U L K H E A D - F R E E D R I F T W A Y .3 U P P L Y L I N E E L E Y RIE S P 0 N S I B L E 'D E S I G E L E M E N T ------------- P 0 R 0 @'U S G R A V E L B E R M 'TION ENVIRONMEN TYPICAL A. Z -SHOREFORM TS PZ"RSATIONAL BEACH-ORIENTEED P RI MIA R Y HUNTING, NATURE-STUDY ORIEN=- D Dii RY Sao TOTA L BE RM WI DT H H. T., H.T. WAVE-BUILT BERM ',NrIND-BLO`ArN SAND AND ORGANIC MARSH SCIL HIG19-ENERGY ZONE LO'd HYDRAULIC ENERGY ZONE -31-Losic BIRD AND MA MA L HABITAT ORGANIC PROCESS AREA BIOTIC, BENTHIC, MARINE, SHORE-BIRD 141AKTAT Z W) T 7 Cyc. EPE T0 SALT40RT (Salicornia) FLCR4L > --DUNE MI)ED S"iRU35 SU,::_-7S-'S-'ICNS GWS SALT-GRAS� G _'?J@ S' S E'S Z' I H.T. .211 Xe-*CRETiart dkAv WJ4F ZWE FC A-7 THE ACCRETION - SHOREFORM AS A BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE As in so many instances of man's invasion of natural environments, recreational shore use is not always in the best interest of the resource, or man himself. Some open space entities such as estuaries, for example, are invaluable bio-process environments at the food chain baseline, and intensive recreational use, can bring about serious reproductions in natural process operation. Man can affect such biologic systems in two ways, either directly in terms of consumptive or pollutive activities, or indirectly in terms of affecting the less flexible geosphere to which the the more flexible bioshere is trying to adapt. In the Puget Sound basin scheme-of-things, the basic and constantly recurring geo-hydraulic process sequence is the Feeder Bluff - Driftway - Accretion Terminal System. Not only has this resulted in accretion shoreforms composed of high priority recreational Class I berm beaches, but a direct consequence of this process has also been the creation of bio-process habitat in the form of shallow lagoons and protected salt marshes leeward of these shoreforms. Thus the glacial gravel in a re- ceding sea bluff is directly responsible for shallow marine, benthic, and salt-marsh - tide-channel communities all performing cumulative functions for and within the total biosphere of the inland sea. It is this dual recreational - biological resource potential that establishes the high priority resource position of accretional shoreforms at this time. It remains to be determined whether this is a dilemma or an asset. It is an unusual Juxtaposition of dry recreational and wet biological environments, both esthetically and functionally valuable in their own right. From the standpoint of recreation, this dual resource has fared without major problems thus far. The windward beach system has readily absorbed boat landing and beach traffic because of its usually robust gravel and driftwood composition, while any leeward marshy shores and shallow lagoons have tended to discourage polluting motor boats, or consumptive marine activities aside from seasonal bird hunting. However, it has been in its use as a real estate commodity that the effects have been devastating. Attesting to this are the bulkhead blocking of feeder bluffs and driftways, obliteration of storm-tide berm buffers, and the conversion of marshy lagoons into sterile boat basins and fills, all challenging system integrity. THE ACCRETION - SHOREFORM AS AN ECONOMIC RESOURCE If it were generally realized that only about five percent of our total inland marine shores are Class I dry berm type associated with accretion shoreforms and their multi-purpose backshore en- vironments - them would be few misgivings in classifying them as an endangered species, and assigning them highest heritage resource status. In the context of that reality, as. wall as any long-term economics, their burial under single family residential housing and bulkheads constitutes their most misapplied, and self- defeating use on the part of developer, owner, and permit-issueing government alike. Structural intrusion of the upper foreshore, and backshore-berm with the subsequent destruction of ram Class I type beache's has the following economic consequences: A. L0SSES TO THE SHORE OWNER First of allit removes the very beach environment that attracted ownership in the first place, And the beach is thus lost as an economic asset in terms of later resale values tied to recreational and esthetic amenities. Proliferation of such use along a single reach of beach subsequently reduces the "immediate setting" value. of the lots in the shorescape, one over which neighboring beach owners could have exerted some control for their common gain. 2. Berm and foreshore Occupancy and bulkheading downgrades neigh- boring property values, while seriously limiting adjacent shore use because of established bulkhead alignments. Irregular align- ment and spotty bulkheading also create driftwood accumulation and erosion pockets of natural beach lots between bulkheads. This, in effect, commits remaining beach lots-to, certain design restric- tions, and limits lot utilization., 3. Placing houses into the dynamic and shifting accretion zone of the shore-process corridor invites bulkhead deferse works to protect an eventually untenable position..It changes the. ber, and driftwood beach-building action of storm waves to one of bulkhead battering and erosive undercutting, and thus makes an enemy of the construe- tive forces that produced and maintained this heritage environment. The consequences of such arbitrary and misplaced structural intru- sions not only invite costly maintenance, but can lead to total losses under extreme coincident storm-tide "disaster" conditions. Housing placed on accretion shoreforms within medium to high wave- energy zones may be inundated by combined wave and storm-surge water levels -of. eight feet or more above MHHW along open Puget Sound and Strait shorelands. Such locations on accretion beaches will, in the future, exact heavy insurance charges or refusals. Just as the X-year frequency river flood inundates the floodway and floodway fringe of its floodplain, so does the X-year fre- quency storm-surge tide inundate the berms and marshy backshores that constitute the storm-tide surgeplain. B. LOSSES TO THE DEVEL0PER 1. Row-housing over the backshore berm within 'a planned development not only removes the magnet that would increasingly attract future families to the vicinity of such a shoreform environment, but by its, view-blocking presence, and beach destruction drasti- cally reduces future interest in, or purchase and resale value of the adjacent and backup fringelands. Such effects are neither in the - long-term- interest of the buying public the heritage viewing public, or the real estate industry. 2. the colonization of points, spits, and berm barriers places housing at the lowest watertable level in the county, locations where future secondary and tertiary treatment facilities will have major cost impacts on developer and lot owner alike. While the initial siting of row-housing on an accretion shoreform would appear-to be a low-cost and logical development plan that returns high profit margins on high-priced waterfront property, it is often a mo-st short-sight-d approach from a business standpoint if the limited number and size lots over the beach are equated to. the unlimited number of lots that could be sold and re-sold at increasing profits as time further appreciates the values that the magnet of a natural shoreform environment in terms of view and accessibility offers the surrounding uplands. Most developers of waterfront properties today still pluck the goose that laid-, and could -continue to lays the golden eggs. C. LOSSES TO THE LOCAL PUBLIC 1. In view of the fact the beach berms of accretion shoreforms generally create an adjacent low-energy zone for lagoon, marsh, or estuarine environments, it is almost impossible to develop the berm backshore without loosing the dependent bio-habitat area - even if the latter remains untouched by dredging and filling. Only when such an integrated shoreland system is of large scale, exists there an option for multi-use resource management. The destruction of one-resource to create another, whether that be beach berm backshore, adjacent marsh habitat, or a lagoon and Vidal bio-process system, .-such action represents a taking of heritage resources Without compensation to the public. Functional components of the Shore-Process Corridor. do not exist and operate along arbitrary geographic or property lines, but rather. along long-established ecologic boundaries. if the boundaries between resource and real estate are not established in shorelands management, long- term, and often irreversible losses of finite resources become inevitable. 2. When accretion-beach housing burial removes the functional, recreational, and esthetic focus that such an original shoreform exerts on the surrounding lands, - it, also. removes the potential tax bass inherent in the local landscape. Not only that, but seldom are the costs of final services and utilities for such growth-restricted and limited housing sites justified. Docu- mentary evidence continues to accumulate supporting the conten- tion that preservation of such multi-purpose resource entities of open -space through public aquisition can often be amortized through the resulting tax base increases on the surrounding lands, POSITION PAPER 33-75 Wolf Bauer 0 F T H E B U L K H E A D I N G S Y N D R 0 M E Man's structural intrusion into the geo-hydraulic zone of the Shore-Process Corridor has placed fixed and "dead" objects into a shifting and "live" environment, the inevitable outcome of which is their rejection by a dynamic system. In fighting this rejection, man has made the sea his enemy, rather than treating it as the friendly energy source of his seascape heritage. While the self-imposed defense of an untenable shore position may be man's property-right prerogative, it is hardly an absolute right. when his actions and structures affect a longshore beach process system, and alters the erosion - transport - accretion status of adjacent shores within the local Drift Sector. Bulkheaded structures projecting into the foreshore not only in- crease wave down-cutting of the foreshore shelf, but often act as groins that tend to interrupt longshore drift, leading to unbalan- cing geo-hydraulic effects along down-drift reaches. When bulkheads are placed at the toe of sea cliffs that act as feeder bluffs, beach maintenance and the very existence of shoreforms nay be at stake. (Figure 8A Beach Profile vs. Major Wave Action Zone) CC NICE NITRAMED ZrONEE, OF 11,CNIGEST EXPOSURE TO TWA Ir Zw A CTION 2A 2-laizs 2-HIR3 2-HRS _T_ J EFFP_1C1-'1 OF KEACH PPUILE ONLY (Constant Tide-rise) Be rM 2- HRS 2-HIRS 2-HRS EMECT OF PK-FILE PLUS A CTUAL PjiTEE 'OF TIDE, PISE L F= L) E Bem building is a vtal process for the creation and maintenance of Class T beaches and acc--tion shcrefonms. Ir. studlying the effects of decreasing water rise rates durinz each fInal. flooding cycle, when su-peri_-nvo!@ed on. increasing beach profile slopes as sho-,m- in the above diagraxa, it becon-es atmarent that most of the geo-hydraulic action t.-,.kes Diace in the unDer 1"oreshore and lower backshore. Thus in terms of shoreline nanazement in aen-eral, and of bulkheading in Darticular, it is inr>ortant to realize that even a. slight int?-asion into the uz),per foresr,"Ire is o' major beach-D +hat the siL-nificance, It should also beco7ie obvious me an- h-A L, tiaieline as an arbitrari line fL-ids itself Positioned 4Kn the niadle of major zeo-hydraulic action, and renresents an urrealistic and --nore-resource rr@anar7c7ient. .Dro::>-r boundary in tems A- Beach shore property always abuts the public domain on the seaward side. What is more important and usually ignored, however, Is the fact -that those portion of waterfront lands which project into the Shore-Process Corridor are, and have always been, functional components of an integrated beach pro- cess system. Thus a part of such shorelands a c t u a lly lie swithin a zone of instant geology and often dependent biology f or. which the shore owner must assume heritage responsibilities vis-a-vis: his neighbors and the general public. Beach ownership thus also implies stewardship over established beach system processes ill which concurrent erosion, transport and acccretion constitute the very essence of their historic resource functions and viability. The purchase of waterfront property does not buy the beach system anymore than it buys the waterway. It goes without saying, that resource ste wardship places -certain development restrictions and/or' structural setbacks upon that portion of real estate which-is part- of the beach-process zone. Development limitations under a policy of "shore-care", rather than one of "shore-use." that ends in beach burial, should invite equitable compensatory measures in the f orm of perpetual leases, tax credits,, and other forms of remunerations from the public. Whether bulkheading is in the best private and public interest or not, it continues to be one of the most misapplied, costly,and environmentally critical activities on Puget Sound shores. It. is the purpose of this position paper to discuss some of the shortcomings and problems associated with such shore "defense" measures with the hope of encouraging both technical and environ- mentally valid improvements over present practices and attitudes. BULKHEAD TYPES AND FUNCTIONS Bulkheads seawalls, and revetments may be divided into two broad categories, namely solid-walled vertical or sloped. structures made of wood, steel, or concrete (boxed, cribbed, or piled), or structures and walls of various size rock or geometric shapes either dumped or laid in place, or mesh-enclosed. Marine shore bulkheads are generally meant to perform two functions, namely to act as a retaining wall for the back-up bank or fill. areas or as a shore revetment to armor the shore against wave erosion and inundation. Such a structure must therefore be able to withstand both seaward movement or tipping from landward earth, and hydrostatic pressures, as well as resist toe and/or side erosion. .and drift-log battering from high-water storm waves. It should be obvious that no one type of protective wall can perform all these functions with equal efficiency. Aside from the need to maintain itself against these forces, the most common purpose of a marine-shore bulkhead is to serve as a Protective element for a backup structure or resource, such as a house, patio, parking area, road, park, etc. which intrudes and. projects into the Shore-Process Corridor. The object to be protected may be located at, or near bulkhead top or storm-tide level, or at some level substantially higher than extreme high water. It nay be located directly over, or at considerable distance back from the bulkhead face, distances and, levels which, sad to say, often have little relationship to the boundary-range of storm wave inundation* RIPRAP BULKHEADS AND REVETMENTS While. multi-ton riprap rock is used extensively as an economic and efficient material for construction of free-standing seawalls and jetties, this material is now increasingly used for bulkheading of fills and as revetment against shore erosion - applications &or which such rock has many disadvantages unless the installations are better designed than is generally the case. The advantage of using riprap lies not only in its lower in-place cost, but also in better resistence to drifting impact, and, tho fact that it is more easily repaired after storm damage. These advantages, however, are not usually sufficient to outweigh some of its faults and shortcomings. The large the individual rock size, the larger become the void spaces that allow hydraulic: material sluicing out-of their backshores, FIG. 9A RIPRAP ENVIRONMENT oRiGINAL BUFFER 20rim ORIGIHAL 0 0 1= ---@> STASLM ADVANCE RE:TREAT BAC@rsHoFRL- ACCR,ETION B EACH t N4 -FIL OIL +L:'i*@; X! S@ QX/a ly 4 Afo 514 00. AIA 74c"R IP txoN lk SE4414RO -,CYP4".o11yc V040 5#04 CC.5 unless a broad belt of costly graded rock filter makes up their backfill. No matter how carefully such filter rock is selected and placed, however, the very nature of downward and seaward, expanding void spaces under wave-induced hydraulic pressure, suction, and cavitation of in-and-out surging currents will even- tually pull all peripheral soils through the structure. Boulders too will be undercut at their bases, and tend to make them sink lower with time. The most negative feature of riprap, however, resides in the offending visual impact and environmental degradation of the shore resource. The use of such rock heaps, just as in the case of streambank revetments, has 'now mushroomed into a serious. shore despoilage a syndrom that is lining our beautiful beach environments with ugly,, incompatible borders and backdrops of rabble. (See Figure 9A) GABION-TYPE BULKHEADS Gabions are wire basket (mesh) enclosed, building blocks of rock aggregate somewhat of the size and shape of hay bales. Thoir use, is beginning to be applied. to marine shore defense -works along our inland marine shores. While such artificial construction forms have a place in certain. shore protection applications, they have inherent drawbacks under, Puget Sound marine shore conditions. While their porosity and flexi- bility is tauted as a wave-impact advantage,, they are not designed with massive driftlog impact in mind, and their wire bonds can be, and are broken in high energy shore zones. Their so-called conforming flexibility does not eliminate foreshore undercutting, but makes gabion walls deform and move out of line rather easily- a critical weakness if they must also act as a backshore re- taining wall. They represent an artificial intrusion of wire and rubble that likewise becomes an esthetic affront to, our shore environments and beach experiences. BULKHEAD ON EROSION SHORES Prevention of marine bank and bluff recession by protecting their toes from wave erosion is a short-term expedient at best. Since recessional bluffs usually front on either Class II or III erosion beaches, they are natural bulkheads in themselves., i.e. their toe s are at, or below MHHW level on Class.III shores, or just two or three feet above that level in back of Class II beaches. Wave erosion operates as an undercutting mechanism against the bluff, as well as a downward scouring and abrading action over the.upper foreshore (wave-cut shelf). Since the more or less soft and easily eroded glacial till of the bluff face continues to recede at the same Pace as the undercutting, the bluff will seldom ovarhang the toe for very long, as it might if the cliff were solid rock. If, on the,other hand, a concrete bulkhead is. erected against the toe of a F) lo.A SHORE EROSION RELATIVE RECESSIONS BLUFF RECESSIOM SHELP'LOWERIN,G X-xl@ HF-Sr WAVC-OPFur I.EvaL. LOWEST LEVE ka ic LING 77 BLUFF- BULMSEADING C? of STABL-2 SLOPM 5HORM-PROCESS CCAR100FIL BULKHEA0 EriviRorimErjT ON EROSION BEACK FIG. 12A GROIM-EFFECr -ram 111PAC.r No 7@ v, 7 -1 @7 Tx@@ SC04/#R 1.1101F B34VER bluff, and with its base cut Into the solid foroshore shelfig toe recession will. be monentarily halted, while scouring and downeuttirg of the fomshore shelf continues and accelerates in front of th-3 structure. (See Figures PA and)ZX) Such erosion is not only due to loss ofp and thinnAng @3f cushirinirig beach cover of sand a-,d gravel nonmally piled against the bluff toe, but the steep face of the seawall, turns the breaker s-,Yash into a nstr- Vertical, high-@-_locity scouring. cary-3nIL. ',@uch action finally undercuts the bulkhead base with resulting seaward tipping or structural collapse. In high energy beach zones, driftlog battering often damages the bulkhead before undercutting succeeds, depending on the hardness @of the foreshors shelf, or the depth of drift cov'e_r protecting it. If the bulkhead is not aligned with adjacent ones, or projects by itself into the ff'oreshoree, th5n side erosion and cav-itation by refracted corner --mves further hasten its instability and destruction. in terns of so-called bluff protection, solid and riprap ty@e bulk- heads and [email protected] placed against the toes of such cliffs cannot, and do not stop recession of their upper faces and rims. Only when such an embark:aent has been contoured to a slope that is flatter than its ang,19-of-reposs, or the local slippa@_e plane, will toe bulkheading have a direct bearing on further high bluff rscession. Such artificial slope alterations are seldom possible. '11he usual reve ment of a six to twelve foot high bulkhead at the bottom of a fifty or two-hundred foot cliff has little effect on upper face erosion, nor on any sluffing and sporadic slide tendencies. Most active feeder bluffs in the Puget Sound Basin have steep, unstable, critical-slope faces that would continue recession to a flatter and more stable profile irrespective of retaining walls or complete elimination of bottom wave impacts. Not only are such attempts at recession control futile, they impact negatively on the functional integrity of their Drift-Sector system, and hence on other private holdings and the public domain. BULKHEADING ON ACCRETION BEACHES The technical problems con- nected with storm-wave protec- tion along Class I berm beaches are somewhat different from those relating to Class II and III erosion shores discussed previously. the foreshore is not usually a wave-cut shelf of in-situ glacial material that has been compacted by ice pressure and/or clay bonding, but rather one which forms a water-saturated and unconsolidated base of loose and deep sand and gravel. While the intertidal wave-cut foreshore shelves of bluff beaches are invariably flat-sloped and more or less fixed at either a Class II or Class III profile eleva- tion, the foreshore of accretion beaches may be either flat or steep, and may show considerable elevation changes after each storm. Such changes may occur within various cycles ranging from weekly to seasonal, and to multi-year intervals. Thus the placement of any type of fixed-location bulkhead structure into such an ever- shifting geo-hydraulic environment adds many variables and problems. Shoreforms accreted out into or alongside deeper waters often have steep foreshore profiles that allow storm-tide breakers to impact their backshores with. greater force than is the case on beaches with shallow wave-breaking foreshores. Frequent profile changes expose berm-located bulkheads to varying levels and points of, attack. Undercutting of the soft base is much more ofa problem, here and even with box design, spread-footing concrete bulkheads sub-bass liquefaction sand mobility and rapid downcutting causes settling, tipping and sometimes complete overturning. The final effect of building upon a berm foreshore and backshore is that of changing a Class I accretion beach into a Class II or III erosion beach, while burying a rare resource. Them is simply no technically efficient high storm-tide defense measure that will not also be detrimental to the existing geo-hydraulic and bio-habitat environments of an accretion shoreform and its beach. Only when geographic scale-is such as to allow sufficient setback of housing, roads$ or other structures without encroachment on the associated. backshore marsh or lagoon habitat may realistic and workable boun- daries between resource and real estate be established and, honored. A-20 B E A C H E N H A N C E M E N T V E R S U S D E F E N S E --------------------------- ---------------------------------- Unlike the well-studied and documented geo-hydraulic and geo-pneumatic interactions of beach sands with high-energy wave s and winds along the open ocean coastline the lower level wave dynamics impacting gravel- type shore materials along our inland marine, waters create some mar- kedly different shore-process systems and environments. A basic dif- ference arises from the fact that the source of beach cover material in, the Puget Sound 3asin and Straits is of relatively recent origin. i.e. thousands rather than millions of years. Such material is con- stantly being derived from coarse-grained glacial debris where beaches tend to,-live, so to speak, from hand-to-mouth along-'the wind-operated. transport gradient of each Drift-Sector, and where variations in the material budget- often have early shore-process, repercussions. The fine r grained beach sands of the open coast, on the other hand, derive from both -river silts and ancient dunes and-sediments that have accumulated as vast fore and nearshore sand reservoirs that are constantly being recycled by wind and waves with a massive flywheel balance effect. The frequent and sizeable geo-pneumatic action that creates foredune and deflation, plain environments in many parts of the coast is largely missing in the inland shorescape, where the formation of accretion shoreforms is primarily controlled by breaker swash currents work no, on gravel-size material. Not only am the swash currents of ocean brea- kers deeper and of longer duration (wave length), but the interstices. D Y N A M I C S H 0 R E S Y S T E M (VERTICAL TRANSPORT COMPONENTS) F EXCAVATION AND ENTRAINMENT DIGGING S TO RM LINE BERM HIGH-TIDE OLLECTION STILLWATER RIDGE LIME b J C) 0 C-i NJ FULL LANDWARD TRANSPORT TURBULENT SUSPENSION 0 -,4 1' 7.e PARTIAL SEAWARD, SURFACE SWASH RETURN RE CYCLE L) 44k 47 2 5>@ -,jjj. Z:@ PERCOLATION FCTURNi WOLF 1MEK 21 of ocean-beach sandgrains present much greater friction to swash percolation. This results in relatively stronger and more erosive back-swash currents than is the case in gravel beach cover. Depen- ding on ther ratio of sand-to-gravel, oi- range of gravel Size high-tide shore waves may erode and lower the profile of a sand berm beach-as the surface current of the return swash pulls the sand seaward, while much of this current is lost by percolation through porous gravel. Thus under similar storm conditions, a sand- berm beach may be eroded, while a gravel-berm beach may be accreted. (See Figure 13A) The writer's study of hundreds of Puget Sound accretion shoreforms has shown that stable, seldom-breached beach berms are created and maintained when updrift feeder bluffs contain sufficient gravel of those sizes which the local peak-wave action can just barely classify and move in' a net-drift direction along the beach. Whenever such maximum gravel-size fractions are missing, or where the proportion of smaller sizes and sand is too great for proper wave classification, accretion shoreforms and their berm spines are unstable, frequently breached,and. subject to-erratic cycles of erosion and accretion.. It should be obvious that these same unbalancing conditions are often induced in naturally stable accretion systems by updrift blockage of material supply, as by feeder bluff revetments, foreshore bulkheading and groining, or the dissection of a Drift-Sector system by boat chan- nels and jetties. The characteristics of a storm-resistant accretion berm are usually those of a porous ridge of loosely-held gravel that can absorb considerable overtopping swash by percolation, as well as a berm that is broad enou gh to allow some momentary (less than four-hours) peak- storm e rosion to occur along its high tide edge. without being breached (erosion accretion buffer zone)., Any fixed structures or non-porous surfaces and fills will act to reduce these features of coarse-gravel mobility, porosity, and berm width, and will impair the inherent geo-hydraulic pe rf ormance, of such a berm. such impairment usually precipitates subsequent defense measures tha further destroy nature's self-maintaining s torm buf fe r. Gravel berm-building action under moderate high wave conditions Presents us with a -valuable example of an ideal wave-impact barrier that operates as a porous and flexible dike or seawall bulkhead. Such a storm be rm not only dissipates wave energy by void-space diffusion of water, but by dampening wave and driftlog impacts within a resilient barrier that can: absorb work energy through its flexible mass, "BERMHEADS" VERSUS BULKHEADS The wri ter s experience has shown that one of the potentlailly. happy solutions to certain beach erosion problems in Puget Sound re sts in tho fact that we can go nature one better by supplying certain gravel-starved ero-sional Class 11 and Class III beaches with specially-sized berm-building gravel that will.not only reduce the rate of erosion, but will in addition produce a natural type backshore berm to serve as a recreational dry Class I drift- wood beach of which there is a great scarcity. (only about 5% of all our inland marine shores) In view of the fact that Puget. Sound shorelands contain millions of tons of gravel, such building beach-cover mate rial is everywhere available. It is theref ore technically and economically feasible to reduce the need for that type of bulkheading which has, up to now only served to downgrade so =ch of this shore resource heritage, Many years of observing and documenting the sorry sight and con- sistent failures of innumerable marine bulkhead installations under all kinds of conditions has convinced the writer that properly de- signed and placed, gravel berms could replace, in many instances, expensive wooden, steel, or concrete defense work s. such natural Bermheads would not only provide erosion protection for the,backup shoreland, but would alzo reduce down-cutting of foreshores on erosional beaches, while significantly lowering first cost and maintenance. Perhaps the greatest benefits, however, will result through esthetic appeal by replacing an artificial, alien structure, with a shore-compatible environment that quickly becomes "naturalized" with driftwood and backshore flora. Such "bermheads- may become. narrow Class I beaches, where they either beef up-or restore an original ALTERNATE I E L EVAT 10 N V1, I BLAima Tice PUTURE DRIFT-13EUT CGwq^voL) -STABLE BA(K5HORE. REFERUICE 24' VARIABLF- 5TORM -BUFFEK BERM TOP (POROUS) BA(A-SLOPt AT H +1.2.6, is, APPRbXIMATE BREAKER-LINE.5 16HIEST TI (NO sTu"- 5vfkr.F-) lv WAVE + I S. 0 S'WAVE !,q; AVE I 3, W A 12.s, + 12@31 clROM P rO#AM <.Yl-,L'- PATH -MPkDC M L -tic- H V. sr rlaw -T 0 ?1 aWAV ROA V 6- WNW q /yoff., C4,,r AVAW" 04W 79 Mt%wwf $ft Wombs -vT -Iti-,PLAC GRAVEL FSEMT SAMD COVER 7VIS PRE 7-71: so. it -7, - O%v CLAV lvrpt^T POROUS-GRAVEL FILL. 0lwm A*4-1-ft ILS "AV ssumao Paw3emAt BLOM - e ADDED MiQN4167-llca DRY SILACH CIO MLLW MLLW ADDEO mwmw DRY lmrALM PRZ5er4T PlWMW DRY 8eACWl is, PRE5ENT MFT-SEILT (COAR54M-SM40. WWI-) UNSIASIA. aAcr<:$WQftc- IS, IALTERNATE 2 PLAMr cy VARIAt3LE 5TORM t3UFFFR JaIRM-Y" R"o ITS &CIAM FROM CMAOZ CYCLE PAY" I'Ir 7' . . ;.*. . 4% -F, i4 61 4.5 -tel- ADDED 416"gST A N.CEKTRAL PRWILE C &go- HVDFL4MJUC COMOMOP45 ADDED MNHVJ oaV SeAcm PRE3eMT MNWw 04RV 7 tj PRESErff DRIFrT-EffL`T PROFILE (UPPER Faftrumpta) gs, 4 vex T 20 LOST UPPER DW BEA(H WITH TV01CAL FkIPRAP FtEVKTM6J"fr 1 :5 0 ri KTvk I C C OMPA^160" All it TM 0, z - .7 1., ..,J, :4@ EXISTIK6 AND ENKANCED BEACH PROF)LES -1 BEACH lp EROSION COKTROL & Cl-ASS CREATION PROJECt BIRCH SAY FMOURcrl EVAL/JAYlom FIRM -WHA7044 COUMCAL OP 60VORM"m-rrs NO. EIS-175 Jr DATE -_16UME SCALE TO-SICALZ OUMEATIOMS Of9tY F-1,6- I+A IVOLP aAUCR fxl----@7 accretion beach, or create a dry backshore where none existed before. Whether such bermheads can be placed SeAward of existing and failing bulkheads,or must replace them,- depends on the-latters projection into the foreshore, or their position in the tidal horizon. It also hinges on the local wave-energy level, location within the Drift-Sector System, shore orientation,and convex or concave shoreline curvature in terms of prevailing wave angle groining requirements, foreshore width and slope, beach cover depth-and supply, and finally whether the foreshore represents an in-situ shelf -or accretion base. Gravel-type flexible bermheads,as a technically and environmentally acceptable shore defense measure, cannot replace single, and indivi- dually projecting bulkheads for the same reason that isolated bulk- heads are already failure-programmed, and often interfere with their driftway operation. Thus the application of bermhead placement amounts to a gradual high-tide shore re-alignment over a minimum reach a project thatentails, in most instances, the cooperative effort of shore owners to each side. The design and placement of a pro- tective bermhead beach does not represent beach feeding, nor the simple dumping of gravel to buffer existing 'structures. Rather it involves a seaward realignment of the active upper driftbelt at the expense of some middle foreshore space. This is most difficult along a beach oriented as an active driftway and may even call for submerged groining with oversize cobble-type berm-core material in conjunction with gravel sizing for minimum storm-wave movement. In all cases it must preserve the existing longshore drift operation, The writer is reluctant to advocate such beach enhancement programs as a universal approach until at least the major remaining unimpaired accretion shoreforms and their Class I beaches have been secured and protected as an endangered species. There are, nevertheless,, overriding circumstances, at times, where the unhappy combination of people concentration and wet erosional Class III beaches create a. frustrating shore situation that begs correction in.the public interest. (An example of such a dilemma exists along the east shore of Puget sound between Tacoma and Everett where more than 99% of the shoreline is without backshore, at high tides., precisely where also the highest people pressure in the State impacts on a marine shore.) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The creation and superposition of a backshore upon any foreshore is, of course, an intru- sion into the Shore Process Corridor. It is in.fact a consumptive use of the foreshore resource and should be justified only when a proper scale ratio maintains surrounding eco-system viability. Such an intrusion first of all shifts the high tideline seaward while It buries all or part of the upper foreshore along with any established inter-tidal benthic flora and fauna. Such negative impacts need to be considered, minimized, or eliminated. They must in all cases be balanced against a justification based on highest public, benefits in any one situation. While a narrow bermhead protective or recreational dry berm.beach would occupy primarily the upper foreshore of minimum benthic importances there may also be time s where the burial loss of several thousands of clams, representing a single recreational resource,must be weighed against additional thousands of people- visit$ in which a dry high-tide beach fills the needs for many additional resource opportunities denied by a wet erosional shore. The expression "tampering with nature" needs to be applied within the realistic context of a.constantly unbalanced nature trying to balance itself along a high-to-low energy gradient. A. natural cyclic system may be enhanced by applying corrective cycles to improve the natural environment. Such improvements may be affected by the addition of scarce or missing components to an inferior or weak natural system. Whatever the artificial$ or arti- ficially-induced enhancement process it is not so much the means as it is the end-ef feet and desired results that count. With this brief introduction to a relatively new approach to the problems of natural and intruded shores, let us now evaluate its applicability to the local-shore environments,, J@ E 1 em-e"n t I I CZM 306.- 5B Final-Report Page No. Element 6 LAND USE STUDY Introduction The Shoreline Management Act has been in effect about six years, the City of Seattle processed its first application and granted .a Permit in the fall of 1971. How has the permit sy,�tem worked? What, if any, have been.the visible and use activity effects of this form of land/water use management? -..The purpose of this project was to begin to answer these and other questions, to establish the base for annual.measurement of use and activity changes.occurring on our shorelines, and to deter- mine with as much precision as possible how Seattle shorelines are actually used, so that the effects of the Act and the Program can be evaluated. In addition, knowing in Precise detail what activities take Place on Seattle shorelines provides a base against which to compare the permit data (also automated as another project under this CZM grant), as another evaluative measure. These evaluations may then supply the factual basis for amendment of the Seattle Shoreline Master Program. Methodology All uses within the shoreline district were documented, except single-family residential units on land, including apartment houses and house boats. Four sources of land use data were used, two of them available from City records: the License and Consumer Affairs Department records and Fire Department records. The other sources used as 'cros-s checks-were the Polk and reverse directories. City Light or Water Department records which might have been used were.not readily available. None of the four sources were completely- accurate. However, extensive telephone checks with occupants improved the level of accuracy, so that we have a confidence level above 95 percent for the specific land/water uses at any ..given address, age of structure, water dependency and related factors. The information has been geocoded, so that it can be mapped or can be analyzed by location such as Lake Union or the Duwamish Harbor Island industrial area, for example,. Following is a list of the data obtained: CZ'7114 3 0 65 BFinal Report Element 6 LAND USE STUDY Introduction The Shoreline Management Act has been in effect'about six years; ,the City of Seattle processed its first application and granted a Dermit in the fall.of 1971. How has the permit system worked? What, if' any, have been the visible and use-activity effects of this form of land/water use-management? One purpose of this project was to begin to answer these Iand@other questions, to establish the base for annual measurement of use and activity changes occurring on our shorelines, and to deter- mine with as much precision as possible how Seattle shorelines are actually used, so that the effects of the Act and the Program can be, evaluated. In addition, knowing in precise detail what. activities take olace on Seattle shorelines provides a base against.which.to compare the permit data (also automated as another project under this CZM grant), as another evaluative measure. These evaluations may then supply the factual basis for amendment of the.Seattle Shoreline Master Program. Methodology All uses within the shoreline district were documented except single-family residential. units on land, including apartment houses and house boats. Four sources of land use data were used, two of them available from City records: the License and Consumer Affairs Department records and Fire Department records. The other sources used as cross checks were the Polk and reverse directories. City Light or Water Department records which might havebeen used were not readily available. None of the four sources Were completely accurate. However, extensive telephone checks with occupants improved the level of accuracy, so that we have a confidence level above 95 percent for the specific land/wate-_r uses at any given address, age of structure, water depende.-Licy and related factors. The information has been geocoded, so that it can be mapped or can be analyzed by location suchas Lake Union or 'the Duwamish Harbor,Island industrial area, for example. Following is a list, of the data obtained: List of Land Use Data Items Name of firm 2. Address 3. Telephone number 4. Kroll Map number 5. Principal activity 6. 131,1ultiple uses 7. Auxiliary activities 8. Number of stories 9. Age of structure 10. Moorage berths, if any 11. Zoning 12. Shoreline environment 13. Access to shoreline 14. Water dependency In addition, there is space to add building and site area as 'well as shoreline l.ength figures and Assessor's data when that becomes available. Element 6 continued Land Use Catego-ries Uniqueness is not unique to the shoreline district: a@ least one- third of the 300 odd use categories are for one-of-a-k-ind establish- ments. As might be expected, the ranqe of uses is very wide and includes, among many others, a mattress factory, a quLlting'conp- any, a brass foundry, a fly-wheel welder, a marine sanitation company, a funeral home, an employment counselor, a library con- sulting service, and an auctioneer. The largest number of any use is multiple-residential structures with,103. The next largest number is boat sales with@73. Next come marinas with 72; restaurants, 45; distributors, 38; mari;ne .freight, 36; accounting services, 36; small boat building, 27; and architects, 24. Insurance firms accounted for 18; engineers (all types) number 16; real estate and investment services combined, 33; graphic art .and design services, 21., There are 13 beauty shops (and three barbers); 11 management services; 16 general contrac[_-6rs; and 14 specialty gift shops,.not counting many boutiques and other retail establishments. Element 6 continued Of the 10 units or more group, most were structures of 20 units or less. A small group, (3), were in the 50-1-00 unit range., and three had more than 100 units. Madison Park had the greatest density and largest number of multiple units (1,101). Of the two largest structures, one has 232 and one has 304 units; both are at Maai@@.o`n Park. Leschi had 324 multiple units, West Seattle 462, and the Shilshole area about 200, 156 of which are in one condominium. Age of Structures The data are not complete at this time, but cover about two-thirds of the entries. Of those which have a date, the distribution follows: Buildings Date of Construction Number Percent 1881 through 1919 (40 years) 73 12.3 1920 through 1929 66 10.1,6 1930 through 1939 94 15.2 through 1949 71 11.5 1950 through 1959 108 17.5 1970 through 1969 151 24.6 1970 through 1976 51 8.3 Total 617 100.0 The dates in the listout show certain peaks. For example, in the first group, three buildings were constructed before 19001 five from 1900-1909 and 65 between 1910-1919. This compares very favorablv with construction dates for subsequent decades, consider- ing. that many have been demolished to make way for newer buildings. The dates 1910, 1920 and especially 1930 occur frequently in the listout of construction dates. This rounding out may be due to a tendencv to date a building to the nearest decade. 1910 and 1920, however, were both in a series of boom years. For.Seattle, 1930 was the last year of high construction before the depression took hold, and most of the construction done in the.1940's was done in the last half of the decade, following World War II. The low number of structures for the 40 year period prior to 1910 is due to several factors; fewer buildings were constructed prior to 1900 and, of course, few of those remain in use after 80 to 90 years. At the othe'r end of the scale, if the 70's are averaged to a full decade,' the total would be only 102; only 2/3 of the 1960's, the peak period. Element 6 continued Permits Received by Type of Anplicant Partly as a way of measuring whether the Permit system is increas- ing public access to the shoreline and partly to define the clientele, permits were analyzed by type of applicant. Xbout one-fourth (24.7%) of all permits went topublic agencies over the five-year period. The Port, with 23 permits, had 5.3%; Parks, 4.8%; other City agencies (mostly Engineering) 6.5%; and DNTR, 2.3%. The remaining 4.8% are scattered am *on-L--- Ildetro, the State Highway Department, two universities, and the Corps.of Engin- eers. of private applicants, organizations account for 1.5% and single family residents, 13%. Thusf three-fifths (60.8%) of all shore- line permits were issued to provide individuals and corporations for commercial, manufacturing, or other industrial uses. on the basis of the figures above and the permit data, the permit@ system in and of itself does not necessarily encourage any in- crease in public access to the shorelines on either public or pri- vate properties. The time series does show an increase in Parks permits from one in.1971 to 7 in 1976, but these are a small part of the total. Element 6 continued Mapped Land Use Data All data maD shows all establishments'studied and sets the iDattern of non-sing.le family use for the city. Access As for permit data, selected land use data items were mapped, generally relating to access and other shoreline goals. Maps show commercial and industrial uses which have direct shoreline access, and those which are on upland lots. The printout data as well as the maps show that a substantial humber of establishments do not have direct access to the shoreline, but that access could be"pro- vided at most points along the non-residential shoreline, all other things being equal. Access.is defined as being located on a property with water fronL- age. Residential As noted in description of the data, multi-family residential units and houseboats are mixed in with other uses in several areas; single-family residential units were not counted. These multi- residential uses are also mapped. A high degree of clustering is apparent. When houseboats alone are mapped at large.scale, they also exhibit strong clustering. Boat Building and Repair, Marinas and Boat Sales Again, the findings are not surprising. These activities are all closely related in location and most are located on the Canal or Lake Union. The strong relationship between these activities is an indication of their interdependence. Element 6 continued Conclusions from Land Use Data The.land use data indicate that a minority of shoreline uses are water dependent, and it suggests that if reserving shorelines for water dependent uses is a City goal, encouragement other than-'a. shoreline use permit system is needed. If water dependence is defined in a strict sense, only about 20% of all establishments located on the shoreline ate actually water dependent. Adding houseboats brings up the percentage to about 40%, still less than half. The Duwamish River from Kellogg Island south has a variety of' specialty industrial uses which service other industries. Virtu- ally none are water dependent althougli the primary uses which they serve may be. The land use data also reveal the very wide range of uses on the Seattle shorelines, although without being able to assi-gn front-. age to each separate use, it is difficult to evaluate the sign'ifi- cance of many of the 1.00-odd unique uses. However, where there .are more than half a dozen establishments with the same use, the fact that their space requirements tend-to be similar makes com- parisons more meaningful. Thus, the aggregate total of all .boating-oriented uses provides a measure of the importance of pleasure boating as a land use activity on the shorelines, as well as its economic significance. In the same way, the very high number of business and professional services establishments also is significant. The age of structures tells a good deal about existing building stock; if this could be related to building per- mit data for earlier years, an even better understanding of the nature of shoreline development and potential redevelopment could be gained. Clustering of similar uses, which occurs in several areas, tells us that these activities have certain specific locational require- ments not met by other sites and which can be deduced from analyz- ing the site characteristics. Thus, any new establishment of the same type will also have the same locational requirements. This information strengthens not only our understanding of inter- related activities, but can be used in future shoreline land use, planning. CZM 306 SHORELINE LAND USE STUDY 1977 METHODOLOGY by John B. Crull This project was funded in part by a Coastal Zone Management Contract from the Office of Coastal Zone .Management through the Washington State Department of Ecology. CZM 5B Final Report METHODOLOGY OUTLINE OF ELEMENTS AND PROCEDURES A) Development of data source requirements B) Investigation and review of possible data sources Selection of six primary and seven secondary sources. 1) Primary Sources a) Business License Applications b) Fire Department Building Inspection CArds c) Polk Directory d) Reverse Directory e) Kroll Zoning 14aps f) Shoreline Maps 2) Secondary Sources a) Seattle Park Department b) Seattle Engineering Department c) U.S. Coast Guard d) U.S. Navy e) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers f) Metro g) Port of Seattle D) Development of Land.Use Classification Code .1) Survey of Existing codes a) Standard Industrial Code (SIC), b) Standard Land Use Classification Code (SLUC) c) Classification of Land Use (SCAG) d) Kitsap Co. Land.Use Code e) U.S.G.S. Land Use and Land Cover Classification Code f) Two-Digit Classification Code for Area-Coextensive Surface Accounti-ng in the Puget Sound Region g) Seattle Building Department Real Property Inventory and Improved Property Report 2) Seattle Shoreline Classification of Land Use a) Activity Codes b) Summary of Land Use Classification System c) E) Design of Computor Card Column Entries F) Design of Data Collection Form 7 G) Determination of Street Segments and address ranges to be included in study. H) Collection of LIcense Department Data 1) Secure permission 2) Collection of B & L numbers 3) Recording of.data 7 I) Collection of Fire Department Data 1) Secure permission 2) Schedule station visits 3) Collect and record data Collection of Krolland Shoreline map data K) Collection of Polk and Reverse Director Data L) Data Weaknesses M) Assignment of Identification Numbers N) Data Processing 0) Updating of the Data File 1) Updating problems -2- jaher U Lak ity Nort, NIE 14051 Blue Ridge 3 reenv4 95 th M2 LU W z z Crow Hill NW 85ith W W NtJ75*h 04 m S nset z z R i G Green @j NW 65 th Uke avenr a a I ifff- Fort N 45th Lawton lhurst rerno"t 0 U of '73 union Bay Dra ej A Uj A F77771 Shoreline Areas ill -L:L@ included in the Shoreline Land Use Study E Un Central in lill 7- istr* Elliott Bay -le W LakeWash 0 Floacing ar. t I'm Alki Be on 4. point U) WS Ea 0, W t Seattle 3 - Colum ia Deir* W right n, SWH HiShFbint H, land rk D ni SW Barton F n eroy ITY MITS W it Center inier B@--ach S Ith A). The list of potential sources surveyed for the Shoreline Land Use Study included those suggested by the CZM 305 Report on Data Automation. Several additional sources were considered that were not included in the 305 Report. All sources were evaluated against the followint criteria: a) The data must be systematically and comprehensively collected. b) The data must be updated and kept current on a-regular basis. c) The source must be easily accessible both initially and in the future. d) Duplication of information should be minimized. Sources supplying a greater number of needed@data entries are preferable to those supplying a fewer number. f) The data must be well suited to commercial and industrial portions of the shoreline. B) List of Sources Considered Seattle Building Department Card file Seattle Community Development Department Shoreline Permits Seattle Enginee )ring Department List of street ends Seattle Lighting Department Account & Billing Information ..Seattle Fire Department Building Inspection Cards Seattle License Department Business Licenses Seattle Office of Policy Planning. Colored Zoning Maps Seattle Parks Department Park Property Listing Seattle Water Department Account and Billing Information Metro Location of Sewage Plants Port of Seattle @Inventory ofPort -Properties King County'Assessor Commercial Records U.S. Coast Guard Inventory of Properties U.S. Navy Inventory of Properties U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Inventory of Properties Kroll Maps Address & Zoning Information Shoreline Maps Shorelin- classi- fications and frontages List of Sources Considered continued Aerial Photography Land Use Informatior Polk Directory Occupancies Bell Reverse Directory @Occupancies Bell Telephone Directory verification of Occup4pcy C) Data Sources Selected Primary Sources 1) Seattle, License Department Business License Applications a) License files are well suited to the non-reside'ntial portions of the shoreline included in.the study.".. Every business whether operating from a private resi- dence or commercial fishing vessel is required to, Possess a business license. Since the Licenses are used for taxation purposes, the files are current and complete. b) Businesses no longer operating are dropped and new ones are added routinely. c) The Business License application is a public record and therefore is easily accessible. Files are referenced by hand geocoded cards containing the B & L numbers. All files are located at one central place. d) Business Licenses provide the following information: -Name of Business .-Name of owner -Type of ownership (individual, partnership, or corporation) .-Description of Activity in detail -phone number of the business. -Future updating of the License data is facilitated by a monthly printout of new Business License that is sent to PCD from the License Department. 2) Seattle Fire Department Building Inspection Cards a) Every commercial, industrial and residential (triplex or larger) building is inspected every year by the Fire Department. Records of these inspections are kept in the form of"Building Inspection Cards." These files are uniformly maintained and updated throughout the study area. b) Fire Department Inspection Cards provide the following information which is applicable to the Study: -Name.of the business and/or name of the building -Date of Construction -Number of Stories -Number-of Apartment Units c) The files are.well organized and keyed to a map of the Inspection area. By using the map-and numbered blocks, the shoreline data can be easily located. The cards are not found in a central location, however, Each Fire Station inspects its own response area. There are 13 stations inspecting the Study Area. 1LJ flij @tt-$1.00 NON-REFUNDABLE CITY OF SEATTLE DEPARTAAFNIT OF LICENSES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS 102 SHATTIE !'AUNICIPAL BUILDING S--AT-',LE, VI.ASHIN GTON 93104 APPLICATION FOR BUSINESS LICENSE P L EA 3 E PRI, N I OR TYPE - Be sure oil infarmc-ion ii comp;m:te. Ii ocid"tionol spcce is needed, ottach-suppiemental sheets. (T RA D E N A M, __@'@INESS AD@DRES_S ---ZIP CODE---- IN @()ETAIL@.@.. STARTING DATE OF BUSINESS IN SEATTLE DOES THE BUSINESS CONFORNI fO PARTNERSHIP CORP____@) THER THE REQUIREMENTS OF: THE ZONING C01 D ORATION -77-7-77 @_ES"D::.,.-E ADDRESS AND PHON 0-. =-INNER, PARTNERS. CORP. OFFICERS: (TITLISi YES NO ZONING REPORT NAME, ADDRESS. AND PHONE NO. OF RESIDENT AGENT OR LOCAL MANAGER: (_0THER BUSINESS LO CATIONS IN SE!A@TTLE; iF WAREHOUSE STREM lip C008 PHONE STOCK O.NLY CHECK BOX IF YOU PURCHASED BUSINESS@ DID YOU TAKE OVER: ENTIRE BUSINESS Lj PORTION THEREOF FORMER BUSINESS OWNEWS NAME LICENSE NO. ADDR'ESS PHONE NO. REMARKS: SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT TITLE FOR OFFfCE USE ONLY PEGULA FORY LICENSES DArE INWiAL5 C ODE TYPE EXPIRES PLAT: LICENSE MASTER CARD A 03A i-Lo _z CCv%?urFR F 0 R%@ E p &N N@_:; R 0 \1%" E S 109 MADE BY % RF7lLJRN,,V4ITE AND YELLOW COPIES'VVITIH YOUR REMITTANCE. 'Kc6c_? PINK COPY. ID Numher Cart Ordur t;l C Nuirnlwr IN. AA A 5 E D F- P 7- 1 -FA .4. Z > Pt P- F- 0 A r;A 3 4 rz 5 f r- z Geocooing ning IBM: "Z. 0 tl L7 Z. Shoreline Z"Op.F-LJh4E- Environment 0 0 @i o:. :3 cl Access ta Shoreline logo W. Previously Enteret A'7-A Number of Stories Total Grid Fl Area Sq. Ft. Date of F- S, DE%"r D Cn'ircion z DE: F T 4-rA 3 0 Rb L DI zELq-t ;a F- L E R.S I te C- -r IN 'N LICA, DEP Starting Date of Business E P-r Gerwiral Code Kj' L )q < E Auxiliary C-4, LA v 5 @cn Ownersi6p Co@l, L 141. .I Use A r,!:, Sq F, Numl.er .1 d) An information trading system is being developed whereby DCD Land Use information will be exchanged for any additions or alterations-in the inspection card files. Such an arrangement would preclude future visits to theindividual Fire Stations for updating of the data. 3) Polk and Reverse Directories. The two directories provide a listing of addresses and occupants that is checked against the other two primary data sources. The Polk Directory is updated yearly and the Reverse every three months. Polk Directory: -Addresses in numerical order -Name of occupant, building or householder -Telephone number -Indication of new listing -Includes vacancies Reverse Directory: -Address in numerical order -Name of occupant -Telephone number 4) Kroll Zoning Maps The maps are essential to the study and supplyinform- ation for four data requirements: a) The maps were used to assemble the list of street -segments and address ranges included in the study. This listing is necessary for the collection of data from every other source. b) The map number is used as a-gener al geographical locater for each record. c) The maps are used to determine the zoning classification for each record. d) The Kroll maps are used in conjunction with the Shoreline Maps for the measurement of shoreline front- age. 5. Shoreline Maps The 1" = 200' Shoreline Master-Program maps are used for two data entries in the Study. a) Shoreline Environments as outlined in the SSMP are derived from the maps. b) The Shoreline Maps show the actual shoreline and is used to calculate the amount.of frontage each use has. Secondarv Sources, 1) Seattle Park Department List of Park Properties Public properties are not listed by any of primary source unless a building is present on property. It is therefore necessary to obtain additional information pertaining to open space. and public lands.. Most parks do not have a precise.. address, rather, a general location address such as Beach Drive S.W. & S.W. Alaska Street. Properties addressed in this manner were assigned precise addresses for geocoding purposes (4390 Beach Drive S.W.) 2) Seattle Engineering Department List of Street Ends The list of street ends is used for calculating the amount of public access present within the study area. Most street ends are 60 ft. wide. 3) U.S. Coast Guard USCG Pronerties The Coast Guard supplied all of the necessary data pertaining to their properties located on the Seattle waterfront. .4) U.S. Navy Navy Properties The Navy supplied all necessary data pertaining to their properties located on the Seattle waterfront. 5) U.S.- Army Corps of Engineers - Corps Properties The Corps supplied all necessary data pertaining to their properties located on the,Seattle waterfront. 6),.Metro - Metro Properties Metro supplied all necessary data pertaining to their properties located on the Seattle waterfront. 7) Port of Seattle Port Properties The Port of Seattle supplied all necessary 'data pertaining to their properties located on the Seattle waterfront in- cluding a 1977 catalog of properties. D. Development of. a Land Use Classification Code .1) Survey of Existing Classification Codes a) Standard Industrial Classification Manual (SIC) produced by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 1972 The SIC code represents the first attempt to develop a standardized system of classifying.economic activities. -he basic four-digit code is provided in the form of a hierarchy of categories, with the most general level represented by the first digit, second level by thesecond digit, and so on. The code has become a solid. base around which several Land Use Codes have been developed.., However, the SIC alone will not adequately serve as a Land Use Code as any feature that is not associated with an economic activi:-Ey is not included in the Manual.. Standard Land Use Classification Code (SLUC) produced by the U.S. Urban Renewal Administration and the Bureau of 'Public Roads, 1965 Like the SIC code, the Standard Land Use Classification Code was developed to standardize land use coding. The code consists of a four-digit hierarchial activity code with three auxiliary codes. The classification code used in this study has been derived from the SLUC code. Those changes that have been made in code are either additions of elements that are peculiar to Seattle or deletions of elements that do not occur in Seattle. c) SCAG classification of Land Use produced by the Southern California Association of Governments, 1972 The SCAG code is a regional. adaptation of the SLUC code with some alterations occurring inthe Residential and Agricultural sections. Certain elements of the code ha-ve been incorporated into the Seattle shoreline code. Other Activity Codes Surveyed d) Kitsap County Land Use Code.- developed by the U of W Remote Sensing Lab. The code consists of an abbreviated four-digit code with a.regional rather than urban orientation. e) U.S.G.S. Land Use and Land Cover Classification Code for use with Remote Sensor Data, paper 964. This newly developed code is also more appropriately applied to a regional area. f) Two Digit Classification for Area-Coextensive Surface Accounting in the Puget Sound Region, produced by the Puget Sound Council of Governments.. The code is over generalized for this study and better suited to a smaller scale inventory. g) Seattle Building Department Real Property Inventory and Improved Property Report. The code was developed by theBuilding Department to classify City properties. Although elements of the @system are applicable to the Shoreline Study, over- all nature of system is not. Shoreline Classification of Land Use The four-digit code settled upon for this study is essentially a derivitive of the SLUC code. The format, however, is likely that of the SCA%G code in that it is arranged onto 8-1/2 x 11" sheets of paper in the normal orientation. The SLUC code is arrang.ed with the lines in avertical rather than horizontal manner. Approximately 25% of entries have been altered, added, or deleted to adapt the code to the Seattle environment. In addition to the four-digit activity code, three additional digits have been provided; a one-digit general code; a one- digit auxiliary code; and a one-digit ownership code. A lengthy index of land use activities was produced to accomp- any the code for reference purposes. Examples of each c an be found in this section. 7-1 C VA. 30' 519i i LAND USE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORIES AND CODE NUMBERS ACTIVITY CODES (columns 2-48 cord 2) General Code (column 42) 0 - No general code 1 - Located on a pier 2 - Located in a shopping center or shopping complex 3 - Office or professional building 4 - Open 5 - Open 6 - Operating free private residence 7 - Open 8 - Open 9 - Open Activity Code (Columns 4 - ) Refer to Land Use Classifications (NOT INCLUDED HERE) Auxiliary Code (column 47) 0 - Not an auxiliary code 2 - Central or administrative office 3 - Warehousing or storage - inside or outside 4 - Automobile parking lot or garage 5 - Operations, repair and maintenance 6 - Under construction 7 - Boat 8 - Sales representative or branch office 9 Ownership Code (column ) 0 - Private, individual or partnership 1 - Corporation 2 - City of Seattle 3 - King County 4 - State of Washington 5 - Federal Government 6 - Port of Seattle 7 - Metro 8 - Foreign Government, individual or corporation 9 SUMMARY 0F LAND USE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ONE AND TWO-DIGIT LEVELS LIVING AREAS 11 Household Units 12 Group Quarters 13 Residential Hotels 14 Mobile Home Parks or Trailer Courts 16 Transient Lodgings 18 Supplemental Residential 19 Re s idential, NEC (Not Elsewhere Classified) 2-3 INDUSTRIES 21 Food and kindred Products 22 Textile -Mill Products 23 Apparel and Other Finished Products Made From Fabrics, Leather, and Similar Materials 24 Lumber and Wood Products (Except Furniture) 25 Furniture and Fixtures 26 Paper and Allied Products 27 Printing, Publishing, and Allied Industries 28 Chemicals and Allied Products 29 Petroleum Refining and Related Industries 31 Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastic Products 32 Stone, Clay, and Glass Products 33 Primary Metal Industries 34 Fabricated Metal Products 35 Professional, Scientific, and Controlling Instruments, Photographic and Optical Goods, Watches and Clocks 39 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 4 TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, AND UTILITIES 41 Railroad, Rapid Rail Transit, and Street Railway Transportation 42 Motor Vehicle Transportation 43 Aircraf t Transportation 44 Marine Craft Transportation 45 Highway and Street Right-of-Way 46 Automobile Parking 47 Communications 43 Utilities 49 Transportation, Communications, and Utilities, NEC 5 TRADE, WHOLESALE AND RETAIL 51 Wholesale Trade 52 Retail Trade Building Materials, Hardware, Farm Equipment and Supplies 53 Retail 'Trade General Merchandise Page 2 5 54 Retail Trade - Food 55 Retail Trade - Automotive, Marine Craft, Aircraft, and Accessories 56 Retail Trade - Apparel and Accessories 57 Retain Trade - Furniture, Home Furnishings and Equipment. 58 Retail Trade - Eating and Drinking Places 59 Miscellaneous Retail Trade 6 SERVICES 61 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate Services 62 Personal Services 63 Business Services 64 Repair Services 65 Professional Services 66 Contract Construction Services 67 Governmental Services 68 Educational Services 69 Miscellaneous Service organizations 7 CULTURAL, ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATIONAL 71 Cultural Activities and Nature Exhibitions 72 Public Assembly 73 Amusements 74 Recreational -Activities 75 Resorts and Group Camps 76 Parks 79 Other Cultural, Entertainment, and Recreational Activities, NEC 8 RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND EXTRACTION 81 Agriculture 82 Agricultural Related Activities 83 Forestry Activities and Related Services 84 Fishing Activities and Related Services 35 M i n ing Activities and Related Services, 89 Other Resource Production and Extraction, NEC 9 UNDEVELOPED LAND AND WATER 91 Undeveloped and Unused Land Area. (except forests) 92 Water Areas 93 Vacant Floor Area and-Buildings 94 Under Construction 7 G) Use of Shoreline and Kroll.maps to determine the,street seg- ments and address ranges included in the study area. Both sets of maps were used to compile a list of streets and the associated address ranges (Figure The list can be used with all necessary data sources as. a means of accepting or rejecting various parcel information by address. If the address is outside the acceptable range but a sub- stantial portion of the property is within, the parcel will be included in-the study. In most cases, the properties included in the study extend STREETS and AVENUES ADDRESS RANGE (thru and incuding EVE, I ODD the following numbers Salmon Bay Waterway to Lake T on South Shore W. Commodore Way x 2100 3200 W. Emerson Place x 1900 2100 W. Emerson Street x 1500 1900 21 Avenue West x 4000 4300 W. Ewing Street x 200 1200 W. Nickerson Street x 100- 200 Nickerson Street x 100 800 13 Avenue West x x 4000 8Avenue West x x 700 3800 6Avenue West x x 3600 3 Avenue West x X 3600 3Avenue North x x 3000 W. Florentina Street x x 300 W. Etruaia Street x x 400 STREETS and AVENUES, ADDRESS -T,,TTN3ER5- ADDRESS (thru and includino- ODD the fo11ci-j-in*_g nm,.LbersL_ Shilshole Bay to Lake Union, North Shore Seaview Avenue N.W. x 5400 7900 N.W. 54 Street x 2900 3400 N.W4 Market Street x .2400 2900 Shilshole Avenue N.W. x 1400 2400 N.W. 45 Street x 8bo - 1500 Leary Way N.W. 3800 4500 .N. Canal Street x 100 300 N.W. 35 Street. x 100 300 N.W. Canal Street x 100 400 N. 34 Street x 400 800 N. 35 Street x 100 300 N.W. 35 Street x 100 300 28. Avenue N.W. x x 5300 24 Avenue N.W.. x x 5300 5400 14 Avenue N.W. x x 4300 4400 11 Avenue N.W. x x 4300 -.4400 9Avenue N.W. x x 4100 4200 N.W. 42 Street x 800 N.W. 40 Street x x 600-- 700 N.W. Bowdoin Place x 400 500 6 Avenue N.W. x x 3900 9 Avenue N.W. x 300 400 N. 35 Street x 100 300 STREETS and AVENUES A-T',D?.ESS N1,MBEF-L ADDRESS MNGE (thru and including ODD -ing nu:-:bers D the fo!107. T Lake.Union Fairview Avenue N. x 800 1200 Fairview Avenue E. x X. 1200 3200- Eastlake Avenue. E. X 2800 2900 Minor Avenue E. x 2200 2500 Valley.Street x 900 1100 Fuhrman Avenue E x x 3200 E. Martin Street x x 100 E. Edgar Street x x 100 E. Hamlin Street x x 100 E. Roanoke Street x x 0 .100 E. Lynn Street x x 10 90 E. Galer Street x x 0 100 Yale Avenue N. X. x 1100 Fairview Place N. x x 1200 Terry Avenue NN. x x 800 900 Westlake Avenue N. x x 800 2900 N. Northlake Way x 900 2500 N.E. Northlake Way x x 0 500 N.'Northlake Place x 1700 STREETS and AVENUES ADDRESS NIUI'r:@B ERS ADDRESS RANGE (thru and includin,:,- EVEN ODD tI i ef ollc-r-inz aj:m@bers Portage Bay N.E. Northlake Way x x 600 800 N.E. Northlake Place x 600 80G.- N.E. Boat Street x x 900 1400 15 Avenue N.E. 3600 Portage Bay Place E. x x 3200 Fuhrman Avenue E. x 2900 3300 E. Shelby Street x x 1200 E. Hamlin Street, x x 1200 Boyer Avenue E. x 2400 2800... E. Miller Street X x 1500 E. Calhoun Street x 1500 16 Avenue E-. x 2400 2500 W. Montlake Blvd. E. x 2500 E. Hamlin Street 1800 1830 E . Shelby Street x 1800, S-REETS and AVENUES ADDRESS NU7v@BEF-13 ADDRFSS RANGE Lbxu and. including ODD th following num.bers-) Central Waterfront Elliott Bay @W. Garfield Street x X 1500 2400-- .Alaskan Way W. x x 100 1500,* Alaskan Way, x x 0 2900 x 0 1900 Alaskan Way S. Elliott Avenue W. X, 100 300, Elliott Avenue x 2300 3000, Board Street x 0 51 Clay Street x x 0 51 Cedar Street @x x .0 Vine Street x x 0 51 Wall Street x x o 51 Western Avenue x 100 2200 S. Washington Street- X, x 0 50 S. Massachusetts Street x x 0 50 S-,=-LTS and AVENUES A7,DR:-:SS NT-@,=Fls- ADDRESS RLNGE (thru and 0--, 11oz -ncr mr.-,bers f c East Waterway, West Waterway, Duwamish Waterway East Bank E. Marginal Way S. X 1700 67-- 7300 76oo S. Nevada Street X X 0 50, S. Idaho Street X X 0 50 S.W. Idaho Street X X 1100 S. Oregon Street X X. 0 50 S. Spokane Street X X 0 50 S.W. Spokane Street X 900 X 1000 -.1300 X X 1400 1700 S. Brandon X X 0 50 Ohio Avenue S. X X 5400 Diagonal Avenue S. X ..X .01- 50 S. Fid .algo Street X X 0.- 50 1 Avenue S. X X 5900 7200 S.W. Front Street X X 0 99 S.W. Mic higan Street X. X 0 200 Occidental Avenue S. X X 6500 Avenue S. X X. 6500 S. River Street X X 100. 300 Fox Avenue S. X .6700 7000 S. Holly Street X X 200 300 S. Brighton Street X X 200 300 S. Willow Street X X 200 400 STREETS-and AVENUES A-DDRESS NTYr.,2-EPS ADDRESS R-A-NGE (thru and including NT ODD the follo-,ping n2,-.ibers) East Waterway, West Waterway, Duwamish Waterwa West Bank S.W. Florida Street x 2600 2900 26 Avenue S.W. X@ 2300 33010 Iowa Avenue S.W.' x 3300 3800 Chelan Avenue S.W. x x 3200 3400 West Marginal Way S.W. x 3500 7000 S.W. Dakota Street x x 1100 S.W. Idaho Street x 1100 S.W. Alaska Street x x 1200 S.W. Edmonds Street x 1100.- 1200 12 Avenue S. x x 4700 .4900 S.W. Front St Ireet x x 300 500 S.W.,Michigan:Street x 200 500 2 Avenue S. x x 7000,- 7200 Occidental Avenue S. x X 7100 .7200 3 Avenue S. x x 7200 7300 4 Avenue South x x 7200. 7300 5 Avenue South x x 7400 7 Avenue South x 7600 8 Avenue South X- 1700 10 Avenue South x x 78007 7900 S. Fontanelle-Street x x 400 500 S. Webster Street x x 500 600 S. Riverside Drive x x 500.- 700 S. Holden Street x x 700 S. Chicago Street x x 800 900 S. Kenyon Street x x 800 900 S. Portland Street x 700 800 IT E STREETS and -4,17ENTT@ ADDRESS N -1,1BERS ADDRESS RANGF thru and -Mcluding FV'EN ODD the follic-,ring mimbers) Harbor Island 11 Avenue S.W. x 1800 3500 16 Avenue S.W. x 1800 3400- S.W. Massachusetts Street x 1100 13 Avenue S.W. x X. 1700 1800. KlickitaL Avenue S.W. x 3200 -.3400 S.W. Florida Street x 1100 2000 S.W. Lander Street x x 1700 1900 West Seattle Harbor Avenue S.W x 1000,- 2300 Alki Avenue S.W. x x 1000 3200 Rainier Beach Seward Park Avenue S. x 9000 9400 Rainier Avenue S. x 9400 9500 Leschi Lakeside Avenue S. x 100 400 Lake Washington Blvd. x 100 .400 Madison Park 43 Avenue E. x 1600 2000 H) Collection. of License Department Data The collection of data from all of the current Business License applications within the study area can be.divided into.three processes. 1) Securing of permission to use the Business LicenseFiles. 2) Collection of B & L numbers 3) Recording of data A) An initial.survey of License Department data was made prior to any official correspondence. This survey was made with the assistance of Karen Goodnow of the License Department. On January 26, 1977, an official request for use of the files was made to Director Galle. The request was accepted and Assistant Director Keith Kleinhen arranged for our access to the files. The arrangement involved a sharing of responsibility between the- two departments in carrying out the data collection. DCD would collect the individual B & L numbers and record the data from the applications. The License Department will use the list of B & L numbers collected by DCD to pull and refile the 1300 records. All time used for filing is billed to DCD. B) The list of street segments is used to collect @B & Lnumbers from the manually geocoded address file. To minimize inter- ference with the License Department's daily routine, only one person can work with the address file at any given time. Two weeks were required to complete the collection of B & L numbers. Three to four hundred applications were pulled for recording each day. The recording phase was completed in one week. Data was recorded directly onto the Data Collection Form. Data collected from the License files: -Name of Business -Address of Business -Telephone number -Type of Business in detail -Type of ownership It was originally planned that the starting date of business -could also be obtained from this source However, this entry on the application reflects the most recent change in ownership characteristics and not the earliest opening date. Many applications were found to be either incompletely filled out or over generalized. In these cases it was necessary to-telephone the businesses to verify or complete the inform- ation'. Land Use Elements that are not,present in Business License files: -All vacant buildings, portions thereof and properties. -All residential properties -All publicly owned properties -Branch or Subsidiary -Bus-inesses operating under Licenses of parent E Desiqn of Computor Card Column Entries Design of the data cards was based on a listing of.all of the data that can be obtained from the sources plus allowance for future entries. In addition to the data, there must be room for identification numbers, card order numbers, a card status number and the date. Approximately 10 drafts of data and card designs were tried-` before an acceptable format was achieved. .The final format consists of a series of trailing cards from two to any needed number. Cards 3, 4 . . . are identical in format to card 2.. Each additional card is assigned a new Card order Number and is for records with multiple activities. Each activity is entered on a new card. F. Design of Data Collection Form In order to simplify and expedite data handling, a collection form was designed that matches the computor card design.. Data contained on this form can be key punched from directly and thereby eliminating a time-consuming transposition of data to a workable form. The Data Collection form is essentially an adaptation of the card design to allow space-for information entry. The forms provide an excellent way of storing the working data and are a filing system of land use information in and of themselves. Like the card design, the Form design is developed thraugh a series of modifications before its acceptance in the final form. C ZP1 306 SIIORELI14E LAND USE STUDY DATA CARD ENTRIES CART) I Items Columns (1) IDENTIFICATION CODE 1-5 (5) 4- Sequential ID number 1- Card order number (2) CARD STATUS AND DATE 6-10 (5) 1- Status, codeOl 4- Date, mo/yr (3) KROLL MAP NUMBER 11-13 .(3) (4) ADDRESS 14-43 (30) (5) GEOCODING 44-61 (18) (6) ZONING 62-63 (2.) (7) SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT 64 (1) (8) TOTAL PARCEL AREA 65-68 (4) (9) LAND AREA 69-72 (4) (10) WATER AREA 73-76 (4) (11) ACCESS TO SHORELINE 77 (1) CZIM 306 SHORELINE LAND USE STUDY DATA CARD ENTRIES CARD 2, 3, Items Columns IDENTIFICATION CODE 4- Sequential ID number 1- Card order number (2) CARD STATUS AND DATE 6-10 (5) 1- Status, Coded 4- Date, mo/yr (3) BUILDING DATA PREVIOUSLY ENTERED (4) NUMBER OF STORIES 12-13 (2) (5) TOTAL GROUND FLOOR AREA (sq' f t) 14-17 (4) (G) DATE OF CONSTRUCTION (yr) 18-21 (4) (7) NAME OF BUSINESS 22-37 (15) (8) STARTING DATE OF BUSINESS 38-41 (3) (91) USE CODE 42-48 (7) 1- General code 4- Activity code I- Auxiliary code_ 1- Ownership code (10) USE. AREA (sq ft) 49-52 (3) WATE111 DEPENDENCE 53 (1) ('12), NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLD UNITS 54-56 (3) (13) NUMBER OF MOORAGE BERTHS 57-60 (4) 111WGRANI PUNCHING GRAPHIC ........ .. PUNCH 4 41 .......... -T bTA 6 0 141 Jo ll@ 1? 03 )-4 7 1 41 42 SA VO) LJ cl yet o q ME- --C?F-' D- .5@1 E- C L cx i Q) o 4v ------------ IS 5 11 S t4 f? I% it Lil c 4 4 "&Z-r, vp '3j 40 T Tr -N L- ARD 5 -t:A 3 F7- _tAV tj@@j OD E ^M-L ARL U L-T P J- E.- U V. ------ --- - --- -------- -- --- - ------ Sill ' IORI-ErL 4A [-7 30 35 40 40 Bu 8 lu 50 55 6u tib folm, IJ@I,Acfro pwichilly S1,11,11I A-0 ..... ........... th;i Awti A'-;b,. A L- t- t-% 110 L.,O U 0 L t-J @,-i I dLA CAFiD I CAnD 2 LUMN NUMBEns 7 7 G 7 10 1 1 13 14 F j `4 2 4 'S 47 1! 4 @J- 5 71 1 2 (:A :;0 2 38 4 1 If VAII@ @L, 14 IL 0, U C '0 > K r o I I T o t a W c - C Activity 0 Parcel 0 0 Ch cr Name of Business Dascriptlon of ActlvltV Coda -j Date Map Address Street Name 0 0 r Zi z 0) N Area c Fj z Number Number < LO) .-.o M 0 U) C 0 z U U w E U U 0 Co z Land 1.7.6 We 17 I'll IMI 11-11 It I I H-1111-111111111111 211-11HIMMU11,111411 -111.11411111111 L 111111H (Ili I III ... I ... 11-1111191111111 HFHM r I 111-1 Total Land TT777U Water. EXPLANATION OF DATA FORM AND DATA CARD ENTRIES The data form has been designed for both data collection and key punching. Columns on the form are in the same order as those on the da ta cards. The first 10 columns on each card have the same format; however, the card order number will be different for each card of the record. Columns 11-69, located in the center Portion of the form, are to be entered on the first card. The last section (columns 11-54) on the form.are entries for the 2nd card. Any additional cards will represent additional uses and will be identical to card 2. The entry on the form labeled Description of Activity refers to the type of business or auxiliary activity talking place at a particular address. This portion will not be transferred to the data. card but will be used to assign land use code numbers. New cards can be added at any time by retaining the first 10 columns for the same identification sequence present on cards 1 and 2. Cards-1 and 2 Item 1 (Columns 1-5) IDENTIFICATION CODE ID Number (1-4) Each parcel will be given a unique number beginning with 0001 and progressing sequentially (0002, 0003, 1 1 1). Every card pertaining to a particular parcel (or address) will be assigned the same ID number. (Column 5) card order number Each card will be assigned a card order number which refers to the placement of the cardin a-particular record. ("A" record refers to all cards that possess the same ID number). The card containing the location information will be card 1; cards 2, 3, 4, and soon will all be identical in format and will refer to the building and activity elements. Item 2 (Columns 6-10) CARD STATUS AND DATE Card status (column 6) indicates whether the entry is new, revised or deleted. Code 0 - New 1 - Revised 2 - Deleted The date (columns 7-10) indicates the date (mo/yr) that the new or revised entry is made. Code Example 12 77 mo/yr 12/77 01 76 mo/yr 01/76 Card #1 Item 3 (Columns 11-13) KROLL MAP NUMBEER The Kroll Map Nu-mber is used to denote the general location of the parcel. Code 001 Item 4 (Columns 14-43) ADDRESS The address of each parcel must be entered in full and correctly so that the computer will not reject the card. Item 5 (Columns 62-63) ZONING Code Zones 01 RS 9600 Single Family Residence Low Density 02 RS 7200 Single Family Residence Medium Density 03 RS 5000 Single Family Residence High Density 04 RW Residential Waterfront 05 RD 7200 Duplex Residence Medium Density 06 RD 5000 Duplex Residence High Density 07 RM 1600 Multiple Residence Lowest Density 08 RM 800 Multiple Residence Low Density 09 RMH 350 Multiple Residence High Density 10 RMV 200 Multiple Residence High Density-Variable Height 11 RMV 200 Multiple Residence Highest Density Variable Height 12 RM-MD Multiple Density Mixed Density 13 BN Neighborhood Business 14 BI Intermediate Business 15. BC Community Business 16 BM Metropolitan Business 17 CM Metropolitan Commercial 18 CMT Metropolitan Commercial Temporary 19 CG General Commercial 20 M Manufacturing 21 IG General Industrial 22 IH Heavy Industrial Item 7 (Column 64) SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT (As set out in the Seattle Shoreline Master Program) .Code Environment 1 Conservancy Natural 2 Conservancy Management 3 Urban Residential Urban Stable 5 Urban Development 6 Urban Stable/Lake Union 7 Urban Stable/Central Waterfront Item 8 (Columns 65-76) PARCEL AREA Total Area (columns 65-68) Land Area (columns 69-72) Water Area (columns 73-76) Area is represented in the following manner: Code The 4th column in each category indicates the power of 10, that the number is raised to), Example: 3245 3.24 X 105 324,000 sq.ft. 2402 2.4 X 102 240 sq.ft. Item 9 (Column 77) ACCESS TO SHORELINE Access refers to aparcel abutting the shoreline or having shoreline f rontage. Code Access does exist. 0 Addess does not exist. -3- CARD 2, 3 . . . Item 1 (Columns 1-5) IDENTIFICATION CODE Same as Card #1 Item 1 Item 2 (Columns 6-10), CARD STATUS AND DATE Same as Card #1, Item 2 It em 3 (Column 11) BUILDINING DATA PREVIOUSLY ENTERED Code 0 Not previously entered. Items 4-6 (Columns 12-21) have been entered on a preceding card for a particular structure.. (columns 12-21 are to be filled in.only one time for, each building even if there is more than one activity taking place within the building.) Item 4 (Columns 12-13) NUMBER OF STORIES Code 01 02 Item 5 (Columns 14-17) TOTAL GROUND FLOOR AREA in Sq. Ft. Refers to the indoor floorarea of the lst story. Code Example 3225 = 3.22 x 105 sq. ft. Item 6 (Columns 18-21) DATE OF CONSTRUCTION Code Year 1975 Item 6 (Columns 22-37) NAME OF BUSINESS Abbreviated, if necessary. If there is room in the box, include the telephone number also. The phone number will not be keypunched but may be needed"' to obtain additional information. S H@ T7, S S E,0 Code 899 1:)%e-_Fers to the last 3 digits of the vear .(1899) 976 Refers to the last 3,digits of the year (.1976) Item 9 (Coli_hmns 42-48) USE CODE Refer to attached Use Code. Item 10 (Columns 49-52) USE AP-PA-Scr- Ft. Refers to the total square footage.used for a coded use (Item 9) Code 5 Example 3225 3.22 x 10 322,000 sq. ft. Item 11 (column 53) WATER DEPENDENCE r .As defined in Section 155. of the Seattle Shoreline Master @Program. Code 0. Not a water-dependent use. 1 A water-dependent use. Item 12 (Columns 54---56) NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLD UNITS Code 001 002 Item 13 (Columns 57-60) NUMBER OF MOORAGE BERTHS Code 0001 0002 Collection of Fire Department Data The initial survey of Fire Department.data was carried out with the assistance.of Lt. Schick. @A request to use the information contained'on the Fire Depart- ment's Building Inspection cards was made to Chief Hanson on March 14, 1977. The inspection cards are located at each of- the nineteen Fire Stations that have inspection districts with- in the study area. Chief Zwaller scheduled the visits to each of the nineteen based on a list that DCD supplied. The data from the Building Inspection cards was recorded at the stations by E.14D staff and entered onto the forms at alater date. Data Collection from the Inspection Cards: @Name of Business or building -Address -Telephone number -Date Constructed -Number of stories -Number of Residential Units The Fire Department.inspects all industrial, commercial and residential buildings (triplex. or larger) in the city on an annual or biennial basis. In order to expedite the data collection, information was not recorded onto each form at the Fire Station. All of the data was recorded and transferred to the forms at a later date. U::: S a V J L is t 0 f FE r e S'Ca t i 'ns with D z t r i z: t S Extending into Urban Shore"Llne Areas Phan-3. for-all s t a -t.:So n B 4091 Station N I - - Address Ila t e r BOMP 0 J@rea AN-re Ellio ft t Bay 2 De nn.y Regrade 233 4 .-West Wat-erway- '2550 '26th Ave.; -SW West Vaterway 0 treat X e ur-LO171 S;I Qu an Anne 110 Lee St- Lal N -S-I -in tip. CIC Fremont -38-29 Iiinden Ave Lake T 1.0 Downtown 301.2.nd Avenue S' Elliott Bay,. 11 lst Avenue S Bridge .1514 'SW'Holden Street Duwamish Tlat6= i University 1020 NE 50th Street Portage-, Bay:-. 18 Ballard 1.5Z3_.NW. Market@-'S treat Salmon Bay- Z-11 9' East Waterway 1 S,. Spokane Street East Watezwa3r... 7S*I Q!jeen G. -A Lake Whi. S, hxp 20 h Ann 3205' 13th . ven a - E Ca_bitol Hill 901'E. Roanoke Street Lake' Unior...' 2 2: Portage Bay 2-6 South Park 86.0 S.. Cloverdale- St. Duwamish Waterwi 2 7' Boeing Tield 10OG S. - Myrtle Street Duwamish Watetiw4 .1fest Seattle -Ferry.Avenue STI -Elliott. Bay. A@9 2139. 30 L"chi 2931 Mt...Baker Blvd.S. '.,Lake WashingUm .33- Raini-e-r Beach 9645 Rdnton Ave...S.-- -Lake Was-hington 34. 'Nadison PArk 633 32nd Avenue E.'" Lake Vashi4gt= 36. '.K6116gg Island 3600. 23rd Avende SIR Diiwamish Waterw 4.1- Magnolia '1416 :34th-Aven'ue 19. 'El.liott ]My.: V 0 D G Verbal Orders Don't Go SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT INTRA-DEPARTMENT MEMO Battalion 1 Date March 22, 1977 TO: All concerned Reply? RE: Memorandum of March 22, 1977 The Department of Community Development will be visiting these stations on the days listed regarding their survey of Shoreline Land Use. April 18 - Station 10, all day 19 - Station 2 all day 20 - Station 17, 0900-1200 Station 22, 1300-1600 21 - Station 20, 0900-1200 Station 8, 1300-1600 22 - Station 41, 0900-1200 Station 9, 1300-1600 April 25 - Station 36, 0900-1200 Station 4, 1300-1600 26 - Station 11, 0900-1200 Station 26, 1300-1600 27 - Station 18 0900-1200 Station 34, 1300-1600 28 - Station 19, 0900-1200 Station 27, 1300-1600 May 2 - Station 33 0900-1200 3 - Station 30, 1300-1600 4 - Station 29, 0900-1200 All Stat F, T) i.,xc@ a S S AD D R Phone Reg. OCCUPANCY:* WI O%CCUPANT:* OWNER AGENT:* DAT E TYPE No. o f CELIAR/ STAND- CONST'D: BLDG: STORIES: -Z" C S FD AUTO- (W) VALVE LOC lE C T: SPRINKLER: 4* (P) LOC. COND, FIRE FIRE EXT. SYSM.,IS: ESCAPE.- C E R'llf 77ATE OF OCCUPANCY- PERMIT SCHEDULE SPECIAL INSPECTION SCHEDU PRE- Yes (@z Ce FIRE: No Date tX-X_ LAOS -jCCTJ?AN,-CY nlr,"%TA CAFD (P)tAf .1:11at )45- Index 9VO/ Area..L-._ No.* /V .4 - hone Emer (Lqone Reg-)p of 0 7.4-2 7 0 C ILA @fc A.D @f ES3 S _: - P 0- LOC @10 6 @ - cs; E SORT, I KLER VALV:_ Ula C'. FIRE LX7. yi7E ESCAPE SYSTEMS: LOC. CERTTFICATE Or OCCURi'l-NCY .1 SPECIAL INFORMATION CLASSIFICA-,TON: f _Lj L E PRE- cti Rr.: No r7 1 J) Collection of Data from the Kroll and Shoreline laps Y The Kroll Zoning maps, previously used to determine street segments, were used in a second step to supply zoning inform- ation. Each form (Or record) was checked against the maps,,and the z,one that applied to each address was entered onto the form. In a similar manner the Shoreline maps were used to supply the shoreline environment of each property. Both sets of maps were used in conjunction to determine whether or not each of the 1458 records have access to the shoreline- (Access is applied here to mean that the property on which a ,'business is located has shoreline frontage.) K) Data Collection from the Polk and Reverse Directories 'After the data from the other primary sources was collected and arranged into a numerical order by address, each record was checked against.current volumes of both directories. The Polk Directory provides a complete listing of occupants by address. Some vacant structures are recorded, but the actual amount of vacant building space is probably not accurately represented. Like the Polk, the Reverse Directory provides a listing of occupants by address. Only occupants with a telephone number are recorded in the directory. For uses that do have telephone numbers, the Reverse Directory is highlyaccurate, but all other information is not present. L) Data Weaknesses Due to time restraints on project, many of the gaps or weak- nesses of the data sources were not compensated for. These weaknesses are listed here so that any future work on the project will involve an effort to minimize them in the future. -All data is tailored to use oroccupancy and not property ownership. Property ownership or TDroperty lines are not reflected in the study. -Undeveloped property may not have an occupant and,there- fore may not show up in any of the data sources. -All uses are represented in a like manner. There is no indication-of the size, value or volume of production. Two businesses which produce the same product are repre- sented in the same way even though they may be operating on widely different scales. -One business may be undertaking several distinct uses that are not reflected in the data. An example might be U.S. Plywood Corp-given the activity code 2421 - (Saw Mil.1s general) which may also be operating as a logging con- tractor (2410), pulp mill (2610), Plywood & Veneer products (2431), Wooden containers (2440) . . . Warehouses that are located at the actual business site do not show up in the data.- -There was not enough time to make field inspections. Thus all of the data is from recorded sources. The actual.s,itu- ation may not be accurately represented in the data. .-In numerous instances it was necessary to call.businesses to complete the form. This most often occurred when a record appeared in only one or two of the sources. The remaining data must.be obtained by interview. A telephone interview was required in about 35% of the records. -None of the sources were as complete as expected. Both-Business Licenses and Fire Inspection Cards were no more than 80% complete. The Inspection Cards were found not to be current in several instances.. The two directories were not much better. Combining all of the sources raised the overall covetage to approximately 95%. A great deal of time was spent completing data for records that only appear in one source. Assignment of Identification Numbers All records were assembled and.arranged in numerical order and then-divided into geographical areas for numbering. ..Each geographical area was given series of .500 numbers. The list of areas and numbers is included here. C ZM 3050 SHORELINE LAND USE STUDY Identification Number Sequencing SysLem Numbers Shoreline SeqmenL. -Last 'Number Used .0001-0500 Fremont Br to .0042 Gasworks Park 0501-1000, Gasworks Park to the UofW 1001-1500 East Side of Lk Union 1300 So Side of Portage Bay 1501-2000 So and West Sides of Lk Union 2001-2500 No, Shore of the Ship Canal 2507 3000 So Shore of the Ship Canal 3001-3100 Madison Park 3101-3200 Leschi 3201-3300 Rainier Beach @3500-4000 City Property (Parks) 4001-5000 Central Waterfront 'arbor Island .5001-5500 1, 5035 5501-6000 West Seattle 5620 6001-6500 East Side of the Duwamish, 6501-7000 West Side of the Duwamish 7001- 7500 Moorage N) Data Processing Following the previous steps, the Data Collection Forms were sent to the Urban Data Center at theUniversity of Washington for the key punching and geocoding. Each record contains from two to seven data cards depending on the number of uses assigned to the record. Fifteen percent of the records were rejected from the geo- coding process and were geocoded by hand. The majority of these rejections were parks and other unaddressable parcels. It should be noted that all data records are represented by a single address. Thereis no indication of aerial or lineal extent in the Geobasis program. Parks are given a single point address. 0) Updating of the Data- File Constant updating is essential to the effectiveness of the study. In commercial and industrial areas the land use may change at rapid rate. Updating efforts have been planned in the following manner: a) Monthly printouts of all new Business Licenses are received from the License Department. Each month the printout is reviewed and those businesses operating in shoreline areas,are recorded for annual entry into the automated file. b)@ A system for trading of the Land Use Data with the Fire Department for any additions or deletions in the Inspection card data is currently being developed. c) New editions of.the Reverse Directory and the Polk Directory will be reviewed on a regular basis to up- date any occupancy data. d) The Seattle Departments of Lighting and Water are being investigated for possible future sources of occupancy, data. if an arrangement can be made to access these automated files the updating process would be greatly simplified. e) Future updating will involve fie-ld checking of data. Inclusiong.of this practice will also enable EMD to test the accuracy of other sources. f) By mid-year 1978 the King County Assessor's Commercial Property files will be automated and retrievable. The potential of access to this body. of.data will greatly enhance the scope of the study'. :Assessor's records pro- vide property values-i-o-wner,s,.h@il@@,,.-i-mprovements, improve- ment values, and property boundries. g. Time must be allocated to the up-dating process in the yearly work programs. Updating Problems The single greatest problem in keeping the data current involves tracking existing business changes of address. Business License data is approximately 85% accurate in recording changes in location. The two directories may indicate the new.listings. Neither indicates a move from a previous address. Access to the Lighting or Water D'epartmentst records would solve this problem. Until that time, field checking is the most reliable method. + + SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 ALL 1458 USES INCLUDED IN THE SHORELINE. LAND USE STUDY r\l -SHORELINE LAND-USE 1977 20OWs-AND 30Ws INDUSTRIAL WATER DEPENDENT USES SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 20Ws and 3000's INDUSTRIAL NON-WATER DEPENDENT USES SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 BOAT BU I LD I NG AN D R EPAI R 0 - 3444 - LARGE SHIPS X - 3445 - ENGINES AND ACCESSORIES (MFG) 3446 - SMALLER COMMERCIAL BOATS y 3447 - PLEASURE CRAFT W VY x x SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 BOAT BUILDING AND REPAIR - LAKE UNION 0 - 3444-LARGESHIPS x - 3445-- ENGINES AND ACCESSORIES (MFG) 3446 - SMALLER COMMERCIAL BO ATS Y 3447 - PLEASURE CRAFT Ix SHORELINE LAND USE 19-7-7 COMMERCIAL WATER DEPENDENT USES 0 4000's - TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, AND UTILITIES + 5000's - TRADE, WHOLESALE AND RETAI L x 6000's - SERVICES x SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 COMMERCIAL NON-WATER DEPENDENT USES 0 4000's - TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, AND UTILITIES + 5000's - TRADE, WHOLESALE AND RETAIL x 6000's - SERVICES SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 7440-7449 - mARINAS, 5185 & 5591 BOAT AND ACCESSORY SALES SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 HOUSEBOAT MOORAGES - LAKE UNION SHORELINE LAND USE 1977 RESIDENTIAL USES (HOUSEBOATS AND MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS) Element 7 I --- i @ @@ I I L.-L CZM 306 5B Final Report Element 7 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Introduction For any public regulation to success, that is, to meet its assigned objectives, there must be general understanding and acceptance by the public., Because this need is critical to.the success of the Shoreline Master Program, it is essential to make the program available .to as many people as possible. Therefore, special efforts were made to assure that the program would be readily avail- able to all. CZM assistance provided.a major portion of the printing cost of the adopted draft. Copies were placed in all publ'ic libraries and in the three universities' libraries. Copies were also sent to all com- munity councils, members of the Citizens Advisory Councill the City Council, local, state and federal public agencies, and the press. In addition, following the press printed announcements that copies were available, many citizens ob- tained copies. CZM assistance also made possible a sturdy and attractive cover, as well as the map which was a separate contract (see Element 8) element but was inserted-into the SMP. I Element 3 1 1--- Obsiaw 'i - t CZM 306 5B Final Report Element 8 SHORELINE 14AP Introduction The Shoreline Map, showing the location of the various shoreline districts, was printed separately from the Master Program so that the map could be more readily used as a reference, and.so that the entire city could be included on one map at a readable scale. The map was inserted into copies of the Shoreline Master. Program. . Element 9 j AAL CZM 5B Final Report Element 9 UPDATE OFFICIAL MAPS Introduction official maps were prepared. for the Shoreline Master Program during the previous grant @.eriod. However, following the year of official reviews by the Planning Commission, the City Council and DOE a number of changes were necessary. These changes required anumber,of map changes, and a perti- nent example is attached. In addition, harbor lines in several areas were changed or added. Making the changes also included research and consultation with the Port of Seattle and.the City's Engineering Department., 201 4 Ir 1/2 1 9 1A XA 14 ow 7 Vi alb cm bow Z:7 7 10 J,, 4, Ud > ED"NDS < 2 Atlyelyi 24 0 L -3 6 i:,5 -e- 30- 29, 27 0 Ud' c 'HALF T I 2 40/ -39'. 4 4 4) 4 38- A D U 4 C Ov 3 W 7-S-\ _75) _70 3 4 .4 5% -7- SL'r; 46 T 40 0 0\ 4 OGRAM S SHORELINE* MASTER PR ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION. MAP ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATIONS 40, Ud CN CONSERVANCY NATUPIAL 0A I @-T CM CONSERVANCY MANAGEMENT VR URBAN RESIDENTIAL I-IT U S URBAN STABLE 4- "o, o WATERFRONT US/@CW URBAN STABLEXENTRAL. US/LU .. -URBAN STABLEILAKE UNION A' -UD URBAN DEVELOPMENT CITY OF SEATTLE Mob., 41 Ud 10 t DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ova Emm-1 FEET 0 100 200 400 1 11 -For Use and Bulk Proulmions. see ArjjClo 21A of ille Zoninq Ordinance. 4.. M C. 1c. C\) 19 t U s A V4 o I L4 0+1 s I- 10 R E L I I E M A T E- 1-1 'PROGRAM -lAL 11-ICATION MAP 100 ENVIRONMEN NV l[K)IIA till N I Al@ (-,i A';,.;wic.AT10NS C N Y NA1,A N A,(; L 1\1 1: N T C m kill '@IM N I IAl. WMAN I I c I N I I I A I \N A I W A K t, UNION US,, LU i.JIMAN i j-.. -cc u U) A r-I I (wM1 N 1 CiTY OF SE-Al -F-- DEPARTMENT OF f Mit COMMUNITY DEVELO@'@11ENT US/CW 100 No -ino FEET F -d 11'.1k I i cni N AL U0 [I 'P RO G -M C 7A1(-_I. 0 N M A IPA 11_1 T10 N S 3oo 743 F . . ....... 5 C o 1 a L; pceded 3-3 A .10. a sumnEuNE MASTER PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION , MAP ENvinotiMENTAL CJ. A' Sl FICAT IONS C N NATURAL CM MANA(-,[,MENr tin imnAN W @MFFJT IAL US URBAN Anl,F US/CW IMAM !;T Anl_ ucrWmAL VVATEnrnONT 3 1.45 S. 2 2 US,/LU Unnl\f\l ST AF11 r.,'l-Ai<r U@110N UD URDAN [if N/F, 1-,Ol'NlrNr CITY OF SEATTLE DErARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0 J00 200 4oo FEET -o u,m, 1;,:Ic IA of thn Zoning Orfli@lnflce. Ud lZ t 1. 7 7 5.00 4 .4 S'--i C. R E Ll N E N IA S P9, 0 G R A M NTAL CLASSIFICATION NlAP ENV!RONNIE@ ENWRONMENTAL CLAS31FICATIONS C ilil E ' V Ce MA G E M EN) T U C3 5,:@ i%i S 1'*D EN T i A L @US ST 6 L c- C u R US. LU N I @L, 7 C@ TY 0 F S E A T COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF 40o FEET la'O 'Fo, Us@ j.d 3.iA R49ui.t.am.," Amcl. 21A of ih. Za,-9 Ord-llce. 16 23 1-ZO 26 v, C L 7 3 QN U'r C 2 A, vv @j Ilk, z tj -7 -V Yll 17 T" c- '7@ 'R @j Zq,3 cn z J "I -4 JL Z s ;> /cm Z@ p NATURAL ------------------ CN ACY MAcivAGEMENT :OiNiSERVA UR @-;PBAi,4 RESIDENTIAL Cn US @aA.,j STABL@F 90 -,'qATER Lj S/ C @*4 U.-ABAN STABLEICENTRAL FRONT C,5 U$/LU uRSAN STABLE.ILAKE UNJON U0 D EV S LOPF41 EIN r i r C!-, Y OF SE-AITTLE ENT OF E P A R T M, MMUMTY oEVELOPMENT 71 =0@ Usd a"d LU,A oi ch. Zo.t.9 Q,rdo@d za z z 7 '3 ir Z4 19 Cn zo 2z 26 R R, , @4 Vj 7 13. 5 Z U s 2 tp ss'. vv QP C@) '7, ly -7 -V _A us 4 7 J-3 ZT j Pf Us JL 44 77 Ale, J DATE DUE 3 GAYLO@Cj! Ic. 23,3, 3 6668 14107 4478