"Initial" City Proposals Would Have
Serious Negative Impacts on Floating Homes
The Seattle SMP (Shorelines Master Program) Revision Citizen Advisory Committee will complete its work in early June. Seattle DPD (Department of Planning and Development) will then develop draft policy and regulations for the shoreline. These draft regulations will go to the City Council for approval in the summer of 2010.
Although DPD has not yet formally developed its proposed new regulations for floating homes, the information they have provided thus far has sent up red flags for the houseboat community.
 |
|
The Association's SMP Workgroup met with DPD Representatives on the Log foundation Moorage. From left: Amalia Walton, FHA Board; Maggie Glowacki, Lead DPD Planner; Bob Bowman, Workgroup Chair; Bill Keasler, FHA Pres; Brennon Staley, DPD Planner; Ed Waddington, FHA Co-Treas. Photo by Jann McFarland. |
In response to DPD's policy proposals, our FHA workgroup has met twice with DPD representatives to provide feedback and to educate city staff on the serious harm their proposals could do to the floating home community. See Lesson in Non-conforming and FHA Meets With DPD.
Based on the information we have received to date, FHA is very concerned about three issues: 1) the long term viability of floating homes in Seattle, 2) the float size and other "conforming" requirements for new replacement houseboats and 3) new standards for flotation depth.
Long Term Viability
Proposed DPD language states that "new" floating homes and/or floating home moorages are prohibited. DPD says this proposed language is based on the state Shoreline Management Act. DPD says that existing floating homes could be replaced, but would need to meet at least some conforming over-water standards where feasible.
FHA expressed concern with the proposed language that explicitly prohibits new floating homes. It is felt that DPD has gone beyond what is required by WAC (Washington Administrative Code). FHA thinks that "prohibit" de-legitimizes floating homes in the long term and devalues them. It has been suggested that language other than outright prohibition would be more appropriate. DPD has informally responded that it may be possible for DPD to use other language. This issue is not yet resolved.
FHA expressed concern with proposed wording in the Comprehensive Plan which changes floating home moorage from a "water dependent use" to an "allowed use". DPD said that this new language more clearly states the situation and does not really constitute a substantial change for floating homes. FHA feels this wording leads to further erosion of legitimacy for the floating home community. FHA needs to better understand the possible ramifications of this proposed change. This issue is not yet resolved.
Float Size and Other
Conforming Requirements
DPD's best available science indicates that over-water coverage is detrimental to salmon migration through the ship canal from the Montlake Cut to the locks. Thus, DPD's current goal is to lessen the amount of over-water coverage, in part by restricting the size of the floats for new replacement floating homes.
Originally, DPD planned to require all new replacement houseboats to meet conforming floating home standards, standards which the vast majority of floating home moorages do not currently meet. Imposing conforming standards for new replacement floating homes on these non-conforming docks would not be physically possible without substantially reducing the float size for most floating homes because of setback, open water and walkway access requirements.
In February, our workgroup took DPD staff on a walking tour of a dock and explained the physical limitations, if not impossibility, of bringing existing nonconforming docks into conforming status. We also mentioned the potential loss of value to houseboat owners if float size was reduced to the 1200 sq ft conforming limit, even in a situation where no other conforming standards are imposed.
DPD said they would re-evaluate their proposed regulations in light of the issues we presented. It appears, however, that DPD may still plan to limit the float size of replacement houseboats, although we do not yet know their specific proposals.
FHA has serious questions about DPD's interpretation of the scientific
information it is relying on as it develops new regulations.
FHA, as well as other CAC representatives, has serious questions about DPD's interpretation of the scientific information it is relying on as it develops new regulations. FHA does not believe the float size issue has been resolved. We will continue to work with DPD staff, collect other available scientific research, and propose alternate language in an attempt to satisfactorily resolve these issues.
On a positive note, DPD says it plans to eliminate the "conforming/non-conforming" terminology. Instead it would use such terminology as, "standard A and standard B."
Flotation Depth
DPD is concerned about flotation depth and the current lack of standards for flotation.
The primary concern is the impact of flotation on fish migration. The DPD proposal would set standards for flotation depth based on a yet to be determined formula related to the size of the float and the height of the houseboat.
It was unclear if this new standard would be just for new construction or also for existing houseboats. DPD said that maintenance of flotation would be allowed, but indicated that without standards, owners would keep adding flotation until they reach the bottom of the lake.
We pointed out that there are natural limits to flotation depth. FHA also questioned why flotation depth made a difference, since over-water structures such as docks above the water cause fish to go around them.
DPD said that research on fish behavior around docks and piers done by Charles Simenstad from the UW shows some fish go around and some go under floats. DPD is also concerned that deeper flotation may impede water circulation, which could be a causal factor in higher water temperature and thus be problematic for fish. DPD acknowledged that they don't have all the answers yet from science.
Again, FHA has serious questions about DPD's interpretation of the scientific information it is relying on as it develops new regulations. FHA is very concerned about setting flotation standards that are not realistic and that could have severe economic consequences for houseboat owners. This issue is yet to be resolved.
The FHA Board and SMP workgroup are continuing to work with DPD and the SMP Citizen Advisory Committee to help ensure that DPD proposes reasonable and fair regulations that maintain the viability of floating homes in Seattle. At this point we are not confident that this will be the case. At the annual meeting in April, we will provide more information and discuss possible strategies as we move forward with the SMP process.