Inadequate Standards Used for Cornwall Overwater Bridge

The City of Bellingham is developing the Cornwall Landfill/ Boulevard Park Overwater Pedestrian Bridge based on shoreline development standards from 1989. This is the date of the current City Shoreline Master Program (SMP), which incorporates the requirements of the Washington Shoreline Management Act (SMA) at the local level.


This is a problem because the Shoreline Management Act was significantly revised by the Department of Ecology in 2003. These revisions are commonly referred to as the “2003 SMP Guidelines”. WAC Chapter 173-26. The 2003 Guidelines were based on an increased understanding of the sources of shoreline degradation, and resulted in stronger shoreline development standards.

Under the 2003 Guidelines, new shoreline development must result in “no net loss” to the shoreline environment. Under “no net loss” standards, new development is not allowed to harm existing shoreline functions. Adverse impacts to the shoreline environment must be avoided first. Where this is not possible, impacts must be minimized as part of a process known as mitigation sequencing. Because mitigation alone will not prevent all cumulative adverse impacts, restoration is also required. In order to determine that no net loss is being achieved, a baseline standard is determined through a shoreline inventory and characterization analysis, in addition to a cumulative impact analysis. The baseline standard is used to measure the results from on-going monitoring efforts.

Because the 2003 SMP Guidelines required jurisdictions to update and revise their local SMP, the Department of Ecology (DOE) established specific dates for jurisdictions to complete this task. The City was required to update its SMP by December 1, 2005. After making little effort for a number of years, the City became serious only after the DOE indicated that it would update Bellingham’s SMP on behalf of the City if it continued to delay this process.

The City finally completed its SMP update in November, 2010, and forwarded its revised SMP to DOE for review and approval a month later. It is anticipated that it will take the DOE another 1 or 2 years to complete its review. Unfortunately, the DOE allows jurisdictions to continue to use their outdated SMP’s until the revised ones are approved.

The City acknowledges that its 1989 SMP is outdated and fails to reflect “substantial changes in the way shorelines are regulated.” (2009 SMP, page xiv). This is, perhaps, an understatement. The 1989 SMP does not comply with the SMA, the GMA, or the City Comprehensive Plan. The 1989 SMP does not require “no net loss” (NNL) standards for shoreline development. It fails to address “Shorelines of Statewide Significance”, (SSWS), which imposes a higher level of protection for certain waters, such as Bellingham Bay. It fails to require mitigation sequencing or restoration efforts.

In addition, the 1989 SMP does not reflect updated science regarding shoreline buffers, critical saltwater habitat, shoreline modification/stabilization, docks and piers, dredging, marine pilings, native vegetation retention, restoration and conservation, remediation, intensification of shoreline use, over-water structures, impervious surfaces, or shoreline lighting.

All of these issues, of course, are relevant to the Cornwall Landfill Overwater Bridge. As long as the City obtains the Hearing Examiner’s approval for its conditional use permit at the November 17, 2010 hearing, it will be able to construct this project based on outdated 1989 shoreline standards. Perhaps this explains the City’s rush to obtain project approval.

Many components of the proposal might not be approved under updated shoreline development standards. For example, the project relies upon concrete rip-rap to stabilize the Bridge at both landing sites. The project provides virtually no mitigation for the enormous amount of permanent environmental degradation associated with overwater structures, including significant loss of fish and wildlife habitat and water quality degradation. (In fact, the City asserts that this half mile bridge, which creates 35,000 sq. feet of new impervious surface, will not be a source of any water pollution.) The project ignores mitigation sequencing requirements, which makes a land-based shoreline trail more appropriate.

It is unjust to allow the City to benefit from its failure to comply with its deadline to update its SMP. Had the City complied within one or even two years of its due date, it is likely that revised and more protective shoreline development regulations would already be in place. If the City develops this project under outdated 1989 SMP standards, the project is almost assured of violating no net loss standards and adding to the degradation of shoreline functions in Bellingham Bay.