17-06494-000_BE_EdmondsWaterfrontCtr_20170905.pdfBIOLOGICAL EVALUATION BPS
FF"�y
For informal ESA Consultation j '"•
US Army Corps For: (Corps Reference Number)
of Engineers
Seattle District Version: May 2012
** This form is for projects that have insignificant or discountable impacts on listed species. It contains all the
information required for a biological evaluation, but in abbreviated form and with minimal instructions on
how to fill it out. For more detailed instructions, a format for development of a biological assessment or
biological evaluation can be found on the Seattle District Corps website (www.nws.usace.army.mil — click on
regulatory and then on endangered species, BA Template). You may also contact the Corps at 206-764-3495
for further information.
Drawings and Photographs - Drawings and photographs must be submitted. Photographs must be submitted
showing local area, shoreline conditions, existing overwater structures, and location of the proposed project.
Drawings must include a vicinity map; plan, profile, and cross-section drawings of the proposed structures; and
over- and in -water structures on adjacent properties. (For assistance with the preparation of the drawings, please
refer to our Drawing Checklist located on our website at www.nws.usace.army.mil Select Regulatory —
Regulatory/Permits — Forms.) Submit the information to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch,
P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, Washington 98124-3755.
Date: September 5, 2017
SECTION A General Information
1. Applicant name
Carrie Hite, City of Edmonds, Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department
Mailing address: 700 Main Street, Edmonds, WA 98020
Work phone:
425-771-0256
Home phone:
Email:
carrie.hite edmondswa. ov
Fax:
425-771-0253
2. Joint -use applicant name
Not applicable
Mailing address:
Work phone:
Home phone:
Email:
Fax:
3. Authorized agent name
Shelby Petro
Mailing address: Herrera Environmental Consultants, 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100, Seattle, WA 98120
Work phone:
206-787-8307
Home phone:
Email:
spetro@herrerainc.com
Fax:
206-441-9108
4. Location where proposed work will occur
220 Railroad Avenue, Edmonds, WA 98020, Snohomish County
200 Beach Place, Edmonds, WA 98020, Snohomish County
Waterbody: Puget Sound, WRIA 8, HUC 17110
1/4 Section: SE Section: 23
Township: 27N Range: 3E
Latitude: 47.81122
Longitude:-122.3854
5. Description of Work
Project Description
The City of Edmonds Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department (City) and the Edmonds
Senior Center (Senior Center) propose to redevelop the Edmonds Senior and Community Center; the
associated parking lot, bulkhead, and beach access; and to construct an overwater walkway in front of
the Ebb Tide Condominium building (Figure 1; Figure 2). Together, those elements comprise the
Edmonds Waterfront Center Project (project). The proposed Edmonds Waterfront Center building
will be used by the Senior Center to continue providing senior and community services, and it will be
used by the City for programming and events during the late afternoon and evening hours. The
proposed overwater walkway will connect two existing portions of the Edmonds Marine Walkway to
provide a continuous pedestrian access along the waterfront. The project site for the Edmonds
Waterfront Center, parking lot, and beach access is at 220 Railroad Avenue in Edmonds, Washington
(Figure 1), within Section 23 of Township 27 North and Range 03 East of the Willamette Meridian.
The overwater walkway will be constructed within a City -owned easement on the beach in front of
the Ebb Tide Condominiums, directly south of the proposed Waterfront Center building (Figure 2).
The existing parking lot extends onto a bulkhead located partially below mean higher high water
(MHHW) of Puget Sound. The bulkhead is composed of fill material and supported by 36 creosote -
treated timber piles around the perimeter. The bulkhead timbers and fill will be removed and new
beach access will be provided by installing concrete stairs and a ramp within the existing footprint,
above MHHW (Figure 2). The stairs and ramp will be supported by no more than 60 steel H-piles.
Large woody debris, boulders, and a sand/gravel mix for beach nourishment will be installed, and
native vegetation will be planted in the area of bulkhead removal. The parking lot will be
reconfigured and will incorporate a bioretention planter for water quality treatment and infiltration.
There are two existing outfalls in the bulkhead to Puget Sound, both of which will be shortened to end
above (landward of) MHHW.
The proposed overwater walkway will link the existing portions of the Edmonds Marine Walkway
between the ferry terminal and the Edmonds Marina in front of the Ebb Tide Condominiums through
a City -owned easement. The overwater walkway will be a 10-foot-wide, concrete and grated structure
approximately 154 feet long, elevated on seven steel piles. Approximately 50 percent of the footprint
of the structure will be grated, with 60 percent of the grating having an open area (meeting the
requirements of WAC 220-660-380). A portion of the City's easement is waterward of MHHW,
requiring two of the steel support piles to be installed below MHHW. Steel piles will be installed only
during low tide, outside the water, avoiding the need for in -water work. A barge may be used for
construction or staging equipment.
A set of stairs at the south end of the proposed overwater walkway will be demolished. It will be
replaced with stairs next to the existing stairway location to provide beach access. No more than six
steel H-piles will be installed to support the stairs. Piles will be installed above MHHW between
high -tide cycles.
While construction equipment is mobilized on site for the proposed project, two concrete foundations
and three creosote -treated timber piles will be removed from the intertidal zone (Figure 2).
Table 1 summarizes the volumes and areas of activities proposed for the project.
F—Table 1. Proposed Project Activities and Associated Volumes and Areas Affected.
Proposed Activity Volume (CY) Area (SF)
Remove 36 creosote -treated timber pilcs
1,424
3,841
and fill from bulkhead
Remove three creosote -treated timber
27
9
piles from the intertidal zone
Remove two concrete foundations
213
567
Drive seven 30-inch-diameter steel piles
63
35
for the overwater walkway
Place overwater walkway structure
n/a
1,383
Install access stairs (south of overwater
45
150
walkway)
Drive up to six 16-inch or 18-inch steel
30
15
H-piles for stairs
Install beach access stairs and ramp
300
2,000
Drive up to 60 16-inch or 18-inch steel
300
140
H-piles for beach access stairs and ramp
Place sand/gravel mix for beach
1,210
3,841
restoration
Pile Driving
Pile driving will occur for a maximum of 5 days for 240 minutes per day. If a vibratory hammer is
used for installation, proofing would require 15 minutes for each pile. If an impact hammer is used,
installation would take approximately 105 minutes for each pile. Pile -driving details are provided in
Table 2.
Table 2. Pile Driving Proposed for the Edmonds Waterfront Center Project.
5.1 Number of piles being replaced:
36 creosote -treated timber piles will be removed from the existing
bulkhead; 3 creosote -treated timber piles will be removed from the
intertidal zone;
7 new 30-inch diameter steel piles will be installed for the overwater
walkway; up to 6 H-piles will be installed to support new stairs
leading to the beach; up to 60 H-piles will be installed to support the
stairs and ramp access landward of the beach.
5.2 Replacement pile type:
Steel
(e.g., ACZA-treated wood, steel,
coating used on steel piles)
5.3 Replacement pile size:
30-inch-diameter steel piles for overwater walkway
(e.g., 12-inch)
16-inch and 18-inch steel H-piles to support new stairs and ramp
access
5.4 Installation method:
Piles will be installed with a vibratory hammer to the extent possible.
(e.g., vibratory, impact hammer)
Piles may be proofed with an impact hammer, if necessary, to reach
the appropriate load -bearing capacity. Piles will be installed during
low tide to avoid any in -water impact driving and to minimize the
potential for sound pressure wave impacts on listed species.
5.5 Anticipated dates, number of
Anticipated dates: July 15—October 14
minutes, and number of days
Minutes per day: 240
vibratory pile driving
Number of days: 37
5.6 For vibratory installation, will
Yes. Number of pile strikes per pile: 300
proofing be required? If so, how
many pile strikes per pile?
5.7 For impact hammer installation,
If a vibratory hammer is not used, then an impact hammer will be
estimate the number of pile strikes
used. Number of strikes per pile: 3,500
required per pile:
5.8 For impact hammer installation
Proofing:
or proofing, estimated number of
Number of strikes per day: 7,000 (install 2 piles per day)
pile strikes per day:
Anticipated dates: July 15—October 14
5.9 For impact hammer pile driving
Not applicable, all impact driving will be done in the dry
or proofing, sound attenuation
measures:
5.10 Anticipated dates, number of
Anticipated dates: July 15—October 14
minutes and number of days of
Minutes per day: 240
impact hammer pile driving or
Number of days: 37
proofing:
5.11 Describe substrate into which
The substrate consists of 15 feet of sand to silty sand with gravel and
piling will be driven:
sandy gravel, underlain by medium dense to dense deposits of sandy
gravel and sand with little to no silt content (Landau 2017).
H
Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Potential impacts to forage fish spawning habitat have been avoided or minimized by designing the
minimum possible footprint below the MHHW elevation. During construction, in -water work and
impacts to potential forage fish spawn (i.e., eggs) will be avoided and minimized to the extent
practicable by conducting a forage fish spawn survey before construction, by avoiding any
construction and barge grounding in spawning areas if eggs are found, by staging equipment on
uplands, and by timing work waterward of MHHW to occur during dry, low -tide conditions. An
eelgrass survey will be conducted prior to barge use. A barge would not be grounded or anchored on
eelgrass beds or forage fish spawning areas, and would be located to avoid shading eelgrass beds. Soil
stabilization and stormwater controls are described in Sections 6.I and 6.K, and a full list of
conservation measures is provided in Section 11.
Mitigation
To mitigate for unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed overwater walkway, the project
will restore the beach within the footprint of the removed bulkhead. Restoration will consist of
planting native vegetation and placing large woody debris, boulders, and clean fish -mix gravels and
sand that match existing beach characteristics for beach nourishment and forage fish spawning
habitat. This proposed habitat enhancement will compensate for the two new steel piles that will be
placed below MHHW to support the overwater walkway. Refer to the Critical Areas Report and
Mitigation Plan (Herrera 2017) for details. Additionally, the project will remove three creosote -
treated timber piles from within the intertidal zone adjacent to the bulkhead and two concrete
foundations buried in the beach in front of the existing Senior Center (Figure 2).
6. Construction Techniques
A. Construction sequencing and timing of each stage (duration and dates)
Demolition of the Senior Center building will begin in June 2018, followed by construction of the
Waterfront Center building, parking lot, bulkhead removal, and beach restoration. Together, the
demolition and construction will span approximately 15 to 20 months. Work conducted within or
adjacent to the water, including removal of the bulkhead, piles, and concrete, and construction of the
overwater walkway, will be timed according to the USACE in -water work window, which is July 14
to October 14. The overwater walkway may be constructed as a later phase of the project during the
in -water work window in 2019.
B. Site preparation
The site will be prepared by installing temporary erosion and sediment control (TESL) best
management practices (BMPs) prior to demolition. Once the TESC BMPs are in place, land -based
equipment will be used to demolish the existing building, parking area, landscaping, bulkhead, and
other site features. Materials will be hauled off site for disposal at existing permitted and approved
upland disposal sites. The site will be regraded and prepared for installation of the site utilities,
Edmonds Waterfront Center building, overwater walkway, beach access, parking area, and other
amenities (Figure 2)
C. Equipment to be used
Construction equipment may include water trucks, compactors, dump trucks, excavators,
cement/mortar mixers, cranes, graders, tractors/loaders/backhoes, bull dozers, front end loaders,
vibratory and impact hammers for pile driving, and barges. Any equipmcnt that will be operated on
the beach will be track -mounted and operated on the upper beach during low tides.
D. Construction materials to be used
The overwater walkway supports will be steel, and the overwater walkway structure will be concrete
with grating to allow light to penetrate below. Beach restoration and installation of access stairs and
ramp will occur within the footprint of the removed bulkhead. The stairs and ramp will be concrete
supported by up to 60 H-piles. Beach restoration will consist of the placement of large woody debris,
boulders, and clean fish -mix gravels and sand for beach nourishment. Upland materials will be
standard construction materials for the building and parking lot, including concrete, timber, plastic
piping, and other common materials.
E. Work corridor
The work corridor will be limited to the project footprint, which includes the existing Senior Center
and parking lot (tax parcel 27032300104200), the 10-foot-wide City easement (AC 8311070085) in
front of the Ebb Tide Condominiums, and portions of the walkway north and south for connection
purposes (tax parcels 27032300415300 and 27032300104400; and SP 8101160178, a City of
Edmonds easement). Equipment will be operated from uplands to the greatest extent feasible. Some
track -mounted equipment may be operated on the upper beach in the dry during low tides. No
equipment will be operated in wetted areas, other than barges. If a barge is used, it would be partially
grounded within 40 feet of the proposed overwater walkway within a temporary construction
easement on the Ebb Tide Condominium property. (The City will obtain that easement.) Prior to
barge use, an eelgrass survey will be conducted to identify appropriate locations for the barge and
anchors (i.e., locations that will avoid impacts on eelgrass communities).
F. Staging areas and equipment wash outs
Construction staging for bulkhead removal will occur landward of MHHW. Staging for the overwater
walkway construction will occur within the footprint of the existing parking lot or in a barge
grounded on the low -tide terrace. If a barge is used, it will not be grounded on eelgrass or forage fish
habitat. Equipment wash out areas will be located near the construction entrance(s).
G. Stockpiling areas
All materials will be stored or stockpiled in previously developed areas. They will be stored in a
manner that prevents material from washing into the water.
H. Running of equipment during construction
Construction hours would be confined to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays (with the approval of the City Engineer).
No construction work will be done on Sundays and federal holidays, per Edmonds City
Code 5.30.110.
Con
I. Soil stabilization needs/techniques
Erosion will be minimized through the development and implementation of a TESC plan and
execution of BMPs, such as:
• A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) will be implemented.
• TESC measures will be installed prior to clearing, grubbing, excavation, and grading
activities.
• Clearing and ground -disturbing activities will be limited to the minimum area needed to
construct the project.
• Where necessary, erosion and sediment control measures (e.g., stabilized construction
entrance, silt fences, wattles, plastic covering, and drain inlet protection) will be installed to
prevent release and discharge of sediments from construction areas.
• High -visibility fencing will be installed to delineate clearing and construction limits.
• Any waste material, debris, or spoils will be disposed of at an approved and permitted upland
commercial site or approved waste site.
• Containment measures will be implemented at staging and material stockpile areas to prevent
runoff.
• After construction, all TESC measures will be removed, and all disturbed ground surfaces
will be revegetated with native plants and mulched to prevent erosion and sedimentation.
J. Clean-up and re -vegetation
Construction materials will be removed from temporarily impacted areas, and the area will be
restored to preconstruction conditions. The beach restoration area will be planted with appropriate
native beach vegetation per the planting plan included in the Critical Areas Report and Mitigation
Plan (Herrera 2017).
K. Storm water controls / management
During construction of the project, the contractor will reduce and control surface and runoff water
impacts by adhering to the requirements of the TESC plan and permit conditions. BMPs implemented
during construction may include:
• Implementation of a SWPPP
• Limiting clearing and land disturbing activities to the minimum area needed to construct the
project
• Use of wattles and silt fences to control stormwater runoff flow rates and to prevent sediment
from entering surface waters
• Storm drain inlet protection to prevent sediment discharges
• Use of turbidity and debris curtains to prevent any discharge of materials to waters of Puget
Sound
• Stabilizing temporary stormwater facilities with rocks or quarry spalls to prevent scour and
erosion
7
• Employing temporary (e.g., weed -free mulch and plastic sheeting) and permanent (mulch)
cover measures to protect disturbed areas.
• Temporary covering of fill material stockpiles to prevent erosion and sediment release
• Frequent sweeping of silt from roadway surfaces to prevent sediment runoff
• Frequent inspection of flow and erosion control TESC facilities and maintenance of facilities
for continued proper functioning
L. Source location of any fill used
Imported clean sands and gravels placed landward and waterward of MHHW will be sourced from a
legal local quarry. Large woody debris, with intact root wads where possible, and boulders will be
locally sourced.
M. Location of any spoil disposal
Creosote -treated timber piles, concrete, and fill associated with the bulkhead removal will be disposed
of off site at an approved landfill. Disposal of creosote -treated materials will follow the BMPs
outlined by the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) guidance on creosote -treated
timber piling removal and disposal (WDNR 2017).
7. Action Area
The project action area is defined as all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the action and not
only the immediate area involved in the action (50 CFR §402.02). The action area includes the project
footprint and all surrounding areas where project activities could potentially affect the environment.
The extent of the action area encompasses direct and indirect effects, as well as any effects of
interrelated or interdependent actions. The terrestrial and aquatic action areas are shown on Figure 3.
The terrestrial extent of the action area is defined by temporary increases in noise that may result
from construction. For this project, the construction activity with the largest area of potential effect is
terrestrial pile driving using an impact or vibratory hammer for pile installation. Terrestrial impact
pile driving is expected to produce an estimated peak sound pressure of 110 dBA at 50 feet.
Jackhammers and graders are the next loudest pieces of equipment, estimated at 89 dBA at 50 feet.
Using the rules of decimal addition project noise is estimated at 110 dBA. Typical ambient noise
levels in Edmonds near the waterfront are assumed to be 78 dBA, based on typical, high -density,
urban areas (WSDOT 2017). This is likely a conservative estimate due to the proximity of the
Edmonds Ferry Terminal (about 500 feet to the north of the project site). Using attenuation rates for
hard sites (i.e., pavement or water), it is estimated that in -air project noise will attenuate to ambient
noise at 0.38 mile (1,991 feet).
The aquatic action area is determined by the greatest extent of increased turbidity from construction.
Any increase in suspended sediment is expected to be localized, of short duration, and confined to the
beach foreshore. Increased turbidity is expected due to substrate disturbance associated with fill
removal and bulkhead setback and from the first tidal inundation after construction. Increased
suspended sediments from removal of fill, pile driving, and beach nourishment in areas subject to
future tidal inundation is anticipated to be limited to approximately 150 feet seaward of the project
site and extend along and within the active beach foreshore north to the ferry terminal pier and south
to the Edmonds Marina, resulting in an area of approximately 3.8 acres of aquatic action area. This
aquatic action area extends onto the unvegetated upper low tide terrace, and is less than 20 feet in
depth relative to extreme high water.
Noise and pollution do not define the aquatic action area because their likely impacts will be limited
to an area smaller than those of increased turbidity. All pile driving and earth moving will be
conducted in the dry at low tide. Although ground vibrations will occur, it is unlikely that they will
generate underwater noise at levels sufficient to affect aquatic species given the wide beach at the
project location and that pile driving will occur during low tide. The distance to the water line and
shallow depth of water adjacent to the project footprint will further reduce the likelihood of noise
transmission (WSDOT 2017). Therefore, pile driving is not expected to generate a significant in -
water noise impact. Stormwater from pollution generating surfaces on site will be treated and
infiltrated in a bioretention cell, then discharged through an existing outfall in the bulkhead that will
be shortened to above MHHW. Untreated stormwater will not enter surface Puget Sound. A separate
existing outfall and the second shortened outfall from the removed bulkhead will convey stormwater
from non -pollution generating surfaces. The project will comply with Washington State surface water
quality requirements in marine waters (WAC 173-201A-210).
8. Species Information
This biological evaluation (BE) was prepared to determine the potential effects of the proposed
project on listed and proposed threatened and endangered species and their designated critical habitat.
Species lists and maps were obtained from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2017a), the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS 2017), and the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife (WDFW 2017a) (Table 3).
Table 3. USFWS and NMFS Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat Potentially
Present in the Waterfront Center Project Action Area.
Designated
Critical Habitat
Federal
in the Action
Common Name
Scientific Name
ESU/DPS
Status
Area?
Chinook salmon
Oncorhynchus
Puget Sound
threatened
yes
tshawytscha
Bull trout
Salvelinus confluentus
Coastal -Puget Sound
threatened
yes
Steelhead
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Puget Sound
threatened
no
Eulachon
Thaleichthys pacificus
Southern
threatened
no
Yelloweye
Sebastes ruberrimus
Puget Sound/Georgia
threatened
yes
rockfish
Basin
Bocaccio
Sebastes paucispinis
Puget Sound/Georgia
endangered
yes
Basin
Marbled murrelet
Brachyramphus
CA, OR, WA
threatened
no
marmoratus
ESU = evolutionarily significant unit
DPS = distinct population segment
N
Species lists from USFWS indicate the potential presence of North American wolverine (Gulo gulo
luscus), streaked horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata), and yellow -billed cuckoo (Coccyzus
americanus) in the action area. No suitable habitat exists within the action area for those species.
Examination of the PHS database maps from WDFW and an analysis of habitat types and conditions
within the action area showed that the species do not occur in the action area; therefore, there will be
no effect on wolverine, streaked homed lark, or cuckoo, and they are not addressed further in this BE.
Species lists from NMFS indicate the potential presence of Southern resident killer whale (Orcinus
orca; SRKW) and Southern DPS green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) in the action area. SRKW
have been observed along the Edmonds waterfront. The action area does not extend to waters deeper
than 20 feet. SRKW do not use the shallow waters contained within the action area. SRKW will not
occur in the action area, so the proposed project will have no effect on SRKW.
Southern DPS green sturgeon forage in estuaries in Washington, Oregon, and California during the
summer months, and congregate off of northern Vancouver Island B.C. and Canada in the winter
months. There is no suitable foraging habitat for green sturgeon in the action area The species is rare
in Puget Sound, which is not considered within its natural range; therefore, the project will have no
effect on green sturgeon.
Use of the action area by listed salmonid species is discussed in Section 9.F. Use of the action area by
eulachon, yelloweye rockfish, and bocaccio is discussed in Section 9.H. Use of the action area by
marbled murrelet is discussed in Section 9.J.
9. Existing Environmental Conditions
A. Shoreline riparian vegetation and habitat features
The project site is located along the Puget Sound nearshore environment (intertidal and shore zones),
which is defined by the City of Edmonds as a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area (FWHCA).
FWHCAs are regulated by the City of Edmonds as environmentally critical areas in accordance with
Edmonds City Code Chapter 23.
Most of the shoreline within the action area is occupied with seawalls and fill; there is only a small
area of upper intertidal and backshore vegetation. The upper intertidal shoreline is entirely armored
with rock, wood, and concrete, except for a 250-foot section of natural beach and restored native
vegetation at Brackett's Landing South, approximately 250 feet north of the bulkhead to be removed.
A narrow sand and gravel beach extends north and south of the ferry terminal. The beach north of the
terminal is mapped by WDFW as providing spawning habitat for surf smelt (WDFW 2017a). The
beach south of the terminal, within and adjacent to the project area, while it maybe suitable for
forage fish spawning, is not mapped as forage fish spawning habitat (WDFW 2017a). Pedestrian
activity along this shoreline is significant.
Vegetation in the marine riparian zone (the narrow shoreline adjacent to the Sound) has been highly
modified by development and disturbance, including fill associated with the BNSF railroad bed, the
ferry terminal, and bulkheads and seawalls for shoreline protection.
B. Aquatic substrate and vegetation
The nearshore subtidal area between the project site and the Port of Edmonds Marina is mostly sand,
with several areas of artificial reef materials and rock at depths of -15 to -90 feet mean lower low
water (MLLW). Between the ferry terminal and Dayton Street (approximately 1,200 feet south of the
10
ferry terminal), expansive macroalgae beds were found during surveys for the City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program, including Laminaria spp. and Nereocystis spp., from the -5-foot contour
to the -60-foot MLLW contour (CH2M Hill 2004). The area directly offshore of and including the
docking area of the ferry terminal is devoid of macroalgae, probably as a result of propeller -induced
turbulence. The green algae, Ulva lactuca, and the red algae, Gracilaria sjoestedhi, were found from
Edmonds Marina to the ferry pier and from the ferry pier north through Edmonds Underwater Park
and beyond (CH2M Hill 2004).
Eelgrass beds were found to be continuous at depths of about -2 feet to -20 feet MLLW during the
surveys (CH2M Hill 2004). The eelgrass beds start at approximately 300 linear feet waterward from
the project site, and 150 linear feet from the project action area, both measured perpendicular to the
shoreline. Although there is eelgrass near the project site, impacts on eelgrass are not anticipated
because:
• The eelgrass is over 300 feet offshore, and in a different geomorphic unit (foreshore and
backshore versus low tide terrace). Finlayson (2006) has shown that there is very little, if any,
exchange of sediment between the foreshore and the low tide terrace.
• The size and grade of the placed sand/gravel material will be matched to areas adjacent to it
such that the area backfilled will not be a significant source of sediment.
• The embayment formed will likely trap more material than will be exported due to the new
shoreline geometry.
• Larger volumes of backfill at comparable distances were placed at Brackett's Landing South
without detrimental impact to the same eelgrass beds.
If a construction barge is used, it would not be grounded on eelgrass beds, because they are located
far offshore; also, an eelgrass survey will be done prior to barge use to confirm areas suitable for
barge and anchor placement. The nearshore subtidal area within the aquatic action area north of the
ferry terminal is mixed coarse substrate and sand. Dense eelgrass is present starting about 1 mile
northeast of the project site, between Northstream Creek and Perrinville Creek. A dense band of kelp
was mapped off the mouth of Shell Creek (0.8 mile northeast of the project site) (Edmonds 2007).
C. Surrounding land/water uses
The shoreline in the action area is zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW) and Public Use (P). The
Washington State Ferries terminal, the BNSF railway, and the Port of Edmonds Marina are dominant
land uses in the action area. The railway borders a large portion of the marine shoreline in the action
area. On either side of the ferry terminal are two regional parks, Brackett's Landing North and South.
Collectively, the two parks include public beach, picnic areas, interpretive information, public
restrooms, a parking lot, and showers. Pedestrian activity and beachcombing is intense and dispersed.
On the northern side of the ferry terminal is another regional park, Edmonds Underwater Park. From
the ferry terminal to the Port of Edmonds Marina is the Edmonds Marine Walkway, a public
waterfront walkway. Surrounding land uses are commercial, industrial, and residential.
D. Level of development
The terrestrial action area is highly developed; the shoreline is dominated by urban structures and
pavement related to transportation, residential, and commercial facilities. Likewise, the highly
developed marine aquatic areas include the railroad bed, bulkheads, ferry docks, commercial piers,
sewer and stormwater outfalls, and a few residential structures.
11
E. Water quality
At the Puget -Sound scale, there are multiple water quality concerns (Encyclopedia of Puget Sound
2017):
• Levels of toxic contaminants in biota that live or feed in Puget Sound
• The eutrophication of marine waters, producing hypoxic and anoxic regions
• Wastewater contamination, principally from combined sewer overflows or septic systems
• Harmful algal blooms, which introduce toxins that enter the food web
• Acidification of marine waters, and the adverse ecological effects that result
At the action -area scale, water quality is impaired due to exceedances of criteria for bacteria in water
samples taken at Brackett's Landing and exceedances of toxic contaminants, including
Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Chrysene, and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), in tissue samples (Ecology 2017).
F. Describe use of the action area by listed salmonid fish species.
Chinook salmon, steelhead, and bull trout use nearshore areas for adapting from freshwater to
saltwater, for migration, and as nursery areas for juveniles. Nearshore area surveys conducted in 2001
found juvenile Chinook at several locations in the Edmonds vicinity. Salmonid stocks that may be
present near Edmonds include runs from the Skagit and Stillaguamish Rivers, but are mostly from the
Snohomish, Green, Puyallup, and Nisqually Rivers and smaller drainages in central and southern
Puget Sound (Edmonds 2007). No Chinook, steelhead, or bull trout have been observed in Shell
Creek or Shellabarger Creek, which drain directly to Puget Sound 0.7 mile north and 0.6 mile south
of the project footprint, respectively (WDFW 2017b).
Chinook salmon and steelhead use of habitat in the action area would be during periods of juvenile
foraging and juvenile and adult migration. The eelgrass beds along the shoreline provide high quality
foraging habitat for juveniles (Edmonds 2007). Once juveniles leave estuarine/delta habitats and enter
Puget Sound, they distribute widely throughout nearshore ecosystems. Chinook juveniles spend a
greater amount of time in the nearshore environment as they grow, whereas steelhead have a longer
freshwater rearing time and are larger when they enter the marine environment, so they are likely to
head to deeper waters beyond the nearshore for foraging.
Chinook salmon abundance in shoreline areas of Puget Sound typically peaks in June and July,
although some are still present in shoreline habitats through at least October. When juveniles first
enter estuarine areas, their optimal habitat is low gradient, shallow water, fine-grained substrates (silts
and mud), low salinity, and low wave energy. As they grow, they use a greater diversity of Puget
Sound habitats including deeper, more offshore habitats, and eventually, most fish leave for North
Pacific Ocean feeding grounds (Fresh 2006).
Bull trout use mouths of estuaries and nearshore areas primarily from March to July. Some fish re-
enter marine areas briefly in the fall to return to foraging areas. In summer, fish may leave
estuary/marine areas due to high temperatures (Goetz et al. 2003). Bull trout habitat use in the action
area would be during periods of adult foraging and migration (P. Verhey, personal communication).
Bull trout display wide-ranging foraging habits and are known to consume juvenile salmon (including
Chinook) that inhabit shallow nearshore areas (Edmonds 2007).
12
G. Is the project located within designated/proposed bull trout or Pacific salmon critical habitat?
If so, please address the proposed projects' potential direct and indirect effect to primary
constituent elements.
Designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon and for bull trout is present with the action area.
Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat
Chinook salmon critical habitat includes only the marine nearshore, from extreme high tide to a depth
of 30 meters. Chinook salmon PCE 5 is present in the action area.
PCE 5. Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and
forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural
cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders,
and side channels.
Existing Conditions. Most of the existing (terrestrial) shoreline within the action area lacks
natural elements and complexity because it is lined with seawalls and fill, so only a small area of
backshore vegetation remains. The upper intertidal shoreline is entirely armored with rock, wood,
and concrete, except for a 250-foot section of natural beach and restored native vegetation at
Brackett's Landing South, approximately 250 feet north of the bulkhead to be removed.
Vegetation in the marine riparian zone (the narrow shoreline adjacent to the Sound) has been
highly modified by development and disturbance, including fill associated with the BNSF
railroad bed, the ferry terminal, and bulkheads and seawalls for shoreline protection. The
nearshore and beach areas in the action area are subject to human disturbance caused by, for
example, pedestrians and boats.
Effects to PCE. The proposed overwater walkway piers will place a small amount of fill in the
nearshore environment; however, the impacts will be more than offset by bulkhead removal and
shoreline restoration, as detailed in Section 5, Description of Work. Work conducted below the
MHHW will cause minor amounts of turbidity. Short-term effects on water quality will be
minimized by use of BMPs, and will be of limited scope and duration. Effects on forage fish will
be minimized by avoiding disturbance of forage fish spawning areas, as described in Section 11,
Conservation Measures.
Bull Trout Critical Habitat
Bull trout critical habitat includes the marine nearshore, from MHHW to -10 meter MLLW, and any
tidally influenced freshwater heads of estuaries. Bull trout PCEs 2, 3, 4, and 8 are present in the
action area.
PCE 2. Migratory habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between
spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including, but not
limited to permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers.
Existing Conditions. Bull trout use nearshore areas, such as the action area, for adapting from
freshwater to saltwater, and for foraging, growth, migration, and overwintering (USFWS 2004).
Within the action area, water quality is impaired due to exceedances of criteria for bacteria in
water samples taken at Brackett's Landing and exceedances of toxic contaminants, including
Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Chrysene,
and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), in tissue samples (Ecology 2017). The creosote -treated
13
piles in the intertidal zone and associated with the bulkhead are sources of water pollution. The
existing water quality impairments are not expected to act as a barrier to migration in the action
area. There are no other barriers to migration that would impede migration in the action area.
Effects to PCE. The overwater walkway is not expected to be a barrier to migration. The
overwater walkway surface and curbs will be grated to allow light to penetrate through the
structure, limiting shading. If a barge is used for construction, it would temporarily shade the area
directly beneath the barge. Shading could impact juvenile salmon migration behavior in the action
area; however, impacts would be minimized by adhering to the USAGE -approved work window,
when migrating juveniles are least likely to be present. Turbidity during construction could
temporarily degrade water quality, but effects will be of short duration and will be minimized by
adhering to BMPs and conservation measures, and, therefore, will not affect this PCE.
Bulkhead removal will remove a structure from the water, thereby improving habitat. Removing
the creosote -treated pilings will eliminate a source of pollution and provide the opportunity for
localized water quality improvement. Therefore, the project would not negatively affect this PCE.
PCE 3. An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic
macroinvertebrates, and forage fish.
Existing Conditions. The beach north of the ferry terminal is mapped by WDFW as providing
spawning habitat for surf smelt (WDFW 2017a). The beach south of the ferry terminal, within
and adjacent to the project area, is not mapped as forage fish spawning habitat (WDFW 2017a);
however, the action area provides suitable forage fish spawning habitat.
Effects to PCE. The bulkhead removal will improve nearshore habitat for migrating and foraging
bull trout by restoring the shoreline with native substrate and vegetation. Nearshore restoration
will improve forage fish spawning habitat and may improve the food base. Detrimental effects on
forage fish will be minimized by avoiding disturbance of potential forage fish spawning habitat,
as described in Section 11, Conservation Measures. If a barge is used for construction, it would
not be grounded on eelgrass beds or in forage fish spawning areas, as confirmed by eelgrass
mapping and forage fish spawning surveys prior to construction.
PCE 4. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and
processes with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and substrates, to
provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure.
Existing Conditions. Most of the existing shoreline within the action area lacks natural elements
and complexity because it is developed with seawalls. The upper intertidal shoreline is entirely
armored with rock, wood, and concrete, except for a 250-foot section of natural beach and
restored native vegetation at Brackett's Landing South, approximately 250 feet north of the
bulkhead to be removed. Vegetation in the marine riparian zone (the narrow shoreline adjacent to
the Sound) has been highly modified by development and disturbance, including fill associated
with the BNSF railroad bed, the ferry terminal, and bulkheads and seawalls for shoreline
protection.
Effects to PCE. The bulkhead removal will improve nearshore habitat for migrating and foraging
bull trout by restoring the shoreline with native substrate and vegetation. The proposed project
will, therefore, have a beneficial effect on this PCE.
14
PCE 8. Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are
not inhibited.
Existing Conditions. There are multiple water quality concerns in Puget Sound, as noted above.
Within the action area, water quality is impaired due to exceedances of criteria for bacteria in
water samples taken at Brackett's Landing and exceedances of toxic contaminants, including
Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Chrysene,
and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), in tissue samples (Ecology 2017). The creosote -treated
piles in the intertidal zone and associated with the bulkhead are sources of water pollution.
Effects to PCE. Removing the creosote -treated pilings will eliminate a source of pollution and
provide the opportunity for localized water quality improvement. Water quality will be
temporarily degraded due to turbidity from substrate disturbance associated with fill removal and
bulkhead setback, and from the first tidal inundation after sediment disturbance from work done
in the dry. Increased suspended sediments will be localized and of short duration; therefore, no
measurable effects on this PCE are expected.
H. Describe use of the action area by other listed fish species
Green sturgeon, eulachon, and yelloweye and bocaccio rockfish have all been documented in Puget
Sound. Green sturgeon are rare in Puget Sound; they have only been observed in estuaries, thus they
are very unlikely to use the action area. Eulachon are infrequent in Puget Sound; they would use the
nearshore environment in the action area for incidental migration. Free-floating larval bocaccio and
yelloweye rockfish would use the action area for foraging; they have been observed under free-
floating algae, seagrass, and detached kelp (79 FR 68043). Juvenile bocaccio and yelloweye rockfish
are most commonly found on rocky reefs, kelp canopies, and artificial structures, such as piers and oil
platforms; adults generally move into deeper water as they increase in size and age (NOAA 2017).
I. Is the project located within designated/proposed critical habitat for any of the species listed
below?
Southern resident killer whale Marbled murrelet
Northern spotted owl Western snowy plover
Green sturgeon Eulachon
There is no designated critical habitat for northern spotted owl, green sturgeon, marbled murrelet,
western snowy plover, or eulachon within the action area; and they are not discussed further in this
BE.
Critical habitat for SRKW is mapped offshore along the Edmonds waterfront. The waterfront is
within Area 2, which includes Puget Sound south from the Deception Pass Bridge, entrance to
Admiralty Inlet, and Hood Canal Bridge (71 CFR 69063). The critical habitat designation includes
waters deeper than 20 feet based on extreme high water. The aquatic action area includes waters that
are shallower than 20 feet based on extreme high water. Therefore, the aquatic extent of the action
area does not extend to SRKW critical habitat; and it is not discussed further in this BE.
Critical habitat for yelloweye rockfish and bocaccio is present in the action area. The physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of adult bocaccio and adult and juvenile yelloweye
rockfish are: 1) quantity, quality, and availability of prey species to support individual growth,
15
survival, reproduction, and feeding opportunities; 2) water quality and sufficient levels of dissolved
oxygen to support growth, survival, reproduction, and feeding opportunities; and 3) the type and
amount of structure and rugosity that supports feeding opportunities and predator avoidance
(79 FR 68054). For juvenile bocaccio, those features include: 1) quantity, quality, and availability of
prey species to support individual growth, survival, reproduction, and feeding opportunities; and
2) water quality and sufficient levels of dissolved oxygen to support growth, survival, reproduction,
and feeding opportunities (79 FR 68054).
J. Describe use of action area by marbled murrelets.
In the Puget Sound region, marbled murrelets are typically found in fall and winter, and many are
winter residents only. They are associated with the nearshore marine environment fewer than 3 miles
from shore. They are most commonly seen in the San Juan Islands and the Strait of Juan de Fuca
(Striplin and Battelle 2001). The nearest critical habitat is in the Snoqualmie National Forest,
approximately 30 miles east of the action area (USFWS 2017b).
Marbled murrelets are observed intermittently in inland Puget Sound waters. Winter and summer
surveys conducted by WDFW in 2000 from Mukilteo (7 miles north of Edmonds) to Golden Gardens
Park (8 miles south of Edmonds), found no murrelets in winter and only one to four birds during the
summer (Striplin and Battelle 2001). During surveys between Edmonds and Golden Gardens Park,
marbled murrelets were only seen in 8 out of 17 years between 1983 and 2000; between 1 and
17 birds were observed each year they were present (Striplin and Battelle 2001).
K. Describe use of action area by the spotted owl.
The action area is not used by spotted owls.
L. Describe use of action area by Southern Resident killer whales.
SRKW are observed intermittently in Puget Sound, with the fewest sightings from May through July.
During early autumn, southern resident pods, especially J pod, routinely expand their movements into
Puget Sound, likely to take advantage of chum and Chinook salmon runs (71 CFR 69063). Extremely
shallow waters of Puget Sound (less than 20 feet deep) are not considered to be within the
geographical area occupied by the species (NMFS 2006); therefore, SRKW would not be found in the
action area.
M. How far is the nearest Steller sea lion haulout site from the action area? Describe their use of
the action area.
The eastern DPS of the Steller sea lion was delisted in 2013 (78 FR 66139); therefore, they are not
discussed in this BE.
N. Forage Fish Habitat
Check box if Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) documented habitat is present.
Surf Smelt: ❑ Pacific Herring: ❑ Sand Lance: ❑
Check box if the proposed action will occur in potentially suitable forage fish spawning habitat:
Surf Smelt: ® Pacific Herring: ❑ Sand Lance:
llC
Laminaria spp. and Nereocystis spp. are present in sand substrate from the -5-foot contour to
the -60-foot MLLW contour, and eelgrass beds are present at depths of about -2 feet to -20 feet
MLLW in sand substrate (CH2M Hill 2004), none of which are within the aquatic action area. Green
algae and red algae are present from the marina to the ferry pier and from the ferry pier north through
the underwater park and beyond (CH2M Hill 2004). They are within the aquatic action area but are
not attached to the substrate.
10. Effects Analysis
Direct Impacts:
The overwater walkway element of the project includes installation of seven steel piles, two of which
will be below MHHW. Pile driving is expected to produce an estimated peak sound pressure of
110 dBA at 50 feet. Although ground vibrations will occur adjacent to shallow water, it is unlikely
that they will generate underwater noise significant enough to affect listed species. Using attenuation
rates for hard sites (i.e., pavement or water), it is estimated that in -air project noise will attenuate to
ambient noise at 0.38 mile (1,991 feet). Pile driving could affect marbled murrelet foraging; however,
proofing of piles is typically of short duration (less than 30 minutes) and is intermittent with long
breaks between installation of each pile, reducing the likelihood that murrelets would be exposed to
impact pile -driving noise. If piles are installed by impact hammer, the distance within which pile -
driving noise could mask murrelet communication is about 140 feet (WSDOT 2017). Murrelets are
unlikely to be that close to project activities due to the level of disturbance during construction.
Water quality will be temporarily degraded due to turbidity from substrate disturbance associated
with fill removal and bulkhead setback and from the first tidal inundation after sediment disturbance
from work done in the dry. Increased suspended sediments will be localized and of short duration.
Turbidity effects on listed fish species depend on the amount and timing of exposure. The response of
fish to elevated suspended solids concentrations is highly variable and dependent upon life -history
stage, species, background suspended solids concentrations, and ambient water quality. Responses
range from avoidance (the most common response) to reduced feeding rates, reduced growth rates,
elevated blood sugars, gill flaring, and coughing (Berg and Northcote 1985; Servizi and Martens
1991; Spence and Hughes 1996).Bulkhead removal will eliminate approximately 36 creosote -treated
timber piles from marine waters (Table 2). Removing the creosote -treated timber piles will eliminate
a source of pollution and provide the opportunity for localized water quality improvement. All
stormwater generated on pollution -generating surfaces of the project site will be treated and infiltrated
in a bioretention cell, thus eliminating untreated stormwater discharge to Puget Sound and providing
further opportunity for localized water quality improvement.
As stated above, use of a construction barge would create shading, which has been demonstrated to
affect salmon migration behavior. Impacts would be minimized by adhering to the USACE-approved
work window, when migrating juveniles are least likely to be present. The barge would not be
anchored over eelgrass or other macroalgae beds and, therefore, would not affect primary
productivity.
Indirect Impacts:
Indirect effects are those caused by, or resulting from, the proposed action and are later in time but
still reasonably certain to occur (50 CFR §402.02). Indirect effects could be caused by changes to
ecological systems resulting in altered habitat or predator/prey relationships or anticipated changes in
human activities, including changes in land use. There are no changes in land use expected from the
project.
17
Removal of creosote -treated timber piles, bulkhead fill, concrete foundations, and beach restoration
with nourishment (sand and gravel), revegetation, and habitat structures will benefit habitat and prey
availability for salmon by improving riparian condition and forage fish spawning habitat.
11. Conservation measures
Proposed work window:
The USACE-designated approved work windows for Tidal Reference Area 6 (Edmonds) are:
• Salmon: July 2 through March 2
• Bull trout: July 16 through February 15
• Pacific Sand Lance: March 2 through October 14.
Combining these work windows, the project could be constructed July 16 through October 14
(USACE 2012). USACE does not provide a work window for surf smelt in Tidal Reference Area 6.
Other conservation measures:
All pile driving and removal, and other work below MHHW, will be conducted during low tide to
avoid in -water work and associated noise and turbidity. All pile removal will be conducted in
accordance with WDNR BMPs and guidelines for removing creosote piling removal and disposal
(WDNR 2017).
During construction of the project, the contractor will minimize erosion and reduce and control
surface and runoff water impacts through the development and implementation of a TESC plan and
execution of BMPs and conservation measures, which may include:
• Implementation of a SWPPP.
• Installing TESC measures prior to clearing, grubbing, excavation, and grading activities.
• Limiting clearing and ground -disturbing activities to the minimum area needed to construct
the project.
• Use of track -mounted equipment to reduce substrate compaction.
• Where necessary, installing erosion and sediment control measures (e.g., stabilized
construction entrance, silt fences, wattles, plastic covering, and drain inlet protection) to
prevent release and discharge of sediments from construction areas.
• Installing high -visibility fencing to delineate clearing and construction limits.
• Use of silt curtains and debris booms to prevent discharge of materials to Puget Sound.
• Disposing of any waste material, debris, or spoils at an approved and permitted upland
commercial site or approved waste site.
• Implementing containment measures at staging and material stockpile areas to prevent runoff.
• After construction, removing all TESC measures, and revegetating all disturbed ground
surfaces with native plants and mulch to prevent erosion and sedimentation.
• Installing storm drain inlet protection to prevent sediment discharges.
18
• Stabilizing temporary stormwater facilities with rocks or quarry spalls to prevent scour and
erosion.
• Employing temporary (e.g., weed -free mulch and plastic sheeting) and permanent (mulch)
cover measures to protect disturbed areas.
• Frequent sweeping of silt from roadway surfaces to prevent sediment runoff.
• Frequent inspection of flow and erosion control TESC facilities and maintenance of facilities
for continued proper functioning.
• If a barge is used for construction or staging, the barge would not be grounded on eelgrass
beds or forage fish spawning areas, and would not shade eelgrass beds.
A forage fish spawn survey will be conducted along two 100-foot transects where project impacts are
proposed: the bulkhead and overwater walkway. The surveys will be conducted 2 days prior to
construction to determine the presence/absence of forage fish spawn within and adjacent to the
project area. The transects will address those impacted areas separately, such that if one element of
the project is abandoned or delayed, only one transect may be necessary. Construction waterward of
the MHHW must begin within 48 hours of presence/absence notification to WDFW and must be
completed within 7 days. If the work cannot be completed within 7 days, a subsequent survey must be
performed to confirm lack of spawn within and adjacent to the work area. If forage fish spawn is
determined to be present adjacent to the work area, a 20-foot buffer will be flagged around the
location; and construction may continue outside that buffer. If spawn is located within the project
work area, construction must be delayed for a minimum of 1 week and subsequent surveys must be
conducted weekly until spawn are determined to be absent.
12. Determination of Effect
Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Chinook Critical Habitat
The project may affect Puget Sound Chinook because:
• Chinook salmon could be present in the action area.
• Chinook salmon and their prey could be exposed to effects from elevated turbidity if present
in the action area during project activities.
• The project involves permanent impacts on the nearshore environment from placement of
overwater walkway pilings.
The project is not likely to adversely affect Puget Sound Chinook for the following reasons:
• The proposed work window (July 16 through October 14) avoids periods when Chinook are
likely to be in the action area.
• Elevated turbidity will be of short duration and limited extent.
• No significant underwater noise would be generated by the project, as all pile driving would
be terrestrial.
• Bulkhead and fill removal combined with habitat restoration will offset placement of
overwater walkway pilings.
The project may affect Chinook critical habitat because it will create short-term modifications to
water quality through slight increases in suspended sediments and placement of piles below MHHW.
19
The project is not likely to adversely affect Chinook critical habitat because:
• Suspended sediments will be of short duration and limited extent and will not occur at levels
that will have any effect on habitat function.
• The project will increase the function of critical habitat by reducing the amount of armoring,
increasing the amount of intertidal habitat, and enhancing riparian vegetation.
• Removal of creosote -treated piles is expected to provide the opportunity for localized water
quality improvement.
• The project is expected to have no adverse effects on forage fish spawning or submerged
aquatic vegetation with implementation of the proposed conservation measures.
Bull Trout and Bull Trout Critical Habitat
The proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, bull trout and bull trout
critical habitat for the same reasons as listed for Chinook salmon.
Steelhead
The proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, steelhead for the same reasons
as listed for Chinook salmon.
Bocaccio and Yelloweye Rockfish and Critical Habitat
The proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, Bocaccio and yelloweye
rockfish and their critical habitat for the same reasons as listed for Chinook salmon.
Eulachon
The proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, eulachon for the same reasons
as listed for Chinook salmon.
Marbled Murrelet
The project may affect marbled murrelet because they could be foraging in the action area during
project activities.
The project is not likely to adversely affect marbled murrelet for the following reasons:
• Murrelets are rare in the action area, surveys by WDFW during the in -water work window
documented presence of only 1 to 17 birds in only 8 out of 17 years.
• Proofing of piles is typically of short duration (fewer than 30 minutes) and is intermittent
with long breaks between installation of each pile, further reducing the likelihood that
murrelets would be exposed to impact pile -driving noise
• If piles are installed by impact hammer, the distance within which pile -driving noise could
mask murrelet communication is about 140 feet (WSDOT 2017). Murrelets are unlikely to be
that close to project activities due to the level of disturbance during construction.
20
13. EFH Analysis
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) is broadly defined by the Act (now called the Magnuson -Stevens Act or the
Sustainable Fisheries Act) to include "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning,
breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. " This language is interpreted or described in the 1997Interim
Final Rule [62 Fed. Reg. 66551, Section 600.10 Definitions] -- Waters include aquatic areas and their
associated physical, chemical, and biological properties that are used by fish and may include historic
areas if appropriate; substrate includes sediment, hard bottom, structures underlying the waters, and
associated biological communities; necessary means the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery
and the managed species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem; and "spawning, breeding, feeding, or
growth to maturity" covers a species' full life cycle.
Additional guidance for EFH analyses can be found at the NOAA Fisheries web site under the
Sustainable Fisheries Division.
A. Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is described in Section 5 of the BE.
B. Addresses EFH for Appropriate Fisheries Management Plans (FMP)
The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) has designated Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for
the Pacific salmon fishery, federally managed ground fishes, and coastal pelagic fisheries. The EFH
designation for the Pacific salmon fishery includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and
other water bodies currently or historically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and
California, except above the impassible barriers identified by PFMC (2014). In estuarine and marine
areas, proposed designated EFH for salmon extends from near -shore and tidal submerged
environments within state territorial waters out to the full extent of the exclusive economic zone
offshore of Washington, Oregon, and California north of Point Conception (PFMC 2014). The Pacific
salmon management unit includes Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho (Oncorhynchus
kisutch), and pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha). All three of these species use Puget Sound for
adult migration, juvenile out -migration, and rearing where suitable habitat is present.
The EFH designation for ground and coastal pelagic fishes is defined as those waters and substrate
necessary to ensure the production needed to support a long-term sustainable fishery. The marine
extent of ground fish and coastal pelagic EFH includes those waters from the near -shore and tidal
submerged environment within Washington, Oregon, and California state territorial waters out to the
exclusive economic zone (370.4 km [231.5 miles]) offshore between Canada and the Mexican border.
The west coast ground fish management unit includes 83 species that typically live on or near the
bottom of the ocean. Species groups include skates and sharks, rockfishes (55 species), flatfishes
(12 species) and ground fishes. Ground fishes such as lingcod (Ophiodon elongates), Cabezon
(Scorpaenichthys marmoratus), and brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus) potentially occur in Puget
Sound (NOAA Fisheries 1998). Coastal pelagic are schooling fishes, not associated with the ocean
bottom, that migrate in coastal waters. West coast pelagic fish include the pacific sardine (Sardinops
sagax), Pacific chub (Scomber japonicus), northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax), jack mackerel
(Trachurus symmetricus), and market squid (Loligo opalescens). These fishes are primarily associated
with the open ocean and coastal areas (PFMC 1998) and are not likely to occur in the action area.
21
C. Effects of the Proposed Action
i. Effects on EFH
Groundfish
Essential fish habitat for ground fishes is present in the project action area. The project will result
in a minor, temporary effect on water quality. No permanent adverse effects on EFH for ground
fishes or their prey species will result from the project actions. Therefore, the project will not
adversely affect EFH for ground fishes.
Coastal Pelagic Species
Coastal pelagic species are not likely to occur in the action area; therefore, the project will not
adversely affect EFH for coastal pelagic fishes.
Pacific .Salmon
Essential fish habitat for Pacific salmon is present in the project action area. The project will
result in a minor, temporary effect on water quality. No permanent adverse effects on EFH for
ground fishes or their prey species will result from the project actions. Therefore, the project will
not adversely affect EFH for Pacific salmon.
ii. Effects on Managed Species
The project will not adversely affect managed species because impacts will be minimized
through project design and implementation of BMPs to minimize sedimentation and turbidity.
Moreover, it is unlikely that managed species will be present in the action area during project
construction.
iii. Effects on Associated Species, Including Prey Species
Chinook and coho salmon prey on surf smelt and sand lance. There is no documented spawning
for surf smelt or sand lance in the action area. Preconstruction surveys will occur, and no
construction will occur in spawning areas, as described above in Section 11 of the BE.
Chinook and coho salmon prey, in part, on benthic macroinvertebrates. The project will not
involve any in -water work; however, the project could cause minor temporary effects on benthic
macroinvertebrates. Impacts will be minimized through project design and implementation of
BMPs to minimize sedimentation.
D. Proposed Conservation Measures
The habitat requirements for the Magnuson -Stevens Act -managed species within the action area (i.e.,
EFH) are similar or identical to those of the ESA -listed salmonid species. Conservation measures are
listed in Sections 5 and 11 of the BE.
E. Conclusions by EFH
The proposed project will not adversely affect EFH for groundfish, coastal pelagic species, or
Pacific Salmon.
22
14. References
Berg, L., and T.G. Northcote. 1985. Changes in territorial, gill -flaring, and feeding behavior in juvenile
coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) following short-term pulses of suspended sediment. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 42.8 (1985): 1410-1417.
CH2M Hill. 2004. SR 104 Edmonds Crossing Final Environmental Impact Statement and Final
Section 4(f) Evaluation. Prepared for US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration,
and Washington State Department of Transportation. Prepared by CH2MHILL, Seattle, Washington.
Ecology. 2017. Washington State Water Quality Assessment 303(d)/305(b) List. Accessed May 12, 2017.
<https://fortress.wa. ovg/ecy/approvedwga/ApprovedSearch.aspx?LISTING_ID=42487>.
Edmonds, City of 2007. Shoreline Master Program Update Shoreline Inventory & Characterization.
SMA Grant Agreement No. 60600108. Prepared for City of Edmonds. Prepared by Sea -Run Consulting,
TetraTech, Inc., Reid Middleton, Inc., and Pentec.
Encyclopedia of Puget Sound. 2017. Puget Sound Institute, University of Washington. Accessed May 12,
2017. <https://www.eopugetsound.org/science-review/section-1-introduction-1>.
Finlayson, D.P. 2006. The geomorphology of Puget Sound beaches. PhD Thesis. University of
Washington, Seattle.
Fresh, K.L. 2006. Juvenile Pacific Salmon in Puget Sound. Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership Report
No. 2006-06. Published by Seattle District, US Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, Washington.
Goetz, F., E. Jeanes, G. Hart, C Ebel, J. Starkes, and E. Conner. Behavior of Anadromous Bull Trout in
the Puget Sound and Pacific coast of Washington. Presented at Estuarine Research Federation
Conference. September, 2003, Seattle, Washington.
Herrera. 2017. Critical Areas Report and Mitigation Plan. Prepared for the City of Edmonds Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services Department by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. August.
Landau. 2017. Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Edmonds Waterfront Development and
Restoration and Ebb Tide Condominiums Walkway Projects Edmonds, Washington. Prepared for Barker
Landscape Architects. Prepared by Landau Associates, Edmonds, Washington.
Newcombe, C.P., and J.O.T. Jensen. 1996. Channel suspended sediment and fisheries: a synthesis for
quantitative assessment of risk and impact. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16.4
(1996): 693-727.
NOAA. 2017. Threatened Yelloweye and Endangered Bocaccio in Puget Sound/Georgia Basin. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA Fisheries Westcoast Region. Accessed July 20, 2017.
<http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.goy/protected species/rockfish/rockfish in Puget sound.html>.
NMFS. 2006. Designation of Critical Habitat for Southern Resident Killer Whales Biological Report.
National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Region.
23
NMFS. 2017. Status of ESA listings and critical habitat designations for West Coast salmon and
steelhead. Accessed online May 12, 2017.
<http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.goy//publications/ ig s maps/maps/salmon_ steelhead/critical_habitat/
wcr salmonid_ch_esajuly2016.pdf>.
PFMC. 1998. Final Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Review for Amendment 11 to the Pacific
Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan. Pacific Fishery Management Council. PFMC. 2014.
Amendment 18 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. Appendix A: Identification and Description of Essential
Fish Habitat, Adverse Impacts, and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon. Pacific Fishery
Management Council.
Servizi, J.A., and D.W. Martens. 1991. Effect of temperature, season, and fish size on acute lethality of
suspended sediments to coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences 48.3 (1991): 493-497.
Spence, B.C., and R.M. Hughes. 1996. An ecosystem approach to salmonid conservation. ManTech
Environmental Research Services, Corporation.
Striplin and Battelle. 2001. King County Marine Habitat Report. Prepared for King County Division of
Natural Resources and Parks, Wastewater Treatment Division, Seattle, Washington. Prepared by Stiplin
Environmental Associates, Seattle, Washington and Battelle Marine Science Laboratory, Sequim,
Washington.
USACE. 2012. Approved work windows for fish protection for all marine/estuarine areas excluding the
mouth of the Columbia River (Baker Bay) by tidal reference area. August 14. Accessed June 9, 2017.
<http://www.nws.usace.gr y.mil/Portals/27/docs/re ug latoD /ESA%20forms%20and%20templates/Marin
e%20Fish%20Work%20 Windows%20(8-14-12).pdf>.
USFWS. 2004. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal -Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull
Trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Volumes I (Puget Sound Management Unit, 389 + xvii pp.) and II
(Olympic Peninsula Management Unit, 277 + xvi pp.). US Fish and Wildlife Service., Portland, Oregon.
USFWS. 2017a. List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in the proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by the proposed project. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington Fish
and Wildlife Office. Lacey, Washington.
USFWS. 2017b. Critical Habitat Mapper. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Accessed May 12, 2017.
<https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting l>.
WDFW. 2017a. Priority habitats and species report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Accessed May 12 2017.<http://apps.wdfw.wa.goe/phsontheweb/>.
WDFW. 2017b. SalmonScape interactive map. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlifc. Acccsscd
May 12, 2017. <http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscgpe/map.html>.
WDNR. 2017. Washington Department of Natural Resources Derelict Creosote Piling Removal Best
Management Practices for Pile Removal & Disposal. Accessed online June 26, 2017.
<http://file.dnr.wa.goy//publications/aqr rest pileremoval_bmp 2017.pdf>.
WSDOT. 2017. Biological Assessment Guidance. WSDOT BA Preparation Manual. Washington State
Department of Transportation. Accessed June 9, 2017.
<http://www.wsdot. wa. gov/Environment/Biology/BA/BAguidance.htm>.
24
15. Appendices
As needed include mitigation, revegetation plans, monitoring plans, results ofstudies, water quality
information, etc.
25
Stairs
Match
Existing
Elevation
Edmonds
Marine
Walkway
1, • /, ` \
• ti� �� \\O� `��:�?`\ Sirs\�i:\'iL'�\�� .. 1�� �� •
.,��-�_ • ■. • � �e „ u _. � ��.�rrrca•�as :� e � �v-.s�Yii� � �,��� ` . \ ��r ���.��t�.� JI
a
_ r
•Setback
- ,i\\—Replace Existing CB
Ebb Tide Edmonds
� ,4
Condominiums Waterfrontq,
Center fffm
Underwater
Sports
42" Fence/Guardrail
51 0 1 <;
r%
�
y9T
sz
9p
=°
Crb all w/
pence, Max. Ht. 6'
200 ft
/
Shoreline
25'
Setback
TO��
Entry ® .-i
ke
ftw
\S9
7
i
2,9' �-6" Bollards, Typ.
BNSF R.O.W.
Match Existing 11
Existing Utility Pole/
ASPHALT Street Light, To Remain
RAILROAD AVENUE
2.0' TOC
retention Bioretention Planter
Planter 1 Overflow, Typ.
Existing Utility Pole/ Street
Light, To Remain
I IIIIIIIIII
•� y e
Main
�P ra
Ent ry
Trei
a1Liu
l
-
r7�1/lS
_ -
M
Ex. Bus Shelter—
Bioretention Planter 2—
ASPHALT
Direction Curb Remo. Per
RAILROAD AVENUE
ting, Typ
match
9 �
8:
r� ty
Street fight, V
�ma'
771
to
CB
LEGEND
^`
Landscape Plantings
Bioretention Planter
Lawn
Beach Restoration
®
Asphalt
Concrete
Tree (Max. Ht. 25')
— —1 o- —
Existing Topography
•13.0'
Proposed Grading
---MHHw—
MHHW (El. 8.6)
---- OHW ----
OHW
0
Boulder
Large Woody Debris
----
Property Line
--- —
Right of Way
-----
Limit of Work
— — —
Easement
PARKING -
Total Existing Stalls: 77
Proposed Stalls: 71
Standard Stalls: 27
Compact Stalls: 35 (49%)
ADA Std. Stalls: 2
ADA Van Stalls: 1
Van Stalls: 4
NOTE:
1. The entire project is within the
Flood Plain Boundary
0 10 20 40
1111106�—
Scale: 1" = 20'-0"
(22" x 34" sheet)
0
a
- U
CASPERS ST
44,
yJ
'BOSS DALEY ST
Z
>
524)
w ST MAIN ST
W DAYTON ST U) DAYTON ST
,'N MAPLE ST
w
Q, a-• . '' - "ems' > w
q a
ALDER STLO
> C --
O I a
WALNUT ST
y ` _ U)
-or. Z'-HOLLY DR
AHOELU WAY
HOMELAND DR
_ 104 s
' ;HEMLOCK WAY
. LN
Legend
j3 Project Area
Aquatic Action Area
Terrestrial Action Area
Street
Ferry
Figure 3.
Action Areas for the Edmonds
Waterfront Center Project,
Edmonds, Washington.
NN 0 350 700 1,400
/,\ Feet
(6jJ HERRERA
K:'.Protons\V2017\17-06494-OOOP.I.c lRoport\BE\.ct,on_.....d (8=17)