Resolution 1326RESOLUTION NO. 1326
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING INTENT TO ADOPT AN UPDATE TO THE
SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AS ATTACHED HERTO.
WHEREAS, the City Council heard a brief introduction to the Shoreline Master Program at the
December 4, 2012 council meeting; and
WHEREAS, the December 4, 2012 introduction focused on how the Shoreline Master Program
applied to the Harbor Square property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued review of the SMP at the February 26, 2013 meeting with a
broader overview of the SMP update; and
WHEREAS, at the March 26, 2013 meeting, staff provided an in depth review of the three Urban
Mixed Use shoreline environments (ECDC 24.30.070) as well as brief discussion of the allowed uses
in the different shoreline environments and setbacks for various uses and shoreline environments;
and
WHEREAS, at the April 23, 2013 Council meeting, staff reviewed how proposed changes to the
City's SMP may impact property owners around Lake Ballinger as well as other single family
property owners within the City's shoreline jurisdiction as well as changes to the Meadowdale
Marina area; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the SMP update on June 6, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued discussion at the October 8, 2013 Council meeting and
directed staff to bring back options for a new shoreline environment and setbacks/buffers for the
Harbor Square property; and
WHEREAS, at the December 17, 2013 Council meeting, Council directed staff to draft an Urban
Mixed Use IV interim shoreline designation for Harbor Square and the Unocal/Chevron property
on the south side of Edmonds marsh; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a briefing on the SMP update at the September 2, 2014
Council meeting, including discussion of the new Interim Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline
designation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the attached proposed update to the
Shoreline Master Program on September 16, 2014; and
WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.090 requires that proposed Shoreline Master Programs be reviewed and
approved by the state prior to taking effect, now therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. INTENT TO ADOPT NEW SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM. The city council
hereby expresses intent to adopt the following attached documents:
1. A new Shoreline Master Program to read as set forth in Attachment A hereto, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full.
2. Updated Shoreline Jurisdiction and Environmental Designation Maps, to read as shown in
Attachment B, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set
forth in full.
3. An updated Shoreline Inventory and Characterization, to read as shown in Attachment C,
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full.
4. An updated Shoreline Restoration Plan, to read as shown in Attachment D, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full.
5. A cumulative Impacts Analysis, to read as shown in Attachment E, which is attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full.
RESOLVED this 18th day of November, 2014.
CITY OF EDMONDS
/PC6" P 0. fa �-
MAYOR, DAVE EARLING
ATTEST:
CI'l CLERK, SCO ASSEY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: November 14, 2014
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: November 18, 2014
RESOLUTION NO. 1326
4851-5533-3898, v. 1
Edmonds Shoreline Master Program
PartI. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................3
24.10.000 Purpose and Intent.............................................................................................................................3
24.10.010 Authority...........................................................................................................................................4
24.10.020 Applicability.....................................................................................................................................4
24.10.030 Relationship to Other Plans or Regulations......................................................................................4
24.10.040 Liberal Construction.........................................................................................................................5
24.10.050 Administrative Procedures................................................................................................................5
24.10.060 Document Organization....................................................................................................................6
Part II. Master Program Elements: Goals & Policies for the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program.............6
24.20.000
Introduction....................................................................................................................................... 6
24.20.010
Economic Development Element......................................................................................................7
24.20.020
Public Access Element......................................................................................................................8
24.20.030
Recreational Element......................................................................................................................10
24.20.040
Circulation Element........................................................................................................................11
24.20.050
Shoreline Use Element....................................................................................................................12
24.20.060
Conservation Element.....................................................................................................................16
24.20.070
Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Element...................................................................17
24.20.080
Flood Damage Prevention Element................................................................................................18
24.20.090
Views and Aesthetics Element........................................................................................................19
24.20.100
Urban Design Element....................................................................................................................19
24.20.110
Restoration Element........................................................................................................................20
PartIII. Shoreline Environments.........................................................................................................................22
24.30.000
Introduction.....................................................................................................................................
22
24.30.010
Adoption Criteria............................................................................................................................22
24.30.020
Shoreline Jurisdiction and Environments Designation Maps..........................................................22
24.30.030
Aquatic Environment......................................................................................................................23
24.30.040
Natural Environment.......................................................................................................................25
24.30.050
Urban Conservancy Environment...................................................................................................27
24.30.060
Shoreline Residential......................................................................................................................28
24.30.070
Urban Mixed Use............................................................................................................................30
24.30.080
Urban Railroad................................................................................................................................33
Part IV General Policies & Regulations............................................................................................................34
24.40.000 Applicability...................................................................................................................................34
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 1 of 160
24.40.010
Archaeological and Historic Resources..........................................................................................34
24.40.020
Critical Areas..................................................................................................................................35
24.40.030
Flood Hazard Reduction.................................................................................................................43
24.40.040
Public Access and Views................................................................................................................44
24.40.050
Shoreline Vegetation Conservation.................................................................................................47
24.40.060
Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint pollution......................................................................49
24.40.070
Shoreline Development Table: User Guide.................................................................................51
24.40.080
Shoreline Development Table: Shoreline Development Permitted by Area Designation ......51
24.40.090
Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards...............................................................................54
Part V Specific Modification Policies & Regulations......................................................................................57
24.50.000 Applicability...................................................................................................................................57
24.50.010 General Modification Policies and Regulations..............................................................................57
24.50.020 Shoreline stabilization.....................................................................................................................58
24.50.030 Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats..................................................................................................66
24.50.040 Landfill............................................................................................................................................74
24.50.050 Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs............................................................................................77
24.50.060 Dredging and dredge material disposal...........................................................................................80
24.50.070 Shoreline habitat and natural systems restoration and enhancement projects.................................86
Part VI Specific Use Policies & Regulations.....................................................................................................87
24.60.000
Applicability...................................................................................................................................87
24.60.010
Aquaculture.....................................................................................................................................88
24.60.020
Boating Facilities............................................................................................................................94
24.60.030
Commercial Development and Light Industrial............................................................................101
24.60.040
Forest Practices.............................................................................................................................104
24.60.050
In -stream Structures......................................................................................................................105
24.60.060
Recreational Development............................................................................................................105
24.60.070
Residential Development..............................................................................................................109
24.60.080
Transportation and Parking...........................................................................................................112
24.60.090
Utilities..........................................................................................................................................119
Part VII Nonconforming Development.........................................................................................................123
24.70.000 Purpose..........................................................................................................................................123
24.70.010 Nonconforming Uses....................................................................................................................123
24.70.020 Nonconforming development, building and/or structure..............................................................124
24.70.030 Nonconforming Lots............................................................................................................................127
24.70.040 Nonconforming Signs..........................................................................................................................128
24.70.050 Nonconforming local public facilities..................................................................................................129
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 2 of 160
Part VIII
Administration — Shoreline Permits...............................................................................................129
24.80.000
Purpose..........................................................................................................................................129
24.80.010
Exemptions from Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Process.........................................129
24.80.020
Letter of Exemption......................................................................................................................133
24.80.030
Review Criteria for All Development...........................................................................................134
24.80.040
Substantial Development Permit Criteria......................................................................................134
24.80.050
Conditional Use Permit Criteria....................................................................................................134
24.80.060
Variance Permit Criteria...............................................................................................................135
24.80.070
Minimum Application Requirements............................................................................................136
24.80.080
Notice of Application....................................................................................................................138
24.80.090
Special Procedures for Limited Utility Extensions and Bulkheads...............................................140
24.80.100
Public Hearings.............................................................................................................................140
24.80.110
Notice of Decision, Reconsideration, and Appeals.......................................................................141
24.80.120
Initiation of Development.............................................................................................................142
24.80.130
Revisions.......................................................................................................................................142
24.80.140
Time requirements of Shoreline Permits.......................................................................................144
24.80.150
Administrative Authority and Responsibility...............................................................................145
24.80.160
Compliance...................................................................................................................................146
24.80.170
Enforcement..................................................................................................................................146
PartIX Definitions............................................................................................................................................147
24.90.000
General Information......................................................................................................................147
24.90.010
Definitions: A to B.......................................................................................................................147
24.90.020
Definitions: C to F........................................................................................................................149
24.90.030
Definitions: G to 0.......................................................................................................................152
24.90.040
Definitions: P to R........................................................................................................................155
24.90.050
Definitions: S to T........................................................................................................................157
24.90.060
Definitions: U to Z.......................................................................................................................158
PartX Appendices...........................................................................................................................................160
24.100.000 Appendix A - Maps of Shoreline Environments and Jurisdictions...............................................160
Part I. Introduction
24.10.000 Purpose and Intent
This master program, in harmony with the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, is based on the
philosophy that the shorelines of the state and our city are among the most valuable and fragile
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 3 of 160
resources that we possess. The Shoreline Management Act made clear that there is a great public
concern regarding the use, protection, restoration, and preservation of these shorelines, which
concern is the premise of this master program. In recognition of private property rights, local
public opinion, existing realities, and the necessary coordination between several levels of
government, this program represents an approach toward the enhancement of shorelines rather
than the restriction of their use.
The purposes of this Master Program are:
A. To carry out the responsibilities imposed the City of Edmonds by Washington State
Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58).
B. To promote uses and development of the City of Edmonds shoreline consistent with
the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan while protecting and restoring
environmental resources.
C. To promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing a guide and
regulation for future development of the shoreline resources of the City of Edmonds.
24.10.010 Authority
Authority for enactment and administration of the program is the shoreline Management Act of
1971, chapter 90.58 RCW, as now or hereafter amended
24.10.020 Applicability
All proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction of the City of
Edmonds must conform to the Shoreline Management Act and this Chapter. All uses, even those
not meeting the definition of development, are subject to the provisions and development
regulations of this chapter, even though a permit may not be required.
24.10.030 Relationship to Other Plans or Regulations
A. Uses, developments and activities regulated by this Chapter may also be subject to the
provisions of the city of Edmonds comprehensive Plan, the Washington State Environmental
Policy Act, Edmonds City Code, and various other provisions of local, state, and federal law,
as may be amended. Project proponents shall comply with all applicable laws prior to
commencing any use, development or activity.
B. The shoreline master program has been developed as a both a policy and a regulatory
program. As such, the shoreline master program is a part of and was developed to be
consistent with the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan and its component elements.
C. The Edmonds Community Development Code establishes specific and detailed regulations
for most of the uses, development, and activities regulated in this chapter. The Edmonds
Community Development Code and this chapter are intended to operate together to produce
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 4 of 160
coherent and thorough shoreline regulations. Uses, developments and activities must comply
with both the Edmonds Community Development Code and the shoreline master program in
all cases. If there is a conflict between the two, the shoreline master program shall prevail.
24.10.040 Liberal Construction
As provided for in RCW 90.58.900, the Shoreline Management Act is exempted from the rule of
strict construction; the Act and this Master Program shall, therefore, be liberally construed to
give full effect to the purposes, goals, policies, and standards for which the Act and this master
Program were enacted.
24.10.050 Administrative Procedures
The general administrative procedures for this Title 24 (Edmonds Shoreline Master Program) are
not part of this program. They are included with the text of Title 24 for consistency and ease of
use. The Department of Ecology will be notified of any changes to the administrative chapters
listed below.
The use of separate local administrative and enforcement procedures is consistent with the 2003
Washington State Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-191(2)(a)(iii)(C)),
Administrative Provisions.
"Local governments may include administrative, enforcement, and permit review procedures
in the master program or the procedures may be defined by a local government ordinance
separate from the master program. In either case, these procedures shall conform to the
Shoreline Management Act, specifically RCW 90.58.140, 90.58.143, 90.58.210 and
90.58.220 and to chapter 173-27 WAC."
This allows the city of Edmonds to revise local administrative procedures (fees, application
meetings, authority of Administrator, etc) without another formal state amendment process.
ECDC 24.80 must still be consistent and remain consistent with the related provisions in the
Shoreline Management Act and sate shoreline rules (WACs). In the event of a conflict, the state
RCW or WAC, as amended, will prevail over the local ordinance.
The following sections are administrative procedures separate from Title 24:
ECDC 24.80.070
Minimum Application Requirements
ECDC 24.80.080
Notice of Application
ECDC 24.80.100
Public Hearings
ECDC 24.80.110
Notice of Decision, Reconsiderations, and Appeals
ECDC 24.80.130
Initiation of Development
ECDC 24.80.160
Administrative Authority and Responsibility
ECDC 24.80.170
Compliance
ECDC 24.80.180
Enforcement
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 5 of 160
24.10.060 Document Organization
This Master Program is divided into the following ten parts, consistent with the material to be
included within a master program as established in Chapter 173-26 WAC:
A. Part I, ECDC 24.10.000 through 24.10.000, contains basic and general information regarding
the shoreline master program.
B. Part II, ECDC 24.20.000 through 24.20.110, contains the city's goals and policies with
respect to the program elements established in Chapter 173-26 WAC.
C. Part III, ECDC 24.30.000 through 24.30.080, contains information regarding the different
shoreline environments to be found within the city including goals, policies and regulations
specific to each of the shoreline environments.
D. Part IV, ECDC 24.40.000 through 24.40.060, contains policies and regulations with respect
to general master program provisions identified in Chapter 173-26 WAC.
E. Part V, ECDC 24.50.000 through 24.50.070, contains policies and regulations that apply to
specific modifications that are regulated under the shoreline master program.
F. Part VI, ECDC 24.60.000 through 24.60.090, contains policies and regulations that apply to
specific uses that are regulated under the shoreline master program.
G. Part VII, ECDC 24.70.000 through 24.70.050, contains policies and regulations that apply to
nonconforming development with the shoreline jurisdiction of the City of Edmonds.
H. Part VIII, ECDC 24.80.000 through 24.80.180, contains administrative procedures for
shoreline permitting
I. Part IX, ECDC 24.90.000 through 24.90.060, contains definitions applicable to the shoreline
master program
Part X, ECDC 24.100.000 through 24.100.010, contains appendices pertaining to this
chapter.
Part II. Master Program Elements: Goals & Policies for the
Edmonds Shoreline Master Program
24.20.000 Introduction
This section contains goals and policies that form the foundation of Edmonds' Shoreline Master
Program which are implemented through the regulations in ECDC chapters 24.40 through 24.60,
and apply to all areas of the City of Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction, regardless of the designated
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 6 of 160
shore environment. The Shoreline Management Act requires cities to adopt goals, or "elements,"
to guide and support major shoreline management issues.
24.20.010 Economic Development Element
A. Purpose.
The economic development element provides for the location and design of industries,
industrial projects of statewide significance, transportation facilities, port facilities, tourist
facilities, commerce and other developments that are particularly dependent on their location
on or use of the shorelines of the state in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(a).
B. Economic Development Goal.
It is a goal of the city to encourage port facilities, tourist facilities, mixed use, commercial
and light industrial development in specific and limited shoreline areas which enhance the
public's access to the shoreline. Water dependent, oriented and water enjoyment
development are preferred in shoreline areas. The nature of this economic development
should attract, and be open to, the general public and should not unduly interfere with the
character of the shoreline area or with nearby shoreline and upland uses.
C. Economic Development Policies.
1. Mixed -use commercial and light industrial uses in the shoreline area should be permitted
only where compatible with existing or planned shoreline and upland development, or
where legal parcels of land can be aggregated to minimize the impacts from the mixed -
use commercial or light industrial use.
2. Mixed -use commercial and light industrial uses should be permitted only where
infrastructure, particularly the roadway system, is presently adequate or is made adequate
to accommodate the demands generated by commercial or light industrial development.
3. New shoreline light industrial and commercial development should be limited to that
which is classified as water -dependent, water -related, or water -enjoyment uses and non -
water -oriented uses which are not accessory to a water -oriented use should be
discouraged and/or prohibited.
4. Permitted mixed -use commercial and light industrial development in shoreline areas
should enhance opportunity for the public to take advantage of shoreline amenities. Uses
that support or enhance the opportunity for public access and compliment the cultural arts
related to the shoreline should be encouraged. This might include uses wherein the public
can view and enjoy the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline and vista beyond.
5. New development or redevelopment should avoid or mitigate additional loss of shoreline
ecological functions.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 7 of 160
6. Development should be discouraged in any critical area and only allowed where impacts
to these areas can be mitigated.
7. In shoreline areas where large tracts of land can be aggregated, some degree of flexibility
is appropriate to allow for innovative and planned site design within parameters
established by the city.
8. Economic benefits derived from wildlife, marine and fish habitats, public access,
recreational scuba diving and tourism should be recognized and retained.
9. Priority should be given to those mixed -use commercial or light industrial uses which are
water -dependent.
10. The potential adverse effects of mixed -use commercial and light industrial development
on other activities should be minimized through local performance standards.
11. The recreational opportunities along the shoreline should be developed as an economic
asset in a manner that will enhance the public enjoyment of the shorelines and in -water -
related activities.
12. Commercial activities in shoreline areas should be operated with minimum adverse
impact on the quality of the environment of the shoreline and adjacent areas.
24.20.020 Public Access Element
A. Purpose
The public access element provides for public access to publicly owned or privately owned
shoreline areas where the public is granted a right of use or access in accordance with RCW
90.58.100(2)(b).
B. Public Access Element Goal 1
It is a goal of the city to provide the maximum reasonable opportunity for the public to view
and enjoy the amenities of the shoreline area from public viewpoints, while assuring that
such access does not contribute to intrusions upon private property, nuisance, personal
danger, or over -burdening of fragile natural resources.
C. Public Access Policies 1
1. The city should use street ends and other publicly owned or controlled land within the
shoreline area as a means of providing additional safe public access to shoreline areas.
When these types of areas are developed, the city should also provide for some associated
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 8 of 160
limited off-street parking or public transportation connection in order to minimize
impacts to surrounding properties.
2. The city should develop signage, public information brochures and publications for
distribution which identify all locations for public access to the shorelines, and
underwater activities with information about each site location.
3. The city should maintain public shorelines, waterways and tidelands in public ownership
for continued public access and use.
4. With principal access to tidelands existing at public beaches to the north and south, the
city, where practicable, should acquire and develop safe convenient public access for
pedestrian access and water access to and use of public tidelands and beaches.
5. Public pedestrian access for neighborhood use should be encouraged.
6. Public access afforded by shoreline street ends, public utilities and rights -of -way should
be preserved, maintained and enhanced.
D. Public Access Goal 2
Incorporate public access into new shoreline development and unify individual public access
elements into an organized system.
E. Public Access Policies 2
1. Public access will be considered in the review of all private and public developments
(including land division) with the exception of one- and two-family dwelling units when
necessary to mitigate significant environmental impacts or through provisions designed to
exchange access rights for development bonuses.
2. Developments, uses and activities on or near the shoreline should not impair or detract
from the public's access to the water.
3. Public access should be provided as close as possible to the water's edge without
adversely affecting a sensitive environment and, if feasible, should be designed with
provisions for disabled and physically impaired persons.
4. Public access should be designed to provide for public safety and to minimize potential
impacts to private property and individual privacy.
5. Assure that public access improvement result in no net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
6. No public access shall be acquired through a taking without just compensation.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 9 of 160
24.20.030 Recreational Element
A. Purpose
The recreation element provide for the preservation and enlargement of recreational
opportunities including but not limited to parks, tidelands, beaches, and recreational areas in
accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(c).
B. Recreational Goal
It is the goal of the city to provide substantial recreational opportunities for the public in
shoreline areas through the preservation and expansion of these opportunities through
programs such as acquisition, development and maintenance.
C. Recreational Policies
The city should continue to acquire and develop park land within shoreline areas. The
city should also, where feasible, develop street ends within the shoreline area to provide
for public recreation. The nature and extent of recreational opportunities provided within
the various lands in the shoreline area owned or controlled by the city depends on the
nature of the area involved, the amenities and natural resources to be found in that area,
the location of the area and the needs of the community.
2. When mitigation requirements or bonus programsl permit, large or intensive private
developments within the shoreline area should provide some public recreation amenities,
in addition to public pedestrian access along the water's edge.
3. The city should consider both active and passive in -water, shoreline and upland
recreational needs in development of recreational areas to meet local and regional needs.
4. The city should acquire, develop, expand and maintain public recreation facilities to meet
public demand for recreation use and enjoyment of the water and shoreline.
5. Recreation facilities in the shoreline area should be restricted to those dependent upon a
shoreline location, or those benefiting from a shoreline or in -water location that are in the
public interest.
6. Public recreation facilities should be designed, developed, and maintained to respect the
shoreline environment and minimize the degradation of the shoreline and its natural
systems.
7. Public information and education programs, and attendant enforcement procedures,
should be developed and implemented to help ensure that the public is aware of park
regulations and private property rights, and to prevent the abuse of the shoreline and its
natural ecological system.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 10 of 160
8. Recreational boating facilities including waterway trails and trailheads, terminals,
moorage, and service facilities should be provided for on publicly owned land.
9. Recreational boating facilities including waterway trails and trailheads, terminals,
moorage, and service facilities should be allowed on private property, except in the
Natural Environment.
24.20.040 Circulation Element
A. Purpose
The circulation element provides for the general location and extent of existing and proposed
major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other public utilities and facilities
in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(d).
B. Circulation Goal
It is the goal of the city to provide for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and
emergency services within the shoreline area while recognizing and enhancing the unique,
fragile and scenic character of the shoreline area with minimum disruption to the shoreline
environment and minimum conflict between different users.
C. Circulation Policies
Railroad Avenue, Dayton Street, Main Street, Admiral Way, and Sunset Avenue, which
provide access to and through the city's accessible downtown shoreline area, should be
designed and regulated to safely accommodate the vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian
traffic using these corridors, as well as to facilitate egress and ingress from adjacent
properties and to enhance the scenic character and recreational use of this corridor, while
recognizing that shoreline uses should have primary access to Railroad Avenue and
Admiral Way.
2. Whenever practicable, safe pedestrian and bicycle movement on and off roadways in the
shoreline area should be encouraged as a means of personal transportation and recreation.
3. Where new streets are needed to serve uses in the shoreline area, these streets should be
the minimum size necessary to provide safe and efficient vehicular, pedestrian and
bicycle access, including access for emergency vehicles, to the properties to be served.
4. Public waterborne transportation linked to public and private forms of ground
transportation should be encouraged to minimize auto usage, and to eliminate barriers
between public waterborne transportation and ground transportation in conformance with
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 11 of 160
5. All transportation planning should be coordinated to provide efficient use and transfer
between modes while minimizing the adverse environmental impacts of such facilities.
6. Circulation and transportation systems should be located, designed and developed with
respect to existing and/or planned rail, highway and ferry facilities.
7. Public transit systems should be linked to the urban waterfront.
8. Pedestrian walkways, trails and bicycle linkages should be provided between the historic
downtown and the waterfront, including the train station and ferry terminal.
9. New or expanded non -water oriented transportation facilities should be located outside of
shoreline jurisdiction whenever feasible.
24.20.050 Shoreline Use Element
A. Purpose
The shoreline use element considers the proposed general distribution and general location
and extent of the use on shorelines and adjacent land areas for housing, business, industry,
transportation, agriculture, natural resources, recreation, education, public buildings and
grounds, and other categories of public and private uses of the land in accordance with RCW
90.58.100(2)(d).
B. Shoreline Use Goals
The goals of the city are to:
Allow for a diversity of uses within the shoreline area consistent with the dramatically
different character of the various shorelines within the city, and to preserve and enhance
the natural and aesthetic quality of important shoreline areas while allowing for
reasonable development which meet the goals and policies of the Shoreline Management
Act.
2. Provide performance and development standards for shoreline uses which achieve
compatibility among activities.
3. Reserve shoreline and water areas particularly suited for specific and appropriate uses,
especially water -oriented and water -dependent uses, for such uses whether they are
existing or potential.
4. Establish and implement policies and regulations for shoreline use consistent with the
Shoreline Management Act of 1971. These policies and regulations should insure that the
overall land use patterns in shoreline areas are compatible with existing shoreline
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 12 of 160
environment designations and will be sensitive to and not degrade habitat and ecological
systems and other shoreline resources.
5. Ensure that proposed shoreline uses are distributed, located and developed in a manner
that will maintain or improve the health, safety and welfare of the public.
6. Ensure that proposed shoreline uses do not minimize the rights of others or infringe upon
the rights of private ownership.
7. Encourage restoration of shoreline areas that have been degraded or diminished in
ecological value and functions as a result of past activities or catastrophic events.
8. Ensure that planning, zoning and other regulatory and non -regulatory programs
governing lands adjacent to shoreline jurisdictions are consistent with SMA policies and
regulations and the provisions of this SMP.
9. Encourage increased accessibility to the shoreline for a variety of users and activities.
10. Develop adaptive management strategies to increase capacity to respond to future
possible impacts on the Edmonds shoreline from climate change in the Puget Sound
region.
11. Ensure that residential development in the shoreline area is compatible with adjacent uses
and minimizes impacts to shoreline processes and functions.
12. Ensure future shoreline development will achieve no net loss of ecological functions and
values.
C. Shoreline Use Policies
"Environmentally critical areas" are to be protected and regulated consistent with the
city's environmental review and critical areas regulations contained in Chapters 20.15A
and 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020.C.
2. New uses and developments in shoreline areas that have established desirable
development patterns should be designed to be compatible with those areas; provided the
existing uses are consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and the City's
comprehensive plan and shoreline master program.
3. In shoreline areas without established development patterns and which are not unique or
fragile, the city should allow for a wide range of development options consistent with the
Edmonds Community Development Code within established limits to protect the public
interest.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 13 of 160
4. Over -water structures other than ferry terminal passenger shelters, docks, piers,
walkways, breakwaters and other similar structures should be prohibited with the
exception of minor appurtenant buildings, buoys, divers resting floats, and art sculpture.
5. Water -dependent uses should have priority over non -water -dependent uses in the
shoreline area. Nonetheless, uses such as dry-docks, boat yards, and similar marine
enterprises are incompatible with the character of the majority of the shoreline area and
should be limited to specific designated areas.
6. Uses in shoreline areas should not degrade water quality and land disturbances (land
covered by water and the land area adjacent to the ordinary high water mark) should be
the minimum necessary.
7. The pattern and distribution of land and water uses should be controlled and encouraged
in order to enhance the shoreline natural systems, protect against their damage, and
provide for their public use and enjoyment.
8. Multiple uses of shorelines should be encouraged. Shoreline uses which allow large
numbers of people to enjoy the marine environment should be given a higher priority
than uses that lead to the usurpation of the limited urban waterfront by any single use
activity.
9. Shoreline use should be compatible with its site, in harmony with adjacent uses, and
consistent with long-range comprehensive planning for waterfront use.
10. Uses which adversely alter or degrade the defined shoreline "natural systems" should be
prohibited.
11. The City of Edmonds shall stay abreast of scientific information regarding climate
change and sea level rise and reevaluate the Shoreline Master Program development
standards as soon as adequate scientific information is available.
12. The Edmonds Marsh study identified in the City of Edmonds Capital Improvement Plan
is an important study for determining the potential impacts of climate change and sea
level rise on the City of Edmonds and should be considered a high priority for
completion.
13. All use and development should use low impact development (LID) techniques where
appropriate and feasible.
14. The rehabilitation of "natural systems" (e.g., the improvement in water quality, removal
of beach obstructions, etc.) should be encouraged.
15. Shoreline Use and Development Review.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 14 of 160
a. Shoreline use and development should be provided for through a process of review
and analysis that gives priority to:
i. The protection and enhancement of the shoreline natural system;
ii. The provision for shoreline -dependent uses;
iii. The provision for shoreline -oriented uses; and
iv. The accommodation of necessary uses that are neither shoreline -dependent
nor shoreline -oriented.
b. The priority system will recognize, but not be limited to, the following systems and
uses:
i. Protect and enhance natural systems:
A. Biological:
1. Critical areas for fish spawning, rearing, feeding, and migration, including
beaches, marshland, aquatic vegetation and nearshore subtidal area;
2. Waterfowl and water associate bird nesting, resting, feeding and nursery
areas;
3. Shellfish life — supporting areas;
4. Upland mammal breeding, rearing and feeding areas;
5. Upland plant growth areas (greenbelts, etc.);
6. aquatic (non -fish and non -shell fish) marine organisms life supporting
areas; and
7. Other.
B. Geological:
1. Bluff and landslide areas;
2. Beaches and tidelands — shoals and coves;
3. Marshland and slough area;
4. Streams and ravines;
5. Below low water submerged lands — canyons, cliffs, rock reefs, sand or
mud flat, etc.; and
6. Other.
ii. Provide for shoreline -dependent uses, such as:
A. Ferry and passenger terminals;
B. Terminal and transfer facilities for marine commerce and industry;
C. Marine and fresh water construction, dismantling and repair;
D. Marinas — boats;
E. Intakes and outfalls;
F. Boat launch facilities;
G. Shoreline recreation — including parks, bike and walking trails, beaches, etc.
H. Water -related recreation — including scuba diving, waterway trail system,
fishing and small craft boating;
I. Marine and limnological research, interpretation and education;
J. Piers and related facilities for the loading and unloading of petroleum
products; and
K. Other uses of like intensity and dependency.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 15 of 160
24.20.060 Conservation Element
A. Purpose
The shoreline conservation element provides for protection of natural resources, including
but not limited to scenic vistas, aesthetics, and vital estuarine areas for fisheries and wildlife
protection in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(f).
B. Conservation Goal
It is the goal of the city to preserve, protect, and enhance unique and fragile areas of flora and
fauna and scenic vistas to help assure the continued availability of these resources for future
generations and to protect the ecological functions of the shoreline to ensure no net loss of
functions. This element is concerned with the preservation of the natural shoreline resources,
considering such characteristics as scenic vistas, linear park systems, waterway trail systems,
estuarine areas for fish and wildlife protection, critical habitat, beaches and other valuable
natural or aesthetic features. Assure preservation of the unique, fragile and scenic shoreline
resources by carefully preserving the non-renewable resources and managing for the
continued utilization of renewable resources.
C. Conservation Policies
1. The City should work to maintain environmentally sensitive and critical areas for present
and future generations, such as the Edmonds Marsh, the historically contiguous wetland
east of SR-104, the Edmonds Underwater Park and the shoreline sanctuary.
2. Development in shoreline areas should be managed so that any adverse impacts on
aquatic and land plants and animals are avoided or mitigated to result in no net loss of
ecological function.
3. Where practicable, steps should be taken to enhance the shoreline area as a spawning
ground for salmon, forage fish, and other species of fish and aquatic marine life.
4. Irreplaceable shoreline resources should be preserved for their intrinsic value and
continued public enjoyment.
5. Beneficial use of shoreline resources should be provided for while respecting the natural
shoreline environment.
6. Where practicable, restoration of damaged shoreline features and systems should be
encouraged.
7. Limited improvements in public recreation areas should be permitted where such
improvements would enhance public access to and public education and understanding of
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 16 of 160
the value of the shoreline resource (an example of which is the Edmonds Underwater
Park).
8. Provide for the preservation of the natural shoreline resources through the protection of
existing and the designation of potential public recreational areas.
9. Provide for the preservation of the natural shoreline resources through the continuation
and expansion of interpretive and environmental education programs, and public outreach
and involvement in stewardship.
10. The city, where practicable, should acquire key shoreline parcels that become available;
such parcels are those integral to necessary expansion of existing prime beach areas.
24.20.070 Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Element
A. Purpose
The historic, cultural, scientific and educational element provides for the protection and
restoration of buildings, sites, and areas having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational
values in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(g).
B. Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Goal
Identify, protect, preserve and restore important archaeological, historical, art and cultural
sites located within the shoreline jurisdiction area for educational and scientific uses and
enjoyment of the natural amenities by the general public.
C. Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Policies
1. Wherever practicable, shoreline development should recognize the former and current
use of much of the city's shoreline area for such uses as boatyards, railroads, ferry
landings, logging, and industrial sites, and recognize the earlier uses of the shoreline by
Native American cultures.
2. The large, relatively undisturbed area known as the Edmonds Marsh should be preserved
for, among other reasons, its educational and scientific value as well as its role in
stormwater management.
3. Educational projects and programs including signage should be encouraged that foster a
greater appreciation of the importance of shoreline management, maritime activities,
environmental conservation, cultural and maritime history.
4. The city should develop signage and informational programs which identify and explain
unique scenic and cultural opportunities.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 17 of 160
5. Important archaeological, historical and cultural sites located within the shoreline
jurisdiction area should be identified, protected, preserved or restored for educational and
scientific uses and enjoyment of the natural amenities by the general public.
6. Historical/cultural sites should be acquired through purchase or gift, so as to insure their
protection and preservation.
7. Where practicable, buildings, sites and areas having historic, cultural, educational, or
scientific value to the community should be protected and restored.
8. Where practicable, all buildings, sites, and areas which are placed on the State or Federal
Historic Register should be preserved, protected and restored.
9. Where practicable, significant archeological features and data should be protected for
scientific study and public observation.
24.20.080 Flood Damage Prevention Element
A. Purpose
The flood damage prevention element provides for protection against flood damage and the
preservation and restoration of ecosystem wide ecological functions in accordance with
RCW 9038.100.
B. Flood Damage Prevention Element Goal
It is a goal of the city to reduce the likelihood of flood damage by locating development
away from flood -prone areas and by protecting and restoring shoreline ecological functions
and ecosystem -wide processes.
C. Flood Damage Prevention Policies
Structural flood control devices should be allowed only after it is demonstrated that
nonstructural solutions are not feasible to reduce the hazard.
2. Participate in watershed -wide programs to reduce flood hazards and improve the
shoreline ecology.
3. Discourage new development in shoreline areas that are reasonably likely to be harmed
by flood conditions, or which would create or intensify flood hazard impacts on other
properties.
4. Ensure that flood hazard reduction measures do not result in a net loss of ecological
functions in shoreline areas.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 18 of 160
24.20.090 Views and Aesthetics Element
A. Purpose
The views and aesthetics element provides for preservation and/or protection of public scenic
vistas, public views of the water, and other aesthetic qualities of shorelines for enjoyment by
the general public.
B. Views and Aesthetics Goal
It is the goal of the city to assure that the public's ability and opportunity to enjoy shoreline
views and aesthetics is protected.
C. Views and Aesthetics Policies
1. The scenic and aesthetic qualities of shorelines and public vistas should be preserved
through development standards.
2. Public views from the shoreline upland areas should be enhanced and preserved.
Enhancement of views should not be construed to mean excessive removal of vegetation
which partially impairs views.
3. Public visual access should be maintained, enhanced and preserved on shoreline street
ends, public utilities and rights -of -way and within public "view corridors" as designated
by the city.
24.20.100 Urban Design Element
A. Purpose
The urban design element provides for the development between the shoreline and adjacent
areas in manner that provides linkages that will enhance the beauty and visual identity of
Edmonds.
B. Urban Design Goal
It is a goal of the city to encourage development within the shoreline area that is visually
coherent, provides visual and physical linkage to the shoreline, enhances the waterfront, and
is consistent with the Streetscape Plan.
C. Urban Design Policies.
The shoreline area within and south of the north boundary of the Brackett's Landing
North Park, to the south city limits (generally the urban mixed -use shoreline
environment) is one of the most scenic areas of the city. It also, to a large extent,
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 19 of 160
establishes the visual identity of Edmonds. As such, both public and private development
in these areas should be controlled and regulated to provide an urban environment which
preserves or enhances the opportunity for the public to enjoy the scenic quality of the
shoreline.
2. Projects should be encouraged to provide "street furniture," public art, related
interpretative signage, landscaping and other amenities within or adjacent to the right-of-
way of Railroad Avenue and Admiral Way to complement a pedestrian promenade along
the shoreline consistent with the streetscape plan.
3. Where possible, the owner of uplands abutting pedestrian waterfront activities should be
encouraged to incorporate public art elements, public art and cultural amenities that
promote aesthetic considerations consistent with the City of Edmonds Arts Commission
goals.
4. New and remodeled developments should provide public view corridors adjacent to
either the north or south property line to enhance public visual access to the Puget Sound
and to provide for a visual link between the downtown and its waterfront roots. The
location of the view corridor should be coordinated with the development of adjacent
properties in order to maximize public visual access to the Puget Sound. Properties with
significant frontage on the shoreline should consider providing view corridors in multiple
locations so as to maximize public visual access to the shoreline. In the application of
design standards, the preservation of public views shall be given priority over
landscaping and fencing requirements.
5. Projects should minimize the amount of vehicular parking in the Urban Mixed -Use I and
II shoreline environments through use of joint use parking agreements (where permitted),
and by locating employee parking off -site and outside the Urban Mixed -Use I and II
shoreline environments.
6. Projects should be designed to locate vehicular parking away from the shoreline,
bulkhead, or areas of pedestrian circulation.
7. Developments should provide conveniently situated bicycle parking on site.
8. Projects should be designed to minimize impacts to existing shoreline ecological
functions.
24.20.110 Restoration Element
A. Purpose
The restoration element provides for the timely restoration and enhancement of ecologically
impaired areas within available economic resources in a manner that achieves a net gain in
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 20 of 160
shoreline ecological functions and processes above baseline conditions as of the adoption of
the city's shoreline master programs.
B. Restoration Goal
It is the goal of the city to improve water quality, restore degraded and lost habitat corridors,
and improve connectivity of the shoreline environments though voluntary and incentive -
based public and private programs and actions consistent with the City of Edmonds Shoreline
Master Program Restoration Plan.
C. Restoration Policies
1. Protect and/or restore freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat and habitat -forming
processes.
2. Protect and restore wetland and restore salt marsh habitat to improve shoreline ecological
functions.
3. Remove intertidal fill; restore beach deposits and processes and ecological functions.
4. Remove/replace creosote -treated logs, pilings, and debris.
5. Increase availability of large woody debris and opportunities for recruitment in the
nearshore zone.
6. Protect and restore native species of vegetation, fish, and wildlife.
7. Remove or improve fish- and wildlife -passage barriers.
8. Manage and treat stormwater to improve water quality, decrease peak flow events, and
increase implementation of low impact development (LID) practices.
9. Protect naturally eroding bluffs and associated ecological functions.
10. Protect and restore wildlife corridors.
11. Ensure that shoreline restoration projects do not degrade critical areas and water quality.
12. Establish incentives that could provide opportunities for new development to restore
impaired shoreline ecological functions.
13. Work with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway to encourage nearshore restoration
projects on the railroad right-of-way.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 21 of 160
Part III. Shoreline Environments
24.30.000 Introduction
Local governments are required, under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act of 1971
through WAC 173-26, to develop and assign a land use categorization system of shoreline areas
as a basis for effective Shoreline Master Programs. The intent of designating shoreline
environment is to encourage development that will enhance the present or desired character of
the shoreline. To accomplish this, segments of shoreline are given an environment designation
based on existing development patterns, natural capabilities and limitations, and the aspiration of
the local community.
24.30.010 Adoption Criteria
Shoreline Designations have been determined after consideration of -
A. The ecological functions and processes that characterize the shoreline, together with the
degree of human alteration; and
B. Existing development patterns together with ECDC Title 16 Zoning designations, the City
Comprehensive Plan designations and other officially adopted plans; and
C. The goals of the City of Edmonds citizens for their shorelines; and
D. Other state policies in the Act and the Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (RCW
90.58.020 and WAC 173-26, respectively).
24.30.020 Shoreline Jurisdiction and Environments Designation Maps
A. The location and extent of areas under the jurisdiction of the Master Program, and the
boundaries of the various shoreline environments affecting the lands and waters of the City
are shown in Appendix A of this Master Program. (ECDC 24.100.000)
B. The purpose of the official shoreline maps in Appendix A is to identify Shoreline area
designations. The map does not necessarily identify or depict the lateral extent of shoreline
jurisdiction. Where uncertainty or conflict may occur in the exact location of jurisdictional
or shoreline designation boundary line, the shoreline Administrator shall rely up the criteria
contained in RCW 90.58.030(2) and chapter 173-22 WAC pertaining to determinations of
shorelands, as amended, rather that the incorrect or outdated map.
C. In the event that new shoreline areas are discovered (e.g. associated wetlands) that are not
mapped and/designated on the official shoreline map, these areas will be designated in the
following manner.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 22 of 160
If a newly discovered shoreline area is adjacent to a single shoreline area environment,
then the newly discovered shoreline area will be assigned the same shoreline designation
as the adjacent shoreline area.
2. If a newly discovered shoreline area abuts more than one shoreline area environment, the
shoreline area environment that is most restrictive shall be assigned to the newly
discovered shoreline area.
24.30.030 Aquatic Environment
A. Purpose
The purpose of the aquatic low -intensity environment (Aquatic I) is to protect, restore, and
manage the unique characteristics and resources of the areas waterward of the ordinary high
water mark.
The purpose of the aquatic high -intensity environment (Aquatic II) is to protect the unique
characteristics and resources of the aquatic environment by managing water -dependent use
activities to prioritize preservation and restoration of natural resources, navigation,
recreation, and commerce, and by assuring compatibility between shoreland and aquatic uses.
B. Classification Criteria
1. General. These are lands waterward of the ordinary high water mark for both saltwater
and freshwater bodies of water, including any submerged or inter -tidal areas. The
Aquatic I and II environment designations include the water surface together with the
underlying lands and the water column. Information from the shoreline inventory and
characterization report was used in conjunction with the comprehensive plan and zoning
information to determine the appropriate environment designation.
2. Aquatic I (Low Intensity). These areas are mostly characterized by aquatic ecosystems
that have been modified by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad bed fill that covers
the intertidal and transitional upland zones along the beach. The beach has been altered
by seawalls or large -rock riprap. These shoreline areas generally exhibit low -intensity
development and few over -water structures. In freshwater areas, there may be a
significant number of docks and piers serving residential areas.
3. Aquatic II (High Intensity). These areas are more intensely developed areas with water -
dependent uses. The marine nearshore has been significantly modified by commercial
waterfront development, including the Port of Edmonds Marina and the Washington State
Ferries pier.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 23 of 160
C. Area Designated
Aquatic I (Low Intensity): Applicable to all marine aquatic environments waterward of
the ordinary high water mark between the southern boundary of the City and the old
Union Oil dock, between the northern edge of the Edmonds fishing pier and the southern
edge of the Main Street ferry terminal, between the northern edge of the Main Street ferry
terminal and the northern boundary of the City, and Lake Ballinger.
2. Aquatic II (High Intensity): Applicable to those marine aquatic environments waterward
of the ordinary high water mark between the old Union Oil dock and the northern edge of
the Edmonds fishing pier, and between the southern and northern edges of the Main
Street ferry terminal.
D. Management Policies
New over -water structures should be limited and allowed only for water -dependent uses,
public access, or ecological restoration.
2. The size of new over -water structures should be limited to the minimum necessary to
support a structure's intended use.
3. Uses and activities within the Aquatic I and II environments should be compatible with
the adjoining shoreline environments.
4. In order to reduce the impacts of shoreline development and increase effective use of
water resources, multiple uses of over -water facilities should be encouraged, provided
that use conflicts can be avoided.
5. All developments and uses on navigable waters or their beds should be located and
designed to minimize interference with surface navigation and moorage.
6. Uses and activities within Aquatic I shoreline environments should be limited to public
access, boat moorage, and necessary utility and transportation facilities.
7. All developments and uses should consider impacts to public views.
8. All developments and uses should allow for the safe, unobstructed passage of fish and
wildlife, particularly those species dependent on migration.
9. Restoration opportunities associated with project impacts should be encouraged in the
aquatic environment.
10. Uses that adversely impact the ecological functions of critical saltwater and freshwater
habitats should not be allowed except where necessary to achieve the objectives of RCW
90.58.020, and then only when their impacts are mitigated according to the sequence
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 24 of 160
described in WAC 173-26-201(2)(e) necessary to achieve no net loss of ecological
functions.
11. Dredging and dredge material disposal should be limited to the minimum amount
necessary. Dredging operations should minimize impacts to other shoreline uses and
functions.
12. Filling should be avoided if practicable and limited to the minimum amount necessary.
Filling operations should minimize impacts to other shoreline uses and functions.
13. Ensure that piers and docks are compatible with the shoreline area where they are located
and are designed and maintained to minimize adverse impacts to the environment.
14. Ensure that marinas are located, designed, constructed, and operated in a manner that will
minimize damage to shoreline processes and functions, be compatible with adjacent uses,
and protect the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline environment.
15. All developments and uses on navigable waters should be located and designed to
minimize interference to navigation.
24.30.040 Natural Environment
A. Purpose
The purpose of the Natural environment designation is to protect those shoreline areas that
are relatively free of human influence or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline
functions intolerant of human use. These systems require that only very low -intensity uses be
allowed in order to maintain the ecological functions and ecosystem -wide processes.
B. Designation Criteria
A Natural designation should be considered for shoreline areas if any of the following criteria
apply:
1. The shoreline is ecologically intact and therefore currently performing an important,
irreplaceable function or ecosystem -wide process that would be damaged by human
activity;
2. The shoreline is considered to represent ecosystems and geologic types that are of
particular scientific and educational interest; or
3. The shoreline is unable to support new development or uses without significant adverse
impacts to ecological functions or risk to human safety;
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 25 of 160
Such shoreline areas include largely undisturbed portions of shoreline areas such as wetlands,
estuaries, unstable bluffs, coastal dunes, spits, and ecologically intact shoreline habitats.
Ecologically intact shorelines, as used here, means those shoreline areas that retain the
majority of their natural shoreline functions, as evidenced by the shoreline configuration and
the presence of native vegetation. Generally, but not necessarily, ecologically intact
shorelines are free of shoreline structural modifications, structures, and intensive human uses.
In forested areas, they generally include native vegetation with diverse plant communities,
multiple canopy layers, and the presence of large woody debris available for recruitment to
adjacent water bodies. Recognizing that there is a continuum of ecological conditions
ranging from near natural conditions to totally degraded and contaminated sites, this term is
intended to delineate those shoreline areas that provide valuable functions for the larger
aquatic and terrestrial environments which could be lost or significantly reduced by human
development. Whether or not a shoreline is ecologically intact is determined on a case -by -
case basis.
The term "ecologically intact shorelines" applies to all shoreline areas meeting the above
criteria ranging from larger reaches that may include multiple properties to small areas
located within a single property.
C. Area Designated
The Natural Designation includes all natural diverse wetland and riparian habitat areas within
shoreline management jurisdiction. These include, but are not limited to:
The Edmonds Marsh and the historically contiguous wetland to the east of State Route
104.
2. The Shell Creek wetland and lower riparian zone, and the wetlands which are now
isolated on the east side of the railroad tracks, which are partially or entirely within 200
feet of the ordinary high water mark of Puget Sound.
D. Management Policies
1. Any use that would substantially degrade the ecological functions or natural character of
the Natural shoreline area should not be allowed.
2. The following new uses should not be allowed in areas designated Natural:
a. Residential
b. Commercial uses,
c. Industrial uses,
d. Non -water -oriented recreation,
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 26 of 160
e. Roads, utility corridors, and parking areas that can be located outside Natural -
designated shorelines.
3. Scientific, historical, cultural, educational research uses, and low -intensity, water -
oriented recreational access uses may be allowed, provided that no significant ecological
impact on the area will result.
4. New development or significant vegetation removal that would reduce the capability of
vegetation to perform normal ecological functions should not be allowed. Subdivision of
property in a configuration that would, to achieve its intended purpose, require significant
vegetation removal or shoreline modification that adversely impacts ecological functions
should not be allowed.
5. Critical areas within shorelines designated as Natural should be protected pursuant to the
Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020.C.
6. Restoration opportunities should be encouraged in areas with a Natural designation.
24.30.050 Urban Conservancy Environment
A. Purpose
The purpose of the Conservancy designation is to protect and restore ecological functions of
open space, floodplains, and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed
settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses.
B. Designation Criteria
The Urban Conservancy environment is applied to shoreline areas within the City where any
of the following characteristics apply:
1. They are suitable for water -related or water -enjoyment uses;
2. They are open space, flood plain or other sensitive areas that should not be more
intensively developed;
3. They have potential for ecological restoration;
4. The retain important ecological functions, even though partially developed; or
5. They have the potential for development that is compatible with ecological restoration.
C. Area Designated
Areas generally lying upland of the ordinary high water mark and in between the southern
boundary of the City and the south side of the old Union Oil dock, the Willow Creek outlet
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 27 of 160
of the Edmonds Marsh, between the southern edge of the area known as Brackett's Landing
South and the southern edge of the Main Street ferry terminal, and from the northern edge of
the Main Street ferry terminal to the northern boundary of the area known as Brackett's
Landing North, including the spit, and to the east as far as the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
railroad right-of-way.
D. Management Policies
Uses that preserve the natural character of the area or promote preservation of open space
or sensitive lands either directly or over the long term should be the primary allowed uses
in Conservancy areas.
2. Uses that result in restoration of ecological functions should be allowed if the use is
otherwise compatible with the purpose of the Conservancy designation and the setting.
3. Public access and public recreation objectives should be implemented in Conservancy
areas whenever feasible.
4. Water -oriented uses should be given priority over non -water -oriented uses. For shoreline
areas adjacent to commercially navigable waters, water -dependent uses should be given
highest priority.
5. New development should be designed and located to preclude the need for shoreline
armoring, vegetation removal, flood control, and other shoreline modifications.
6. Restoration opportunities should be encouraged in Conservancy areas.
7. Standards should be established for shoreline stabilization measures, vegetation
conservation, water quality, and shoreline modifications within Conservancy areas.
These standards shall ensure that new development does not result in a net loss of
shoreline ecological functions or further degrade other shoreline values.
24.30.060 Shoreline Residential
A. Purpose
The purpose of the shoreline residential environment is to accommodate residential
development and appurtenant structures that are consistent with this chapter. An additional
purpose is to provide appropriate public access and recreational uses.
B. Designation Criteria
General. These are areas typified by residential development in areas where topography,
transportation systems, and development patterns make it extremely unlikely that more
intensive use would be appropriate.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 28 of 160
2. Shoreline Residential L• This designation is appropriate for shoreline areas with larger -lot
residential development along the marine shoreline.
3. Shoreline Residential II: This designation is appropriate for shoreline areas with smaller -
lot residential development along the marine shoreline.
4. Shoreline Residential III: Designation for single-family residential development adjacent
to freshwater (e.g., Lake Ballinger).
C. Area Designated
General. A shoreline residential environment designation has been assigned to shoreline
areas that are predominantly single-family or multifamily residential development or are
planned and platted for residential development. There are three levels of shoreline
residential environment designations corresponding to the Edmonds zoning and
comprehensive plan designations. The areas which are appropriate for this classification
are as follows:
2. Shoreline Residential I: The upland area adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Urban
Railroad environment designation which is zoned RS-12 and RS-20.
3. Shoreline Residential II: The upland area adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Urban
Railroad environment designation which is zoned RS-6.
4. Shoreline Residential III: The upland area adjacent to the shoreline of Lake Ballinger
which is zoned RSW-12.
D. Management Policies
1. Multi -lot residential and recreational developments should provide public access and
joint use for community recreational facilities when consistent with statutory and
constitutional limitations on development exactions.
2. Commercial development within the shoreline residential environment should be limited
to water -oriented uses. Commercial development does not include lawful home
occupations.
3. Structurally engineered shoreline modifications and stabilization should be prohibited
except in cases of emergency as defined.
4. Steep slopes shall be protected per the requirements of ECDC 23.80, the building code,
and this SMP.
5. Any new development or redevelopment should utilize low impact development
techniques where feasible and appropriate.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 29 of 160
6. Standards for density or minimum frontage width, setbacks, lot coverage limitations,
buffers, shoreline stabilization, vegetation conservation, critical area protection, and
water quality shall be set to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, taking
into account the environmental limitations and sensitivity of the shoreline area, the level
of infrastructure and services available, and other comprehensive planning
considerations.
7. Access, utilities, and public services should be available and adequate to serve existing
needs and/or planned future development.
24.30.070 Urban Mixed Use
A. Purpose
The purpose of the urban mixed -use environment is to provide for high -intensity, water -
oriented commercial, transportation, and industrial uses while protecting existing ecological
functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded.
B. Designation Criteria
General. These areas have been intensely developed with a mix of commercial uses, port
facilities, multimodal transit facilities, railroad facilities, and limited light industrial uses.
Two very distinct areas make up the three Urban Mixed -Use environments. The
Edmonds waterfront area west of the railroad tracks which has the ability to provide
direct access to the navigable waters of the Puget Sound and the near waterfront area east
of the railroad tracks with no direct access to Puget Sound. A policy of the Shoreline
Management Act is to plan for and foster all reasonable and appropriate uses and the
shoreline master program rules generally prohibit nonwater-oriented development unless
navigability is severely limited. Given these two distinct areas, the Urban Mixed -Use
environments west of the railroad tracks is appropriate for water -oriented development,
while the area east of the railroad tracks may be appropriate for nonwater-oriented
development given its separation from Puget Sound.
The environmental differences between the Urban Mixed -Use environments are further
emphasized by the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning applied
to these areas. West of the railroad tracks the comprehensive plan designation and
zoning encourage water -oriented type development and uses, while east of the railroad
tracks the comprehensive plan designation and zoning encourage mixed -use type
development, including mixed commercial -residential development.
2. Urban Mixed -Use I: This designation is appropriate to water -related and water -
enjoyment commercial and recreational uses.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 30 of 160
3. Urban Mixed -Use II: This designation is assigned to areas that are suitable and planned
for high -intensity, water -dependent uses related to commerce, transportation, and
recreation.
4. Urban Mixed -Use III: The designation is appropriate for those areas that have been
intensely developed and that have no direct access to navigable waters. This designation
is assigned to areas that are suitable and planned for mixed -use development including
high -intensity, commerce, transportation, recreation and residential development.
5. Urban Mixed -Use IV: The Urban Mixed -Use IV designation is being established as an
interim shoreline designation. The Edmonds Marsh being identified as a shoreline of the
state is new to this SMP update and was identified as a shoreline of the state late in the
planning process. With properties within 200-feet of the salt influenced portions of the
marsh now under shoreline jurisdiction (where they had not previously been so
designated) specific review of the effects of establishing a shoreline environment on
existing and proposed uses around the marsh must be studied.
The south side of the marsh has been identified as the future site of the Edmonds
Crossing Ferry Terminal which underwent significant environment review with a Final
Environmental Impact Statement issued in 2004. On the north side of the Marsh is the
Harbor Square commercial development owned by the Port of Edmonds. The SMP
update process was delayed to allow the Port of Edmonds time to submit a long planned
Harbor Square Master Plan for concurrent review by the City of Edmonds. The Port's
proposed Harbor Square Master Plan was ultimately not adopted by the City.
The Edmonds Marsh is also being studied for potential restoration projects including the
daylighting of the Willow Creek outlet as well as the marshes role in the flooding
problem at the Dayton Street/State Route 104 intersection and the role the marsh and play
in a solution to the flooding problem.
Establishing the Urban Mixed -Use IV designation as an interim designation will allow
the City, in cooperation with property owners, Ecology, scientists, interested
agencies/organizations, and members of the public, to carefully review effects of
establishing a new shoreline jurisdiction for the area around the marsh on existing and
planned development as well as the ecological role the Edmonds Marsh plays in the City
of Edmonds. The City intends to study the issues surrounding the Edmonds Marsh and
related Urban Mixed -Use IV designation for two years from the effective date of this
SMP. At the end of the study period, the City will adopt appropriate shoreline
environment designation(s) for the area surrounding the Edmonds Marsh including
evaluating whether a new designation is needed and whether the entire area should have
the same designation.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 31 of 160
C. Area Designated
Urban Mixed -Use I: The upland area above ordinary high water north of the northern
border of the Edmonds fishing pier to the southern edge of the area known as Brackett's
Landing South. This area would include the waterfront commercial area.
2. Urban Mixed -Use II: The upland area above ordinary high water between the old Union
Oil dock and the northern border of the Edmonds fishing pier and between the southern
and northern edges of the Main Street ferry terminal. This area would include the
Edmonds Marina and associated facilities, as well as the Main Street ferry terminal.
3. Urban Mixed -Use III: The six parcels near the existing ferry terminal bounded by the
railroad right-of-way to the west, Main Street, Sunset Avenue North, Bell Street.
4. Urban Mixed -Use IV: The upland areas beyond the tidally influenced portions of
Edmonds Marsh including portions of Harbor Square on the north side of the marsh and
portions of the former UNOCAL oil storage facility on the south side of the marsh.
D. Management Policies
In regulating uses in the Urban Mixed -Use environments, first priority should be given to
water dependent uses. Second priority should be given to water -related and water -
enjoyment uses. Non -water oriented uses maybe allowed as part of mixed use
developments. Non -water oriented uses may also be allowed in limited situations where
they do not conflict with or limit opportunities for water oriented uses or on sites where
there is no direct access to the shoreline.
2. Full utilization of existing urban areas should be achieved before further expansion of
intensive development is allowed.
3. Reasonable long-range projections of regional economic need should guide the amount of
shoreline designated Urban Mixed -Use However, consideration should be given to the
potential for displacement of non -water -oriented uses with water -oriented uses when
analyzing full utilization of urban waterfronts and before considering expansion of such
areas.
4. Where feasible, visual and physical public access should be provided.
5. Aesthetic objectives should be implemented by means such as sign control regulations,
appropriate development siting, screening and architectural standards, and maintenance
of natural vegetative buffers.
6. Any new development or redevelopment should utilize low impact development
techniques where feasible and appropriate.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 32 of 160
7. Any new development shall include environmental cleanup, restoration of shoreline or
other development techniques where feasible and appropriate to assure no net loss of
shoreline ecological functions, and shall comply with any relevant state and federal law.
24.30.080 Urban Railroad
A. Purpose
The purpose of the Urban Railroad environment designation is to identify the 100-foot right-
of-way for the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad along the Edmonds shoreline. This
designation will provide for high -intensity transportation uses while protecting ecological
functions.
B. Designation Criteria
This area has been historically developed and used as a dedicated railroad right-of-way and
contains limited improvements which are designed to aid in the transportation of goods and
passengers by rail. This shoreline environment area generally contains very few areas of
undisturbed natural shoreline.
With the exceptions of Lund's Creek estuary, Edmonds Underwater Park, Brackett's landing
and part of Marina Beach Park, the entire Edmonds shoreline (more than 90 percent) is
armored by the BNSF railroad bed and bulkheads. Most of the BNSF rail bed along the
Edmonds shoreline consists of an armored berm with two sets of parallel tracks on top,
comprising a top width of at least 24 feet or more and a wider base width. The waterward
side of the berm is typically armored with large rock or granite blocks, placed vertically or on
a 2:1 slope.
C. Area Designated
The area is defined as that area within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway right-of-
way as established on the date of the adoption of this master program, from the northern
right-of-way line of Main Street to the northern city limits, and from the southern city limits
north approximately 300 feet.
D. Management Policies
1. Restoration opportunities associated with project impacts should be encouraged in areas
designated Urban Railroad.
2. Aesthetic objectives should be implemented by means such as sign control regulations,
appropriate development siting, screening and architectural standards, and maintenance
of natural vegetative buffers.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 33 of 160
Part IV General Policies & Regulations
24.40.000 Applicability
The provisions of this chapter shall be applied either generally to all shoreline areas or to
shoreline areas that meet the specified criteria of the provision without regard to environment
designation.
24.40.010 Archaeological and Historic Resources
A. Applicability. The following provision apply to archaeological and historic resources whose
presence are either recorded at the State Historic Preservation Office and/or by the City of
Edmonds or such resources that are uncovered during development activities.
Archaeological sites located both in and outside shoreline jurisdiction are subject to chapter
27.44 RCW (Indian graves and records) and chapter 27.53 RCW (Archaeological sites and
records) and development or uses that may impact such sites shall comply with chapter 25-48
WAC as well as the provisions of this section.
B. Regulations:
Where practicable, consistent with constitutional and statutory limitations, public or
private developments shall be prevented from destroying or destructively altering
potential or recognizable sites having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational value as
identified by appropriate authorities.
2. The city may require that a site be redesigned or that development be postponed for a
definite or indefinite period if this is reasonably necessary to protect a historic site or
items of historic, archeological or cultural significance
3. Upon receipt of application for a shoreline permit or request for a statement of exemption
for development on properties with 500 feet of a site known to contain an historic,
cultural or archaeological resource(s), the City shall require a cultural resource site
assessment; provided that, this requirement may be waived if the Administrator
determines that the proposed development activities do not include any ground disturbing
activities and will not impact a known historic cultural or archaeological site. The site
assessment shall be conducted by a professional archaeologist or historic preservation
professional, as applicable, to determine the presence of significant historic or
archaeological resources. The fee for the services of the professional archaeologist or
historic preservation professional shall be paid by the landowner or responsible party.
4. Whenever historic, cultural or archaeological sites or artifacts are discovered in the
process of development on shorelines, work on that portion of the development site shall
be stopped immediately, the site secured and the find reported as soon as a possible to the
Administrator. Upon notification of such find, the property owner shall notify the
Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and appropriate
Native American Tribes. In such cases, the developer shall allow site inspection and
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 34 of 160
evaluation by a professional archaeologist and tribal representative to ensure that all
possible valuable archaeological data are properly salvaged. Work should not resume
until approval is obtained from the Shoreline Administrator.
24.40.020 Critical Areas
A. Applicability. Critical areas include the following areas and ecosystems: wetlands, areas
with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water, fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas.
B. The City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance, as codified in Chapters 23.40 through 23.90
ECDC (dated November 23, 2004, Ord. 3527), are herein adopted as a part of this Program,
except for the specific subsections list below in ECDC 24.40.020.D. All references to the
City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance in this Program are for this specific version. As a
result of this incorporation of the Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance, the provisions of
Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020.D, shall
apply to any use, alteration or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a
shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. In addition to the critical
area regulations in Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC (Appendix B) of this Master
Program), the regulations identified in this section also apply to critical areas within shoreline
jurisdiction. Where there are conflicts between the City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance
and this Shoreline Master Program, provisions of the Shoreline Master Program shall prevail.
C. The specific provisions of the Critical Area Ordinance listed below may only be
implemented within shoreline jurisdiction through the shoreline variance process;
1. Wetlands:
a. ECDC 23.50.040.F.3. Any shoreline project that proposes going beyond a 25%
buffer reduction through the mechanisms described in ECDC 24.40.020.E.3 would
require a shoreline variance. No variance is required for wetland buffer reductions
consistent with ECDC 24.40.020.E.3.
2. Geologically Hazardous Areas:
a. ECDC 23.80.040.B.I & 2: Allowed activities in geologically hazardous areas
b. ECDC 23.80.070.A. Lb & A.2: Buffer reduction and alterations
3. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
a. ECDC 23.90.040.D.2: Reduced buffer widths
b. ECDC 23.90.040.D.4: Additions to structures existing within stream buffers
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 35 of 160
D. Exceptions. The specific provisions of the Critical Area Ordinance listed below shall not
apply to development within shoreline jurisdiction.
1. General Provisions:
a. Provisions of chapter 23.40 ECDC relating to reasonable economic use of property do
not apply to property with shoreline jurisdiction; specifically ECDC 23.40.000 and
ECDC 23.40.210(2).
b. ECDC 23.40.130.D: Monitoring Program
c. ECDC 23.40.210: Variance
d. ECDC 23.40.220.C.8: Minor Site Investigation Work
e. ECDC 23.40.230: Exemptions
2. Wetlands:
a. ECDC 23.50.010.B: Wetland Ratings
b. ECDC 23.50.040.F.1: Standard Buffer Widths
c. ECDC 23.50.040.F.4: Wetland Buffer Width Averaging.
d. ECDC 23.50.040.F.8.b: Passive Recreation
e. ECDC 23.50.040.L• Exemptions
f. ECDC 23.50.050.F: Mitigation Ratios
g. ECDC 23.50.050.G: Wetlands Enhancement as Mitigation
E. Development limitations.
1. All uses, modifications and activities on sites containing marine shorelines,
environmentally sensitive areas and/or critical areas must comply with all applicable
local, state, and federal laws pertaining to development in these areas unless in conflict
with the provisions of this Master Program.
2. The site must be specifically designed so that hazards from or impact on the
environmentally sensitive area and/or critical areas will be mitigated.
3. Mitigation sequencing. In order to comply with ECDC 24.40.020.E.2 above, a shoreline
permit applicant or project proponent shall demonstrate all reasonable efforts have been
taken to provide sufficient mitigation such that the activity does not have significant
adverse impacts. Mitigation shall occur in the following prioritized order:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 36 of 160
a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such
as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts.
c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the
initiation of the project.
d. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and
maintenance operations during the life of the action.
e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments.
4. Monitoring Program. Mitigation plans shall include a program for monitoring
construction and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included
outlining the schedule for site monitoring (for example, monitoring shall occur in years 1,
2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 after site construction), and how the monitoring data will be evaluated
to determine if the performance standards are being met. A monitoring report shall be
submitted as needed to document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency
actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a
period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a
period less than ten years.
5. Long-term Protection of Mitigation Sites. The City shall require documentation that a
mitigation site has been permanently preserved from future development or alteration that
would be inconsistent with the functions of the mitigation. The documentation may
include, but is not limited to, a conservation easement, deed restriction or other
agreement between the applicant and the owner of a mitigation site. Such documentation
shall be recorded with the Snohomish County auditor.
F. Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with WAC 173-22-035 that
are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient
to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands
intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and
drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment
facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990,
that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway.
Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas
to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State wetland rating system for
western Washington (Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 37 of 160
— Revised, Ecology Publication #04-06-025) or as revised by Ecology. This document
contains the definitions and methods for determining the criteria and parameters defining
the following wetland rating categories:
a. Category L Category I wetlands are: 1) relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands
larger than 1 acre; 2) wetlands that are identified by scientists of the Washington
Natural Heritage Program/DNR as high quality wetlands; 3) bogs; 4) mature and old -
growth forested wetlands larger than 1 acre; 5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; or 6)
wetlands that perform many functions well (scoring 70 points or more).
b. Category II. Category II wetlands are: 1) estuarine wetlands smaller than 1 acre, or
disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; 2) interdunal wetlands larger than 1
acres; 3) disturbed coastal lagoons or 4) wetlands with a moderately high level of
functions (scoring between 51-69 points).
Category III. Category III wetlands are: 1) wetlands with a moderate level of
functions (scoring between 30 and 50 points); or 2) interdunal wetlands between 0.1
and 1 acre in size.
d. Category IV. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scoring
fewer than 30 points) and are often heavily disturbed.
2. Development in designated wetlands within shoreline jurisdiction shall be regulated in
accordance with the following:
a. Buffer Requirements. The standard buffer widths in ECDC 24.40.020.F.2.b below
have been establish in accordance with best available science. The buffers are based
on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland
professional using the Washington state wetland rating system for western
Washington.
i. The use of the standard buffer widths requires the implementation of the measures
in ECDC 24.40.020.F.2.c, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the
adjacent land uses.
ii. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in ECDC
24.40.020.F.2.c, than a 33% increase in the width of all buffer is required.
iii. The standard buffer widths assume that the buffer is vegetated with a native plant
community appropriate for the ecoregion. If the existing buffer is unvegetated,
sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive species that do not perform needed
functions, the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant
community or the buffer should be widened to ensure that adequate functions of
the buffer are provided.
iv. Additional buffer widths are added to the standard buffer widths. For example, a
Category I wetland scoring 32 points for habitat function would require a buffer
of 225 feet (75 + 150).
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 38 of 160
b. Wetland Buffer requirements for wetlands within City of Edmonds shoreline
jurisdiction.
Wetland Category
Standard Buffer
Additional
Additional
Additional
Width
buffer width if
buffer width if
buffer width if
wetland scares
wetland scares
wetland scares
21-25 habitat
26-29 habitat
30-36 habitat
points
Points
points
Category L• Based on
75 ft
Add 30 ft
Add 90 ft
Add 150 ft
total score
Category L• Bogs
190 ft
NA
NA
Add 35 ft
Category I: Forested
75 ft
Add 30 ft
Add 90 ft
Add 150 ft
Category I: Estuarine
150 ft
NA
NA
NA
Category II (all)
75 ft
Add 30 ft
Add 90 ft
Add 150 ft
Category III (all)
60 ft
Add 45 ft
Add 105 ft
NA
Category IV (all)
40 ft
NA
NA
NA
c. Required measures to minimize impacts to wetlands. Measures are required, where
applicable to a specific proposal.
Disturbance
Required measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights
• Direct lights away from wetland
Noise
• Locate activity that generates noise away from
wetland
• If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native
vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source
• For activities that generate relatively continuous,
potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy
industry or mining, establish an additional 10' heavily
vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the out
wetland buffer
Toxic runoff
• Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland
while ensuring wetland is not dewatered
• Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within
150 feet of wetland
• Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater runoff
• Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads
and existing adjacent development
• Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly
enters the buffer
• Use Low Impact Development techniques (per PSAT
publication on LID techniques)
Change in water regime
• Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new
runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
Pets and human disturbance
• Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 39 of 160
delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance
using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion
• Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or
protect with a conservation easement
Dust
• Use best management practices to control dust
Disruption of corridors or
• Maintain connections to offsite areas that are
connections
undisturbed
• Restore corridors or connections to offsite habitats by
replanting
d. Where wetland or buffer alterations are permitted by the City of Edmonds, the
applicant shall mitigate impacts to achieve no not loss of wetland acreage and
functions. Compensatory mitigation shall be provided according to Wetlands in
Washington State, Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands,
Appendix 8-C, Table 8-C11, Ecology Publication #05-06-008, or as revised by
Ecology.
e. Buffer width Reductions Though Buffer Enhancement. At the discretion of the
Edmonds development services director, wetland buffer width reductions (or approval
of standard buffer widths for wetlands where existing buffer conditions require
increased buffer widths) may be granted concomitant to the development and
implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for Category III and IV
wetlands only. Approval of a wetland buffer enhancement plan shall, at the
discretion of the director, allow for wetland buffer with reduction to no less than 25
percent of the standard width; provided, that:
i. The plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be increased or
retained through plan implementation to at least the level provided by a standard
buffer or through additional mitigation;
ii. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in
buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and
eight feet on center for trees;
iii. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success in accordance
with ECDC 24.40.020.E.4; and
iv. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance
standards for assessing increases in wetland buffer functioning as related to:
1. Water quality protection;
2. Provision of wildlife habitat;
3. Maintenance of wetland hydrology; and
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 40 of 160
4. Restricting wetland intrusion and disturbance.
f. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging. The director may allow modification of a standard
buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best
available science on a case -by -case basis by averaging buffer widths. Only those
portions of a wetland buffer existing with the project area or subject parcel shall be
considered for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed
where a qualified professional wetland scientist demonstrates that:
i. It will not reduce the function and value of wetlands or associated buffers;
ii. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical
characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation,
and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not by
adversely impacted by narrower buffer in other places;
iii. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a
subject parcel for wetland extending off -site, after averaging is no less than that
which would be contained within a standard buffer; and
iv. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced to less than 25 percent of
the standard buffer width.
g. Physically Separated and Functionally Isolated Buffers.
i. Areas which are both physically separated and functionally isolated from a
wetland and do not protect the wetland from adverse impacts due to preexisting
public roads, structures, or similar circumstances, shall be excluded from the
buffers otherwise required by this subsection.
ii. A critical area report prepared by a qualified professional is required to determine
whether the buffer is functionally isolated.
h. Passive Recreation. The following passive recreation facilities may be permitted
within a wetland buffer provided the facilities are designed and in accordance with an
approved critical area report:
i. Walkways and trails; provided, that those pathways are limited to minor crossings
having no adverse impact on water quality. They should be generally parallel to
the perimeter of the wetland, located only in the outer twenty-five percent (25%)
of the wetland buffer area, and located to avoid removal of significant trees. They
should be limited to pervious surfaces no more than five (5) feet in width for
pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing non -treated piling may be
acceptable;
ii. Wildlife viewing structures; and
iii. Fishing access areas down to the water's edge that shall be no larger than six feet.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 41 of 160
Additions to structures existing within wetlands and/or wetland buffers may be
permitted pursuant to ECDC 23.50.040.H. Additions to structures within wetlands
will also require state and federal approval.
G. Geologically hazardous areas. Development in designated geologically hazardous areas shall
be regulated in accordance with the following:
New development or the creation of lots should not be allowed that would cause
foreseeable risk from geological conditions to people or improvements during the life of
the development.
2. New development should not be allowed that would require structural shoreline
stabilization over the normal, useful life of the development. Exception may be made for
instances where stabilization is necessary to protect allowed uses where no alternative
locations are available and no net loss of ecological functions will result. The
stabilization measures shall conform to ECDC 24.50.020, Shoreline stabilization.
3. Where no alternatives, including relocation or reconstruction of existing structures, are
found to be feasible, and less expensive than the proposed stabilization measure,
stabilization structures or measures to protect existing primary residential structures may
be all in conformance with ECDC 24.50.020 requirements and then only if no net loss of
ecological functions will result.
H. Critical Saltwater Habitats.
1. Development shall not intrude into or over critical saltwater habitats except when all of
the conditions below are met:
a. The public's need for such an action or structure is clearly demonstrated and the
proposal is consistent with protection of the public trust, as embodied in RCW
90.58.020;
b. Avoidance of impacts to critical saltwater habitats by an alternative alignment or
location is not feasible or would result in unreasonable and disproportionate cost to
accomplish the same general purpose.
c. The project, including any required mitigation, will result in no net loss of ecological
functions associated with critical saltwater habitat.
d. The project is consistent with the state's interest in resource protection and species
recovery.
2. Private, non-commercial docks for individual residential or community use may be
allowed provided that:
a. Avoidance of impacts to critical saltwater habitats by an alternative alignment or
location is not feasible;
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 42 of 160
b. The project, including any required mitigation, will result in not net loss of ecological
functions associated with critical saltwater habitat.
3. Where inventory of critical saltwater habitat has not been completed, all over water and
near -shore developments in marine and estuarine waters shall be required to conduct an a
habitat assessment of the site and adjacent beach sections to assess the presence of critical
saltwater habitats and functions.
I. Critical Freshwater Habitats.
Existing hydrological connections into and between water bodies, such as streams and
wetlands, shall be maintained. Obstructed channels shall be reestablished as a condition
of nonwater-dependent uses, where feasible.
Additional authority. In addition to any other authority the city may have, the city is hereby
authorized to condition or deny a proposed use, modification or activity or to require site
redesign because of hazards associated with the use, modification or activity on or near an
environmentally sensitive and/or critical area, and/or the effect of the proposal on the
environmentally sensitive area and/or critical area.
24.40.030 Flood Hazard Reduction
A. Applicability. The following provisions apply to actions taken to reduce flood damage or
hazard and to uses, development, and shoreline modification that may increase flood hazards.
B. Regulations.
1. Development and redevelopment shall be located and designed to prevent the need for
structural flood hazard reduction measures.
2. Nonstructural flood reduction measures shall be given preference over structural
measures.
3. Flood control works shall be permitted when it is demonstrated by engineering and
scientific evaluations that:
a. They are necessary to protect health/safety and or existing development;
b. Non-structural flood hazard reduction measures are infeasible; and
c. The flood control work will not result in a net loss of ecological function in the
shoreline area.
4. New structural flood control works shall be placed landward of associated wetlands, and
designated habitat conservation areas, except for works that improve ecological
functions, such as wetland restoration.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 43 of 160
5. Development within the shoreline environment shall meet the standards and provisions
for protection of frequently flooded areas as provided to areas of special flood hazard in
the current edition of the International Residential Code and International Building Code,
as adopted in ECDC Title 19.
24.40.040 Public Access and Views
A. Applicability. Public access includes the ability of the general public to reach, touch, and
enjoy the water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the
shoreline from adjacent locations. The public access provisions below apply to all shorelines
within the City of Edmonds.
B. Regulations
1. Except as provided in subsections 2 through 4 of this section, shoreline substantial
developments or conditional uses shall provide public access where any of the following
conditions are present:
a. Where the use or modification will create increased demand for public access to the
shoreline, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact.
b. Where the use or modification will interfere with an existing public access way, the
development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact.
Where a use which is not a priority shoreline use under the Shoreline Management Act
will locate on a shoreline of the state, the use or modification shall provide public access
to mitigate this impact.
d. Within the Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction, where a use or modification will interfere
with a public use of lands or waters subject to the public trust doctrine, the development
shall provide public access to mitigate this impact.
e. New multifamily residential development.
f. Where there is a subdivision of land into more than four parcels.
2. An applicant need not provide public access where one or more the following conditions
apply:
a. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist which cannot be prevent by any
practical means;
b. Inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of
alternative design features or other solutions;
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 44 of 160
c. The cost of providing the access, easement or an alternative amenity is unreasonably
disproportionate to the total long-term cost of the proposed development;
d. Unacceptable environmental harm will result from the public access which cannot be
mitigated;
e. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between any access provisions and the
proposed use/modification and adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated; or,
6. Statutory or constitutional requirements would prohibit the mandatory dedication of
access without just compensation or compliance with statutory criteria.
3. In order to meet any of the conditions in subsection 2.a through 2.e of this section, the
applicant must first demonstrate and the city determine in its finds that all reasonable
alternatives have been exhausted, including but not limited to:
a. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and/or limiting hours of use;
b. Designing separation of uses and activities (e.g., fences, terracing, use of one-way
glazings, hedges, landscaping, etc.); and
Developing provisions for access at a site geographically separated from the proposal
such as street end, vista or trail system.
4. Exceptions. The following uses, developments, modifications and activities are exempt form
providing public pedestrian access under this section:
a. The construction, repair, remodeling and use of one detached single-family dwelling unit,
as well as the construction, remodeling, repair, and use of bulkheads, docks and other
uses, modification and activities incidental to the use of the subject property as a
detached single-family residence.
b. All shoreline uses, modifications and activities in conservancy environments, or
environmentally sensitive areas where the city determines that access would create
distinct and unavoidable hazards to human safety or be contrary to city policies regarding
the protection of unique and fragile environments.
5. Shoreline development by public entities, such as local governments, port districts, state
agencies, and public utility districts, should provide public access measures as part of each
development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety,
security, or impact to the shoreline.
6. Public Use Facilities.
a. In addition to the public pedestrian areas required by subsection 1 of this section, the
applicant may propose and/or the city may require that benches, picnic tables, a public
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 45 of 160
access pier or boardwalk, or other public use facilities be constructed on the subject
property.
b. If public use facilities are required or proposed, the city will determine the size, location
and other regulations (design considerations) on a case -by -case basis.
7. Timing. The public pedestrian access required by this section must be completed and
available at the time of occupancy or completion of work; provided, however, that the city
may on a case -by -case basis defer the physical availability of public access in the following
cases:
a. If shoreline development without public pedestrian access exists on both sides of the
subject property and the city determines that the size, location and topography or the
subject property does not warrant making public waterfront access available until
additional adjacent waterfront access can be obtained.
b. If pre-existing legal or nonconforming improvements on the subject property physically
preclude the provisions of public waterfront access within a reasonable period of time.
8. Easements recorded. In each case where public pedestrian access is required, whether it is
physically available at the end of development or deferred until a later date, all owners of the
subject property must record a public pedestrian easement, in a form approved by the city
attorney, establishing the right of the public to access, use and traverse that portion of the
subject property.
9. Signs. The city shall require the posting of signs, obtained from the city at the city's cost,
designating public pedestrian access. The planning manager or his/her designee is authorized
to establish reasonable rules and regulations governing the public's use of public pedestrian
access and use areas under this chapter. Where appropriate, these rules and regulations shall
be included within the document recorded under subsection 8 of this section.
10. Shoreline uses, modifications and activities shall be designed and operated to avoid blocking,
reducing or adversely interfering with the public's existing physical and visual access to the
water and shorelines.
11. View Protection Regulations.
a. Within the Urban Mixed Use I, Urban Mixed Use II and adjacent Aquatic I and Aquatic
II shoreline designations no building or other major structure may be located within the
following required view corridors:
i. Landward of the ordinary high water mark, a view corridor must be maintained across
30 percent of the average parcel width. The view corridor must be in one continuous
piece. Within the view corridor, structures, parking areas, and landscaping will be
allowed; provided, that they do not obscure the view from adjacent public right-of-
way to and beyond the Puget Sound. This view corridor must be adjacent to either
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 46 of 160
the north or south property line, whichever will result in the widest view corridor
given development on adjacent properties. If the subject property has shoreline
frontage in excess of 1,000 feet, the city may require a maximum of one-third of the
required view corridor to be placed in a location between the north and south property
lines, in a location which will provide for the greatest unobstructed view of the Puget
Sound.
ii. Waterward of the ordinary high water, view corridors which are required pursuant to
this section must be maintained starting at a width equal to the adjacent upland view
corridor and expanding in a conical fashion 30 degrees from the prolongation of the
view corridor water of the ordinary high water mark.
b. Within the Urban Mixed Use IV designation
i. Uses and activities must be designed and operated to avoid blocking or adversely
interfering with visual access from public areas to the water and shorelines.
12. Public access provided by shoreline street ends, public utilities and rights -of -way shall not be
diminished (RCW 35.79.035 and 36.87.130).
13. Public access sites shall be connected directly to the nearest public street and shall include
provisions for disabled and physically impaired persons, where feasible.
14. Public access easements and permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed of title and/or
on the face of a plat or short plat as a condition running contemporaneous with the authorized
land use, at a minimum. Said recording with the county auditor's office shall occur at the
time of permit approval (RCW 58.17.110).
15. The minimum width of public access easements shall be 25 feet, unless the administrator
determines that undue hardship would result. In such cases, easement width may be reduced
only to the minimum extent necessary, as determined by the administrator, to relieve the
hardship. Provided the larger easement is not needed for emergency access.
16. Future actions by the applicant successors in interest or other parties shall not diminish the
usefulness or value of the public access provided.
17. Visual access shall be maintained, enhanced and preserved on shoreline street ends, public
utilities and rights -of -way and within public view corridors as designated by the city.
24.40.050 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation
A. Applicability.
1. Vegetation conservation includes activities to protect and restore vegetation along or near
marine and freshwater shorelines that contribute to the ecological functions of shoreline
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 47 of 160
areas. Vegetation conservation provisions include the prevention or restriction of plant
clearing and earth grading, vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds and
nonnative species.
2. Unless otherwise stated, vegetation conservation does not include those activities covered
under the Washington State Forest Practices Act, except for conversion to other uses and
those other forest practice activities over which local governments have authority.
Vegetation conservation provisions apply even to those shoreline uses and developments
that are exempt from the requirement to obtain permit.
3. Where new developments and/or uses are proposed, native shoreline vegetation should be
conserved to maintain shoreline ecological functions and/or processes and mitigate the
direct, indirect and/or cumulative impacts of shoreline development, where feasible.
Important functions of shoreline vegetation include, but are not limited to:
a. Providing shade necessary to maintain water temperatures required by salmonids,
forage fish, and other aquatic biota.
b. Providing organic inputs critical for aquatic life.
c. Providing food in the form of various insects and other benthic macroinvertebrates.
d. Stabilizing banks, minimizing erosion, and reducing the occurrence of landslides.
Reducing fine sediment input into the aquatic environment through stormwater best
management practices.
f. Filtering and vegetative uptake of nutrients and pollutants from ground water and
surface runoff.
g. Providing a source of large woody debris into the aquatic system.
h. Regulation of microclimate in the stream -riparian and intertidal corridors.
i. Providing habitat for wildlife, including connectivity for travel and migration
corridors.
B. Regulations.
1. Alteration of native shoreline vegetation shall only be allowed as set forth below:
a. Landscaping or maintenance associated with an existing legal use or new permitted
shoreline use or development. The use of native plant species shall be encouraged.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 48 of 160
b. Removal of noxious weeds as listed by the state in WAC 16-750, provided such
activity shall be conducted in a manner consistent with best management practices
and native vegetation is promptly reestablish in the disturbed area.
Modification of vegetation in association with a legal, nonconforming use provided
that said modification is conducted in a manner consistent with this Master Program
and results in no net loss to ecological functions or critical fish and wildlife
conservation areas.
d. Restoration activities conducted in accordance with an approved plan designed to
improve ecological functions and values.
2. The removal or disturbance of existing vegetation and the alteration of topography shall
be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate approved shoreline development.
3. Exposed soils shall be immediately developed or revegetated to prevent erosion.
4. Revegetation must be planted such that complete coverage of exposed soils is attained
within one growing season.
5. In all cases where clearing is followed by revegetation, native plants shall be preferred.
24.40.060 Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint pollution
A. Applicability. The following provisions applies to all development and uses within shoreline
jurisdiction that may affect water quality.
B. Regulations.
An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be submitted with a permit application
for activities that involve the removal of vegetation, stockpiling of earth or other
materials, or any activity that could result in shoreline erosion or siltation. Said program
shall conform to the City of Edmonds' stormwater code requirements, Engineering
Design Standards and shall at a minimum, utilize Best management Practices (BMPs) to
prevent shoreline erosion and siltation.
2. The bulk storage of oil, fuel, chemicals, or hazardous materials, on either a temporary or
permanent basis, shall not occur in shoreline without adequate secondary containment
and an emergency spill response plan in place.
3. All development approved under this Shoreline Master Program shall be designed and
maintained consistent with the City's Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, all codes related
to stormwater, and Engineering Design Standards.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 49 of 160
4. New development is encouraged to employ Low Impact Development principles and
practices such as setbacks, retaining land cover, and reducing impervious areas, and use
special caution to avoid infiltration of stormwater in shoreline areas along marine bluffs.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 50 of 160
24.40.070 Shoreline Development Table: User Guide
SDP
Listed shoreline development permitted as a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and subject to the policies and regulations
of this Master Program. Pursuant to WAC 173-27-040 and ECDC 24.80.010, certain shoreline uses and modifications may be
exempt from the requirements of the substantial development permit process. These exemptions shall be construed narrowly and
only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the
substantial development permit process. Developments meeting the exemption from the requirements of the substantial
development permit process are still subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
SCUP
Listed shoreline development may be permitted as Shoreline Conditional Use Permit subject to the policies and regulations of this
Master Program. Shoreline developments requiring Shoreline Conditional Use Permits are not subject to the exemptions in WAC
173-27-040 or ECDC 24.80.010.
X
Listed shoreline development is prohibited.
*
Prohibited shoreline development is subject to specific exceptions. See Shoreline Area Regulations section for the listed
shoreline development.
+
Permitted shoreline development is subject to specific limitations on where and/or when development may be permitted. See
Shoreline Area Regulations for the listed shoreline development.
24.40.080 Shoreline Development Table: Shoreline Development Permitted by Area Designation'
Shoreline
Development
Shoreline Area Designation
Urban
Railroad
Urban
Mixed
Use I
Urban
Mixed Use
II
Urban
Mixed
Use III
Urban Mixed
Use IV
Shoreline
Residential I
Shoreline
Residential II
Shoreline
Residential III
Aquatic I
Aquatic 11
Conservancy
Natural
A uaculture
X SCUP SCUP X SCUP X X X SCUP SCUP SCUP SCUP
Artwork
SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP X X SDP SDP
Boating Facilities
Launch Ramps
X
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Marinas
X
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Covered
Over -water
structures
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 51 of 160
Shoreline
Shoreline Area Designation
Development
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban Mixed
Shoreline
Shoreline
Shoreline
Aquatic I
Aquatic II
Conservancy
Natural
Railroad
Mixed
Mixed Use
Mixed
Use IV
Residential I
Residential II
Residential III
Use I
II
Use III
Commercial and Light Industrial
Water -oriented
X
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Nonwater-
X
SDP+
SDP+
SDP±
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
oriented
Dredging
SCUP SCUP SCUP X X X X SCUP SCUP SCUP SCUP X
Landfill
SCUP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SCUP
SCUP
SCUP
SCUP'
Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats
Commercial
X
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
SDP
X
X
Private, Public,
and Shared
X
SDP
SDP
X
X
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
Aircraft
X
X
X
X
X
XR
XR
X
X
X
XR
Xx
Recreation
X SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP
Residential
Detached
Residential
X
X
X
SDP
X
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
(Single-family)
Attached or
stacked
Residential
X
X
X
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(Multi -family)
Shoreline Stabilization
Groins
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
SCUP
SCUP
SCUP
X
Breakwaters
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
SCUP
SCUP
SCUP
X
and jetties
Bulkheads and
similar
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
SCUP
X
X
SDP
X
X
SCUP
X
structures
Bioengineering
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
SDP
X
X
SDP
SDP+
SDP+
SDP
X
Gabions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 52 of 160
Shoreline
Shoreline Area Designation
Development
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban Mixed
Shoreline
Shoreline
Shoreline
Aquatic I
Aquatic II
Conservancy
Natural
Railroad
Mixed
Mixed Use
Mixed
Use IV
Residential I
Residential II
Residential III
Use I
II
Use III
Signs
SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP
Transportation
Railroads
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ferry Terminals
SCUP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
SCUP
SCUP
X
X
Parking —
supporting
associated
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
SCUP+
X
water-
dependentuse
Parking — not
supporting an
associated
SDP
SCUP+
SCUP+
SDP
SDP
X
X
X
X
X
SCUP+
X
water -
dependent use
Other
SCUP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SDP
SCUP+
SCUP+
Utilities
SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SCUP
In the event that there is a conflict between the development(s) identified in this Table 24.40.080 and the policies and/or regulations with the text of this Master Program, the policies and regulations within the text shall apply.
2: Artwork associate with a permitted use in the Aquatic I or Aquatic II designation may by permitted; otherwise it is a prohibited use.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 53 of 160
24.40.090 Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards
The following table establishes shoreline -specific development standards in the different shoreline environment designations. Setbacks represent minimum distances and may be
larger if a critical area is present consistent with ECDC 24.40.020 and Title 23 ECDC.
Shoreline
Shoreline Area Designation
Development
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban Mixed
Shoreline
Shoreline
Shoreline
Aquatic I
Aquatic II
Conservancy
Natural
Railroad
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Use IV
Residential I
Residential II
Residential III
I
II
III
A uaculture — Over Water Structures
Shore Setback
(waterward
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ordinary high)
Maximum
Height above
deck of
3ft
3ft
3ft
3ft
3ft
N/A
N/A
N/A
3ft
3 ft.
N/A
3ft
overwater
structure
Commercial and Light Industrial Development
Water Depend nt Commercial Use
Shore Setback
N/A
0'
0'
0'
0'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Side Setback15
N/A
0' 2
0' 2
Varies
0'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Maximum
Height16
N/A
30'
30'
25'
35'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Maximum
N/A
None
None
None
None
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coverage
All Other Commercial and Li ht Industrial Develo ment
Shore Setback
N/A
15'
15'
50'
100150 "
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Side Setback
(commercial/
N/A
0'/15' 2, 3
0'/15' 2,3
Varies
0'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
residential) 15
Maximum
16
N/A
30'
30'
25'
35'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Height
Maximum
N/A
None
None
None
Varies
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coverage
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 54 of 160
Shoreline
Shoreline Area Designation
Development
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban Mixed
Shoreline
Shoreline
Shoreline
Aquatic I
Aquatic II
Conservancy
Natural
Railroad
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Use IV
Residential I
Residential II
Residential III
I
II
III
Recreation
Shore Setback
N/A
15'
15'
15'
15'17
N/A
N/A
35'
N/A
N/A
50'
N/A14
Maximum
N/A
30'
30'
25'
35'
25'
25'
25'
15
15 15'4
25'
25'
Height16
Maximum
N/A
None
None
None
None
35%
35%
35%
N/A
N/A
10% or 4,000
N/A
Coverage
square feet
20% or
Maximum
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10,000
N/A
impervious
square feet
Residential Develo went
Shore Setback
N/A
N/A
N/A
50'17
100150
N/A
N/A
35'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bluff Setback
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
50'13
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Maximum 16
N/A
N/A
N/A
25'
35'
25'
25'
25'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Height
Minimum Lot
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Varies11
6,000 sq ft
12,000 sq ft
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Area (Sq. Ft.
Maximum
Density6
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Varies 12
7.3
3.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Maximum
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
35%
35%
35%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Coverage
Transportation and Parkin
Parkin
Uncovered Parking
Shore Setback 1 60' 60' 60' 50"1 100150 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 60' N/A
Structured Parking
Shore Setback
N/A
N/A
N/A
50'
100150
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Maximum
Height16
N/A
N/A
N/A
25'
35'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Ferry Terminals
Maximum
8
30'
30'
30'
30'
30'
N/A
N/A
N/A
35'
35'
N/A
N/A
Height
Railroads
Maximum
25' 9
30'')
30' 9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Height
Property line
5'
5
5'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 55 of 160
Shoreline
Shoreline Area Designation
Development
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban
Urban Mixed
Shoreline
Shoreline
Shoreline
Aquatic I
Aquatic II
Conservancy
Natural
railroad
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Use IV
Residential I
Residential II
Residential III
I
II
III
All Other Develo
ment
Shore Setback
N/A
15'
15'
50' 17
100150
N/A
N/A
35'
N/A
N/A
50'
N/A 14
Maximum
16
25'
30'
30'
25'
35'
25'
25'
25'
25'
35'/15' 10
25'
25'
Height
Minimum Lot
N/A
None
None
None
None
Varies"
6,000 sq. ft.
12,000 sq. ft.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Area (Sq. Ft.)
Maximum
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Varies"7.3
3.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Density
Maximum
None
None
None
None
Varies19
35%
35%
35%
N/A
N/A
10%
10%
Coverage
1 ' Aquaculture pens shall be no closer to the shoreline than the identified distance.
Z ' See ECDC 24.40.040.13.11 for view corridor requirements.
3 : No side setback is required from adjacent commercial property. A minimum 15-foot setback is required from lot line adjacent to shoreline residential environments. The area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum
six-foot high fence or hedge.
4 ' Above ordinary high water mark.
5 ' Thirty-five feet total of both sides, 10 feet minimum on either side.
6 ' Density means "dwelling units per acre" determined by dividing the total lot area by the density allowed by the underlying zoning; the number of lots or units permitted shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number.
7 ' In the Urban Mixed Use I and II environment, the 60-foot setback for parking may be reduced by a maximum of 20 feet. See ECDC 24.60.080.D.2.c. and 24.60.080.D.3.c
8 ' Subject to exceptions, see ECDC 24.60.070.C.10.
9 ' Subject to exceptions, see ECDC 24.60.080.D. l.b.xiii. I through ECDC 24.60.080.D.l.b.xiii.4.
10 . Accessory structures for the sale of gas, oil and live bait, shall not exceed 15 feet above the height of the dock or pier.
11 . Varies between 12,000 and 20,000 square feet per site depending on the underlying zoning.
12 : Varies between 3.7 and 2.2 dwellingunits per acre depending on the underlying zoning. Density means "dwelling units per acre" determined b dividing the total lot area b the density allowed b the underlying zoning; the
P P g Yi g g Y g P Y g Y tY Y Y� g g'
number of lots or units permitted shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number.
13 . May be reduced through the shoreline variance process pursuant to ECDC 24.40.020.C.3.
14 : Three areas within the City of Edmonds have the natural environment designation: Edmonds Marsh, Shell Creek Wetland, and Perrinville Creek Wetland. All three areas are separated from the Puget Sound by the railroad
right-of-way.
15 ' Side setback determined by the underlying zoning. No required side setback in the BD2, CG, or MP2 zones. Five foot side setback in the OR zone,
16 : The maximum height limit shall be determined b the underlying comprehensive planning document and zoning designation. Height limits eater than 35 feet shall be su orted b view analysis and structures designed to
Sh Y Y� g P P g g g g greater pP Y Y Sn
minimize impacts on public views.
17 ' Fences within the shore setback of the Urban Mixed Use 11-1-IV zone that create separate areas for public and private uses should not be allowed.
18 : Setback for new development within the Urban Mixed -Use IV environment is 100 feet. New development activities within the Urban Mixed -Use W environment require the establishment of a 50-foot vegetation buffer
adjacent to the Edmonds Marsh where the vegetative buffer is absent.
19 : Varies between 75% and no maximum coverage requirement per site depending on the underlying zoning.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 56 of 160
Part V Specific Modification Policies & Regulations.
24.50.000 Applicability.
Shoreline modification activities are structures or actions that permanently change the physical
configuration or quality of the shoreline, particularly at the point where land and water meet.
Shoreline modifications include but are not limited to structures such as bulkheads and piers and
actions such as clearing, grading and removing vegetation. Generally, shoreline modifications
are undertaken to prepare for a shoreline use, to support and upland use, or to provide shoreline
stabilization or defense from erosion.
24.50.010 General Modification Policies and Regulations
A. General Modification Policies.
Locate and design all new development in a manner that prevents or minimizes the need
for shoreline modifications.
2. Ensure that shoreline modification, where permitted, are as compatible as possible with
natural shoreline processes and character.
3. Regulate shoreline modifications to assure that modifications individually and
cumulatively do not result in a net loss of ecological functions. Mitigation may be
required to meet the no net loss standard.
4. Give preference to those types of shoreline modifications that have a less impact on
ecological functions and require mitigation of identified impacts resulting from shoreline
modifications.
5. Incorporate all feasible measures to protect ecological shoreline functions and ecosystem -
wide processes in the placement and design of shoreline modifications. To avoid and
reduce ecological impacts, the mitigation sequence in ECDC 24.40.020.E.3 shall be
utilized.
B. General Shoreline Modification Regulations
1. Shoreline modification activities that do not support a permitted shoreline use are
considered "speculative" and are prohibited by this Master Program, unless it can be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Shoreline Administrator that such activities are in
the public interest and necessary and for the maintenance of shoreline environmental
resource values.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 57 of 160
2. Structural shoreline modification measures shall be permitted only if nonstructural
measures are unable to achieve the same purpose. Nonstructural measures considered
shall include alternative site designs, increased setbacks, relocation, and bioengineering.
3. Shoreline modification activities, with the exception of restoration or enhancement
efforts, are prohibited in wetlands, and undeveloped spits, hooks, bars, barrier beaches, or
similar accretion terminals or accretion shore forms.
4. Proponents of shoreline modification projects shall obtain all applicable federal and state
permits and shall meet all permit requirements.
5. Best Available Science. All reports prepared in support of a shoreline modification
shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of shoreline environment
and field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used.
24.50.020 Shoreline stabilization
A. Applicability. Shoreline stabilization includes actions taken to address erosion impacts to
property and dwellings, businesses, or structures cause by natural processes, such as current,
flood, tides, wind, or wave action. These actions include structural and nonstructural
methods.
Nonstructural methods include building setbacks, relocation of the structure to be protected,
ground water management, planning and regulatory measures to avoid the need for structural
stabilization.
Structural methods can be "hard" or "soft". "Hard" structural stabilization measures
structural stabilization measures refer to those with solid, hard surfaces, such as concrete
bulkheads. These are static structures traditionally constructed of rock, concrete, wood,
metal, or other materials that deflect, rather than absorb, wave energy. "Soft" structural
measures rely on softer materials, such as vegetation, drift logs, and gravel. They are
intended to absorb wave energy, mimicking the function of a natural beach. The following
methods of shoreline stabilization are organized from "soft" to "hard":
"Soft"
• Vegetation enhancement;
• Upland drainage control;
• Biotechnical measures;
• Beach enhancement;
• Anchor tree; and
• Gravel placement;
"Hard"
• Rock revetments;
• Gabions;
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 58 of 160
• Groins;
• Retaining walls and bluff walls;
• Bulkheads; and
• Seawalls.
The following policies and regulations apply to all actions and developments that modify the
shoreline for the purposes of preventing shore erosion.
B. Shoreline Stabilization Policies
1. Discourage new development requiring structural shoreline defense works.
2. Relocating existing structures out of harm's way is preferable to construction of structural
defense works.
3. Allow structural stabilization methods only:
a. After it is demonstrated that nonstructural solutions would not be able to reduce the
potential damage sufficiently, and
b. Where it has been demonstrated to be necessary to support or protect a new use
consistent with this Master program, a legally established, inhabited structure or
ongoing shoreline use that is in danger of loss or substantial damage or when
necessary for reconfiguration of the shoreline for hazardous substance remediation or
restoration of ecological functions.
Structural stabilization will not be permitted for the indirect purpose of creating land
by filling.
4. Encourage "soft" stabilization and protection works over "hard" structural means.
Furthermore, designs that do not interrupt net drift or migration of anadromous fish are
preferred (for example, open poling construction is preferable to sold walls, and floating
breakwaters are preferable to solid landfills.)
5. Consider the effect that proposed shore defense works have on ecosystem -wide processes
(e.g. sand movement) and functions (e.g. habitat). Make provisions to avoid and
minimize impacts where feasible. Mitigation must be provided to achieve no net loss.
6. Give special attention to the effect these structures will have on aesthetic qualities of the
shoreline, public access, and use of the water.
C. Shoreline Stabilization Regulations
1. For the purposes of this section, standards on shoreline stabilization, "replacement"
means the construction of a new structure to perform a shoreline stabilization function of
an existing structure which can no longer adequately service its purpose. Addition to or
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 59 of 160
increases in size of existing shoreline stabilization measures shall be considered new
structures.
2. Structural stabilization methods shall be permitted when necessary for reconfiguration of
the shoreline for mitigation or enhancement purposes.
3. New development that would require shoreline stabilization which causes significant
negative impacts to adjacent or down -current properties and shoreline areas should not be
allowed.
4. New development on steep slopes or bluffs shall be set back sufficiently to ensure that
shoreline stabilization is unlikely to be necessary during the normal, useful life of the
structure, as demonstrated by a geotechnical analysis.
5. New structural stabilization measures shall not be allowed except when necessity is
demonstrated in the following manner:
a. To protect existing primary structures:
i. New or enlarged structural shoreline stabilization measures for an existing
primary structure, including residences, should not be allowed unless there is
conclusive evidence, documented by a geotechnical analysis, that the structure is
in danger from shoreline erosion caused by tidal action, currents, or waves.
Normal sloughing, erosion of steep bluffs, or shoreline erosion itself, without a
scientific or geotechnical analysis, is not demonstration of need. The geotechnical
analysis should evaluate on -site drainage issues and address drainage problems
away from the shoreline edge before considering structural shoreline stabilization.
ii. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
b. In support of new nonwater-dependent development, including single-family
residences, when all of the conditions below apply:
i. The erosion is not being cause by upland conditions, such as the loss of vegetation
and drainage.
ii. Nonstructural measures, such as placing the development further from the
shoreline, planting vegetation, or installing on -site drainage improvements, are
not feasible or not sufficient.
iii. The need to protect primary structures from damage due to erosion is
demonstrated through a geotechnical report. The damage must be caused by
natural processes, such as tidal action, currents, and waves.
iv. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 60 of 160
c. In support of water -dependent development when all of the conditions below apply:
i. The erosion is not being caused by upland conditions, such as the loss of
vegetation and drainage.
ii. Nonstructural measures, planting vegetation, or installing on -site drainage
improvements, are not feasible or not sufficient.
iii. The need to protect primary structures from damage due to erosion is
demonstrated through a geotechnical report.
iv. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
d. To protect projects for the restoration of ecological functions or hazardous substance
remediation projects pursuant to chapter 70.105D RCW when all of the conditions
below apply:
i. Nonstructural measures, planting vegetation, or installing on -site drainage
improvements, are not feasible or not sufficient.
ii. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
6. Geotechnical reports pursuant to this section that address the need to prevent potential
damage to a primary structure shall address the necessity for shoreline stabilization by
estimating time frames and rates of erosion and report on the urgency associated with the
specific situation. As a general matter, hard armoring solutions should not be authorized
except when a report confirms that there is a significant possibility that such a structure
will be damaged within three years as a result of shoreline erosion in the absence of such
hard armoring measures, or where waiting until the need is that immediate, would
foreclose the opportunity to use measures that avoid impacts on ecological functions.
Thus, where the geotechnical report confirms a need to prevent potential damage to a
primary structure, but the need is not as immediate as the three years, that report may still
be used to justify more immediate authorization to protect against erosion using soft
measures.
D. Shoreline Stabilization Siting and Design Regulations.
1. When any structural shoreline stabilization measures are demonstrated to be necessary,
pursuant to above provisions.
a. Limit the size of stabilization measures to the minimum necessary. Use measures
designed to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Soft approaches shall
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 61 of 160
be used unless demonstrated not to be sufficient to protect primary structures,
dwellings, and businesses.
b. Ensure that publicly financed or subsidized shoreline erosion control measures do not
restrict appropriate public access to the shoreline except where such access is
determined to be infeasible because of incompatible uses, safety, security, or harm to
ecological functions. Where feasible, incorporate ecological restoration and public
access improvements into the project.
c. Mitigate new erosion control measures, including replacement structures, on feeder
bluffs or other actions that affect beach sediment -producing areas to avoid and, if that
is not possible, to minimize adverse impacts to sediment conveyance systems.
2. Bulkheads and other shoreline protective structures may not be constructed within a
marsh, bog, or swamp or between a marsh, bog or swamp and the primary body of water
(Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger).
3. Bulkheads and other shoreline protective structures may not be placed waterward of the
ordinary height water mark, unless:
a. It is to stabilize a fill approved under ECDC 24.50.040; or
b. There has been severe and unusual erosion within one year immediately preceding the
application for the bulkhead or other similar protective structure. In this event, the
city may allow the placement of the bulkhead or other similar protective structure to
recover the dry land area lost by this erosion.
4. Bulkheads and other shoreline protect structures shall be located landward of the ordinary
high water mark and generally parallel to the natural shoreline unless geotechnical
evaluation demonstrates the necessity for alternative design. In addition:
a. Where no other bulkheads are adjacent, the construction of a bulkhead shall be as
close to the eroding bank as possible and in no case shall it be more than six (6) feet
from the toe of the bank.
b. A bulkhead for a permitted landfill shall be located at the toe of the fill.
c. Where permitted, a bulkhead must tie in flush with existing bulkheads on adjoining
properties, except where the adjoining bulkheads extend waterward of the ordinary
high water mark.
5. An existing bulkhead or other shoreline stabilization structure may be replaced with a
similar structure if there is a demonstrated need to protect principal uses or structures
from erosion caused by currents, tidal action, or waves.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 62 of 160
a. The replacement structure should be designed, located, sized, and constructed to
assure no net loss of ecological functions.
b. Replacement walls or bulkheads shall not encroach waterward of the ordinary high-
water mark or existing structure unless the residential structure to which it is
appurtenant was occupied prior to January 1, 1992, and there are overriding safety or
environmental concerns. In such cases, the replacement structure may abut the
existing shoreline stabilization structure.
c. Where a net loss of ecological functions associated with critical saltwater habitats
would occur by leaving the existing structure, remove it as part of the replacement
measure.
d. Soft shoreline stabilization measures that provide restoration of shoreline ecological
functions may be permitted waterward of the ordinary high-water mark.
e. For purposes of this section standards on shoreline stabilization measures,
"replacement" means the construction of a new structure to perform a shoreline
stabilization function of an existing structure which can no longer adequately serve its
purpose. Additions to or increases in size of existing shoreline stabilization measures
shall be considered new structures.
6. Materials used in bulkhead construction shall meet the following standards:
a. Bulkheads shall utilize stable, non-erodable materials such as concrete, wood, and
rock that are consistent with the preservation and protection of the ecological habitat.
b. Shore materials shall not be used for fill behind bulkheads, except clean dredge spoil
from a permitted off -site dredge and fill operation.
c. The extent and nature of any backfill proposed landward of a bulkhead or other
shoreline protective structure shall comply with adopted City standards.
7. If hard stabilization methods are employed the following design criteria shall be meet:
a. The size and quantity of the material shall be limited to that the minimum necessary
to withstand the estimated energy intensity of the hydraulic system;
b. Filter cloth must be used to aid drainage and help prevent settling;
The toe reinforcement or protection must be adequate to prevent a collapse of the
system wave action; and
d. Fish habitat components shall be considered in the design subject to Hydraulic Project
Approval by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 63 of 160
8. When hard stabilization measures are required at a public access site, provision for safe
pedestrian access to the water shall be incorporated into bulkhead design.
9. Stairs or other permitted structures may be built into a hard stabilization structure but
shall not extend waterward of it.
E. Geotechnical Reports.
Geotechnical reports required pursuant to this section shall address the need for shoreline
stabilization and shall include the following.
1. A scaled site plan showing:
a. The location of existing and proposed shore stabilization, structures, fill, and
vegetation, with dimensions indicated distances to the ordinary high water mark.
b. Existing site topography with two foot contours.
2. A description of the processes affecting the site, and surrounding areas that influence or
could be influenced by the site, including areas in which lake or marine geomorphic
processes affect the site, including, but not limited to:
a. Soil erosion, deposition, or accretion;
b. Evidence of past or potential erosion due to tidal action and/or waves;
c. Littoral drift; and
d. An estimate of shoreline erosion rates.
3. A description and analysis of the urgency and risk associated with the specific site
characteristics.
F. Shoreline Stabilization — Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
2. Urban Mixed Use I
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 64 of 160
b. Gabions are prohibited.
3. Urban Mixed Use 11
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
4. Urban Mixed Use III
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
6. Shoreline Residential I
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
7. Shoreline Residential II
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
8. Shoreline Residential III
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Gabions are prohibited.
9. Aquatic I
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 65 of 160
a. Bioengineering approaches are permitted on tidelands and shorelands when necessary
to restore an eroding accretion shoreform or to retard erosion elsewhere subject to
policies and regulations of this program.
b. Bulkheads or revetments are prohibited except for an approved water -dependent
development subject to policies and regulations of this Program.
c. Gabions are prohibited.
10. Aquatic II
a. Bioengineering approaches are permitted on tidelands and shorelands when necessary
to restore an eroding accretion shoreform or to retard erosion elsewhere subject to
policies and regulations of this program.
b. Bulkheads or revetments are prohibited except for an approved water -dependent
development subject to policies and regulations of this Program.
c. Gabions are prohibited.
11. Conservancy
a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to
policies and regulations of this Program
b. Gabions are prohibited.
12. Natural: Shoreline stabilization is prohibited; except that, bioengineering approaches
may be permitted as a conditional use when necessary to restore and eroding accretion
shoreform or to retard erosion elsewhere.
24.50.030 Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats
A. Applicability
Docks are fixed structures floating upon water bodies. Piers are fixed, pile -supported
structures. Floats are floating structures that are moored, anchored, or otherwise secured in
the water that are not connected to the shoreline. Docks, piers, and floats that serve four or
fewer boats regularly moored are reviewed a recreational facilities. Proposals for five or
more boats are considered marinas and are regulated under ECDC 24.60.020, Boating
Facilities.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 66 of 160
B. Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats Policies
1. A dock associated with a single family residence is considered a water -dependent use
provided that it is designed and intended as a facility for access to watercraft and
otherwise complies with the provisions of this section.
2. New pier or dock construction, excluding docks accessory to single-family residences,
should be permitted only when the applicant has demonstrated that a specific need exists
to support the intended water -dependent use.
3. Shared pier and dock facilities are preferred over single -user moorage where feasible.
New subdivisions of more than two (2) lots should provide joint shared moorage.
4. Piers and docks, including those accessory to single-family residences, shall be designed
and constructed to avoid or to minimize and mitigate the impacts to ecological functions,
critical areas resources such as eelgrass beds and fish habitats and processes such as
currents and littoral drift.
C. Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats Regulations
1. The following piers, docks, and floating developments are prohibited in the shoreline
jurisdiction:
a. Aircraft moorage is prohibited, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to
exceed 36 hours) in the event of severe weather conditions.
b. Covered moorage.
2. Size of Piers and Docks. Piers and docks may not be larger than is necessary to provide
safe and reasonable moorage for the boats which can reasonably be expected to be
moored. The city will specifically review the size and configuration or each proposed
pier or dock to ensure that:
a. The pier or dock does not extend waterward beyond the point necessary to provide
reasonable draft for the boats to be moored and shall not extend beyond the outer
harbor line; and
b. The pier or dock is not larger than is necessary to moor the specified number of boats;
and
c. The pier or dock will not interfere with the public use and enjoyment of the water or
create a hazard to navigation; and
d. The pier or dock will not adversely affect nearby uses; and
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 67 of 160
e. The pier or dock will not have a significant long-term adverse effect on aquatic
habitats.
3. In order to minimize impacts on nearshore areas and avoid reduction in ambient light
level:
a. The width of piers, docks and floats shall be the minimum necessary and shall not
exceed 4 feet in width, except where specific information on use patterns justifies a
greater width. Marine floats shall not exceed 8 feet in width not more than 40 feet in
length and freshwater floats shall not exceed 6 feet in width and 20 feet in length
unless authorized by a variance. Exceptionally large vessels or vessels that require a
relatively deep draft may be required to use a buoy, other alternative mooring
scheme, or to moor in a marina. Materials that will allow light to pass through the
deck may be required where width exceeds 4 feet.
b. Dock surfaces designed to allow maximum light penetration shall be used on
walkways or gangplanks in nearshore areas.
c. Piers, docks and floats shall be located along a north/south orientation to the
maximum extent feasible.
d. The surface of new piers, docks and floats shall provide at least 50% functional
grating.
4. Waterward of the ordinary high water mark, pier and dock height may not exceed a
height of five feet above water level, except that pilings may extend a reasonable amount
above dock height to provide for tidal conditions.
5. Prohibited substances. No part of a pier, dock or other components that may come in
contact with the water may be treated with or consist, in whole or in part, of creosote, oil
based paints, toxic chemicals, or other substances that would be harmful to the aquatic
environment, unless specifically permitted and authorized by appropriate state and
federal regulatory agencies.
6. If the pier, dock or float will extend waterward of the inner harbor line, the applicant
must obtain a lease from the Department of Natural Resources prior to proposing this use.
7. No structure regulated under this section, other than moorage structures and sheds
associated with gas and oil sales for boats, may be waterward of the ordinary high water
mark.
D. Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats - Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Moorage structures are prohibited.
2. Urban Mixed Use I:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 68 of 160
a. Private, shared, public and commercial moorage structures are permitted subject to
the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
b. Aircraft moorage is prohibited, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to
exceed 36 hours) in the event of severe weather conditions.
c. Moorage structures and facilities located may not be located waterward of public
parks, public beaches, or public facilities, nor may they be located so as to obstruct
waterward view from these public uses.
d. Permitted Accessory Uses:
i. Boat and motor sales
ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities
iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat
motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take
place within a building or be screened from public view.
iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks
v. Dry land boat storage; provided, however, that stacked storage shall not be
permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height in the Urban Mixed Use I
shoreline environment.
vi. Meeting and special event rooms.
vii. Gas and oil sales for boats, if;
A. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high
water mark; and
B. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills.
C. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more
than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of
the deck.
viii. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground.
Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine
55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and
hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of wastes and hazardous
substances which exceed these standards, shall be placed underground. No tank
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 69 of 160
of any kind intended for the permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances
shall be permitted.
3. Urban Mixed Use II
a. Private, shared, public and commercial moorage structures are permitted subject to
the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
b. Aircraft moorage, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to exceed 36
hours) in the event of severe weather conditions.
Moorage structures and facilities located may not be located waterward of public
parks, public beaches, or public facilities, nor may they be located so as to obstruct
waterward view from these public uses.
d. Permitted Accessory Uses:
i. Boat and motor sales
ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities
iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat
motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take
place within a building or be screened from public view.
iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks
v. Dry land boat storage; provided, however, that stacked storage shall not be
permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height in the Urban Mixed Use I
shoreline environment.
vi. Meeting and special event rooms.
vii. Gas and oil sales for boats, if;
A. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high
water mark; and
B. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills.
C. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more
than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of
the deck.
viii. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground.
Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 70 of 160
55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and
hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of wastes and hazardous
substances which exceed these standards, shall be placed underground. No tank
of any kind intended for permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances shall
be permitted.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Moorage structures are prohibited.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Moorage structures are prohibited.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Moorage structures are prohibited.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Moorage structures are prohibited.
8. Shoreline Residential III
a. Moorage structures and facilities may only be permitted and used accessory to
detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and
facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the
moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise
made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which
the moorage is accessory.
b. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with moorage structure.
c. Residential Moorage Structure Development Standards:
i. Height. The height of a residential dock or pier shall not exceed five feet above
the ordinary high water mark. The height of attendant pilings shall not exceed five
feet above the ordinary high water mark or that height necessary to provide for
temporary emergency protection of floating docks as determined in accord with
generally accepted engineering practices.
ii. Length. The length of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed the lesser of 35
feet or the average length of existing docks or piers within 300 feet of the subject
dock or pier.
iii. Width. The width of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed 25 percent of
the lot width when measured parallel to the shoreline. A joint use dock located at
the property line with another lot which shares the joint use dock may not exceed
25% the total of both lots.
iv. Setbacks. All residential docks or piers shall observe a minimum 10-foot side
yard setback from a property line or a storm drainage outfall. Joint use docks or
piers may be located on the side property line; provided, that the abutting
waterfront property owners shall file a joint use maintenance agreement with the
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 71 of 160
Snohomish County auditor in conjunction with, and as a condition of, the issuance
of a building permit. Joint use docks or piers shall observe all other regulations of
this subsection. If such joint maintenance agreement is terminated, the dock or
pier shall be brought into compliance with the bulk and set back provisions of this
Master Program.
v. Number. No lot shall have more than one dock or pier or portion thereof located
on the lot.
vi. Size. No residential dock or pier shall exceed 400 square feet.
vii. Floats. Offshore recreational floats are prohibited.
viii. Covered Buildings. No covered building shall be allowed on any residential dock
or pier.
9. Aquatic I
a. Private, shared, and public moorage structures are permitted subject to the policies
and regulations of this Master Program.
b. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on
the subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet for moorage structures, provided that
joint or shared moorage facilities may be located within the setback from the lot
with whom the facility is shared.
c. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property maybe within 100 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on
the subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet.
10. Aquatic II
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 72 of 160
a. Private, shared, public and commercial moorage structures are permitted subject to
the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
b. No moorage structure on private property maybe within 100 feet of a public park.
No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the
subject property.
d. The side property line setback is 10 feet.
11. Conservancy
a. Moorage structures and facilities may only be permitted and used accessory to
detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and
facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the
moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise
made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which
the moorage is accessory.
b. Moorage structures and facilities may not provide moorage for more than two boats;
provided, however, that waterfront lots are encourage to develop joint or shared
moorage facilities. If this occurs, the joint or shared moorage facility may contain up
to two moorages for each waterfront lot participating in the joint or shared moorage
facility.
c. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with moorage structure.
d. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on
the subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet.
e. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be with 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the
subject property.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 73 of 160
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet for moorage structures, provided that
joint or shared moorage facilities may be located within the setback from the lot
with whom the facility is shared.
12. Natural. Moorage structures are prohibited.
24.50.040 Landfill
A. Applicability.
Landfill is the creation of or addition to the surface of the land by the filling, placement
or depositing of sand, soil, or gravel, or other material on land covered by water, or in a
wetland, march, bog, swamp, or similar water detention area. Landfill is normally done
for and, in this Master Program, must be associated with a specific purpose or use such as
the development of a commercial site, construction of roadways or a jetty.
2. When backfill of bulkhead involves over one cubic yard per lineal foot, such bulkheads
shall be evaluated under both this section and ECDC 24.50.020, Shoreline stabilization.
B. Fill Policies
Landfill should only be permitted to the minimum extent necessary to accommodate an
approved shoreline use or development and with assurance of no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions and processes. Enhancement and voluntary restoration of landforms
and habitat are encouraged.
2. Allow landfills waterward of the ordinary high water mark, in those limited
circumstances where permitted, only when necessary to facilitate water -dependent uses
or ecological restoration projects that are consistent with this program and the City of
Edmonds Comprehensive Plans. Where feasible, public access to the shoreline and the
water should be incorporated into the design.
C. Landfill Regulations
1. Landfill water ward of the ordinary high water mark may be permitted as a conditional
use in limited instances for the following purposes only, with due consideration given to
specific site conditions, and only in conjunction with approved shoreline use and
development activities that are consistent with this program:
a. Water -dependent use permitted under this Master Program.
b. To create public use or public recreation areas.
c. Cleanup and disposal of contaminated sediments as part of an interagency
environmental clean-up plan.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 74 of 160
d. Disposal of dredged material considered suitable under, and conducted in accordance
with the dredged material management program of the Department of Natural
Resources.
Expansion or alteration of transportation facilities of statewide significance currently
located on the shoreline and then only upon a demonstration that alternatives to fill
are not feasible.
f. Mitigation action, environmental restoration, beach nourishment or enhancement
projects.
2. Landfills shall be permitted only where it is demonstrated that:
a. The project has been located, designed, and constructed in a manner that minimizes
impacts to ecological processes and functions and where impacts cannot be avoided,
mitigation is provided to achieve no net loss.
b. The fill will not result in erosion of the shoreline or undermine stability of
neighboring properties.
c. The fill is the minimum necessary to reasonably accomplish the purpose for the fill
under subsection C.1 of this section.
d. Where existing public access will be reduced, equivalent public access has been
provided on or off site as part of the project.
e. Fill material consists only of soil, sand, rock, or gravel. The fill material must not
contain organic or inorganic materials that would be detrimental to water quality or
existing habitats.
f. Placement of landfill will be timed so as to minimize damage to water quality and
aquatic life.
3. The applicant must stabilize exposed fill areas with vegetation.
4. Landfills, beach nourishment and excavation shall be designed to blend physically and
visually with existing topography whenever possible, so as not to interfere with long term
appropriate use including lawful access and enjoyment of scenery.
5. A temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan shall be provided for all proposed
landfill and excavation activities.
6. The fill shall be designed and supervised by a civil engineer or similarly qualified
professional. The professional shall certify that the fill meets the following requirements:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 75 of 160
a. The fill is designed and executed to minimize adverse impacts on neighboring
properties and the environment, and is fully integrated into an otherwise approved
facility.
b. The fill is designed and executed to provide permanent structural integrity for the fill
and surrounding areas.
D. Applications for landfill projects shall include the following information:
1. Proposed use of the landfill area.
2. Analysis of the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the fill material
demonstrating that the fill is of such quality that significant water quality, ecological
impacts, and public health problems would not occur from its placement.
3. Fill must meet all state standards. Assessment of water quality impacts shall be included
as an attachment.
4. Source of the landfill material.
5. Location of the landfill relating to natural or existing drainage patterns.
6. Location of the perimeter of the landfill relating to the ordinary high water mark and
critical areas. The applicant should consult with the Department of Ecology in
determining the location of the ordinary high water mark. For development proposals at
or water ward of the ordinary high water mark, an OHWM field determination by a
qualified professional shall be provided with the application. The field determination
shall be consistent with guidance development by the Department of Ecology and is
subject to verification by the city of Edmonds and the Department of Ecology.
7. Perimeter erosion control or stabilization means, and schedule for implementation.
8. Type of surfacing and run-off control and treatment devices.
E. Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Program.
2. Urban Mixed Use L• Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this
program.
3. Urban Mixed Use I1: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this
program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 76 of 160
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this
program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this
program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of
this program.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of
this program.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of
this program.
9. Aquatic I: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Program.
10. Aquatic II: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Program.
11. Conservancy: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Program.
12. Natural: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use when necessary to protect or
restore shoreline ecological functions subject to policies and regulations of this program.
24.50.050 Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs
A. Applicability:
A breakwater is a protective structure usually built offshore to protect harbor areas, moorage,
navigation or beaches from wave action. A jetty, groin or weir is a structure usually built
singly or in pairs perpendicular to the shore to prevent shoaling or accretion of sediment drift.
Projects the requiring fill must also meet the requirements of ECDC 24.50.040, Landfill.
B. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins, and Weirs Policies
1. Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs located waterward of the ordinary high watermark
shall be allowed only where necessary to support water -dependent uses, public access,
shoreline stabilization, or other specific public purpose.
2. Open pile or floating breakwater designs are preferred.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 77 of 160
3. Solid rock or fill -based weirs, groins and jetties should not be constructed unless it can be
demonstrated that they are part of a larger system that will reduce the need for overall
shoreline modification and that they are intended to prevent damage to existing
structures. They should not be proposed to protect new structures.
C. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins, and Weirs Regulations
1. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins and Weirs may be allowed provided that:
a. Jetties and breakwaters are permitted where they are an integral component of a
professionally designed harbor, marina, or port. Where permitted, floating portable
or submerged breakwater structures, or small discontinuous structures are preferred
where physical conditions make such alternatives with less impact feasible.
b. Groins are permitted as a component of a professionally designed community or
public beach management program that encompasses an entire drift sector or reach
for which alternatives are infeasible. Or where installed to protect or restore shoreline
ecological functions.
c. The breakwater is essential to the safe operation of a moorage facility.
d. The city determines that the location, size, design and accessory components of the
moorage facility to be protected by the breakwater provide a public benefit and are
within the public interest.
e. The breakwater, jetty, groin, or weir is designed to protect critical areas and where
impacts are unavoidable, mitigation will be provided to ensure no net loss of
ecological functions and processes.
2. Public Access:
a. Where appropriate projects shall be required to maintain, replace or enhance existing
public access opportunities by incorporating physical or visual access areas and/or
facilities into the design of the project.
b. Publicly financed or subsidized projects shall not restrict appropriate public access to
the shoreline and shall provide new public access except where such access is
determined to be infeasible because of incompatible uses, safety, security, or harm to
shoreline ecological functions.
3. All breakwaters, jetties, groins, or weirs must be designed and constructed under the
supervision of a civil engineer or similarly qualified professional. As part of the
application, the engineer or other professional designing the project must certify that:
a. The project is designed to meet the requirements of this Program and accomplish the
purpose of the project using the best available science.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 78 of 160
b. The project is designed to be the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposed
purpose.
c. The project is designed to have the minimum feasible adverse impacts upon the
environment, nearby waterfront properties, and navigation.
d. Any unavoidable impacts have been mitigated to ensure no net loss of ecological
functions and processes.
D. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins, and Weirs — Shoreline Area Regulations.
1. Urban Railroad: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
2. Urban Mixed Use I: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited.
8. Shoreline Residential III:
a. Bulkheads are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program.
b. Jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited.
9. Aquatic I: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs may be permitted as a conditional use
subject to the policies and regulations of this Program.
10. Aquatic II: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs may be permitted as a conditional use
subject to the policies and regulations of this Program.
11. Conservancy:
a. Breakwaters and jetties maybe permitted as a conditional use if accessory to a water -
dependent use and littoral sediment transport is not significantly disrupted.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 79 of 160
b. Groins may be permitted as a conditional use when necessary to protect or restore
shoreline ecological functions subject to policies and regulations of this program.
12. Natural: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs may be permitted as a conditional use
when necessary to protect or restore shoreline ecological functions subject to policies and
regulations of this program.
24.50.060 Dredging and dredge material disposal
A. Applicability.
Dredging is the removal or displacement of earth such as gravel, sand, mud, or silt from
lands covered by water. Lands covered by water include tidelands, marinas, and wetlands.
Dredging is normally done for, and in this Master Program must be associated with, a
specific purpose or use such as maintaining navigation channels, developing/expanding
marinas, constructing bridge footings, laying submarine cable and in some cases aquaculture
(See Aquaculture Section ECDC 24.60.010).
Dredging to restore preexisting contours within a designated and authorized navigation
channel, marina or basin is considered normal maintenance and is exempt from the
requirement for a substantial development permit. Dredging is only maintenance where there
is a designated and authorized facility such as a marina, federal navigation channel or berth
authorized by permit. If an operation expands an existing the channel or basin, a permit is
required even if the marina or similar project has been operation for years.
Dredge spoil is the material removed by dredging. Dredge spoil disposal is the depositing of
dredge materials on land or into water bodies for the purpose of either creating new or
additional lands or for disposing of the dredge material (See also, Landfill Section, ECDC
24.50.040).
B. Dredging and dredge material policies
1. Site and design new development to avoid or, if that is not possible, to minimize the need
for new and maintenance dredging.
2. Dredging waterward of the ordinary high water mark for the primary purpose of
obtaining fill material shall not be allowed, except when the material is necessary for the
restoration of ecological functions.
3. Dredging should be permitted for water -dependent uses of economic importance to the
region and/or essential public facilities only when necessary and when alternatives are
infeasible or less consistent with this Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 80 of 160
4. Plan and conduct dredge and dredge disposal operations in a manner that avoids or
minimizes interference with navigation and significant ecological impacts. Impacts
which cannot be avoided should be mitigated in a manner that assures no net loss of
shoreline ecological functions.
S. Minor dredging for fill materials as part of ecological restoration or enhancement, beach
nourishment, public access or public recreation should be permitted if consistent with this
Program.
C. Dredging and dredge material regulations
1. Dredging shall only be permitted for the following activities:
a. Development of approved wet moorages, harbors, ports and water -dependent
industries of economic importance to the region only when there are no feasible
alternatives.
b. Maintenance dredging for the purpose of restoring a lawfully established
development.
c. Establishing, expanding, relocating or reconfiguring navigation channels where
necessary to assure safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses.
Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins shall be
restricted to maintaining previously dredge and/or existing authorized location, depth,
and width.
d. To remove silt or sediment deposited because of severe and unusual erosion or
resulting from the existence of a bulkhead on nearby property.
e. To provide sufficient draft for boat moorage.
f. Restoration or enhancement of shoreline ecological functions and processes
benefiting water quality and/or fish and wildlife habitat.
g. Dredging waterward of the ordinary high water mark for the primary purpose of
obtaining fill material shall not be allowed, except when the material is necessary for
the restoration of ecological functions. When allowed, the site where the fill is to be
placed must be located waterward of the ordinary high water mark. The project must
be either associated with a MRCA or CERCLA habitat restoration project or, if
approved through a shoreline conditional use permit, any other significant habitat
enhancement project.
2. The existing physical alignment and ecological function and processes shall be
maintained, except to improve hydraulic function, water quality, fish or wildlife habitat,
or fish passage.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 81 of 160
3. New development shall be sited and designed avoid or, if that is not possible, to minimize
the need for new and/or maintenance dredging.
4. Dredge Spoils.
a. Dredge spoil disposal in open waters may be approved only in accordance with the
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) evaluation procedures for
managing in -water disposal of dredge material; when approved by applicable
agencies, which may include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to section
109Rivers and harbors ActO and Section 404 (Clean Water Act) permits, and
Washington State Department of fish and Wildlife hydraulic Project approval (HPA);
and when found to meet the following conditions.
i. Land disposal is infeasible, less consistent with this Program, or prohibited by
law.
ii. Nearshore disposal as part of a program to restore or enhance shoreline ecological
functions and processes is not feasible.
iii. Offshore habitat will be protected, restored, or enhanced.
iv. Adverse effects on water quality or biologic resources from contaminated
materials will be mitigated.
v. Shifting and dispersal of spoil will be minimal.
vi. Water quality will not be adversely affected.
b. Dredging spoils may be used as fill or landscape material for a development in the
shoreline areas that is otherwise approved by the city under this Program (ECDC
24.50.040).
The city may permit dredging spoils to be temporarily deposited in the shoreline area
for transfer and removal to an approved disposal site. The dredging spoils may not be
stored in the shoreline area longer than is reasonably necessary and must be stored in
a manner that will protect the environment and neighboring properties from
undesirable effect and adverse impacts.
d. Dredge spoil disposal is prohibited on marine shorelines between the line of extreme
low tide and the ordinary high water mark, and on Lake Ballinger shorelines or beds;
except that, dredge spoil may be used in approved projects for the restoration or
enhancement of shoreline ecological functions and processes, such as beach
nourishment.
e. The City may impose reasonable limitation on dredge disposal operating periods and
hours and may require provision for buffer strips at land disposal sites.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 82 of 160
5. Proposals for dredging and dredge spoil disposal, when permitted, shall:
a. Be kept to the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposed use.
b. Include all feasible mitigating measures to protect habitats and to minimize adverse
impacts such as turbidity, release of nutrients, heavy metals, sulfides, organic
materials, or toxic substances, depletion of oxygen, disruption of food chains, loss of
benthic productivity, and disturbance of fish runs and important localized biological
communities.
Be scheduled so as to not materially interfere with the migratory movements of
anadromous fish.
d. Utilize techniques that cause minimum dispersal and broadcast of bottom material.
e. Not interfere with geohydraulic processes.
f. Be found, through analysis by qualified professional, to be nonpolluting or shall have
no significant negative pollution impact.
g. Meet all requirements of applicable regulatory agencies.
h. Not result in erosion of the shoreline or undermine the stability of neighboring
properties.
D. Dredging and Dredge Material Application. Applications for shoreline dredging and dredge
spoil disposal shall provide, at a minimum, the following information:
1. A description of the purpose of the proposed dredging and an analysis of compliance with
the policies and regulations of this Program.
2. A detailed description of the existing physical character, shoreline geomorphology and
biological resources provided by the area proposed to be dredged, including:
a. A site plan map outlining the perimeter of the proposed dredge area. The map must
also include the existing bathymetry depths based on Mean Lower Low Water
(MLLW) and have data points at a minimum of 2-foot depth increments.
b. A habitat survey must be conducted and WDFW must be contacted to ensure the
survey is conducted according to the most recent WDFW eelgrass/macroalgae survey
guidelines.
Information on stability of bedlands adjacent to proposed dredging and spoils
disposal areas.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 83 of 160
3. A detailed description of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of the
dredge spoils to be removed, including:
a. Physical analysis of material to be dredged: material composition and amount, grain
size, organic materials present, source of material, etc.
b. Chemical analysis of material to be dredged: volatile solids, chemical oxygen demand
(COD), grease and oil content, mercury, lead and zinc content, etc.
c. Biological analysis of material to be dredged.
4. A description of the method of materials removal, including facilities for settlement and
movement.
a. Dredging procedure: length of time it will take to complete dredging, method of
dredging and amount of materials removed.
b. Frequency and quantity of project maintenance dredging.
5. Detailed plans for dredge spoil disposal, including specific land disposal sites and
relevant information on the disposal site, including but not limited to:
a. Spoils disposal area:
i. Physical characteristics including location, topography, existing drainage
patterns, surface and ground water;
ii. Size and capacity of disposal site;
iii. Means of transportation to the disposal site;
iv. Proposed dewatering and stabilization of spoils;
v. Methods of controlling erosion and sedimentation; and
vi. Future use of the site and conformance with land use policies and regulations.
b. Total initial spoils volume.
c. Plan for disposal of maintenance spoils.
6. Hydraulic modeling studies sufficient to identify existing geo-hydraulic patterns and
probable effects of dredging.
E. Dredging and dredge material disposal — Shoreline Area Regulations
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 84 of 160
1. Urban Railroad: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
2. Urban Mixed Use L• Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies
and regulations of this Program.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies
and regulations of this Program.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an
essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an
essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an
essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an
essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the
policies and regulations of this Program.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
9. Aquatic I: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and
regulations of this Program. Maintenance dredging pursuant to ECDC 24.50.060.C. Lb
and .c is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program without a
conditional use permit provided the original constructed bottom contours have been
established and documented in a prior shoreline permit authorization.
10. Aquatic II: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and
regulations of this Program. Maintenance dredging pursuant to ECDC 24.50.060.C. Lb
and .c is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program without a
conditional use permit provided the original constructed bottom contours have been
established and documented in a prior shoreline permit authorization.
11. Conservancy: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Program.
12. Natural: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an essential element
of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the policies and
regulations of this Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 85 of 160
24.50.070 Shoreline habitat and natural systems restoration and
enhancement projects
A. Applicability. Shoreline habitat and natural systems enhancement projects include those
activities proposed and conducted specifically for the purpose of establishing, restoring, or
enhancing habitat for priority species in shorelines.
B. Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Restoration and Enhancement Projects Policies
1. This program recognizes the importance of the restoration of shoreline ecological
functions and processes and encourages cooperative restoration efforts and programs
between local, state and federal agencies, tribes, non-profit organizations, and landowners
to address shorelines with impaired ecological functions and/or processes.
2. Restoration and enhancement actions should restore shoreline ecological functions and
processes as well as shoreline features and should be targeted towards meeting the needs
of sensitive and/or locally important plant, fish and wildlife species.
3. Priority should be given to restoration and enhancement actions that:
a. Create dynamic and sustainable ecosystems.
b. Improve water quality.
Restore native vegetation and natural hydrologic functions of degraded and former
wetlands.
d. Restore nearshore ecosystems processes, such as sediment transport and delivery and
tidal currents that create and sustain habitat.
e. Restore freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat and habitat -forming processes.
f. Mitigate erosive and associated impacts caused by stormwater runoff.
g. Protect and restore wildlife corridors.
h. Protect and restore native species of vegetation, fish, and wildlife.
C. Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Restoration and Enhancement Projects Regulations.
Restoration shall be carried out in accordance with the approved shoreline restoration plan
and in accordance with the policies and regulation of this Program.
D. Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Restoration and Enhancement Projects — Shoreline
Area Regulations
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 86 of 160
1. Urban Railroad: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of
this Program.
2. Urban Mixed Use I: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
9. Aquatic I: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this
Program.
10. Aquatic II: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this
Program.
11. Conservancy: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of
this Program.
12. Natural: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this
Program.
Part VI Specific Use Policies & Regulations
24.60.000 Applicability
Shoreline use and development shall be classified by the Administrator and regulated under one
or more of the following applicable sections of this Chapter. Unless otherwise stated, all use and
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 87 of 160
development shall also comply with all of the General Policy and Regulations in Part IV of this
Program and all of the Specific Modification Policies and Regulations in Part V of this Program.
24.60.010 Aquaculture
A. Applicability
Aquaculture is the farming or culture of food fish, shellfish, or other aquatic plants or animals
any may require development such as fish hatcheries, rearing pens and structures, and shellfish
rafts, as well as use of natural spawning and rearing areas. Aquaculture does not include the
harvest of free-swimming fish or the harvest of shellfish not artificially planted or maintained.
B. Aquaculture Policies
1. Aquaculture is a water -dependent use and, when consistent with control of pollution and
avoidance of adverse impacts to the environment and preservation of habitat for resident
native species, is a preferred use of the shoreline.
2. Potential locations for aquaculture activities are relatively restricted because of specific
requirements related to water quality, temperature, oxygen content, currents, adjacent
land use, wind protection, commercial navigation, and salinity. The technology
associated with some forms of aquaculture is still experimental and in formative states.
Therefore, some latitude should be given when implementing the regulations of this
section, provided that potential impacts on existing uses and shoreline ecological
functions and processes should be given due consideration.
3. Preference should be given to those forms of aquaculture that involve lesser
environmental and visual impacts and lesser impacts to native plant and animal species.
In general, projects that require no structures, submerged structures or intertidal
structures are preferred over those that involve substantial floating structures. Projects
the involve little or no substrate modification are preferred over those that involve
substantial modification. Projects that involve little or no supplemental food sources,
pesticides, herbicides or antibiotic application are preferred over those that involve such
practices.
4. Aquaculture activities should be designed, located and operated in a manner that supports
long term beneficial use of the shoreline and protects and maintains shoreline ecological
functions and processes.
5. Aquaculture should not be permitted where it would resulting a net loss of shoreline
ecological functions; adversely affect the quality or extent of habitat of native species
including eelgrass, kelp, and other macroalgae; adversely impact other habitat
conservation areas; or interfere with navigation or other water -dependent uses.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 88 of 160
6. Aquaculture facilities should be designed and located so as not to spread disease to native
aquatic life, establish new nonnative species which cause significant ecological impacts,
or significantly impact the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline.
7. The City should actively seek substantive comment on any shoreline permit application
for aquaculture form all appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies; affected tribes;
and the general public regarding potential adverse impacts. Comments of nearby
residents or property owners directly affected by a proposal should be considered and
evaluated, especially in regard to use compatibility and aesthetics.
C. Aquaculture Regulations
Aquaculture that involves little or no substrate modification shall be given preference
over those that involve substantial modification. The application/proponent shall
demonstrate that the degree of proposed substrate modification is the minimum necessary
for feasible aquaculture operations at the site.
2. The installation of submerged structures, intertidal structures, and floating structures shall
be allowed only when the applicant/proponent demonstrates that no alternative method of
operation is feasible.
3. Aquaculture proposals that involve substantial substrate modification or sedimentation
through dredging, trenching, digging, mechanical harvesting, or other similar
mechanisms, shall not be permitted in areas where the proposal would adversely impact
existing kelp beds or other macroalgae, eelgrass beds or habitat conservation areas.
4. Aquaculture activities, which would have a significant adverse impact on natural
dynamic shoreline processes or which would result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions, shall be prohibited.
5. Aquaculture practices shall be designed to minimize use of artificial substances and shall
use chemical compounds that are least persistent and have the least impact on plants and
animals.
6. If uncertainty exists regarding potential impacts of a proposed aquaculture activity, and
for all experimental aquaculture activities, baseline and periodic operational monitoring
by a City -approved consultant (unless otherwise provided for) may be required, at the
applicant's/proponent's expense, and shall continue until adequate information is
available to determine the success of the project and/or the magnitude of any probable
significant adverse environmental impacts. Permits for such activities shall include
specific performance measures and provisions for adjustment or termination of the
project at any time if monitoring indicates significant, adverse environmental impacts that
cannot be adequately mitigated.
7. New aquatic species that have not previously been cultivated in Washington State shall
not be introduced into City of Edmonds waters without prior written approval of the
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 89 of 160
Director of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Director of the
Washington Department of Health.
8. For aquaculture projects using over -water structures, storage of necessary tools and
apparatus waterward of the ordinary high water mark shall be limited to containers of not
more than 3 feet in height, as measured from the surface of the raft or dock.
9. No processing of any aquaculture product, except for the sorting or culling of the cultured
organism and the washing or removal of surface materials or organisms after harvest,
shall occur in or over the water unless specifically approved by permit. All other
processing and processing facilities shall be located on land and shall be subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
10. Aquaculture wastes shall be disposed of in a manner that will ensure strict compliance
with all applicable governmental waste disposal standards, including but not limited to
the Federal Clean Water Act, Section 401, and the Washington State Water Pollution
Control Act (RCW 90.480. No garbage, wastes or debris shall be allowed to accumulate
at the site of any aquaculture operation.
11. Predator control shall not involve the killing or harassment of birds or mammals.
Approved controls include, but are not limited to, double netting for seals, overhead
netting for birds, and 3-foot high fencing or netting for otters. The use of other non-
lethal, non -abusive predator control measures shall be contingent upon receipt of written
approval form the National Marine Fisheries Service and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, as required.
12. All floating and submerged aquaculture structures and facilities in navigable waters shall
be marked in accordance with U.S. Coast Guard requirements.
D. Aquaculture Application Requirements
1. Applications for aquaculture use or development shall include in their applications all
information necessary to conduct a thorough evaluation of the proposed aquaculture
activity, including but not limited to the following:
a. A site plan map including:
i. The perimeter of the proposed aquaculture operations area.
ii. Existing bathymetry depths based on Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW datum).
iii. Adjacent upland use, vegetation, presence of structures, docks, bulkheads and
other modifications. If there are shore stabilization structures, provide the beach
elevation at the toe of the structure and the top of the structure (MLLW datum).
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 90 of 160
iv. Areas where specific substrate modification will take place or structures will be
constructed or installed.
v. Access provisions for barges or track equipment.
vi. Location of storage or processing structures or facilities.
b. A baseline description of existing conditions, including best available information on;
i. Water quality.
ii. Tidal variations.
iii. Prevailing storm wind conditions.
iv. Current flows.
v. Flushing rates.
vi. Littoral drift.
vii. Areas of differing substrate composition.
viii. Areas of aquatic, intertidal, and upland vegetation complexes.
ix. Existing shoreline or water uses and structures.
x. Aquatic and benthic organisms.
xi. A vegetation habitat survey must be conducted. The WDFW must be contacted
prior to the survey to ensure it is conducted according to the most current WDFW
eelgrass/macroalgae survey guidelines.
xii. Further baseline studies including surveys and sampling may be required
depending upon the adequacy of available information, existing conditions, and
the nature of the proposal.
c. A detailed description of the project proposal including:
i. Species to be reared.
ii. Substrate modification or vegetation removal.
iii. Planting, harvest and processing location, method and timing, including work
proposal and construction techniques proposed, type of work, frequency, and
duration.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 91 of 160
d. Anticipated use of any feed, pesticides, herbicides, antibiotics, vaccines, growth
stimulants, antifouling agents, or other chemicals, and an assessment of predicted
impacts. No such materials shall be used until approval is obtained from all
appropriate State and Federal agencies, including but not limited to the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration, and the Washington State Departments of Ecology, Fish and
Wildlife, and Agriculture, as required, and proof thereof is submitted to the City.
Compounds with the least persistence shall be used.
Number of employees/workers necessary for the project, including average and peak
employment.
f. Methods of waste disposal and predator control.
g. Methods to address pollutant loading, including biological oxygen demand (BOD).
h. Assessment of potential impacts on shoreline ecological functions and processes
addressing the baseline conditions identified, including but not limited to indirect
cumulative effects.
i. For floating culture facilities or other structures, the City may require a visual impact
analysis. Depending on the size and complexity of the proposal, such analysis may
be prepared by the applicant/proponent, without professional assistance, provided that
it includes an adequate assessment of impacts.
Information demonstrating that the site has natural potential for the type(s) of
aquaculture proposed, due to necessary substrate or other conditions, as well as water
quality suitable for the type(s) of aquaculture proposed.
k. Information demonstrating that the proposed aquaculture activities will not result in a
net loss of shoreline ecological functions or processes or adversely affect habitat
conservation areas.
Information demonstrating that the proposed aquaculture activities will not
substantially and materially conflict with areas devoted to established uses of the
aquatic environment. Such uses include but are not limited to navigation, moorage,
sport or commercial fishing, log rafting, underwater utilities, and scientific research.
Existing public opportunities for gather wild stock aquatic resources on public lands
shall be address in any application for aquaculture on public tidelands or bedlands.
Compensation for loss of public access to public aquatic resources may be required.
2. Application for aquaculture activities must demonstrate that the proposed activity will be
compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 92 of 160
a. Aquaculture activates shall comply with all applicable noise, air, and water quality
standards. All projects shall be designed, operated and maintained to minimize odor
and noise.
b. Aquaculture activities shall be restricted to reasonable hours and/or days of operation
when necessary to minimize substantial, adverse impact from noise, light, and/or
glare on nearby residents, other sensitive uses or critical habitat.
c. Aquaculture facilities shall not introduce incompatible visual elements or
substantially degrade the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. Aquaculture structures
and equipment, except navigation aids, shall be designed, operated and maintained to
blend into their surroundings through the use of appropriate colors and materials.
E. Aquaculture — Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Aquaculture is prohibited.
2. Urban Mixed Use 1• Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Aquaculture is prohibited.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to
policies and regulations of this Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Aquaculture is prohibited.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Aquaculture is prohibited.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Aquaculture is prohibited.
9. Aquatic I: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
10. Aquatic Il• Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
11. Conservancy: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and
regulations of this Program.
12. Natural: Aquaculture activities that do not require structures, facilities, or mechanized
harvest practices, and that will not result in the alteration of natural systems or features
may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 93 of 160
24.60.020 Boating Facilities
A. Applicability
The section applies to facilities that provide launching, storage, supplies, moorage, and other
services for five or more pleasure and/or commercial watercraft. Commercial development,
not accessory to the operation of a marina, shall comply with ECDC 24.60.030, Commercial
Development. For the purposes of this section, boating facilities excludes docks serving four
or fewer single family residences which are subject to the policies and regulations of
ECDC 24.50.030, Piers, Docks and Floats.
B. Boating Facilities Policies
1. Boating facilities, including marinas and launch ramps, are water -dependent uses and
should be given priority for shoreline location. Boating facilities should contribute to
public access and enjoyment of waters of the state.
2. Boating facilities should provide physical and visual public shoreline access and provide
for multiple use, including water -related use, to the extent compatible with shoreline
ecological functions and processes and adjacent shoreline use.
3. Accessory uses to boating facilities should be limited to water -oriented uses, or uses that
provide physical or visual shoreline access for substantial number of the general public.
4. Boating facilities shall be located, designed, constructed and operated in a manner that
will minimize damage to shoreline processes and functions. When impacts cannot be
avoided, impacts must be mitigated to assure no net loss of ecological function necessary
to sustain shoreline resources.
5. Boating facilities should be located, designed and operated so that other appropriate
water -dependent uses are not adversely affected.
6. Location and design of boating facilities should not unduly obstruct navigable waters and
should avoid adverse effects to recreation opportunities such as fishing, pleasure boating,
commercial aquaculture, swimming, beach walking, picnicking and shoreline viewing.
7. Boating facilities should be located, designed, constructed and maintained to avoid
adverse proximity impacts such as noise, light and glare; aesthetic impacts to adjacent
land uses; impacts to public visual access to the shoreline.
C. Boating Facilities Regulations
1. The following moorage structures are prohibited in the shoreline jurisdiction:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 94 of 160
a. Aircraft moorage, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to exceed 36
hours) in the event of severe weather conditions.
b. Covered moorage.
2. Marinas or launch ramps shall not be permitted within the following marine shoreline
habitats because of their scarcity, biological productivity and sensitivity unless no
alternative location is feasible, the project would not result in a net loss of shoreline
ecological functions, and the proposal is otherwise consistent with this Program.
a. Marshes, estuaries and other wetlands;
b. Tidal pools and rock shores;
c. Kelp beds, eelgrass beds, spawning and holding areas for forage fish(such as herring,
surf smelt and sand lance);
d. Subsistence, commercial and recreational shellfish beds; and
e. Other critical saltwater habitats
3. Boating facilities and accessory uses shall be designed so that lawfully existing or
planned public shoreline access and/or navigation rights are not unnecessarily blocked,
obstructed or made dangerous.
4. The boating facility shall be designed to avoid the need for maintenance dredging.
5. Boat Storage:
a. Marinas shall provide dry upland boat storage with a launch mechanism to protect
shoreline ecological functions and processes, efficient use shoreline space and
minimize consumption of public water surface area unless:
i. No suitable upland locations exist for such facilities; or
ii. It can be demonstrated that wet moorage would result in fewer impacts to
ecological functions and processes; or
iii. It can be demonstrated that wet moorage would enhance public use of the
shoreline.
b. Dry moorage and other storage areas should be located away from the shoreline and
be landscaped with native vegetation to provide a visual and noise buffer for
adjoining uses.
6. Waste Disposal.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 95 of 160
a. Marinas shall provide pump out, holding, and/or treatment facilities for sewage
contained on boats or vessels.
b. Discharge of solid waste of sewage into a water body is prohibited. Marinas and boat
launch ramps shall provide adequate restroom and sewage disposal facilities in
compliance with applicable health regulations.
c. Garbage or litter receptacles shall be provided and maintained by the operator at
several locations convenient to users.
d. Marina operators shall post all BMP's pertaining to handling, disposal and reporting
of waste, sewage, fuel, oil or toxic materials where all users may easily read them.
7. Oil Product Handling, Spills, and Wastes. Fail safe facilities and procedures for
receiving, storing, dispensing, and disposing of oil or hazardous projects, as well as a
spill response plan for oil and other products, shall be required of new marinas and
expansion or substantial alteration of existing marinas. Compliance with Federal or State
law may fulfill this requirement. Handling of fuels, chemicals or other toxic materials
must be in compliance with all applicable Federal and State water quality laws as well as
health, safety and engineering requirements. Spill prevention and response, including
report requirements, follow applicable Federal and State requirements.
8. Public Access. Marinas and boat launches shall provide public access for as many water -
dependent recreational uses as possible, commensurate with the scale of the proposal.
Features for such access could include but are not limited to docks and piers, pedestrian
bridges to offshore structures, fishing platforms, artificial pocket beaches, and underwater
diving and viewing platforms.
9. Prohibited substances. No part of a boating facility that may come in contact with the
water may be treated with or consist of creosote, oil based paints, toxic chemicals, or
other substances that would be harmful to the aquatic environment, unless specifically
permitted and authorized by appropriate State and Federal regulatory agencies.
10. If the boating facility will extend waterward of the inner harbor line or extended mooring
on waters of the state is proposed, the applicant must obtain a lease from the Department
of Natural Resources prior to proposing this use.
11. No structure regulated under this section, other than moorage structures, boat gear storage
lockers, and sheds associated with gas and oil sales for boats, may be waterward of the
ordinary high water mark.
D. Boating Facilities — Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Boating facilities are prohibited.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 96 of 160
2. Urban Mixed Use I
a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master
Program.
b. Permitted Accessory Uses:
i. Boat and motor sales
ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities
iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat
motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take
place within a building or be screened from public view.
iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks
v. Dry land boat storage; provided, however, that stacked storage shall not be
permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height in the Urban Mixed Use I
shoreline environment.
vi. Meeting and special event rooms.
vii. Gas and oil sales for boats, if;
A. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high
water mark; and
B. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills.
C. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more
than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of
the deck.
viii. Boat launch ramps that meet the following requirements:
A. The ramp is paved with concrete.
B. There is sufficient room on the subject property for maneuvering and parking
so that traffic impact on the adjacent public right-of-way will not be
significant.
C. Access to the ramp is not directly from the adjacent public right-of-way.
D. The design of the site is specifically approved by the city.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 97 of 160
ix. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground.
Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine
55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and
hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of waste or hazardous
substances which exceed these standards must be place underground. No tank of
any kind intended for the permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances
shall be permitted
3. Urban Mixed Use II
a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master
Program.
b. Moorage structures and boating facilities may not be located waterward of public
parks, public beaches, or public facilities, nor may they be located so as to obstruct
waterward view from these public uses.
c. Permitted Accessory Uses:
i. Boat and motor sales
ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities
ill. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat
motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take
place within a building or be screened from public view.
iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks
v. Meeting and special event rooms.
vi. Gas and oil sales for boats, if;
1. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high
water mark; and
2. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills.
3. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more
than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of
the deck.
vii. Boat launch ramps that meet the following requirements:
1. The ramp is paved with concrete.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 98 of 160
2. There is sufficient room on the subject property for maneuvering and parking
so that traffic impact on the adjacent public right-of-way will not be
significant.
3. Access to the ramp is not directly from the adjacent public right-of-way.
4. The design of the site is specifically approved by the city.
viii. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground.
Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine
55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and
hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of waste or hazardous
substances which exceed these standards must be placed underground. No tank of
any kind intended for the permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances
shall be permitted.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Boating facilities are prohibited.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Boating facilities are prohibited.
6. Shoreline Residential I. Boating facilities are prohibited.
7. Shoreline Residential II. Boating facilities are prohibited.
8. Shoreline Residential III
a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master
Program.
b. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with moorage structure.
c. Moorage structures and boating facilities may only be developed and used accessory
to detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and
facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the
moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise
made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which
the moorage is accessory.
9. Aquatic I
a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master
Program.
b. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 99 of 160
i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on
the subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage
facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility.
c. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on
the subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage
facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility.
d. Boat gear storage lockers shall not exceed 18 square feet in area and three feet in
height as measured from the top of the deck. Only one storage locker is permitted per
boat slip.
10. Aquatic II
a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master
Program.
b. No moorage structure on private property maybe within 100 feet of a public park.
No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the
subject property.
d. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage
facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility.
e. Boat gear storage lockers shall not exceed 18 square feet in area and three feet in
height as measured from the top of the deck. Only one storage locker is permitted per
boat slip. This provision does not apply to under covered moorage structures.
11. Conservancy
a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master
Program.
b. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with boating facilities.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 100 of 160
Moorage structures and boating facilities may only be developed and used accessory
to detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and
facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the
moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise
made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which
the moorage is accessory.
d. Moorage structures and boating facilities may not provide moorage for more than two
boats; provided, however, that waterfront lots are encourage to develop joint or
shared moorage facilities. If this occurs, the joint or shared moorage facility may
contain up to two moorages for each waterfront lot participating in the joint or shared
moorage facility.
e. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on
the subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage
facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility.
f. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following
setbacks apply:
i. No moorage structure on private property maybe within 100 feet of a public park.
ii. No moorage structure may be with 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the
subject property.
iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage
facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility.
12. Natural. Boating facilities are prohibited.
24.60.030 Commercial Development and Light Industrial
A. Applicability
Commercial development means those uses and facilities that are involved in wholesale or
retail trade or business activities. Examples include but are not limited to restaurants, hotels,
shops, offices, and recreation facilities. Industry applies to those businesses or uses involved
in the production, processing, manufacturing, or fabrication of goods. Warehousing and
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 101 of 160
storage of materials or products is considered part of the industrial process. This is a broad
category that mostly applies to the downtown Commercial Waterfront (CW) where
development must also comply with ECDC 16.55. Uses and activities associate with
commercial development that are identified as separate use activities in this Master Program,
such as Boating Facilities, Piers and Docks, Utilities, etc. are subject to the regulations
established for those uses in addition to the standards for commercial development.
The design, layout and operation of certain commercial uses directly affects their
classification with regard to whether or not they qualify as water related or water enjoyment
uses.
B. Commercial Development and Light Industrial Policies
In securing shoreline locations for commercial and light industrial use, preference should
be given first to water -dependent commercial uses, then to water -related, water -
enjoyment commercial uses.
2. Restoration of impaired shoreline ecological functions and processes should be
encouraged as part of commercial and light industrial development.
3. Commercial and light industrial development should ensure visual compatibility with
adjacent noncommercial properties.
4. Commercial and light industrial uses located in the shoreline should provide public
access in accordance with constitutional or other legal limitations unless such
improvements are demonstrated to be infeasible or present hazards to life and property.
5. Commercial and light industrial development should be encouraged to locate where
environmental cleanup and restoration of the shoreline area can be incorporated.
C. Commercial Development and Light Industrial Regulations
1. Commercial and light industrial uses are allowed subject to the policies and regulations
of ECDC 24.40.020 and the specific criteria below:
a. Water -dependent commercial and light industrial uses shall be given preference over
water -related and water -enjoyment commercial uses. Prior to approval of water
dependent uses, the Administrator shall review a proposal for design, layout and
operation of the use and shall make specific findings that the use qualifies as a water -
dependent use.
b. Water -related commercial and light industrial uses may not be approved if the use
displaces existing water -dependent uses. Prior to approval of water -related
commercial uses, the Administrator shall review a proposal for design, layout and
operation of the use and shall make specific findings that the use qualifies as a water -
related use.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 102 of 160
Water -enjoyment commercial uses may not be approved if they displace existing
water -dependent or water -related uses. Prior to approval of water -enjoyment uses,
the Administrator shall review a proposal for design, layout and operation of the use
and shall make specific findings that the use qualifies as a water -enjoyment use.
d. Nonwater-oriented commercial and light industrial uses may be permitted where
located on a site physically separated from the shoreline by another property in
separate ownership or a public right-of-way such that access for water -oriented use is
precluded. All other nonwater-oriented uses are prohibited in the shoreline unless the
use provides significant public benefit with respect to the objectives of this Master
Program and the Shoreline Management Act and is:
i. Part of a mixed use project that includes a water -oriented use; or
ii. Proposed on a site where navigability is severely limited.
2. Over -water construction of commercial and light industrial uses is prohibited except as
follows:
a. Only those portions of water -dependent commercial and light industrial uses that
require over -water facilities shall be permitted to locate waterward of the ordinary
high-water mark.
b. Nonwater-dependent commercial and light industrial uses shall not be allowed over
water except in limited instances where they are appurtenant to and necessary in
support of water -dependent uses.
D. Commercial Development and Light Industrial— Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited.
2. Urban Mixed Use I:
a. Water -oriented commercial and light industrial use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater-oriented
commercial use and development may be permitted subject to the criteria for such
uses in ECDC 24.60.030.C.1.d.
b. A minimum of 15-foot setback is required from lot lines adjacent to shoreline
residential environments. This area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum
six-foot high fence or hedge.
3. Urban Mixed Use II:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 103 of 160
a. Water -oriented commercial and light industrial use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater-oriented
commercial use and development may be permitted subject to the criteria for such
uses in ECDC 24.60.030.C.1.d.
b. A minimum of 15-foot setback is required from lot lines adjacent to shoreline
residential environments. This area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum
six-foot high fence or hedge.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Commercial use is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater-oriented commercial use and development
shall be permitted.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Commercial and light industrial use is permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater-oriented commercial use and
development shall be permitted.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Commercial and light industrial use and development is
prohibited.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Commercial and light industrial use and development is
prohibited.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Commercial and light industrial use and development is
prohibited.
9. Aquatic I: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited, except
that water -dependent uses and appurtenant structures may be permitted subject to the use
and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation.
10. Aquatic II: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited, except
that water -dependent uses and appurtenant structures may be permitted subject to the use
and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation.
11. Conservancy: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited.
12. Natural: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited.
24.60.040 Forest Practices
A. For the purposes of this Master Program, preparatory work associated with the conversion of
land to non -forestry uses and/or developments shall not be considered forest practices and
shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions for the proposed non -forestry use, the
general provisions of this Master Program, including vegetation conservation, and shall be
limited to the minimum necessary.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 104 of 160
B. All forest practices undertaken on shorelines shall comply with the applicable policies and
provisions of the Forest Practices Act, Chapter 76.09 RCW as amended, and any regulations
adopted pursuant thereto (WAC 222), as administered by the Department of Natural
Resources and local provisions contained in Title 20 ECDC.
24.60.050 In -stream Structures
A. Applicability.
"In -Stream structure" means a structure place by humans within a stream or river waterward
of the ordinary high water mark that either causes or has the potential to cause water
impoundment or the diversion, obstruction, or modification of water flow.
B. In -stream Structure Policies
In -stream structures should provide for the protection and preservation of ecosystem -
wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural resources, including, but not limited to,
fish and fish passage, wildlife and water resources, shoreline critical areas,
hydrogeological processes, and natural scenic vistas.
C. In -stream Structure Regulations.
1. The location and planning of in -stream structures shall give due consideration to the full
range of public interests, watershed functions and processes, and environmental concerns.
2. In -stream structures shall be constructed and maintained in a manner that does not
degrade the quality of affected waters.
3. In -stream structures shall allow for normal ground water movement and surface runoff.
4. In -stream structures shall preserve valuable recreation resources and aesthetics values.
24.60.060 Recreational Development
A. Applicability
Recreational development provides opportunities for play, sports, relaxation, amusement, or
contemplation. It includes facilities for passive recreational activities, such as hiking,
photography, viewing, and fishing. It also includes facilities for active or more intensive
uses such as parks, campgrounds, and golf courses. This section applies to both publicly and
privately owned shoreline facilities intended for use by the public or a private club, group,
association, or individual. Commercial recreational development must be consistent with he
provisions of this section and the provisions of ECDC 24.60.030 for commercial uses.
This Master Program gives priority to recreational development that is primarily related to
access to, enjoyment and use of the water and shorelines of the state.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 105 of 160
B. Recreational Development Policies
1. Encourage the coordination of local, state, and federal recreation planning so as to
mutually address recreational needs. Shoreline recreational development should be
consistent with all adopted park, recreation, and open space plans.
2. Encourage the linkage of shoreline parks, recreation areas, and public access points in a
linear system, such as hiking paths, bicycle paths, and scenic drives.
3. Locate and design recreational developments in a manner that preserves, enhances, or
creates scenic views and vistas.
4. Locate and design recreational facilities to minimize adverse impacts including those
related to stormwater runoff, water quality, visual qualities, public access, and vegetation
and habitat maintenance.
5. Encourage physical and visual access to shorelines and surface waters.
6. Locate golf courses outside of the shoreline area.
7. Prohibit use of recreational off -road vehicles within the shoreline area, except by public
agencies for maintenance operations and emergency services.
C. Recreational Development Regulations
Where significant adverse impacts are adequately mitigated resulting in no net loss of
ecological processes or functions, recreational development is a priority use for shoreline
location, subject to the following:
1. The following recreational uses and developments are prohibited:
a. Golf courses;
b. Use of recreational off -road vehicles is prohibited within the shoreline, except by
public agencies for maintenance operations and emergency services;
c. Campgrounds; and
d. Overnight recreational spaces or sites located within the shoreline.
2. Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions for:
a. Vehicular and pedestrian access, both on -site and off -site;
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 106 of 160
b. Vehicular traffic, both inside and outside the facility;
c. Vehicular parking;
d. Water supply, sewage disposal, and garbage collection;
e. The prevention of overflows and trespasses onto adjacent properties;
f. Screening, buffer strips, fences, and signs to prevent park overflow and to protect the
value and enjoyment of adjacent or nearby private or public properties;
g. Security; and
h. Maintenance.
3. Valuable shoreline resources and fragile or unique areas, such as wetlands and accretion
shore forms, shall be used only for non -intensive recreation activities.
4. Encourage recreational facilities to provide signage and enforce regulations that prohibit
tree cutting and limit the taking of marine life, driftwood, and the like.
5. Signs associated with recreational facilities shall be kept to a minimum in number and
size and shall be erected as informational or directional aids only.
6. Stairways and landings shall be located upland of existing bulkheads, banks, and the
ordinary high water mark unless integral to a water -dependent use or Overwater structure
permitted by this Master Program.
D. Recreational Development — Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Recreational development prohibited.
2. Urban Mixed Use I: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 107 of 160
7. Shoreline Residential IL• Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
9. Aquatic I: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted, subject to the
use and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation;
provided that, underwater parks may be permitted as a conditional use.
10. Aquatic II: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted, subject to the
use and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation;
provided that, underwater parks may be permitted as a conditional use.
11. Conservancy: Low intensity water -oriented recreational use and development is
permitted subject to the policies and regulations of the Master Program and the following
criteria:
a. Structures will not result in more than ten percent (10%) building coverage or 4,000
square feet, whichever is greater and total impervious surface will not exceed twenty
percent (20%), or 10,000 square feet, whichever is greater.
b. Alteration of topography shall be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate
allowed development.
c. Use of areas or facilities will not result in use patterns that lead to degradation of
shoreline ecological functions and processes.
12. Natural: Low intensity water -oriented recreational use and development consisting of
primitive trails may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program and the following criteria:
a. Essential minor structures such as trails, boardwalks, piers, stairs, small picnic areas,
viewpoints, restrooms, interpretive facilities, or development that will not result in a
net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes are permitted, subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
b. Any necessary landscaping shall use native or similar self -maintaining vegetation.
Recreational development requiring extensive structures or substantial alterations to
topography or native vegetation is prohibited.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 108 of 160
24.60.070 Residential Development
A. Applicability
Residential development refers to one of more buildings, structures, lots, parcels, or portions
of parcels that are used or intended to be used to provide a dwelling for human beings.
Residential development includes single-family residences, duplexes, other detached
dwellings, multifamily residences, apartments, townhouses, mobile home parks, group
housing, condominiums, subdivisions, planned unit developments, and short subdivisions.
Residential development also includes accessory uses and structures such as garages, sheds,
tennis courts, swimming pools, driveways, parking areas, fences, cabanas, saunas, and guest
cottages, when allowed by the underlying zoning. Single-family residential development is
identified as a priority use the shoreline area when developed in a manner consistent with
control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment.
A Substantial Development Permit is not required for construction of a single-family
residence by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser for his own use of the use of his family.
However, such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to
this Master Program. In addition, when applicable, all residential development is subject to
the variance and conditional use requirements of this Master Program.
Uses and facilities associate with residential development, which are identified as separate
use activities or modifications in this Master Program, such as clearing, grading and landfill
are subject to the regulations established for those uses in this Master Program.
B. Residential Development Policies
1. Discourage residential structures or accessory structures in areas waterward of the
ordinary high water mark, within nearshore management areas, or within wetlands,
habitat conservation areas, flood hazard areas or their respective buffers.
2. Allowable density of new residential development should comply with applicable
comprehensive plan goals and policies, zoning restrictions, and shoreline area designation
standards. The density of development should be appropriate to the local natural and
cultural features.
3. Structures or development for uses accessory to residential use should preserve shoreline
open space, be visually and physically compatible with adjacent shoreline features, be
reasonable in size and purpose, and result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions
and processes.
4. New residential development should be planned and built in accordance with the policies
and regulations in ECDC 24.50.020 and to minimize the need for shoreline stabilization
and flood hazard reduction measures.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 109 of 160
5. Measures to conserve native vegetation along shorelines should be required for all
residential development. Vegetation conservation may include avoidance or
minimization of clearing or grading, restoration of areas of native vegetation, and/or
control of invasive species.
6. Consider additional design features for new Planned Residential Developments,
subdivisions and short subdivisions that:
a. Cluster dwelling units in order to preserve natural features, minimize physical
impacts, and provide for public access to the shoreline.
b. Maintain usable waterfront areas for the common use of all property owners with the
development.
7. Encourage joint use of shoreline facilities, including access stairs.
C. Residential Development Regulations
Clearing and grading associated with a single-family residence may be exempted from
the shoreline substantial development permit requirement, provided the following
conditions are met:
a. The clearing and grading activity is confined to the construction site; and
b. Grading does not exceed 250 cubic yards.
2. New over -water residences, including floating homes, are prohibited.
3. Residential development shall be:
a. Located and designed to avoid the need for structural shore defense and flood
protection works in the foreseeable future.
b. Designed to minimize potential conflicts with the use of adjacent public lands and
areas of public access. This may include providing a physical separation to reinforce
the distinction between public and private space, achieved by providing adequate
space, through screening with landscape planting or fences, or other means.
4. Subdivisions:
a. Shall comply with local plans, codes, and ordinances.
b. Shall be designed to exemplify the definition and policy of the applicable shoreline
designation as well as the environmental and physical capabilities of the subject site.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 110 of 160
c. Shall be designed, configured and developed in a manner that assures no net loss of
ecological functions results from the plat or subdivision at full build -out of all lots.
d. Shall be prohibited if flood control or shoreline protection measures are necessary to
create a residential lot or site area.
Shall provide a community recreation and/or open space area for the benefit of all
residents or property owners in the development; provided that such provisions shall
not apply to lot line adjustments or lot consolidation.
f. Public access for the subdivision of a property into 4 or more lots shall be considered
in accordance with ECDC 24.40.040 Public Access and Views.
g. May be required to cluster residential units and structures to avoid wetlands, habitat
conservation areas or landslide hazards that are located on the development site.
h. Shall be designed to minimize potential conflicts with the use of adjacent public lands
and areas of public access. This may include providing a physical separation to
reinforce the distinction between public and private space, achieved by providing
adequate space, through screening with landscape planting or fences, or other means.
Shall comply with the applicable policies and performance standards of this Master
Program, with regard to roads, utilities, and other improvements.
5. New multifamily residential development should provide community and/or public
access in accordance with ECDC 24.40.040 Public Access and Views.
D. Residential Development — Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad: Residential development is prohibited.
2. Urban Mixed Use I: Residential development is prohibited.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Residential development is prohibited.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Single family and multifamily residential development is permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Residential development is prohibited.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Single family residential development is permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Single family residential development is permitted subject to
the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page I I I of 160
8. Shoreline Residential III: Single family residential development is permitted subject to
the policies and regulations of this Master Program.
9. Aquatic I: Residential development is prohibited.
10. Aquatic II: Residential development is prohibited.
11. Conservancy: Residential development is prohibited.
12. Natural: Residential development is prohibited.
24.60.080 Transportation and Parking
A. Applicability
Transportation facilities are those structures and developments that aid in land and water
surface movement of people, goods, and services. They include roads and highways, bridges
and causeways, bikeways, trails, railroad facilities, ferry terminals, float plane terminals,
airports, heliports, and other related facilities.
B. Transportation and Parking Policies
1. New or expanded public transportation facility route selection and development should
be coordinated with related local and state government land use and circulation planning.
2. Transportation system plans and transportation projects within shorelines should provide
safe travel ways for non -motorized traffic such as pedestrians and bicyclists. Space for
such uses should be required along roads on shorelines, where appropriate, and should be
considered when rights -of -way are being vacated.
3. Transportation system route planning, acquisition, and design within the shoreline should
provide, where possible, for compatible uses such as utility lines, pedestrian shore access
or view points, or recreational trails.
4. Avoid unnecessary duplication or roads by making use of existing roads where
practicable.
5. Public transportation routes, particularly arterial highways and railways, should be
located, designed, and maintained to permit safe enjoyment of adjacent shore areas and
properties by other appropriate uses such as recreation or residences. Vegetative
screening or other buffering should be considered.
6. Parking is not a preferred use in shorelines and should only be allowed to support
authorized uses where no feasible alternatives exist.
C. Transportation and Parking Regulations
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 112 of 160
Transportation and parking facilities shall be planned, located, and designed so that
routes will have the least possible adverse effect on unique or fragile shoreline features,
will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adversely impact existing
or planned water -dependent uses.
2. Roads shall be located to avoid critical areas. Landfills for transportation facility
development are prohibited in water bodies, wetlands, and on accretion beaches, except
when all structural and upland alternatives have been proven infeasible and the
transportation facilities are necessary to support uses consistent with this program. Such
landfill may be permit as a Conditional Use Permit and must comply with the provisions
of ECDC 24.50.040. Where impacts cannot be avoided, impacts must be mitigated to
assure no net loss of ecological function necessary to sustain shoreline resources.
3. Culverts, bridges and similar devices shall be designed to pass water, sediment, and
debris loads anticipated under appropriate hydraulic analysis.
4. All roads and drainage systems shall be maintained to prevent erosion and/or water
quality degradation.
5. Road routes shall make provisions for pedestrian, bicycle, and other non -motorized
modes of travel whenever feasible.
6. Parking facilities are not a water -dependent use and shall only be permitted within the
shoreline to support an authorized use where it can be demonstrated that there are no
feasible alternative locations away from the shoreline.
7. All uses must provide sufficient off-street parking spaces in order to accommodate the
reasonably anticipated number of vehicles that will be coming to the subject property.
Specific parking standards for uses are identified in the ECDC 17.50, as now or hereafter
mended.
8. Parking layouts must be designed efficiently to use the minimum amount of space
necessary to provide the required parking and safe and reasonable access. Parking should
not be located between the building(s) on the subject property and the shoreline. Exterior
parking areas, other than for detached dwelling units, must be attractively landscaped
with vegetation that will not obstruct view of the shoreline from adjacent public areas or
adjacent public rights -of -way.
9. Transportation facilities shall be constructed of materials that will preclude or minimize
adverse affects on water quality or aquatic plants and animals over the long term.
Elements within or over water shall be constructed of materials approved by applicable
state agencies for use in water for both submerged portions and other components to
avoid discharge of pollutants from splash, rain or runoff. No part of a transportation
facility that may come in contact with the water may be treated with or consist, in whole
or in part, of creosote, oil based paints, toxic chemicals or other substances that would be
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 113 of 160
harmful to the aquatic environment, unless specifically permitted and authorized by
appropriate state and federal regulatory agencies.
10. Maintenance activity including vegetation control and erosion control shall be carried out
consistent with this Master Program. Necessary minor resurfacing of existing roadways
and replacement of culverts that improve shoreline ecological functions may be exempt
from substantial development permit requirements as provided by ECDC 24.80.010.
11. Ferry Terminals:
a. The maximum permitted height of structures waterward of the ordinary high water
mark shall not exceed 35 above the OHWM, except as provided below:
i. Structures related to the loading of pedestrian passengers shall be permitted to
exceed the maximum permitted height limit when necessary to perform the
intended function.
ii. Buildings and structures which house pedestrian passengers, employees and
equipment storage shall be permitted to be 20 feet above the height of the ferry
loading dock.
iii. View analysis shall be conducted for ferry structures exceeding 35 feet above the
OHWM and structures designed to minimize impacts on view corridors.
b. The maximum permitted height of structures landward of the ordinary high water
mark shall not exceed 30 feet above the average grade level except that bridge and
overpasses may exceed the maximum height limit when necessary to perform their
intended function.
12. Railroads:
a. Overwater Structures are prohibited.
b. Accessory buildings shall be located on the landward side of the railroad tracks and a
minimum of five feet from the property line.
c. The size and configuration of structures shall conform to this program unless federal
safety standards require a different size or configuration.
D. Transportation and Parking — Shoreline Area Regulations
1. Urban Railroad
a. The principal use permitted in this shoreline area is the use of the subject property by
the railroad for its tracks (i.e., single main track, double main tracks and team tracks),
yards and buildings.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 114 of 160
b. The following accessory uses structures and facilities are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program:
i. Subgrade and road bed;
ii. Railroad track/road crossing signals;
iii. Slide fences;
iv. Railroad signals;
v. Bridges (i.e. pedestrian overpass bridges, vehicular overpass bridges and pipeline
overpass bridges);
vi. Railroad signage (i.e., speed, track, whistle, etc.);
vii. Drainage facilities, including culverts;
viii. Railroad crossings;
ix. Buildings for housing of maintenance people not to exceed 600 square feet in
area;
x. Storage of items for maintaining the area;
xi. Railway loading platforms;
xii. Underpasses; and
xiii. Pedestrian safety fencing provided it does not exceed six feet in height above
grade and is not constructed of solid sight -obscuring material. If the proposed
fence is to exceed either six feet in height, or is constructed of solid sight
obscuring material, then a shoreline conditional use permit is required.
xiv. The Maximum permitted height of structures is 25 feet above grade level, except
as specified below:
1. Accessory buildings shall not exceed 15 feet in height above average grade
level.
2. Bridges and overpasses may exceed the maximum height limit when
necessary to perform their intended function.
3. Slide fences shall not exceed fix feet in height.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 115 of 160
4. Signal devices and signage shall be determined on a case -by -case basis
according to the goals and policies of this Shoreline Master Program and the
Shoreline Management Act and when required by federal law or regulation.
c. Ferry terminals may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
2. Urban Mixed Use I:
a. Railroads are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program
consistent with ECDC 24.60.070.D.1, except that the maximum permitted height of
structures is 30 feet, subjects to the same exception listed in ECDC
24.60.070.D.l.b.xiii.I through ECDC 24.60.070.D.I.b.xiii.4.
b. Transportation facilities (including ferry terminals and railroads) are permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Parking areas not
serving a specific approved water dependent use may be permitted as a conditional
use, provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline.
Parking facilities. In the Urban Mixed Use I environment, the 60-foot setback for
parking established in ECDC 24.40.090 may be reduced by a maximum of 20 feet if a
public walkway or publicly accessible open space is provided waterward of the
bulkhead. The parking setback may be reduced by one foot for every one foot of
public walkway or publicly accessible open space that is provided waterward of the
OHWM, to a maximum of 20 feet. The minimum setback for parking facilities shall
be no less than 40 feet from the bulkhead.
3. Urban Mixed Use II:
a. Railroads are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program
consistent with ECDC 24.60.070.D.1, except that the maximum permitted height of
structures is 30 feet, subjects to the same exception listed in ECDC
24.60.070.D.l.b.xiii.I through ECDC 24.60.070.D.l.b.xiii.4.
b. Transportation facilities (including ferry terminals and railroads) are permitted
subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Parking areas not
serving specific approved water dependent uses may be permitted as a conditional
use, provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline.
c. Parking facilities. In the Urban Mixed Use II environment, the 60-foot setback for
parking established in ECDC 24.40.090 may be reduced by a maximum of 20 feet if a
public walkway or publicly accessible open space is provided waterward of the
bulkhead. The parking setback may be reduced by one foot for every one foot of
public walkway or publicly accessible open space that is provided waterward of the
OHWM, to a maximum of 20 feet. The minimum setback for parking facilities shall
be no less than 40 feet from the bulkhead.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 116 of 160
4. Urban Mixed Use III:
a. Unless permitted as an essential public facility, the following transportation facilities
are prohibited in this shoreline area designation:
i. Railroads.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV:
a. Unless permitted as an essential public facility, the following transportation facilities
are prohibited in this shoreline area designation:
i. Railroads.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I
a. Unless permitted as an essential public facility, the following transportation facilities
are prohibited in this shoreline area designation:
i. Railroads;
ii. Ferry Terminals; and
iii. Parking.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
7. Shoreline Residential II
a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area
designation:
i. Railroads;
ii. Ferry Terminals; and
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 117 of 160
iii. Parking.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
8. Shoreline Residential III
a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area
designation:
i. Railroads;
ii. Ferry Terminals; and
iii. Parking.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
9. Aquatic I
a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area
designation:
i. Parking.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
c. Ferry terminals may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
d. Transportation facilities of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline
may be expanded or altered as a conditional use upon demonstration that alternatives
to expanding in or alteration of the Aquatic I environment are not feasible.
10. Aquatic II
a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area
designation:
i. Parking.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 118 of 160
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the
policies and regulations of this Master Program.
c. Ferry terminals may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
d. Transportation facilities of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline
may be expanded or altered as a conditional use upon demonstration that alternatives
to expanding in or alteration of the Aquatic II environment are not feasible.
11. Conservancy
a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area
designation:
i. Railroads; and
ii. Ferry terminals.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above may be permitted as a
conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program,
provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline.
c. Parking facilities may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
12. Natural
a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area
designation:
i. Railroads;
ii. Ferry terminals; and
iii. Parking.
b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are may be permitted as a
conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program,
provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline.
24.60.090 Utilities
A. Applicability
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 119 of 160
Utilities are services and facilities that produce, convey, store, or process power, gas, sewage,
communications, oil, waste, and the like. On -site utility features serving a primary use, such
as a water, sewer or gas line to a residence, are "accessory utilities" and shall be considered a
part of the primary use.
B. Utilities Policies
1. Solid waste disposal activities and facilities are prohibited in shoreline areas.
2. New public or private utilities should be located inland from the land/water interface,
preferably out of the shoreline jurisdiction, unless this location is reasonably necessary
for the efficient operation of the utility facility or service.
3. Utilities should be located and designed to avoid negative impacts to public recreation
and public access areas and significant natural, historic, archaeological or cultural
resources.
4. Utilities should be located such that shoreline defense works will not be required for the
life of the project.
5. All utility development should be consistent with and coordinated with all local
government and state planning, including comprehensive plans and single purpose plans
to meet the needs of future populations in areas planned to accommodate growth. Site
planning and rights -of -way for utility development should provide for compatible
multiple uses such as shore access, trails, and recreation or other appropriate use
whenever possible; utility right-of-way acquisition should also be coordinated with
transportation and recreation planning.
6. Utilities should be located in existing rights -of -way and corridors whenever feasible.
7. Utilities serving new development should be located underground, wherever feasible.
8. Development of pipelines and cables on aquatic lands and tidelands, particularly those
running roughly parallel to the shoreline and development of facilities that may require
periodic maintenance which would disrupt shoreline ecological functions should be
discourage except where no other feasible alternative exists. When permitted, provisions
shall assure that the facilities do not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions
or significant impacts to other shoreline resources and values.
9. Utilities should be designed and development to preserve scenic views and aesthetic
qualities of the shoreline area.
C. Utilities Regulations
Prohibited Pipelines. Except for gas or oil pipelines, city -approved sanitary sewer,
stormwater outfall lines, or other conveyance systems for on -site drainage collection
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 120 of 160
systems for approved boat wash -down to special on -site treatment facilities otherwise
permitted in this section, no pipeline for the transmission of any substance that would be
hazardous to the aquatic environment may be constructed within the shoreline area.
2. Except where infeasible, all utility lines, pipes, conduits, meters, vaults and similar
infrastructures and appurtenances must be placed underground consistent with the
standards of the serving utility.
3. Utilities may not be located waterward of the ordinary high water mark unless no
practicable alternative exists and this location is essential to the operation of the utility.
4. Utilities shall be located adjacent to or within existing utility or circulation easements or
rights -of -way whenever feasible. Joint use of rights -of -way and corridors is encouraged.
5. Utility production and processing facilities, such as power plants and sewage treatment
plants, or parts of those facilities, that are not water -dependent shall be located outside of
shoreline jurisdiction unless alternative locations are demonstrated to be infeasible and it
is demonstrated that the facilities do not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions and processes or significant adverse impact to other shoreline resources and
values such as parks and recreation facilities, public access and aesthetic resources.
6. Outfall pipelines and diffusers are water -dependent, but should be located only where
there will be no net loss in shoreline ecological functions and processes or adverse
impacts upon shoreline resources and values.
7. Facilities for processing, storage and disposal of solid waste are not normally water -
dependent. Components that are not water -dependent shall not be permitted in shoreline
jurisdiction.
8. Temporary storage of solid waste in suitable receptacles is permitted as an accessory use
to a primary permitted use, or for litter control.
9. When feasible, utility development shall include public access to the shoreline, trail
systems, and other forms of recreation, providing such uses will not unduly interfere with
utility operations, endanger the public health, safety, and welfare, or create a significant
and disproportionate liability for the owner.
10. Utility developments shall be located and designed so as to avoid, to the extent
practicable, the need for any structural or artificial shoreline modification works for the
life of the project.
D. Utilities Application Requirements
Applications for new or expanded shall be accompanied by adequate documentation that the
proposal meets the policies and regulations of this Master Program, including but not limited
to:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 121 of 160
1. Description of the proposed facilities;
2. Reasons why the utility facility requires a shoreline location;
3. Alternative locations considered and reasons for their elimination;
4. Location of other utility facilities in the vicinity of the proposed project and any plans to
include the other types of utilities in the project;
5. Plans for reclamation of areas disturbed both during construction and following
decommissioning and/or completion of the useful life of the utility;
6. Plans for control or erosion and turbidity during construction and operation; and
7. Identification of any possibility for locating the proposed facility at another existing
utility facility sire or within an existing utility right-of-way.
E. Utilities — Shoreline Area Regulations
Urban Railroad: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations
of this Master Program.
2. Urban Mixed Use I: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
3. Urban Mixed Use II: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
4. Urban Mixed Use III: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
5. Urban Mixed Use IV: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
6. Shoreline Residential I: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
7. Shoreline Residential II: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
8. Shoreline Residential III: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and
regulations of this Master Program.
9. Aquatic I: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this
Master Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 122 of 160
10. Aquatic II: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this
Master Program.
11. Conservancy: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of
this Master Program.
12. Natural: Utility development may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies
and regulations of this Master Program.
Part VII Nonconforming Development
24.70.000 Purpose
The purpose of this section is to allow certain nonconforming uses, buildings, signs and lots
within shoreline jurisdiction to continue while limiting the continuation of certain aspects of
nonconformity. Other nonconforming uses, buildings, signs and lots, which are declared to be
nuisances, are required to be eliminated.
24.70.010 Nonconforming Uses
A. Nonconforming uses are shoreline uses which were lawfully established prior to the effective
date of the Shoreline Management Act or this Master Program, or amendments thereto, but
which do not conform to present regulations or standards of this Master Program or policies
of the act.
B. A use which is listed as a conditional use but which existed prior to adoption of this Master
Program or any relevant amendment and for which a conditional use permit has not been
obtained shall be considered a nonconforming use. A use which is listed as a conditional use
but which existed prior to the applicability of this Master Program to the site and for which a
conditional use permit has not been obtained shall be considered a nonconforming use.
C. A nonconforming use may continue, unless required to be abated by subsection (D) of this
section, but it may not be expanded in any way, including additional lot areas, floor area,
height, number of employees, equipment, or hours of operation, except as otherwise provided
in ECDC 24.70.050.
D. Lapse of Time.
1. If a nonconforming use is discontinued for 6 consecutive months or for 12 months during
any two-year period, any subsequent use shall be conforming. It shall not be necessary to
show that the owner of the property intends to abandon such nonconforming use in order
for the nonconforming rights to expire. Uses such as agricultural or aquiculture, which
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 123 of 160
vary seasonally, shall be deemed abandoned if the seasonal use is not utilized during one
full season consistent with the traditional use.
2. If a nonconforming uses ceases because its building is damaged in excess of 75 percent
of its replacement cost, the use may be reestablished if, but only if, an application for a
building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.015, et seq., is filed within six
months of the date such damage occurred. After the application has been filed, only one
180-day extension may be granted.
3. The right of reestablishment of use described in subsection D.2 of this section shall not
apply if:
a. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the
owner or the owner's agent; or
b. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence
of the owner or the owner's agent.
c. In the event that subsection D.3.a or .b of this section apply, the nonconforming use
shall be abated if damage exceeds 25 percent of replacement cost. "Replacement
cost" shall be determined as proved in ECDC 24.70.020.
E. A nonconforming use shall not be changed to another nonconforming use, regardless of the
conforming or nonconforming status of the building or structure in which it is housed.
24.70.020 Nonconforming development, building and/or structure
A. Nonconforming development means a shoreline development which was lawfully
constructed or established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or this
Master Program, or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present regulations
or standards of the program.
B. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site
development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such
standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds
or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city. Subject to
the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling
unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence
conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981.
In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of
the effective date of the annexation of the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be
overcome only by clear and convincing evidence.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 124 of 160
C. A structure for which a variance has been issued shall be considered a legal nonconforming
structure and the requirements of this section shall apply as they apply to preexisting
nonconformities.
D. A nonconforming development, building and/or structure which is moved any distance must
be brought into conformance with this Master Program.
E. Nonconforming development, building and/or structure may be maintained and continued,
unless required to be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section; provided, that it is not
enlarged, intensified, increased, or altered in any way which increases its nonconformity
except as expressly provided in subsection F though L of this section.
F. Historic Buildings and Structures. Nothing in this section shall prevent the full restoration by
reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed on the National Register of
Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the Washington State
Cultural Resource Inventory, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or is listed in a
council -approved historical survey meeting the standards of the State Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Restoration" means reconstruction of the historic
building or structure with as nearly the same visual design appearance and materials as is
consistent with full compliance with the State Building Code and consistent with the
requirements of Chapter 20.45 ECDC, Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The
reconstruction of all such historic buildings and structures shall comply with the life safety
provisions of the State Building Code.
G. If a nonconforming development, building and/or structure is destroyed or damaged to an
extent not exceeding 75 percent replacement cost at the time of destruction, it may be
restored to its former size, shape and lot location as existing immediately prior to the time the
structure was damaged, so long as restoration is either:
1. Completed within one year of the date of damage; or
2. Completed within one year of the date of issuance of all required permits, so long as
applications for such permits are vested within six months of the date of damage and are
pursued in a timely manner.
H. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building
official and shall be appealable as Type II staff decision under the provisions of Chapter
20.06 ECDC.
I. The right of restoration described in subsection E of this section shall not apply if:
1. The development, building and/or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the
unlawful act of the owner or the owner's agent; or
2. The development, building and/r structure is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing
neglect or gross negligence of the owner or the owner's agents.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 125 of 160
Residential Buildings in Commercial Zones. Existing nonconforming buildings in
commercial zones in use solely for residential purposes, or structures attendant to such
residential use, may be remodeled or reconstructed without regard to the limitations of
subsections D, E and G of this section, if, but only if, the following conditions are met:
The remodel or reconstruction takes place within the footprint of the original building or
structure. "Footprint" shall mean an area equal to the smallest rectangular area in a plane
parallel to the ground in which the existing building could be placed, exclusive of
uncovered decks, steps, porches, and similar features; and provided, that the new
footprint of the building or structure shall not be expanded by more than 10 percent and is
found by the city staff to be substantially similar to the original style and construction
after complying with current codes.
2. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with entirely
on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or reconstructed if,
by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a conforming neighboring
lot or building would be limited by such remodel or reconstruction.
3. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not
apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures.
4. A nonconforming residential single-family building may be rebuilt within the defined
building envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are substantially similar
to the original style and structure after complying with current codes. "Substantial
compliance" shall be determined by the city as a Type II staff decision, except that any
appeal of the staff decision shall be to the ADB rather than the hearing examiner. The
decision of the ADB shall be final and appealable only as provided in ECDC 20.07.006.
K. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory
dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial
evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January
1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall
be that of the effective date of the annexation to the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may
be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence.
L. BD5 Zone. The BD5 zone was created in part to encourage the adoption and reuse of
existing residential structures for live/work and commercial use as set forth in ECDC
16.43.030.B.5. In the BD5 zone, conforming and nonconforming buildings may be
converted to commercial or other uses permitted by ECDC 16.43.020 and this Master
Program without being required to come into compliance with the ground floor elevation
requirements of ECDC 16.43.030.B.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 126 of 160
24.70.030 Nonconforming Lots
A. A nonconforming lot is one which met applicable zoning ordinance standards as to size,
width, depth and other dimensional regulations at the date on which it was created but which,
due to the passage of a zoning ordinance, the amendment thereof or the annexation of
property to the city, no longer conforms to the current provisions of the zoning ordinance. A
lot which was not legally created in accordance with the laws of the local governmental
entity in which it was located at the date of the creation is an illegal lot and will not be
recognized for development.
B. Continuation. A nonconforming lot may be developed for any use allowed by the zoning
district in which it is located, so long as such development conforms to other requirements of
this Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act, and all other applicable site use and
development standards are met or a variance from such site use or development standards has
been obtained. In order to be developed a nonconforming lot must meet minimum lot size
standards established by the provisions of this code, subject to the provisions of subsection D
of this section.
C. Combination. If, since the date on which it became nonconforming due to its failure to meet
minimum lot size or width criteria, an undeveloped nonconforming lot has been in the same
ownership as a contiguous lot or lots, the nonconforming lot is to be and shall be deemed to
have been combined with such contiguous lot or lots to the extent necessary to create a
conforming lot and thereafter may only be used in accordance with the provisions of this
Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act, and the Edmonds Community
Development Code, except as specifically provided in subsection D of this section.
D. Exception for Single -Family Dwelling Units. An applicant may build on single-family
residence consisting of no more than one dwelling unit on a lot or parcel regardless of the
size of the lot or parcel if, but only if, one of the following exceptions applies:
1. In a Shoreline Residential environment, such nonconforming lot may be sold or
otherwise developed as any other nonconforming lot pursuant to the following
conditions and standards:
a. The lot area of the nonconforming lot is not less than the minimum lot areas specified
in the table below for the zoning district in which the subject property is located; and
b. Community facilities, public utilities and roads required to serve the nonconforming
lot are available concurrently with the proposed development; and
c. Existing housing stock will not be destroyed in order to create a new buildable lot.
Lot Area Table
% Needed for
Lot Size Needed
Zone
Legal Lot
for legal lot
(1)
RS-20
60%
12,000
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 127 of 160
(2)
RS-12
70%
8,400
(3)
RS-10
75%
7,500
(4)
RS-8
80%
6,400
(5)
RS-6
90%
5,400
2. An applicant applies for necessary permits to construct the unit within five years of the
date the lot or parcel was annexed into the city and the lot or parcel was lawfully created
under provisions of Snohomish County subdivision and zoning laws as well as the laws
of the state of Washington; or
3. An applicant may remodel or rebuild on residence on a nonconforming lot without regard
to the 75 percent destruction requirement of ECDC 24.70.020.G if a fully completed
building permit application is vested within six months of the destruction of the residence
and all other development requirements of this Master Program, the Shoreline
Management Act, and the Edmonds Community Development Code are complied with;
or
4. The lot lines defining the lot or parcel were recorded in the Snohomish county recorder's
office prior to December 31, 1972, and the lot or parcel has not at any time been
simultaneously owned by the owner of a contiguous lot or parcel which fronts on the
same access right-of-way subsequent to December 31, 1972, and the lot or parcel has
access to an access right-of-way which meets the minimum requirements established by
the Edmonds Community Development Code.
24.70.040 Nonconforming Signs
Nonconforming signs are injurious to health, safety and welfare and destructive of the aesthetic
and environmental living conditions which this Master Program and zoning ordinances are
intended to preserve and enhance. Nonconforming signs shall be brought in to compliance with
the provisions of Chapter 20.60 ECDC under the following terms and conditions:
A. No nonconforming sign shall be expanded, extended, rebuilt, reconstructed or altered in any
way, except as provided below. The following acts are specifically permitted and shall not in
and of themselves require conformance with the provisions of this Master Program of
Chapter 20.60 ECDC
1. Normal maintenance of the sign;
2. A change in the name of the business designated on the sign; or
3. Any action necessary to preserve the public safety in the event of damage to the sign
brought about by an accident an act of God.
B. Any nonconforming sign shall be brought into immediate compliance with the code in the
event that it is expanded in violation of subsection A of this section.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 128 of 160
C. None of the forgoing provisions relating to permitted maintenance, name change or
preservation of the sing under subsection A of this section shall be construed so as to permit
the continuation or preservation of any nonconforming off -premises sign.
24.70.050 Nonconforming local public facilities
Existing legal nonconforming local public facility uses, buildings, and/or signs, owned and/or
operated by local, state, or federal governmental entities, public service corporations, or common
carriers (including agencies, districts, governmental corporations, public utilities, or similar
entities) may be expanded, enlarged, altered, or modified, subject to the policies and provisions
of this Master Program and review under Chapter 20.16 ECDC, Essential Public Facilities.
Part VIII Administration — Shoreline Permits
24.80.000 Purpose
This chapter establishes the permit review procedure for shoreline permits, in accordance with
the Shorelines Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW and Chapter 173-27 WAC. All proposed
uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to Chapter 90.58
RCW, the Shoreline Management Act, and this Master Program, regardless of whether a
shoreline permit, statement of exemption, shoreline variance, or shoreline conditional use permit
is required.
24.80.010 Exemptions from Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Process
A. Application and interpretation
1. Exemptions shall be construed narrowly. Only those developments that meet the precise
terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the
substantial development permit process.
2. An exemption from the substantial development permit process is not an exemption from
compliance with the Shoreline Management Act or the City of Edmonds' Shoreline
Master Program, or from any other regulatory requirements. To be authorized, all uses
and developments must be consistent with the policies and provisions of this Master
Program and the Shoreline Management Act.
3. When a development or use is proposed that does not comply with the bulk, dimensional
and performance standards of the master program, such development or use can only be
authorized by approval of a variance.
4. A development or use that is listed as a conditional use pursuant to this Master Program
or is an unlisted use, must obtain a conditional use permit even though the development
or use does not require a substantial development permit.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 129 of 160
5. The burden of proof that a development or use is exempt from the permit process is on
the applicant.
6. If any part of a proposed development is not eligible for exemption, then a substantial
development permit is required for the entire proposed development project.
7. The City of Edmonds may attach conditions to the approval of exempted developments
and/or uses as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline
Management Act and this Master Program.
B. Exemptions Listed. The following developments shall not require substantial development
permits:
Any development of which the total cost or fair market value, whichever is higher, does
not exceed five thousand seven hundred eighteen dollars ($5718), if such development
does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the
state. The dollar threshold established in this subsection must be adjusted for inflation
every five years consistent with WAC 173-27-040(2)(a). For purposes of determining
whether or not a permit is required, the total cost or fair market value shall be based on
the value of development that is occurring on shorelines of the state as defined in RCW
90.58.030(2)(c). The total cost or fair market value of the development shall include the
fair market value of any donated, contributed or found labor, equipment or materials.
2. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage
by accident, fire or elements. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent
a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. "Normal repair"
means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including
but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a
reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes
substantial adverse effects to shoreline resource or environment. Replacement of a
structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the
common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement
structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development including
but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the
replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or
environment.
3. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. A
"normal protective" bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural developments
installed at or near, and parallel to, the ordinary high water mark for the sole purpose of
protecting an existing single-family residence and appurtenant structures from loss or
damage by erosion. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if constructed for the
purpose of creating dry land. When a vertical or near vertical wall is being constructed or
reconstructed, not more than one cubic yard of fill per one foot of wall may be used as
backfill. When an existing bulkhead is being repaired by construction of a vertical wall
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 130 of 160
fronting the existing wall, it shall be constructed no further waterward of the existing
bulkhead than is necessary for construction of new footings. When a bulkhead has
deteriorated such that an ordinary high water mark has been established by the presence
and action of water landward of the bulkhead then the replacement bulkhead must be
located at or near the actual ordinary high water mark. Beach nourishment and
bioengineered erosion control projects may be considered a normal protective bulkhead
when any structural elements are consistent with the above requirements and when the
project has been approved by the department of fish and wildlife.
4. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. An
"emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the
environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full
compliance with this chapter. Emergency construction does not include development of
new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new
protective structures are deemed by the administrator to be the appropriate means to
address the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation the new
structure shall be removed or any permit which would have been required, absent an
emergency, pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW, these regulations, or the local master
program, obtained. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of
chapter 90.58 RCW and the local master program. As a general matter, flooding or other
seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur but that are not imminent are not
an emergency.
5. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor
buoys.
6. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family
residence for their own use or for the use of their family, which residence does not
exceed a height of twenty-five feet above average grade level and which meets all
requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other
than requirements imposed pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW. "Single-family residence"
means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family including those
structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal
appurtenance as defined in 24.90.010.F. Construction authorized under this exemption
shall be located landward of the ordinary high water mark.
7. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for
the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single-
family and multiple -family residences. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for
watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities or other
appurtenances. This exception applies if either:
a. In salt waters (Puget Sound), the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two
thousand five hundred dollars; or
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 131 of 160
b. In fresh waters (Lake Ballinger) the fair market value of the dock does not exceed ten
thousand dollars, but if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding
two thousand five hundred dollars occurs within five years of completion of the prior
construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial
development for the purpose of this chapter.
8. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other
facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation
system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow
and artificially stored ground water from the irrigation of lands.
9. The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands, when such marking does
not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water.
10. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other similar
drainage or utility facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created,
developed or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system.
11. Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW.
12. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an
application for development authorization under this chapter, if:
a. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters;
b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including but
not limited to fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic
values;
The activity does not involve the installation of any structure, and upon completion of
the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions
existing before the activity;
d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a
performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local
jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and
e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550.
13. The process of removing or controlling aquatic noxious weeds, as defined in RCW
17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed
control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the
department of agriculture or the department of ecology jointly with other state agencies
under chapter 43.21C RCW.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 132 of 160
14. Watershed restoration projects as defined in WAC 173-27-040(2)(o). The administrator
shall review the projects for consistency with the shoreline master program in an
expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along with any conditions within forty-
five days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption from
the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for
exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this section.
15. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish
passage, when all of the following apply:
a. The project has been approved in writing by the department of fish and wildlife; ;
b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the department of fish and
wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW; and;
c. The City has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the local
shoreline master program. The City shall make such determination that in a timely
manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. .
24.80.020 Letter of Exemption
A. The Administrator is hereby authorized to grant or deny requests for letters of exemption
from the shoreline substantial development permit requirement for uses and developments
with shorelines that are specifically listed in ECDC 24.80.010.B. The letter of exemption
shall indicate the specific exemption of this Program that is being applied to the
development, and shall provide a summary of the Administrator's analysis of the consistency
of the project with this Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. As appropriate,
such letters of exemption may contain conditions and/or mitigating measures of approval to
achieve consistency and compliance with the provisions of this Master Program and the
Shoreline Management Act. A denial of an exemption shall be in writing and shall identify
the reason(s) for the denial. The Administrator's actions on the issuance of a letter of
exemption or a denial are subject to appeal pursuant to ECDC 24.80.110.C.
B. A letter of exemption shall be prepared addressed to the applicant/proponent and the
Washington State Department of Ecology, pursuant to the requirement of WAC 173-27-050
when the project is subject to one or more of the following Federal permitting requirements:
1. A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers section 10 permit under the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899; (The provisions of section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act generally apply to any
project occurring on or over navigable waters. Specific applicability information should
be obtained from the Corps of Engineers.); or
2. A section 404 permit under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. (The
provisions of section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act generally apply to
any project which may involve discharge of dredge or fill material to any water or
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 133 of 160
wetland area. Specific applicability information should be obtained from the Corps of
Engineers.)
C. Apart from the activities listed in ECDC 24.80.020.13, no letter of exemption shall be
required for other uses or developments exempt pursuant to ECDC 24.80.010 unless the
Administrator has cause to believe a substantial question exists as to qualification of the
specific use or development for the exemption, an applicant requests a letter of exemption, or
the Administrator determines there is a likelihood of adverse impacts to shoreline ecological
functions.
24.80.030 Review Criteria for All Development
No authorization to undertake use or development on shorelines of the state shall be granted
unless upon review the use or development is determined to be consistent with the policy and
provisions of the Shoreline Management Act and the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master
Program.
24.80.040 Substantial Development Permit Criteria
A. A substantial development permit shall be required for all proposed use and development of
shorelines unless the proposal is specifically exempt pursuant to ECDC 24.80.010.
B. In order for a substantial development permit to be approved, the decision maker must find
that the proposal is consistent with the following criteria:
1. All regulations of the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program appropriate to the
shoreline designation and the type of use or development proposed shall be met, except
those bulk and dimensional standards that have been modified by an approval of a
shoreline variance under ECDC 24.80.060.
2. All policies of the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program appropriate to the
shoreline designation and the type of use or development proposed shall be considered
and substantial compliance demonstrated.
24.80.050 Conditional Use Permit Criteria
A. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide greater flexibility in the administering
of use regulations of this Master Program in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW
90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit
by the City or the Department of Ecology to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use
and/or to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline Management Act and this
Master Program.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 134 of 160
B. Uses specifically classified or set forth in the Master Program as conditional uses may be
authorized provided that the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the master
program;
2. That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines;
3. That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other
authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the
comprehensive plan and shoreline master program;
4. That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline
environment in which it is to be located; and
5. That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
C. Uses which are not specifically identified as an allowed use or uses which are specifically
prohibited by this Master Program may not be authorized pursuant to either subsection B of
this section.
D. In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative
impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if conditional use
permits were granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist,
the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW
90.58.020 and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
24.80.060 Variance Permit Criteria
A. The purpose of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk,
dimensional or performance standards set forth in this Master Program where there are
extraordinary circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property
such that the strict implementation of this Master Program will impose unnecessary hardships
on the applicant or thwart the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020. Variances from the use
regulations of this Master Program are prohibited.
B. Variances will be granted in circumstances where the denial of the permit would result in a
thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant must
demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and that the public interest shall suffer no
substantial detrimental effect.
C. Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located landward of the ordinary
high water mark (OHWM) may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of
the following:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 135 of 160
That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in
the applicable master program precludes, or significantly interferes with lawful,
reasonable use of the property;
2. That the hardship described in 1 of this subsection is specifically related to the property,
and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features
and the application of this Master Program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions
or the applicant's own actions or those of a predecessor in title;
3. That the design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area
and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master
program and will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment;
4. That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by the other
properties in the area;
5. That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to afford relief, and
6. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
D. Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located waterward of the ordinary
high water mark (OHWM) may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of
the following:
1. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in
the applicable master program precludes all reasonable use of the property;
2. That the proposal is consistent with the criteria established under subsection ECDC
24.80.060.C.1 through 6 of this section; and
3. That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely
affected.
E. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact
of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example if variances were granted to
other developments and/or uses in the area where similar circumstances exist the total of the
variances shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and shall not
cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
24.80.070 Minimum Application Requirements
A complete application for substantial development, conditional use, or variance permit shall
contain as a minimum, the following information:
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 136 of 160
A. The name, address and phone number of the applicant. The applicant should be the owner of
the property or the primary proponent of the project and not the representative of the owner
or primary proponent.
B. The name, address and phone number of the applicant's representative if other than the
applicant.
C. The name, address and phone number of the property owner, if other than the applicant.
D. Location of the property. This shall, at a minimum, include the property address and
identification of the section, township and range to the nearest quarter, quarter section or
latitude and longitude to the nearest minute. All applications for projects located in open
water areas away from land shall provide a longitude and latitude location.
E. Identification of the name of the shoreline (water body) that the site of the proposal is
associated with. This should be the water body from which jurisdiction of the act over the
project is derived.
F. A general description of the proposed project that includes the proposed use or uses and the
activities necessary to accomplish the project.
G. A general description of the property as it now exists including its physical characteristics
and improvements and structures.
H. A general description of the vicinity of the proposed project including identification of the
adjacent uses, structures and improvements, intensity of development and physical
characteristics.
I. A site development plan consisting of maps and elevation drawings, drawn to an appropriate
scale to depict clearly all required information, photographs and text which shall include:
1. The boundary of the parcel(s) of land upon which the development is proposed.
2. The ordinary high water mark of all water bodies located adjacent to or within the
boundary of the project. This may be an approximate location provided, that for any
development where a determination of consistency with the applicable regulations
requires a precise location of the ordinary high water mark the mark shall be located
precisely and the biological and hydrological basis for the location as indicated on the
plans shall be included in the development plan. Where the ordinary high water mark is
neither adjacent to or within the boundary of the project, the plan shall indicate the
distance and direction to the nearest ordinary high water mark of a shoreline. The precise
location of the ordinary high water mark shall be field verified by the City of Edmonds
and/or the Department of Ecology.
3. Existing and proposed land contours. The contours shall be at intervals sufficient to
accurately determine the existing character of the property and the extent of proposed
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 137 of 160
change to the land that is necessary for the development. Areas within the boundary that
will not be altered by the development may be indicated as such and contours
approximated for that area.
4. Existing critical areas as together with any supporting information consistent with the
reporting requirements of ECDC 23.40.090.
5. A general indication of the character of vegetation found on the site.
6. The dimensions and locations of all existing and proposed structures and improvements
including but not limited to; buildings, paved or graveled areas, roads, utilities, septic
tanks and drainfields, material stockpiles or surcharge, and stormwater management
facilities.
7. Where applicable, a landscaping plan for the project.
8. Where applicable, plans for development of areas on or off the site as mitigation for
impacts associated with the proposed project shall be included and contain information
consistent with the requirements of this section.
9. Quantity, source and composition of any fill material that is placed on the site whether
temporary or permanent.
10. Quantity, composition and destination of any excavated or dredged material.
11. A vicinity map showing the relationship of the property and proposed development or use
to roads, utilities, existing developments and uses on adjacent properties.
12. Where applicable, a depiction of the impacts to views from existing residential uses and
public areas.
13. On all variance applications the plans shall clearly indicate where development could
occur without approval of a variance, the physical features and circumstances on the
property that provide a basis for the request, and the location of adjacent structures and
uses.
24.80.080 Notice of Application
A. Upon receipt of a fully completed shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline
conditional use permit, or shoreline variance application, the City shall issue a Notice of
Application in the manner set forth in ECDC 20.90.010.E.
B. The public comment period for a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline
conditional use permit, or shoreline variance shall be thirty (30) days following the date of
notice of application. Public comments may be submitted at any time prior to the closing of
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 138 of 160
the record of an open record predecision hearing or, if no open record public hearing is
required, prior to the decision on the project permit.
C. If an open record predecision hearing, as define in RCW 36.7013.020, is required for the
requested project permits, the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the open record hearing. The public hearing shall not be closed to the receipt of
written comments prior to thirty (30) days following the date of the notice.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 139 of 160
24.80.090 Special Procedures for Limited Utility Extensions and Bulkheads
A. An application for a substantial development permit for a limited utility extension or for the
construction of a bulkhead or other measures to protect a single-family residence and its
appurtenant structures from shoreline erosion shall be subject to all of the requirements of
this chapter except that the following time periods and procedures shall be used:
The public comment period shall be twenty days. The notice provided shall state the
manner in which the public may obtain a copy of the local government decision on the
application no later than two days following its issuance;
2. The local government shall issue its decision to grant or deny the permit within twenty-
one days of the last day of the comment period specified in subsection (2)(a) of this
section; and
3. If there is an appeal of the decision to grant or deny the permit to the local government
legislative authority, the appeal shall be finally determined by the legislative authority
within thirty days.
B. For purposes of this section, a limited utility extension means the extension of a utility
service that:
1. Is categorically exempt under chapter 43.21C RCW for one or more of the following:
Natural gas, electricity, telephone, water, or sewer;
2. Will serve an existing use in compliance with this chapter; and
3. Will not extend more than two thousand five hundred linear feet within the shorelines of
the state.
24.80.100 Public Hearings
A. The Administrator shall determine whether an application requires a public hearing pursuant
to the criteria below no later than fifteen (15) days after the minimum public comment period
provided by ECDC 24.80.080.13. An open record public hearing shall be required for all of
the following:
1. One or more interested persons has submitted to the administrator, with 15 days of the
final publication notice of the application, a written request for such a hearing together
with a statement of the reasons for the request; or
2. The proposal is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and
an Environmental Impact Statement is required in accordance with the State
Environmental Policy Act; or
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 140 of 160
3. The proposal requires a variance and/or conditional use approval pursuant to this Master
Program; or
4. The use or development requires an open record public hearing for other City of
Edmonds approvals or permits.
24.80.110 Notice of Decision, Reconsideration, and Appeals
A. Notice of Decision
1. Within five days of a decision for action on a shoreline substantial development permit,
shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance, the Administrator shall mail or
hand deliver a copy of the final decision to the following:
a. The applicant/proponent;
b. Any person(s) who have filed a written request for a copy of the decision;
c. All persons who submitted substantive written comments on the application.; and
d. The Department of Ecology.
2. The notice of decision to ECDC 24.80.110.A.1.a through c shall include findings and
conclusions, and a statement of the SEPA threshold determination and the procedures for
an appeal (if any) of the permit decision or recommendation.
3. Decisions filed with the Department of Ecology shall contain the following information:
1. A copy of the complete application;
2. Findings and conclusions that establish the basis for the decision including but not
limited to identification of shoreline environment designation(s), applicable Master
Program policies and regulations and the consistency of the project with appropriate
review criteria for the type of permit(s).
3. The final decision of reached by the City of Edmonds on the proposal;
4. A completed permit data sheet in the form provided in WAC 173-27-990 or hereafter
amended.
5. Where applicable, the City of Edmonds shall also file the applicable documents
required by SEPA, or in lieu thereof, a statement summarizing the actions and dates
of such actions taken under RCW 43.21 C.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 141 of 160
B. Reconsideration. The applicant/proponent or any party of record may request
reconsideration of any final action by the decision maker within (10) days of the decision.
Grounds for reconsideration must be based upon the content of the written decision. The
decision maker is not required to proved a written response or modify his/her original
decision. He/she may initiate such action as he/she deems appropriate. The procedure of
reconsideration shall not pre-empt or extend the appeal period for a permit or affect the date
of filing with the Department of Ecology, unless the applicant/proponent requests the
abeyance of said permit appeal period in writing with ten (10) days of a final action.
C. Appeals
1. Local appeals of decision by the Shoreline Administrator or the Hearing Examiner shall
be pursuant to the procedure and timelines of ECDC 20.01, ECDC 20.06, and ECDC
20.07..
2. Appeals of a final decision of the City of Edmonds or the Department of Ecology shall be
filed within 21 days of the date of filing of the final permit and shall be heard by the
Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to the procedures and timelines of RCW 90.58.180.
24.80.120 Initiation of Development
A. Development pursuant to a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline conditional
use permit, or shoreline variance shall not begin and shall not be authorized unit twenty-one
(2 1) days after the "date of filing" or until all review proceeding before the Shoreline
Hearings Board have terminated.
B. Date of filing:
1. "Date of filing" of a substantial development permit is the date of actual receipt of the
decision by the Department of Ecology.
2. The "date of filing" for a shoreline conditional use permit or a shoreline variance shall
mean the date the permit decision rendered by the Department of Ecology is transmitted
by the Department to the City of Edmonds and the applicant/proponent.
24.80.130 Revisions
A. A revision is required when an applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms,
or conditions of an approved permit. Changes are "substantive' if they materially alter the
project in a manner that relates to its conformance to the terms and conditions of the permit,
this Master Program, or the Shoreline Management Act. Changes, which the Administrator
determines are not substantive, do not require approval of a revision.
B. When a permit revision is required, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and text
describing the proposed changes. If the Administrator determines that the revisions proposed
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 142 of 160
are within the scope and intent of the original permit, the Administrator may approve the
revision as a Type II decision.
C. "Within the scope and intent of the original permit" means all of the following:
1. No additional over water construction is involved except that pier, dock, or float
construction may be increased by five hundred square feet (500) or ten percent (10%)
from the provisions of the original permit, whichever is less;
2. Ground area coverage and height maybe increased a maximum often percent (10%)
from the provisions of the original permit;
3. The revised permit does not authorize development to exceed height, lot coverage,
setback, or any other requirements of the applicable master program except as authorized
under a variance granted as the original permit or a part thereof;
4. Additional or revised landscaping is consistent with any conditions attached to the
original permit and with the applicable master program;
5. The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed; and
6. No adverse environmental impact will be caused by the project revision.
D. If the sum of the proposed revision and any previously approved revisions do not meet the
criteria in ECDC 24.80.130.C, an application for a new Shoreline Permit must be submitted.
E. If the revision involves a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit or Shoreline Variance, which was
conditioned by the Department of Ecology, the revision also must be reviewed and approved
by the Department of Ecology. Under the requirements of WAC 173-27-110(6), the
Department of Ecology shall render and transmit to the City of Edmonds and the applicant its
final decision with fifteen (15) days of the date of the department's receipt of the submittal
from the City of Edmonds. The City of Edmonds shall notify parties of record of the
department's final decision.
F. Revision approvals, including the revised site plans, a detailed description of the authorized
changes, and the final ruling on consistency with this section shall be filed with the
Department of Ecology. In addition, the City of Edmonds shall notify parties of record of the
revision.
G. Revisions to shoreline permits may be authorized after the original authorization has expired.
Revisions made after the expiration of the original permit shall be limited to changes that are
consistent with this Master Program and that would not require a permit under this Master
Program. If the proposed change is a substantial development as defined by this Master
Program, then a new permit is required. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be used to
extend the time requirements or to authorize substantial development beyond the time limits
or scope of the original permit.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 143 of 160
H. Appeals on revisions shall be in accordance with RCW 90.58.180 and shall be filed within
twenty-one days from the date of receipt of the City of Edmonds' action by the Department
of Ecology or, when appropriate under subsection E of this section, the date the Department
of Ecology's final decision is transmitted to local government and the applicant. Appeals
shall be based only upon contentions of noncompliance with the provisions of subsection C
of this section. Construction undertaken pursuant to that portion of a revised permit not
authorized under the original permit is at the applicant's own risk until the expiration of the
appeals deadline. If an appeal is successful in proving that a revision is not within the scope
and intent of the original permit, the decision shall have no bearing on the original permit.
24.80.140 Time requirements of Shoreline Permits
A. The following time requirements shall apply to all substantial development permits and to
any development authorized pursuant to a shoreline conditional use permit or shoreline
variance:
Construction activities shall be commenced or, where no construction activities are
involved, the use or activity shall be commenced within two (2) years of the effective
date of a substantial development permit. However, the City of Edmonds may authorize a
single extension for a period not to exceed one (1) year based on reasonable factors, if a
request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed
extension is given to parties of record on the substantial development permit and to the
Department of Ecology
2. Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five (5) years after the
effective date of a substantial development permit. However, the City of Edmonds may
authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one (1) year based on reasonable
factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of
the proposed extension is given to parties of record and to the Department of Ecology.
3. The effective date of a substantial development permit shall be the date of filing as
provided in ECDC 24.80.120.13. The permit time periods in subsections 1 and 2 of this
section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued
due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions or due to the need to obtain
any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the
development to proceed, including all reasonably related administrative or legal actions
on any such permits or approvals.
4. Authorization to conduct development activities pursuant to a shoreline permit issued by
the City of Edmonds shall expire five (5) years after the date of issuance provided the
activity was not pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal action.
However, the City of Edmonds may authorize a single extension for a period not to
exceed one (1) year based on reasonable factors.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 144 of 160
B. Notwithstanding the time limits established in ECDC 24.80.140.A.1 and .2, upon finding of
good cause based on the requirements and circumstances of the proposed project and
consistent with the policies and provisions of this Master Program and the Shoreline
Management Act, the Administrator or Hearing Examiner as appropriate may set different
time limits for a particular substantial development permit as part of the action to approve the
permit. The Hearing Examiner may also set different time limits on specific conditional use
permits or variances with the approval of the Department of Ecology. The different time
limits may be longer or shorter than those established in ECDC 24.8 0.140.A. I and .2 but
shall be appropriate to the shoreline development or used under review. "Good cause based
on the requirements and circumstances of the proposed project" shall mean that the time
limits established for the project are reasonably related to the time actually necessary to
perform the development on the ground and complete the project that is being permitted,
and/or are necessary for the protection of shoreline resources.
C. The Administrator or Hearing Examiner as appropriate shall notify the Department of
Ecology in writing of any change to the effective date of a permit with an explanation of the
basis for approval of the change. Any change to the time limits of a permit other than those
authorized ECDC 24.80.150.A and .B shall require a new permit application.
24.80.150 Administrative Authority and Responsibility
A. Shoreline Administrator
The Shoreline Administrator shall be the planning manager or his/her designee and is vested
with the following authority and responsibility to:
1. Have overall administrative responsibility for this Master Program;
2. Determine if a public hearing should be held on a shoreline permit application by the
Hearing Examiner pursuant to ECDC 24.80.100;
3. Grant or deny written Permit Exemptions from shoreline Substantial Development Permit
requirements of this Master Program;
4. Authorize, approve or deny shoreline Substantial Development Permits, except for those
for which a public hearing is required pursuant to ECDC 24.80.100;
5. Make written recommendation to the Hearing Examiner or City Council as appropriate
and insofar as possible, in order to assure that all relevant information, testimony, and
questions regarding a specific matter are made available during their respective reviews
of such matter.
6. Review and evaluate the records of project review actions (permits and exemptions) in
shoreline areas and report on the cumulative effects of authorized development of
shoreline conditions at a minimum every seven years when this Master Program is
updated. The administrator shall coordinate such review with the Washington State
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 145 of 160
Department of Ecology, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other
interested parties.
7. Advise interested citizens and project proponents of the goals, policies, regulations and
procedures of this Master Program; and
8. Make administrative decisions and interpretations of the policies and regulations of this
Master Programs and the Shoreline Management Act.
B. Hearing Examiner
The Hearing Examiner is vested with the following authority:
1. To grant or deny shoreline Substantial Development Permits requiring public hearings
pursuant to ECDC 24.80.100;
2. To grant or deny shoreline Conditional Use Permits under this Master Program;
3. To grant or deny variances form this Master Program; and
4. To decide on appeals of administrative decisions issued by the Administrator of this
Master Program in accord with procedures set forth in Title 20 of this code.
C. City Council
1. The Edmonds City Council is vested with the authority to hear closed record appeals of
determinations of the Hearing Examiner and approve any revisions or amendments to this
Master Program in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Shoreline
Management Act and the Washington Administrative Code.
2. To become effective any amendment to this Master Program must be reviewed and
adopted by the Department of Ecology pursuant to RCW 90.58.190 and Chapter 173-26
WAC.
24.80.160 Compliance
Failure to comply with the conditions of approval associated with a shoreline permit shall cause
the permit to immediately become void and any continuation of the use activity shall be
considered a violation of this Master Program and a public nuisance subject to enforcement
proceedings.
24.80.170 Enforcement
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 146 of 160
Procedures for investigation and notice of violation, compliance, and the imposition of penalties
for the violation of any requirements of this Master Program shall be consistent with provisions
in ECDC 20.110.040, Part II 173-27 WAC, RCW 90.58.210, and RCW 90.58.220.
Part IX Definitions
24.90.000 General Information
A. For the purpose of this Master Program, certain terms and their derivations shall be construed
as specified in this section. Some terms used in this Master Program may have a different
definition and application under other City of Edmonds regulations. Words in the singular
include the plural, the plural the singular. The words "shall", "will" and "must" are
mandatory; the word "may" is permissive. "Should" means that the particular action is
required unless there is a demonstrated, compelling reason, based on policy of the Shoreline
Management Act and this Master Program, against taking the action. Additional definitions
applicable to this master Program and adopted by reference herein, are found in RCW 90.58
and Chapters 173-26 and 173-27 WAC. The following definitions apply throughout this
Program, unless otherwise indicated.
B. If a definition is not included here, the city shall rely on definitions found in applicable
citations in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), Washington Administrative Code
(WAC), the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), and finally a standard
dictionary, in that order. In case of conflict with the ECDC, the definition within the RCW,
WAC, and/or this Master Program shall prevail.
24.90.010 Definitions: A to B
A. "Abandoned" means knowing relinquishment of right or claim to the subject property or
structure on that property.
B. "Accessory" means a use, activity, structure or part of a structure which is demonstrably
subordinate and incidental to the main activity or structure on the subject property.
C. "Accessory building" means one which is subordinate to the main building, and is incidental
to the use of the main building on the same lot.
D. "Alteration(s)" means a change or rearrangement of the structural parts of existing facilities
or an enlargement by extending the sides or increasing the height or depth or the moving
from one location to another.
E. "Applicant" means a person who applies for any permit or approval to do anything governed
by this code and who is either the owner of the subject property, the authorized agent of the
owner, or the city.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 147 of 160
F. "Appurtenance" means a structure or development which is necessarily connected to the use
and enjoyment of a single-family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high
water mark and also of the perimeter of any marsh, bog, or swamp. See also "Normal
appurtenances."
G. "Aquaculture" means the farming or culture of food fish, shellfish, or other aquatic plants or
animals any may require development such as fish hatcheries, rearing pens and structures,
and shellfish rafts, as well as use of natural spawning and rearing areas. Aquaculture does
not include the harvest of free-swimming fish or the harvest of shellfish not artificially
planted or maintained.
H. "Aquaculture practices" means any activity directly pertaining to growing, handling, or
harvesting or aquaculture produce, including, but not limited to, propagation, stocking,
feeding, disease treatment, waste disposal, water use, development of habitat and structures.
Excluded from this definition are related commercial or industrial uses such as wholesale and
retail sales, or final processing and freezing.
"Average grade level" means the average of the natural or existing topography of the portion
of the lot, parcel, or tract of real property which will be directly under the proposed building
or structure: In the case of structures to be built over water, average grade level shall be the
elevation of the ordinary high water mark. Calculation of the average grade level shall be
made by averaging the ground elevations at the midpoint of all exterior walls of the proposed
building or structure.
J. "Average parcel depth" means the average of the distances from the ordinary high water
mark to the street providing direct access to the subject property as measured along the side
property lines or the extension of those lines where the water frontage of the subject property
ends, the center of the ordinary high water mark of the subject property and the quarter points
of the ordinary high water mark of the subject property.
K. "Average parcel width" means the average of the distances between side property lines as
measured along the ordinary high water mark and the front property line.
L. "Backfill" means material placed into an excavated area, pit, trench or behind a constructed
retaining wall, rockery or foundation.
M. "Boat launch or ramp" means graded slopes, slabs, pads, planks, or rails used for launching
boats by means of a trailer, hand, or mechanical device.
N. "Buoy" means a floating object anchored to the bottom of a water body.
O. "Breakwater" means an offshore structure generally aligned parallel to shore, sometimes
shore -connected, that provides protection from waves.
P. "Buffer" means the area adjacent to a critical area and/or shoreline that is required for the
continued maintenance, function, and/or structural stability of the critical area and/or
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 148 of 160
shoreline. Buffer widths vary depending on the relative quality and sensitivity of the area
being protected. Unlike zoning or shore setbacks, buffer areas are intended to be left
undisturbed, or may need to be enhanced to support natural processes, functions and values.
Q. "Building" means any structure having a roof, excluding all forms of vehicles even though
immobilized.
R. `Bulkhead" means a retaining wall whose primary purpose is to hold or prevent the backfill
from sliding while providing protection against light -to -moderate wave action.
24.90.020 Definitions: C to F
A. "City" means the City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation.
B. "Commercial use" means an activity with goods, merchandise, or services offered for sale or
rent.
C. "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds and all
elements thereof as amended or, if repealed, its successor document, listing the goals and
policies regarding land use within the city.
D. "Contour line" means a line on a map or on the earth representing a specific elevation above
sea level or an elevation relative to a specific datum point.
E. "Coverage" means the total ground coverage of all buildings or structures on a site measured
from the outside of external walls or supporting members or from a point two and one-half
feet in from the outside edge of a cantilevered roof, whichever covers the greatest area.
F. "Critical areas" include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) wetlands; (b) areas with a
critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas; (d) frequently flooded areas; and (e) geologically hazardous areas
designated through the Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance.
G. "Cross-section (drawing)" means a visual representation of a vertical cut through a structure
or any other three-dimensional form.
H. "Dedication" means the deliberate granting of an interest in land by an owner for public use
or purpose, reserving no other rights than those that are compatible with the full exercise and
enjoyment of the public use or purpose to which the property has been devoted.
I. "Development" means a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures;
dredging; drilling; dumping; grading; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; bulk
heading; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any project of a permanent or
temporary nature which interferes with the normal public use of the surface of the waters
overlying lands subject to the act at any stage of water level.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 149 of 160
J. "Development permit" means any permit or approval under this code or the ECDC that must
be issued before initiating a use or development activity.
K. "Dock" means a structure designed to protrude overwater or float upon the water, and which
is attached to the shoreline and is used for moorage or other water -related activity such as
swimming or diving.
L. "Dredging" means removal of earth and other materials from the bottom of a body of water
or from a wetland.
M. "Dredging spoils" means the earth and other materials removed from the floor of a body of
water or wetland by the dredging process.
N. "Drift cell," "drift sector," or "littoral cell" means a particular reach of marine shore in which
littoral drift may occur without significant interruption and which contains any natural
sources of such drift and also accretion shore forms created by such drift.
O. "Dry land" means the area of the subject property landward of the ordinary high water mark.
P. "Dwelling unit" means a building providing complete housekeeping facilities for one family.
Dwelling unit does not include recreational vehicles or mobile homes.
Q. "Dwelling unit, attached" means a dwelling unit that has one or more vertical walls in
common with or attached to one or more other dwelling units or other uses and does not have
other dwelling units or uses above or below it, excluding lawfully permitted accessory
dwelling units.
R. "Dwelling unit, detached" means a dwelling unit that is not attached or physically connected
to any other dwelling unit or other use.
S. "Dwelling unit, stacked" means a dwelling unit that has one or more horizontal walls in
common with or adjacent to one or more other dwelling units or other uses and may have one
or more vertical walls in common with or adjacent to one or more other dwelling units or
other uses, excluding lawfully permitted accessory dwelling units.
T. "ECDC" means the "Edmonds Community Development Code."
U. "Easement" means land which has specific air, surface or subsurface rights conveyed for use
by an entity other than the owner of the subject property or to benefit some property other
than the subject property.
V. "Ecological functions" or "shoreline functions" means the work performed or role played by
the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of the
aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem. See
WAC 173-26-200 (2)(c).
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 150 of 160
W. "Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)" means Ordinance 2182 as amended or,
if repealed, its successor document.
X. "Enhancement" means alteration of an existing resource to improve or increase its
characteristics and processes without degrading other existing functions. Enhancements are
to be distinguished from resource creation or restoration projects.
Y. "Environmentally sensitive areas" means an area designated and mapped by a city under
WAC 197-11-908, as now or hereafter amended. Certain categorical exemptions do not apply
within environmentally sensitive areas (WAC 197-11-305 and 197-11-908, as now or
hereafter amended).
Z. "Erosion and deposition" means the removal of soils and the placement of these removed
soils elsewhere by natural forces such as wind or water.
AA. "Excavate(tion)" means the mechanical removal of soils and/or underlying strata.
BB. "Feasible" means, for the purpose of this chapter, that an action, such as a development
project, mitigation, or preservation requirement, meets all of the following conditions:
1. The action can be accomplished with technologies and methods that have been used in
the past in similar circumstances, or studies or test have demonstrated in similar
circumstances that such approaches are currently available and likely to achieve the
intended results;
2. The action provides a reasonable likelihood of achieving its intended purpose; and
3. The action does not physically preclude achieve the project's primary intended legal use.
In cases where this Master Program requires certain actions unless they are infeasible, the
burden of proving infeasibility is on the applicant.
In determining an action's infeasibility, the City of Edmonds may weigh the action's relative
public costs and public benefits, considered in the short- and long-term time frames.
CC. "Ferry terminal" means a combination of waterward and upland improvements providing
the interface between public/private waterborne transportation and public/private ground
transportation.
DD. "Fill" means the addition of soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, earth retaining structure, or
other material (excluding solid waste) to an area waterward of the OHWM, in wetlands, or
on shoreland in a manner that raises the elevation or creates dry land.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 151 of 160
EE."Fill material" means dirt, structural rock or gravel, broken concrete and similar structural
substances customarily used to raise the level of the ground, but excluding topsoil, bark,
ornamental rocks or gravel placed on the surface of the ground.
FF. "Float, recreational" means an offshore platform/buoy used for water -dependent activities
such as, but not limited to, swimming and diving.
24.90.030 Definitions: G to O
A. "Gabions" means structures composed of masses of rocks, rubble or masonry held tightly
together, usually by wire mesh, so as to form blocks or walls; sometimes used on heavy
erosion areas to retard wave action or as foundations for breakwaters or jetties.
B. "Geotechnical report" or "geotechnical analysis" means a scientific study or evaluation
conducted by a qualified expert that includes a description of the ground and surface
hydrology and geology, the affected land form and its susceptibility to mass wasting, erosion,
an other geologic hazards or processes, conclusions and recommendations regarding the
effect of the proposed development on geologic conditions, the adequacy of the site to be
developed, the impacts of the proposed development, alternative approaches to the proposed
development, and measures to mitigate potential site -specific and cumulative geological and
hydrological impacts of the proposed development; including the potential adverse impacts
to adjacent and down -current properties. Geotechnical reports shall conform to accepted
technical standards an must be prepared by qualified professional engineers or geologists
who have professional expertise in both regional and local shoreline geology and processes.
C. "Government facility" means the movement or redistribution of the soil, sand, rock, gravel,
sediment, or other material on a site in a manner that alters the natural contour of the land.
D. "Grading" means the movement or redistribution of the soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, or
other material on a site in a manner that alters the natural contour of the land.
E. "Haines Wharf' means Lots 7 through 11 in the plat of Meadowdale Tidelands.
F. "Hotel" means any building containing five or more separately occupied rooms that are
rented out for sleeping purposes. A central kitchen and dining room and interior accessory
shops and services catering to the general public can be provided. Not included are
institutions housing persons under legal restraint or requiring medical attention or care.
G. "Improvement" means any structure or manmade feature.
H. "Inner harbor line" means the line designated as such by the State Harbor Line Commission
pursuant to Article XV, Washington State Constitution.
"Land surface modification" means the clearing or removal of trees, shrubs, ground cover
and other vegetation, and all grading, excavation and filling of materials. The removal of
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 152 of 160
overhanging vegetation and fire hazards as specified in ECDC 18.45.030(E) shall not be
deemed to be land surface modifications.
J. "Landscaping" means the planting, removal and maintenance of vegetation along with the
movement and displacement of earth, topsoil, rock, bark and similar substances done in
conjunction with the planting, removal and maintenance of vegetation.
K. "Landward" means upland from the ordinary high water mark.
L. "Lot" means a single tract of land legally created as a separate building site with frontage on
a street or access easement. For purposes of this code the area of the lot used to calculate lot
area shall be the area of the lot which is upland of the OHWM and adjoining lots under
common ownership which were created without subdivision or short subdivision approval
from applicable city or county governments. This lot area shall be considered as one lot and
subject to the regulations contained herein. The terms of this section shall apply regardless of
whether the individual adjoining lots meet current zoning requirements.
M. "Low Impact Development (LID)" means a stormwater and land use management strategy
that strives to mimic pre -disturbance hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage,
evaporation and transpiration by emphasizing conservation, use of on -site natural features,
site planning, and distributed stormwater management practices that are integrated into a
project design.
N. "LID Principles" means land use management strategies that emphasize conservation, use of
on -site natural features, and site planning to minimize impervious surfaces, native vegetation
loss, and stormwater runoff.
O. "Low impact development best management practices" means distributed stormwater
management practices, integrated into a project design, that emphasize pre -disturbance
hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration. LID
BMPs include, but are not limited to, bioretention/rain gardens, permeable pavements, roof
downspout controls, dispersion, soil quality and depth, vegetated roofs, minimum excavation
foundations, and water re -use.
P. "Marine launcher" means a mechanical device that can hoist vessels off trailers and transport
them into the water and often is associated with dry land moorage facilities.
Q. "Master plan" means a complete development plan for the subject property showing
placement, dimensions and uses of all structures as well as streets and other areas used for
vehicular circulation.
R. "Mean sea level" means the level of Puget Sound at zero tide as established by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
S. "Minor appurtenant building" means minor buildings associated with overwater structures
including but not limited to the following: storage buildings less than 150 square feet in area,
ferry terminal passenger shelter, covered moorage, etc.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 153 of 160
T. "Mixed -use developments" are shoreline developments which combine more than one
separate but related activity into a coordinated package. Activities usually include one or
more water -dependent uses with non -water -dependent uses. Drive-in businesses are not
permitted.
U. "Modification" means an action undertaken in support of or in preparation for a shoreline use
that modifies the physical configuration or qualities of the shoreline area.
V. "Moorage" means a place to tie up or to anchor a waterborne craft.
W. "Mooring buoy" means a floating object anchored to the bottom of a water body that
provides tie up capabilities for waterborne craft.
X. "Moorage facility" means a pier, dock, dolphin, buoy or other structure providing docking or
moorage space for waterborne craft.
Y. "Motel" means a building containing units which are used as individual sleeping units having
their own private toilet facilities and sometimes their own kitchen facilities, designed
primarily for the accommodation of transient automobile travelers. Accommodations for
trailers are not included. This term includes tourist court, motor lodge, auto court, cabin
court, motor hotel, motor inn and similar names.
Z. "Multimodal terminal (facility)" means a terminal (facility) designed for the co -location of
transportation loading and unloading by multiple forms of transportation including land,
water or rail.
AA. "Nonconformance" means any use, structure, lot, condition, activity, or any other feature
or element of private property or the use or utilization of private property that does not
conform to any of the provisions of this code or that was not approved by the city through the
appropriate decision -making process required under this code and/or was established prior to
the original Edmonds shoreline master program.
BB. "Normal appurtenances" normal appurtenances include a garage; deck; driveway;
utilities; fences; installation of a septic tank and drainfield and grading which does not
exceed two hundred fifty cubic yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any
wetland or waterward of the ordinary high water mark. Local circumstances may dictate
additional interpretations of normal appurtenances which shall be set forth and regulated
within the applicable master program.
CC. "Office (use)" means a place of employment in a building or separately defined space
within a building providing services other than production, distribution or sale or repair of
goods or commodities. The following is a nonexclusive list of office uses: accounting,
architectural, engineering, consulting or other similar professional services; management,
administrative, secretarial, marketing, advertising, personnel or other similar personnel
services; sales offices where no inventories or goods are available on the premises; real
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 154 of 160
estate, insurance, travel agent, brokerage or other similar services. The following uses are
specifically excluded from the definition of office: medical, dental, or other health care;
veterinary; banks, loan companies and similar financial institutions.
DD. "Off-street parking" means motor vehicle parking facilities within the lot area of a private
lot or public lot established for that purpose.
EE."Official newspaper of the city" means the publication designated by ordinance or resolution
to contain official newspaper publications for the city government.
FF. "Official notification boards of the city" means the bulletin boards in the public areas of the
city of Edmonds Community Services Building, the Edmonds Main Post Office Branch, and
the Edmonds Public Library.
GG. "OHWM" means ordinary high water mark (see ECDC 24.90.030.FF)
HH. "Open space" means land not covered by buildings, roadways, parking areas or other
surfaces through which water cannot percolate into the underlying soils.
II. "Ordinary high water mark" on all lakes, streams, and tidal water is that mark that will be
found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of
waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark
upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as
that condition existing on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may
change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by the City of Edmonds or the
Department of Ecology; PROVIDED, that in any area where the ordinary high water mark
cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean
higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of
mean high water.
JJ. "Oriented" means facing or directed toward.
KK. "Outer harbor line" means the line designated as such by the State Harbor Line
Commission pursuant to Article XV, Washington State
24.90.040 Definitions: P to R
A. "Parking area" means any area designed and/or used for parking of vehicles.
B. "Parking space" means an area which is improved, maintained and used for the sole purpose
of temporarily accommodating a motor vehicle that is not in use.
C. "Pedestrian orientation" pertains to facilities which encourage pedestrian movement and are
designed and oriented toward use by pedestrians.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 155 of 160
D. "Pier" means a fixed structure which abuts the shoreline and is used for moorage or other
water -related activities such as fishing, swimming and diving.
E. "Planning division" means the planning division of the community services department of
the City of Edmonds.
F. "Planning manager" means the manager of the planning division of the City of Edmonds or
the acting manager of that division.
G. "Planning official" means the manager of the planning division or his/her designee.
H. "Port" means a special purpose unit of local government created for the purpose of managing
port -related lands, facilities and activities. For the purposes of this document, "port" refers to
the port of Edmonds and its facilities and operation.
I. "Property line" means those lines enclosing a lot, its developable area and those lines
defining a recorded vehicular access easement. The following are categories of property
lines:
1. "Front property line" is any property line that is adjacent to a street or easement more
than 20 feet in width, except that the Burlington Northern right-of-way shall not be
considered a front property line.
2. "Rear property line" is any property line that is farthest from and essentially parallel to a
front property line except on a lot which contains two or more front property lines.
3. "Side property line" is any property line other than a front property line or a rear property
line.
J. "Public access" is the physical ability of the general public to reach and touch the water's
edge and/or the ability to have a view of the water and the shoreline from upland locations.
There are a variety of types of public access including picnic areas, pathways and trails
(including disabled), floats and docks, promenades, viewing towers, bridges, boat launches,
street ends, ingress and egress, parking and other similar facilities or locations.
K. "Public access pier or boardwalk" means an elevated structure or floating structure which is
constructed waterward of the ordinary high water mark and intended for public use.
L. "Public park" means an area provided by a unit of government to meet the active or passive
recreational needs of people in the water and on the upland shoreline.
M. "Public right-of-way" means land dedicated to the movement of vehicles and pedestrians and
providing for primary access to adjacent parcels and or public waterborne transportation.
Secondarily, the land provides space for utility lines and appurtenances and other publicly
owned devices.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 156 of 160
N. "Public use area" means a portion of private property that is dedicated to public use and
which contains one or more of the following elements: benches, tables, lawns, gardens, piers,
exercise or play equipment or similar improvements or features. These elements are to
provide the public with recreational opportunities in addition to the right to traverse or stand
in this area.
O. "Public utility" means a private business organization such as a public service corporation,
including physical plant facilities, performing some public service and subject to special
governmental regulations, or a governmental agency performing similar public services, the
services by either of which are paid for directly by the recipients thereof. Such services shall
include but are not limited to: water supply, waste water treatment, stormwater treatment,
electric power, telephone, cablevision, gas, and transportation for persons and freight.
P. "Railroad right-of-way" means the land occupied by a railroad for its tracks, yard, buildings,
and related structures.
Q. "Restaurant" means a building where food is sold to the public for on -premises consumption
or to go. It may include alcoholic beverage service only pursuant to a Class "C," "D," or "H"
state liquor license.
R. "Restore," restoration" or "ecological restoration" means the reestablishment or upgrading of
impaired ecological shoreline processes or functions. This may be accomplished through
measures including, but not limited to, revegetation, removal o intrusive shoreline structures
and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not imply a requirement for
returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre -European settlement conditions.
S. "Retail establishment" means a commercial enterprise which provides goods or services
directly to the consumer and whose goods are available for immediate purchase and removal
from the premises by the purchaser or whose services are traditionally not permitted within
an office use.
24.90.050 Definitions: S to T
A. "Shore setback" means the minimum distance between a structure or use and the shoreline
ordinary high water mark.
B. "Shoreline areas" and "shoreline jurisdiction" means all "shorelines of the state" and
"shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030.
C. "Shoreline conditional use" means a use or development which is specifically listed by this
master program as a conditional use within a particular shoreline environment or a use which
is not addressed by this master program within any shoreline environment.
D. "Shoreline Management Act (SMA)" means Chapter 90.58 RCW as now or hereafter
amended.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 157 of 160
E. "Shoreline master program (SMP)" means the ordinance of the City of Edmonds adopted
under authority of Chapter 90.58 RCW.
F. "Shoreline modifications" means those actions that modify the physical configuration or
qualities of the shoreline area, usually through the construction of a physical element such as
a dike, breakwater, pier, weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline structure.
They can include other actions, such as clearing, grading, or application of chemicals.
G. "Shoreline variance" means a procedure to grant relief from the specific bulk, dimensional or
performance standards set forth in this master program, and not a means to allow a use not
otherwise permitted within a shoreline environment.
H. "Silt or sediment" means the soil particles mobilized and deposited by the processes of
erosion and deposition.
I. "Street" means the public or private right-of-way or access easement which provides
vehicular access to more than three lots.
J. "Structure" means anything which is built or constructed; an edifice or building of any kind,
or any piece of work artificially built-up or composed of parts joined together in some
definite manner. Not included are fences less than six feet in height, retaining wall, rockeries,
and similar improvements of a minor character less than three feet in height.
K. "Structural alterations" means any change in a supporting member of a building or structure.
L. "Subject property" means the entire lot, series of lots or parcels on which a development or
use is or will locate and that is otherwise subject to the provisions of this code. For the
purposes of this chapter, land leased from the Department of Natural Resources, which is
contiguous to the applicant's property, shall also be considered the "subject property."
24.90.060 Definitions: U to Z
A. "Use, development and/or activity" means "development" as that term is defined in Chapter
90.58 RCW. "Use" also means the nature of the activities taking place on private property or
within structures thereon.
B. "Vehicle holding area" means any area designated by the city or state for holding vehicles
prior to loading onto a ferry.
C. "Water -dependent use" means a use or a portion of a use which is dependent on the water by
reason of the intrinsic nature of its operations and can not exist in any other location.
Examples of water -dependent uses may include ferry and passenger terminals, marinas and
sewer outfalls.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 158 of 160
D. "Water -enjoyment use" means a recreational use, or other use facilitating public access to the
shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use; or a use that provides for recreational use or
aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for a substantial number of people as a general
characteristic of the use and which through the location, design and operation assures the
public's ability to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. In order to
qualify as a water -enjoyment use, the use must be open to the general public and the
shoreline -oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use
that fosters shoreline enjoyment. Primary water -enjoyment uses may include, but are not
limited to, parks, piers, scuba diving facilities and other improvements facilitating public
access to shorelines of the state; and general water -enjoyment uses may include but are not
limited to, restaurants, museums, aquariums, scientific/ecological reserves, resorts and
mixed -use commercial; provided, that such uses conform to the above water -enjoyment
specifications and the provisions of the master program.
E. "Water -oriented use" refers to any combination of water -dependent, water -related, and/or
water -enjoyment uses and serves as an all -encompassing definition for priority under the
SMA. "Non -water -oriented" serves to describe those uses which have little or no relationship
to the shoreline and are not considered priority uses under the SMA. Examples include
professional offices, automobile sales or repair shops, mini -storage facilities, multifamily
residential development, department stores and gas stations.
F. "Water -related use" means a use or a portion of a use which is not intrinsically dependent on
a waterfront location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location
because:
Of a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival or shipment of
materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or
2. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water -dependent commercial
activities and that the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less
expensive and/or more convenient.
G. "Waterward" means toward the body of water on the waterside of the ordinary high water
mark.
H. "Wetlands" means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not
include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but
not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities,
wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands
created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of
a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally
created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 159 of 160
Part X Appendices
24.100.000 Appendix A - Maps of Shoreline Environments and Jurisdictions
24.100.010 Appendix B — Shoreline Master Program Version of Edmonds
Critical Area Regulations
City Council DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 160 of 160
JI
ronmental Designations: City -Wide
Figure 1
:a I
X
WN
911111111=1911119
I
Environmental Designations: Marine Shoreline (North)
Figure 2
-VOW.
me
0 1 M =I 0 11110
Environmental Designations: Marine Shoreline (South)
Figure 3 am
_ 1. ' +-•
JL
F
�: 'w!'z{'�r ':� � . � 'k'� �s = 1. • ��i
" •'c.
•7 �..1 - - a r �. •. 3 � � �i.� �r �. ri,
a
., 71
t-
40.
�'-
�_ S r.
1�. r•
Legend
SMP
Designations
Aquatic 1
-
Shoreline Residential III
-
Aquatic 11
Urban Mixed Use I
11111110
Conservancy
-
Urban Mixed Use 11
-
Natural
Urban Mixed Use III
Shoreline Residential I ®
Urban Mixed Use IV
Shoreline Residential 11
Urban Railroad
• Planning Segement Break
�i OHW
Edmonds City Limits
f Railroad
Stream
r,
C
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
'nc. 1 Sq"
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Shoreline Inventory & Characterization
SMA Grant Agreement No. 60600108
November 2007
Prepared for:
City of Edmonds
by:
Sea Run Consulting
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Reid Middleton, Inc.
Pentec
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background and Purpose....................................................................................................................
1
1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction and Study Area Boundary ..............................................................................
1
1.3 Methodology......................................................................................................................................
2
1.4 Shoreline Planning Segments.............................................................................................................
2
2. Current Regulatory Framework Summary .......................................................................................
5
2.1 City of Edmonds Plans and Regulations............................................................................................
5
2.1.1 Current Shoreline Management Act Compliance...............................................................................................
5
2.1.2 Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Other City Regulations................................................................................
6
2.2 State and Federal Shoreline Regulations............................................................................................
7
2.2.1 Shoreline Substantial Development Permits.......................................................................................................
7
2.2.2 WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval(HPA)........................................................................................................
7
2.2.3 Ecology Section 401 Water Quality Certification...............................................................................................
8
2.2.4 USACE Clean Water Act Section 404 and Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10..................................................
8
2.2.5 NOAA Fisheries and USFWS Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7............................................................
9
3. Watershed Characterization...........................................................................................................
10
3.1 Ecosystem -wide Processes...............................................................................................................
10
3.1.1 Climate.............................................................................................................................................................
11
3.1.2 Topography.......................................................................................................................................................11
3.1.3 Geology and Soils.............................................................................................................................................
11
3.1.4 Surface Water and Groundwater......................................................................................................................
12
3.1.5 Coastal Processes.............................................................................................................................................
13
3.1.6 Historic Land Use Development.......................................................................................................................
14
3.2 Shoreline Uses..................................................................................................................................14
3.2.1 Tribal Fisheries................................................................................................................................................
16
3.2.2 Commercial Fisheries.......................................................................................................................................
16
3.2.3 Recreational Fisheries......................................................................................................................................
17
3.3 Water Quality...................................................................................................................................18
3.3.1 Freshwater Quality ...........................................................................................................................................
18
3.3.2 Marine Water Quality .......................................................................................................................................
21
4. Inventory and Land Use Patterns...................................................................................................
22
4.1 Existing Land Use............................................................................................................................
22
4.2 Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Corresponding Zoning Designations .........................................
23
4.3 Roads and Transportation Facilities.................................................................................................
24
4.4 Wastewater and Stormwater Utilities...............................................................................................
24
4.5 Existing Public Access Sites............................................................................................................
25
4.6 Historical/Cultural Resources...........................................................................................................
26
4.7 Toxic or Hazardous Material Clean-up Sites and Dredge Material Disposal Sites ..........................
27
5. Nearshore Physical Characterization.............................................................................................
34
5.1 Geologic Units..................................................................................................................................
35
5.2 Soils..................................................................................................................................................35
5.3 Landslide Hazard Areas...................................................................................................................
36
5.4 Seismic Hazards...............................................................................................................................
36
5.5 Shoreline Slope Stability..................................................................................................................37
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page ii
5.6 Erosion Hazard Areas....................................................................................................................... 37
5.7 Aquifer Recharge Areas...................................................................................................................38
5.8 Lakes and Streams............................................................................................................................38
5.9 Flood Hazard Areas..........................................................................................................................
39
5.10 Nearshore Processes.........................................................................................................................
39
5.11 Shoreline Modifications...................................................................................................................
40
5.11.1 Shoreline Armoring..........................................................................................................................................
41
5.11.2 Docks, Piers, and Over/In-water Structures.....................................................................................................
42
6. Nearshore Biological Characterization.......................................................................................... 44
6.1 Wetland Habitat................................................................................................................................ 45
6.2 Fish and Wildlife..............................................................................................................................46
6.2.1 State Priority Habitats and Species.................................................................................................................. 47
6.2.2 Federal Threatened and Endangered Species.................................................................................................. 50
6.3 Riparian Zones................................................................................................................................. 51
6.3.1 Freshwater........................................................................................................................................................51
6.3.2 Marine.............................................................................................................................................................. 52
6.4 Beaches and Backshore Flats........................................................................................................... 52
6.5 Sub -Estuaries (Stream Mouths and Deltas)...................................................................................... 53
6.6 Eelgrass Meadows............................................................................................................................ 54
6.7 Kelp Beds......................................................................................................................................... 55
6.8 Habitat Conservation Areas.............................................................................................................. 55
7. Segment Summaries and Assessment............................................................................................ 56
7.1
Segment A—Lund's Gulch to Perrinville Creek..............................................................................
57
7.1.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
57
7.1.2 Lund's Gulch Creek..........................................................................................................................................
58
7.1.3 Meadowdale Creek...........................................................................................................................................
59
7.2
Segment B—Perrinville Creek to Southwest County Park..............................................................
60
7.2.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
60
7.2.2 Perrinville Creek..............................................................................................................................................
60
7.3
Segment C—Southwest County Park to Fruitdale Creek.................................................................
61
7.3.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
61
7.4
Segment D—Fruitdale Creek to Shell Creek...................................................................................
61
7.4.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
61
7.4.2 Fruitdale Creek.................................................................................................................................................
62
7.4.3 Northstream Creek............................................................................................................................................
62
7.4.4 Shell Creek........................................................................................................................................................
63
7.5
Segment E—Shell Creek to Edmonds Underwater Park..................................................................
64
7.5.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
64
7.6
Segment F—Edmonds Underwater Park to Port of Edmonds.........................................................
64
7.6.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
64
7.7
Segment G—Port of Edmonds Marina............................................................................................
66
7.7.1 Marine Shoreland.............................................................................................................................................
66
7.7.2 Edmonds Marsh and Shellabarger and Willow Creeks....................................................................................
67
7.8 Segment H—Port of Edmonds Marina to Point Edwards................................................................ 68
7.9 Segment I —Lake Ballinger.............................................................................................................. 69
8. Shoreline Planning Reaches........................................................................................................... 71
8.1 Reach 1............................................................................................................................................. 71
8.2 Reach 2............................................................................................................................................. 72
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page iii
8.3 Reach 3............................................................................................................................................. 73
8.4 Reach 4............................................................................................................................................. 73
9. References......................................................................................................................................75
Appendix A: Data Gaps Table
Appendix B: Figures
Tables
Table 1. Shoreline Segments
3
Table 2. Shoreline Planning Reaches.............................................................................................4
Table 3. Waterbodies with Recent Violations of State Water Quality Standards in Edmonds,
Washington............................................................................................................................ 21
Table 4. Soil Types and Surficial Geologic Units Present at Each Shoreline Segment ...............35
Table 5. Common Shellfish Found in the Edmonds Shoreline Jurisdiction.................................47
Table 6. Salmonids Found within the Edmonds Shoreline Jurisdiction ....................................... 49
Table 7. Marine Shore Inventory Habitat Features recorded for Snohomish County 2001 ......... 56
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page iv
Acronyms and Definitions
BA Biological Assessment
BEACH Washington's Beach Environmental Assessment, Communication and Health
Program
BETX Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Toluene, or Total Xylenes
BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe
CAO Critical Areas Ordinance
CARAs Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas
CWA Clean Water Act
DMMP Dredged Material Management Program
DNR Department of Natural Resources
DOE Department of Ecology
ECDC Edmonds Community Development Code
Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology
EFH Essential Fish Habitat
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Endangered Species Act
FEIS Final Environmental Inpact Statement
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FS Feasibility Study
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GMA Growth Management Act
GPS Global Positioning System
HDPE High -Density Polyethylene
HPA Hydraulic Project Approval
JARPA Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Unit
MHHW Mean Higher High Water
MLLW Mean Lower Low Water
MSA Magnuson -Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act
MSL Mean Sea Level
MTCA Model Toxics Control Act
MW Monitoring Well
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ()
NWSSC Northwest Salmon and Steelheaders Council
OHW Ordinary High Water
OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page v
PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon
PCBs Polychlorinated biphenyls
PSAMP Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program
PSDDA Puget Sound Dredge Disposal Analysis
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCW Revised Code of Washington
RI Remedial Investigation
SMA Shoreline Management Act
SMP Shoreline Master Plan
SQG Small Quantity Generators
SQS Sediment Quality Standards
SVOCS Semivolatile Organic Compounds
SWM Surface Water Management
TMDL Total Daily Maximum Load
TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geologic Survey
UST Underground Storage Tanks
VOCS Volatile Organic Compounds
WAC Washington Administrative Code
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WDNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
WISAARD Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records
Data)
WRIA Water Resources Inventory Area
WSF Washington State Ferries
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page vi
1. Introduction
1.1 Background and Purpose
The purpose of the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report is to document baseline
environmental conditions in the shoreline jurisdiction of the City of Edmonds (City),
Washington. This inventory and characterization provides a basis for updating the City's
Shoreline Master Program to comply with the Shoreline Management Act (SMA), Revised Code
of Washington (RCW) 90.58, and its implementing guidelines, Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) 173-26. The inventory and characterization will help the City evaluate ecological
functions and values of natural resources in its shoreline jurisdiction, and explore opportunities
for conservation and restoration.
This report provides a framework of information that will support future updates to the City's
shoreline environment designations, shoreline management policies, and regulations.
1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction and Study Area Boundary
Under the SMA, the shoreline jurisdiction includes areas that are 200 feet landward of the
ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of waters that have been designated as "shorelines of
statewide significance" or "shorelines of the state." These designations were established in 1972
and are described in WAC 173-18. Generally, "shorelines of statewide significance" include
portions of Puget Sound and other marine water bodies, rivers west of the Cascade Range that
have a mean annual flow of 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) or greater, rivers east of the
Cascade Range that have a mean annual flow of 200 cfs or greater, and freshwater lakes with a
surface area of 1,000 acres or more. "Shorelines of the state" are generally described as all
marine shorelines and shorelines of all other streams or rivers having a mean annual flow of
20 cfs or greater and lakes with a surface area greater than 20 acres. For this inventory, OHWM
was defined as an elevation equivalent to mean higher high water (MHHW), to be consistent with
interpretations by state agencies (e.g., Washington Department of Ecology).
This characterization focuses on the approximately 5.2 miles of Puget Sound marine shoreline
within the city limits of the City of Edmonds (Figure 1). The shoreline of Puget Sound,
including the shoreline within the City limits, is defined as a "shoreline of statewide significance"
waterward of the line of extreme low tide [RCW 90.58.030(2)(e)(iii)], extending waterward (in
Edmonds) to the offshore city limit (see Figure 1). Although there are other areas in Puget Sound
with additional characteristics that are designated as "shorelines of statewide significance," none
is present in the Edmonds vicinity. Lake Ballinger, with a surface area of about 100 acres,
qualifies as a "shoreline of the state" but is too small to be a "shoreline of statewide
significance." No streams within the City qualify as either a "shoreline of the state" or a
"shoreline of statewide significance."
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 1
Under the SMA, the shoreline area to be regulated under the City's Shoreline Master Program
must also include adjacent "shorelands," which are defined as the upland area within 200 feet of
OHWM, as well as any associated wetlands (RCW 90.58.030). "Associated wetlands," means
those wetlands that are in proximity to and either influence or are influenced by tidal waters or a
lake or stream subject to the SMA (WAC 173-22-030 (1)). These are typically identified as
wetlands that physically extend into the shoreline jurisdiction, or wetlands that are functionally
related to the shoreline jurisdiction through a surface water connection and/or other factors.
Specific language from the RCW describes the limits of shoreline jurisdiction as follows:
"Those lands extending landward for two hundred feet in all directions as measured on a
horizontal plane from the ordinary high water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas
landward two hundred feet from such floodways; and all associated wetlands and river deltas "
(RCW 90.58.030(2)(f)).
For this inventory, we included all wetlands and creeks that are directly hydraulically connected
to shorelands as part of the Edmonds' shoreline jurisdictional boundary. The approximate area of
the shorelands is shown with a dashed line on some of the figures in this document; this line is
not a surveyed line. It is a representation of the approximate location of the setback 200 feet
from the OHWM jurisdiction.
1.3 Methodology
Information collected and reviewed to create this inventory and characterization was obtained from
many sources, including the City, Snohomish County, and state and federal agencies. Some of the
primary sources of data for the inventory's geographic information systems (GIS) database are:
• City of Edmonds Community Development Code (2005);
• Snohomish County Marine Shore Inventory and Database (2001);
• City of Edmonds records and files;
• Washington State ShoreZone Inventory (2001);
• Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington (2001);
• Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species,
Priority Resident and Anadromous Fish Presence, Wildlife Heritage Points, Seabird
Colonies, and Sea Lion Haulout Site reports (2006);
• Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Brightwater Regional Wastewater
Treatment System (2003).
Numerous other data sources, including local and state databases and reports, were reviewed
for best available science and information to inventory and characterize the Edmonds
shoreline. These sources are cited in the document and References section. Data gaps are
identified in Appendix A.
1.4 Shoreline Planning Segments
For the shoreline ecological inventory, the City's shoreline jurisdiction was divided into nine
segments (A through I), based on biological and physical features and ecological functions
described in a recent Shoreline Habitat Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2001). The inventory
segmentation focused on the aquatic environment and the adjacent shoreline features that directly
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 2
influence it. The subsequent characterization and analysis required that the segments be
considered in conjunction with existing land uses and zoning designations, using a broader -scale
assessment of ecological differences and similarities observable along the shoreline to develop
four shoreline planning reaches that are consistent with Edmonds' Comprehensive Plan and the
Critical Areas Ordinance. Shoreline segments are described in Table 1 and depicted on Figure 2.
Detailed segment descriptions are provided in Section 7. Shoreline planning reaches, which
combine similar shoreline segments, are described in Table 2 and depicted on Figure 2.
Table 1. Shoreline Segments
Length
..
Approx.Approx.
PA
:. ..Jurisdiction
Lund's Gulch to Perrinville Creek 7,100
23%
B
Perrinville Creek to Southwest
2,100
7%
County Park
C
Southwest County Park to
5,300
17%
Fruitdale Creek
D
Fruitdale Creek to Shell Creek
3,300
11%
E
Shell Creek to Edmonds
3,300
11 %
Underwater Park
F
Edmonds Underwater Park to Port
1,850
6%
of Edmonds
G
Port of Edmonds Marina
3,200
10%
(including Edmonds Marsh and
Shellabarger Creek)
H
Port of Edmonds Marina to Point
900
3%
Edwards
I
Lake Ballinger
4000
12%
I - Does not include the length of constructed piers, jetties, breakwaters, or piers that extend waterward from shore.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 3
Table 2. Shoreline Planning Reaches
N
General :. ..
Approx.
Percentage.
City's Shoreline
(feet)'
Jurisdiction
1
Lund's Gulch to Caspers
A, B, C, D,
19,351 64%
Street
north half of
E
2
Caspers Street to Main
South half of
2,253
7%
Street
E, north half
of F
3
Main Street to Point
South half of
4,716
16%
Edwards
F, G, H
4
Lake Ballinger
I
3,947
13%
1 - Does not include the length of constructed piers, jetties, breakwaters, or piers that extend waterward from shore.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 4
2. Current Regulatory Framework Summary
2.1 City of Edmonds Plans and Regulations
2.1.1 Current Shoreline Management Act Compliance
The City of Edmonds first adopted a shoreline master program in the 1970s consistent with the
SMA of 1971. Over the years, the City of Edmonds made minor amendments to its Shoreline
Master Program (SMP). In 1996, the City began an update of the SMP. This effort resulted in a
revised SMP adopted by Edmonds City Council in 2000 in Ordinance 3318, Section 3. The
adopted SMP is found in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 23.10. The
SMP was adopted as both a policy plan and a regulatory program. It was developed to be
consistent with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive plan and its component elements
(ECDC 23.10.030.)
This chapter is divided into the following five parts, consistent with the material to be included
within a master program as established in Chapter 173-26 WAC: Part I, contains basic and
general information regarding the shoreline master program. Part II, contains the City's goals
and policies with respect to the seven program elements established in Chapter 173-16 WAC.
Part III contains information regarding the different shoreline environments to be found within
the City. Part IV contains regulations that apply to the various uses, developments, and activities
that are regulated under the shoreline master program. Part V contains appendices pertaining to
the shoreline master program.
Part III of the Edmonds SMP establishes the environmental designations for various shoreline
areas of the state. The different environment designations are intended to provide a way to
regulate shoreline use developments and activities in the different areas of the City's shoreline.
Specific use regulations found in the Edmonds SMP apply to the different environment
designations. The current Edmonds SMP contains five different environment designations:
Conservancy, Natural, Suburban Residential, Urban Mixed Use, and Urban Railroad. The SMP
provides boundary descriptions for each of the environments. The official map of the City
designating the various shoreline environments is adopted by reference in ECDC 23.10.110.
In December 2003, the state of Washington adopted new guidelines consistent with
RCW 90.58.020 for development of local shoreline master programs. The 2003 legislature
adopted a schedule for updating local shoreline master programs (SSB 6012). The City of
Edmonds is required to adopt an amended SMP consistent with the new Guidelines by 2011.
However, all jurisdictions may amend their SMP at any time before the scheduled date.
Edmonds has chosen to begin its update in 2006. It applied for and was awarded a grant to
complete this work by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 5
2.1.2 Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Other City Regulations
2.1.2.1 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan
The City of Edmonds amended its comprehensive plan in 2004 in compliance with the Growth
Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A.) The comprehensive plan has the following purposes:
A. To serve as the basis for municipal policy on development and to provide
guiding principles and objectives for the development of regulations.
B. To promote the public health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity, and the
general welfare and values of the community.
C. To anticipate and influence the orderly and coordinated development of land
and building use of the City and its environs and conserve and restore natural
beauty and other natural resources.
D. To encourage coordinated development and discourage piecemeal, spot or strip
zoning, and inharmonious subdividing.
E. To facilitate adequate provisions for public services (such as transportation,
police and fire protection, water supply, sewage treatment, and parks).
The comprehensive plan contains land use types and compatible zoning classifications. Along
the Edmonds shorelines, land is designated as Single Family, Park and Open Space, and Master
Plan Development. The City designations for land use are important to the shoreline to establish
the general land use pattern and provide the policy guidance for development of shoreline
environment designations within the Edmonds SMP.
The Edmonds comprehensive plan contains a land use element specific to the downtown
waterfront area titled Downtown Waterfront Activity Center. This element of the comprehensive
plan incorporates a number of other planning efforts for the Edmonds waterfront, including the
1994 Downtown Waterfront Plan. This section of the Edmonds comprehensive plan provides
policy guidance for the shoreline master program. It contains descriptions of the different
waterfront areas and waterfront area policies.
2.1.2.2 City of Edmonds Zoning Code
City of Edmonds Community Development Code, Titles 16 and 17, contain the zoning ordinance
for Edmonds. Title 16 contains the designations and accompanying regulations for the City of
Edmonds. These designations are consistent with the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. Title 16
contains the designations, their purposes and development standards. Title 17 contains general
zoning regulations applicable to all zoning districts (Figure 3).
2.1.2.3 City of Edmonds Environmentally Critical Areas Code
Title 23.40 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) contains the
environmentally critical areas code for the City of Edmonds. This title implements the goals,
policies, guidelines, and requirements of the comprehensive plan and the Washington State GMA
requirements to protect critical areas of the City. These regulations are intended to protect
critical areas through the application of the best available science, as determined by
WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172. The regulations were adopted
by Ordinance 3527, Section 2 in 2004. The regulations contain a critical area review process,
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 6
including mitigation planning, requirements and sequencing, allowed activities, exemptions,
noncompliance penalties, and protective measures. Specific natural resources addressed in the
Edmonds Community Development Code are as follow: Wetlands, ECDC 23.50; Critical Aquifer
Recharge Areas (CARA), ECDC 23.60; Frequently Flooded Areas, ECDC 23.70; Geologically
Hazardous Areas, ECDC 23.80; and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas, ECDC 23.90.
These environmentally critical areas (Figure 4) apply to the City's shoreline jurisdiction.
2.2 State and Federal Shoreline Regulations
Development in or above federally or state -designated waters generally requires permits from
local, state and federal agencies. Project review and authorization, in the form of permit -
applications, are usually required when changes to federally navigable waters, state waters, or
fish and wildlife habitat are anticipated.
For tidal waters, construction activities are regulated by the local jurisdiction (in this case,
Edmonds), Washington Department of Ecology, and the Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife (WDFW), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA). In addition, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's National Marina Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) must concur that any project requiring federal approvals (a USACE
permit, for example) is consistent with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). These agencies will
require that proposed projects avoid or offset project impacts on certain fish and wildlife species
through design and/or environmental controls and/or restoration activities.
Each agency defines its in -water jurisdiction based on an established water elevation, which
extends landward from the water to extreme high water, mean higher high water (MHHW), mean
high water, or ordinary high water (OHW), depending on the agency. Permits and approvals that
are typically required by agencies with regulatory authority in shoreline/shoreland areas are
described below.
2.2.1 Shoreline Substantial Development Permits
The City of Edmonds is the local permit authority for construction activities waterward of OHW
and within 200 feet of the OHWM for uplands. All shoreline permits are processed by the City
of Edmonds pursuant to Edmonds Municipal Code, 23.10.035. The City is also responsible for
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) compliance of a project. Following the local
government decision on all permit applications, applications are sent to Ecology. Ecology must
approve, approve with conditions, or deny each conditional use permits and variances. Ecology
does not have direct approval authority over the more common Shoreline Substantial
Development Permits (SDP) if they are found inconsistent with the local SMP and the SMA,
Ecology may file an appeal with the Shorelines Hearings Board.
2.2.2 WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
Any form of work that uses, diverts, obstructs, or changes the natural flow or bed of any
freshwater or saltwater of the state requires an HPA from WDFW. The purpose of the HPA is to
address potential project impacts, through construction and operation, on state -managed fish and
wildlife species in fresh and marine waters. Saltwater activities requiring an HPA include
construction of bulkheads, fills, boat launches, piers, dry docks, artificial reefs, dock floats,
marinas, placement of utility lines, pile driving, and dredging. The state jurisdiction for an HPA
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 7
is defined as proposed construction or work waterward of the MHHW line in saltwater and OHW
in fresh water (See Chapter 220-110 WAC), for all lakes, streams, and marine waters in
Edmonds.
A Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JARPA) is a Washington State -designed project
information form and notification document used for preparing a permit application for an HPA.
Drawings of the proposed project are submitted along with the JARPA form to WDFW for
review and permit issuance. The JARPA form is also submitted to other local, state, and federal
agencies for their reviews and approvals.
2.2.3 Ecology Section 401 Water Quality Certification
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act [CWA])
regulates discharges of pollutants into federally designated waters, which include Lake Ballinger,
Edmonds Marsh, and the marine waters along the Edmonds shoreline. Under the CWA, Ecology
is authorized by USEPA to regulate and administer water quality discharge permits through the
Section 401 Water Quality Certification. The Water Quality Certification includes construction -
generated water discharges, including site stormwater runoff, into federally/state-designated
waters. Water Quality Certification is typically issued in conjunction with the Section 404 permit
process administered by USACE and described below. Upland projects outside of the shoreline
jurisdiction that affect groundwater or involve discharges of sewage or stormwater, also require
water quality permits from Ecology under Section 401 authorization if they discharge into waters
of the state. Outfall construction for discharges within the shoreline jurisdiction also requires
Section 401 Water Quality Certification.
2.2.4 USACE Clean Water Act Section 404 and Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10
USACE administers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act. Permit compliance for both acts is triggered by construction in "navigable waters,"
including rivers, harbors, and marine nearshore areas designated by the federal government; a
Section 404 permit is issued for dredging or filling navigable waters, including wetlands.
Typical shoreline construction projects in marine waters, such as construction or maintenance of
bulkheads, piers, and docks, are subject to both Sections 10 and 404 approvals and typically
require individual permit applications and extensive reviews and negotiation to obtain USACE
approvals; however, simple repair and maintenance activities of such structures may be allowed
under a Nationwide Permit. Nationwide Permits are part of an expedited permit process that
allows USACE to authorize work that falls under certain thresholds of disturbance.
The project permit application for USACE authorization consists of a JARPA (same as the one
submitted for an HPA) and a set of project drawings (same as the one submitted for an HPA).
Before USACE can issue permit approvals for a project, it must obtain project review and
concurrence under the ESA Section 7 for all federally designated threatened or endangered species
in the project area. Section 7 and other relevant sections of the ESA are administered by the
USFWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), referred to as NOAA Fisheries.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 8
2.2. S NOAA Fisheries and USFWS Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7
NOAA Fisheries and USFWS administered the ESA for all federally permitted, funded, or
authorized projects located in areas where a federally designated threatened or endangered species
is known to occur. All federal agencies, including USACE, must coordinate their construction -
related authorizations with NOAA Fisheries and/or USFWS (depending on the species present in
the area) to protect threatened and endangered species. Potential project effects on federally
designated threatened or endangered species are addressed through a Biological Assessment (BA),
following specific analytical guidelines that are described in the Endangered Species Consultation
Handbook and subsequent memoranda issued by NMFS (now NOAA Fisheries). In addition,
other agencies, including USACE and the Washington Department of Transportation, have
interpreted and developed their own guidance requirements for making a biological evaluation.
Ultimately, NOAA Fisheries and USFWS are responsible for reviewing the BA and providing a
Biological Opinion that describes the conditions under which a project may proceed. They do
not issue permits —they provide written authorization, so that other permits may be issued
without violating provisions of the ESA.
NOAA Fisheries also requires compliance with the Magnuson -Stevens Fisheries Conservation and
Management Act (MSA) for federally permitted, funded, or authorized projects in areas with
designated habitat for commercial fisheries species. In Washington nearshore areas, habitat for
commercial fish species often overlaps with habitat for threatened and endangered fish species
protected under the ESA. An analysis of potential project effects, similar to a BA, is required for
MSA commercial fisheries and designated habitat. This is called an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
assessment. Often NOAA Fisheries will prepare the EFH assessment and provide it with a letter
of concurrence or a Biological Opinion for ESA -listed species.
Numerous federally designated threatened and endangered species protected under the ESA may
be found within Edmonds shoreline and shoreland areas. As of 2006, some ESA -listed species
within Edmonds marine shorelines include Chinook salmon and bull trout. These species must
also be evaluated if their habitat extends into fresh water streams and wetlands; however, they
have no formally designated presence/habitat in Edmonds Marsh, Lake Ballinger, or other city
streams and drainages. Because Chinook salmon is also a commercial fish species protected
under the MSA, it would also be considered in an EFH assessment. Bald eagle may be present
along freshwater, brackish, or marine shorelines in Edmonds, so a project -specific analysis is
necessary to determine if ESA compliance would be triggered. Other species are proposed for
listing or added to the list over time, so it is necessary for each proposed project to address the
most current listing of all threatened and endangered species. The current status of every
federally designated species is recorded in the Federal Register and available online.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 9
3. Watershed Characterization
A watershed is naturally determined by topography, rainfall, vegetation, soils, and geologic
conditions but is significantly affected by land use activities, including earth moving and filling,
vegetation clearing, water extraction and diversion, drainage channelization and impounding, and
paving. The City of Edmonds lies within multiple small watersheds and one large one. For
purposes of this report, the Edmonds Watershed is defined as the small streams that flow directly
to Puget Sound and discharge into the shoreline jurisdiction of the City of Edmonds. These
include Lund's Gulch Creek, Perrinville Creek, Fruitdale Creek, Northstream Creek, Unnamed
Creek, Shell Creek, and Shellabarger/Willow Creek. The southeast corner of Edmonds that
drains into Lake Ballinger is part of the Lake Washington watershed, identified by the state as
Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 8. About 13 percent of the City (808 acres) drains into
WRIA 8 via Lake Ballinger and McAleer Creek.
The Edmonds Watershed consists of a series of relatively short and deeply incised drainages that
have cut through the high marine bluff that characterizes much of the Central Sound western
shore between Everett and Seattle. Each drainage consists of a narrow ravine, flanked by a
narrow corridor of shrubs and mixed coniferous and deciduous trees, surrounded by moderate to
dense residential development. The largest drainage area, occupied by the oldest part of the City,
includes two convergent creeks (Willow and Shellabarger) and a broad estuarine wetland
(Edmonds Marsh) that has been largely filled and channeled by decades of industrial and
commercial development.
The Lake Washington watershed includes Lake Ballinger, part of which drains the southeast
corner of the City. The surrounding subbasin consists of dense residential development
surrounding the lake, and a narrow strip of commercial development along the I-5 corridor.
3.1 Ecosystem -wide Processes
Puget Sound is a deep, glacially carved ford -like estuary that connects to the Strait of Juan de
Fuca through Admiralty Inlet and Deception Pass. It extends approximately 140 miles in a north -
south direction, reaches a maximum depth of greater than 850 feet, and is characterized by a
series of relatively deep basins separated by shallower sills. The Strait of Juan de Fuca opens
into the North Pacific Ocean between Washington State and Vancouver Island in Canada. The
tidal pattern of Puget Sound is dominated by a mixed semidiumal tidal cycle, characterized by
two unequal high tides and two unequal low tides each day, with a large tidal exchange averaging
between 12 and 14 feet. The City of Edmonds lies in the northern portion of Puget Sound's
Central Basin. This area of Puget Sound is called the Triple Junction region. In the Triple
junction region, Admiralty Inlet and Possession Sound join the Central Basin at the southern end
of Whidbey Island (KC DNR WTD 2003).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 10
3.1.1 Climate
The Puget Lowland has a maritime climate with cool winters, dry summers, and a distinct rainy
season. The City of Edmonds receives an average of 37.2 inches of precipitation per year, mostly
as rain. Temperatures range from a mean of 40.1 degrees in January to a mean of 65.2 degrees in
July, with an average high temperature of 75.2 degrees and an average low of 35.2 degrees (City
of Edmonds 2005). During the latter half of the summer and early fall, the lower valleys are
sometimes filled with fog or low clouds until noon, while at the same time, the higher elevations
are sunny. Winds are generally from the southwest during the rainy season (early October
through mid -April) and from the northwest during the dry summer months (WRCC 2006).
3.1.2 Topography
Edmonds is located in the central part of the Puget Lowland, which is bounded on the east by the
Cascade Range and on the west by the Olympic Mountains. The Puget Lowland is characterized
by north -south trending valleys and hills in low relief, with intervening elongated saltwater and
freshwater bodies.
The City itself occupies a gently sculpted upland that ranges from 300 to 500 feet above mean
sea level (MSL), with west -facing slopes that descend to Puget Sound. This area has been
termed the Intercity Plateau. Creeks drain westward off of the upland into Puget Sound. A small
area in the eastern part of the City is drained by heavily dissected south -flowing streams that
drain directly or indirectly into Lake Washington (KC DNR WTD 2003).
The westward -flowing drainages (e.g., Lund's Gulch Creek) typically consist of narrow, deeply
incised V-shaped ravines with steep walls composed largely of glacial soils. Perennial streams
drain the basins, each descending approximately 500 vertical feet over horizontal distances
ranging from 0.8 to 1.5 miles (Snohomish County SWM 2002).
3.1.3 Geology and Soils
Geology and soils determine many physical characteristics of a shoreline and influence the
nearshore processes that continually re -shape the shore. A shoreline's substrate and slope are the
result of geologic processes that created the underlying landforms and provide the overlying
material that weathers into soils and beach substrates. In unstable, steep areas with easily eroded
soils, a combination of underlying geology, slope, and soils can create "feeder bluffs", where
landslides contribute large quantities of soils to the nearshore to provide new material (sand and
gravel) to eroding beaches. Not all eroding bluffs "feed" shoreline beaches—longshore currents
and bathymetry may carry eroded material into deeper subtidal areas farther off shore, rather than
distributing it along upper beach elevations. No specific studies were found that documented
location of feeder bluffs along the city shoreline; for practical purposes, however, no feeder
bluffs exist along the Edmonds shoreline because the railroad bed prevents most landslide
material from reaching the beach.
The inland portions of the City of Edmonds are typically underlain by Vashon till (Qgt), a
glacially -deposited, dense, compacted mixture of gravel, sand, and silt that mantles the upland
regions of central Puget Sound (Figure 5). In some areas, such as near Lake Ballinger, the till is
overlain by discontinuous deposits of more -recent recessional outwash (Qgo) and alluvium (Qa).
Along the shore of Puget Sound, and in the stream valleys that drain to the sound, the till has
been eroded exposing underlying advance outwash (Qga, Qga(t), Qcg, Qgu) and older pre -Fraser
deposits (Qc(w)). A significant wetland deposit (Qa) and an area of artificial fill (Qf) occur at
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 11
Edward's Point and the Edmonds Marina and Washington State Ferry terminal, respectively
(WDNR 2005).
Most soils in the City of Edmonds belong to the Alderwood-Everett soil map unit (Figure 8).
Alderwood soils are formed on the Vashon till. These soils are moderately deep and moderately
well drained. The surface layer is gravelly sandy loam, and the subsoil is very gravelly sandy
loam. A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 20 to 40 inches. Everett soils are
formed on the advance and recessional outwash deposits. These soils are very deep and
somewhat excessively drained. The surface layer is gravelly sandy loam and the subsoil is very
gravelly sandy loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is very gravelly loamy sand
over extremely gravelly sand (MRCS 2006).
3.1.4 Surface Water and Groundwater
Within the City jurisdiction, most surface water within the Edmonds Watershed flows directly into
Puget Sound through numerous small creeks, all exhibiting similar drainage patterns through the
central Puget Sound west shoreline. In general, the headwaters of the main stems are in relatively
flat, developed areas. The streams carry runoff from these areas into steep ravines before flowing
into Puget Sound. The existing drainage systems in the upper watershed consist of a network of
pipes and ditches, built to older design standards, which collect and convey stormwater runoff
from paved and other hardened surfaces directly to streams. Over the past several decades, the
volume of stormwater flowing into the main stem and tributaries has increased significantly
compared to pre -development volumes. Discharge rates have also increased, causing an increase
in flooding events and in erosion of the ravine channels as the stream works to adjust its size to
accommodate the increased flows (Snohomish County SWM 2002).
Lund's Gulch Creek drains an area of approximately 2.3 square miles (1,440 acres), although
probably less than 5 percent lies within the City of Edmonds. The upper portion of the basin is
flat with drainage systems consisting of older ditch and culvert systems that lack sufficient
conveyance capacity. The upper watershed is urbanized with medium to high -density residential
development. Commercial development is also located along the Highway 99 corridor. Notable
hydrologic features in the basin include a 21-acre forested wetland and a regional detention
facility located upstream of 52nd Avenue. Lund's Gulch Creek flows from 52nd Avenue,
through a steep forested ravine to Southwest County Park, and then to Puget Sound (Snohomish
County SWM 2002).
The majority of Lake Ballinger lies within the City of Mountlake Terrace, although
approximately 0.75 miles of shoreline (37 acres of surface area) are within the City of Edmonds.
The lake drains into McAleer Creek, which flows into Lake Washington. The lake has an
average depth of 15 feet and a maximum depth of 35 feet (Bell -McKinnon 2006). It is eutrophic,
meaning that it is nutrient -rich. Within the City, the shoreline is dominated by single-family
homes, with numerous docks and piers. The lake receives stormwater runoff from the Cities of
Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, and Shoreline, and areas of south Snohomish and
north King Counties. In addition, it receives stormwater inputs (and accompanying water quality
problems) via Hall Creek, which flows into the north end of Lake Ballinger.
The groundwater system in western Snohomish County, including the Edmonds area, consists of
a sequence of aquifers and confining units within the unconsolidated geologic deposits. From
stratigraphically highest to lowest, the principal aquifers in the area occur in the alluvial deposits
(e.g., Qa), recessional outwash (Qgo), and advance outwash (Qga, Qga(t), Qcg, Qgu). The
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 12
Vashon till (Qgt) and pre -Fraser deposits (Qcw) typically act as confining units in this area
(Thomas et al. 1997).
Recharge to the groundwater system occurs primarily by infiltration and percolation of
precipitation. Recharge occurs throughout upland areas of the City area, except in locations that
are covered by impervious materials such as buildings or pavement. Groundwater flows from the
upland recharge areas toward plateau edges or stream valleys. Groundwater discharges to
surface -water bodies such as streams, lakes, and marshes to springs, and seeps along stream
valleys and bluffs directly to Puget Sound (Thomas et al. 1997).
CARAs are defined by WAC 365-190-030(2) as those areas with a critical recharging effect on
aquifers used for potable water. CARAs are protected as critical areas under the Washington
State GMA. CARAs have prevailing geologic conditions associated with infiltration rates that
create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to
the replenishment of ground water. No areas meeting criteria for CARAs exist in the vicinity of
the City of Edmonds (ECDC 23.60.010).
3.1. S Coastal Processes
Steep, gradually receding bluffs commonly back the shoreline along Edmonds. In a natural
system, over time, bluffs erode and recede landward, providing sediment to the shore. Prior to
vegetation clearing and construction of bulkheads and other structures that protect property from
wave and tidal action, natural bluff recession rates were generally quite slow in most of Puget
Sound (Adolfson 2004). Vegetation reduces erosion by holding surficial soil layers in place,
absorbing water, and dispersing rainfall energy and runoff. Sediment that accumulates at the
base of bluffs helps to protect the bluff from further erosion and reduces the recession rate.
Under natural conditions, sediment from eroded bluffs may enter the intertidal zone within the
nearshore, where it is subject to transport by waves and water currents. Along the west shore of
Central Puget Sound, the BNSF railroad bed forms a nearly continuous barrier between the
eroding bluffs and the intertidal zone, reducing or preventing natural sediment influx. The
waterward side of the railroad bed is armored by either a sloped or vertical seawall, which
extends through the commercial area and marina (Figure 6). Prevailing winds and waves cause
sediment to drift along the shore, primarily within the intertidal zone. Sediment that is
sufficiently small (typically sand), is suspended for short durations by wave action and is
transported along the shore parallel to the beach. Gravel is transported by rolling (saltation) as a
result of storm waves. The direction of drift transport is generally in the direction of prevailing
winds, which may differ in the summer and winter. The predominant, or net, shore -drift
direction is the most important consideration for coastal processes (Adolfson 2004). Net shore -
drift is determined through geomorphologic analysis of beach sediment patterns and of coastal
landforms.
Many shorelines can be divided into discrete littoral, or shore, drift cells, which are independent
of one another and for which distinct sediment sources and sinks can be identified. Heightened
concerns about the adverse impact of shoreline modifications on geologic processes, and
consequently, on nearshore biological resources, has created a need for information on longshore
sediment transport. The Net Shore -Drift in Washington State program (Ecology 2002) map
coverage denotes the extent of individual drift cells and the direction of net shore -drift within the
littoral zone for much of Puget Sound (see Figure 5).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 13
3.1.6 Historic Land Use Development
According to the 1909 Sanborn map, the present location of the State Ferry terminal had been
used for maritime transportation at that time. The property was then called the "City Dock," and
it contained a freight warehouse that was used for shipping. Civic improvements continued with
construction of a new City wharf in 1911.
Puget Sound Navigation, commonly known as the Black Ball line, controlled most of the
regional ferry routes, until cross -sound service was taken over in 1951 by the State Ferry System.
Seattle -Everett electric interurban trains also served Edmonds for several decades. This service
began in 1910 and reduced the market for the steamboat service of the Telegraph and City of
Everett, the last two ships on the Seattle -Edmonds -Everett route. By that date the Great Northern
Railroad had double -tracked its roadway through Edmonds with eight daily trains at its new
depot. Later, increased competition from private vehicles resulted in reduced services (BOLA
Architecture + Planning 2005).
In the 1920s, a sea dike and a sea gate were built to prevent floods of the tide flat areas southwest
of downtown, near Edmonds Marsh. In 1924, a Unocal tank farm facility substation was
established east of the railroad tracks near the foot of Dayton Street. Uses of the Edmonds
waterfront began to shift from traditional industries to alternate commercial businesses in the
1940s and 1950s. In the 1950s, the Port of Edmonds expanded its breakwater and built a small
marina on the site of former mills. Restaurants and shopping mall retailers began constructing
new facilities in the marina area (BOLA Architecture + Planning 2005).
3.2 Shoreline Uses
Numerous plant and wildlife species depend on shorelines for the variety of conditions and
functions that these transitional habitats provide. Competing uses are high in the shoreline
jurisdiction, with human activities and structures dominating most of the shoreline jurisdiction
uplands and influencing sizable areas of aquatic elevations, from the waters' edge outward to
navigable depths. Overall, regional shoreline aquatic habitat is relatively stable, due to the
presence of the BNSF railroad. The effect of this significant structure dividing the upper
intertidal marine shorelands from upland shorelands is discussed in greater detail in subsequent
report sections. The Edmonds shoreline is an indicative example of the majority of marine
shoreline in this area. To a great extent, shoreline development in this regional area is limited by
the lack of marine -to -upland access due to the BNSF railroad right-of-way.
The central Puget Sound marine shoreline in the vicinity of Edmonds, between Seattle and
Everett, is dominated by urban structures, including transportation -related, residential, and
commercial facilities, and pavement to provide vehicle access and parking. The few areas with
pedestrian beach access also feature roads, flanked by paved walkways, which further eliminate
habitat in favor of vehicles and people. The railroad bed adds an additional 35- to 75-ft-wide
swath of rock pavement in the upper intertidal and adjacent upland shoreland along most of the
central Puget Sound west shore. Structures in marine aquatic areas include railroad bed,
bulkheads, ferry docks, commercial piers, sewer and stormwater outfalls, and a few residential
structures. Freshwater shoreline uses consist largely of non-native landscaping, small residential -
related structures, small piers and docks, and paved roadways. There is little "passive" human
use of shoreline areas along the metropolitan extent of this area of Puget Sound —even the parks
are developed with pavement, roads, structures, stormwater pipes, wastewater treatment facilities,
and managed (unnatural or non-native) vegetation. The steep bluffs that abut large segments of
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 14
marine shorelines are also highly influenced by human activities, through vegetation clearing for
construction and "views." The remaining small-scale, immature vegetation is inadequate for
slope stabilization, contributing to erosion and landslides that regularly destabilize large areas of
shoreland that would otherwise be undeveloped and available to wildlife.
Within the intertidal and subtidal portions of the central Puget Sound area, aquatic and shoreland
habitats are used by fish, shellfish, and wildlife. Common wildlife species that adapt to
urbanized areas, such as deer, coyote, raccoon, and opossum, are present along this regional
shoreline. Because Puget Sound is a regional flyway for migratory birds, numerous birds,
including rare or unusual species, are regularly observed along the shoreline. Many migratory
birds congregate in the large Snohomish River estuary to the north, transiting along the
Snohomish County shoreline. Port Susan, north of the Snohomish River estuary, provides
critical habitat for large numbers of shorebirds during spring and fall migrations and for birds
staying during winter. It is one of only four sites in Puget Sound that regularly support more than
20,000 shorebirds in a season (Seattle Audubon Society 2006). Large flocks of wintering ducks
use the sloughs and sheltered bays. In winter, trumpeter and tundra swans and large numbers of
snow geese forage along the shoreline and in the fields. Short -eared owls are regularly seen, as
are other unusual sparrows such as Harris's, American tree, white -throated, vesper, and clay -
colored. Many species of wintering raptors, including snowy owl and bald eagle, are attracted to
the area. Further south, the Seattle shoreline along Discovery Park attracts abundant and diverse
migratory bird species, including western grebe, red -throated and common loons, marbled
murrelet, and rhinoceros auklet. Parasitic jaeger, Bonaparte's gull, and common tern are species
present in late summer and fall. Five common species of gull use the beach all winter. Brant
geese are commonly observed during spring migration foraging on eelgrass. Spring- and fall -
migrating shorebirds, such as surfbird and ruddy and black turnstones, use rocky beach areas,
while sanderlings use sandy beaches and remain all winter (Seattle Audubon Society 2006).
Edmonds lies within the regional shoreline between these two important bird stop -over areas.
The City of Edmonds sponsored an International Migratory Bird Day event in 2005 to raise
awareness of the value of the shoreline and adjacent areas as migratory bird habitat.
Birds protected under the ESA that are frequently observed in this region include bald eagle and
marbled murrelet.
Marine mammals, such as harbor seals and sea lions, are frequently observed in the nearshore
areas. Dall's porpoise, harbor porpoise, and killer whale also inhabit the deeper waters of this
regional shoreline area. The Southern Resident population of killer whale, consisting of J, K, and
L pods, is listed under the ESA as endangered. This protected population, which sometimes
appears in central Puget Sound during the height of the fall Chinook and chum salmon
migrations, is not present in Puget Sound from early to mid -February through May or June
(Wiles 2004).
Much of the marine food web is supported by the seasonal concentrated presence of salmon and
trout runs, which provide the basis for commercial, recreational, and tribal fisheries. Chinook,
coho, pink, and chum salmon, steelhead, and cutthroat and bull trout stocks from the Snohomish
River and southern Puget Sound rivers likely migrate along the central Puget Sound western
shoreline as juveniles. Several adult bull trout, rarely caught in Puget Sound, were tagged and
tracked migrating along the Snohomish County shoreline between the Stillaguamish River (north
of the Snohomish River) and Seattle (Salmon Bay and Elliott Bay/Green River) in 2003 (Goetz et
al. 2004). Salmonid species listed as threatened species under the ESA in Puget Sound include
Chinook salmon and bull trout.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 15
The presence of a nearly continuous band of eelgrass along the Snohomish and King County
shoreline provides critical habitat for juvenile salmonids, in addition to other fish species. Forage
fish (e.g., surf smelt, sand lance, and Pacific herring) forage and spawn intertidally and form the
foraging base for salmon and many other species of marine fish and shorebirds.
In this central Puget Sound region near Edmonds, human use of the shoreline is primarily for
transportation, with the BNSF railroad bed constituting the largest area of use and other regional
transportation hubs (e.g., former Unocal pier, WSF terminal, SR-104) comprising smaller areas
of use. Residential housing is the other major use of this regional shoreline area. Commercial
uses, including marinas, piers and docks, restaurants, and offices, occupy a relatively small area
of regional shoreline, clustered in the urban cores of cities. Passive human use, such as
picnicking and beachcombing, is concentrated at the city and county parks that provide parking
and public access. Small "hobo camps" of transients occur at regular intervals along the BNSF
railroad, usually hidden in the lower wooded reaches of the numerous ravines along this
shoreline. Recreational, tribal, and commercial fishing and shellfish harvesting constitute a
major human use of aquatic resources between Everett and Seattle.
3.2.1 Tribal Fisheries
Several tribal nations recognized as "Puget Sound Treaty Tribes" have fishing rights at all "usual
and accustomed grounds and stations" in Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Tribes
have commercial fishing rights for salmon in their usual and accustomed fishing areas and also
have the legal right to harvest shellfish and bottom fish from the same areas. Management of
tribal and commercial fishing is a joint effort of WDFW and the treaty tribes. Recognized tribes
participating in the management of Central Puget Sound fisheries are the Lummi, Suquamish,
Swinomish, and Tulalip (CH2M HILL 2004). Other tribes, including the Upper Skagit,
Duwamish, and Muckleshoot, have also claimed historic use of this area.
Current commercial fisheries near Edmonds include fisheries for salmon, Dungeness crab, spot
prawn, and spiny dogfish. There is a tribal shrimp harvest area located on a 200- to 300-foot
depth band from Point Edwards to roughly one mile north of Picnic Point (CH2M HILL 2004).
WDFW Crustacean Management Region 4, Catch Area 26B and Management Region 2W,
Catch Area 26A have tribal fisheries for Dungeness crab that are open year-round. Many treaty
tribes are involved in coho salmon fishing in Management Area 10, mostly in the vicinity of
Point Edwards (FHWA et al. 1998).
In addition to commercial fishing, these tribes also harvest fish in their usual and accustomed
areas for ceremonial and subsistence purposes. Fishing quotas and fishing open dates are
negotiated from year to year, based on return projections calculated by tribal and WDFW harvest
management biologists. During the past decade, because of poor salmon returns in the same
years, the number of fishing days has dwindled to as few as three days each for the state and
tribal fisheries in Salmon Management Area 10 (CH2M HILL 2004).
3.2.2 Commercial Fisheries
The following information was taken primarily from the Brightwater FEIS (KC DNR WTD
2003). Dungeness crab is the only commercially harvested crab species in Puget Sound, with
the commercial harvest usually extending from October to April. Occasionally there are
commercial harvest openings for short periods during the summer and at other times of the year.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 16
The Edmonds shoreline falls within the WDFW Crustacean Management Region 4, Catch
Area 26B and Management Region 2W, Catch Area 26A. Most of the commercial harvest for
Dungeness crab occurs north of Everett; however, commercial harvesting does occur near
Edmonds in Catch Area 26A. The commercial fishery in Catch Area 26B is currently closed to
commercial harvest.
There is a commercial spot prawn fishery (both state and tribal) in Puget Sound, including in the
vicinity of Edmonds. The management regions and catch areas are the same as those for
Dungeness crab. The state commercial fishery remains open for 1 to 2 months, typically from
June until the end of July. The quota is typically reached quickly and the fishery lasts
approximately two weeks per season. Catch Areas 26A and 26B are two areas that open early to
spot prawn fishing if test fishing shows that fewer than 2 percent of the females have eggs.
Under these conditions, fishing is allowed in these two areas from approximately April 11
through October 15, or until quotas are reached.
There is currently a commercial spiny dogfish fishery in Central Puget Sound. Fishing typically
occurs from Possession Bar south to Port Madison. The primary fishing gear used is long line,
but set nets may also be used. While the fishery is open year-round, most fishing occurs in the
spring and fall. The fishery generally occurs in water depths between -100 to -300 feet Mean
Lower Low Water (MLLW).
3.2.3 Recreational Fisheries
Along the City waterfront are two WDFW management areas: Salmon Management Area 9,
located north of the Edmonds Marina; and Salmon Management Area 10, located south of the
marina. The coho season extends from roughly mid -September to early October, and the chum
season extends from October through November. Salmon Management Area 9 is usually closed
to non -treaty tribal commercial salmon fishing; therefore, the northern border of Salmon
Management Area 10, located south of the Edmonds Marina, is a popular location for coho
salmon fishing.
Sport fishers in Puget Sound target a wide range of salmonids, including coho salmon, king
(Chinook) salmon), steelhead trout, pink salmon, cutthroat trout, and blackmouth (immature
Chinook salmon). Fishing intensity is highest in the fall when salmon return to spawn in
tributary streams and rivers. Sport fishing activity in the vicinity of Edmonds is generally
concentrated off Point Edwards just south of the ferry terminal (Parametrix 2001a, cited in KC
DNR 2003). The Edmonds fishing pier is open year-round for recreational fishing. Several
species of fish are caught off the Edmonds fishing pier, including smelt, Chinook and pink
salmon, rockfish, and perch (WDFW 2003). Invertebrates collected from the fishing pier include
squid, shrimp, and red rock and Dungeness crabs. Clams are also collected in this area.
The central Puget Sound bottomfish sport fishery is also active. Historically, the most important
fish species were rockfish, flatfish, Pacific cod, sablefish, and walleye pollock. Populations of
many of these fish species have significantly declined in recent years, particularly Pacific cod,
walleye pollock and Pacific whiting (hake), which have all been rated as "critical" or "depressed"
by WDFW. Although not recommended by the Washington State Department of Health, because
of water quality concerns, recreational shellfishing occurs along many central Puget Sound
shorelines, particularly at public access beaches such as Marina Beach Park, and Meadowdale
Beach Park. Harvesting for clams and crabs occurs frequently during low tides at these beaches
(Parametrix 2001, cited in KC DNR 2003).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 17
Recreational fishing for spot prawns is an active fishery that typically opens in late April and
remains open for about 2 weeks. The area near the Edmonds Marina is a popular area for spot
prawn fishers. There is a recreational squid fishery in the Central Basin of Puget Sound that
typically occurs from late fall through March. Squid fishing frequently occurs in areas with
public fishing piers.
3.3 Water Quality
There is little water quality information specific to the surface waters of the creeks and Puget
Sound nearshore in the City of Edmonds. A series of studies by Snohomish County (titled
Drainage Needs Reports) on similar streams near Edmonds (Report No. 11, Puget Sound
Tributaries), available from online websites, offer a close approximation to stream conditions
within the City. Other freshwater programs, either conducted by King County or administered by
the State (such as Ecology's Rivers and Streams Water Quality Monitoring program), tended to
focus on highly urbanized areas with known pollutant sources based on current or past recent
industrial activities or densely populated areas with relatively large watershed sub -basins (e.g.,
Thornton Creek, Lake Washington). These studies were not particularly applicable to Edmonds
streams or Lake Ballinger.
Groundwater quality in the City of Edmonds is generally good and has no widespread
contamination issues, as reported in a U.S. Geologic Services (USGS) study on groundwater
systems and quality in western Snohomish County (Thomas et al. 1997). However, the USGS
study also notes the potential for chemicals released from various human activities to locally
impact groundwater quality. This would include a potential for groundwater contamination at
various locations in the area from leaking underground storage tanks, which are listed by
Ecology, along with the nature and extent of contamination, the affected medium (e.g., soil,
surface water, or groundwater), and the status of cleanup efforts. Contaminated sites are most
likely to be present in areas with commercial or industrial development. Ecology's database was
reviewed for properties within the Edmonds shoreline area listed as contaminated sites. The
former Unocal site and the Chevron Richmond Beach Asphalt Terminal property were the largest
industrial properties in the Edmonds area; both properties have documented or suspected soil and
groundwater contamination. The Port of Edmonds includes two locations along Admiral Way
listed as both groundwater and soil contaminated sites that have been undergoing cleanup actions
since 1995, but are not yet de -listed. Other properties within the SMP boundary areas that were
listed on Ecology's 2006 database of contaminated sites have been reported as cleaned up.
3.3.1 Freshwater Quality
The Edmonds Watershed tributaries flow into Puget Sound, which is classified as Class AA
(Extraordinary) by WAC-201A, and thus all tributaries in the study area are designated as Class
AA for water quality by the State. The applicable water quality criteria for Class AA freshwater
in Washington are summarized in the Snohomish County Drainage Needs Report (2002).
The Snohomish County Drainage Needs Report (2002) evaluated nearby Lund's Gulch and
Norma Creeks and concluded, "The overall water quality of Norma Creek is poor, and is typical
of other well -developed urban residential watersheds. Degradation of water quality can largely
be attributed to pollutants associated with the surrounding land uses, and a lack of treatment
facilities. Although few water quality data are available for Lund's Gulch Creek or Picnic Point
Creek, the water quality of these creeks can be expected to be comparable to that of Norma
Creek, based on the general similarities in land use, topography, and observation of stream
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 18
conditions. Norma Creek is not meeting Class AA criteria for fecal coliform and dissolved
oxygen, and is on the Ecology 1998 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies for both parameters."
Other water quality problems in adjacent area streams include elevated metals and high sediment
loads. The primary sources of these water quality problems are presumed to be urban residential
areas, commercial areas, roadways, and excess sediment from eroding stream banks, slopes, and
construction sites.
Other water quality exceedances in Norma Creek included fecal coliform, dissolved oxygen, high
sediment bed loads, and excess sedimentation in the lower reaches of both Norma Creek and
Lund's Gulch Creek. Copper, lead, and zinc, which are usually the most significant metals in
urban runoff, have been detected in water samples from Norma Creek. The levels of total
recoverable metals in Norma Creek are comparable to metals concentrations for other built -out
urban residential areas, such as in urban King County. Long-term sampling in Norma Creek
shows that the stream appears to be meeting Class AA standards for temperature and pH, and
these parameters are not a problem. Temperature and pH are often measured to assess stream
conditions for fish health.
Sampling of benthic invertebrate populations has been used to determine the health of streams in
Snohomish County. Results indicate relatively poor biological health due to any number of
factors including flow regime, sediment transport, streambed habitat, and water quality. It should
be noted, however, that the sample site is in a depositional zone, in which the streambed
conditions are often not conducive to a diversity of benthic invertebrates.
In summary, the predominant water quality problems likely found in Edmonds and adjacent
county streams are heavy sediment loads in the lower reaches, and high bacterial concentrations
and low dissolved oxygen in the upper reaches.
Ecology maintains a water quality 303(d) list, composed of waterbodies where tested pollutants
have exceeded thresholds established by the state surface water quality standards
(WAC 173-201A). Streams that do not appear on the 303(d) list may fall short of that pollutant
threshold, but may not be free of pollutants as not all streams are tested as part of this process.
Therefore, absence from the 303(d) list may not necessarily indicate that the waterbody is not
impaired. No streams within Edmonds were found on the 303(d) list. The 1998 303(d) list was
the last one submitted to and approved by EPA. Lake Ballinger is on the 303(d) waterbody list
for total phosphorus exceedance.
Lake Ballinger water quality has been studied for more than 30 years; problems identified in the
mid-1970s were partially addressed in the late 1980's, but water quality continues to decline,
despite limited efforts to reduce non -point source pollutants entering the lake. In 1977, a Phase I
Federal Clean Lakes Restoration Project identified water quality degradation related to surface
water and stormwater runoff from the surrounding drainage basin that caused high nutrient loads
and fluctuating water levels, resulting in periodic flooding, blue-green algae blooms,
hypolimnetic anoxia, high turbidity, low transparency, and sediment phosphorous recycling. In
the mid-1980s, the lake was placed on the 303(d) list for failing to meet the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) human health criteria for total phosphorous. A decade later, control
measures were implemented, using stormwater diversion and structural controls, hypolimnetic
injections/withdrawal (to reduce sediment phosphorous), lake level reduction, and public
education. Initially, erosion stabilization efforts on Hall Creek (revegetation of streambanks and
adjacent slopes) and construction of two regional sedimentation ponds resulted in reduced
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 19
phosphorus and sediment inputs into the lake (KCM 1986). Hypolimnetic injection and
withdrawal greatly reduced internal phosphorus loading for three years. However, high
phosphorus and ammonia loading, primarily from Halls Creek, increased dramatically in the third
year due to deterioration of surface water quality throughout the developing Lake Ballinger
basin, resulting in increased phosphorus, ammonia, and biological oxygen demand in the lake.
This poor -quality surface water was injected into the lake bottom, causing the lake to become
anoxic (oxygen -starved) in 1986. A series of recommendations, including more stringent
controls on stormwater quality in the basin and improved maintenance of the hypolimnion
injection system, have been proposed recently (City of Mountlake Terrace 2005).
In 1990, the City of Mountlake Terrace treated Lake Ballinger with alum to reduce the excessive
phosphorus concentration in the lake. The clarity of the lake was increased by 40% and the
phosphorus levels were reduced by 70% within 48 hours of the treatment. Although the short-
term result of the alum treatment was satisfactory, the longevity of the treatment has become
limited by continued external phosphorus loading. Currently, the increased external nutrient
loading exceeds the internal (phosphorus) sediment component of loading and appears to be
directly and indirectly (through recycling of increased productivity) driving the lake ecosystem
(Bell -McKinnon 2006).
A Total Daily Maximum Load (TDML) for total phosphorous was approved by the EPA for Lake
Ballinger in 1993. A TMDL of 30.0 mg/L was recommended by Ecology. In 2006, a study plan
was developed by Ecology to monitor the effectiveness of the TMDL and determine if past
restoration treatments had been effective in restoring Lake Ballinger to its designated uses.
Surface water quality in the Lake Ballinger basin continues to fluctuate seasonally. At times,
standards for temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, nitrates and phosphates, and coliform
organisms are violated (City of Mountlake Terrace 2003). Residential runoff is a primary
pollutant source in the spring and fall due to chemical applications to lawns and gardens. Rapid
stormwater runoff from nearby urban development is another cause of seasonal water quality
change. For example, stormwater runoff from large parking lots in the industrial district of the
City is the major problem for the Halls Creek / Lake Ballinger drainage system (City of
Mountlake Terrace 2003).
The Washington Department of Health issued a state fish advisory recommending that people
limit their consumption of largemouth and smallmouth bass from fresh waterbodies in
Washington State, due to various persistent and harmful chemical pollutants, such as mercury
and PCBs. A recent national study on mercury deposition (USGS 2000) found mercury
(presumably from air -borne deposition from an ASARCO smelter) in Lake Ballinger and Lake
Washington sediment. Lake Washington sediment showed mercury concentrations increased
above background in the early 20th century, leveled off between 1930 and 1970, and fell steadily
through the 1960s. In a different trend, Lake Ballinger sediment data showed increases from the
1960s through the 1990s. The sources causing the increases are not currently known.
The outlet of Lake Ballinger is McAleer Creek, which flows into Lake Washington, within the
WRIA 8 Cedar-Sammamish watershed. Water quality samples collected by Ecology between
1991 and 1997 were shown to have high levels of fecal coliform violating water quality criteria.
High fecal coliform is typical in urbanized areas with large populations of pets and wildlife (e.g.,
geese, raccoons, etc.).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 20
3.3.2 Marine Water Quality
There are few marine water quality data collected along Edmonds or in adjacent marine waters.
Although numerous water quality monitoring programs have sampled central Puget Sound
shorelines for decades (e.g., Ecology and WDFW's Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program
[PSAMP] for water and sediment, Ecology's Beach Environmental Assessment and
Communication of Health [BEACH] program, Ecology's South Puget Sound Marine
Environmental Modeling program, Ecology's Marine Water Quality Monitoring Program) water
quality sampling stations are typically located within major urban centers with known
contamination, such as Seattle and Everett, or rural locations, such as Whidbey Island. Thus,
few site -specific data were available and the nearest data locations, in urbanized industrial bays
several miles away, were not appropriate for comparison. Applicable marine water quality data
are reported below.
Table 3 shows areas on the 303(d) list for recent violations in marine water quality samples.
Fecal coliform and ammonia as nitrogen (ammonia-N) are used as indicators of animal and
human waste and fertilizers from landscape runoff. Landscape runoff enters the marine
shoreline through creeks and numerous city stormwater drainages that discharge into Puget
Sound (see Figure 6).
Table 3. Waterbodies with Recent Violations of
State Water Quality Standards in Edmonds,
Washington
Through Ecology's BEACH program, Snohomish County conducts weekly water quality
monitoring of recreational areas from May through September, for bacteria that may pose a risk
to people using the waterfront. Within Edmonds, water quality is monitored at Marina Beach
Park (South Edmonds) and Edmonds Underwater Park. Elevated levels of enterococcus bacteria
were found at Marina Beach Park in 2004 and 2005, but not at concentrations triggering an
advisory to water users or a beach closure, although the park is closed to shellfish harvesting.
The south section of Marina Beach Park is an off -leash dog park, which likely contributes
substantial enterococcus bacteria to the area.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 21
4. Inventory and Land Use Patterns
4.1 Existing Land Use
The City of Edmonds is located in southwest Snohomish County. Edmonds has a highly
developed and well -established land use pattern (Figure 8). The Edmonds marine shoreline
extends 5.2 miles from north to south. The City's northern border is the Meadowdale Beach Park
shared by unincorporated Snohomish County and Woodway to the south. Unincorporated
Snohomish County, the City of Lynnwood, the City of Mountlake Terrace, and the City of
Shoreline bound the rest of the City (see Figure 1).
The BNSF Railway borders a majority of the Edmonds marine shoreline. The railroad tracks
form a barrier between the natural shoreline and the existing residential neighborhoods for over
half the Edmonds marine shoreline. This part of the City's marine shoreline is primarily
characterized by a seawall and fill that created the BNSF railroad bed.
Approximately 2,000 feet south of the northern marine shoreline border of the City is an old pier
structure once used in the fishing industry. This is commonly referred to as Laebugten's Wharf.
The pile -supported wharf structure is currently unused, except as a fish pen.
Edmonds' southern shoreline is the current location for the Washington State Ferry (WSF)
terminal to Kingston, in addition to commercial and residential properties, waterfront parks,
walkways, and the Port of Edmonds Marina. On either side of the ferry terminal are two regional
parks, Brackett's Landing North and South, respectively. Collectively, these parks include public
beach, picnic areas, interpretive information, public restrooms, a parking lot, and showers. Paths
lead to a wheelchair -accessible jetty. On the northern side of the ferry is another regional park,
Edmonds' Underwater Park. This park was one of the first officially designated underwater parks
on the West Coast. The facility includes 27 acres of tide and bottom lands and was established as
a marine preserve and sanctuary in 1970.
From the ferry terminal to the Port of Edmonds Marina is a public waterfront walkway. This
public facility offers wheelchair -accessible access to the waterfront while acting as a breakwater
for existing residential and commercial structures within the shoreline area. At the southern
portion of this walkway, at the northern edge of the marina, is a city park and public fishing pier.
Olympic Beach Park is located just north of the fishing pier. The shoreline jurisdiction extends
east to the vicinity of Railroad Avenue from Main Street and south to the vicinity of Dayton
Street. Between Railroad Avenue and the City's walkway are a number of commercial offices, a
senior center, a parking lot, and private residential condominiums.
From Dayton Avenue south to the southern edge of the Edmonds Marina, the upland jurisdiction
of the shoreline extends to the vicinity of Admiral Way, including Edmonds Marina. The Port of
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 22
Edmonds owns and operates the marina and adjacent uplands, including the Harbor Square
Development and the land adjacent to the Edmonds Marsh.
The marina includes 676 wet moorage slips and 279 dry storage spaces. More than 50 guest
moorage slips are available for overnight and short-term stays. The Port provides two boat
haulout facilities, showers, laundry facilities, restrooms, fuel, and boat launch for both tenants
and guests. A rubble mound breakwater that extends some 2,400 feet from north to south
protects the marina. The marina was originally constructed in 1961 with a major reconstruction
in 1998 following destruction by a major winter storm.
On Port property upland from the marina and within the shoreline jurisdiction are several
businesses and restaurants with associated parking facilities. In addition, the Port Administrative
offices are located on the uplands, east of the marina, within the shoreline jurisdiction.
The southern -most portion of the Edmonds marine shoreline jurisdiction ends at two beach parks,
referred to collectively as Marina Beach Park. North Marina Beach, between the marina and the
former Unocal pier, includes a large open grassy area with picnic and playground facilities, as
well as car -top boat launch opportunities. South Marina Beach, south of the pier, is a designated
off -leash dog park area maintained by volunteers.
Edmonds' freshwater shoreline consists of the south and west shores of Lake Ballinger. The
eastern half of Lake Ballinger is located in the City of Mountlake Terrace. This shoreline is
zoned single family residential.
4.2 Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Corresponding Zoning Designations
The GMA of Washington requires that local governments must adopt comprehensive plans to
provide plans and policies for orderly development of land within the local jurisdiction. The
corresponding zoning (see Figure 3) must be consistent with and implement the goals and
policies of the local comprehensive plan. The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, adopted in
2004, contains those goals and policies that are implemented through the local zoning code found
in Titles 16 and 17 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). The two
documents are now consistent in that the comprehensive plan and the zoning code support the
same land uses.
The City's comprehensive plan designates the northern portion of the City of Edmonds marine
shoreline for residential use, Single Family — Resource. This corresponds to lower -density single
family zoning designations such as RSW-12, RS-12, and RS-20, which allow densities of less
than 4 dwelling units per acre. Due to the railroad tracks and easements located between the
uplands and beach areas, there is no upland access to residential properties that would justify the
development of waterfront facilities, such as piers and docks.
Between Brackett's Landing North and South, the shoreline is designated park or open space
under the City comprehensive plan. From Brackets Landing South, the shoreline jurisdiction is
designated Shoreline Commercial or Master Plan Development. This entire area is part of the
Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. The Edmonds comprehensive plan contains a full
description of the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center, including a vision, goals, transportation
issues related to development of the Edmonds Crossing --a multi -modal facility for ferry, bus, and
commuter train facilities --and a set of downtown waterfront plan policies. This portion of the
2004 comprehensive plan also contains a detailed description for areas of the downtown
waterfront area.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 23
The southern -most portion of the Edmonds shoreline is designated master plan development,
which includes the proposed Edmonds Crossing project.
Along Lake Ballinger, the comprehensive plan designation is Single Family -Urban 1. This
designation corresponds to the zoning designations of RS-6 and RS-8 translating to between
5 and 8 dwelling units per acre. The Lake Ballinger shoreline is fully developed with single
family residences. Almost all of these homes also have piers or docks.
4.3 Roads and Transportation Facilities
Edmonds is served by a series of State and local roads. SR 104 runs from the east at Interstate 5
through the southern part of Edmonds, ending at the State of Washington Ferry Terminal.
SR 524 begins in Lynnwood at Interstate 5 and runs west through the center of Edmonds from
the crest of the hill and down into the city center. Local roads provide access throughout
Edmonds. These roads provide access for Community Transit, the commuter bus service for
South Snohomish County. Commuter Park and Ride lots are located throughout Edmonds and
are served by Community Transit bus service.
The rail lines along the Edmonds' shoreline are primarily used by BNSF for freight service, but
also provide Amtrak passenger train service through Edmonds. Sound Transit provides daily
commuter service to and from Seattle.
Washington State Ferries operates ferry service from Edmonds to Kingston providing access to
the Olympic Peninsula. This is one of the busiest commuter ferry terminals in Puget Sound, as
well as one of the major access points from the east side of Puget Sound to the west.
4.4 Wastewater and Stormwater Utilities
The City of Edmonds operates and maintains a wastewater treatment plant on the corner of
SR 104 and Dayton Street that was originally put into service in 1957 to provide primary
treatment and was upgraded to secondary treatment by 1991. The current average annual flow
rate is approximately 6 MGD. The plant has primary treatment and sedimentation, air -activated
sludge secondary processes, and chlorine disinfection for liquid treatment (KC DNR
WTD 2003).
The City of Edmonds, through agreement with King County, Ronald Wastewater District,
Olympic View Water and Sewer District and the Cities of Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace,
also provides wastewater service to the Town of Woodway, the Richmond Beach service area,
the City of Mountlake Terrace, the Olympic View Water and Sewer District, the Ronald
Wastewater District, and areas of the City of Lynnwood (Snohomish County 2002). King
County uses its Lake Ballinger pump station to pump wastewater generated in Mountlake Terrace
and the Lake Ballinger area of Edmonds to either the Edmonds or West Point Treatment Plants.
The Unocal site is currently serviced by a private septic system (FHWA et al. 1998).
The City of Edmonds also owns two secondary treated wastewater outfalls and a number of
wastewater trunk lines. These trunk lines include two 36-inch-diameter outfalls that enter Puget
Sound north of the Port of Edmonds' breakwater. Both outfalls extend approximately 1,200 feet
into the sound at a depth of about -60 feet MLLW (FHWA et al. 1998). In addition, the
Lynnwood Regional Wastewater Plant, a 7.4-mgd capacity wastewater treatment plant, is located
in the City of Edmonds in Segment B. The Lynnwood Treatment Plant's outfall extends
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 24
approximately 1,000 feet into Puget Sound, near 170th Street SW. The outfall is a 36-inch high -
density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe located at a depth of approximately -200 feet MLLW (Davis,
personal communication 2002).
Stormwater drainage information, including locations and diameters of stormwater outfalls that
pass through Edmonds' Shoreline Master Plan jurisdictional area, is shown in Figure 6 (City of
Edmonds 2003). The city provides stormwater catchment basins and maintains them by
conducting regular clean -out efforts and annual inspections. Solid material is mechanically
settled in the catchment basins. The city also administers a program to react and respond to
illegal discharges (City of Edmonds 2006a). The area southwest of Edmonds Marsh on the
former Unocal property has stormwater system separate from the City. Because it discharges
through City shorelands, it is included in this inventory. The stormwater collection and treatment
system that was used on the 27-acre Unocal property includes a series of catch basins connected
by underground concrete pipes that served the upper and lower yards (EMCON 1994 cited in
CH2M HILL 2004). Much of that system remains in place although the Unocal facility is no
longer operating and site demolition and clean-up is underway. The Unocal stormwater system
operates as follows:
During normal precipitation events, all of the catch basins drained into a duplex sump, and the
collected stormwater was pumped into an oil/water separator in the lower yard. Any recoverable
oil was skimmed from the oil/water separator, and the treated stormwater was pumped into
Detention Basin 2. Flows were discharged from Detention Basin 2 into Willow Creek, in the
ditch section adjacent to the BNSF tracks, via a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES)-permitted outfall. If this treatment system exceeded capacity, stormwater was routed
from Detention Basin 2 into a larger detention basin through a spillway. The large detention
basin has no outlet; therefore, after high flows subside, stormwater is pumped back through the
oil/water separator and eventually into Willow Creek. During very high tides and heavy rainfall
events, stormwater was discharged directly from the oil/water separator into Willow Creek via
NPDES-permitted outfall 001 (EMCON 1994 cited in CH2M HILL 2004). This was estimated
to occur three to four times a year.
4.5 Existing Public Access Sites
Public access to the marine shoreline is available within the City in seven areas: Meadowdale
County Park (Lund's Gulch), Southwest County Park (Perrinville Creek), Edmonds Underwater
Park, Brackett's Landing Park (north and south units), Olympic Beach Park and Fishing Pier, the
Port of Edmonds Marina, and Marina Beach Park (north and south units). The BNSF railroad is
privately owned, and pedestrian access across the tracks is prohibited, except at designated
locations due to safety concerns. Edmonds Marsh and the adjacent Wildlife Sanctuary are also
publicly accessible, with a boardwalk and viewing areas provided. Public access to Lake
Ballinger within the City is located at the end of McAleer Way.
The City of Edmonds provides public access sites to the marine shoreline primarily along the
southern portion of its 5.4 mile shoreline. Waterfront public parks are located along the shoreline
on both sides of the Washington State Ferry Terminal at Brackett's Landing North and South.
Waterfront access is available at Olympic Beach Park and Fishing Pier where Dayton Street
intersects with the water. Another major waterfront park, Marina Beach Park, is located at the
southern -most portion of the Edmonds marine shoreline.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 25
The City of Edmonds provides public access (for fishing, swimming, and hand -launching small
boats) at the west side of Lake Ballinger off of McAleer Way. Other public access to Lake
Ballinger located in the City of Mountlake Terrace.
4.6 Historical/Cultural Resources
The Unocal treatment plant site, Point Edwards, and the City are within territory attributed to the
Snohomish, Suquamish, and Snoqualmie people. The Snoqualmie may have had a winter village
or a permanent fishing camp used on an annual basis at Edmonds. The Suquamish fished for
salmon in the waters off Edmonds and gathered cattails at Edmonds. (Haeberlin and Gunther
1930, Turner 1976, Tweddell 1953, Kennedy and Larson 1984, Lane 1974, Miller 1999, Snyder
1988 cited in KC DNR WTD 2003).
Edmonds lies within lands and waters once controlled by the Suquamish Tribe. At the time of
historic contact, there was a large population in southern Puget Sound consisting of eight closely
related tribal groupings: Twana-Skokomish, Nisqually, Puyallup, Duwamish, Suquamish,
Skykomish, Snoqualmie, and Muckleshoot—all of whom spoke Coast Salish languages (Wessen
and Stilson 1987 cited in CH2M HILL 2004). These peoples were skilled fishermen, hunters,
and plant collectors who employed a settlement and subsistence system marked by a central base
or winter village and a cycle of movements to smaller, more informal, settlements at different
times of the year to exploit locally available resources. The winter village was a focal point of
social and ceremonial life.
Living along the Sound, the Suquamish had direct access to intertidal and marine resources, and
their principal settlements were located adjacent to or on modern saltwater beaches. The
Edmonds waterfront area, with its generally flat beach and adjacent intertidal estuary/wetland
marsh, is a spot that would have been most favorable for the location of one or more prehistoric
or proto-historic Suquamish settlements (CH2M HILL 2004).
Suquamish subsistence patterns along the western shores of Puget Sound are similar to those
reported for the nearby Duwamish who inhabited the Seattle waterfront area. The Duwamish and
their neighbors (Suquamish) practiced a seasonal round that consisted of spring, summer, and fall
migrations to fishing grounds, berry and root patches, and shellfishing areas, with retirement to a
sedentary lifestyle in the winter longhouses. The fall fisheries were crucial to their subsistence
because they provided dried or smoked food for the winter months.
In 1841, Lt. Charles Wilkes USN of the U.S. Exploring Expedition named Point Edwards `Point
Edmund,' presumably in honor of his son. Early city history recounts the pioneering settlement
by George and Etta Brackett in 1870, followed by the City's destination as a Mosquito Fleet stop,
a logging community, and the home of 11 shingle mills. The first cedar shingle mill was built
near 220 Railroad Avenue about 1890, at the time the City of Edmonds incorporated.
Between 1889 and 1891, a seawall and associated backfill were constructed into the upper
foreshore by the Seattle & Montana Railroad (later part of the Great Northern) to Edmonds. The
fill was constructed to defend the overlying railroad from wave erosion and burial by landslide
colluvium from adjacent receding bluffs. By 1910, eight trains stopped daily and a depot was
built. The present station was built in 1956.
The number of mills grew rapidly because of the availability of quality timber close at hand,
unlimited source of water power, and good transportation. At the height of the shingle industry,
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 26
mills stretched along the Edmonds waterfront. The remains of a later (1930's-era) mill are still
visible in the upper reach of Fruitdale Creek.
Brackett's Landing is on the Washington Historical Register as an Exploration/Settlement site in
recognition of Etta and William Brackett, the first European -American settlers in the area that
would become Edmonds (WDAHP 2006). Early inhabitants, numbering about one thousand,
were mostly loggers, shingle sawyers, boom -men, kneebolters, and shingle weavers who were
dependent on the mills. Rail spurs served the mills and cargoes were also shipped by coastwise
steamers. In 1902, Allen Yost and family formed the Edmonds Spring Water Company, dammed
upper Shell Creek, and piped the retained water into the town for consumption. Remnants of
these dams and settling tanks are visible along the Shell Creek and Weir park trails (City of
Edmonds 2006b).
Along the waterfront, a shingle mill in operation in 1907 continued production until the early
1950's. Receding forests and competition eventually forced its closure in 1951. An auto ferry
began operating between Edmonds and Kingston in 1923, and later to Port Townsend, Port
Ludlow, and Victoria.
The Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data
(WISAARD) database was searched for State and National Register listed properties within
Edmonds. This comprehensive database provides information available for over 1800 registered
historical sites including images of the property, a short summary description about the
significance of each resource and a link to the nomination document as a PDF file.
Archeological sites that are National Register listed are included. As of 2006, there were no
nationally registered historic places within the Edmonds shorelands. The Edmonds Crossing
project area (former Unocal site, partially bordering Willow Creek and Edmonds Marsh) contains
no prehistoric or historic archaeological sites that are currently listed on, nominated to, or
determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (CH2M HILL 2004). A
prehistoric archaeological site was discovered on May 3, 1995, during field reconnaissance along
the small access road to the Deer Creek Fish Hatchery. The site was named the Deer Creek
Hatchery Shell Scatter and was designated as site 45-SN-310 by OAHP. It is located about
50 feet or more north of the present access road, northwest of the hatchery building and stock
pond (CH2M HILL 2004). This site is not within the SMP area.
4.7 Toxic or Hazardous Material Clean-up Sites and Dredge Material Disposal Sites
According to the federal and state environmental agency databases reviewed, the WSF terminal
is a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) small -quantity generator of hazardous
waste (less than 2.2 pounds of acute hazardous waste or 220 pounds of other hazardous waste per
month) (CH2M HILL 2004).
The areas north and south of the ferry terminal have had industrial uses in the past dating back to
at least 1909. The primary industries in the immediate vicinity were shingle mills. The shingle
mill south of the dock is noted as destroyed by fire in the 1926 Sanborn map. The 1955 aerial
photograph and later photographs suggest that the area south of the terminal was used as a
boatyard (CH2M HILL 2004).
The SR-104/Edmonds Crossing FEIS (CH2M HILL 2004) reviewed numerous databases for
hazardous waste information in the downtown Edmonds area, including the EPA National
Priority List, Resource Conservation Recovery Information System, Comprehensive
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 27
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System, Corrective Action
Report, Emergency Response Notification System, Facility Index System, and Toxic Substance
Control Act; the USDOT Hazardous Material Information Reporting System; and the
Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) Leaking Storage Tanks Site List, Confirmed and
Suspected Contaminated Sites List, Statewide Underground Storage Tank Site Report, and Solid
Waste Facilities Handbook. The FEIS documented the locations of historic or potential current
hazardous waste. For this report, the locations were screened for their proximity to the shoreline
area. The following sites within the shoreline area were associated with known or suspected
chemical contaminants, including total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOCs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and metals:
• WSF ferry terminal (current RCRA Small Quantity Generator (SQG), former freight
operations; with SVOCs, metals)
• Anderson Marine (former shingle mill, leaking underground storage tank, reported
cleaned up in Ecology's LUST database)
• Commercial buildings north of marina (former shingle mill, lumber yard, paint
warehouse; with TPH, SVOCs, metals)
• Boat storage and maintenance area (former general location of Washington Steel and
Bolt Company, BNSF railway maintenance facility; with possible dredge spoil fill,
with TPH, SVOCs, polychlorinated biphenols or PCBs, metals)
Port of Edmonds Furbreeders Building (leaking underground storage tanks)
• Port of Edmonds underground storage tanks (new), possible dredged spoils fill,
marine fueling facility (with TPH, SVOCs, metals)
• Former area of Willow Creek/Unocal/Port of Edmonds Dry Storage discharge (water
discharge, possible dredge spoil fill, with SVOCs, metals, and TPH contamination in
soil and groundwater)
In addition, marine sediment north of the marina was reported to be adversely affected by historic
operations and discharges (CH2M HILL 2004); however, sediment investigations in the Edwards
Point area did not find evidence of contamination (KC DNR WTD 2003).
The largest potential hazardous waste facility in the Edmonds area is the Unocal site. The facility
was constructed and operated along the top, side, and base of a hill in an area bordered by Puget
Sound marine shorelands, Willow Creek, and Edmonds marsh (partially filled during the many
phases of facility construction). Although the site is outside the city of Edmonds and its SMP
boundaries, the facility partially drains into Edmonds and adjacent SMP areas. The following
detailed description of the facility is taken from the SR-104/Edmonds Crossing FEIS (CH2M
HILL 2004).
"The Unocal Point Edwards facility was constructed and put in operation in the early
1920s. The site is approximately 44 acres (EMCON 1994; 1995; 1996a). The facility
was used as a bulk fuel terminal for storage and distribution of fuel from approximately
1923 until 1991 and would be categorized as a "substantially contaminated site" using
FHWA terminology (FHWA 1997). The ... 29-acre lower yard was used for other
operations including dock operations, railcar unloading, truck loading, laboratory
operations, warehousing, and other facility maintenance and support activities. In
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 28
addition, an asphalt refinery, constructed in about 1953 and dismantled around 1980
(EMCON 1995), operated in the lower yard. A total of 10 underground storage tanks
(USTs) were located at the facility. According to EMCON (1994, 1995), six of the USTs
have been removed... Two detention basins are located in the lower yard along with two
oil/water separators. Surface water runoff from the site was once directed to the
detention basins and discharged to a tidal basin that empties to Puget Sound. Discharge
from this area was easily observed in early aerial photographs. In the 1960s, when the
Port of Edmonds Marina was constructed, the discharge stream was covered and rerouted
through culverts.
A number of petroleum product releases to the environment have been reported for the
facility, including nine spills recorded between 1954 and 1990. According to EMCON
(1994), the spills ranged from a few gallons to 80,000 gallons and involved fuel oils,
heavy fuel oils, gasoline, off -specification emulsified asphalt, and diesel. Other minor
releases have occurred on land, but have not entered water. EMCON (1994) reports that
periodic product releases have occurred within the tank farm, loading facilities, and
piping systems, but complete records of these events are not available. EMCON (1994)
also provides information on a diesel release to Puget Sound that occurred from a 1971
derailment on the BNSF tracks immediately south of the Unocal pier approach trestle,
and a spill of asphalt cutter stock to the Sound in 1990 from the Chevron facility 1 mile
south of Point Edwards.
According to the environmental agency databases reviewed, the site is reported to be on
EPA and Ecology contaminated sites lists, as an UST and LUST site, and as a RCRA
large -quantity generator of hazardous waste. Ecology and Unocal have entered into an
Agreed Order for conducting the site RI and FS under MTCA. Before entering into the
Agreed Order, a number of voluntary site investigations and environmental clean-ups
were conducted at the site. An RI was conducted by Unocal in compliance with the
Agreed Order with Ecology. The RI was conducted between October 1994 and
August 1996. Additional quarterly and annual groundwater monitoring and product
recovery has continued through 2002 (Brearley, pers. comm., 2003). According to the
Ecology Site Manager, the current schedule is to finalize the RI and issue a supplemental
RI/FS by the fall of 2003. These documents will be released for public comment at that
time (South, personal communication, 2003).
According to the draft RI report, the primary environmental impacts at the existing
Unocal property include free product on the groundwater table, related petroleum
hydrocarbon chemicals in subsurface soil and groundwater, and paint/sand blast grit -
related metals in the surface soil. Free product has been found in six plumes in the lower
yard: the railroad spur plume, truck loading rack plume, asphalt plant plume, RW-2
plume, office plume, and Detention Basin No. 1 plume. These plumes are the result of
releases during former Unocal operations. Recovered product results indicate that the
free product consists of gasoline -range, diesel -range, and oil -range hydrocarbons. Field
observations made during the RI have been interpreted by EMCON (1996a) to indicate
that much of the free product may be heavier -end hydrocarbons. Based on product
thickness measurements over the last 10 years, product migration rates are estimated by
EMCON (1996a) at less than 6 feet per year.
Groundwater at the existing Unocal property generally flows to the northwest toward
Puget Sound. The groundwater table is present within 4 to 8 feet below the ground
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 29
surface in most areas. Petroleum hydrocarbon constituents dissolved in groundwater
were primarily found near free product plumes and in areas with freephase product
trapped in the vadose zone near the water table. These chemicals were found at or above
MTCA clean-up levels for TPH and benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, or total xylenes
(BETX) in site shallow wells (EMCON, 1996a). Except for zinc, metals concentrations
in groundwater were generally low, with the highest concentrations found in isolated
locations around the terminal. Zinc was the most frequently detected metal in
groundwater, with the highest concentrations found in wells along the perimeter of the
site. Non-BETX volatile organic compounds were not found in groundwater at the
terminal (EMCON, 1996a).
EMCON reports that high concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in soil were
primarily found near free product plumes and in areas with free -phase product trapped in
the vadose zone. High concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons were also found in the
material within Detention Basin No. 1. Elevated metals concentrations were found in
surface soil in areas of sand -blast grit and paint chips that occur under pipe runs and
manifolds, in isolated grit piles, and in certain tank basins. Leachable metals
concentrations were low, indicating that leaching of metals from surface soil is not likely.
Additionally, metals were not found in substantial concentrations in subsurface soil.
Petroleum -related chemicals were detected in on -site stormwater, primarily from the
lower yard. Non-BETX volatile organic compounds, and oil and grease were not found
in stormwater. Similarly, these constituents were also not detected in surface water in the
drainage ditch and tidal basin adjacent to the site, nor were TPHs in the gas, diesel, or oil
ranges. The highest metals concentrations, and elevated PAH concentrations, were found
in surface water upgradient of the site. Biotoxicity testing results for sediments collected
in the drainage ditch along the existing Unocal property boundaries exceeded clean-up
screening level criteria at five of 15 sample locations. No discernible pattern was
identified by EMCON (1996a) that would point to a single sediment toxicity source.
However, the draft RI report concluded that the potential was low for toxic effects further
downgradient from the upland tidal basin in the drainage ditch. No sampling and
analysis of offshore marine sediments was performed for the RI."
Since the draft RI was submitted, Unocal has begun interim clean-up actions at the site under the
supervision of Ecology. The following clean-up actions have occurred or are ongoing:
"Lower yard interim remedial action 2001-2003. Free petroleum product and associated
petroleum -contaminated soil were removed from four areas of the lower yard east of
Willow Creek/drainage ditch and shipped off site for thermal treatment. The excavations
extended vertically to between 6.5 and 10.5 feet below grade and extended laterally until
product -saturated soil was not observed in the excavation side walls (or until structural
concerns made it prudent to cease excavation). Additionally, the excavation was kept
open for several weeks to allow for removal of floating product from the groundwater
surface. This work was performed primarily between August 28 and November 7, 2001.
A final interim action as -built report was submitted to Ecology in November 2002 (Maul
Foster & Alongi, November 30, 2002). According to Unocal, no free product has been
observed in monitoring wells in the area since the action was completed (Brearley, pers.
comm.., 2003). A second lower yard interim remedial action was completed in
December 2003 that included excavation of contaminated materials from Detention Basin
No. 1 and the southwest lower yard. The excavated materials were transported and
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 30
disposed of at an offsite landfill (Brearley, pers. comm., 2004; South, pers. Comm.,
2004).
The FS for clean-up alternatives for contaminated soils and groundwater at the existing
Unocal property has not been completed. A draft FS report was submitted to Ecology
in 2004, but the agency was notified that the document is to be replaced with a revised
version. Ecology is deferring review of the FS until receipt of the revised document
(South, pers. comm., 2004).
Environmental clean-ups at the Unocal property that have occurred at the lower yard
(adjacent to Edmonds and near SMP boundaries) include an interim action to remove free
product from groundwater and petroleum contaminated from four areas was completed
in 2002. Contaminated materials from Detention Basin No. 1 and the southwest lower
yard were excavated and disposed of offsite during an interim action completed in
December 2003."
Studies were conducted at the Point Edwards site, west of the BNSF right-of-way, including the
Marina Beach Park and subtidal areas in the vicinity of the Unocal pier and the two stormwater
outfalls and the Port of Edmonds South Marina dry storage area. Soil and groundwater samples
from Marina Beach Park were analyzed for TPH as gasoline, diesel, and heavy oil, and metals.
Although TPH (as heavy oil) was detected in soil, concentrations were substantially below
MTCA Method A clean-up levels for unrestricted land use and as such do not represent a threat
to human health or the environment. Groundwater samples collected from the boreholes were
analyzed for TPH as gasoline, diesel, and heavy oil, and volatile organic compounds. These
contaminants were not detected in groundwater.
A subsurface investigation at the Port of Edmonds' South Marina, north of Marina Beach Park,
confirmed the presence of TPH in soil and groundwater. The source of the petroleum
hydrocarbons was not established. Ecology's Hazardous Site List ranked this site "5" (lowest
potential threat to human health and the environment) and is awaiting remedial action (as of
February 2003).
A sediment investigation was conducted at the Point Edwards site in accordance with a sampling
and analysis plan approved by Ecology. Sediment samples were collected from 15 stations
offshore of Marina Beach Park between the inner and outer harbor lines and in the DNR lease
areas. Sample stations included five in the vicinity of the Willow Creek drain and Edmonds Way
drain located south of the Port of Edmonds breakwater. The chemical analytical results showed
compliance with the Washington State Sediment Quality Standards (SQS) [WAC 173-204-320],
and as such the marine sediments were found to be uncontaminated (CH2M HILL, 2000d).
The area west of the railroad tracks between Point Edwards and Dayton Street has been used
historically by various industries, wood shingle mills, a steel and bolt manufacturing facility, a
lumberyard with a paint and oil warehouse, and a boat maintenance facility. Most of these
industrial facilities had docks or piers. In addition, various residences were located here.
Possible onshore or offshore contaminants that could have resulted from operation, storage, and
maintenance activities at these facilities include petroleum products, semivolatile organic
compounds (including PAHs), volatile organic compounds, and metals. Ecology's sediment
database indicates that sediments in the vicinity of the proposed pier under this alternative have
concentrations of PAHs elevated above Puget Sound Marine Sediment Clean -Up Screening
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 31
Levels (WAC) 173-204-520 (including fluorene, indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene, and phenanthrene,
Washington Sediment Management Standards).
Since the 1960s, the area has been managed and operated by the Port of Edmonds Marina. The
marina was dredged in the early 1960s and early 1970s in conjunction with construction projects;
no maintenance dredging was performed. According to Port of Edmonds staff, the marina was
last dredged about 1987 and the sediments were transported to an upland site for a parking lot
project. Some of the marina dredge spoils were used as fill at the Harbor Square business park.
Sediment testing data are not available. According to historical aerial photographs, surface water
discharge from the existing Unocal property previously entered Puget Sound within the area now
used by the marina. As such, it is possible that the dredged sediments may have been
contaminated from boat maintenance and repair operations, as well as possible industrial
discharges from adjacent sites (e.g., Unocal).
According to the environmental agency database search, the Port of Edmonds has removed old
USTs and replaced them with new tanks. In 1985, the tanks were located close to the water near
the marina fuel dock. Ecology's database also indicates that one or more leaking USTs have
been reported and that clean-up of soil and groundwater was initiated in 1995. In addition, the
database search indicated that the Port is a RCRA small -quantity generator of hazardous waste.
According to staff at the Port of Edmonds, two Northwest Farm Food Co-op tanks were acquired
by the Port and were replaced, along with two tanks previously owned by the Port, in June 1995.
The exact location of these tanks was not identified during the database search (Howard, pers.
comm., 1995). In addition to fueling activities at the marina, some boat maintenance activities
appear to take place in the upland storage areas immediately west of the BNSF right-of-way. At
least one boat was observed being prepared for painting during the site visit on June 2, 1995. A
subsurface investigation conducted to collect geotechnical information for design of a dry
stacked storage area of the south marina of the Port of Edmonds detected petroleum in soils. The
Port of Edmonds initiated a focused environmental investigation to confirm the presence of
petroleum in the subsurface and to help determine the origin of the petroleum. Background
information in the investigation report stated that the south marina site was filled in 1962 using
dredged sediments from what is now the marina basin (Landau, 1998). Subsurface soil samples
contained concentrations of TPH (as diesel and oil) that exceeded MTCA Method A clean-up
levels at five locations. Groundwater samples were reported to contain concentrations at or
above MTCA Method A clean-up (1 milligram per liter) at two locations. The report
recommended additional investigation to assess the presence of other petroleum constituents and
to further evaluate the source(s) of contamination.
Unocal was contacted regarding the potential that the Edmonds Bulk Terminal may have been
the source of the contamination. Unocal responded by installing a single monitoring well (MW-
301) in the right-of-way area immediately north of Shellabarger Creek (Brearley, pers. com.,
2000). The purpose of the well was to evaluate whether the backfill and storm drain might have
presented a preferred path of flow for petroleum hydrocarbons from the Unocal property onto the
Port's property. It is not clear from the report whether the well was installed in the backfill of the
Shellabarger/Willow Creek culvert (48-inch diameter) or in the backfill of the Edmonds Way
storm drain (72-inch diameter). Testing of soils and groundwater collected from MW-301 did
not reveal contamination. Other commercial facilities exist adjacent to the rights -of way,
including restaurants, retail, and professional offices. Some private residences were also
observed. It is not known whether these structures have any heating oil USTs or any building
materials with asbestos -containing materials or lead -based paint.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 32
BNSF maintains a railroad maintenance area within the railroad right-of-way immediately south
of the Dayton Street crossing. According to historical aerial photographs, it appears that this
maintenance area has been in existence since at least the late 1940s. During the site visit on
June 2, 1995, a maintenance building, a diesel aboveground storage tank, a flammable gas tank
(propane), and several 55-gallon drums of what appeared to be lubricating oils were observed.
The drums were outside and directly on the ground. They were corroded, and one had visible oil
leakage on the top. Stained soils were also observed in the area. Currently, there is a railroad
spur to the west of the tracks where rail cars were stored. Historically, as evidenced from aerial
photographs, there was also a rail spur on the east side of the tracks under what is now the Harbor
Square business park. Potential contaminants in this area could include petroleum products,
semivolatile organic compounds, volatile organic compounds, PCBs, and metals. Insufficient
information is available to classify the site as "reasonably predictable" or "substantially
contaminated" in accordance with FHWA terminology (FHWA, 1997).
Other hazardous material clean-up sites were identified by searches through state and federal
databases. Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program database, including the LUST database was
searched in 2006 for site addresses within the shoreline jurisdiction. Sites within the SMP
shoreline jurisdiction were reviewed for their material and clean-up orders. The LUST list
indicated that all potential clean-up sites within the shoreline jurisdiction were either completed
(i.e., cleaned up) or, in the case of the former Unocal site and two Port of Edmonds properties,
undergoing remedial action.
The Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP) represents a coordinated multi -agency
approach to management of dredged materials in the state of Washington. The cooperating
agencies include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Seattle District, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency - Region 10, and the Washington Departments of Ecology and Natural
Resources. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), through its DMMP
office, provides oversight of all disposal activities occurring on the public's state-owned aquatic
lands. The Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis Program (PSDDA) manages disposal within
Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. There are no recognized dredge material disposal
sites in the Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction. The closest site is in Port Susan, west of Everett,
at 47058.85'N 1220 16.74'W (NAD83) or 47058.86'N 122016.57'W (NAD27) (USAGE et al.
2002).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 33
5. Nearshore Physical Characterization
The City of Edmonds abuts the eastern shore of Central Puget Sound and contains 5.2 miles of
sand, gravel, and cobble beach, mostly backed by moderate to high bluffs. Natural beach area
and beach replenishment material has been limited by the topography of the area (bluffs
predominate), the BNSF railroad bed and right-of-way, seawalls and other structures in the
intertidal zone, and the loss of sediment sources that replenish beach substrate under natural
conditions. Data from the Snohomish County database (2001) indicate that most of the shoreline
is bordered by armored slopes or vertical seawalls (see Figure 6). Most of the upper intertidal
zone has been armored and filled, and additional areas of the lower intertidal beach have been
covered by boulders dislodged from the armored face of the railroad bed.
Edmonds beaches are typical of sediment -starved beaches, indicated by a relatively narrow and
steep beach profile and coarser -grained sediment. Puget Sound beaches that have limited
replenishment typically have a narrow, steep foreshore in the upper intertidal areas with an
intertidal/shallow subtidal bench adjacent to the upper beach. The beach material may vary
seasonally, but is typically coarse -grained (coarse sand, gravel, or cobble) (Downing 1983).
Exceptions are the low -gradient beach south of the marina breakwater (Marina Beach Park),
where a large sand flat was constructed, and the Brackett's Landing beaches, which capture some
finer material between the fishing pier, the WSF ferry pier, and the groin at Edmonds'
Underwater Park. Sediment -starved beaches gradually loose their intertidal fine material to
subtidal depths, resulting in continued steepening of increasingly coarser -grained nearshore
slopes until equilibrium is reached. These conditions affect beach function both physically and
biologically. Physically, the intertidal beaches begin to disappear in most areas. A few areas
(e.g., the groin at Edmonds Underwater Park) may actually accumulate sand that normally would
have been deposited along a longer stretch of beach.
Adjacent marine shorelands and upland areas consist primarily of steep slopes and moderate to
high bluffs, ranging in height from 15 to 100 ft above sea level. The high shoreland is crossed by
deeply incised ravines with perennial streams and a few riparian wetlands. In the downtown area
of Edmonds, the shorelands drop to sea level in a broad bowl that contains the largest wetland
(Edmonds Marsh) and two additional streams.
Small deltas have formed at the mouths of most creek drainages in Edmonds, particularly at Shell
Creek (Pentec Environmental 2001). Stream discharges are not sufficient to significantly alter
the salinity at these locations, although they may serve as a source of organic material to the local
estuarine environment. These small deltas tend to be composed of sand and gravel and provide a
lower gradient habitat relative to the adjacent fringing beach. In general, they do not provide
enough sediment to supply a significant source of sand and gravel to adjacent beaches.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 34
5.1 Geologic Units
Recessional outwash deposits (Qgo), Vashon till (Qgt), and pre -Fraser deposits [Qc(w)] are
exposed in shoreline Segments A through E. Advance outwash (Qcg, Qgu) is extensively
exposed in incised stream channels above the shoreline in these segments. Segments E, F, G, and
H contain artificial fill (Qf ).
Advance outwash (Qga, Qga(t), Qcg, Qgu) is extensively exposed in incised stream channels
above the shoreline area in these segments. Segments F, G, and H contain a combination of
artificial fill and alluvial deposits (Qf and Qa). Segment I (Lake Ballinger) is underlain
predominantly by outwash deposits (Qga and Qgo). These geologic units were described in more
detail in Section 3.1.4 and shown on Figure 5. Table 4 summarizes the surficial geologic units
present along each shoreline segment.
5.2 Soils
With the exception of Segments F, G, and H, which are mapped as urban land, soils along
Edmonds' Puget Sound shoreline are all mapped as various members of the Alderwood-Everett
soil unit (MRCS 2006). These soils are described in more detail in Section 3.1.4. The south and
west shores of Lake Ballinger (Segment I) are mapped as Mukilteo Muck (a very deep, very
poorly drained organic soil that occurs in depressional areas) and Alderwood soil, respectively.
Table 4 summarizes the soil types that are present along each shoreline segment (Figure 8).
Table 4. Soil Types and Surficial Geologic Units
Present at Each Shoreline Segment
Shoreline
Segmentil
Surficial -...
NRCS 0i
A
Alderwood-Everett Gravelly Sandy Loams, 25 to 70 % slopes Qc(w)
and 2 to 8 % slopes
B
Alderwood-Urban Land Complex, 8 to 15 % slopes
Qgt
C
Alderwood-Everett Gravelly Sandy Loams, 25 to 70 % slopes
Qgo, Qgu, Qcg
and 2 to 8 % slopes
D
Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam, 0 to 8 % slopes and 8 to 15 %
Qc(w)
slopes
E
Alderwood-Urban Land Complex, 2 to 8 % slopes except in the
Qc(w), Qf
center of the segment Custer Fine Sandy Loam
F
Urban land
Qf
G
Urban land
Qf
H
Urban land
Qf
I
West side of lake is Alderwood-Urban Land Complex, 8 to 15
Qgo, Qga, Qa
% slopes. South side of lake is Mukilteo Muck.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 35
5.3 Landslide Hazard Areas
Landslide hazard areas, as discussed in this inventory, are areas that have been given landslide
hazard designation by the City of Edmonds. Per ECDC Chapter 23.80.020, landslide hazard areas
are areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and
hydrologic factors. Susceptibility is based on any combination of bedrock, soil, slope (gradient),
slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors that are prone to failure. Within the City of
Edmonds, landslide hazard areas specifically include:
1. Areas of ancient or historic failures in Edmonds which include all areas within
the Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area as identified in the 1979 report
of Robert Lowe Associates and amended by the1985 report of GeoEngineers, Inc.
2. Any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and a vertical relief of ten
(10) or more feet, except areas composed of consolidated rock.
3. Any area potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision or stream bank
erosion.
4. Any area located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to, or potentially subject to,
inundation by debris flow or deposition of stream -transported sediments.
Along the City's shorelines, only the northern two-thirds of Segment A, predominantly along
Browns Bay, is presently mapped by the City of Edmonds as a landslide hazard area (Figure 9),
based on geologic conditions and analysis conducted in 1979 and 1985. The City data agree with
the Coastal Zone Atlas (Ecology 2001), which depicts Browns Bay as unstable, with recent
landslides; however, the landslide dataset was based on information collected in the mid-1970s
(Ecology) to mid-1980s (GeoEngineers, Inc.), which omits the other city shoreline areas that
have had recent slides.
5.4 Seismic Hazards
Per ECDC Chapter 23.80.020, Designation of Specific Hazard Area, seismic hazard areas are
areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope
failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting.
The most damaging effect of an earthquake is shaking at the ground surface. Ground shaking
during an earthquake is strongest in areas of soft soils, such as in river valleys or along the
shorelines of bays and lakes. In addition, ground shaking in areas of soft soils underlain by
stiffer soils or rock is generally stronger than in areas where there is little or no variation between
the surface and substratum.
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which strong earthquake shaking causes a soil to rapidly lose its
strength and behave like quicksand. Liquefaction typically occurs in artificial fills and in areas of
loose sandy soils that are saturated with water, such as low-lying coastal areas, lakeshores, and
river valleys. The northwest shoreline of Lake Ballinger contains areas of moderate and high soil
liquefaction risk.
Along the City shorelines, landslide hazard areas and areas of moderate to high risk of soil
liquefaction are shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10, respectively. These hazard areas contain some
of the elements that define a seismic hazard area. Further definition of seismic hazard areas is
provided by the City on a case -by -case basis.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 36
5.5 Shoreline Slope Stability
For the purposes of this inventory, shoreline slope stability refers to the relative stability of
coastal slopes as portrayed in the Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Zone Atlas
(Ecology 2001). This determination refers to the relative stability of coastal slopes as interpreted
by geologists based on aerial photographs, geological mapping, topography, and field
observations. This mapping was digitized from the Department of Ecology Coastal Zone Atlas
and represents conditions observed in the early and mid-1970s.
Along the Edmonds Puget Sound shoreline, the northern two-thirds of Segment A is mostly
mapped as "unstable" (i.e., slopes generally are greater than 15 percent in areas underlain by
weak, unstable materials in which old or recently active landslides have occurred) with some
areas mapped as "unstable old landslides" (i.e., former landslide areas, generally located within
areas underlain by weak, unstable materials. Slopes generally are greater than 15 percent.),and
some mapped as "modified" areas (i.e., highly modified by human activities and considered
unpredictable). The southern one-third of Segment A is mapped as "intermediate (i.e., believed
to be stable under natural conditions; may become unstable if disturbed. Slopes generally greater
than 15 percent, but may be less in areas with less stable geologic materials.). Segment B is
mostly mapped as "stable" (i.e., well -drained permeable layers with slopes less than 15 percent).
Segment C is mapped as "unstable." The northern portion of Segment D is mapped as
"intermediate," while the southern portion is mapped as "stable." Segments E through H are
mapped as modified and stable.
Segment I (Lake Ballinger) is not addressed by the Coastal Zone Atlas; however, the available
geology and soils data indicate that the northwestern shoreline of the lake contains areas with
unconsolidated soils (Alderwood-Urban Land complex and Mukilteo Muck), moderate slopes
approaching 15 percent, high erosion potential, and moderate to high soil liquefaction potential.
These factors indicate probable slope instability along part of Segment I. There are some
potential indications this may also increase seismic risks.
5.6 Erosion Hazard Areas
In this inventory, erosion hazard areas are areas determined by the City of Edmonds to be erosion
hazards. Per ECDC Chapter 23.80.020, erosion hazard areas are at least those areas identified by
the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as having a
"moderate to severe," "severe," or "very severe" rill and inter -rill erosion hazard. Erosion hazard
areas are also those areas impacted by shoreland and/or stream bank erosion. Erosion hazard
areas include:
1. Those areas of the City of Edmonds containing soils that may experience severe
to very severe erosion hazard. This group of soils includes, but is not limited
to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater:
a. Alderwood Soils (15 to 25 percent slopes);
b. Alderwood/Everett Series (25 to 70 percent slopes);
c. Everett Series (15 to 25 percent slopes);
2. Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils
interbedded with granular soils and springs or groundwater seepage; and
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 37
3. Areas with significant visible evidence of groundwater seepage, and which also
include existing landslide deposits regardless of slope.
Erosion hazard areas are shown on Figure 9. All shoreline segments of the City, except
Segment F (between the ferry terminal and the marina) contain hillsides mapped as erosion
hazard areas. In addition, all streams within the City, included in the SMP Update because of
their hydraulic connection to shorelines of the state, are mapped with extensive erosion hazard
areas along their banks.
In urban areas, erosion hazard areas are important considerations along waterways where soil
deposition can harm wetlands, streams, and lakes by excessive accumulation. Clearing
(vegetation removal) and grading (earthmoving) are the first steps toward destabilization of
slopes (Canning 2001). Soil protection provided by vegetation is especially important in erosion
hazard areas in Edmonds to prevent soil compaction and erosion on ravine slopes and lake
shorelines, thereby limiting turbidity and sedimentation in waters that harbor fish and aquatic
invertebrates.
5.7 Aquifer Recharge Areas
As described in Section 3.1.5, groundwater in the Edmonds area is recharged in upland areas and
discharged along streams, lakes, and the Puget Sound shoreline. No significant recharge areas
are expected to exist in the shoreline area. Additionally, no CARAs have been identified
anywhere in the City (ECDC 23.60.010).
5.8 Lakes and Streams
Within the City limits, numerous surface water drainages flow into Puget Sound through gorges
downcut in the steep bluffs. The Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) defines streams as
"areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear
evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not
contain water year round." From north to south, the following perennial streams were identified
along the marine shoreline: Lund's (Gulch) Creek and Meadowdale Creek in Segment A;
Perrinville Creek in Segment B; one unnamed creek in Segment C; Fruitdale Creek, Northstream
Creek, and Shell Creek (with tributary Hindley Creek) in Segment D; and Shellabarger (various
spellings)/Willow Creek in Segment H. Willow Creek, which lies mostly within Woodway,
flows into the Edmonds Marsh along the base of the hillside of the former Unocal site where it
mixes with flows from Shellabarger Creek before flowing through a series of ditches and culverts
into Puget Sound near the Unocal Pier at Point Edwards. Shellabarger Creek, situated along the
western bluff abutting Puget Sound, represents the intersection of the land surface with the
Vashon advanced outwash aquifer water table. The Edmonds CAO recognizes the six named
creeks south of Lund's Creek as Category 2 streams.
None of the streams included on the 2004 CAO inventory within the City of Edmonds meet the
criteria for "shorelines of the state," but all contain potential or actual fish habitat and, thus, meet
designation criteria for Type F waters pursuant to WAC 222-16-030. The only lake within City
limits is Lake Ballinger in Segment I. Neither the inlet source (Hall Creek) nor the outlet
(McAleer Creek) of Lake Ballinger flow within the City, although small areas of the City drain
into them.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 38
5.9 Flood Hazard Areas
Aside from the shoreline of Puget Sound itself, the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) 100-year floodplain only includes the Edmonds Marsh, a small portion of the Shell
Creek drainage extending about one -quarter -mile upstream from the stream outfall, and shoreline
areas of Lake Ballinger located within the City limits. In total, these areas include only 84 acres
or 0.67 percent of Edmonds' total jurisdictional area (EDAW 2004).
Although the flood hazard areas in the City of Edmonds are defined on the FEMA maps, a better
way to describe them is by referring to their base (100-year) flood elevations. For the coastline
this elevation is 10 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) or 14 feet North American
Vertical Datum (NAVD). For Lake Ballinger this is elevation is 282.5 feet NGVD or 286.1 feet
NAVD. Some flooding has occurred along the coast, but more serious flooding has occurred in
areas adjacent to the Edmonds Marsh/Shelleberger Creek and on Lake Ballinger in recent years.
5.10 Nearshore Processes
The Net Shore -Drift in Washington State program (Ecology 2002) map coverage denotes the
extent of individual drift cells and the direction of net shore -drift within the littoral zone for the
City shoreline, based on a shoreline study conducted in the early 1990s by Jim Johannessen. The
Edmonds shoreline littoral drift zone consists of two large partial drift cells separated by an area
of no appreciable net drift (see Figure 5). No clear net -shore drift pattern was observed from
Ecology's 2001 aerial photos taken of the Edmonds shoreline.
A large drift cell (SN-3) extends north from King County and terminates at the south end of the
marina, contributing sand and drift logs to Marina Beach Park. SN-3 measures approximately
6.2 miles. Accretion shoreforms in this drift cell were found in relatively close proximity to
Point Wells and the King -Snohomish county line. Historically, about 66 percent of this drift cell
actively contributed slide material to the nearshore; following the railroad construction, little
material currently reaches the shore (Johannessen et al., 2005).
Between the park and the downtown area is a 1.6-mile-long area of no appreciable net drift
(SN-2/SN-3 NAD), which terminates at a latitude roughly even with Caspers Street. The ferry
terminal and southern breakwater of the Edmonds Marina impede net shore -drift in this shore
segment. The southern breakwater of the Edmonds Marina prevents northward sediment
transport, resulting in accretion and progradation of the South Marina Beach (Johannessen et al.,
2005); however, the beach was initially constructed along with the marina breakwater and may
not receive enough nearshore drift sediment to be self -maintaining. North of the ferry terminal at
Brackett's Landing (north unit) is a constructed rock groin and beach area that may function as a
potential accretion shoreform. The beach was artificially nourished in 1989 with several
different sizes of gravel (Shipman in prep). Results of historic accretion shoreform mapping
indicated that 58 percent of the historic accretionary beaches in this drift cell have been lost due
to anthropogenic alterations to the nearshore (Johannessen et al., 2005).
North of the "no drift" area, another large drift cell (SN-2) moves sediment northerly along the
city shoreline and beyond the city limits. SN-2 originates approximately 1,000 ft north of the
ferry terminal and extends approximately 10.7 miles to just beyond Elliott Point in Mukilteo.
Eighty-nine percent of the shores of this drift cell are modified by the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe (BNSF) seawall. Landslides delivered sediment over the top of the BNSF railroad in three
percent of the drift cell. The remaining 11 percent consisted of small accretion shoreforms
typically formed from sediment derived from nearby streams (Johannessen et al., 2005). The few
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 39
small deltas along the shoreline are symmetrical and give little visual indication of a predominant
drift direction. Currently there are no intact bluff sediment sources in this drift cell; however,
historic mapping and analysis shows that at least 74 percent of this cell was an active sediment
source prior to construction of the BNSF seawall (Johannessen et al,. 2005).
Today, intermittent landslides continue to occur along bluff shores, but sediments loads rarely
reach the water, due to the presence of the BNSF railroad bed and land use restrictions by State
agencies that prevent the timely transfer of slide material onto the beach. Obstructions to beach
re -nourishment and net shore drift, such as bulkheads, breakwaters, groins, docks, and boat
ramps, block the redistribution of upland sediment onto the nearshore and result in increased
erosion in areas where the beach is depleted. Hardened surfaces also deflect waves and
concentrate wave energy onto adjacent properties, leading to increased beach erosion and a
restructuring of shoreline substrate slope and particle size, which in turn alters biological
composition from sandy beach communities (e.g., eelgrass, littleneck clam, Dungeness crab, surf
smelt) toward gravel and cobble beach communities (e.g., kelp, butter clam, red rock crab)
(Williams and Thom 2001).
5.11 Shoreline Modifications
Shoreline modifications refer to features or structures added to or removed from a shoreline that
alters the shoreline's natural function, typically resulting in changes to wave energy dissipation,
erosion, and sediment transport. Examples of modifications include armored intertidal slopes
(e.g., bulkheads, riprap armoring, etc.), overwater structures (e.g., dock and piers), cleared
vegetation (commonly done to improve views), channelized stream outlets (confining streams to
channels or culverts that discharge at a point, instead of across a broad area), dredging, and filling.
Visible shoreline modifications along the City's waterfront within 200 feet of OHW were
recorded using a GPS during a shoreline inventory and transferred into a GIS database
(Snohomish County 2001). Figure 6 depicts the primary shoreland modification,
bulkhead/seawall, and locations of armoring and overwater structures that affect marine habitat.
No corresponding data were available for Lake Ballinger, although aerial photos reveal numerous
piers and floats along the entire Edmonds shoreline.
In general, the Edmonds marine shoreline is defined by the steep shoreline bluffs and the
BNSF railroad bed along the northern two-thirds of its length. The western edge of the rail bed
fill covers the intertidal and transitional upland zones along the beach, with either a vertical
seawall or a steep armored slope composed of large boulders or granite block. The remaining
third of the shoreline, adjacent to the downtown area and south to the county border, is
characterized by low or no banks; however, the low banks have been bulkheaded or armored and
filled by buildings and road. These structures have likely been constructed on historic backshore
habitat, which formerly allowed a slow and widespread re -distribution of erodable bluff material
along the shoreline. Today, only infrequent and severe landslides are able, at few locations, to
contribute "pulses" of sediment to the nearshore.
Intertidal structures have also eliminated most nearshore riparian vegetation and limited marine
life to those species adapted to hard, nearly vertical substrates. Shoreline hydrology along the
southern third of the city is further modified by a rock groin, a ferry terminal, a parking lot, a
fishing pier, a marina, and a commercial pier. Nearshore drift is interrupted, reduced, or shifted
seaward by these structures, causing drift sediment and organic material to drop into subtidal,
rather than intertidal areas. What once had been a broad sandy gravel intertidal slope with a
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 40
width of hundreds of feet is now, in numerous areas, a narrow intertidal gravel and cobble beach
with a width of 50 feet or less. Considering that many marine invertebrates, fish, and plants are
adapted specifically to a narrow range of intertidal elevations, the reduction of intertidal habitat
represents a significant loss of habitat area for those species along the Edmonds shore.
5.11.1 Shoreline Armoring
Shoreline armoring typically refers to the placement of hard structures, such as rock -covered
slopes and bulkheads, to deflect wave energy away from a location perceived as vulnerable to
erosion. Armoring is also done to stabilize an area from normal changes in sediment transport
(e.g., to reduce shoaling at a marina entrance or encourage sand deposition along beach).
Shoreline armoring has adverse effects on the nearshore physical processes necessary to maintain
native species habitats and shoreline functions. These effects include the loss of beach areas,
impoundment of sediment, modification of groundwater regimes, lowering of beach elevations,
concentration and redirection of wave energy to adjacent areas, alteration of substrate, and loss of
riparian vegetation and associated functions (KC DNR WTD 2003).
With the exceptions of Lund's Creek estuary, Edmonds Underwater Park, Brackett's Landing,
and part of Marina Beach Park, the entire Edmonds shoreline (more than 90 percent) is armored
by the BNSF railroad bed and bulkheads. Most of the BNSF rail bed along the Edmonds
shoreline consists of an armored berm with two sets of parallel tracks on top, comprising a top
width of at least 24 feet or more and a wider base width. The waterward side of the berm is
typically armored with large rock or granite blocks, placed vertically or on a 2:1 slope. Concrete
or wood bulkheads comprise the upper intertidal shoreline of the marina, adjacent commercial
and residential buildings, and parking areas (see Figure 6). Many of these structures are probably
reconstructions of old timber mill structures that date back to the late 1800s, when Edmonds was
established specifically because of the potential for waterfront access to transport lumber by
steamship and rail (BOLA Architecture + Planning 2005). The railroad tracks were constructed
along the shoreline, and mills and docks were built waterward, on planks and fill placed on the
beach. A new city wharf was built in 1911 near the WSF ferry terminal, and a sea dike and sea
gate were built around the same time to prevent floods of the tide flats areas southwest of
downtown in the area of the Edmonds Marina.
Impacts to coastal processes from the extensive armoring of upper intertidal habitat along the
Edmonds shoreline have affected the area for over a hundred years. Historic records of site -
specific shoreline natural conditions are generally either unavailable or not quantifiable, so it is
difficult to ascertain pre -development shore features and derive subsequent changes to nearshore
conditions and processes. However, one potentially useful historic record in this regard is the
United States Coast Survey's topographic sheet ("T-sheet") for the Edmonds' area. T-sheets are
comprehensive and detailed early map representations of nearshore conditions in the second half
of the 19th century, and are generally quite accurate, with some limitations.
The most obvious impact is the conversion of intertidal sand and gravel beach habitat into steep -
walled, armored upland slopes and structures with little or no habitat value.
A second impact to shoreline function from armoring is the isolation of landslide material from
the beach and adjacent shoreline areas. In many Puget Sound areas, landslide material is the
sediment source that replenishes beaches from erosion by waves and currents; drift cell studies
indicate that 66 to 74 percent of nearshore sediment sources from bluffs between Shoreline and
Mukilteo have been eliminated by the railroad (see Section 5.10). The stream deltas north of
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 41
downtown Edmonds shore contribute small volumes of nearshore sediment (about 11 percent in
Drift Cell SN-2) to the beach. The loss of historic sources of beach sediment caused by the
construction of rail bed and other bulkheads, and the interruption of shoreline drift at other
structures, such as the marina, ferry terminal, and the groin north of the Edmonds Underwater
Park, further limit sediment replenishment. These modifications may be responsible for the
relatively steep and narrow beach along this shoreline, and a possible shift from sandier substrate
to gravelly cobble substrate in some areas.
Another impact to shoreline function from armoring and filling is the loss of nutrients from beach
wrack that normally accumulates in broad bands along upper intertidal elevations. Beach wrack,
consisting of decomposing marine and terrestrial shoreline vegetation, is a significant source of
nutrients to the nearshore and a habitat upon which many aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates
thrive (Sobocinski 2003). Beach wrack also provides shelter, food, and protection from solar
energy and desiccation over intertidal sediment that is used as spawning and foraging substrate
for several species of forage fish (e.g., sand lance and surf smelt) and shellfish (e.g., crabs, snails,
gastropods).
The sea dike and sea gate would have stopped the natural tidal inundation of the Edmonds Marsh,
shifting water quality to a less -saline, more stagnant brackish wetland, and shifting vegetation to
species that are tolerant of lower salinity, warmer temperatures, and eutrophic water conditions.
About three-quarters of the former marsh was subsequently filled for development of the marina,
Harbor Square development complex, Edmonds sewage treatment plant, SR-104, and a City
park. These changes have likely eliminated most sediment input to the intertidal nearshore.
It is possible that the shoreward extent of eelgrass has been reduced by the presumed steepening
of the shoreline caused by armoring and fill. The addition of such marine structures and the
resulting elimination of beach vegetation and possible coarsening of beach substrate may have
reduced or eliminated forage fish spawning areas along most of the Edmonds shoreline.
5.11.2 Docks, Piers, and OverAn-water Structures
Overwater and in -water structures in Edmonds include docks, piers, ramps, wharves, and a
marina. Over/in-water structures change the levels of light, shoreline energy regimes, substrate
type and stability, and water quality along shorelines (Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). These
changes result in alterations in the presence, abundance, and diversity of plant and animal species
in the nearshore, including eelgrass, algae, fish, and wildlife. The physical supports that hold up
overwater structures, such as bulkheads and piling, alter wave energy and sediment dynamics that
affect plant propagation, fish foraging, spawning and migration, and shellfish settlement and
rearing. In addition, construction materials associated with overwater structures can leach
contaminants (e.g., creosote, metals from paint) into the nearshore environment.
The most significant over/in-water structures within the City's shorelands are the Port of
Edmonds Marina and the Washington State Ferry terminal. The marina covers about
617,000 square feet, and the ferry terminal covers about 24,700 square feet (CH2M HILL 2004).
Other overwater coverage includes Laebugten's Wharf (about 70,300 square feet, including the
ramp, pier, and wharf structure), the former Unocal fuel pier (about 23,500 square feet), the City
and Port of Edmonds fishing pier, and a small concrete ramp in Segment F.
In the locations of overwater piers, aerial photographs and hydroacoustic surveys reveal the
fragmentation of an otherwise continuous band of eelgrass paralleling the shore. Eelgrass is
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 42
absent from under -pier areas probably due to shading and erosion from boat propeller wash and
current/wave refraction around pier piles.
Although these structures appear to cover large areas of the shallow nearshore marine waterfront,
they are probably less extensive than the historic boardwalks, beach mills, and numerous
steamship docks that covered the waterfront in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
Along the Lake Ballinger shoreline, docks and piers were noted at almost every parcel. Aerial
photos revealed about 47 structures that extend into the lake. These structures alter freshwater
shoreline physical and ecology characteristics, although the effects are difficult to estimate
because the lake itself is a highly modified wetland that was converted into a lake by damming
the outlet to McAleer Creek.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 43
6. Nearshore Biological Characterization
Physical shoreline conditions and processes described in Section 5 determine the biological
species, conditions, and processes of the nearshore. Within the Edmonds SMP area, the marine
shoreline is dominated by seawalls and fill, with the exception of three small beach parks.
Waterward of the seawalls is a short, steep beach that ranges from sandy gravel to gravelly
cobble. Landward of the seawall are moderate to tall (greater than 70 ft) bluffs, except in the
commercial waterfront area. In addition to the seawalls within the intertidal zone, five additional
in -water structures extend into the subtidal: the former Unocal pier, the Edmonds marina, the
WSF pier, the rubble mound groin north of the ferry terminal, and Laebugten's Wharf. These
structures all affect the physical characteristics of the shoreline, which influence or determine the
biological characteristics. The effects of in -water structures on longshore currents, sediment and
nutrient transport, light (photosynthetic active radiation), and substrate largely determine the
habitats available for aquatic plants and animals.
The seawalls and fill for the railroad, marina, and commercial district occupy much of the
intertidal zone, eliminating habitat for plants and animals that depend on those limited elevations
between aquatic and terrestrial conditions. This includes the loss of upper intertidal and
backshore vegetation, such as pickleweed, saltgrass, dune grass, driftwood, and beach wrack.
Beach wrack, which consists of accumulations of aquatic and terrestrial plants and animals,
provides nutrients and minerals to the shoreline and food and habitat to a community of resident
and migratory species, including insects, fish, birds, and mammals. Recent studies of Pacific
Coast and Puget Sound beaches have shown that the loss of beach wrack results in the absence of
critical food resources for marine and terrestrial communities, and migrating shorebirds (Orr et
al., 2005, Sobocinski 2003). Shoreline armoring eliminates beach wrack and decreases
abundance and species diversity in both benthic infaunal invertebrate and insect assemblages in
the upper intertidal zone. The impacts of shoreline modifications are most profound when they
are installed below MHHW and where backshore vegetation has been removed (Sobocinski
2003), which is the condition of most of Edmonds' marine shoreline.
The numerous streams along this Central Puget Sound shoreline continue to contribute nutrients,
insects, and terrestrial plant detritus to the marine nearshore via culverts under the BNSF railroad
bed. These streams are unlikely to have ever been a significant source of driftwood or log debris,
although landslides along the eroding bluffs would have regularly contributed logs to the marine
nearshore. Currently, the BNSF railroad, the marina and WSF ferry terminal, and commercial
seawalls occupy the zone in which drift logs and beach wrack would have accumulated.
Mid- and upper intertidal beach elevations provide spawning habitat for forage fish, such as surf
smelt and sand lance, which form a critical base of the Puget Sound food web for birds, fish, and
marine mammals. Although a few spawning areas for forage fish occur between Seattle and
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 44
Everett, none has been identified by WDFW in the Edmonds area, possibly due to intertidal
beach alterations and habitat loss due to seawalls and fill.
Shoreline armoring, backshore fill, and in -water structures affect sediment transport and
deposition as described in the previous section. The results of a shift in the physical shoreline
conditions affects beach biological function in several ways. Structures deflect energy from
waves and currents into unarmored areas, resulting in small areas of sediment accumulation (e.g.,
Underwater Marine Park spit) at the expense of larger areas of beach erosion, slope steepening,
and substrate coarsening. The rate of erosion or sedimentation is too extreme for most plants and
animals to adapt to, so these continually disturbed areas soon favor large numbers of a few
species that thrive in unstable habitats. The result of sediment coarsening is often seen in a shift
to larger, hardier bivalves (e.g., horse clams instead of Manila clams) and the loss of eelgrass at
intertidal elevations.
In both freshwater and marine ecosystems, structures such as bulkheads, docks, and piers create a
physical barrier between upland and aquatic biological communities, in addition to eliminating
critical habitat features (especially vegetation), that forms important transitional habitat between
the upland fresh -water ecosystem and the marine ecosystem.
6.1 Wetland Habitat
The City has four areas with potential wetlands that may be associated with the draft shoreline
jurisdiction (Figure 11). These four areas are: the Edmonds Marsh area, the area around the
mouth of Shell Creek, the area around the mouth of Perrinville Creek, and the Lake Ballinger
area.
The City has one wetland (the 23-acre Edmonds Marsh), designated as a Category 1 wetland
(highest quality), in addition to a Wildlife Habitat and Natural Resource Sanctuary. It is
classified by the State as a priority habitat. Edmonds Marsh has been filled on the east by
SR 104, the Harbor Square commercial area to the north, the BNSF tracks and the Port of
Edmonds to the west, and the historical Unocal facility and Deer Creek Fish Hatchery to the
south. The isolated remnant of Edmonds Marsh east of SR104 is hydraulically connected with
the main marsh via a culvert under SR 104 that also conveys Shellabarger Creek. Portions of the
marsh are seasonally flooded from discharges from Willow and Shellabarger Creeks. For the
purpose of this inventory, both sections are treated as the Edmonds Marsh.
A series of ditches, pipes, and a culvert under the railroad tracks convey flows from the wetland
under Admiral Way into Puget Sound.
The Edmonds Marsh receives water from approximately 900 acres, including Willow and
Shellabarger Creeks, as well as runoff from surrounding properties. Adjacent property on the
former Unocal site includes two stormwater detention ponds that were created from diking and
filling the south portion of the wetland. During certain storm conditions, stormwater overflows
from the ponds currently discharge into Willow Creek, which flows through the marsh. The
marsh (including flows from Shellabarger Creek) drains to Puget Sound via a channelized portion
of Willow Creek. The creek passes through a tide gate into a 48-inch pipe, which extends
1,275 feet into the lower intertidal portion of the beach south of the Edmonds Marina breakwater.
The tide gate is kept closed from October through March (although there is some leakage);
during the spring and summer months the marsh is tidally influenced.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 45
The marsh tends to be brackish in the winter months and saline in the summer, once the tide gate
is opened. The upgradient (eastern) portion of the marsh nearest the fish hatchery is primarily
freshwater and is dominated by cattails, hard -stem bulrush, common velvet grass, water parsley,
climbing nightshade and redtop. The overstory consists of alder, black cottonwood, Scouler's
willow, Western red cedar, Douglas fir, and bigleaf maple. The shrub and herb layers include
beaked hazelnut, salmonberry, red elderberry, skunk cabbage, horsetail, fringecup, and creeping
buttercup. The western, estuarine portion of the marsh is dominated by American three -square,
fleshy jaumea, Pacific silverweed, seacoast bulrush, salt grass, brass button, and soft rush.
Invasive species are present throughout the marsh (and may be dominant) and include Himalayan
blackberry, Japanese knotweed, Scot's broom, purple loosestrife, and reed Canary grass
(CH2MHILL 2004).
The marsh is used by a wide variety of bird species (over 225 species), including the great blue
heron (a State monitor species), which nests near the marsh (WDFW 2006a).
The presence of some other potential wetlands outside of shoreline jurisdiction was noted as part
of the Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2002), based on the
Snohomish County Critical Areas 1991, but little information is available regarding these
features. Vegetation is anticipated to be similar to that observed in the freshwater portion of
Edmonds Marsh. Wildlife use is likely to be less, because of the smaller size of these other
potential wetland areas.
6.2 Fish and Wildlife
None of the streams included on the 2004 CAO inventory within the City of Edmonds meet the
criteria for "shorelines of the state," but all contain potential or actual fish habitat and, thus, meet
designation criteria for Type F waters pursuant to WAC 222-16-030. As of 2004, Edmonds
anadromous fishbearing streams are known to include Willow Creek, Shellabarger Creek, Shell
Creek, Hindley Creek (a tributary of Shell Creek), Perrinville Creek, and Lund's Creek
(ECDC 23.90.010).
Numerous fish and wildlife species depend on the Edmonds shoreline and adjacent shoreland
habitats for either part or all of a life stage. Certain species and habitats are therefore recognized
by state and federal agencies because of their special values. Special values are often associated
with consumptive use by people representing commercial, recreational, or tribal interests. In
some cases, special value is assigned because of rarity (e.g., killer whale) or ecological
importance (e.g., forage fish). These species and associated habitats are typically documented
and protected by WDFW, at the state level, and several federal agencies. Government agencies
may assign variable levels of value and protection to a species or its habitat, based on numerous
factors. This is collectively referred to as a species' "status." General fish and wildlife species
and their status are discussed below.
Under the state's SMA, the City of Edmonds is also responsible for identifying critical habitats
within its boundaries for the protection of natural resources under their jurisdiction. The
Potential Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas identified in the CAO are shown in Figure 4.
Edmonds Underwater Park is a portion of the area owned or controlled by the City of Edmonds
designated as Brackett's Landing Shoreline Sanctuary. Brackett's Landing Shoreline Sanctuary
includes intertidal areas owned or under the control of the City in addition to the underwater park
area. The City has designated additional critical habitats that include Edmonds Marsh.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 46
6.2.1 State Priority Habitats and Species
WDFW has identified priority habitats for shellfish, salmonids, eagle, great blue heron,
California sea lion, and harbor seal in the wetland, riparian, and estuarine habitats along the
Edmonds shoreline (see Figure 11). State special status species that may occur in nearshore areas
include peregrine falcon, pileated woodpecker, Vaux's swift, merlin, purple martin, great blue
heron, green heron, western big -eared bat, Keen's myotis bat, long-eared bat, and longlegged bat.
6.2.1.1 Shellfish
Shellfish resources include clams, mussels, crab, and shrimp. Species representing all of these
groups are found in the marine waters of the City (Table 5).
Table 5. Common Shellfish Found in the Edmonds
Shoreline Jurisdiction
Common Name
Dungeness crab
Scientific Name
Cancer magister
Red rock crab
Cancer productus
Bay mussel
Mytilus edulis
Small clam
Macoma charlottensis
Native littleneck clam
Protothaca staminea
Manila clam
Tapes japonica or venerupis philippinarum
Bentnose clam
Macoma nasuta
Butter clam
Saxidomus gigantea
Heart cockle
Clinocardium nuttalli
Horse clam
Tresus capex
Geoduck clam
Panopea abrupta
Spot prawn
Pandalus platyceros
Broken -back shrimps
Heptacarpus spp.
Dock (coon -stripe) shrimp
Pandalus danae
Information from KC DNR WTD 2003, WDFW 2006a, Kozloff 1993, Golder and Parametrix 2002
Several clam species inhabit Puget Sound waters in the vicinity of Edmonds, including horse or
gaper, manila, native littleneck, butter, cockle, and geoduck clams. Clams have planktonic larvae
that settle onto the bottom and crawl until they find a suitable habitat. They then attach
themselves by a filament and burrow into the substrate after reaching sufficient size. Manila,
native littleneck, butter, and horse clams, and heart cockle are found in intertidal sand and in
sand -gravel substrates; butter and horse clams are the most abundant. Manila clams are typically
found in intertidal habitat, whereas native littlenecks can occur from the mid -intertidal down to
shallow subtidal areas. Butter clams can inhabit low intertidal down to subtidal areas (Harbo
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 47
1999). Horse and geoduck clams are found in both intertidal and subtidal zones but can occur in
deeper waters than other clam species. Geoduck clams can occur from low intertidal areas down
to a depth of over 300 feet (KC DNR WTD 2003). The small clam Macoma charlottensis
dominates deeper subtidal areas.
Hardshell clams, such as littleneck and butter clams, may be in sufficient densities to support
recreational harvest, in those intertidal beach areas characterized as gravelly or cobbly. Geoduck
are harvested both recreationally and commercially in Puget Sound. Geoduck beds were
identified by WDFW along the entire Edmonds shoreline, from the marina north to the City
boundary. The Edmonds beds range in depth from about -20 to -120 feet MLLW (KC DNR WTD
2003). A recent geoduck survey (Golder and Parametrix 2002) confirmed the range of geoduck
beds along the City and recorded mean densities between 0.4 and 2.5 geoducks per square meter,
with greater densities at increasing depth. A commercial geoduck harvest area occurs along the
entire City nearshore, from the north end of the Edmonds marina to Picnic Point and north.
Dungeness crab in Puget Sound prefer sandy bottom habitats or those with sandy -muddy
substrates that support eelgrass, typically in waters ranging from approximately -9 to —185 feet
MLLW. Dungeness crab can be expected to occur in the marine zones adjacent to the City at
depths typically seen in other parts of the Central Basin of Puget Sound over similar substrate.
They have also been harvested commercially and recreationally near the City of Edmonds
(KC DNR WTD 2003). A juvenile Dungeness crab study, sponsored by the Snohomish County
Marine Resources Committee, is currently being conducted in the North Marina Beach area
(Lider 2006 personal communication).
Red rock crab is more abundant in intertidal areas than Dungeness crab and is commonly
associated with rock/gravel substrates, although they may also occur in sandy and muddy areas
containing eelgrass. Red rock crab preys and scavenges on a variety of benthic species, including
clams, mussels, snails, and other crabs. Like Dungeness crab, this species also has planktonic
larvae that settle out as juveniles in intertidal to shallow subtidal areas. Red rock crabs are expected
to occur along the Edmonds shoreline and have been harvested recreationally near Edmonds.
Several species of shrimp inhabit Puget Sound waters, including pink, humpback, and coonstripe
shrimp, as well as spot prawns (also known as spot shrimp). Spot prawn, the largest of the
pandalid shrimps, is the most important commercially and recreationally harvested shrimp
species in Puget Sound. Adult spot prawns inhabit discrete areas called beds and are typically
found in waters between depths of -185 to -285 feet MLLW in central Puget Sound. Spot prawn
habitat requirements depend on the developmental stage of the animal. Adults occupy deeper
waters, while juveniles use shallower waters where vegetation is present. Spot prawns exhibit
seasonal migrations from deep to shallow waters; they can also migrate vertically in the water
column. There are commercial, tribal, and recreational spot prawn fisheries in or near Point
Edwards (KC DNR WTD 2003).
6.2.1.2 Salmonids
Eight species of salmonids use nearshore areas of Puget Sound at some point in their life cycle.
These include Chinook, chum, coho, sockeye, and pink salmon and sea -run cutthroat, steelhead,
and bull trout (Striplin and Battelle 2001).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 48
Table 6. Salmonids Found within the Edmonds
Shoreline Jurisdiction
Common Name
Chinook salmon (also called king, blackmouth)
Scientific Name
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Coho salmon (also called red)
O. kisutch
Sockeye salmon
O. nerka
Chum salmon (also called dog, fall, calico)
O. keta
Steelhead (same as rainbow trout)
O. mykiss
Pink salmon (also called humpback)
O. gorbuscha
Bull trout
Salvelinus confluentus
Cutthroat trout
O. clarki
Salmonids use nearshore areas for adapting from freshwater to saltwater, for migration, as
nursery areas for juveniles (Striplin and Battelle 2001). Nearshore area surveys conducted in
2001 found juvenile coho, Chinook, sockeye, and chum salmon, along with cutthroat and
steelhead trout at several locations in the Edmonds vicinity.
Deeper water provides habitat for adult salmonids. Salmonid stocks that may be present near
Edmonds include runs from the Skagit and Stillaguamish Rivers, but mostly from the Snohomish,
Green, Puyallup, and Nisqually Rivers and smaller drainages in central and southern Puget Sound.
All streams within the City of Edmonds discharge either directly or indirectly to Puget Sound.
However, anadromous salmon use (primarily chum and coho) has only been documented in three
drainages (Lund's, Shell, and Willow Creeks), although natural spawning may be limited to
Lund's and Shell Creek (accidental releases from the Deer Creek Hatchery are presumed to
account for adults in Willow Creek). Juvenile chum salmon have been released in Perrinville
Creek as part of a class project at Seaview Elementary School; however, no adult returns to this
stream have been reported (Pentec Environmental 2002). In general, high sediment loads and
impassable fish barriers have limited the use of potential spawning and rearing habitat that may
be present. Native cutthroat trout are present in Perrinville, Northstream, Shell, Hindley,
Shellabarger, and Willow Creeks. No bull trout have been observed in any of the drainages
within the City (Pentec Environmental 2002).
6.2.1.3 Forage Fish
Forage fish include those species that are preyed upon by species of concern. Forage fish include
herring, surf smelt, and sand lance.
Sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) and surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus) are generally found in
nearshore areas. Both species are a prey item for seabirds, marine mammals, and a variety of
fishes. From November 2000 to February 2001 and again from November 2001 to
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 49
February 2002, King County conducted sand lance and surf smelt spawning surveys on beaches
in the vicinity of Edmonds. Documented sand lance spawning habitat was found at Brackett's
Landing and along Ocean Avenue. Documented surf smelt spawning habitat was found at Point
Edwards (KC DNR WTD 2003). Although there are Pacific herring spawning grounds in the
central basin of Puget Sound, none are within the City's shoreline.
6.2.1.4 Shorebirds and Upland Birds
Birds with priority habitats that occur within the City include bald eagle, purple martin, and great
blue heron.
The bald eagle is listed as a federal and state threatened species. The following paragraph was
taken from the Brightwater FEIS (KC DNR WTD 2003). Bald eagles are both residents in and
migrants through the Puget Sound region. Eagle populations are usually highest in the region in
the winter months, when both resident birds and winter migrants are present due to the mild
winter climate and abundant fall salmon runs. Bald eagles generally perch, roost, and build nests
in mature trees near water bodies and available prey, usually away from intense human activity.
They prey on a variety of foods, including fish, birds, mammals, carrion, and invertebrates. In
the Puget Sound region, waterfowl and fish are generally the most common food for eagles. Bald
eagles typically return to one of several nests located within an established nesting territory.
Their seasonal home range for foraging and nesting averages 1.8 square miles in this region.
WDFW priority habitat map (2006a) notes nesting bald eagles at two locations within the City
limits. It is not known if these nests are occupied every year, although nesting has been noted
over the last 10 years (since 1997).
Great blue heron have nested in the woods surrounding the Edmonds marsh. Up to 17 birds have
been observed in the marsh in recent years (WDFW 2006a). The WDFW Priority Habitat and
Species map (2006) noted the presence of a seabird colony (glaucous -winged gull) near the
Edmonds Underwater Park. In April 2004, gourds were installed on a group of pilings south of
the Edmonds ferry dock by volunteers, with the approval of the Edmonds Parks and Recreation
Director. Prior to that time purple martin, a priority species, had not been nesting on the
Edmonds waterfront due to lack of nesting habitat. Since the artificial nest sites were provided,
Martins have successfully nested in 2004 and 2005, and nesting activity has been observed
recently (Lider 2006 personal communication).
6.2.1.5 Marine Mammals
A Priority Haulout Area has been identified by WDFW (2006a) within the Edmonds Underwater
Park for harbor seals and California sea lions. These pinnipeds, along with the endangered
Steller sea lion, will use beaches or structures near beaches as haulout areas. In the past, floats
installed for divers at the Edmonds Underwater Park were taken over by sea lions. Because the
sea lions rendered the floats unusable by divers, the floats were eventually removed, so this
haulout designation may no longer be relevant; however, the adjacent beaches are frequently
used by harbor seals (Lider 2006 personal communication).
6.2.2 Federal Threatened and Endangered Species
Several federally listed threatened or endangered species that may inhabit marine waters or
adjacent habitats within the City are identified in the State database (WDFW 2006a). Threatened
birds include the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 50
marmoratus). Bald eagles are known to be present in nearshore areas of the Central Basin of
Puget Sound, and there are documented eagle nests and breeding areas within the City
(Figure 11). Marbled murrelets are observed intermittently in inland Puget Sound waters; winter
and summer surveys by WDFW conducted near Edmonds found no murrelets in winter and only
a few birds in the Edmonds area in summer (Striplin and Battelle 2001).
Federally listed threatened fish species that may occur in or in the vicinity of Edmonds, including
Puget Sound Chinook salmon and bull trout. Puget Sound steelhead are currently proposed for
federal listing as a threatened species. All three salmonids require varied habitats during
different phases of their lives. Adults use nearshore areas as migration corridors when returning
from the oceanic life stage, while juveniles reside in the nearshore prior during their outmigration
from freshwater to the ocean. Bull trout adults also use shallow nearshore marine and estuarine
areas as foraging grounds and migration corridors.
Federally listed marine mammals may be present in the Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction, but are
not commonly observed. Steller sea lion (Eumetopius jubatus), listed as endangered, is not
commonly observed in the Central Basin of Puget Sound, although the area beaches and large
fish diversity at the Edmonds Underwater Park would provide attractive habitat. The southern
Puget Sound resident population of killer whale (Orcinus orca), listed as threatened, is also an
uncommon visitor to central Puget Sound. Because the City of Edmonds' shoreline jurisdiction
extends far offshore, it is likely that killer whales could transit through the area; however,
extensive shoreline development, ferry traffic, and the absence of salmon -bearing streams makes
it unlikely that they would be attracted to the nearshore.
Critical habitat is designated by the federal government as part of its management of threatened
and endangered species under the ESA. Critical habitats with the City of Edmonds include those
for Chinook salmon and bull trout. Chinook salmon are not known to have used any of the small
creeks within the City; critical habitat includes only the marine nearshore, from extreme high tide
to a depth of 30 meters (FR Vol. 70, No. 170, September 2, 2005). Likewise, bull trout habitat is
not recognized within any of the City creeks; critical habitat includes the marine nearshore, from
MHHW to -10 meter MLLW, and any tidally influenced freshwater heads of estuaries
(FR Vol. 70, September 26, 2005). Chinook salmon habitat use along the Edmonds shoreline
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. Bull trout habitat use
along the Edmonds shoreline would be during periods of adult foraging and migration. Bull trout
display wide-ranging foraging habits and are known to consume juvenile salmon (including
Chinook) that inhabit shallow nearshore areas.
6.3 Riparian Zones
Riparian habitats are those habitats that border streams, lakes, and marine beaches. All habitat types
occur with the City. Figure 11 shows the location of both freshwater and marine riparian habitats.
6.3.1 Freshwater
Two major drainages have been identified by the State as having priority riparian habitats; Lund's
Creek and Perrinville Creek. Additional riparian habitat is associated with Shell, Hindley (a
tributary of Shell), Shellabarger and Willow Creeks and parts of the shoreline of Lake Ballinger.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 51
Riparian habitat within the City is typically characterized by western red cedar, red alder, willow,
bigleaf maple and Douglas fir, depending on the degree of flooding and gradient with the
corridor. Characteristic understory vegetation includes Indian plum, salmonberry, thimbleberry
and elderberry, with an herbaceous layer consisting of curly dock, skunk cabbage, salal, Oregon
grape, stinging nettle, sword and lady fern, horsetail, and piggy -back plants. Invasive (e.g.,
Himalayan blackberry, ivy) or introduced plant species (e.g., holly, grasses, morning glory) may
also be present, depending on the degree of disturbance or cultivation along the stream corridors.
Riparian corridors support a variety of wildlife, including birds (such as song birds, owls,
flickers, and pileated woodpeckers) and mammals (such as beaver, otter, and deer).
6.3.2 Marine
The City's marine riparian zone is the narrow shoreline adjacent to the Sound, extending
5.2 miles from Point Edwards to the mouth of Lund's Gulch. This zone has been highly
modified by development, including fill associated with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
(BNSF) railroad bed and the Port of Edmonds Marina, construction of piers and wharfs to
support industrial/commercial facilities in the downtown area (including the former Unocal
facility), and bulkheads and seawalls for shoreline protection. These developments have replaced
native vegetation, such as salt -tolerant plants found on less developed sites, which would
otherwise grow at the highest tide elevations and in adjacent upland areas.
Marine riparian vegetation, when present along the Edmonds shoreline, is characterized by a mix
of native and invasive species (including dune wildrye, white sweet clover, yarrow, Puget Sound
gumweed, oceanspray, English plantain, and Scot's broom). Near the shoreline, at the base of
the small streams that flow through ravines, vegetation is a combination of non-native herbs and
shrubs, and fast-growing deciduous trees that have established on the steep slopes following
logging, clearing, and landslides. Plant species are described in more detail for each segment in
Section 7.
Native vegetation is mostly absent from the shoreline because of urban development in the
downtown Edmonds area and the BNSF railroad in other areas. Native trees and shrubs that
would have dominated this Puget Sound lowland forest shoreline include western hemlock,
western red cedar, Sitka spruce, Douglas fir, bigleaf maple, red alder, madrona, and black
cottonwood (Kruckeberg 1995). Common shrubs associated with lowland coastal forest would
be Scouler's willow, vine maple, salal, red huckleberry, Oregon grape, and devil's club
Kruckeberg 1995). A few native trees, such as bigleaf maple and red alder, and many native
shrubs are present in the ravines and along the estuarine edges, but no longer along the shoreline
edges. Besides providing essential wildlife habitat for native animal species, the dense native
forest that would be present along the shoreline (and overhanging the upper intertidal beach)
provides an important source of terrestrial insects for shoreline -oriented migratory animals,
including shorebirds and juvenile salmonids (Brennan et al. 2004, Sobocinski 2003). Shade from
vegetation also plays an important role in sheltering the eggs of beach -spawning forage fish from
ultraviolet light and desiccation (Pentilla 2001). The elimination of fringing shoreline vegetation
decreases food, shelter, and habitat value for all animals that use the shoreline.
6.4 Beaches and Backshore Flats
No undeveloped areas of natural backshore flats remain along the Edmonds shoreline.
Backshore flats would likely have been common along the southern third of Edmonds, in the
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 52
locations of the existing marina, waterfront commercial buildings, ferry terminal, and parks.
Additional areas of backshore flats were likely common at the base of the bluffs, where the
BNSF railroad bed was constructed. The areas without natural backshore flats were likely those
areas where the BNSF railroad bed was constructed with vertical walls in the lower intertidal
zone.
Edmonds beaches are typical of sediment -starved beaches. Along most of the armored shoreline,
steep, narrow beaches composed of gravelly cobble have replaced broad, sand and gravel
beaches. The current sandy beaches at Marina Park and Brackett's Landing were constructed and
have been artificially re -supplied with sand and gravel brought from upland sources. Little
vegetation is typically present in the intertidal zone, with the exception of rockweed (Fucus spp.),
sea lettuce (Ulva spp.) and the low -salinity tolerant Enteromorpha sp. (in cases where there are
freshwater seeps). However, many burrowing organisms use the intertidal area, particularly from
the mid -tidal elevations and deeper. Typical sandy beach communities are characterized by
cockles, clams, moon snails, isopods, burrowing worms, nudibranchs, sea cucumbers, and sea
stars. In addition to those species, periwinkles, drills and other snails, barnacles, mussels, hermit
crab, shore crab, errantiate (not confined to tubes or burrows), and tube -dwelling worms,
anemones, tunicates, and sponges will also be present if the beach contains some gravel or
cobble. Small fish (gunnels, blennies, and sculpin) may also be present in small depressions or
under rocks. More stable, hard substrate (e.g., consolidated clay or rock) will encourage the
presence of urchins. At high tide, larger organisms will be move into the beach areas, including
Dungeness and red rock crab, juvenile salmon and other fishes (Kozloff 1993).
6.5 Sub -Estuaries (Stream Mouths and Deltas)
The Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) recognizes six Edmonds creeks as Category 2
streams. Streams are defined in the CAO as "areas where surface waters produce a defined
channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the
passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year round." None of the streams
included on the 2004 CAO inventory within the City of Edmonds meets the criteria for
"shorelines of the state," but all contain potential or actual fish habitat and, thus, meet
designation criteria for Type F waters pursuant to WAC 222-16-030. Among these streams are
"Anadromous Fishbearing Streams" (streams existing in whole or in part within the City of
Edmonds in which anadromous fish are known to occur). As of 2004, Edmonds fishbearing
streams are known to include Willow Creek, Shellabarger Creek, Shell Creek, Hindley Creek (a
tributary of Shell Creek), Perrinville Creek, and Lund's Creek (ECDC 23.90.010).
Due to the location of the BNSF rail bed, sub -estuary habitat along Edmonds' shoreline has been
significantly reduced by fill and further constricted by culverts. The sub -estuaries now occur
shoreward/upgradient of the tracks, separated from Puget Sound by 50- to 150-ft-long culverts
except at Edmonds Marsh, where the culvert is about 800 ft long. These inland sub -estuaries
receive relatively high volumes of stormwater runoff from the backshore drainage ditch that
parallels the rail bed. All stormwater runoff from all upland areas along the tracks flows toward
the tracks and into the ditch, and then it is conveyed into the stream sub -estuaries. Because the
steep slopes along the tracks are frequently denuded by slides and vegetation removal, unusually
high sediment inputs are conveyed into the ditch and into the sub -estuaries, further degrading
water quality. It is likely that the sub -estuaries support an altered benthic and epibenthic
invertebrate community that favors large numbers of a few species that are tolerant of high
siltation and small volumes of pollutants released by train traffic (e.g., oil and grease).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 53
Small deltas have formed at the outlets of most sub -estuaries in Edmonds, particularly at Shell
Creek (Pentec Environmental 2001). Stream discharges are not sufficient to significantly alter
the salinity at these locations, although they may serve as a source of organic material to the local
estuarine environment. These small deltas tend to be composed of sand and gravel and provide a
lower gradient habitat relative to the adjacent fringing beach.
Small deltas are fairly productive and will be inhabited by worms, clams, mussels, snails,
barnacles, amphipods, and other small crustaceans, anemones, red rock crab, sea stars, and small
fish. The gravel and cobble that may be present can serve as holdfasts for smaller algae and kelp
at the lower beach elevations. These stream deltas serve as foraging areas for diving ducks,
shorebirds, fish -eating birds (such as herons and kingfisher), river otter, and fish. This habitat
also provides spawning and rearing areas for many marine species that live out their lives in
deeper water (e.g., midshipman fish).
The small deltas along the marine shore also provide critical migration corridors for wildlife and
anadromous fish between the marine shore and upland freshwater riparian habitat. Access to and
from the marine shore is largely limited to the stream corridors and culverts at sub -estuaries.
Large animals, such as raccoons and deer, may climb the railroad embankment, but face lethal
train traffic. Urban development, including housing, parks, the ferry terminal, and the railroad
bed has eliminated virtually all overhanging marine shoreline vegetation in Edmonds; thus
terrestrial wildlife foraging in the intertidal beach habitat has no shelter or cover to avoid
predation or adverse weather, other than at the sub -estuaries.
Aquatic species are also dependent on sub -estuaries as migration corridors. Both juvenile and
adult salmonids migrate through sub -estuaries to and from the ocean. The variable salinity
within sub -estuaries provides juveniles with a relatively sheltered area and abundant food in
which to adjust from freshwater to salt water (osmoregulation) during their migration to the
ocean; adults returning to spawn depend on sub -estuaries for holding until stream flows adjust to
acceptable volumes and temperatures for upstream migration.
6.6 Eelgrass Meadows
Eelgrass is distributed in patchy narrow bands along the City waterfront south of the marina to
Point Wells, and north of Shell Creek to Picnic Point (KC DNR WTD 2003) (Figure 1). Dense
patches are present in some areas, including north and south of the Lynnwood outfall (near
Meadowdale Creek), and north and south of Laebugten's Wharf. Although the WDNR ShoreZone
inventory in 2001 depicted eelgrass between the ferry terminal and the north side of the marina, the
recent Battelle Nearshore Survey (KC DNR WTD 2003) did not show eelgrass in that area.
At its shallowest extent, the eelgrass starts 10 feet waterward of the shore, at about -2 feet
MLLW. The deepest extent is probably about 200 feet offshore, to a maximum depth of
about -20 feet MLLW, based on the depth of nearby eelgrass beds that were mapped south of the
marina for a recent eelgrass survey (Parametrix, reported in KC DNR WTD 2003). The density
of the mapped eelgrass beds is variable, ranging from a few shoots per square meter, to several
hundred per square meter.
Eelgrass beds provide foraging and refuge habitat for many species, including juvenile fish and
Dungeness crab. Many diving ducks and other seabirds will also forage in the eelgrass beds. By
late spring and summer, there is usually a well -developed invertebrate community inhabiting the
beds, including small algae (attached to the eelgrass blades), flatworms, small crustaceans
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 54
including copepods, amphipods, isopods, hydroids, jellyfish, snails, nudibranchs, six -rayed
seastars, spider crabs, and many others (Kozloff 1993).
6.7 Kelp Beds
Bull kelp (Nereocystis luetkeana) and sugar kelp (Laminaria saccharina) are the most common
types of kelp in central Puget Sound. Distribution of kelp, especially bull kelp, varies over time
(Shaffer 1998 in KC DNR WTD 2003, see Figure 12). In general, kelp beds are found offshore
of eelgrass beds, in deeper water, in areas of higher currents and rocky substrates that provide
stable platforms for holdfast attachment. A dense band of kelp was recently mapped off the
mouth of Shell Creek, extending about 1,000 feet to the north and south. Six smaller kelp beds
were identified offshore in the general area of Perrinville Creek. One small kelp bed was mapped
south of Laebugten's Wharf (KC DNR WTD 2003). The DNR ShoreZone Inventory indicates
that an area of bull kelp was observed north of the Edmonds Underwater Park for about
2,000 feet, and between Perrinville and Fruitdale Creeks for about 3,000 feet.
Kelp beds provide habitat for a variety of fish species, herring spawning substrate, and refuge for
a variety of crabs and shrimps. Young rockfish common to the Central Basin of Puget Sound
(brown, copper, and quillback) are typically found in kelp beds prior to moving to more typical
adult rocky reef habitat.
6.8 Habitat Conservation Areas
Brackett's Landing Shoreline Sanctuary Conservation Area is defined in WAC 220-16-720 as
those bed lands and tidelands owned by the City of Edmonds at Brackett's Landing Shoreline
Sanctuary, and the water column above these bed lands and tidelands including all of the area
known as Edmonds Underwater Park. Established in 1970, this is the oldest marine conservation
area in Puget Sound, serving as a reference area for research into long-term marine conservation
and ecological adaptation and recovery (WDFW 2006b).
According to WDFW (2006b), the park's predominant fishes include copper rockfish (Sebastes
caurinus), quillback rockfish (S. maliger), lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus), and cabezon
(Scorpaenichthys marmoratus). Kelp greenling (Hexagrammos decagrammus), painted greenling
(Oxylebius pictus), surfperches (Embiotocidae), and black rockfish (S. melanops) are also
common in the park, although they are associated with artificial rocky reef habitats that are
atypical of the natural nearshore habitat of this locale. Flatfishes are often found on the sand and
mud habitats away from the artificial structures, and the eelgrass beds support many small fishes
such as bay pipefish (Sygnathus leptorhynchus), juvenile codfishes (Gadidae), and shiner perch
(Cymatogaster aggregata). Pelagic schooling fishes may be seen in the park such as juvenile and
adult salmon, tubesnouts (Aulorhynchus flavidus), and juvenile herring (Clupea harengus
pallasi).
Predominant macro -invertebrates include giant anemones (Metridium senile) that cover much of
the artificial structures.
Marine mammals frequent the site, including harbor seals and sea lions. Diving ducks, such as
surf and white -winged scoters and red -breasted mergansers, can be observed during the winter at
the park. Red -necked grebes (Podiceps grisegena), Western grebes (Aechmophorus
occidentalis), and horned grebes (Podiceps auritus) also occur in the reserve, as do seabirds such
as marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus) (WDFW 2006b).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 55
7. Segment Summaries and Assessment
The marine shoreline was divided into segments (see Figure 2) based on a habitat assessment
(Pentec Environmental 2001) that considered numerous environmental factors favorable to
salmonids. The segmentation was determined by biologists based on shoreline physical
characteristics identified through field surveys and hydrological, chemical, geomorphologic,
biological, and landscape features identified from natural resource maps and reports, and a
review of aerial photographs. Lake Ballinger was assigned a separate segment from the marine
shoreline because of its physical separation and unique lacustrine characteristic.
Detailed information about the habitat features within each segment were obtained from literature
cited in this inventory, including a shoreline inventory conducted along the marine shore in 2001-
2002 (Snohomish County 2001). The marine shore inventory consisted of teams of biologists
carrying global positioning system (GPS) receivers who walked along the shoreline in two tracks
parallel to OHW and recorded the type and location of numerous physical and biological features
within 200 feet of OHW (Table 7). This dataset provides the most comprehensive documentation
of shoreline marine features, although continuing development at certain locations (e.g., the
former Unocal site, the waterfront commercial district) has undoubtedly changed some
conditions since 2000.
Table 7. Marine Shore Inventory Habitat Features
recorded for Snohomish County 2001
Location
X
X X
X X
X X X
X
X
Material
I X
X
X
I X
X
Condition
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Elevation
X
X
X
X
X
X
Length
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I X
X
Width
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Diameter
X
Patch Size
X
X
X
Type or Species
X
X
X
Flow
I
I
X
X
X
Complexity
X
X
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 56
7.1 Segment A—Lund's Gulch to Perrinville Creek
7.1.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment A, from the northern edge of Edmonds to the mouth of Perrinville Creek, is about
7,100 feet long. The segment includes part of Lund's Creek estuary, although most of the creek
and estuary is outside of Edmonds' city limits. The segment also includes Meadowdale Creek.
The segment forms a broad arc along the shoreline, referred to as Browns Bay.
The BNSF railroad track bed fills the transition zone between the upper intertidal zone and the
upland slope. Along this segment, the waterward side of the railroad bed consists of a rock -
armored, steep slope (about 1:1). Some of the armoring is in good condition, but a length of
about 4,000 feet is failing, as evidenced by deep holes in the waterward face and large rocks that
have tumbled into the intertidal zone. At the top of the bed, the track(s) and adjacent fill width
varies between 10 and 15 feet. Throughout the segment are numerous small pipes and culverts
that convey creeks and stormwater drainages under the BNSF railroad. At least 34 pipes, ranging
in diameter from 4 inches to 3 feet, cross through the railroad bed and discharge into Puget
Sound. Within the shoreline jurisdiction, most of Segment A is devoid of riparian vegetation,
except for about 400 feet of upland shoreline, immediately south of Lund's Creek estuary, where
the forested ravine meets the water. The forest is separated from the intertidal beach by the
railroad bed, and trees have been cleared to improve water views in front of several residences so
the (lack of) riparian vegetation offers diminished value to the marine shoreline.
Near Laebugten's Wharf, the railroad bed moves inland, and an area of low bank stretches for
about 230 feet along the shoreline, waterward of the tracks. Low -growing vegetation, consisting
of grasses, forbs, and weedy shrubs, covers this "no bank" area just upland of the shoreland.
Laebugten's Wharf covers about 200 square feet of intertidal habitat near the middle of
Segment A, between Lund's and Meadowdale Creeks. At the wharf, a 20-foot-wide wood ramp
crosses the shoreland and extends about 200 feet across the intertidal to the wharf, all on
creosote -treated wood supports.
Attached to the wharf is a salmon -rearing net pen, about 20 x 20 x 12 ft in size. Since 1990, the
net pen has been used by WDFW to rear hatchery coho salmon smolts for release into Puget
Sound as a supplement to recreational and commercial fisheries. About 27,000 fish are released
annually into the Edmonds Marina Boat Basin between May and June (WDFW 2006c). The
Northwest Salmon and Steelheaders Council (NWSSC), Laebugten Chapter, maintains the net
pen, and feeds and releases the penned fish.
South of Laebugten's Wharf is Meadowdale Creek. The railroad fill has largely eliminated the
estuary, and a culvert concentrates creek flows into a narrow band that discharges as a point in
the lower intertidal, instead of a broad arc across the upper intertidal. Consequently, this special
aquatic habitat is greatly reduced in both area and function.
South of Meadowdale Creek is a roughly 1,000-foot-long segment of shoreline that belongs to
the City of Lynnwood. The property includes a sewage treatment plant and outfall. Near the
south end of Segment A, nine derelict wood piles were observed in the intertidal zone.
Segment A is rated as providing moderate quality habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon and bull
trout. Although eelgrass is present along the nearshore, the armored and filled intertidal zone and
lack of riparian vegetation within the 200-foot shoreland decrease habitat value. Lund's Creek
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 57
estuary provides a small section of high quality habitat, but Meadowdale Creek's estuary has
been filled by the railroad bed. Dense urban development in the upland areas adjacent to the
shoreland further reduces habitat value and function along this segment.
7.1.2 Lund's Gulch Creek
Lund's Gulch Creek subbasin drains an area of approximately 2.3 square miles (1,440 acres), of
which only a small fraction, probably less than five percent, lies within the City of Edmonds.
West of 52nd Avenue W, including the area within the City of Edmonds, the creek and its
tributaries are contained within a deeply incised ravine with sloping sidewalls steeper than
40 percent. The creek and ravine are part of Meadowdale County Park.
A significant part of the estuary has been filled by the BNSF railroad bed; the creek passes
through a 36-inch-diameter culvert before entering Puget Sound. Shrubs and small trees on the
east side of the railroad bed extend about 200 feet south of the estuary, except in front of several
houses where vegetation has been cleared for unobstructed water views. Within the city limits,
the ravine is mostly forested, except for a small area at the top of the hillside that contains
medium -density residential housing. The upper portion of the basin is flat with drainage systems
consisting of older ditch and culvert systems that lack sufficient conveyance capacity.
The upper watershed, east of Edmonds, is urbanized with development consisting of medium to
high -density residential development. Commercial development is also located along the
Highway 99 corridor. Notable hydrologic features in the basin include a 21-acre forested
wetland and a regional detention facility located upstream of 52nd Avenue (Snohomish County
SWM 2002).
Snohomish County SWM (Snohomish County SWM 2002) modeled hydrologic conditions for
the entire Lund's Gulch Creek subbasin to determine stormwater runoff volumes that would be
generated at different locations for both existing and future land use conditions. The county also
modeled hydraulic conditions to evaluate the conveyance capacity of portions of Lund's Gulch
Creek, as well as the primary drainage system, to determine water levels and evaluate backwater
conditions that occur when downstream flow restrictions, such as an undersized culvert, cause
high upstream water levels (Snohomish County SWM 2002). Geomorphologic analyses were
conducted to evaluate erosion and sediment deposition problems within or affecting the study
area. The geomorphologic field investigation included portions of the main stem for Lund's
Gulch Creek, and detailed geomorphic analyses were also conducted to assess the stability of the
stream channel and its tendency to erode and deposit sediment. The results of the studies,
models, and analyses were presented in a Drainage Needs Report and appendices available
through Snohomish County. The report identified 19 specific locations within the Lunds Gulch
Creek subbasin with drainage problems. Most problems were related to inadequate stormwater
conveyance and subsequent flooding of roads and private property outside of the creek corridor.
Two undersized culverts within the creek channel were identified as blocking or restricting fish
access and impounding creek flows, resulting in channel erosion and unnatural drainage patterns
that further impacted the creek. The culverts were identified as Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife's priority replacement projects. One section of creek was recommended for
"tightlining," in which 300 feet of channel would be removed and water would be conveyed in a
pipe. Although tightlining may simplify a drainage conveyance problem, it accomplishes one
objective —water conveyance —by eliminating all other physical and biological functions from a
creek system, resulting in practically complete habitat loss. Several other drainage erosion
problems (related to flooding and erosion) that occurred on private property were not
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 58
recommended for correction because the costs were not justified by the limited scope of property
damage; however, the analysis did not consider the cumulative impacts from these small-scale,
but numerous and frequent sediment inputs into the creek channel. Ironically, this type of small-
scale degradation, on a single -lot basis, is now recognized as the primary factor contributing to
the degradation of Halls Creek. Coho and chum salmon and cutthroat trout are the predominant
salmonid species that use Lund's Gulch Creek (Snohomish County SWM 2002). The creek is
neither known nor presumed to support Chinook salmon, bull trout, rainbow trout, or steelhead,
although one steelhead was reportedly seen in the creek in 1978 (Kerwin 2001). Lund's Gulch
Creek may support a small population of resident cutthroat trout. Anadromous fish entering
Lund's Gulch Creek pass through a culvert under the railroad tracks that occasionally clogs with
sediment and sometimes limits access. The condition of fish habitat in the creek is fair to poor.
The creek appears to have good spawning gravels in the first kilometer upstream of saltwater;
however, active transport of bedload material from upstream sources and inputs of sediment
likely limit egg survival in the spawning gravels. No study on the survival rate of eggs laid in
these habitats was available. In addition to stream channel erosion problems, there are also side
ravine sediment discharges throughout the creek.
Little information regarding the salmonid population is available, except for WDFW (Pfeifer
1979, in WDFW 2003), of which all accounts are anecdotal. Coho and chum in Lund's Gulch
Creek have been sighted consistently for the past decade or more, through 2001, by the park
ranger. In 2001, about 100 coho and 100 chum salmon spawned in Lund's Gulch Creek. Local
high schools and the Brackett's Landing Foundation are also reported to participate in off -site
chum salmon rearing for release in Lund's Gulch Creek. The Brackett's Landing Foundation
maintains a small hatchery in the large wetland complex at the headwaters of Lund's Gulch Creek.
The Foundation rears and releases fry and smolts resulting from 10,000 chum and 500 coho eggs
per year (CH2M HILL 2004). Local anglers have reported sea -run cutthroat use of Lund's Gulch
Creek.
The lower reaches of Lund's Gulch Creek provide a low -gradient spawning area without fish
passage barriers as far upstream as 52nd Avenue W. Above 52nd Avenue W., the naturally low
baseflow and moderate to steep gradient limits the area useable for salmonids and further
upstream passage. In the midsection of Lund Gulch Creek, water velocity preferences for most
anadromous species are exceeded due to high gradients. Historical distribution of salmon in
Lund's Gulch Creek probably limited to the lower reaches.
7.1.3 Meadowdale Creek
No information specific to Meadowdale Creek was found during a literature search. References
to a drainage basin study of Meadowdale Creek by R.W. Beck in 1991 were reported in the
Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2002), but no details were
provided. Based on the Snohomish County marine shore inventory, USGS topographic maps,
and aerial photographs, Meadowdale Creek characteristics and conditions appear to closely
resemble the other short -length, deeply incised urbanized creeks that flow through the City.
The outlet of Meadowdale Creek consists of a 30-inch-diameter culvert that passes under the
BNSF railroad bed and discharges directly onto intertidal beach. No delta or defined estuary is
present in aerial photos near the creek outlet. The gradient of the lower reaches of Meadowdale
Creek closely resembles Perrinville Creek, which is moderately steep, but still allows
anadromous fish passage. There are no records by WDFW of anadromous fish using the creek.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 59
7.2 Segment B—Perrinville Creek to Southwest County Park
7.2.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment B, from the mouth of Perrinville Creek to a latitude even with 176th Street SW, is about
2,100 feet long. This segment, rated as having low quality shoreline habitat for salmonids, lies
between two adjacent areas of moderate quality habitat, as identified in the Edmonds Shoreline
Habitat Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2001).
The BNSF railroad track bed fills the transition zone between the lower intertidal zone and the
upland slope. Along this segment, the waterward side of the railroad bed consists of a rock -
armored slope, ranging from 20 to 30 feet high. Little of the armoring is in good condition —a
length of about 1,200 feet is failing, as evidenced by deep holes in the waterward face and large
rocks that have tumbled out into the lower intertidal and shallow subtidal zones. At the top of the
bed, the double tracks and adjacent fill width is about 15 feet.
Near the northern end of this segment is Perrinville Creek. The creek passes through a 36-inch-
diameter concrete culvert under the railroad bed and discharges directly onto the lower
intertidal, where a large delta is forming. Along the rest of the segment, five small plastic pipes,
ranging in diameter from 4 to 6 inches, convey stormwater drainage under the BNSF railroad
into Puget Sound.
A backshore wetland is found within this segment, formed by water impounded along the
railroad bed. The wetland is about 150 feet long and 35 feet wide.
Moderate banks, less than 50 feet high, cover the backshore transition into upland habitat, except
for a 300-feet-long section of low bank on both sides of Perrinville Creek. The upper riparian
slopes along Segment A are mostly devoid of trees and other significant riparian vegetation. A
narrow band of brambles and shrubs separates the rest of the shoreland from lawns and dense
residential housing. Parts of the adjacent hillsides appear to have been cleared about the time of
the 2002 shoreline survey.
The shoreline segment is within a bald eagle breeding territory (WDFW 2006a).
7.2.2 Perrinville Creek
Perrinville Creek is classified by the City of Edmonds as a Category 2 stream. The Perrinville
Creek drainage basin was studied extensively in 1991 (R.W. Beck), 1998 (Pentec and Shannon &
Wilson), and 2002 (Pentec Environmental). This creek closely resembles other creeks within the
City, which are similar in topography, gradient, soils, vegetation, and channel modifications
resulting from the railroad and surrounding urban development. The Perrinville Creek outlet is a
36-inch-diameter concrete culvert that discharges onto lower intertidal beach habitat that is
heavily armored with boulders that have rolled off the BNSF railroad bed. A noticeable delta is
accreting at the culvert outlet, indicating high sediment volumes are likely eroding from the
upstream riparian corridor. The creek slopes moderately (less than 5 percent) for about 500 feet
through residential properties west of Talbot Road. The gradient (and erosion -related problems)
increases upstream of Talbot Road.
Information about fish use of Perrinville Creek is limited. WDFW (1991, 2006a) reported
resident cutthroat trout in the lower reaches and accessible, good quality spawning and rearing
habitat in the lower and middle reaches for anadromous salmonids. Since 1994, juvenile chum
salmon have been released annually in Perrinville Creek as part of a class project at Seaview
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 60
Elementary School; however, no adult returns to this stream have been reported (Pentec
Environmental 2002). In general, high sediment loads and impassable fish barriers upstream of
the culvert at Talbot Road have limited the use of potential spawning and rearing habitat that may
be present. No bull trout have been observed in any of the drainages within the City (Pentec
Environmental 2002).
The lower riparian zone is within a bald eagle breeding territory (WDFW 2006a).
7.3 Segment C—Southwest County Park to Fruitdale Creek
7.3.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment C, from Southwest County Park to Fruitdale Creek, is about 5,300 feet long. The
segment coincides with a habitat segment assessed as moderate quality in the Edmonds Marine
Shore Habitat Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2002). This segment includes one unnamed
creek. Most of this segment is defined by the vertical rock wall along the BNSF railroad bed.
The BNSF railroad track bed fills the transition zone between the mid -intertidal zone and the
upland slope. Along this segment, the waterward side of the railroad bed consists of 3,700 feet of
rock -armored, steep slope (about 1:1) and 1,600 feet of vertical rock wall, about 15 feet high.
Most of the armoring is in good condition; a length of only about 200 feet is failing, as evidenced
by deep holes in the waterward face and large rocks that have tumbled out into the subtidal zone.
At the top of the bed, the double tracks and adjacent fill are about 15 feet wide. At the northern
end of the segment is a 24-inch-diameter concrete culvert that carries stormwater flows under the
railroad bed. Further south along the shoreline, a 36-inch-diameter plastic pipe also conveys
stormwater flows under the railroad bed. Along the rest of the segment, ten small plastic pipes,
ranging in diameter from 4 to 6 inches, convey stormwater drainage under the BNSF railroad into
Puget Sound. A freshwater seep is also located along this segment.
The entire segment consists of a continuous, moderately high bank that appears to have been
cleared of vegetation in patches prior to the survey in 2002. Scattered trees (alder) were present
along some of the slope uphill of the shoreland; however, no significant riparian tree or shrub
layer was present within the shoreland. No vegetation was present from the intertidal zone to the
landward edge of the railroad bed. Along the shallow subtidal zone, extensive eelgrass beds are
visible in aerial photos and in maps of sonar surveys.
This segment is within a bald eagle breeding territory (WDFW 2006a).
7.4 Segment D—Fruitdale Creek to Shell Creek
7.4.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment D, from the mouth of Fruitdale Creek to a point south of Shell Creek, is about
3,300 feet long. This segment, rated as having moderate quality shoreline habitat for salmonids,
lies between two adjacent areas of moderate quality habitat, as identified in the Edmonds
Shoreline Habitat Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2001).
The BNSF railroad track bed fills the transition zone between the mid -intertidal zone and the
upland slope. Along this segment, the waterward side of the railroad bed consists of a rock -
armored slope, ranging from 10 to 20 feet high. Most of the armoring is in good condition, with
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 61
only a short span (about 560 feet) failing, as evidenced by deep holes in the waterward face and
large rocks that have tumbled into the lower intertidal and shallow subtidal zones. At the top of
the bed, the double tracks and adjacent fill width is about 15 feet.
At the northern end of the segment, Fruitdale Creek passes through a 30-inch-diameter concrete
culvert under the railroad bed and discharges directly onto the lower intertidal, where a small
delta has formed. A narrow backshore wetland, about 230 feet long, was formed by drainage
impounded along the railroad bed. A large seep area is also located in this segment. This
segment also includes Northstream Creek and Shell Creek.
Low banks cover the backshore transition into upland habitat. About 1,000 feet of upper riparian
slopes along Segment D contain riparian vegetation; the remainder is mostly landscaped
residential yards devoid of trees and other significant riparian vegetation. No specific data on
vegetation species and composition is available. A narrow band of brambles and shrubs
separates the rest of the shoreland from lawns and dense residential housing.
The shoreline segment is within a bald eagle breeding territory (WDFW 2006a)
7.4.2 Fruitdale Creek
Fruitdale Creek is an Edmonds Category 2 stream, about 0.75 miles long, that drains 143 acres of
the Talbot Park basin. Little information is available for Fruitdale Creek apart from a drainage
study by URS in 1989 and a recent habitat survey (Pentec Environmental 2002). The creek outlet
consists of a 30-inch-diameter concrete culvert under the BNSF railroad bed. During the
2002 survey, the culvert was about 40 percent filled with gravel. The creek channel flows
through a series of pipes, incised channels, debris, and a flood -control structure.
The WDFW (2006a) Priority Species database contains no fisheries information for Fruitdale
Creek. An unspecified fish habitat survey conducted in 1985 (no other information available)
found no fish present. A 2002 habitat survey (Pentec Environmental) verified the lack of
salmonid spawning and rearing habitat in the creek and concluded current fish use of the creek
was unlikely.
7.4.3 Northstream Creek
Northstream Creek is classified by the City of Edmonds as a Category 2 stream that drains the
248-acre Northstream drainage basin (URS 1989). The creek is about 0.75 miles in length and
drops about 400 feet in elevation from the top of the basin to the outlet, through a 24-inch-
diameter culvert under the BNSF railroad bed (Pentec Environmental 2002; Snohomish County
database 2001). In 1989, Northstream Creek was determined to have erosion and water capacity
problems due to stormwater runoff (URS 1989). The stream channel has been confined to a
narrow, concrete -lined ditch between several residential properties; all vegetation has been
removed. Further upstream, the creek regains its natural channel and riparian vegetation.
Information on fish use of Northstream Creek is limited. As of 2002, WDFW had not conducted
fish surveys in the creek, although Pentec Environmental (2002) biologists observed fish,
presumed to be cutthroat trout, downstream of an impassible fish barrier at the site of a 1920's
era shingle mill water diversion structure. Residents along the creek reported that great blue
heron and river otter were present in the basin.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 62
7.4.4 Shell Creek
Shell Creek is classified as a Category 2 stream by the City of Edmonds. The creek drains an
806-acre basin, which includes Hindley Creek. A significant part of the estuary has been filled
by the BNSF railroad bed; the creek passes through a 36-inch-diameter culvert before entering
Puget Sound, where a large delta has formed. The lower reaches of the creek are relatively
undeveloped and provide good -quality shoreline habitat, including a rare Category 2 riparian
wetland along the backshore. Within the shoreland, the wetland is about 100 feet wide and
230 feet long. It extends about a quarter -mile upstream from the railroad, out of the shoreland
boundary.
A short distance upstream of the BNSF culvert, Hindley Creek joins Shell Creek. Gradients are
low in both channels and below the confluence, and spawning gravels are abundant. The middle
and upper reaches of Shell and Hindley Creeks are described in detail in the Edmonds Stream
Inventory and Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2002). Both creeks pass through urbanized
areas, where habitat is degraded by obstructions, culverts, riparian clearing, urban landscaping,
stormwater inputs, and erosion/sedimentation.
A large city park, Yost Park, protects part of the upper watershed from the impacts of dense
urban development. The park includes upland forest and mature second growth riparian
vegetation dominated by mature red alder trees as tall as 90 feet. The dense canopy and poorly
drained soils limit the diversity of understory, which is dominated by salmonberry. Also present
are red huckleberry, salal, sword fern, and elderberry, along with other shrubs, grasses, and
herbaceous plants. The Yost Park red alder forest, meandering stream, and surrounding conifer
forest offers critical refuge to wildlife in an increasingly urban environment (City of Edmonds
2006b).
The park was originally the site of the first Edmonds community water supply; remains of dams
built by the Edmonds Spring Water Company are still visible in Yost Park. Dozens of large old
western red cedar stumps are found throughout the park as well as "nurse logs." As stumps and
logs decay, their nutrients replenish the soil, and encourage smaller plants to grow upon them.
Huckleberry, salal, salmonberry, ferns, moss, lichen and fungi all benefit from the decomposing
wood in the park.
Yost Park provides a habitat for numerous species of resident and migratory birds including
barred owls, pileated woodpeckers, northern flickers, rufus-sided towhees, and Cooper's hawks.
Black -capped chickadee, Swainson's thrush, olive -sided flycatcher, and winter wren are some of
the more common small birds found in the park. Mammals include the nocturnal mountain
beaver, opossum, raccoon, shrew mole, and a few types of bats. Giant pacific salamanders are
sometimes found in the creek, and tree frogs can sometimes be heard singing in the wetlands
surrounding the boardwalk (City of Edmonds 2006b). Although WDFW has not conducted any
recent fish surveys on the Shell Creek system, biologists counted six chum salmon carcasses in
the lower reach of Shell Creek during November 2002 survey, and other Pentec Environmental
biologists reported seeing both coho and chum salmon spawning in lower Shell Creek in 2000
and 2001 (Pentec Environmental 2002). Resident cutthroat trout are likely distributed
throughout many sections of the creek system (Pentec Environmental 2002). The state has
designated lower Shell Creek as habitat for priority anadromous fish species (chum and coho
salmon), and priority resident fish species (cutthroat trout).
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 63
7.5 Segment E—Shell Creek to Edmonds Underwater Park
7.5.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment E, south of Shell Creek to the Edmonds Underwater Park, is about 3,300 feet long. This
segment, rated as having moderate quality shoreline habitat for salmonids, lies between adjacent
areas of moderate and low quality habitat, as identified in the Edmonds Shoreline Habitat
Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2001).
The BNSF railroad track bed fills the transition zone between the lower intertidal zone and the
upland slope. Along this segment, the waterward side of the railroad bed consists of a rock -
armored slope or vertical rock bulkhead, ranging from 10 to 20 feet high. Most of the armoring
is in good condition, with only a short span (about 200 feet) failing, as evidenced by deep holes
in the waterward face and large rocks that have tumbled out into the lower intertidal and shallow
subtidal zones. At the top of the bed, the double tracks and adjacent fill width is about 15 feet.
Near the south end of the segment, the double tracks converge into one track, the gradient drops
slightly, and the shoreline extends waterward against a large rock -armored groin. Along this
segment, the bank transitions from steep high bank to moderate bank along most of the tracks,
and then drops to low or no -bank slopes for the southernmost 700 feet.
Along this segment are two 24-inch-diameter concrete pipes and one 24-inch-diameter
corrugated metal pipe that provide stormwater drainage under the BNSF railroad bed.
Riparian vegetation is largely absent from Segment E. No riparian vegetation occurs between the
railroad bed and adjacent shoreland along about 2,400 feet of the segment. Near the underwater
park, a small area of low -growing vegetation (grasses, weeds) and a narrow band of blackberries,
Scot's broom and other non-native shrubs separate the shoreland from streets, lawns, and
residential housing.
No streams occur in this segment.
7.6 Segment F—Edmonds Underwater Park to Port of Edmonds
7.6.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment F, from the Edmonds Underwater Park to the Port of Edmonds Marina, is about
1,850 feet long. This segment, rated as having low quality shoreline habitat for salmonids, lies
between two adjacent areas of low quality habitat, as identified in the Edmonds Shoreline Habitat
Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2001). A Washington State Ferry terminal is in middle of
this segment. The ferry car ramp and access pier is about 75 feet wide. It is supported by a
combination of older creosote -treated piles and newer steel piles.
Segment F is one of three marine segments whose shoreland is not defined (and filled) by the
BNSF railroad bed. The shoreland transition into the upland consists of low or no bank. 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. About 1,300 linear
feet of this segment consists of a vertical bulkhead; the remaining 250 feet is sloped rock and
concrete armoring. A wood bulkhead, about 75 feet in length, projects about 25 feet into the
intertidal beach area to provide parking for a commercial building. Most of the bulkheads extend
into middle or lower intertidal elevations.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 64
The dominant feature of this segment is the ferry terminal, which covers about 24,700 square feet
over aquatic nearshore habitat (CH2M HILL 2004). In addition, support piling and associated
"halos" cover about 5,868 square feet of substrate. (A "halo" refers to accumulation of shell
debris at the base of a piling from barnacle shell fallout and other debris from the invertebrate
community encrusting on the piling surfaces above. This forms a ring at the pile base and limits
the use of the area by clams and other non -mobile benthic infauna in this zone. The calculated
area assumes that the ring extends outward 18 inches from each piling around the entire
perimeter.) Impacts to benthos, eelgrass, and macroalgae beds occurred when the terminal was
built 50 years ago. Over time, the approach to the pier was dredged to a depth of about 40 feet.
Propeller wash -caused scour eliminated a much larger footprint of eelgrass and macroalgae beds,
in addition to the dredged beds. Eelgrass loss from shading, scour, and dredging was estimated
to be approximately 112,033 square feet or 2.6 acres. Macroalgae losses from these same factors
were estimated to be approximately 165,020 square feet or 3.8 acres. Together, this represents
about 6.4 acres of historical eelgrass and macroalgae loss at the existing Edmonds ferry terminal
(CH2M HILL 2004).
Recently, substrate composition in the scour trough was described as rocky, incised in till,
supporting a community of fish and invertebrates characteristic of rocky environments. Aquatic
substrate prior to the building of the terminal was almost certainly fine to medium sand, as it is
on either side of the terminal today (CH2M HILL 2004). It is likely that the eelgrass beds to the
north and south of the existing terminal were once a continuous bed, although smaller ferry
vessel propeller scour may have disturbed the eelgrass beds decades earlier.
Little or no riparian vegetation characterizes most of the shoreland area, except for restored
native vegetation mixed with ornamental landscaping at Brackett's Landing and ornamental
(grass) landscaping along several commercial buildings. A 10-foot-diameter patch of invasive
Japanese knotweed, observed in 2001, continues to flourish in Brackett's Landing Park.
The nearshore subtidal area between the existing ferry terminal and the Port of Edmonds Marina
is mostly sand. There are areas of artificial reef materials and rock at depths of -15 to -90 feet
MLLW and some mixed sand/gravel at +5 to -15 feet MLLW. The marina breakwater consists
of large rock riprap. A public fishing pier built on concrete piles extends beyond the breakwater.
There is a band of sand/shell substrate at the base of the breakwater
The area near the existing ferry terminal and Dayton Street has expansive macroalgae and
eelgrass beds. Macroalgae, including Laminaria and Nereocystis, are nearly continuous from
the -5-foot contour to the -60-foot MLLW contour. The area directly offshore of and including
the docking area of the existing ferry terminal is conspicuously devoid of macroalgae, probably
as a result of propeller -induced turbulence. Eelgrass beds are continuous from the marina to the
ferry pier and from the ferry pier north through the underwater park and beyond. Depths range
from about -2 feet to -20 feet MLLW. The green algae, Ulva lactuca, and the red algae,
Gracilaria sjoestedtii, are also common (CH2M HILL 2004).
A narrow sand and gravel beach extends north and south of the ferry terminal and provides
habitat for surf smelt and sand lance spawning, according to WDFW records. Surf smelt spawn
between 7 feet and MHHW and sand lance spawn between 5 feet and MHHW; these elevations
comprise most of the publicly accessible beach along the Edmonds Underwater and Brackett's
Landing parks. Heavy public use of these two beaches and the Edmonds Underwater Park (with
over 20,000 diver visits annually) (City of Edmonds 2006c), plus strong propeller wash from the
regular ferry service, probably decrease the habitat value for juvenile salmon, forage fish,
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 65
wildlife, and aquatic vegetation; however, the area is also a state -designated Marine Protected
Area, which prohibits the collection or removal of plants and animals. This sanctuary is the
oldest in Puget Sound, and its longevity has resulted in a succession of marine plants and animals
of unusual size for Puget Sound.
The Edmonds Underwater Park includes 27 acres of tide and bottom lands and was established as
a marine preserve and sanctuary in 1970 (City of Edmonds 2006). The shore consists of sandy
beaches recessed in two small coves to the north of the WSF pier. A jetty consisting of
revetment rock juts into the water, splitting the conservation area. The primary subtidal habitat
of the underwater park is a wide, sand flat gently sloping from the shore seaward. The maximum
depth at the offshore extent of the park is approximately -40 feet MLLW. At the nearshore edge
of the sand flats, healthy beds of eelgrass separate the intertidal zone from the deeper subtidal
habitats. This habitat contains many artificial structures that attract fishes normally associated
with rocky habitats (WDFW 2006b).
The area within Edmonds Underwater Park is recognized as a fish haven for numerous large
commercial species that face high fishing pressure in unprotected areas of Puget Sound.
Exceptionally large lingcod and rockfish are associated with the park (G. Broadhurst 2005;
Seattle Post-Intelligencer 2002.) Floats anchored within the park provided haulout platforms for
California sea lions and harbor seals (WDFW 2006b), but they were subsequently removed to
avoid conflicts with divers. In October 2004, the invasive tunicate Didemnum lahillei was
identified in the Edmonds Underwater Park growing on a submerged ship hull. An eradication
effort using bleach was attempted in 2005. The park continues to be monitored for reoccurrence.
In April 2004, gourds were installed on a group of pilings south of the Edmonds ferry dock by
volunteers, with the approval of the Edmonds Parks and Recreation Director. Since the artificial
nest sites were provided, martins have successfully nested in 2004 and 2005, and nesting activity
has been observed recently (Lider 2006 personal communication).
Along the bulkheads, five drainage pipes, ranging from 3 to 12 inches in diameter, discharge into
the intertidal zone.
No streams occur in this segment.
7.7 Segment G—Port of Edmonds Marina
7.7.1 Marine Shoreland
Segment G consists of the Port of Edmonds Marina, Edmonds Marsh, and Shellabarger Creek.
The marine portion of this segment is about 3,200 feet long. It is rated as having low quality
shoreline habitat for salmonids, but Edmonds Marsh is rated as having high quality habitat, as
identified in the Edmonds Shoreline Habitat Assessment (Pentec Environmental 2001). The
marine segment consists of a steeply sloped rock breakwater surrounding the marina basin and a
vertical concrete bulkhead along the shoreline. The shoreland consists of drives and paved
parking for the marine, with a few port offices and workshops. The only vegetation in this
segment consists of small strips of ornamental landscaping that line the sidewalk between the
parking lot and the marina access street.
The marina extends 500 feet westward into Puget Sound and is dredged to a depth of minus
13 feet (Port of Edmonds 2006). The marina breakwater extends approximately 2,400 feet from
north to south along the shoreline. The marina footprint covers about 617,000 square feet of
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 66
intertidal and subtidal habitat with fill, armored breakwaters, piers, ramps, and docks. The
shoreline is armored with a concrete bulkhead and backfilled to provide an area for port offices,
parking, workshops, and commercial businesses. Although construction of the original marina
was completed as early as 1961, most of the marina's piers, floats, and covered docks were
destroyed in 1996 during a major storm. Reconstruction was completed in 1998 using concrete
and steel materials (Port of Edmonds 2006).
Adjacent to the marina basin is the Olympic Beach Park and Fishing Pier, which includes a
developed urban park with amenities on the shoreline and a public fishing and viewing pier
extending over the marina breakwater to the waterward edge of the marina.
The Port property once included a fur breeding business; as of 1995, the site has been under a
State cleanup order for a leaking underground storage tank that contaminated groundwater
(Ecology 2006).
7.7.2 Edmonds Marsh and Shellabarger and Willow Creeks
Edmonds Marsh and its associated streams (Shellabarger and Willow Creeks) are part of the
SNIP jurisdictional shoreland area. Within this segment, Willow Creek flows parallel to the
BNSF railroad tracks in a ditch, continues under the tracks and marina parking lot, and accesses
the street through several hundred feet of culvert. Contrary to old maps and reports, the creek
discharges subtidally at Point Edwards near the oil pier, not in the marina.
Edmonds Marsh has been altered extensively by filling and creek re-channelization during the
previous decades; about 22 acres remain of the original 40-acre estuarine wetland. It consists of
a primarily freshwater wetland with a small area of saltmarsh along the western edge near the
tide gate.
The Shellabarger Creek drainage basin includes about 354 acres (Pentec Environmental 2002).
A drainage study by URS (1989) identified numerous problems, including stream erosion,
inadequate culvert capacity, nutrient loading from overuse of fertilizers, and oil pollution from
road runoff and illegal dumping. These impacts indicate that the many ecological functions of
Shellabarger Creek are impaired or subsumed by the overwhelming use of the creek as a surface
water conveyance channel, with the primary function of moving excess water and contaminants
off private property and into Edmonds Marsh and Puget Sound. Information on fish use of
Shellabarger Creek is limited. As of 2002, WDFW had not conducted fish surveys in the creek,
although resident cutthroat are likely present, and the creek is accessible to anadromous fish that
use Edmonds Marsh. Steep slopes, lack of suitable spawning gravel, migration barriers (e.g., an
impassible culvert at Third Avenue), lack of riparian vegetation and shade, and poor water
quality probably prevent use by anadromous fish.
Willow Creek, an anadromous fish -bearing Category 2 stream, drains about 343 acres within the
Edmonds Way Basin (Pentec Environmental 2002). Willow Creek flows from a low -density
residential area in the town of Woodway just south of the project area and above the existing
Unocal property. The creek culvert runs under Pine Street near its intersection with SR 104 and
flows past the Deer Creek Fish Hatchery to Edmonds Marsh. The Willow Creek riparian
corridor south of Pine Street and through the Deer Creek Fish Hatchery is a narrow, shaded
corridor with gently sloping banks. Vegetation along the creek includes western red cedar, red
alder, bigleaf maple, and Douglas fir in the overstory; salmonberry, Indian plum, salal, and
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 67
Oregon grape in the shrub layer; and sword and lady fern, pig -a -back, bentgrass, reed
canarygrass, and mannagrass in the herb layer (CH2M HILL 2004).
The downstream area of Edmonds Marsh includes a channelized section of Willow Creek. The
channel, as it approaches the culvert under the BNSF railroad bed, is characterized as a ditch with
a bottom composed entirely of silt. The ditch passes through an area of contaminated
groundwater that is presently in contact with the stream and has been for many decades. The
ditch is connected to a 48-inch-diameter culvert, about 1,275 feet in length, that passes under the
road, parking areas, and beach before discharging into the subtidal zone off Marina Beach Park.
The existing culvert is considered a partial block to migrating adult salmon, because it is so long
and its outlet is frequently blocked by sand. Gradient is not a migratory barrier, because the
slope of the culvert is very low (CH2M HILL 2004).
Willow Creek is known to contain coho salmon, resident and sea -run cutthroat trout, and,
historically, chum salmon. Electrofishing efforts on June 28, 1995 confirmed use by coho
salmon and cutthroat trout. Other fish species observed include sculpins (Cottus sp.) and three-
spined stickleback (Gasterosteous aculeatus) (CH2M HILL 2004).
7.8 Segment H—Port of Edmonds Marina to Point Edwards
This segment consists of the beach south of the marina breakwater to the City limits at Point
Edwards, including the Unocal pier. The segment is about 1,650 feet long, of which 900 feet is
the rock -armored marina breakwater. The shoreland consists of a natural -appearing sand and
gravel, low -gradient beach. The backshore consists of the south breakwater rock wall, a grassy
open space, a narrow parking lot, a section of BNSF railroad bed, fragments of upland vegetation
(shrubs and trees) on the hillside, and a small area of naturalized shoreline with beach logs along
the upper intertidal zone. North of the Unocal pier, North Marine Beach Park is designated as a
marine sanctuary, where beach collecting and shellfish harvesting are prohibited. The
southernmost portion of the segment, south of the Unocal pier, includes a mixed area of riparian
vegetation; including shrubs and small trees, and the BNSF railroad bed. This area is South
Beach Park, which features an off -leash dog area on the beach.
The Point Edwards area has been surveyed extensively for several large infrastructure projects,
including the Brightwater sewage treatment plant and the Edmonds Crossing multimodal
transportation center. The following information about this segment, including the Unocal pier,
was taken from the SR 104, Edmonds Crossing FEIS (CH2M HILL 2004).
The nearshore area just south in the vicinity of the Unocal pier includes a broad shallow bench to
the south that is intertidal to about two-thirds of the distance to the end of the Unocal pier. Water
depths drop off rapidly at that point (at about -10 feet MLLW). The intertidal area is mostly
mixed gravel and small gravel, with some scattered areas of cobble and rocks. Some areas of
medium sand are also present. Shallow subtidal areas are mostly sand with areas of mixed
sand/gravel, sand/shell, and rock from the 8-foot contour and higher. The Edmonds Way
stormwater drainage outfall (between the Unocal pier and the marina breakwater) is supported
and surrounded by riprap materials.
Habitat in the vicinity of the southeast corner of the Edmonds Marina Park breakwater is similar
to that described for the Unocal pier, at least offshore of the zero tide elevation (MLLW). The
marina breakwater is composed of large riprap boulders. Substrates are composed of sand,
mixed sand and gravel, and shell fragments at depths between 0.0 and -10 feet MLLW at the foot
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 68
of the breakwater. Further offshore, substrates are composed of medium to fine sand. These
habitats are used by flatfish and sculpins for the most part.
Eelgrass beds are small, patchy, and sparse in the vicinity of the Unocal pier (11). Macroalgae,
primarily Ulva and Entermorpha species, are abundant in large patches adjacent to the Unocal
pier on both sides. Geoduck clams were found in low densities in the area as a whole
(<O.1/square yard) but were relatively abundant in a few restricted areas (such as between the
Unocal pier and the marina breakwater (2.6/square meter)). Ten to fifteen crabs were found
buried in the sand at about -10 feet MLLW. Most had soft shells, indicating that they had just
molted. Hardshell clams are abundant in the intertidal and shallow subtidal areas surrounding the
Unocal pier (CH2M HILL 2004).
7.9 Segment I —Lake Ballinger
Little specific shoreline information is available for the Lake Ballinger Segment I. The portion
of shoreline with the City of Edmonds is about 4,000 feet. The lake shoreland consists of single-
family homes with docks and piers. In 2006, at least 42 docks and piers were visible in aerial
photos —roughly one structure per waterfront lot. Within this segment, riparian vegetation
consists almost entirely of lawns and a few scattered ornamental plantings. No other vegetation
data were available along the Edmonds shoreline. Habitat value is likely low, due to the
extensive shoreline alteration and the conversion of what was formerly a large wetland into a
small lake and stormwater detention basin.
The lake-level/stormwater control outlet structure is considered a barrier to anadromous fish,
although resident fish have been stocked in the lake. Lake Ballinger is stocked with rainbow and
cutthroat trout, catfish, yellow perch, and largemouth bass (City of Mountlake Terrace 2005).
WDFW releases about 5,000 rainbow trout in the lake each spring for a recreational fishery
(WDFW 2006c). Outside the Edmonds' city limits, the lake discharges into McAleer Creek,
which has anadromous salmonid populations that travel through the Lake Washington system
(WDFW 2003).
Water quality studies of Lake Ballinger indicate that the lake is adversely affected by urban
residential and commercial development, including increasing areas of pavement, high nutrient
loading from surrounding lawns, golf courses, and gardens, and contaminant loading from roads
and parking areas that are conveyed by Halls Creek into the lake. Runoff from the surrounding
sub -basin carries high concentrations of nutrients into the lake, resulting in nuisance algae
blooms and high biological and chemical oxygen demand, which is exacerbated by phosphorus
cycling between lake water and sediment. Water quality conditions are no longer capable of
supporting reproducing populations of cool -water adapted fish, although non-native warm -water
adapted fish are flourishing. There are ongoing efforts by the surrounding jurisdictions,
including Edmonds and the City of Mountlake Terrace, to control flooding and nutrient loading
(especially phosphorous). Efforts to address water quality degradation from the 1950s to present
include: transferal of homes from private septic systems to a public sewer system, stabilization of
Hall Creek banks, construction of sedimentation ponds in Hall Creek, phosphorus control
through alum treatment, hypolimnion "treatment" by injection of Hall Creek water and
withdrawal of low -dissolved oxygenihigh phosphorus lake water, and adjustments to lake inlet
and outlet structures (City of Mountlake Terrace 2005, KCM 1986).
Although the many water quality control efforts were initially effective, increasing urban
development and population density within the Halls Creek and Lake Ballinger sub -basins have
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 69
exceeded design capacity and largely overwhelmed many of the water quality controls. For
example, the sewage conveyance system initially reduced nutrient loads and fecal coliform
contamination in the lake, but high density urban development has increased inputs from other
non -point sources, such as animals (primarily geese, secondarily dogs and cats) and lawn runoff.
The sediment control projects initially designed to limit sediment and phosphorus loading into
the lake have been overwhelmed by Halls Creek sub -basin development and stormwater
management within the lake. The hypolimnetic injection system, although initially successful,
was found after several years to be detrimental to the lake because it relied on the quality of Halls
Creek water, which had become increasingly degraded. In addition, the lack of effective lake -
level management at the outlet weir also results in flooding throughout the surrounding areas of
urban lawns, roads, driveways, sewer connections, and golf courses, all of which contribute
nutrients, sewage, and pollutants to the lake. In terms of ecosystem function, Lake Ballinger's
biological functions have been minimized or eliminated and its hydrologic and hyporheic
functions maximized, resulting in a transformation from a lake into a regional stormwater
detention pond that serves as an (unmaintained) collection basin for nutrients and waste.
Although this functional shift is detrimental to Lake Ballinger's biology and chemistry, it likely
benefits McAleer Creek and Lake Washington by retaining pollutants and controlling stormwater
flows downstream.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 70
8. Shoreline Planning Reaches
The shoreline segments described in the previous section were initially developed for a biological
survey that focused on fisheries and related marine and freshwater habitats, using a detailed level
of characterization and analysis. For the purposes of this shoreline characterization document,
shoreline segments were then examined with adjacent shorelands and upland areas on a broader
scale, considering zoning and land use. The shoreline segments were consolidated into four
shoreline planning reaches, based on ecological similarities within a zoning and land -use context
that would be useful for planning purposes (see Table 2).
This section lists the ecosystem factures or functions within each reach that have been affected or
impaired by land use. It also identifies opportunities for restoration within each reach. Potential
restoration projects and shoreline locations are shown in Figure 13. These will be further
evaluated as part of the preparation of the Edmonds Restoration Plan, a future element of the
Edmonds SMP Update.
8.1 Reach 1
Biological functions or features that have been impaired in Reach 1 (Segments A through E)
include:
• Fish and wildlife accessibility between the marine nearshore and the terrestrial
backshore: blocked by the BNSF railroad bed and restricted to a few small culverts.
• Nutrient transport and cycling: reduced by clearing vegetation from the backshore and
bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore, and further reduced by
restricting the estuarine transitional area to small -diameter culverts that impound creek
flows and block detritus and woody debris from moving between the ravine and the
beach.
• Estuarine and creek -mouth habitat area: significantly reduced, and habitat function,
significantly impaired.
• Marine riparian vegetation: eliminated by railroad fill or cleared for right-of-way
maintenance and upland residential views.
• Beach substrate composition and slope: coarsened and steepened by erosion and lack
of replenishment from upland or aquatic sources.
• Longshore drift: altered by in -water structures (seawalls, bulkheads, culverts, and a
pier) that prevent sediment from naturally recruiting to the beach.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 71
Restoration opportunities (numbered according to Figure 13) include:
1. Replace railroad crossing over Lunds Creek with wider box culvert or trestle.
2. Enhance riparian vegetation along Lunds Creek.
3. Create an off -channel pond for fish and wildlife in lower Lunds Creek.
4. Add woody debris to off -channel pond.
5. Enhance marine riparian vegetation on lower Lunds Creek and along backshore
between bluffs and BNSF railroad.
6. Conduct beach nourishment activities at Lunds Creek outlet.
7. Remove existing pier, piles, and overwater structures near Meadowdale Creek.
8. Conduct beach nourishment activities at Shell Creek outlet.
9. Replace railroad crossing over Shell Creek with trestle.
8.2 Reach 2
Biological functions or features that have been impaired in Reach 2 (Segments E and F) include:
• Fish and wildlife accessibility between the marine nearshore and the terrestrial
backshore: blocked by the BNSF railroad bed and urban development.
• Upper intertidal and adjacent terrestrial habitat: degraded or lost due to urban
development.
• Nutrient transport and cycling: reduced by clearing vegetation from the backshore and
bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore.
• Marine riparian vegetation: eliminated by railroad fill or cleared for right-of-way
maintenance and upland residential views.
• Longshore drift: altered by in -water structures (WSF pier and seawall, groin at
Edmonds Underwater Park) that prevent sediment from naturally recruiting to the
beach.
Restoration opportunities (numbered according to Figure 13) include:
10. Further enhance marine riparian vegetation along Bracketts Landing Park:
remove invasive species (e.g., Japanese knotweed, blackberries), and extend
vegetation enhancement north to Edmonds Underwater Park parking lot and
BNSF railroad.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 72
8.3 Reach 3
Biological functions or features that have been impaired in Reach 3 (Segments F, G, and H)
include:
• fish and wildlife accessibility between the marine nearshore, Edmonds Marsh, and the
terrestrial backshore: blocked by the BNSF railroad bed, Edmonds Marina, and
commercial waterfront development, restricted to a paved corridor and culvert between
Edmonds Marsh and South Marina Park.
• Nutrient transport and cycling: significantly reduced by clearing vegetation from the
backshore and bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore, and
further reduced by restricting the estuarine transitional area to a small -diameter culvert
and tide gate on Willow Creek that impounds creek flows and blocks detritus and
woody debris between the marsh and the beach.
• Estuarine and creek -mouth habitat area: significantly altered and reduced, and habitat
function, significantly impaired.
• Marine riparian vegetation: eliminated by port development, commercial development,
and railroad fill, and cleared for right-of-way maintenance and upland
residential/commercial views.
• Beach substrate composition and slope: coarsened and steepened by erosion and lack
of replenishment from upland or aquatic sources.
• Longshore drift: altered by in -water structures (seawalls, bulkheads, culverts, and the
former Unocal pier) that prevent sediment from naturally recruiting to the beach.
Restoration opportunities (numbered according to Figure 13) include:
11. Restore Willow Creek by removing most or all of the outlet culvert, planting
native riparian vegetation, and addressing soil and groundwater contamination
issues through ongoing site cleanup activities.
12. Remove former Unocal pier: restore marine aquatic vegetation (e.g., eelgrass and
kelp) in former pier footprint. Enhance marine riparian vegetation along South
Marina Park, remove non-native vegetation (e.g. grass) and replace with native
vegetation.
8.4 Reach 4
Biological functions or features that have been impaired in Reach 4 (Segment I) include:
hydrologic function of the lake outlet, which is currently managed as a stormwater
catchbasin control
hyporheic function, which has reached its capacity as a nutrient sink for nitrogen and
phosphorus
• nutrient transport and cycling, significantly reduced by increasing sediment and
nutrient loading from watershed development, stormwater runoff, and former
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 73
septic/sewage inputs; replacing native wetland and riparian vegetation with ornamental
vegetation (e.g., grass) and adding bulkheads, docks, and piers to the shoreline
• lake inlet and outlet deltas, significantly altered or eliminated by control structures.
• fish and wildlife accessibility between the lake and McAleer Creek, blocked by the
outlet control structure.
• fish and wildlife biological communities, significantly altered by habitat alteration (i.e.,
conversion of a wetland into a lake) and introduction of non-native species (e.g.,
catfish, yellow perch, and largemouth bass).
• lake sediment, significantly altered by substantial sediment inputs from urban
development within the Hall Creek and Lake Ballinger drainage sub -basins.
Restoration opportunities (numbered according to Figure 13) include:
13. Control quantity and quality of surface water runoff entering lake.
14. Revise outlet control structure.
Restoration opportunities are discussed in greater detail in a separate restoration document.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 74
9. References
Adolfson Associates. 2004. City of Des Moines Shoreline Inventory and Characterization
Public Review Draft, Seattle, Washington.
Bell -McKinnon, M. 2006. Lake Ballinger Total Maximum Daily Load Effectiveness
Monitoring Study. Quality Assurance Project Plan. Publication No. 03-06-201.
Environmental Monitoring and Trends Section, Environmental Assessment Program,
Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington.
BOLA Architecture + Planning. 2005. A Historic Survey of Downtown Edmonds A
Historic Survey of Downtown Edmonds, Washington for The City of Edmonds & the
Washington State office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Seattle,
Washington. 39 pp.
Brennan, S.J., K.F. Higgins, J.R. Cordell, and V.A. Stamatiou. 2004. Juvenile Salmon
Composition, Timing, Distribution and Diet in Marine Nearshore Waters of Central
Puget Sound in 2001-2002. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks.
Seattle, WA. 164 pp.
Broadhurst, G. 2005. Improving Existing Marine Protected Areas in Puget Sound.
Northwest Straits Commission.
Canning, D. J. 2001. Geologically Hazardous Areas. Washington Department of Ecology,
Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program. Olympia, WA.
CH2M HILL. 2004. SR 104, Edmonds Crossing Final Environmental Impact Statement
and Final Section 4(f) Evaluation. Prepared for U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration, Washington State Department of Transportation, and
City of Edmonds, Bellevue, Washington.
City of Edmonds. 2003. Stormwater drainages and outfalls data and map from City of
Edmonds Engineering Division.
City of Edmonds. 2005. General Information on City website at
http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/edmonds_info.stm; accessed May, 2006.
City of Edmonds. 2006a. Personal communication with Don Fiene, stormwater engineer,
November 14, 2006.
City of Edmonds. 2006b. Discovery Programs. Informational website at:
http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/Discovery_programs_website/Yost_Park.html accessed
December, 2006.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 75
2006c. Discovery Programs. Informational website at: City of Edmonds.
http://www. ci. edmonds.wa.us/Discovery_Programs%20Website/Underwater_Park.html
Accessed May, 2006.
City of Mountlake Terrace. 2005. City of Mountlake Terrace Comprehensive Plan and
Appendix A. Adopted August 2003, Amended December 2004, Amended December
2005. Prepared by City Council, Planning Commission, and staff, with Reid
Middleton, Inc.
Davis, D. 2002. Don Davis, City of Lynnwood, WA. Personal communication in
telephone conversation with D. Lozano, Adolfson Associates, Inc., October 21, 2002.
Downing, J. 1983. The Coast of Puget Sound. University of Washington Press.
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). 2004. Edmonds Community
Development Code, Chapter 15.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology Shorelands and Environmental
Assistance Program). 2001. Coastal Zone Atlas, scale: 1:24,000, original publication
mid-1970s, digitized 2001. Olympia, WA. Online at
<http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/website/coastal%SFatlas/viewer.htm>. Accessed June 4, 2006.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology Shorelands and Environmental
Assistance Program). 2002. Net Shore -Drift in Washington State. Online at:
<http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/gis/data/data.htm#driftcell>. Accessed June 16,
2006.
EDAW 2004. The City of Edmonds 2004 Best Available Science Report Preliminary Draft
(Updated Draft as of November 11, 2004).
EMCON Northwest, Inc. (EMCON). 1994. Background History Report, Unocal Edmonds
Bulk Fuel Terminal, Edmonds, Washington. Prepared for Unocal Corporation.
FHWA (U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration), WSDOT
(Washington State Department of Transportation), and Edmonds (City of Edmonds,
WA). 1998.
Goetz, F.A., E. Jeans, and E. Beamer. 2004. Bull Trout in the NearshorePreliminary
Draft. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. June 2004.
Golder Associates and Parametrix, Inc. 2002. A Geoduck (Panopea abrupta) Survey for
the Brightwater Marine Outfall. Prepared for King County Department of Parks and
Natural Resources, Wastewater Treatment Division.
Johannessen, J.W., MacLennan, A., and McBride, A. 2005. Inventory and Assessment of
Current and Historic Beach Feeding Sources/Erosion and Accretion Areas for the
Marine Shorelines of Water Resource Inventory Areas 8 & 9. Prepared by Coastal
Geologic Services. Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and
Parks, Seattle, WA.
Harbo, R.M. 1999. Whelks to Whales: Coastal Marine Life in the Pacific Northwest, A
Field Guide. Heritage House, Victoria, Canada.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 76
KCM. 1986. Restoration of Lake Ballinger Phase III Final Report. Prepared for the City
of Mountlake Terrace. Prepared for City of Mountlake Terrace by KCM, Inc. and
Aquatic Research Company, Inc., Seattle, WA.
Kerwin, J. 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar -
Sammamish Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington Conservation
Commission. Olympia, WA
King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Wastewater Treatment Division
(KC DNR WTD). 2003. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Brightwater
Regional Wastewater Treatment System, Seattle, Washington.
Kozloff, E. 1993. Seashore Life of the North Pacific Coast. University of Washington
Press.
Kruckeberg, A.R. 1995. The Natural History of Puget Sound Country. Published by
University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Lider, S. 2006. City of Edmonds. Personal communication via email June 15, 2006, based
on personal observations and reports, 1991 to present.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2006. Soil Survey Map of Snohomish
County Area, Washington. http://www.or.nres.usda.gov/pnw_soil/wa_reports.html.
Accessed June 3, 2006.
Nightingale, B. and C. Simenstad. 2001. Dredging Activities: Marie Issues. Prepared for
Washington Departments of Ecology, Transportation, and Fish and Wildlife.
University of Washington.
Orr, M., M. Zimmer, D. Jelinski, and M. Mews. 2005. Wrack deposition of different
beach types: spatial and temporal variation in the pattern of subsidy. Ecology: Vol. 86,
No. 6, pp. 1496-1507.
Pentec Environmental. 2001. Edmonds Shoreline Habitat Assessment. Prepared for City
of Edmonds. October 2001.
Pentec Environmental. 2002. Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment, Edmonds,
Washington. Prepared for the City of Edmonds. July 2002.
Pentilla, D.E. 2001. Effects of shading upland vegetation on egg survival for summer
spawning surf smelt on upper intertidal beaches in Puget Sound. In Proc. Puget Sound
Research 2001.
Seattle Audubon Society. 2006. Bird Web Puget Trough Ecoregion, Port Susan Bay and
Discovery Park. Website at
http://birdweb.org/birdweb/birding_site_details.aspx?id=16&ecoregion=3#birds.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer. 2002. Refuges around the Sound key to fish recovery.
November 22, 2002.
Snohomish County Marine Resources Advisory Committee. 2005-2007. Annual Report &
Recommendations, August 17, 2005. 13 pp.
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 77
Snohomish County. 2001. Marine Shore Inventory and Database. Prepared for
Snohomish County Surface Water Management. Prepared by Landau Associates and
TerraLogic GIS.
Sobocinski. K.L. 2003. The Impact of Shoreline Armoring on Supratidal Beach Fauna of
Central Puget Sound. Masters thesis., University of Washington.
Snohomish County Surface Water Management (SWM). 2002. Drainage Needs Report,
Puget Sound Tributaries. No. 11. December 2002.
Striplin and Battelle. 2001. King County Marine Habitat Report. Prepared for King
County Division of Natural Resources and Parks, Wastewater Treatment Division,
Seattle, WA.
Thomas, B.E., J.M. Wilkinson, and S.S. Embrey. 1997. The Ground -Water System and
Ground -Water Quality in Western Snohomish County, Washington, U.S. Geological
Survey Water -Resources Investigations Report 96-4312.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Seattle District, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 10, Washington Department of Natural Resources, and Washington
Department of Ecology. 2002. Dredged Material Evaluation and Disposal Procedures:
A Users Manual for the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) Program.
Online publication at:
http://www.nws.usace. anny.mil/publicmenu/Attachments/040226%20UM l .pdf
February 2000 (updated with 2003 COC table).
U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS). 2000. Reconstructed Trends National Synthesis Study.
United States Geological Survey. Accessed online October, 2006, at
http://tx.usgs.gov/coreing/
URS. 1989. Edmonds Drainage Basin StudiesShellabarger, Five Corners, North Stream,
Talbot Park Basins. Prepared for City of Edmonds, Washington, Community Services
Department, by URS Corporation, Seattle, WA.
Washington Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (WDAHP). 2006.
WISAARD online database for City of Edmonds at
<http://www.oahp.wa.gov/pages/wisaardIntro.htm>. Accessed May 1996.
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). 2004. Division of Geology and
Earth Resources Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Snohomish County, Washington,
by Stephen P. Palmer, Sammantha L. Magsino, James L. Poelstra, Eric L. Bilderback,
Derek S. Folger, and Rebecca A. Niggemann, Division of Geology and Earth
Resources. Scale 1:100,000, September 2004.
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). 2005. Digital 1: 1 00,000-scale
Geology of Washington State, Open File Report 2005-3, Version 1.0, by Washington
Division of Geology and Earth Resources staff.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2003. Hatchery and Genetic
Management Plan (HGMP). Laebugton Net Pen Coho Program. Updated March 17,
2003. Online at:
<http://wdfw.wa.gov/hat/hgmp/pdf/puget sound/coho/laebugtonnetpencoho2.pdf>
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 78
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2006a. Priority Habitats and
Species Report, Priority Resident and Anadromous Fish Presence Report from the
StreamNet Database, Seabird Colonies Report, and Sea Lion Haulout Site Report, in
the vicinity of T27R04E Section 8, T27R04E Section 28, and T27R03E Section 25.
Report dated October 13, 2006.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2006b. Marine Protected Areas
(MPA) within Puget Sound. MPA 6. Website at
http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/mpa/puget_sound/ 06.htm
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2006c. Hatchery Trout Stocking
Plan for Washington Lakes and Streams. WDFW Fish Program, Fish Management
Division. Olympia, WA. 38 pp.
Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2006. Historical Climate Information, Climate of
Washington Summary. National Data Climatic Center data. Online at
<http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/narrativesAVASHINGTON.htm>. Accessed May 2006.
Wiles, G. J. 2004. Washington State status report for the killer whale. Washington
Department Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 106 pp.
Williams, G.D. and R.M. Thom. (2001). Marine and estuarine shoreline modification issues.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Online at
<http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/ahg/finalsl.pdf>.
H:\DOC\27pl\06\002 Edmonds SMPU\Reports and Deliverables\Inventory\Final November
2007\EdmondsSMPUFinalInvCharNov07. doc
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 79
Appendix A
Data Gaps Table
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 80
EDMONDS SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE
Data Gaps Table
Dec-06
WAC Requirement 7 -
26-201 ( C)
Corresponding Data
Set
Layer Name
Area
Data Source
Data Gap
i Shoreline an
adjacent existing land
use patterns
Existing Land Use
LandUse
Marine Shoreline & Lk.
Ballinger
Snohomish County
Assessor
Existing Land Use
landuse
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Future Land Use
zoning
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Extent of Existing
Structures
Bulk heads
Armorin In
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Not inventoried for Lk
Ballinger
Levees
Not Applicable
Piers and docks
Lk Ballinger
?
Unknown
pier _doc_In
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
Boat launches
boatlaunch
Marine Shoreline & Lk.
Ballinger
IAC?
ramp_lau_In
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
ramp_lau_pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Pipes, outlets
pipe_pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Lk Ballinger
Other structures
other pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
City Outfalls
cit _outfalls
Marine Shoreline
City of Edmonds
Lk Ballinger
Building footprints
Aerial Photo
Marine Shoreline & Lk.
Ballinger
City of Edmonds
Impervious Surfaces
Impervious surfaces
Iandcover01
Marine Shoreline & Lk.
Ballinger
Snohomish County
Vegetation
Aerial photography
Aerial Photo
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Page 1
12/14/2006
datagaptableupdate
WAC Requirement 173-
26-201 ( C)
Corresponding Data
Set
Layer Name
Area
Data Source
Data Gap
Riparian vegetation
pds_lake
Lk Ballinger
Snohomish County
Unknown
pds_marine
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
riparian_ln
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
Shoreline
Modifications
Armoring
Armoring In
Marine Shoreline
Dikes, revetmens,
levees
Not Applicable
Groins
other pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
Shoreline Use Patterns
- water dependant,
water oriented, non-
water oriented
Existing Land Use
LandUse
Marine Shoreline & Lk.
Ballinger
Snohomish County
Assessor
Pipes, outlets, outfalls
pipe_pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Lk Ballinger
Shoreline
Transportation and
Utility Facilities
Roads
roads
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Railroads
rail
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Pipe, outlets
pipe_pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Lk Ballinger
City Outfalls
cit _outfalls
Marine Shoreline
City of Edmonds
Lk Ballinger
ii Critical Areas
Wetlands
wetlands
nwi
City of Edmonds
National Wetland
Inventor
backshor_In
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
stream_o
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
wetlands_edaw
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
edmonds_wetlands
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Aquifer Recharge
Areas
aquifer recharge areas
Solesource
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
Crop
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
Fish & Wildlife
Conservation Areas
jCoho
Streamnet
City of Edmonds
Streamnet
Page 2
12/14/2006
datagaptableupdate
WAC Requirement 173-
26-201 ( C)
Corresponding Data
Set
Layer Name
Area
Data Source
Data Gap
Bulltrout
bulltrout
City of Edmonds
Snohomish County
Sockeye
Streamnet
City of Edmonds
Streamnet
Chinook
Chinook
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
Priority habitats and
species
phspoly
City of Edmonds
WDFW
hrt pts
City of Edmonds
WDFW & DNR - Natural
Heritage
Kelp and eelgrass beds
fkelplin
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
kelpin
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
nkelplin
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
eelpoly
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
vegetation
Marine Shoreline
King County Brightwater
FEIS
Forage fish (herring &
smelt spawning areas)
ff_pts
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
smelt
Marine Shoreline
MRS
sandlanz
Marine Shoreline
MRS
Commercial and
recreational shellfish
areas
growingareas
Marine Shoreline
MRS
crab
Marine Shoreline
MRS
eoduck
Marine Shoreline
MRS
shrmppan
Marine Shoreline
MRS
clamhard
Marine Shoreline
MRS
Geologically
Hazardous Areas
Erosion Hazard Areas
erosion hazard
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Landslide hazard areas
landslide_ hazard
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
steep slope
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
soil slope
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Volcanic hazard areas
GPKHAZ
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
Soil Liquifaction Areas
Isoilliquifaction
ICity of Edmonds
ICity of Edmonds
Page 3
12/14/2006
datagaptableupdate
WAC Requirement 173-
Corresponding Data
26-201 ( C)
Set
Layer Name
Area
Data Source
Data Gap
Eroding shorelines /
feeder bluffs
banksurve In
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
driftcells
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
Geology
geology
geology
City of Edmonds
Washington DNR
Soils
Soils
soils
City of Edmonds
NRCS SSURGO
King County Brightwater
Substrate
Substrate
substrate
Marine Shoreline
FEIS
Frequency Flooded
FEMA floodways and
Areas
floodplain
FEMA_flood
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
ESA Corridors
Chinook
Chinook
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
pentec
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Shorelines of
Statewide Significance
SMMP Maps
Shorla
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
ui Degraded reas
and Sites with
Potential for
Restoration
(iv) Areas of Special
Designated Marine
Interest
Protected Areas
Marine Shoreline
City of Edmonds
Priority habitats and
species
phspoly
City of Edmonds
WDFW
Priority Habitats
priority marine resources
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
h rtg pts
City of Edmonds
WDFW
parcels
parcels
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
Rapidly Developing
Waterfrongs, Clearing
and Grading,
Bulkheads, Intrusive
Development on
Priority Habitats,
Conversion of Harbor
Areas to Nonwater-
oriented Uses
I bulk heads
armorin In
Marine Shoreline
ISnohornish County
Page 4
12/14/2006
datagaptableupdate
WAC Requirement 173-
Corresponding Data
26-201 ( C)
Set
Layer Name
Area
Data Source
Data Gap
pier _doc_In
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
dock
Lk Ballinger
Snohomish Count
Aerial Photography
aerial photography
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Existing land use
LandUse
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Hazard Waste Sites
Unknown
Previously Identified
Toxic or Hazardous
Eroding shorelines /
Material Clean-up Sites
feeder bluffs
driftcells
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Lk Ballinger
Eroding Shorelines
banksurvey_ln
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish County
Lk Ballinger
Existing land use
LandUse
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
(v) Conditions and
Regulations in
Shoreland and
Adjacent Areas that
Affect Shorelines,
such as Surface Water
Management and Land
Use Regulations
Zoning
zonin _coe
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
culverts
fishbarrier
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
parcels
parcels
City of Edmonds
Snohomish County
Adjacent
Lands/Contributing
Drainage Basin
Assessment
Drainage Basins
esa_basins
City of Edmonds
Snohomish County
Landcover
Iandcover01
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
Current shoreline
jurisdiction
Shorla
City of Edmonds
Snohomish County
Potential shoreline
Shoreline Jurisdiction
jurisdiction
broad jurisdiction
City of Edmonds
Snohomish Count
street centerlines
roads
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
(vi) Existing and
Potential Shoreline
Access Sites
city parks
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
public lands
mpl
City of Edmonds
WA DNR
boat launches
ramp_lau_pt
Marine Shoreline
Snohomish Count
boatlaunch
City of Edmonds
IAC?
Page 5
12/14/2006
datagaptableupdate
WAC Requirement 173-
Corresponding Data
26-201 ( C)
Set
Layer Name
Area
Data Source
Data Gap
Channel Migration
Zones for Streams within
Floodplains
FEMA flood
City of Edmonds
Snohomish County
the City
(vii) General Location
of Channel Migration
The Information in this
Zones and Floodplains
Not Mapped
Not Mapped
City of Edmonds
Not Mapped
column
(viii) Gaps in Existing
Availability of Historic
Information
Aerial Photography
aerial photography
City of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Photos unknown
(ix) For Rapidly
Developing Shorelines,
Historical and Aerial
Photographs may be
Necessary to
Document Past
Conditions to Assist in
Preparing an Analysis
of Cumulative Impacts
unknown as to
of Development
archaeology maps
I Not digitally mapped
I City of Edmonds
Unknown
I archaeology data
(x) Archaeological or
Historic Resources in
Shoreline Jurisdiction
Page 6
12/14/2006
datagaptableupdate
Appendix B
Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Shoreline Segments & Planning Reaches
Figure 3: Zoning
Figure 4: Elements of Edmonds Environmentally Critical Areas Map
Figure 5: Geology & Drift Cells
Figure 6: Shoreline Modifications
Figure 7: Existing Land Use
Figure 8: Soils, Sediment, and Substrate
Figure 9: Geologically Hazardous Areas
Figure 10: Soil Liquefaction Areas
Figure 11: Biological Resources
Figure 12: Kelp & Eelgrass Resources
Figure 13: Potential Restoration Projects
Edmonds Shoreline Inventory and Characterization November 2007
Page 81
r
r
0 1.5 _
N
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legend
City of Edmonds Boundary
Other Jurisdictions
Major Road
Railroad
Snohomish/King
County Boundary
Everett
I
Mukilteo
Mill Cree
; _T
r'
_�c
ti I
pi o,
off
INS
as
Lake
xz
r ❑ Snohomish Count
Puget CP King County
runo p
F
�0V FDA
O
�oC. I g9�
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
0 0.5 1
1 i I
Miles
r
r
r
r
r
q1
r
r
r
Sound ��dao ----
;� - °dim_
�� B
•' ,i co
I �
m
co
C,
•. A ° Q
`°
0,
Creek
lVorthstr
edh '
•� Puget Or
19 Th t SW
Hindley
C�spers St
._... coo Y :�—� 01
E.77
Q-
d
St• � .
in t) Q;
crPPk z _ 208Th St
' Sh
Point `' Q a6 -
4 l_ d
Edwards • r- r �C-9�_ nut t ¢'
W �? L Hal
st
204Th
■
II
�:
..'II
Legend
• Planning Segment Break OONi Major Road
00"Swo Planning Segment Street
Edmonds City Limits Railroad
-. DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction Stream
Shoreline Planning Reaches
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
OF EDP
O
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
7 R PI w�
■ I
22 Th St S ,
i
r
o�
I.
,.
T-
04
S} I r1 Lake.
-
I'
Reach 4
r •� : I.
Ballinger Reach 1
1
Lake Ballinger Insetk
-�� +
,J f
v� F{
Miles
k T
/
Q
39 00
1 I}
NL
It . r, Northstr��ek --
1
1 Th
Reach 2
F1
Reach 3
V"'
����� _ ■ �
� I5y -
¢99
}
_ - -r —-
}
- •,C-reek TIT oon-rk
Legend
RS-6
RM-3♦�� BD1 BP CW Reach Breaks
CA
t.�v,
RS-8
RM-2.4 I�� BD2 :::: ' BN ® MP1 Overwater Structure
RS-10
RM-1.5 4trO BD3 (Z�) FVMU MP2 Edmonds City Limits
City of Edmonds
\\\N RS-12
:, _ �, RM-EW �d&W, BD4 — BC — MU Major Road
Railroad
Shoreline Master Plan Update
RSW-12
BD5 BC-EW P
�♦�� . , _ ,
Street
C\ RS-20
4WV OR CG OS Stream
RS-MP
x
CG2
• _
X
@@000
N
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles .
' -:7 �: �•.' i�� J J
Bracki
�' ands
r
OF
188th
St. STY
i
�,1
•'h
n�
f7--3,''i-'�
�`JVi*w� - _ -4 �I k' k
-
h_.
i,
�`_�`
� fin,
- -
e�::a�•
o�
IC I•r
:�
v - 228tfi St. SN/
eer Creek
Legend
Potential Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Areas
Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
Streams (Riparian Habitat Areas)
Areas With Potential Wetlands
� Edmonds City Limits
/\/ Roads
NBallinger L
+. Park & Golf Cour
:Jr _
Lake` 5
Ballinger
OF EDP
O
G Ip
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
��'r....r. I....r... r..�--.■rr—.--.-
Legend
Geology Unit
410 Qa - alluvium
Drift Cells
DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction
- Qc(w) - continental sedimentary deposits or rocks
. Drift Cell End Point
' ' •.: Edmonds City Limits
. Qcg - continental sedimentary deposits or rocks, conglomerate
^i Major Road
-
Qf -artificial fill, including modified land
Shore Drift Patterns
Street
. Qga - advance continental outwash, Fraser -age
SN-2 - South to Northam
Railroad
glacial
SN-2ISN-3-NoAppreciable
�� County Boundary
- Qgo - continental glacial outwash, Fraser -age
Net Shore Drift
SN-3 - South to North
1-\—i Stream
Qgt - continental glacial till, Fraser -age
Water Bodies
- Qgu - glacial drift, undivided
• Segment Break
Over/In Water Structure
SQls - mass -wasting deposits, mostly landslides
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Data Sources:
Geology 1:100,000, Washington DNR 2005 - *Geology data is provisional pending updated data.
Drift Cells: Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program, Washington State Department of Ecology
(Created 2002, based on 1991 data)
1
McAleer
0 0.5 1
I i I
Miles
r'
r'
r'
1'
r'rf 1
r
21 a t4 I
�T 11 N
-- -G% >
_ .Northcrr�
196ThI
Z
H
rn
C ain S
reek F
She lab • ` U �r
f
a
It co
co
I G
�+ o U
rn 99
- •Creek j f
Legend of Fonlo
Shoreline Armoring • City Outfall ****,.o Major Road
f
Ow*#*o Sloped, Rock Over/In-Water Structure Street �r
^O Vertical, Concrete DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction "',F., Railroad rry� g90
ONO Vertical, Rock Edmonds City Limits Stream
ti Vertical, Wood County Boundary Water Bodies City of Edmonds
, Shoreline Master Program Update
Data Sources:
Over/In Water Structures, Snohomish County Shoreline Inventory (2002), aerial photos digitizing (2006) Shoreline
Armoring, Snohomish County Shoreline Inventory (2002)
Outfall Locations, City of Edmonds 2003 (Data only includes City of Edmonds drainage pipes)
0
Reach 3
N
Lake Ballinger Inset
0.5
1
Miles
1
Northstl-, 00
X.'4asper
Puget DrHindley-
s St crpo
z
Reach 2 - >
qj Q r
a�
a i `s/2 ' -
L
� a
Main St
N Lek
Shellab,, .
Q
W
{ .- ..Creek
Legend
Commercial
— Industrial - Manufacturing
Institutional
Mixed Use
Natural Resource Production
Parks
— Residential - Mobile Home
Residential - Multi -Family
U)
0-
rn
Residential - Single Family
Right -of -Way
Undeveloped
Unknown
Utility/Transportation
Water Bodies
Designated Marine
Protected Area
• Planning Reach Break
'1
i
�i
Lynwood Sewage 3
Treatment Area Q
�41"0
a/ems ..
Reach
DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction
Edmonds City Limits
Major Road
Street
Railroad
�i Stream
Water Bodies
[' w7 ", Over/In Water Structure
1
99
1
OF ED&
C>� L
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Point
Edwards
IPA
Hindley.�
--'C spt:rs St
Z
0
i
NO
a
110 *A
k
3�d r
0�QaiP 68Th
�L
StJV
0 f
_7 1
19ITh $t SW
Mc AI ee,-
00
LO
LO
Legend
F Fo
o AIo
Soil Unit
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 2 to 8 % slopes
- McKenna gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 % sl.
,, DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction
U N
Alderwood ravel) sand loam, 8 to 15% slopes
gravelly y p
� Mukilteo muck
",
'..,• Edmonds City Limits
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 25 % slopes
- Pits
'-'o County Boundary
Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loams, 25 to 70 % sl.
- Urban land
Major Road
Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8% slopes
p p
Shoreline Substrate
'\. Street
- Alderwood-Urban land complex, 8 to 15% slopes
O Mixed Coarse
Railroad
City of Edmonds
Custer fine sandy loam
O Mixed Coarse with Eelgrass
�i Stream
Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 % slopes
Everett loam, 8 to 15 %
• Mixed Coarse with Kelp
Water Bodies
Shoreline Master Program Update
gravelly sandy slopes
O Sand
Over/In Water Structure
Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 25 % slopes
O Sand with Eelgrass
- Fluvaquents, tidal
• Sand with Kelp
ft Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 8 % slopes
• Sand with Kelp & Eelgrass
Soils, Sediment, ; Substrate
• Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 25 % slopes
Q Wood Debris
Figure 8
Data Sources: Soils, NRCS SSURGO 2005 Substrate, King County Brightwater FEIS 2003.
'LUn
Puget 11f
Sound
..!..........
North Edmonds Inset
• .t :, Ali&f�
�+I�6F���
ri•
0 0.5 1•
� ,
�
1��
Miles
•4...
i
!
Hindle
iWN
It
•
r�eG.ie+
r11
W�
:..
SAM
" F
p�.
�= 11
5• �•�
� 1■!11
a � �
•FYI
`�
Legend
Edmonds City Limits ' - DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction County Boundary
Major Road 1Oft Contour (W Landslide Hazard
Street 20ft Contour Erosion Hazard
Railroad Stream Steep Slope
OF ED,V
O
G N
r
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Data Sources:
loft Contours, Landslide Areas, Steep Slopes, Erosion Hazards - City of Edmonds (2006)
0
L
N
0.5
1
Miles
rP A -1
_cr`ek
lVorttr��r
Puget Dr creek
Hindley � 1
� J
C�spers St
z �
.Ma/ ShP -
n
�� ° m
I a � cr-ee
- O k
� Sh --
Point _ e�lcb,6
Edwards/,ARHEA�RHE.- > �- N
i
,Creek
177
rn
•• s�
TA
Deer k t
Cr e.e,
Point U) /1
Wells C� - -7
rE
L4
1
19t]Th $t SW
200Th St SW
204Th SSt !
wool
F
8Th St SW
1
St SV
-------244Th St SW---
""" NE 205T
---•--• m ---
Legend of ED4
�d
Liquefaction Hazard v N
Over/In-Water Structure Street
High �.
DRAFT SMP Jurisdictions Railroad
Moderate Edmonds City Limits Stream Iry�. S90
Water Major Road , County Boundary City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Data Sources:
Soil Liquefaction Areas, City of Edmonds 2006
0 0.5
I i
Miles
N
0
Puget
Sound
0
`,Northstrea�
E
Sh
•
~9
i�
L
7C L
;, i.Creek
s
'I
Deer Cr e.e>k
Point
Wells
U)
L
o
! �
a
0
i
A
j0gkAb —NJ
99
d
- > 220Th St Sb
FL
LO
-'73 PI
28 hStS - �•
Q
00
LL
T
y 104 �tLake
Ballinger McAI
244Th St SWSW
rh St
77
2047
i ! '-
1176Th St
180Th
u„ L I
E 205
Legend
-� °V- FDo
i Seabird Colony Geoduck Street
O
WDFW Haulout Location Over/In-Water Structure Railroad
• Important Wildlife Resource Wetland �� Stream
Surf Smelt Spawning Area Designated Marine %`., , County Boundary rry� ga°
Sand Lance Spawning Area Protected Area
_ City of Edmonds
DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction
Bald Eagle Territory Edmonds City Limits Shoreline Master Program Update
Dungeness Crab Major Road
Chinook salmon and bull trout distribution extends along entire Edmonds shoreline. Federally designated critical habitat Biological
, Resources
extends along the marine shoreline from extreme high water to -30 m mean lower low water. Federally designated bull
trout critical habitat extends from mean higher high water to -10 m lower low water. Seabird colony, bald eagle breeding PF
territory, surf smelt and sand lance spawning areas, seal and sea lion haulout, Dungeness crab, geoduck, and wetlands Figure 11
from Priority Habitats and Species database, WDFW 2003.
0 0.5
I i
Miles
N
1
d
Ct,eek
Northstre
a
- Pu e eek
r
r
+' 14 Hindle-y
i J
is C�spers St
+T • Z
r.
y'
M sh -
a�h ++
t n d
Point
Edwards '' -
ARHE ' �-
CO
ni •
fr
,
L
ARHE
���.
U)
0
1
SW
208Th
200Th St SW
li
St S1
Bill gill
Point
Wells
Legend
#011%.0 Continuous Kelp
•
Kelp
Street
Patchy Kelp
Kelp (No Sonar Data Collected)
Railroad
Continuous Eelgrass
O
Kelp & Eelgrass
�� Stream
Patchy Eelgrass
Over/In-Water Structure
' `_ . County Boundary
Sparse Eelgrass
-��. _,.
DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction
0 Moderate Eelgrass
Edmonds City Limits
• Dense Eelgrass
-
Major Road
Op EDP
0
v f �
u11�yC',
IBC. 1 890
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Polyline Eelgrass and Kelp from WDNR ShoreZone Inventory 2001.
Polygon Eelgrass and Kelp from King County Brightwater FEIS 2001.
0 0.5 1
I r I
Miles
Puget
Sound
Point
Edwards
12
01
�4 T
�a
o °0 1�
NO,
° ° 00 o No�t�tred�
�°°
get
D $ ° f Puget `r
0
9 ,f Hindl y
[f
10 Z
>
Q
d• M sh
CO
{�3 4�
WainUt
�11
Q
191Th $t SW
h St
204
1%
Point
LIN
Wells
Legend
• City Outfall
Over/In Water Structure
Street
Shoreline Armoring ._-
DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction
Railroad
- r Sloped
Edmonds City Limits ��
Stream
ON%.# Vertical
Major Road
Water Bodies
1
00*"*o Beach Nourishment J
!
I
New Crossing A�
Riparian Vegetation
000
o `
(wider box culvert or trestle)
OOff -Channel Pond _
Woody Debris
Data Sources:
Over/In Water Structures, Snohomish County
Shoreline Inventory (2002), aerial photos digitizing (2006) Shoreline
Armoring, Snohomish County Shoreline Inventory (2002)
Outfall Locations, City of Edmonds 2003 (Data only includes City of Edmonds drainage pipes)
OF EDP
O
r
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program
Restoration Plan
Table of Contents
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 2
Restoration Planning Requirements................................................................................................ 3
Definitionof Restoration................................................................................................................ 3
RestorationApproach..................................................................................................................... 4
RestorationVision Statement......................................................................................................... 6
Restoration Goals, Policies, and Objectives................................................................................... 7
RestorationOpportunities.............................................................................................................
12
Existing and Ongoing Programs...................................................................................................
19
RestorationStrategies...................................................................................................................
26
ProjectEvaluation.........................................................................................................................
29
Monitoring and Adaptive Management........................................................................................
31
Uncertainty....................................................................................................................................
32
Potential Funding Sources............................................................................................................
33
RestorationGlossary.....................................................................................................................
40
Resource Links and References....................................................................................................
42
1
Introduction
This restoration plan has been prepared in accordance with the Washington State Department of
Ecology (Ecology) Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guidelines direct
local government review and updates of shoreline master programs (SMPs). A significant
feature of the Guidelines is the requirement that local governments include within their SMPs a
"real and meaningful" strategy to address restoration of shorelines (WAC 173-26-186(8)). The
Guidelines emphasize that any development must achieve no net loss of ecological functions.
The Guidelines go on to require a goal of using restoration to improve the overall condition of
habitat and resources and make "planning for and fostering restoration" an obligation of local
government. From WAC 173-26-201(2)(c):
Master programs shall also include policies that promote restoration of ecological
functions, as provided in WAC 173-26-201(2)(f), where such functions are found to have
been impaired based on analysis described in WAC 173-26-201(3)(d)(i). It is intended
that local government, through the master program, along with other regulatory and non -
regulatory programs, contribute to restoration by planning for and fostering restoration
and that such restoration occur through a combination of public and private programs and
actions. Local government should identify restoration opportunities through the shoreline
inventory process and authorize, coordinate and facilitate appropriate publicly and
privately initiated restoration projects within their master programs. The goal of this
effort is master programs which include planning elements that, when implemented,
serve to improve the overall condition of habitat and resources within the shoreline
area of each city and county. [Emphasis added]
WAC 173-26-2012(f) states further that "...master programs provisions should be designed to
achieve overall improvements in shoreline ecological functions over time when compared to the
status upon adoption of the master program." For guidance on preparation of a Restoration Plan,
the City of Edmonds (City) looked to WAC 173-26-186, WAC 173-26-201(2)(c) and (f) and
Restoration Planning and the 2003 Shoreline Management Guidelines, an Ecology report, as
well as Systematic Approach to Coastal Ecosystem Restoration, developed by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (Diefenderfer 2003), in addition to other resources
listed at the end of this chapter. Restoration planning should be focused on tools such as
economic incentives, broad funding sources such as Salmon Restoration Funding and Water
Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) habitat restoration programs, volunteer programs, and other
strategies. Furthermore, because restoration planning must reflect the individual conditions of a
shoreline, restoration planning provisions contained in the Guidelines expressly note that a
restoration plan will vary based on:
• Size of jurisdiction
• Extent and condition of shorelines
• Availability of grants, volunteer programs, other tools
• The nature of the ecological functions to be addressed
2
Restoration Planning Requirements
The Guidelines (WAC 173-26-201(2)(f)) state that SMP restoration plans shall consider and
address the following subjects:
i. Identify degraded areas, impaired ecological functions, and sites with potential for
restoration;
ii. Establish overall goals and priorities for restoration of degraded areas and impaired
ecological functions;
iii. Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs that are currently being implemented, or
are reasonably assured of being implemented (based on an evaluation of funding likely in the
foreseeable future), which are designed to contribute to local restoration goals;
iv. Identify additional projects and programs needed to achieve local restoration goals, and
implementation strategies including identifying prospective funding sources for those projects
and programs;
v. Identify timelines and benchmarks for implementing restoration projects and programs and
achieving local restoration goals;
vi. Provide for mechanisms or strategies to ensure that restoration projects and programs will be
implemented according to plans and to appropriately review the effectiveness of the projects
and programs in meeting the overall restoration goals.
These requirements are intended to provide the framework to restore impacted, altered or
missing ecological functions resulting from past development of the shoreline. Restoration
planning is not intended to directly mitigate past or future development impacts on the City's
shorelines. Restoration is intended to improve overall environmental conditions unrelated to
upcoming projects planned in the shoreline environment. Nonetheless, restoration projects may
leverage opportunities that result from development, and restoration planning needs be aware of
projects and programs so as to not duplicate efforts or potentially waste valuable resources.
Definition of Restoration
The term restoration has a number of definitions, all of which share similar ideas. They often
refer to the return of an area to a previous condition by improving the biological structure and
function (Diefenderfer 2003). Examples of definitions of restoration put forth by various authors
and agencies include: bringing back a former, normal, or unimpaired state; a return to a
previously existing natural condition; reestablishing vegetation; and returning a damaged
ecosystem to its pre -disturbed state. The Guidelines state that:
"Restore," "restoration," or "ecological restoration" means the reestablishment or
upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes or functions. This may be
accomplished through measures including but not limited to revegetation, removal of
intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration
does not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre -
European settlement conditions.
3
The Society of Wetland Scientists (2000) defines wetland restoration, which is similar to
shoreline restoration, as actions taken in a converted or degraded natural wetland (read
"shoreline") that result in the reestablishment of ecological processes, functions, and
biotic/abiotic linkages and lead to a persistent, resilient system integrated within its landscape.
In an effort to be clear and consistent in the discussion of restoration, five key elements of the
concept of restoration are adopted from the Society of Wetland Scientists:
1. Restoration is the reinstatement of driving ecological processes.
2. Restoration should be integrated with the surrounding landscape.
3. The goal of restoration is a persistent, resilient system.
4. Restoration should generally result in movement toward the historic (pre -contact)
type of environment but may not always result in the historic biological community
and structure.
5. Restoration planning should include the development of structural and functional
objectives and performance standards for measuring achievement of the objectives.
In this SMP, restoration is used broadly to include conservation and enhancement actions.
Conservation is different from restoration as described above in that it protects areas relatively
free of degradation. Enhancement, which improves shoreline functions, but may not result in
restoration of underlying process, may be more viable than restoration in some instances.
Restoration Approach
A systematic approach to restoration planning, implementation, and monitoring increases the
accessibility of the plan and increases the long-term usability of the restoration framework. The
five components of a systematic approach to a restoration project are planning, implementation,
performance assessment, adaptive management, and dissemination of results (Diefenderfer
2003).
rd
Planning
implementation
Performance
Asses_%ment
Adaptive
Management
Dissemination of
Results
Figure 1. Five components of a coastal restoration project (Diefenderfer 2003)
NOAA's Systematic Approach to Coastal Ecosystem Restoration is a usable guidance tool for
each of these five components and states:
"The planning process starts with a vision, a description of the ecosystem and landscape,
and goals. A conceptual model and planning objectives are developed, a site is selected,
and numerical models contribute to preliminary designs as needed. Performance criteria
and reference sites are selected and the monitoring program is designed. Cost analysis
involves budgeting, scheduling, and financing. Finally, documentation is peer reviewed
prior to making construction plans and final costing" (Diefenderfer 2003).
This restoration plan should be considered within this overall framework. The restoration
chapter is designed to meet the requirements for restoration planning outlined in the Guidelines,
in which restoration planning is an integrated component of SMPs that include inventorying
shoreline conditions and regulation of shoreline development. The restoration plan builds on the
City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program Update Draft Shoreline Inventory and
Characterization (Shoreline Inventory and Characterization) report (Sea -Run Consulting et al.
2006), which provides a comprehensive inventory and analysis of shoreline conditions in
Edmonds, including rating specific functions and processes of each shoreline segment. The
Shoreline Inventory and Characterization report documents baseline environmental conditions in
the City's shoreline jurisdiction.
This restoration plan provides a vision for ecological restoration, and includes goals, policies,
objectives, and opportunities. It also establishes strategies for implementation, including
recognition of existing and ongoing programs, and it provides a framework for long-term
monitoring of shoreline restoration and shoreline conditions. While this restoration plan includes
broad objectives, specific implementation measures, budgets, schedules, and individual
monitoring programs will be needed for individual restoration projects as they occur.
To ensure that restoration goals are being achieved, it is important for the City to evaluate the
performance effectiveness of this plan and to adapt to changing conditions. At a minimum, this
restoration plan (as well as the entire SMP) will be reevaluated according to the schedule
adopted by the state Legislature. The City will conduct reevaluation of the success of the SMP
and its restoration goals consistent with the comprehensive plan update schedule. At times of
reevaluation, the inventory conditions and restoration metrics will be considered in comparison
to the 2002-2006 conditions reviewed for this SMP. Updates to inventory information and the
results of reevaluation processes will be disseminated to other restoration planning agencies to
facilitate regional monitoring of environmental conditions.
Adaptive management is the process of continually improving management policies and
practices to respond to results. Shoreline planning and restoration is an iterative process. As
data are gathered and compared to past years' data, one will be able to come to a clearer
understanding of environmental processes and stressors. As understanding increases, the City
will have the opportunity to adjust policies, regulations and restoration priorities to adapt to
changes in conditions and information. At a minimum, the City will take corrective actions if the
mandate of no net loss of shoreline ecological resources is not being met.
Restoration Vision Statement
The vision statement establishes the overarching idea of the future restored ecosystem and
provides a basis for the framework, including the restoration goals and objectives. This vision
statement seeks to make clear the intent of addressing ecological restoration:
• The Edmonds shoreline landscape and the ecosystem that makes use of the
coastal habitat are community assets to be restored, protected, and preserved
for the common good.
• The Edmonds shoreline ecosystem is an integral part of the Puget Sound
ecosystem and should be managed in concert with the ecosystem goals in the
Puget Sound Management Plan (Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team
2001).
• All citizens are entitled to ready access to waters whose condition support
high quality recreation and high quality habitat providing for a diverse
population of marine life.
• Puget Sound is an important resource that supports a variety of economic
activities from tourism to navigation to commercial fishing.
• The restoration plan seeks to maintain and protect existing functions and
processes of the Edmonds shoreline ecosystem, where possible.
• The restoration plan looks for opportunities to restore and enhance functions
and processes of the Edmonds shoreline ecosystem, where possible.
Cel
• The restoration plan seeks to evaluate potential restoration projects on best
available science.
• The restoration plan adopts an adaptive management approach to
implementation, funding, and evaluation.
Restoration Goals, Policies, and Objectives
For restoration, the City's SMP identifies three goals for restoring the Edmonds shoreline:
1. Improve water quality.
2. Restore degraded and lost habitat and corridors to improve ecological functions.
3. Improve connectivity of the shoreline environments in terms of both space and time.
The SMP also identifies 13 polices for restoring the Edmonds shoreline:
1. Protect and/or restore freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat and habitat -forming
processes.
2. Protect and restore wetland and restore salt marsh habitat to improve shoreline
ecological functions.
3. Remove intertidal fill; restore beach deposits and processes and ecological functions.
4. Remove/replace creosote -treated logs, pilings, and debris.
5. Increase availability of large woody debris and opportunities for recruitment in the
nearshore zone.
6. Protect and restore native species of vegetation, fish, and wildlife.
7. Remove or improve fish- and wildlife -passage barriers.
8. Manage and treat stormwater to improve water quality, decrease peak flow events,
and increase implementation of low impact development (LID) practices.
9. Protect naturally eroding bluffs and associated ecological functions.
10. Protect and restore wildlife corridors.
11. Ensure that shoreline restoration projects do not degrade critical areas and water
quality.
12. Establish incentives that could provide opportunities for new development to restore
impaired shoreline ecological functions.
7
13. Work with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway to encourage nearshore
restoration projects on the railroad right-of-way.
While these goals and policies identify the direction of needed improvements, objectives identify
specific actions —ideally measurable —that can be taken to achieve the stated goals. For
example, to meet the goal of improving water quality, an objective would be to remove creosote
pilings. Objectives that meet the restoration goals and policies of the SMP are listed in Table 1.
These objectives assist with defining actions or projects to restore the natural processes and
ecological functions identified in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization as not properly
functioning.
Later in this document, opportunities and strategies are identified as possible means of
implementing the objectives. At this level, no measurable performance standards are applied to
goals. For example, the overall goal is to improve water quality to meet the vision of a restored
ecosystem, not to improve it by "X" amount. Individual restoration projects that may be
implemented as part of this plan are expected to include specific measurable goals.
The goals and objectives included here are developed for the Edmonds shoreline and are
consistent with the recommendations in guidance from the Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership
(Fresh et al. 2004, Goetz et al. 2004), as well as that for nearshore habitats in the Final Lake
Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed (WRIA 8) Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan
(WRIA 8 Steering Committee 2005), which includes Edmonds.
Table 1 shows the relationships of the goals, objectives, natural processes and ecological
functions. The first column shows the goals, the second column shows the objectives associated
with those goals and the third column shows the natural process and ecological function that will
be enhanced by completing the objectives. Objectives are found under multiple goals affecting
different natural processes and ecological functions. Potential metrics for monitoring each
objective are listed in the right hand column.
Table 1: Restoration Goals and Objectives
Natural Process
Restoration Goal
Lk
Potential Metrics
Ecological Function
Improve water quality
Remove/replace unused
Sediment Transport
# creosote pilings
creosote pilings; remove
Toxic compound
creosote beach logs
Water and sediment
removal
quality measurements
Vegetation support
Protect and restore wetlands
Hydrologic Processes
Wetland acreage
and salt marsh habitat
Sediment Transport
Nutrients
Wetland functions
Water storage
Sediment storage
Wetland ratings
Toxic compound
removal
Water quality
Nutrient removal
measurements
Manage and treat stormwater
Hydrologic Processes
Water quality
and wastewater properly
Sediment Transport
measurements
Nutrients
Water storage
Storm flows
Sediment storage
Toxic compound
removal
Nutrient removal
Protect and restore native
Hydrologic Processes
% Impervious surface
vegetation
Nutrients
in basin
Water storage
Sediment storage
Acreage of vegetation
Nutrient removal
Toxic compound
Extent of invasive
removal
species
Water quality
measurements
Remove intertidal fill
Sediment Transport
Acreage or number of
restored/remaining
Water storage
impaired areas
Sediment storage
Nutrient removal
Table 1: Restoration Goals and Objectives
Natural Process
Restoration Goal
Objective
Potential Metrics
Ecological Function
Restore degraded
Protect and restore native
Hydrologic Processes
Acreage of vegetation
and lost habitat and
vegetation
Sediment Transport
by type (riparian,
corridors to improve
Vegetation
eelgrass, kelp)
ecological functions
Nutrients
Habitat
Degree of diversity
Improve
Support vegetation
connectivity of the
Woody debris
Species supported
shoreline
recruitment
Organic material
Connectivity/areas of
environments in
availability
isolation
terms of both space
Rearing habitat
and time
Resting habitat
Extent of tree canopy
Predation avoidance
habitat
Linear feet of
Migration corridors
bulkhead
Food production
Food delivery
Extent of invasive
species
Protect and restore wetlands
Hydrologic Processes
Wetland acreage
salt marsh habitat, and
Sediment Transport
estuarine and lagoon
Vegetation
Wetland functions
functions
Nutrients
Habitat
Wetland ratings
Support vegetation
Woody debris
Connectivity/areas of
recruitment
isolation
Organic material
availability
Rearing habitat
Resting habitat
Predation avoidance
habitat
Osmoregulatory
adjustment
Migration corridors
Food production
Food delivery
10
Table 1: Restoration Goals and Objectives
Natural Process
es ora i
llhw
Potential Metrics
-
Ecological Function
Protect naturally eroding
Sediment Transport
Linear feet of active
bluffs, sand spits and
Vegetation
feeder bluff
accretion land forms
Habitat
Support vegetation
Rate of sediment
Woody debris
delivery to beach
recruitment
Organic material
Acreage of vegetation
availability
in bluff areas
Beach habitat
Predation avoidance
Linear feet of
habitat
bulkhead
Migration corridors
Remove intertidal fill/restore
Sediment Transport
Acreage or number of
beach deposits and processes
Vegetation
restored/remaining
Nutrients
impaired areas
Habitat
Linear feet of
Support vegetation
Woody debris
bulkhead
recruitment
Organic material
Number of stream
availability
mouth migration
Rearing habitat
barriers removed
Resting habitat
Predation avoidance
Shoreline
habitat
connectivity/areas of
Migration corridors
interruption
Food production
Food delivery
Manage and treat stormwater
Hydrologic Processes
Water quality
and wastewater properly
Sediment Transport
measurements
Nutrients
Storm flows
Water storage
Sediment storage
Toxic compound
removal
Nutrient removal
11
Restoration Opportunities
This restoration plan recognizes that the Edmonds shorelines are highly altered and retain few
elements that are fully functioning through natural processes. The Edmonds shoreline of Lake
Ballinger is fully developed with single-family housing, yards, and docks. The Puget Sound
shoreline in the City does retain large areas of functioning eelgrass and kelp beds in the littoral
zone (lower intertidal to shallow subtidal elevations). Overall, however, the middle to upper
intertidal zone is modified by the presence of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad,
the Port of Edmonds, the Washington State Ferries terminal, and the former Union Oil dock.
The Edmonds Marsh is impacted and constrained by the former Union Oil development, the
BNSF railroad, Harbor Square, and State Route 104. Preservation is the first priority for
achieving no net loss of existing eelgrass or kelp bed function. In addition, limited opportunities
for restoration of other littoral habitats do exist and, given the currently degraded nature of the
City's shorelines, there is a high potential that the restoration goal of increasing shoreline habitat
function can be met.
Table 2 lists specific opportunities for each shoreline segment that have been identified in the
Shoreline Inventory and Characterization and others that have been provided through other
sources (some of these opportunities are shown geographically in Figure 13 of the Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization). These are opportunities for restoration that correspond to the
restoration goals, policies and objectives.
Opportunities, listed by shoreline segment, are in the left-hand column. The second column lists
the related restoration objectives. Identified restoration activities and monitoring activities,
where known, are listed in the third and fourth columns, respectively. The fifth column indicates
whether funding for the restoration opportunity has been secured. The sixth column provides a
preliminary timeline for when work related to the restoration opportunity might take place.
"Indeterminate" means that the timeline for the restoration opportunity —if work related to the
opportunity occurs at all —is dependent upon other factors, and is therefore difficult to predict.
"Long-term" signifies that no action plan is currently in place for a given restoration opportunity.
Finally, in accordance with the Guidelines, the sixth column indicates the preliminary priority of
restoration opportunities. Opportunities are designated as "high," "medium," or "low" priority.
Restoration opportunities that are currently funded were designated as "high" priority.
Restoration opportunities that would either meet three or more of restoration element policies, or
may receive funding were designated as "medium" priority. Restoration opportunities that
would either meet two or fewer restoration element policies or have no current prospect of future
funding were designated as "low" priority.
Regarding opportunity prioritization, controlling environmental factors (such as hydrology,
water quality, sediment type, etc.) provide the foundation for habitat structures (i.e., species and
their abundance), and the structure supports habitat functions (i.e., production, food support,
rearing, etc.)(Thom 2003). That is, restoration of habitat functions may be ineffective if habitat
structures and controlling factors are not also restored. Thom (2003) states: "There is no
universally accepted method for setting priorities for nearshore sites for restoration or for
determining what strategies are best applied to each site. We have found that restoration of
controlling factors is the key to successful and long-term restoration."
12
So, overall priority should be given to protection and restoration of natural processes that are
needed to support ecosystem and habitat functions. However, where restoration of those
processes is not currently feasible (e.g., sediment supply interruption by the railroad right-of-way
and bulkhead), non -natural measures may be taken to enhance ecological function on a non -self
sustaining basis (e.g., by artificial addition of sediments into a coastal drift cell).
Table 2 is an extensive list that likely exceeds near -term funding opportunities, and yet, is not
exhaustive. Additional restoration opportunities may continue to be identified through local and
regional shoreline monitoring and planning actions. Further discussion of ongoing programs,
implementation strategies, and project evaluation to determine appropriate priority is provided in
sections following the table. As such, Table 2 is a snapshot and it is expected that actual
restoration opportunities and priorities will evolve over time as restoration projects are
completed and new information becomes available. The City may periodically identify
additional restoration opportunities that are consistent with the objectives of this restoration
chapter.
13
Table 2: Restoration Opportunities
Restoration
Restoration
Restoration
Monitoring
Funding
Timeline
Priority
Opportunity
Objective
Activity
Activities
Secured?
Marine Shoreline
Throughout: Enhance
Expand eelgrass
Restoration of
Measure survival
No
Indeterminate/Long
Medium/Low
eelgrass
extent/productivity
eelgrass and
and expansion of
-term
by establishing new
macroalgae beds
transplanted plots
plots
at existing ferry
terminal
proposed for
"Edmonds
Crossing" (new
ferry terminal)
development
Lunds Gulch: Replace
Protect/restore
No ongoing
Monitor fish usage
No
Long-term
Medium
the existing box culvert
nearshore and estuary
activity
beneath the railroad
habitat for enhanced
identified
with a wider box culvert
coho and chum
(may be out of
production; decrease
Edmonds' jurisdiction)
sedimentation;
1*
improve fish passage;
decrease pedestrian
contact
Lunds Gulch: Enhance
Protect/restore
Some planting
Monitor plant
No
Long-term
Medium
riparian vegetation (may
stream habitat for
underway by
survival; control
be out of Edmonds'
enhanced coho
local volunteers
invasives
jurisdiction) 2*
production
Lunds Gulch: Create
Protect/restore
No ongoing
Monitor fish usage
No
Long-term
Low
an off -channel pond in
lacustrine habitat for
activity
county park (may be out
enhanced coho
identified
of Edmonds'
production; provide
jurisdiction) 3*
high -flow refugia
14
Table 2: Restoration Opportunities
Restoration
Restoration
Restoration
Monitoring
Funding
Timeline
Priority
Opportunity
Objective
Activity
Activities
Secured?
Lunds Gulch: Add
Protect/restore
No ongoing
Monitor fish usage
No
Long-term
Low
large woody debris
lacustrine habitat for
activity
(LWD) to off -channel
enhanced coho
identified
pond (may be out of
production
Edmonds' jurisdiction)
4*
Lunds Gulch:
Protect and restore
No ongoing
Perform vegetation
No
Long-term
Medium
Enhance/restore marine
native vegetation
activity
transects after
riparian vegetation 5*
waterward of railroad
identified
planting (1, 3, 5, 7,
and 10 ears
Lunds Gulch: Conduct
Restore beach
No ongoing
Monitor sediment
No
Long-term
Low
beach nourishment
deposits and
activity
transport and
activities 6*
processes;
identified
evolution of beach
protect/restore
profile; check with
nearshore habitat-
aerial photos after
forming processes
initiating activities
Meadowdale Creek:
Remove/replace
No ongoing
Inspect after
No
Long-term
Low
Acquire and remove
creosote-
activity
removal; perform
existing Meadowdale
contaminated pilings;
identified
vegetation
Marina structure 7*
protect/restore
transects for
nearshore habitat
eelgrass (1, 3, 5, 7,
and 10 years)
Shell Creek: Conduct
Restore beach
No ongoing
Monitor sediment
No
Long-term
Low
beach nourishment
deposits and
activity
transport and
activities at the mouth of
processes;
identified
evolution of beach
Shell Creek 8*
protect/restore
profile; check with
nearshore habitat-
aerial photos after
formin rocesses
initiating activities
Shell Creek: Replace
Protect/restore
No ongoing
Monitor fish usage
No
Long-term
Medium
railroad crossing with
nearshore and estuary
activity
trestle or improved
habitat
identified
culvert 9*
15
Table 2: Restoration Opportunities
Restoration
Restoration
Restoration
Monitoring
Funding
Timeline
Priority
Opportunity
Objective
Activity
Activities
Secured?
Underwater Park: Add
Structures increase
Planning by
Monitor vegetation
No
Long-term
Low
more structures
habitat diversity and
local dive groups
establishment and
serve as substrata for
and City Parks
fish use of new
algal colonization
and Recreation
structures
Dept.
Bracketts Landing:
Protect and restore
No ongoing
Perform vegetation
No
Long-term
Medium
Marine riparian
native vegetation
activity
transects after
vegetation restoration
identified
planting (1, 3, 5, 7,
and enhancement;
and 10 years)
opportunity for public
education/interpretive
exhibit describing
Edmonds -wide efforts
10*
Bracketts Landing:
Restore beach
No ongoing
Monitor sediment
No
Long-term
Low
Conduct beach
deposits and
activity
transport and
nourishment activities
processes;
identified
evolution of beach
just north of jetty
protect/restore
profile; check with
nearshore habitat-
aerial photos after
forming processes
initiating activities
Existing Ferry
Remove/replace
Proposed
Inspect after
No
Indeterminate
Medium
Terminal: Removing
creosote-
activity for
removal; perform
portions of the terminal
contaminated piling;
"Edmonds
vegetation
that sit atop creosote
protect/restore
Crossing" (new
transects for
pilings
nearshore habitat
ferry terminal)
eelgrass (1, 3, 5, 7,
development
and 10 years)
South County Senior
Restore beach
No ongoing
Monitor sediment
No
Long-term
Medium
Center:
deposits and
activity
transport and
Reconfiguration of
processes;
identified
evolution of beach
parking lot to restore
protect/restore
profile; check with
beach habitat 11*
nearshore habitat-
aerial photos after
forming processes
initiating activities
16
Table 2: Restoration Opportunities
Restoration
Restoration
Restoration
Monitoring
Funding
Timeline
Priority
Opportunity
Objective
Activity
Activities
Secured?
Edmonds Marsh:
Protect/restore
City of Edmonds
Monitor saltwater
Yes
2007, 2008
High
Channel improvements
freshwater and
Capital
marsh vegetation
estuarine habitat
Improvement
Proj ect
Edmonds Marsh:
Protect/restore
Proposed
Monitor fish usage
No
Indeterminate
Medium
Culvert replacement
nearshore and estuary
activity for
habitat
"Edmonds
Crossing" (new
ferry terminal)
development
Willow Creek: Restore
Protect/restore
Proposed
Monitor fish usage
No
Indeterminate
Medium
creek to open channel
freshwater and
activity for
12*
estuarine habitat;
"Edmonds
increase
Crossing" (new
opportunities for
ferry terminal)
recruitment
development;
culvert
replacement
proposed in
Sound Transit
JARPA
mitigation plan
Point Edwards:
Remove/replace
Proposed
Inspect after
No
Indeterminate
Medium
Remove existing pier
creosote-
activity for
removal; perform
13*
contaminated pilings;
"Edmonds
vegetation
protect/restore
Crossing" (new
transects for
nearshore habitat
ferry terminal)
eelgrass (1, 3, 5, 7,
development
and 10 ears
17
Table 2: Restoration Opportunities
Restoration
Restoration
Restoration
Monitoring
Funding
Timeline
Priority
Opportunity
Objective
Activity
Activities
Secured?
Lake Shoreline
Lake Ballinger:
Manage and treat
Ongoing
Monitor water
Partially
2007-2013/Long-
Medium/Low
Control quantity and
stormwater to
implementation
quality (water
term
quality of runoff
improve water
of the
quality is currently
entering lake 14*
quality, decrease
Stormwater
being monitored
peak flow events, and
Management
through a City of
increase
Manual for
Edmonds Capital
implementation of
Puget Sound;
Improvement
low impact
stormwater
Project)
development (LID)
system
practices
improvements as
street
improvements
are constructed
Lake Ballinger: Revise
Protect/restore
No ongoing
Monitor fish usage
No
Long-term
Medium
outlet control structure
freshwater habitat;
activity
(may be out of
increase
identified
Edmonds' jurisdiction)
opportunities for
15*
recruitment
Numbers correspond to Figure 14 of the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program Update Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization, which
geographically identifies potential restoration projects
Existing and Ongoing Programs
The following list of agencies and organizations with nearshore interests is by no means
complete. It does, however, include those agencies and organizations that appear to have
the most interest in nearshore areas and restoration in and around the City.
Snohomish County Marine Resources Committee
In 1998, passage of the Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative established the
Northwest Straits Commission and seven Marine Resource Committees, including the
Snohomish County Marine Resource Committee (MRC). The Snohomish County MRC
is a citizen -based effort to identify regional marine issues, foster community
understanding and involvement, recommend positive action and develop support for
various protection and restoration measures. The Snohomish County MRC works toward
fulfilling the following performance standards:
a. Broad county participation in MRCs
b. A scientifically -based, regional system of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)
c. A net gain in highly ecologically productive nearshore, intertidal and estuarine
habitat in the Northwest Straits, and no significant loss of existing, high -value
habitat; improvements in state, tribal, and local tools to map, assess, and protect
nearshore habitat and prevent harm from upland activities
d. Net reduction in shellfish harvest areas closed due to contamination
e. Measurable increases in factors supporting recovery of bottom fish (such as
rockfish) —including numbers of fish of broodstock size and age, average fish
size, and abundance of prey species —as well as sufficient amounts and quality of
protected habitat
f. Increases in other key marine indicator species (including those identified in the
1997 West report on Puget Sound marine resources)
g. Coordination of scientific data (for example, through the Puget Sound Ambient
Monitoring Program), including scientific baseline, common protocols, unified
GIS, and sharing of ecosystem assessments and research
h. Coordination with entities on an effective outreach and education effort with
measurements of the numbers of people contacted as well as changes in behavior
Shared Strategy for Puget Sound
The Shared Strategy for Puget Sound (Shared Strategy) is a collaborative effort to protect
and restore salmon runs across Puget Sound. Shared Strategy engages local citizens,
tribes, technical experts and policy makers to build a practical, cost-effective recovery
plan endorsed by the people living and working in the watersheds of Puget Sound. The
Draft Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan, revised in December 2005, is available for
review at http://www.sharedsalmonstrategy.org/index.htm.
19
Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership
The Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership (PSNP) group is a cooperative effort among
government organizations, tribes, industries, and environmental organizations to preserve
and restore the health of Puget Sound's nearshore that generally runs from the top of
bluffs on the land across the beach to the point where light penetrates the Puget Sound's
waters sufficient to support attached marine vegetation (approximately 30 feet deep).
A General Investigation Reconnaissance Study conducted by the United States Army
Corps of Engineers in 2000 identified a direct link between properly functioning
(healthy) nearshore habitat and the physical condition of the shoreline. The study
identified four areas that need restoration and improvement:
1. Restoring shoreline processes to a more natural state,
2. Providing beaches with essential sand and gravel materials,
3. Removing, moving, and modifying artificial structures (bulkheads, riprap,
etc.), and
4. Using alternative measures to protect shorelines from erosion.
The timeframe for implementing projects is longer term, with projects beginning in 2008.
By June 2006, PSNP will produce a strategic needs assessment for comprehensive,
geospatially explicit, process -based restoration of Puget Sound's nearshore ecosystem.
The PSNP Science Team is working to narrow the uncertainty inherent in restoration, by
improving our understanding of the most critical restoration needs at various scales of
analysis in Puget Sound. To do so, PSNP is reviewing and synthesizing a number of
existing key data sets, collecting new information and adopting the most effective
theories on the linkages between landscape ecology and restoration.
The current understanding of relationships between nearshore processes, structures and
functions is illustrated in a nearshore conceptual model (Puget Sound Nearshore Project
2003). This conceptual model continues to be refined as scientists test new hypotheses
about nearshore processes, structure and function. Preliminary outputs of this analysis
are informing those engaged in nearshore habitat restoration as part of their species
recovery plans through this web site and guidance to the Salmon Recovery Funding
Board. In turn, actions taken by salmon recovery lead entities may serve to evaluate
hypothesized relationships between restoration actions and effects on ecosystem
processes and salmon populations. It is expected that over time, the relationship between
local species -specific efforts and regional process -based approaches will converge to the
point that the restoration goals identified by species recovery entities and those of PSNP
are one and the same for many projects. Collaboration and sharing of resources will
serve to bring about a common endpoint as the ecological integrity of Puget Sound is
improved to the benefit of salmon, shellfish, marine birds, and other components of the
ecosystem.
20
Puget Sound Nearshore Policy Group
Staff to the Puget Sound Action Team partnership convened a regional group to conduct
a policy discussion that sets a vision for salmon recovery in Puget Sound's nearshore and
marine environments. This vision will lead to actions that protect and restore Puget
Sound's shorelines, marine areas and estuaries for salmon recovery.
This high-level policy group is central to development of a nearshore chapter in Shared
Strategy's salmon recovery plan for Puget Sound. This group is working to establish
policy direction and identify needed commitments to actions that will protect and restore
Puget Sound's shorelines, marine areas, and estuaries for salmon recovery. This
nearshore chapter will address regional threats to the nearshore environment and
regional -scale management opportunities.
The specific objectives of the nearshore policy group are to:
1. Develop a set of regional strategies for salmon recovery in the nearshore;
2. Identify needed commitments for actions and pathways to gain those
commitments;
3. Develop prescriptions for additional activities that should occur to protect and
restore nearshore and marine ecosystems in the Puget Sound region; and
4. Develop an overall vision of nearshore and marine contributions to salmon
recovery and integrate this vision with all other chapters of the Shared
Strategy's recovery plan.
The nearshore policy group has technical support from personnel who are working with
regional experts and other individuals involved in developing planning area chapters.
Staff members and others are working to assess and analyze relationships among
management actions that might be needed to protect and restore the nearshore and marine
ecosystem processes and functions that will support viable salmon populations.
Puget Sound Partnership
In December 2005, Governor Christine Gregoire appointed 21 leaders in the Puget Sound
region in commerce, research, and government as members of the Puget Sound
Partnership (Partnership). She gave the group a 10-month charge to "develop
recommendations for preserving the health and ecosystem of Puget Sound, and to help
educate and enlist the public in achieving recovery of the Sound by 2020." The
Partnership delivered its recommendations in December 2006 (Puget Sound Partnership
2006). While the entire effort of the Partnership focuses on protection and restoration of
the Puget Sound ecosystem, these topics are central to two of five immediate action
recommendations for the Governor: protect Puget Sound habitat and implement priority
projects to restore damaged forests, rivers, shorelines, and marine waters. To protect
Puget Sound habitat, the Partnership recommends substantially increasing compliance
21
with existing laws, primarily by increasing resources to state and local governments and
acquiring land from willing sellers in watershed, estuarine, and marine shoreline areas.
To restore damaged habitat, the Partnership recommends increased funding necessary to
implement projects identified in recovery plans for salmon and other species and
nearshore evaluation and other programs.
Several of the points made in the Partnership's recommendations bear on strategies
applicable to this restoration plan:
• Regulatory and restoration actions that focus on a single species or location
fail to recognize the importance of natural processes in contributing to habitat
function. Process -based strategies improve the chances of a successful
restoration.
• Implement high -priority restoration projects such as recovery plans for salmon
and other species, and nearshore evaluation and other programs.
• Implement other critical restoration actions such as preventing the spread of
invasive species, removal of derelict vessels and fishing gear, and removal of
creosote logs.
• Improve the success of habitat mitigation from the current rate of 50 percent
to approaching 100 percent.
The Partnership's recommendations provide a focus to coordinate restoration efforts
around Puget Sound.
In 2007, legislation was adopted that made the Partnership a new state agency, replacing
the Puget Sound Action Team. The Partnership will be responsible for integrating the
work of state, local and federal governments, as well as local watershed planning and
salmon recovery efforts.
Puget Sound Technical Recovery Team
The Puget Sound Technical Recovery Team (TRT) provides the overall scientific
conceptual approach for assessing salmon recovery planning. This approach identifies
the four characteristics of a population and their role in maintaining population viability.
These characteristics are abundance, productivity, spatial structure and diversity. TRT
liaisons help watershed groups implement their technical approach to the nearshore
component of their draft habitat plans to ensure that it is consistent with the logic laid out
in the Watershed Guidance.
Washington State University Shore Stewards Program/Water/Beach
Watchers
Washington State University started a Shore Stewards Program in Snohomish County as
part of the Water/Beach Watchers in 2005. The Beach Watcher program provides
education and best practices for shoreline landowners, and participants receive a metal
22
Shore Stewards sign for their property. In addition to working directly with shoreline
landowners, program administrators also periodically conduct public workshops, as they
did in the Edmonds/Woodway area in 2006. While the number of Edmonds shoreline
landowners currently participating in the program is limited, local participation is
expected to increase in the future as this young program becomes more established.
WRIA 8
Watersheds often encompass broad land areas and cross various governmental
jurisdictions. The Watershed Planning Act (RCW 90.82) created a mechanism to focus
water -related planning on a local, watershed basis by forming the Planning Unit,
composed of various interests and governments. The shorelines of Edmonds are located
in Cedar River/Lake Washington Water Resource Inventory Area 8 (WRIA 8). Included
in the new administrative body are counties, municipalities, utilities and tribal
governments, collectively knows as Initiating Governments. The composition of the
Planning Unit must include a wide range of water resource interests and representatives
of state, county, and tribal governments whose policies and resources may be affected by
the proposed plan. The purpose of the Planning Unit is to formulate a plan containing
recommendations on water quality and quantity management, protection and restoration
of instream flows, protection of fish habitat and alternative strategies for managing water,
to be sent to local and state governments for adoption. The Planning Unit instituted two
subgroups; the Steering Committee, to help it move forward with administrative issues;
and a Technical Committee to sort through the details of resource data required to make
informed water management decisions. The final plan for WRIA 8 is now available on
their website.
By enacting the Watershed Planning Act in 1998, the State of Washington sought to
coordinate watershed planning efforts statewide. The legislation provided for three
phasesorganizational, assessment, and planning —and provided funding for local
execution of these phases. This act created 62 WRIAs across the state in which these
activities would take place. Also in 1998, the state enacted the Salmon Recovery
Planning Act (RCW 77.85) to encourage and require an enhanced effort at protecting and
restoring habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon and other fish species then recently
listed as endangered. To clarify roles and responsibilities, to promote interagency
cooperation, and to coordinate efforts and simplify implementation procedures,
12 agencies within state government signed a memorandum of understanding for the
coordinated implementation of these two laws.
City of Edmonds
The City of Edmonds has a number of existing programs and projects with potential
benefits for the shoreline environment (restoration projects are included on "Table 2.
Restoration Opportunities"). These projects and programs include:
• Waterfront acquisition — Acquire any remaining waterfront parcels to
complete access to Puget Sound. This action is intended to increase public
ownership of the waterfront along Puget Sound.
23
• Tideland acquisition — Acquire tidelands whenever feasible, working with
local citizens to secure for public use as identified in the City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Park and Open Space Plan. This action is intended to meet
the need for continued waterfront access.
Edmonds Marsh environmental master plan — Produce comprehensive
environmental master plan for the Edmonds Marsh. Final document will
include an ecological assessment and environmental impact study with input
from the public and local organizations. Plan will directly correlate with goals
and recommendations included in WRIA 8 Chinook Salmon Conservation
Plan.
Edmonds Marsh channel improvements — An environmental study regarding
the current state of the marsh and its impacts from storm water runoff is
proposed. The study would be reviewed by federal and state agencies and
routed through the master plan process as well. Following approval of the
study, dredging of the channel would commence as approved by the agencies.
Dredging of the existing channels would improve the hydraulic capacity of the
channel. The marsh has also experienced a recent influx of freshwater cattails
migrating towards the west. This is presumably resulting from the fact that
the drainage channels in the wetlands have filled with silt and therefore are
not allowing the salt water to flow back as far as it used to flow. Dredging
may therefore enhance diversity (saltwater marsh vegetation) in the marsh as
well.
Environmental education — Various environmental education activities and
programs are offered to schools, scout groups, community organizations and
the general public through the Discovery Programs Office. The mission is "to
provide interpretive and environmental education opportunities for the citizens
of Edmonds, our school -age children, and visitors to our parks and beaches.
Additionally, the program promotes stewardship of Puget Sound, its
shorelines, and the surrounding watershed." Programs include Beach Ranger
visits to classrooms and low -tide beach walks, Discover the Forest at Yost
Park, Earth Day, beach cleanups, spring and summer nature day camps, and
special events such as the Watershed Fun Fair.
• Lake Ballinger monitoring — Roughly half of Lake Ballinger lies within
Edmonds city limits. Lake was at one time deemed the most polluted in the
state. Monitoring efforts are performed to evaluate environmental health of
the lake and the necessity for further enhancement efforts.
Transportation Projects
Two transportation projects developing in the region —the Sound Transit commuter rail
improvements and the Edmonds Crossing terminal improvements —include potential
restoration projects.
24
Sound Transit Commuter Rail
The mitigation plan for the Everett -to -Seattle Commuter Rail Project Third Easement
(Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2005) contains a restoration project identified
in "Table 2. Restoration Opportunities": culvert replacement on Willow Creek. The
construction of a new box culvert under the railroad track at Willow Creek would convey
creek and tidal flows. This action would facilitate daylighting of the creek.
Edmonds Crossing
The Edmonds Crossing project proposes several environmental restoration actions as part
of the project. These actions include:
Daylighting Willow Creek — This action would protect and restore freshwater
and estuarine habitat, improve upon tidal influence and freshwater outflow,
and restore the Edmonds Marsh to estuarine habitat by improving its
connection to Puget Sound. The non -railroad portion of the restoration of
Willow Creek is described in the Edmonds Crossing Environmental Impact
Statement (CH2M-Hill 2004) and would consist of open channel upstream to
about the salt marsh portion of Edmonds marsh. The EIS left to be worked
out during the design phase some hydraulic issues that could influence
potential flooding, and there are minor variations on the approach depending
on which alternative is selected. In general the creek would be open from the
Puget Sound shore for about 300 feet heading east. It would then go through a
culvert under the railroad tracks for about 100 feet with an emergency tide
gate on the east side of the tracks. It is then open to the east for another
800 feet or so. This downstream 1,200-foot reach is channelized; the plans
indicate that the streambed of the upstream reach is natural.
• Removal of the existing Unocal pier at Point Edwards — This action would
eliminate contamination, protect and restore nearshore habitat, and improve
visual and physical access to Puget Sound.
• Removing portions of the existing ferry terminal that sits on creosote piling —
This action would remove pilings, restore aquatic habitat, and minimize the
potential offshore diversion of juvenile salmonids.
• Restoration of macroalgae and eelgrass beds near the existing ferry terminal
that have been damaged by several decades of propeller wash — This action
would connect two macroalgae and eelgrass beds that are presently divided
due to ferry propeller -induced scouring.
• Install newer and larger culvert near Pine Street and State Route 104 — This
action would improve stream flow as well as fish and wildlife passage.
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway
The BNSF railway, as discussed in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization report,
significantly influences the ecological processes and functions of the Edmonds shoreline.
25
When a restoration effort involving the City might benefit from the participation of
BNSF, the City would make every reasonable effort to contact and engage railroad
officials.
Restoration Strategies
This section discusses programmatic measures for the City designed to foster shoreline
restoration and achieve a net improvement in shoreline ecological processes, functions,
and habitats. With projected budget and staff limitations, the City does not anticipate
leading most restoration projects or programs. However, the City's SMP represents an
important vehicle for facilitating and encouraging restoration projects and programs that
could be led by private and/or non-profit entities. The discussion of restoration
mechanisms and strategies below highlights programmatic measures that the City could
implement, as well as parallel activities that would be led by other governmental and
non -governmental organizations.
Restoration Demonstration Project
A small demonstration restoration project that included a variety of techniques could be
completed by the City as an example for others. The City could also identify a set of
good demonstration restoration projects (which have broad public support), then actively
solicit entities to implement one or more of them. Additionally, the City could work with
existing programs such as the Sound Transit JARPA mitigation project or the Edmonds
Crossing mitigation project to leverage funding and efforts to implement smaller scale
demonstration projects.
Volunteer Coordination
Another way the City could accomplish restoration projects is by using community
volunteers. Volunteers could be recruited for project implementation and monitoring and
the City would provide equipment and expertise. The City would also need to fund a
volunteer coordinator to organize projects, solicit various environmental groups and
individual volunteers to complete the projects and partner or coordinate with other
government entities on projects.
Regional Coordination
The City should continue its active role in the WRIA 8 salmon recovery planning
process, an inter -governmental organization facilitating freshwater and shoreline habitat
restoration for salmon recovery. The City should also look for other opportunities for
involvement in regional restoration planning and implementation.
Development Opportunities
When shoreline development is proposed, the City should look for opportunities to
conduct restoration in addition to minimum mitigation requirements. Development may
present timing and funding opportunities for restoration that would not otherwise occur
and may not be available in the future.
26
Mitigation practices may also allow for the "banking" of credits from restoration projects
that can provide advanced mitigation credit for future unavoidable impacts of
development. In certain cases, on -site mitigation opportunities are limited due to
building site constraints, limited potential ecological gains, or other site -specific factors.
In these instances, the City shoreline administrator may identify an off -site restoration
site that could be contributed in lieu of on -site mitigation.
Development Incentives
Development incentives for restoration might include the waiving of some or all of
development application fees or waiving City -required infrastructure improvement fees.
This could serve to encourage developers to try to be more imaginative or innovative in
their development designs to include more habitat preservation or restoration, or public
access to shorelines.
Tax Relief/Fee System
The City may consider a tax/fee system to directly fund shoreline restoration measures.
One possibility is to have the City work with Snohomish County to craft a preferential
tax incentive through the Public Benefit Rating System administered by Snohomish
County under the Open Space Taxation Act (RCW 84.34) to encourage private
landowners to preserve natural shore -zone features for "open space" tax relief. Ecology
has published a technical guidance document for local governments who wish to use this
tool to improve landowner stewardship of natural resources. More information about this
program can be found at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/99108.html. The guidance in this
report provides "technically based property selection criteria designed to augment
existing open space efforts with protection of key natural resource features which directly
benefit the watershed. Communities can choose to use any portion, or all, of these
criteria when tailoring a Public Benefit Rating System to address the specific watershed
issues they are facing."
Another possibility available to the City is a Shoreline Restoration Fund. A chief
limitation to implementing restoration is local funding, which is often required as a match
for state and federal grant sources. To foster ecological restoration of the City's
shorelines, the City could establish an account that may serve as a source of local match
monies for non-profit organizations implementing restoration of the City's shorelines.
This fund could be administered by the City shoreline administrator and would be
supported by a levy on new shoreline development proportional to the size or cost of the
new development project. Monies drawn from the fund would be used as a local match
for restoration grant funds, such as the Salmon Recovery Funding Board Aquatic Lands
Enhancement Account or another source.
Shore Stewards Education
Shore Stewards are shoreline property owners and residents of waterfront communities
with shared beach access who voluntarily follow 10 wildlife -friendly guidelines in caring
for their beaches, bluffs, gardens and homes. These guidelines help them create and
preserve a healthy shoreline environment for fish, wildlife, birds and people. This
program was created to help shoreline residents feel more connected to the nearshore
27
ecosystem because it is found that when people understand the natural processes at work
on their beaches, they may play a more active, positive role in the preservation of healthy,
fish -friendly wildlife habitats.
The 10 guidelines for shoreline living are:
1. Use water wisely
2. Maintain your septic system
3. Limit pesticide and fertilizer usage
4. Manage upland water runoff
5. Encourage native plants and trees
6. Know permit procedures for shoreline development
7. Develop on bluffs with care
8. Minimize bulkheads, docks and other structures
9. Respect intertidal life
10. Preserve eelgrass beds and forage fish spawning habitat
Shore Stewards was created in 2002 with grant funding by the Island County Marine
Resources Committee. The pilot program was launched on Camano Island by
Washington State Beach Watchers, who wrote the resource -packed Shore Stewards
Guide. Shore Stewards is now expanding to other counties of Puget Sound, including
Snohomish County.
Stewardship Certification Process
The Shore Stewards program sets up guidelines for shoreline residents to preserve and
enhance the shoreline environment. With a verification component, Shore Stewards
could provide certification and tracking. This could be implemented as a Shoreline Tax
Incentive when someone participates in the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW) backyard sanctuary program. Since the City recognizes that there are
important opportunities to improve shoreline ecological conditions and functions through
non -regulatory, volunteer actions by shoreline residents and property owners it might
examine the potential for property tax breaks for shoreline property owners who are
actively manage their property for habitat protection or enhancement. To encourage
volunteer actions that better shoreline ecological functions and values, shoreline property
owners actively participating in the WDFW backyard sanctuary program or some similar
program could receive, for example, a 5% credit on their City property taxes.
Resource Directory
The City could develop a resource list for property owners that want to be involved in
restoration. Examples of grant programs that could be included are:
Landowner Incentive Program (LIP)
The Landowner Incentive Program (LIP) is a competitive grant process to provide
financial assistance to private individual landowners for the protection, enhancement, or
restoration of habitat to benefit species -at -risk on privately owned lands. The LIP
website, http://federalaid.fws.gov/lip/lip.html, has more information about the next
application cycle.
Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) Grant Programs
The Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) administers two grant programs for
protection and/or restoration of salmon habitat. Eligible applicants can include municipal
subdivisions (cities, towns, and counties, or port, conservation districts, utility, park and
recreation, and school districts), tribal governments, state agencies, nonprofit
organizations, and private landowners. The City should continue making use of the SRFB
grant programs through its participation in the activities of the lead entity WRIA 8.
Backyard Sanctuary Program
The City should encourage participation in WDFW wildlife backyard sanctuary program.
Project Evaluation
When a project is proposed for implementation by the City, other agency or by a private
party, the restoration project should be evaluated to ensure that the project's objectives
are consistent with those of this restoration plan and, if applicable, that the project
warrants implementation above other candidate projects. (It is recognized that, due to
funding sources or other constraints, the range of any individual project may be narrow.)
Enhancement of selected attributes
Restoration to historic conditions Creation of new ecosystem
Enhancement of selected attributes 0
y
Creation of a new ecosystem (highly disturbed urban site
C
• and landscape)
(highly disturbed site, but landscape is intact)
t;
O
Restoration to historic conditions
�1
Conservation
cr. O
O ++
ai a�i
Protection . (not greatly disturbed site, but
tom.,
Conservation region around site is disturbed)
o
Restoration to predisturbance conditions
A
(minimal site disturbance
landscape is intact)
and
LOW High
Degree of Disturbance of Landscape
(larger dots indicate higher probability of restoration success)
Figure 2 (Thom 2005)
29
It is also expected that the list of potential projects may change over time, that new
projects will be identified and existing opportunities will become less relevant as
restoration occurs and as other environmental conditions, or our knowledge of them,
change.
When evaluating potential projects, the following nine criteria should be considered in
assessing priority (the criteria are not listed in any order of importance):
a. Restoration meets the goals and objectives for shoreline restoration.
b. Restoration of processes that form and sustain habitat is generally of greater
importance than direct restoration of functions.
c. Restoration avoids residual impacts to other functions or processes.
d. Projects address a known degraded condition.
e. Conditions that are progressively worsening are of greater priority.
f. Restoration has a high benefit to cost ratio.
g. Restoration is feasible, such as being located on and accessed by public
property or private property that is cooperatively available for restoration.
Restoration should avoid conflicts with adjacent property owners.
h. There is public support for the project.
i. The project is supported by and consistent with other restoration plans, such
as that for WRIA 8.
The City shall develop a project "score card" as a tool to evaluate projects consistent with
these criteria. As an example, see the project scorecard from the Lower Columbia River
Estuary Partnership that uses eight principles (Johnson et al. 2003). The eight principles
are:
• Size;
• Complexity;
• Accessibility;
• Connectivity of adjacent habitats;
• Potential quality includes the potential for self -maintenance;
• Substantial improvement of ecosystem functions;
30
• Benefit to nearshore-dependent threatened and endangered species; and
• Conformance with natural habitat structure, processes, and functions.
Monitoring and Adaptive Management
In addition to project monitoring required for individual restoration and mitigation
projects, the City should conduct system -wide monitoring of shoreline conditions and
development activity, to the degree practical, recognizing that individual project
monitoring does not provide an assessment of overall shoreline ecological health.
System -wide monitoring will follow this three -pronged approach:
1. Track information using the City's GIS and permit system as activities occur
(development, conservation, restoration and mitigation), such as:
a. New shoreline development
b. Shoreline variances and the nature of the variance
c. Compliance issues
d. New impervious surface areas
e. Number of pilings removed/replaced
f. Fill area removed/added
g. Vegetation retention/loss
h. Bulkheads/armoring additions or changes
The City may require project proponents to monitor as part of project
mitigation, which may be incorporated into this process. Regardless, as
development and restoration activities occur in the shoreline area, the City
should monitor shoreline conditions to determine whether both project
specific and SMP overall goals are being achieved.
2. Periodically review and provide input to ongoing regional monitoring
programs, such as:
a. DNR monitoring (e.g., eelgrass distribution)
b. Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program
c. University of Washington (the Puget Sound Regional Synthesis
Model)
d. Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership
Through this coordination with regional agencies, the City should seek to
identify any major environmental changes that might be occurring.
3. Re -review status of environmental processes and functions at the time of
periodic SMP updates to, at a minimum, validate the effectiveness of the
SMP. Re -review should consider what restoration activities actually occurred
31
compared to stated goals, objectives and priorities, and whether restoration
projects resulted in a net improvement of shoreline resources.
Under the Shoreline Management Act, the SMP is required to result in no net
loss of shoreline ecological resources. If this standard is found to not be met
at the time of review, Edmonds will be required to take corrective actions.
The goal for restoration is to achieve a net improvement. The cumulative
effect of restoration over the time between reviews should be evaluated along
with an assessment of impacts of development that are not fully mitigated to
determine effectiveness at achieving a net improvement to shoreline
ecological resources.
To conduct a valid reassessment of the shoreline conditions every seven years,
it is necessary to monitor, record and maintain key environmental metrics
(quantitative measures and calculations used to assess success) to allow a
comparison with baseline conditions.
As monitoring occurs, the City should reassess environmental conditions and restoration
objectives. Those ecological processes and functions that are found to be worsening may
need to become elevated in priority to prevent loss of critical resources. Alternatively,
successful restoration may reduce the importance of some restoration objectives in the
future.
Evaluation of shoreline conditions, permit activity, GIS data, and policy and regulatory
effectiveness should occur at varying levels of detail consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan update cycle. A complete reassessment of conditions, policies and regulations will
be undertaken every seven years.
Uncertainty
This restoration plan proposes project opportunities to restore shoreline conditions. The
restoration opportunities included are based upon a detailed inventory and analysis of
shoreline conditions (Pentec 2001, Sea -Run Consulting et al. 2006). Nonetheless,
exhaustive scientific information about shoreline conditions and restoration options is
cost prohibitive at this stage. Additionally, many forms of restoration remain, to a
degree, experimental. Monitoring must be an aspect of all restoration projects.
Information from monitoring studies (local and Puget Sound -wide) will help demonstrate
what restoration is most successful in the particular environment of the City's shorelines.
Generally, conservation of existing natural areas is the least likely to result in failure.
Alternatively, enhancement (as opposed to complete restoration of functions), has the
highest degree of uncertainty.
This SMP provides a comprehensive index of restoration opportunities but does not
provide the backup analyses that would allow the City to objectively compare
opportunities against each other. As funding becomes available, restoration opportunities
could be ranked on several criteria by expected rate and degree of success,
32
resources/habitats/functions that would benefit, cost, and other factors. Funding could
also support a long-term monitoring program that evaluates restoration over the life of the
SMP (as opposed to independent monitoring for each project).
Potential Funding Sources
Potential sources of grant funding for restoration opportunities on the City's shorelines
have been documented in Table 3.
33
Table 3: Funding Opportunities
Allocating Entity
Grant Size
Acorn Foundation
(family foundation that supports
Elizabeth Wilcox
Acorn Foundation
projects dedicated to building a
$5,000410,000
Phone: (510) 834-2995
sustainable future for the planet and
Email: ccounsel@igc.org
to restoring a healthy global
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
environment)
Bullitt Foundation
(private philanthropic foundation
providing funding to nonprofit
organizations working to safeguard
Steven Whitney
Aquatic Ecosystems
the natural environment by
Varies
Email: swhitney@bullitt.org
promoting responsible human
activities and sustainable
communities in the Pacific
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Northwest)
Washington Department of Natural
Leslie Ryan
Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account
$10,000-$1 million
Phone: (360) 902-1064
Resources
Email: leslie.ryan@wadnr.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Audubon Washington
Audubon Washington
Varies
Phone: (360) 786-8020
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Basinwide Restoration New Starts General
United States Army Corps of
Bruce Sexauer
Investigation
Engineers
Varies
Phone: (206) 764-6959
Email: bruce.r.sexauer@usace.army.mil
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
National Fish and Wildlife
Pam McClelland
Bring Back the Natives
Foundation
Varies
Phone: (202) 857-0166
Email: mcclelland@nfw£org
34
Table 3: Funding Opportunities
0i Grant Name
Allocating Entity
Grant Size
Washington State Department of
Jeff Nejedly
Centennial Clean Water Fund
Ecology
Phone: (360) 407-6566
Email: jnej461@ecy.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
City Fish Passage Barrier, Stormwater and
Washington Department of
Cliff Hall
Habitat Restoration Grant Program
Transportation
Varies
Phone: (360) 705-7993
Email: hallc@wsdot.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Coastal Grant Program
United States Fish & Wildlife
$5,000-$50,000
Coastal Grant Contact
Service
Phone: (703) 358-2201
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Coastal Zone Management Administration/
Washington State Department of
$19,000429,000
Bev Huether
Phone: (360) 407-7254
Implementation Awards
Ecology
Email: bhue461@ecy.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Chris Doley
Community -Based Restoration Program
Administration
$1,000-$500,000
Phone: (301) 713-0174
Email: chris.doley@noaa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Cooperative Endangered Species
United States Fish & Wildlife
Dan Morgan
Conservation Fund
Service
$1,000414,000
Phone: (703) 358-2061
Email: Dan Morgan@fws.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
Multi -year grantsthat
Adrienne Fisher
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
range from
that rangefrom
Phone: (212) 974-7000
5
$12million
Email: afisher@ddcs.org
35
Table 3: Funding Opportunities
Grant Name
*Estuarinend
Allocating Entity
Grant Size
AM_
L
Salmon Restoration Program
Washington Department of Fish and
Varies
Paul Cereghino
Wildlife
Email: ESRP@dfw.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Johanna Laderman
FishAmerica Grant Program
FishAmerica Foundation
Varies
Phone: (703) 519-9691
Email: jaderman@asafishing.org
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
$5,000-$20,000
John Pai
Five -Star Restoration Program
Environmental Protection Agency
(subgrants average
Phone: (202) 260-8076
$10,000)
Email: pai.john@epa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
FMC Corporation Bird and Habitat
FMC Corporation and The National
Peter Stangel
Conservation Fund
Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Varies
Phone: (404) 769-7099
Email: stangel@nfwf.org
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
United States Forest Service,
Brad Pruitt
Forest Legacy Program — Washington
Washington Department of Natural
Varies
Phone: (360) 902-1102
Resources
Email: brad.pruitt@wadnr.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
United States Fish and Wildlife
Sally Valdes
Habitat Conservation
Service Coastal Program
Varies
Phone: 703-358-2201
Email: sally.valdes@fws.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Hugh and Jane Ferguson Foundation
(family foundation which supports
Therese Ogle
Hugh and Jane Ferguson Foundation
nonprofit organizations in the Pacific
$2 000-$7,500
Phone: (206) 781-3472
Northwest and Alaska. Dedicated to
the preservation and restoration of
Email: OgleFounds@aol.com
nature, including wildlife and their
required habitats)
36
Table 3: Funding Opportunities
Allocating Entity
Grant Size
Washington State Department of Fish
Up to $5,000 for
Ginna Correa or Jeff Skriletz
Landowner Incentive Program
and Wildlife, Lands Division
small grants; others
Phone: (360) 902-2478 or (360) 902-8313
up to $50,000
Website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/lands/lip
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Matching Aid to Restore States Habitat
Ducks Unlimited
(MARSH)
Ducks Unlimited
Varies
Phone: (916) 852-2000
Email: conserv@ducks.org
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
National Fish and Wildlife
Peter Stangel
Migratory Bird Conservancy
$10,000-$60,000
Phone: (404) 769-7099
Foundation
Email: stangel@nfwforg
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Bureau of Land Management, Forest
Caroline Cremer
Native Plant Conservation Initiative
Service, Fish and Wildlife Service,
$10,000-$50,000
Phone: (202) 857-0166
and National Park Service
Email: caroline.cremer@nfwf.org
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant (319)
Environmental Protection Agency,
Aleciea Tilley
Program
Washington State Department of
Varies
Email: ati11461@ecy.wa.gov
Ecology
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
$100,000-$1
North American Wetlands Conservation Act
United States Fish & Wildlife
million (small
Bettina Sparrowe
Grants Program
Service
grants capped at
Phone: (703) 358-1784
$50,000)
Email: r9arw nawwo@fws.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Anna Weinstein
Pacific Grassroots Salmon Initiative
National Fish & Wildlife Foundation
$5,0004100,000
Phone: (415) 778-0999
Email: weinstein@nfwf.org
37
Table 3: Funding Opportunities
Allocating Entity
Grant Size
Dave Nelson
Planning/Technical Assistance Program
Bureau of Reclamation
Varies
Phone: (503) 872-2801
Email: drnelson@pn.usbr.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
United States Fish & Wildlife
Mary Mahaffy
Puget Sound Program
Service
Varies
Phone: (360) 753-7763
Email: mary_mahaffy@fws.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Washington State Department of
Technical
Richard Gersib
Puget Sound Wetland Restoration Program
Ecology
assistance
Phone: (360) 407-7259
Email: rger461@ecy.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Washington State Department of Fish
Kristi Lynett
Regional Fisheries Enhancement Groups
and Wildlife
$10,000440,000
Phone: (360) 902-2237
Email: lynetksl@dfw.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Interagency Committee for Outdoor
Rollie Geppert
Salmon Recovery Funding Board
Recreation
Varies
Phone: (360) 902-2636
Email: Salmon@iac.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Section 204: Environmental Restoration
United States Army Corps of
75% of total
Mona Thomasonproject
Projects in Connection with Dredging
Engineers
Phone: (206) 764-3600
modification costs
Email: mona.j.thomason@usace.army.mil
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
65% of total
Martin Hudson
Section 206: Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration
United States Army Corps of
project
Phone: (503) 808-4703
Program
Engineers
implementation
Email: martin.hudson@usace.army.mil
cost
Table 3: Funding Opportunities
Allocating Entity
Grant Size
Transportation Environmental Research
Michael Koontz
Program (TERP)
Federal Highway Administration
$20,000-$50,000
Phone: 410-962-4586
Email: michael.koontz@fhwa.dot.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st
Washington Department of
Shari Schaftlein
Century (TEA-21)
Transportation
Varies
Phone: (360) 705-7446
Email: sschaft@wsdot.wa.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Washington State Ecosystems Conservation
United States Fish & Wildlife
$500-$26,000
n
Phone: ( Rich Carlson
753-5829
Program
Service
Email: rich—Carlson@fws.gov
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Wetland Protection, Restoration, and
Christina Miller
Stewardship Discretionary Funding
Environmental Protection Agency
$5,000-$20,000
Phone: (206) 553-6512
Email: miller.christina@epa.gov
39
Restoration Glossary
Abiotic: Nonliving, such as environmental factors including light, temperature, and
atmospheric gases.
Biotic: Produced or caused by living organisms or having to do with life or living
organisms.
Disturbance: Any relatively discrete event in time and space that disrupts or alters some
portion of an ecosystem. Disturbances are important factors that affect the character and
state of ecosystems. Examples from nearshore ecosystems include:
Winter storms, which move large quantities of organic (e.g., logs) and
inorganic (e.g., sand) materials that can reshape beaches.
• Landslides, which deposit sand and gravel from bluffs onto beaches and into
nearshore marine waters.
• Shifts in ocean currents, which can result in changes in nutrient availability,
water temperature, primary production, and food web relationships.
Ecosystem: Community of organisms and their physical and chemical environment
interacting as an ecological unit.
Ecosystem process: Any interaction among physical, chemical and biological elements
of an ecosystem that involves a change in character or state of that system. In nearshore
ecosystems, some examples include the following:
• Changes in chemical composition of the water or sediment that occur as part
of nutrient uptake and transformation.
• Movement and mixing of fresh and salt water through an estuarine delta.
• Sediment transport along the shoreline.
Ecosystem recovery: Taking actions that allow an ecosystem to generate and maintain
processes that result in desirable ecosystem structure (e.g., habitats for valued species)
and functions (e.g., forage fish production).
Habitat: The physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a specific spatial unit or
geographic area of the environment occupied by specific biota (e.g., we refer to "Pacific
sand lance habitat" and "sand beach ecosystems"). To define habitat, it is necessary to
know the spatial extent in the ecosystem of a specific habitat for the plant or animal
considered, and the attributes of the habitat that support growth and survival of that
organism.
.O
Nearshore: The estuarine/delta, marine shoreline and areas of shallow water from the top
of the coastal bank or bluffs to the water at a depth of about 30 meters below Mean
Lower Low Water. (This is the average depth limit of light penetration.) This zone
incorporates those geological and ecological processes, such as sediment movement,
freshwater inputs, and subtidal light penetration, which are key to determining the
distribution and condition of aquatic habitats. By this definition, the nearshore extends
landward into the tidally influenced freshwater heads of estuaries and coastal streams.
41
Resource Links and References
Battelle Memorial Institute, Reconnaissance Assessment of the State of the Nearshore
Ecosystem: Eastern Shore of Central Puget Sound, Including Vashon and Maury
Islands (WRIAs 8 and 9). Seattle: King County DNR,
http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/watersheds/Puget/nearshore/sonr.htm 2001.
CHZM Hill 2004. SR 104 Edmonds Crossing; Final Environmental Impact Statement and
Final Section 4(f) Evaluation. Prepared for Federal Highway Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation; Federal Transit Administration; Washington
State Department of Transportation; and City of Edmonds. Prepared by
CHZM Hill, Bellevue, Washington. November 2004.
Diefenderfer, H.L., Ronald M. Thom and J.E. Adkins. For the Expert: Systematic
Approach to Coastal Ecosystem Restoration. Battelle Memorial Institute Pacific
Northwest Division: Richland: NOAA,
http://www.csc.noaa.gov/coastal/expert/systematic/systematic.htm, 2003.
Fresh, K., C. Simenstad, J. Brennan, M. Dethier, G. Gelfenbaum, F. Goetz, M. Logsdon,
D. Myers, T. Mumford, J. Newton, H. Shipman, C. Tanner. 2004. Guidance for
protection and restoration of the nearshore ecosystems of Puget Sound. Puget
Sound Nearshore Partnership Report No. 2004-02. Published by Washington Sea
Grant Program, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Available at
http://pugetsoundnearshore.org/.
Goetz, F., C. Tanner, C.S. Simenstad, K. Fresh, T. Mumford, and M. Logsdon, 2004.
Guiding restoration principles. Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership Report No.
2004-03. Published by Washington Sea Grant Program, University of
Washington, Seattle, Washington. Available at hM2://pugetsoundnearshore.org/.
Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2005. Conceptual Nearshore Marine, Estuarine,
and Wetland Mitigation Plan, Everett -to -Seattle Commuter Rail Project Third
Easement, King and Snohomish Counties, Washington. Prepared for Sound
Transit, Seattle, Washington. Prepared by Herrera Associates, Inc., Seattle,
Washington. August 2005. [not seen; information from Order Number 3306; 401
Water Quality Certification by Washington Department of Ecology.]
Johnson, G. E., R. M. Thom, A. H. Whiting, G. B. Sutherland, J. A.Southard, B. D.
Ebberts, and J. D. Wilcox. 2003. An ecosystem -based approach to habitat
restoration projects with emphasis onsalmonids in the Columbia River Estuary.
Final report prepared bythe Bonneville Power Administration, Columbia River
Estuary Study Taskforce, Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Portland District, Portland, Oregon. PNNL-14412. [not seen]
42
Pentec Environmental (Pentec) 2001. Edmonds Shoreline Habitat Assessment. Pentec
# 1213012. Prepared for City of Edmonds. October 31, 2001.
People for Puget Sound. Sound Stewardship Program. Seattle:
http://pugetsound.org/index/pubs.
Port Townsend. City of, 2005. Chapter 14: Shoreline Restoration. Draft 5.
21 December 2005. Part of City of Port Townsend Shoreline Master Program
Update.
Puget Sound Action Team. Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program. Seattle:
http://www.pugetsoundnearshore. org/material_activity.html#papers.
Puget Sound Action Team 2007. 2007-2009 Puget Sound Conservation & Recovery
Plan. January 2007. Olympia, Washington. http://www.psat.wa.gov/2007-
2009plan.
Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team 2001. 2000 Puget Sound Water Quality
Management Plan; Adopted December 14, 2000. Olympia, Washington.
http://www.psat.wa.gov/2000managementplan.
Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership 2003. Nearshore Ecosystems Conceptual Model.
Fact sheet available at http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org/techical
papers/conceptualmodel.pdf. [viewed 4 October 2006].
Puget Sound Partnership 2006. Sound Health, Sound Future; Protecting and Restoring
Puget Sound. December 2006.
http://www.pugetsoundpartnership.org/reports/final/final/Final wAPPx_lr.pdf.
Sea -Run Consulting, TetraTech, Inc., Reid Middleton, Inc., and Pentec 2006. City of
Edmonds; Shoreline Master Program Update; Draft Shoreline Inventory &
Characterization. SMA Grant Agreement No. 60600108. Prepared for City of
Edmonds. June 2006.
Thom, Ronald M., Gregory D. Williams and Amy B. Borde. Conceptual Models as a
Tool for Assessing, Restoring, and Managing Puget Sound Habitats and
Resources. Bainbridge Island: City of Bainbridge Island,
http://www.psat.wa. gov/Publications/03_proceedings/PAPERS/ORAL/9e_thom.p
df, 2003.
Van Cleve, F. B., C. Simenstad, F. Goetz, and T. Mumford. Application of Best
Available Science in Ecosystem Restoration: Lessons Learned from Large -Scale
Restoration Efforts in the USA. Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership Report No.
2004-01. Seattle: Washington Sea Grant Program, University of Washington,
2004.
43
Williams, Gregory D., and Ronald M. Thom. Marine and Estuarine Shoreline
Modification Issues. Sequim: Battelle Marine Sciences Laboratory,
http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/hab/ahg/mamrsrc.htm 2001.
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update
Cumulative Impacts Analysis
1. Introduction
The Washington State Shoreline Master Program Guidelines state that local Shoreline
Master Programs (SMPs) are required to "evaluate and consider" the cumulative impacts
of reasonably foreseeable future development on shoreline ecological functions and other
shoreline functions promoted by the Shoreline Management Act (SMA). The guidelines
further state that "to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and protection of other
shoreline functions and/or uses, master programs shall contain policies, programs, and
regulations that address adverse cumulative impacts and fairly allocate the burden of
addressing cumulative impacts among development opportunities."
Specifically, the guidelines state that the evaluation of cumulative impacts should
consider:
i. current circumstances affecting the shorelines and relevant natural processes;
ii. reasonably foreseeable future development and use of the shoreline; and
iii. beneficial effects of any established regulatory programs under other local, state,
and federal laws.
Additionally, the guidelines indicate that an appropriate cumulative impact analysis
(CIA) will also consider the effects of unregulated activities and development exempt
from permitting on shoreline ecological functions and other shoreline functions and uses.
Also, the guidelines indicate that particular attention should be paid to policies and
regulations concerned with the platting or subdividing of property, laying of utilities, and
mapping of streets that establish a pattern for future development.
Finally, the guidelines note that methods for determining reasonably foreseeable future
development may vary depending on local circumstances, including demographic and
economic characteristics as well as the nature and extent of shorelines.
2. Current Circumstances Affecting the Shorelines
and Relevant Natural Processes
The City of Edmonds (the City) Shoreline Inventory and Characterization describes in-
depth the current circumstances affecting the City's shorelines and relevant natural
processes. For planning purposes, that document divided up the City's shorelines into
four distinct reaches (Figure 2 — Shoreline Planning Segments & Planning reaches form
the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization is included with this document for ease of
use). The first three reaches are continuous and together cover the City's shoreline
situated along Puget Sound. The fourth reach consists of the City's shoreline along Lake
Ballinger. This section begins with a brief description of each of those four reaches and
reproduces the list of biological functions and features that have been impaired in each
reach as found in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization (section 8). Then, a
summary discussion regarding the ecological functions at risk is provided.
Reach Descriptions and Impaired Biological Functions and Features
Reach I
Reach 1 encompasses the section of the City's shoreline along Puget Sound that begins at
the City's northern limits (in the Lund's Gulch area) and extends south to Caspers Street.
This reach is approximately 19,351 feet in length, and therefore makes up approximately
64% of the City's shoreline jurisdiction. A defining feature of this reach is the pair of
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks that run parallel to the shoreline in
the upper portion of the beach. Because of the tracks, the entire shoreline in this reach is
armored with rock walls. Waterward of the tracks, the beach is generally narrow, steep,
and made up of coarse substrate. Landward of the tracks, the land generally slopes
upward before flattening out. Several creeks flow down these slopes before flowing into
Puget Sound via culverts. This reach has little riparian vegetation.
As mentioned, a primary use of the shoreline in Reach 1 is rail transportation. The other
principal land use in this reach is single-family housing, which is situated on the uplands
above the beach.
In the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization (section 8.1), the following biological
functions or features of this shoreline reach are listed as being impaired:
• Fish and wildlife accessibility between the marine nearshore and the terrestrial
backshore: blocked by the BNSF railroad bed and restricted to a few small
culverts
• Nutrient transport and cycling: reduced by clearing vegetation from the backshore
and bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore, and further
reduced by restricting the estuarine transitional area to small -diameter culverts
that impound creek flows and block detritus and woody debris from moving
between the ravine and the beach
• Estuarine and creek -mouth habitat area: significantly reduced, and habitat
function, significantly impaired
• Marine riparian vegetation: eliminated by railroad fill or cleared for right-of-way
maintenance and upland residential views
• Beach substrate composition and slope: coarsened and steepened by erosion and
lack of replenishment from upland or aquatic sources
• Longshore drift: altered by in -water structures (seawalls, bulkheads, culverts, and
a pier) that prevent sediment from naturally recruiting to the beach
For more detailed information on the current circumstances of Reach 1, see the Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization (sections 7.1-7.5).
Reach 2
Reach 2 consists of the section of the City's shoreline along Puget Sound to the south of
Caspers Street and to the north of Main Street. The length of this section of shoreline is
approximately 2,253 feet, and therefore comprises roughly 7% of the City's shoreline
jurisdiction. The BNSF tracks continue to be a defining feature in this reach. Because of
their presence, most of this reach is armored with rock walls. The slope landward of the
tracks is generally more moderate than in Reach 1. No streams are found in this reach.
Riparian vegetation is scant throughout the reach.
As in Reach 1, the major uses of this reach are rail transportation and single-family
housing. Another significant use of the shoreline in this reach is public recreation, due to
the presence of Brackett's Landing North (Edmonds Underwater Park).
In the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization (section 8.2), the following biological
functions or features of this shoreline reach are listed as being impaired:
• Fish and wildlife accessibility between the marine nearshore and the terrestrial
backshore: blocked by the BNSF railroad bed and urban development
• Upper intertidal and adjacent terrestrial habitat: degraded or lost due to urban
development
• Nutrient transport and cycling: reduced by clearing vegetation from the backshore
and bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore
• Marine riparian vegetation: eliminated by railroad fill or cleared for right-of-way
maintenance and upland residential views
• Longshore drift: altered by in -water structures (Washington State Ferries pier and
seawall, groin at Brackett's Landing North) that prevent sediment from naturally
recruiting to the beach
For more in-depth information on the current circumstances of Reach 2, see the Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization (sections 7.5-7.6).
Reach 3
Reach 3 extends south of Main Street to the City's southern limits (at Point Edwards). It
is approximately 4,716 feet in length, and therefore includes approximately 16% of the
City's shoreline jurisdiction. Major features in this reach include the Washington State
Ferries pier, the Port of Edmonds Marina, and the Unocal pier. The shoreline in this reach
is mostly armored. The transition from the shore to uplands is marked by little or no
bank. Some creeks and a major wetland (Edmonds Marsh) occur in this reach. Little
riparian vegetation is present.
Land uses in this reach are more varied than in Reaches 1 and 2. Land uses include parks,
transportation, commercial, and natural resource production.
al
In the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization (section 8.3), the following biological
functions or features of this shoreline reach are listed as being impaired:
• Fish and wildlife accessibility between the marine nearshore, Edmonds Marsh,
and the terrestrial backshore: blocked by the BNSF railroad bed, Edmonds
Marina, and commercial waterfront development, restricted to a paved corridor
and culvert between Edmonds Marsh and South Marina Park
• Nutrient transport and cycling: significantly reduced by clearing vegetation from
the backshore and bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore,
and further reduced by restricting the estuarine transitional area to a small -
diameter culvert and tide gate on Willow Creek that impounds creek flows and
blocks detritus and woody debris between the marsh and the beach
• Estuarine and creek -mouth habitat area: significantly altered and reduced, and
habitat function, significantly impaired
• Marine riparian vegetation: eliminated by port development, commercial
development, and railroad fill, and cleared for right-of-way maintenance and
upland residential/commercial views
• Beach substrate composition and slope: coarsened and steepened by erosion and
lack of replenishment from upland or aquatic sources
• Longshore drift: altered by in -water structures (seawalls, bulkheads, culverts, and
the former Unocal pier) that prevent sediment from naturally recruiting to the
beach
For more in-depth information on the current circumstances of Reach 3, see the Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization (sections 7.6-7.8).
Reach 4
Reach 4 consists of the City's shoreline along Lake Ballinger, which is located on the
western and southern sides of the lake. The length of this reach is around 3,947 feet, and
therefore constitutes approximately 13% of the City's shoreline jurisdiction.
Land use in Reach 4 consists of single-family housing. Nearly all the houses in this reach
have an accompanying dock or pier. Riparian vegetation consists almost entirely of lawns
and ornamental plantings.
In the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization (section 8.4), the following biological
functions or features of this shoreline reach are listed as being impaired:
• Hydrologic function of the lake outlet, which is currently managed as a
stormwater catchbasin control
5
• Hyporheic function, which has reached its capacity as a nutrient sink for nitrogen
and phosphorus
• Nutrient transport and cycling, significantly reduced by increasing sediment and
nutrient loading from watershed development, stormwater runoff, and former
septic/sewage inputs; replacing native wetland and riparian vegetation with
ornamental vegetation (e.g., grass) and adding bulkheads, docks, and piers to the
shoreline
• Lake inlet and outlet deltas, significantly altered or eliminated by control
structures
• Fish and wildlife accessibility between the lake and McAleer Creek, blocked by
the outlet control structure
• Fish and wildlife biological communities, significantly altered by habitat
alteration (i.e., conversion of a wetland into a lake) and introduction of non-native
species (e.g., catfish, yellow perch, and largemouth bass)
• Lake sediment, significantly altered by substantial sediment inputs from urban
development within the Hall Creek and Lake Ballinger drainage sub -basins
For more in-depth information on the current circumstances of Reach 4, see the Shoreline
Inventory and Characterization (section 7.9).
Summary Discussion — Ecological Functions at Risk
As discussed above, several functions and features of the City's shorelines are impaired.
This section briefly summarizes the at risk ecological functions of the City's shorelines.
Puget Sound shorelines (in reaches 1, 2, & 3)
• Sedimentation — The sedimentation processes of these shorelines are significantly
degraded. The presence of the railroad bed prevents upland sediment from
reaching the beach and resulting in its coarse substrate and steep slope. Also, in -
water structures prevent longshore drift sediment from recruiting to the beach.
• Habitat provision — This function of the shoreline is diminished due to a loss of
habitat related to construction of the railroad bed, vegetation clearing, and uplands
development. Moreover, access between the marine nearshore and the terrestrial
backshore is impaired due to the presence of the railroad bed, and for aquatic
organisms, the presence of small artificial connectors.
• Nutrient transport and cycling — This function is degraded due to the clearing of
backshore vegetation, bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and
backshore, and restricted estuarine transitional areas.
Con
• Woody debris production and distribution — Production is degraded due to
vegetation clearing and uplands development. Distribution is degraded due to the
bulkheading/filling of the upper intertidal zone and backshore, and the limited
estuarine transitional areas.
Edmonds Marsh (in reach 3)
• Habitat provision — This function of the Edmonds Marsh is diminished due to
prior wetland filling and creek re-channelization. The value of the remaining
habitat is diminished because of the reduced access resulting from the presence of
the railroad bed, Edmonds Marina, and commercial waterfront development in
between the marsh and the shoreline, as well as from the restriction of aquatic
access to a single artificial culvert.
• Water quality function — Altered due to the presence of tide gate, which causes
the marsh to be brackish in the winter and saline in the summer (when the tide
gate is opened).
• Nutrient transport and cycling — Reduced due to the restricted estuarine
transitional area between the marsh and Puget Sound.
• Woody debris production and distribution — Reduced due to the restricted
estuarine transitional area between the marsh and Puget Sound.
Lake Ballinger (reach 4)
• Nutrient transport and cycling — Significantly reduced by sediment and nutrient
loading, stormwater runoff, former wastewater inputs, vegetation alteration, and
the presence of artificial shoreline structures.
• Hydrological function — Significantly altered by the stormwater control system.
• Habitat provision — Significantly altered by the stormwater control system, which
has converted the former wetland into a lake, altered or eliminated inlet and outlet
deltas, and blocked fish passage between the lake and McAleer Creek. Habitat has
also been altered by the introduction of non-native species.
• Water quality function — Reduced by sediment, contaminant, and nutrient inputs.
3. Reasonably Forseeable Future Development and
Use of the Shoreline
In this section, the reasonably foreseeable future development and use in each of the four
reaches is described. Next, some additional remarks regarding the reasonably foreseeable
future development and use in the City are given. Then, the cumulative impacts that
might potentially result from actions related to the reasonably foreseeable development
and other shoreline alterations are presented in a tabular format. The table lists the
7
alterations with potential cumulative impacts, lists the ecological functions and processes
at risk, gives the shoreline reaches at risk, provides mitigating draft SMP policies and
regulations, and finally provides some possible non -regulatory mitigation measures. In
the final part of this section is a discussion of the modifications made to regulations as a
result of this CIA.
Reasonably Foreseeable Future Development and Use
Reach I
As mentioned in the previous section, land use in Reach 1 consists primarily of the BNSF
railway and the single-family housing landward of the tracks. Due to the failing condition
of the railroad armoring in many locations, it is likely that portions of it may be repaired
in the future.
Regarding the single-family housing in the uplands, the 2006 City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan designates the land in this area as Single Family —Resource. The
corresponding zoning is either Single Family, 12,000 square foot lots or Single Family,
20,000 square foot lots. While it is possible that a minimal number of the 190 or so
existing residential parcels in the shoreline jurisdiction might be further subdivided, the
comprehensive plan designation and zoning regulations would prevent any dramatic
increase in development intensity. It is also worth mentioning that BNSF ownership and
use of the railroad right -of way precludes the construction of residential docks in this area
and negates the need for these residences to construct their own bulkheads. Activities
related to vegetation (such as clearing) would be expected to continue on these residential
parcels.
Development in the far north of the City, in the Lund's Creek area, is prevented by the
Meadowdale Beach County Park. Although this park is currently zoned as Single Family,
20,000 square foot lots, this land is designated as Park in the City's comprehensive plan.
Waterward of the railroad tracks, a small section of land where the dilapidated
Laebugten's Wharf now stands is designated in the comprehensive plan as Mixed Use
Commercial and correspondingly zoned Commercial Waterfront. In the future, it is likely
that Laebugten's Wharf will be removed. However, it is unlikely that any new structures
would be permitted at this site. Additionally, waterward of the railroad tracks several
parcels have been platted. However, these parcels are non -buildable.
Reach 2
As in Reach 1, the BNSF railway is a major feature of this reach. To accommodate the
future expansion of commuter trains operated by Sound Transit, BNSF plans to construct
a second railroad track in the parts of this reach that feature just one track. Also, due to
the failing condition of the railroad armoring in a few locations, it is possible that
portions of it may be repaired.
The bulk of the developable parcels in Reach 2 are designated as Single Family —Urban
1 in the comprehensive plan. These parcels are correspondingly zoned Single Family,
N.
6,000 square foot lots. These lots are virtually built out. Development activity would
therefore consist primarily of structure remodel or replacement. As was the case with the
single-family residences in reach 1, BNSF ownership and use of the railroad right -of way
precludes the construction of residential docks in this area and negates the need for these
residences to construct their own bulkheads. Activities related to vegetation (such as
clearing) would be expected to continue on these residential parcels.
A small number of parcels in Reach 2 are designated by the comprehensive plan as
Downtown Mixed Commercial and Downtown Residence —Office and zoned Downtown
Mixed Commercial and OfficeResidential, respectively. There parcels are already are
for the most part already intensely developed and future development will largely be
restricted to structure remodel or replacement.
Waterward of the railroad, the area around Brackett's Landing North is designated by the
comprehensive plan as Park/Open Space and zoned Public Use. Thus, development in
this area is precluded. And while a small portion of the shoreline waterward of the tracks
is platted and zoned Waterfront Single Family, 12,000 square foot lots, this is not a
development concern because the land is non -buildable.
Reach 3
Reach 3 comprehensive plan designations include Park/Open Space, Shoreline
Commercial, Master Plan Development, and Multi Family —High Density. These areas
are correspondingly zoned Public Use, Open Space, Commercial Waterfront, Master Plan
Hillside Mixed Use, and Multi Family, 2,400 square feet of lot area per unit.
This reach will likely see intense development and redevelopment activity in the near
future. One of the major sources of this development activity will be the Edmonds
Crossing project. This project is an effort to provide a long-term solution to current
operation and safety conflicts in the downtown area for ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and
pedestrian transportation modes. Part of this effort is the proposed move of the existing
ferry terminal to a location further south and its conversion into a multimodal
transportation complex. State Route 104 would be rerouted to serve the new complex.
Several other development actions may occur in this reach as well. As was the case in
Reach 2, BNSF is planning to install a second railroad track in areas where only one track
currently exists. Also, the Port of Edmonds is considering several projects involving the
construction, renovation, and removal of buildings and facilities. Such development
projects are likely to in turn spur other new development projects in the vicinity.
Reach 4
As already mentioned, land use in Reach 4 consists of single-family housing and
associated infrastructure. The City's comprehensive plan designates the 49 or so parcels
in this reach as Single Family —Resource. All these parcels are correspondingly zoned
Waterfront Single Family, 12,000 square foot lots. These parcels are virtually built out.
Development activity in this reach would be limited to the remodel or replacement of
I
existing houses and ancillary structures (such as docks). Activities related to vegetation
(such as clearing) would be expected to continue on these residential parcels.
Additional Remarks on Reasonably Foreseeable Future Development and Use
On activities exempt from shoreline permits
Some of the reasonably foreseeable development activity in the City would be exempt
from shoreline permits. This is because the SMA exempts from shoreline permitting
several development actions including: single-family residences, normal protective
bulkheads of single-family residences, normal maintenance and repair of existing
structures, salt water docks worth less than $2,500, fresh water docks worth less than
$10,000, and emergency construction.
However, because of a variety of constraints, not much development of entirely new
structures exempt from shoreline permits is expected. The most significant constraint is
the BNSF railway, which precludes many of the parcels along the Puget Sound shoreline
from developing docks or bulkheads.
Therefore, it is likely that most of the exempt development activity would be limited to
work related to the repair or replacement of existing structures. However, development
activity related to existing structures is not expected to produce adverse cumulative
impacts due to the beneficial effects of other regulatory programs (see section 4), such as
the critical areas code.
As an additional note on exempt shoreline development activities, of growing concern in
the Puget Sound area is the increased intensity of use of residential lots (through the
remodel and replacement of existing residences). However, in the City of Edmonds, such
increased intensity of use is not currently foreseeable. This is because development
standards in the shoreline area have not recently been amended. For example, maximum
lot coverage (an important determinant of impervious surface area) remains unchanged at
35%. Moreover, at least several of the houses in the shoreline jurisdiction are located in
portions of parcels outside of the shoreline jurisdiction.
In sum, exempt shoreline development is expected to be minimal, and whatever activity
might occur will be subject to other regulations. Therefore, development activities
exempt from shoreline permits are not expected to result in a net loss of shoreline
ecological function.
On the establishment of future development patterns
As noted in the beginning of this document, the Washington State SMP Guidelines
indicate that particular attention should be paid to policies and regulations concerned with
the platting or subdividing of property, laying of utilities, and mapping of streets that
establish a pattern for future development. Of these factors, as discussed above, the
subdivision of property will likely be the only factor contributing to the future
development pattern in the shoreline area. However, any subdivision activity is expected
10
to be minimal, and therefore should not result any development pattern markedly
different from the existing pattern.
11
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Encourage the use
Placement/Replacement of
Wave action
shorelines
Shoreline use element:
of low impact
shoreline armoring
Functions:
(reaches 1, 2,
24.20.050.C.15 The rehabilitation of "natural
development
Sediment erosion,
& 3)
systems" (e.g. the improvement in water
techniques.
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
deposition, and
quality, removal of beach obstructions, etc.)
Loss of beach areas,
transport; turn over
Lake
should be encouraged when opportune.
impoundment of sediment,
of thermal
Ballinger
modification of groundwater
stratification
(reach 4)
Conservation element:
regimes, lowering of beach
24.20.060.C.2 Development in shoreline areas
elevations, concentration and
Process:
should be managed so that any adverse
redirection of wave energy to
Large woody
impacts on aquatic and land plants and animals
adjacent areas, alteration of
debris production
are avoided or mitigated to result in no net loss
substrate, loss of riparian
and distribution
of ecological function.
vegetation
Functions:
Shoreline
Restoration element:
stabilization,
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
habitat provision,
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
water flow pattern
and habitat -forming processes.
complexity, food
production
General Modification Policies
24.50.010.A.1 Locate and design all new
Process:
development in a manner that prevents or
Sedimentation
minimizes the need for shoreline
Functions:
modifications.
Land formation,
provision of
24.50.010.A.2 Ensure that shoreline
nutrients and
modification, where permitted, are as
12
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
minerals
compatible as possible with natural shoreline
processes and character.
Process:
24.50.010.A.3 Regulate shoreline
Nutrient Transport
modifications to assure that modifications
and Cycling
individually and cumulatively do not result in
Functions:
a net loss of ecological functions. Mitigation
Provision of
may be required to meet the no net loss
nutrients, provision
standard.
of water quality
24.50.010.A.4 Give preference to those types
of shoreline modifications that have a less
impact on ecological functions and require
mitigation of identified impacts resulting from
shoreline modifications.
24.50.010.A.5 Incorporate all feasible
measures to protect ecological shoreline
functions and ecosystem -wide processes in the
placement and design of shoreline
modifications. To avoid and reduce ecological
impacts, the mitigation sequence in ECDC
24.40.020.E.3 shall be utilized.
Shoreline Stabilization Policies:
24.50.020.13.5 Consider the effect that
proposed shore defense works have on
ecosystem -wide processes (e.g. sand
movement) and functions (e.g. habitat).
13
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Make provisions to avoid and minimize
impacts where feasible. Mitigation must be
provided to achieve no net loss.
Regulations:
Flood Hazard Reduction:
24.40.030.B.4 New structural flood control
works shall be placed landward of associated
wetlands and designated habitat conservation
areas, except for works that improve
ecological functions, such as wetland
restoration.
General Shoreline Modification Regulations:
24.50.010.13.2 Structural shoreline
modification measures shall be permitted only
if nonstructural measures are unable to achieve
the same purpose.
Shoreline Stabilization Regulations:
24.50.020.C.2 Structural stabilization methods
shall be permitted when necessary for
reconfiguration of the shoreline for mitigation
or enhancement purposes.
24.50.020.C.3 New development that would
require shoreline stabilization which causes
14
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
significant negative impacts to adjacent or
down -current properties and shoreline areas
should not be allowed.
24.50.020.C.4 New development on steep
slopes or bluffs shall be set back sufficiently to
ensure that shoreline stabilization is unlikely to
be necessary during the normal, useful life of
the structure, as demonstrated by a
geotechnical analysis.
24.50.020.C.5.a — 5.d New structural
stabilization measures shall not be allowed
except when necessity is demonstrated in the
following manner.
5.a.ii The erosion control structure will not
result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
5.b.ii The erosion control structure will not
result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions.
5.d To protect projects for the restoration of
ecological functions or hazardous substance
remediation projects pursuant to chapter
70.105D RCW...
15
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Shoreline Stabilization Siting and Design
Regulations:
ECDC 24.50.020.D. La Limit the size of
stabilization measures to the minimum
necessary. Use measures designed to assure no
net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Soft
approaches shall be used unless demonstrated
not to be sufficient to protect primary
structures, dwellings, and businesses.
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Encourage the use
Placement/Replacement of
Light transmittal
shorelines
Shoreline use element:
of low impact
overwater structures
Functions:
(reaches 1 &
development
Water temperature
3)
24.20.050.C.4 Overwater structures other than
techniques.
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
moderation, energy
source for
Lake
ferry terminal passenger shelters, docks, piers,
walkways, breakwaters and other similar
Changed levels of light,
shoreline energy regimes,
photosynthesis,
Ballinger
structures should be prohibited with the
substrate type and stability,
visibility
exception of minor appurtenant buildings,
and water quality can result in
Nearshore
buoys, divers resting floats, and art sculpture.
alterations in the presence,
Process:
and
Conservation element:
abundance, and diversity of
Wave action
freshwater
plant and animal species in
Functions:
aquatic
24.20.060.C.2 Development in shoreline areas
the nearshore area
Sediment erosion,
habitat
should be managed so that any adverse
deposition, and
impacts on aquatic and land plants and animals
transport; turn over
are avoided or mitigated to result in no net loss
16
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
of thermal
of ecological function.
stratification
Restoration element:
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
and habitat -forming processes.
Moorage Piers, Docks and Floats Polices:
24.50.030.B.4... shall be designed and
constructed to avoid or to minimize and
mitigate the impacts to ecological functions,
critical areas resources such as eelgrass beds
and fish habitats and processes such as
currents and littoral drift.
Boating Facilities Policies:
24.60.020.B.4 Boating facilities shall be
located, designed, constructed and operated in
a manner that will minimize damage to
shoreline processes and functions. When
impacts cannot be avoided, impacts must be
mitigated to assure no net loss of ecological
function necessary to sustain shoreline
resources.
17
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Regulations:
Moorage Piers, Docks, and Floats
Regulations:
24.50.030.C. Lb Covered moorage is
prohibited.
24.50.030.C.3.a — 3.d Regulations to minimize
impacts or nearshore areas and avoid reduction
in ambient light level.
24.50.030.C.5 Prohibited substances.
Boating Facilities Regulations:
24.60.020.C. Lb Covered moorage is
prohibited
24.60.020.C.2 Marinas or launch ramps shall
not be permitted within the following marine
shoreline habitats because of their scarcity,
biological productivity and sensitivity unless
no alternative location is feasible, the project
would not result in a net loss of shoreline
ecological functions...
24.60.020.C.9 Prohibited substances.
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Public outreach
In
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Vegetation clearing
Large woody
shorelines
Shoreline use element:
and education on
debris production
(reaches 1, 2,
24.20.050.C.15 The rehabilitation of "natural
shorelines.
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
and distribution
& 3)
systems" (e.g. the improvement in water
Losses in production and
Functions:
quality, removal of beach obstructions, etc.)
Restore degraded
delivery of woody debris to
Shoreline
Lake
should be encouraged when opportune.
shoreline areas
shoreline, decreased amount
stabilization,
Ballinger
with native riparian
and quality of shoreline
habitat provision,
Views and Aesthetics element:
vegetation where
habitat, decreased water
water flow pattern
24.20.090.C.3 Public views from the shoreline
possible.
quality, altered water
complexity, food
upland areas should be enhanced and
temperatures, erosion, losses
production
preserved. Enhancement of views should not
of favorable microclimates
be construed to mean excessive removal of
Process:
vegetation which partially impairs views.
Light transmittal
Functions:
Conservation element:
Water temperature
24.20.060.C.2 Development in shoreline areas
moderation, energy
should be managed so that any adverse
source for
impacts on aquatic and land plants and animals
photosynthesis,
are avoided or mitigated to result in no net loss
visibility
of ecological function.
Process:
Restoration element:
Sedimentation
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
Functions:
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
Land formation,
and habitat -forming processes.
provision of
nutrients and
Shoreline Vegetation Conservation:
minerals
24.40.050.A.3 Where new developments
19
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
and/or uses are proposed, native shoreline
Process:
vegetation should be conserved to maintain
Nutrient Transport
shoreline ecological functions and/or
and Cycling
processes and mitigate the direct, indirect
Functions:
and/or cumulative impacts of shoreline
Provision of
development...
nutrients, provision
of water quality
Regulations:
Shoreline Vegetation Conservation
Regulations:
24.40.050.B.1.d Alteration of native shoreline
vegetation only allowed when Restoration
activities conducted in accordance with an
approved plan designed to improve ecological
functions and values.
24.40.050.13.2 The removal or disturbance of
existing vegetation and the alteration of
topography shall be limited to the minimum
necessary to accommodate approved
shoreline development.
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Encourage the use
Increased impervious surface
Hydrologic cycle
shorelines
Circulation element:
of low impact
area
(reaches 1, 2,
development
& 3)
24.20.040.C.2 Where new streets are needed to
techniques.
20
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
Functions:
Water, nutrient,
Lake
serve uses in the shoreline area, these streets
should be the minimum size necessary to
Low dissolved oxygen in
water bodies; increased
pathogen, sediment
Ballinger
provide safe and efficient vehicular,
contaminants, nutrients, and
transport, and
(reach 4)
pedestrian, and bicycle access, including
toxics in water; scouring of
water quality
access for emergency vehicles, to the
land from increased runoff
Edmonds
properties to be served.
volume, increased erosion
Process:
Marsh
Conservation element:
Tidal action
Functions:
24.20.060.C.2 Development in shoreline areas
Salinity, water
should be managed so that any adverse
flow patterns,
impacts on aquatic and land plants and animals
water volume
are avoided or mitigated to result in no net loss
of ecological function.
Restoration element:
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
and habitat -forming processes.
Restoration element:
24.20.110.C.8 Manage and treat stormwater to
improve water quality, decrease peak flow
events, and increase implementation of low
impact development (LID) practices.
Transportation and Parking Policies:
24.60.080.B.4. Avoid unnecessary duplication
21
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
or roads by making use of existing roads
where practicable.
Utilities:
24.60.090.13 2. New public or private utilities
should be located inland from the land/water
interface, preferably out of the shoreline
jurisdiction, unless this location is reasonably
necessary for the efficient operation of the
utility facility or service.
24.60.090.B.6. Utilities should be located in
existing rights -of -way and corridors whenever
feasible.
24.60.090.B.7. Utilities serving new
development should be located underground,
wherever feasible.
Regulations:
Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint
pollution regulations:
24.40.060.B.4 New development is
encouraged to employ Low Impact
Development principles and practices such as
setbacks, retaining land cover, and reducing
impervious areas, and use special caution to
avoid infiltration of stormwater in shoreline
22
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
areas along marine bluffs
Transportation and Parking Regulations:
24.60.080.C.1 Transportation and parking
facilities shall be planned, located, and
designed so that routes will have the least
possible adverse effect on unique or fragile
shoreline features, will not result in a net loss
of shoreline ecological functions or adversely
impact existing or planned water -dependent
uses.
24.60.080.C.8 Parking layouts must be
designed efficiently to use the minimum
amount of space necessary to provide the
required parking and safe and reasonable
access...
24.60.080.C.9. Transportation facilities shall
be constructed of materials that will preclude
or minimize adverse affects on water quality or
aquatic plants and animals over the long
term... Elements within or over water shall be
constructed of materials approved by
applicable state agencies for use in water for
both submerged portions and other
components to avoid discharge of pollutants
from splash, rain or runoff. No part of a
23
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
transportation facility that may come in
contact with the water may be treated with or
consist, in whole or in part, of creosote, oil
based paints, toxic chemicals or other
substances that would be harmful to the
aquatic environment, unless specifically
permitted and authorized by appropriate state
and federal regulatory agencies.
Reereational Development — Shoreline Area
Regulations:
24.60.060.D.10.a Structures will not result in
more than ten percent (10%) building
coverage or 4,000 square feet, whichever is
greater and total impervious surface will not
exceed twenty percent (20%), or 10,000
square feet, whichever is greater.
Utilities Regulations:
24.60.090.C.2 Except where infeasible, all
utility lines, pipes, conduits, meters, vaults
and similar infrastructures and
appurtenances must be placed underground
consistent with the standards of the serving
utility.
24.60.090.C.4 Utilities shall be located
24
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
adjacent to or within existing utility or
circulation easements or rights -of -way
whenever feasible. Joint use of rights -of -
way and corridors is encouraged.
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Public outreach
Increased vehicular traffic
Water quality
shorelines
Circulation element:
and education on
maintenance
(reaches 2 &
shorelines.
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
Functions:
Provision of water
3)
24.20.040.C.2 Whenever practicable, safe
pedestrian and bicycle movement on and off
Encourage vehicles
Decreased water quality,
decreased air quality
quality
Edmonds
roadways in the shoreline area should be
waiting at the ferry
Marsh
encouraged as a means of personal
terminal to turn off
Process:
transportation and recreation
engines.
Air quality
maintenance
24.20.040.C.4 Public waterborne
Functions:
transportation linked to public and private
Provision of air
forms of ground transportation should be
quality
encouraged to minimize auto usage, and to
eliminate barriers between public waterborne
transportation and ground transportation in
conformance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
24.20.040.C.7 Public transit systems should
be linked to the urban waterfront.
Transportation and Parking Policies:
24.60.080.13.2 Transportation system plans and
25
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
transportation projects within shorelines
should provide safe travel ways for non -
motorized traffic such as pedestrians and
bicyclists. Space for such uses should be
required along roads on shorelines, where
appropriate, and should be considered when
rights -of -way are being vacated.
Regulations:
Transportation and Parking Regulations:
24.60.080.C.1 Transportation and parking
facilities shall be planned, located, and
designed so that routes will have the least
possible adverse effect on unique or fragile
shoreline features, will not result in a net loss
of shoreline ecological functions or adversely
impact existing or planned water -dependent
uses.
24.60.080.C.5 Road routes shall make
provisions for pedestrian, bicycle, and other
non -motorized modes of travel whenever
feasible.
26
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Dredging
Sedimentation
shorelines
Restoration element:
Functions:
(reaches 1, 2,
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
Land formation,
provision of
& 3)
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
Habitat disruption, increased
water turbidity, altered
nutrients and
Lake
and habitat -forming processes.
hydrology
minerals
Ballinger
Aquatic Environment:
(reach 4)
Process: Marine
24.30.030.D.11 Dredging and dredge material
and freshwater
disposal should be limited to the minimum
habitat
amount necessary. Dredging operations should
Functions: Water
minimize impacts to other shoreline uses and
quality
functions.
Dredging and dredge material policies:
24.50.060.B.1 Site and design new
development to avoid or, if that is not
possible, to minimize the need for new and
maintenance dredging.
24.50.060.B.2 Dredging waterward of the
ordinary high water mark for the primary
purpose of obtaining fill material shall not be
allowed, except when the material is
necessary for the restoration of ecological
functions.
24.50.060.B.4 Plan and conduct dredge and
27
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
dredge disposal operations in a manner that
avoids or minimizes interference with
navigation and significant ecological
impacts. Impacts which cannot be avoided
should be mitigated in a manner that assures
no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
24.50.060.13.5 Minor dredging for fill
materials as part of ecological restoration or
enhancement, beach nourishment, public
access or public recreation should be
permitted if consistent with this Program.
Regulations:
Dredging and dredge material regulations:
24.50.060.C. La — l.g Regulations for when
dredging may be permitted, including;
l.f. Restoration or enhancement of shoreline
ecological functions and processes benefiting
water quality and/or fish and wildlife habitat.
1.g Dredging waterward of the ordinary high
water mark for the primary purpose of
obtaining fill material shall not be allowed,
except when the material is necessary for the
NM
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
restoration of ecological functions. When
allowed, the site where the fill is to be placed
must be located waterward of the ordinary
high water mark. The project must be either
associated with a MRCA or CERCLA habitat
restoration project or, if approved through a
shoreline conditional use permit, any other
significant habitat enhancement project.
23.50.060.C.2 The existing physical alignment
and ecological function and processes shall be
maintained, except to improve hydraulic
function, water quality, fish or wildlife habitat,
or fish passage.
23.50.060.C.3 New development shall be sited
and designed avoid or, if that is not possible,
to minimize the need for new and/or
maintenance dredging.
23.50.060.5.a — 5.h ...when permitted
dredging shall
5.b Include all feasible mitigating measures
to protect habitats and to minimize adverse
impacts such as turbidity, release of
nutrients, heavy metals, sulfides, organic
materials, or toxic substances, depletion of
oxygen, disruption of food chains, loss of
29
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
benthic productivity, and disturbance of fish
runs and important localized biological
communities.
5.c Be scheduled so as to not materially
interfere with the migratory movements of
anadromous fish.
5.e. Not interfere with geohydraulic processes.
51 Be found, through analysis by qualified
professional, to be nonpolluting or shall have
no significant negative pollution impact.
5.h Not result in erosion of the shoreline or
undermine the stability of neighboring
properties.
24.50.060.E.12 — Natural Environment:
Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is
permits as an essential element of an approved
shore restoration or enhancement project
subject to the policies and regulations of the
Program.
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Filling
Sedimentation
shorelines
Restoration element:
Functions:
(reaches 1, 2,
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
Land formation,
& 3)
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
30
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Reduced sediment storage,
provision of
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
decreased water quality,
nutrients and
Lake
and habitat -forming processes.
habitat disruption, altered
minerals
Ballinger
24.20.110.C.3 Remove intertidal fill; restore
hydrology
(reach 4)
beach deposits and processes and ecological
Process: Marine
functions.
nearshore and
Edmonds
freshwater habitat
Marsh
Functions: Water
Shell Creek
Aquatic Environment:
quality
Wetland
24.30.030.D.12 Filling should be avoided if
practicable and limited to the minimum
amount necessary. Filling operations should
minimize impacts to other shoreline uses and
functions.
Shoreline stabilization:
24.50.020.B.3.c Structural stabilization will
not be permitted for the indirect purpose of
creating land by filling.
Landfill:
24.50.040.B.1 Landfill should only be
permitted to the minimum extent necessary to
accommodate an approved shoreline use or
development and with assurance of no net loss
of shoreline ecological functions and
processes. Enhancement and voluntary
31
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
restoration of landforms and habitat are
encouraged.
24.50.040.B.2 Allow landfills waterward of
the ordinary high water mark, in those limited
circumstances where permitted, only when
necessary to facilitate water -dependent uses or
ecological restoration projects that are
consistent with this program and the City of
Edmonds Comprehensive Plans. Where
feasible, public access to the shoreline and the
water should be incorporated into the design.
Regulations:
Landfill Regulations:
24.50.040.C.1.a —1.f Landfill water ward of
the ordinary high water mark may be
permitted as a conditional use in limited
instances for the following purposes only,
with due consideration given to specific site
conditions, and only in conjunction with
approved shoreline use and development
activities that are consistent with this
program:
Lc Cleanup and disposal of contaminated
sediments as part of an interagency
32
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
environmental clean-up plan.
Lf Mitigation action, environmental
restoration, beach nourishment or
enhancement projects.
24.50.040.C.2.a — 2.f Landfills shall be
permitted only where it is demonstrated that:
2.a The project has been located, designed,
and constructed in a manner that minimizes
impacts to ecological processes and
functions and where impacts cannot be
avoided, mitigation is provided to achieve no
net loss.
2.b The fill will not result in erosion of the
shoreline or undermine stability of
neighboring properties.
2.f Placement of landfill will be timed so as
to minimize damage to water quality and
aquatic life.
24.50.040.C.3 The applicant must stabilize
exposed fill areas with vegetation.
24.50.040.E.12 Natural Environment:
Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use
when necessary to protect or restore
33
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
shoreline ecological functions subject to the
policies and regulations of this program.
Alteration:
Process:
Puget Sound
Policies:
Land surface modification
Hydrologic cycle
shorelines
Restoration Element:
Functions:
(reaches 1, 2,
Potential Cumulative Impacts:
Water, nutrient,
pathogen, and
& 3)
24.20.110.C.1 Protect and/or restore
freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat
Reduced sediment storage,
decreased water quality,
sediment transport
Lake
and habitat -forming processes.
altered hydrology
Ballinger
Natural Environment:
Process:
(reach 4)
Sedimentation
24.30.040.D.4 New development or significant
Functions:
Edmonds
vegetation removal that would reduce the
Land formation,
Marsh
capability of vegetation to perform normal
provision of
ecological functions should not be allowed.
nutrients and
Shell Creek
Subdivision of property in a configuration that
minerals
wetlands
would, to achieve its intended purpose, require
significant vegetation removal or shoreline
Process: Upland
modification that adversely impacts ecological
shore habitat
functions should not be allowed.
Functions: water
Urban Conservancy Environment:
quality
24.30.050.D.5 New development should be
designed and located to preclude the need for
shoreline armoring, vegetation removal, flood
control, and other shoreline modifications.
34
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Shoreline Residential:
24.30.060.D.3. Structurally engineered
shoreline modifications and stabilization
should be prohibited except in cases of
emergency as defined.
General Modification Policies:
24.50.010.A.1 Locate and design all new
development in a manner that prevents or
minimizes the need for shoreline
modifications.
24.50.010.A.2 Ensure that shoreline
modification, where permitted, are as
compatible as possible with natural shoreline
processes and character.
24.50.010.A.3 Regulate shoreline
modifications to assure that modifications
individually and cumulatively do not result in
a net loss of ecological functions. Mitigation
may be required to meet the no net loss
standard.
24.50.010.A.4 Give preference to those types
of shoreline modifications that have a less
impact on ecological functions and require
mitigation of identified impacts resulting from
35
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
shoreline modifications.
24.50.010.A.5 Incorporate all feasible
measures to protect ecological shoreline
functions and ecosystem -wide processes in the
placement and design of shoreline
modifications. To avoid and reduce ecological
impacts, the mitigation sequence in ECDC
24.40.020.E.3 shall be utilized.
Regulations:
Critical Areas:
24.40.020.J Additional authority. In addition
to any other authority the city may have, the
city is hereby authorized to condition or deny a
proposed use, modification or activity or to
require site redesign because of hazards
associated with the use, modification or
activity on or near an environmentally
sensitive and/or critical area, and/or the effect
of the proposal on the environmentally
sensitive area and/or critical area.
Shoreline Vegetation Conservation:
24.40.050.B. La —1.d Alteration of native
shoreline vegetation shall only be allowed as
set forth below:
36
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
Lb Removal of noxious weeds as listed by the
state in WAC 16-750, provided such activity
shall be conducted in a manner consistent with
best management practices and native
vegetation is promptly reestablish in the
disturbed area.
1.c Modification of vegetation in association
with a legal, nonconforming use provided that
said modification is conducted in a manner
consistent with this Master Program and
results in no net loss to ecological functions or
critical fish and wildlife conservation areas.
l.d Restoration activities conducted in
accordance with an approved plan designed to
improve ecological functions and values.
24.40.050.13.2 The removal or disturbance of
existing vegetation and the alteration of
topography shall be limited to the minimum
necessary to accommodate approved shoreline
development.
General Shoreline Modification Regulations:
24.50.010.B.1 Shoreline modification
activities that do not support a permitted
shoreline use are considered "speculative"
and are prohibited by this Master Program,
37
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS TABLE
Shoreline Alterations with
Ecological
Shoreline
Mitigating Draft SMP Policies and
Possible Non -
Potential Cumulative
Processes and
Resources at
Regulations (selected regulation excerpts
Regulatory
Impacts
Associated
Risk
included)
Mitigation
Functions at Risk
Measures
unless it can be demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the Shoreline Administrator
that such activities are in the public interest
and necessary and for the maintenance of
shoreline environmental resource values.
24.50.010.13.3 Shoreline modification
activities, with the exception of restoration
or enhancement efforts, are prohibited in
wetlands, and undeveloped spits, hooks,
bars, barrier beaches, or similar accretion
terminals or accretion shore forms.
24.60.090.C.10 Utility developments shall be
located and designed so as to avoid, to the
extent practicable, the need for any structural
or artificial shoreline modification works for
the life of the project.
Modifications to Regulations as a Result of the Cumulative Impacts Analysis
The policies and regulations evaluated in this draft of the cumulative impact analysis
were developed to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and protection of other
shoreline functions and/or uses and these regulations and policies have been iteratively
reviewed by the Department of Ecology for consistency with this requirement. As a
result of this review process, no modifications to the regulations were necessitated as a
result of this cumulative impacts analysis.
4. Beneficial Effects of Any Established Regulatory
Programs Under Other Local, State, and Federal
Laws
Several other established regulatory programs (besides the SMP) yield beneficial effects
on the City's shorelines. Some regulatory programs with beneficial effects are briefly
described below. For more information on the shoreline regulatory framework, refer to
the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization (section 2).
Local
City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan
The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan provides the overall strategy for the physical
layout of the City. One of its purposes is "to anticipate and influence the orderly and
coordinated development of land and building use of the City and its environs and
conserve and restore natural beauty and other natural resources."
City of Edmonds Community Development Code
The City of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Titles 16 and 17 contain
the zoning ordinance for the City. The zoning designations are consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
The ECDC also contains the environmentally critical areas code (Title 23) for the City.
The purpose of this code is to "designate and classify ecologically sensitive and
hazardous areas and to protect these areas and their functions and values, while also
allowing for reasonable use of private property." The code covers wetlands, critical
aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish
and wildlife habitat conservation areas. The code yields beneficial effects on the City's
shorelines because its provisions extend to the critical areas which exist in or are in the
vicinity of the City's shoreline jurisdiction. The code attempts to achieve its purpose by
requiring that "any action taken pursuant to this title shall result in equivalent or greater
functions and values of the critical areas associated with the proposed action, as
determined by the best available science." Mitigation is only allowed when applicants
first demonstrate an inability to avoid or reduce impacts.
State
Shoreline Management Act
The goal of the SMA (RCW 90.58) is to "prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated
and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines." The SMA gives preference to uses
that protect water quality and the natural environment, water -dependent uses, and
preserve or enhance public access or recreational opportunities. Cities, including the City
of Edmonds, and counties prepare SMPs based on state guidelines, yet geared to fit the
specific circumstances of the individual jurisdictions. SMPs include both plans and
regulations for shoreline areas.
Growth Management Act
Many of Washington's cities and counties, including the City, plan according to the
Growth Management Act (GMA). While the goals and policies of the SMA are
themselves a goal of the GMA, other goals of the GMA are particularly relevant in
shoreline jurisdictions as well. Those goals include "Encourage economic development
consistent with resources and facilities throughout the state," "Maintain and enhance
natural resource -based industries," and "Protect the environment and enhance quality of
life." To meet the goals of the GMA, jurisdictions planning under the GMA are required
to designate and protect critical areas, as well as to use the best available science in
developing policies and regulations to protect their functions and values. Also, the land
use element of comprehensive plans is required to consider stormwater management and
discharges into waters of the state.
State Environmental Policy Act
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) aims to maintain and improve
environmental quality. SEPA does so by requiring procedures designed to insure that
governmental agencies give proper consideration of environmental matters when making
decisions on development actions. If initial governmental review of a proposed action
indicates that the action will have probable and significant adverse environmental
impacts, preparation of a detailed environmental impact statement is required. The review
of projects in the shoreline area triggering SEPA will afford the City's shorelines
additional environmental protection.
Water pollution control laws
The state also has water pollution control laws (RCW 90.48) with beneficial effects on
the City's shoreline. In enacting these laws, the legislature declared that it is "public
policy of the state of Washington to maintain the highest possible standards to insure the
purity of all waters of the state consistent with public health and public enjoyment
thereof, the propagation and protection of wild life, birds, game, fish and other aquatic
life, and the industrial development of the state, and to that end require the use of all
known available and reasonable methods by industries and others to prevent and control
the pollution of the waters of the state of Washington. Consistent with this policy, the
state of Washington will exercise its powers, as fully and as effectively as possible, to
retain and secure high quality for all waters of the state."
O
Federal
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act regulates discharges of pollutants into federally
designated waters, which include Lake Ballinger, Edmonds Marsh, and the marine waters
along the City's shoreline abutting Puget Sound.
Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act protects shoreline flora and fauna by requiring all projects
permitted, funded, or authorized by the federal government to protect threatened and
endangered species.
Magnuson -Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act
The Magnuson -Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act requires federally
funded, authorized, or permitted projects that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat
to be consulted upon by NOAA Fisheries.
-41 -
0 0.5 1
1 i I
Miles
r
r
r
r
r
q1
r
r
r
Sound ��dao ----
;� - °dim_
�� B
•' ,i co
I �
m
co
C,
•. A ° Q
`°
0,
Creek
lVorthstr
edh '
•� Puget Or
19 Th t SW
Hindley
C�spers St
._... coo Y :�—� 01
E.77
Q-
d
St• � .
in t) Q;
crPPk z _ 208Th St
' Sh
Point `' Q a6 -
4 l_ d
Edwards • r- r �C-9�_ nut t ¢'
W �? L Hal
st
204Th
■
II
�:
..'II
Legend
• Planning Segment Break OONi Major Road
00"Swo Planning Segment Street
Edmonds City Limits Railroad
-. DRAFT SMP Jurisdiction Stream
Shoreline Planning Reaches
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
OF EDP
O
City of Edmonds
Shoreline Master Program Update