2008/01/09 Council Agenda Packet

SGF Grant Agreement No. G0800312 2 between the Washington State Department of Ecology and the t4 City of Everett Project: Marshlands Sub-Area Plan 4.2: Prepare suitability analysis maps which show optimum locations for each land use, plus a composite map with all optimum land use locations combined. Lot lines will be displayed on all maps for reference. 4.3: Present results of suitability analysis to Project Stakeholder Group at one meeting. Deliverables: Due:April 30, 2008 • Meeting minutes • Modified criteria for suitability analysis in matrix format • Presentation maps of suitability analysis results showing optimal locations for each of the four land uses being analyzed. • Task 5: Alternative Plans The Recipient will prepare a draft for three alternative plans emphasizing a range of fish and wildlife habitat restoration supported by completed and on-going scientific work in the Snohomish River estuary. Draft alternative plans will be reviewed and presented to stakeholders and the public. Final alternative plans will be prepared incorporating stakeholder and public comment as appropriate. 5.1: Each alternative plan will include the following: • Address different types and levels of fish and wildlife habitat restoration and how other land uses, including parks and recreation, agriculture, and infrastructure corridors (such as roads, flood control, and utilities), are affected in each alternative. • Evaluate whether the stream and wetland buffer widths required by the City and County Critical Areas Ordinances and Shoreline Master Programs are adequate to protect fish and wildlife conservation areas as required by the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Master Program rules. • Using best professional judgment (versus hydraulic modeling) of(an) engineer with expertise in river hydraulics/hydrology, evaluate the feasibility and relative impacts and benefits of the alternatives, addressing flooding and infrastructure issues, river levee setbacks, the relocation of the existing flood gate and pump station, water levels. • Address anticipated water quality in restored habitats based on existing available data. • Prepare feasibility study level cost estimates for construction of each alternative, and estimate impact on farm land. • Conduct a preliminary evaluation of environmental consequences of proposed land uses for each alternative. For each alternative, prepare a matrix showing comparative increase in ecological functions and values; and a table showing comparative acreages by land use type. • Prepare a matrix of the various fish and wildlife habitat restoration alternatives including their costs, benefits, and environmental consequences. The matrix will explicitly describe the qualities and acreages planned for fish and wildlife habitat restoration, agriculture, recreation, and infrastructure. • Presentation maps of each alternative plan showing different types and levels of fish and wildlife habitat restoration; alternative maps will also show how recreation, agriculture, and infrastructure are potentially affected by each scenario Page 6 of 21