2005/08/10 Council Agenda Packet

1'3 Exhibit 1 (2) Schedule: The project is planned for construction by the Port beginning in mid 2005 and is scheduled for completion in early 2006. (3) Costs/Funding Sources: A detailed cost estimate is being developed for the restoration and monitoring related to the rail barge facility. Initial estimates are in the range of$800,000 - $1,000,000. The project will be funded by Washington State and the Port of Everett. (4) Habitat Function Benchmark Gain: The project area analyzed is a part of assessment unit (AU) 7.10 in the Salmon Overlay which was scored at 13.0 points per acre.3 The rating of this AU was reduced by the presence of riprap over 50 percent of the shoreline, and extending below MSL over the majority of the area. The portion of AU 7.10 that represents the project area (called AU 7.10A), when evaluated independently of the larger AU, was rated somewhat higher (16.8 points per acre), due primarily to the lesser extent of riprap (not extending below MSL) and the presence of forage fish spawning habitat in AU 7.10A that was unknown at the time of the Salmon Overlay field work. The same AU 7.10A was also scored as it would appear following pier construction and beach restoration. In this condition, the adverse effect of the riprapped shoreline would be removed, raising the score, but a different stressor, overwater coverage would be added, reducing the score. The restoration would include additional forage fish spawning habitat (not reflected in the model sensitivity) and a buffer of riparian vegetation, assumed to be about 25 feet wide and extending over more than 25 percent of the shoreline. This positive indicator, and the lesser influence of overwater structures (added) compared to riprap (eliminated) results in the relative post construction function being a bit higher than that calculated for the present condition (19.2 points per acre vs. 16.8 points per acre). Under the Salmon Overlay assumptions regarding habitat area for use in calculating impacts and gains as change in functional score times change in area, the area of the project site would not be substantively reduced by the in-water fill that creates the 25 to 30-foot wide backshore. This is because a vegetated riparian zone of up to 25 feet in width is considered to be habitat, in that it provides ecological functions (shade, leaf litter, insect fall) to adjacent areas below ordinary high water. Components of the project could be revised during the permitting process. • 2.3 acres of degraded beach will be restored to natural profile. • 0.4 acres of the project area will be planted with riparian vegetation to create a new 15- to 30-foot wide riparian buffer between the railroad and the intertidal zone. 3 Forage fish spawning habitat was not known to be in this area when the SO was completed. Adding that into the model,AU 7.10 should have been scored at 14.0-IVA points per acre. 134 Section 3 General Goals, Objectives,Policies and Regulations Page 3-64