2005/08/10 Council Agenda Packet

Planning Commission Meeting July 12, 2005 Page 6 healthy future for the community, the Snohomish Watershed, and Puget Sound. Her organization looks forward to their eventual positive impacts, while continuing their collaborative efforts with other local groups to promote public access, appreciation, and stewardship for Everett's outstanding natural waterfront resources. Projects such as the Port Gardner Neighborhood Forgotten Creek Rehabilitation project, Estuary Angels Jetty Island invasive species removal work parties, and their recent collaborative Osprey Watch from the Legion Park area are just a few examples of the kinds of local projects that their coalition help support. Together with the proposed amendments that fine tune the City's program for shoreline protection and enhancement, they all offer encouraging prospects for the future of the shorelines. Hilary Franz, the attorney representing the Washington Environmental Council on the litigation before the Growth Board as well as the settlement negotiations, stated that they met on a weekly basis for 10 months and during the negotiations were fortunate that the City had a significant amount of scientific analysis already done. The parties took a landscape approach to the shoreline area protection by assessing the functions that were determined based on the SEWIP program. Offers were negotiated throughout the process and determined what would protect the existing wetland and stream functions to insure that there was no net loss which is policy under the SMA (Shoreline Management Act). The amendments address the impacts of development on existing shoreline ecological functions and they bring this SMP into compliance with the SMA requirements. The amendments primarily affect the Smith and North Spencer Island areas. The area is less developed than almost all the shorelines in the City of Everett and for that reason the Board came to the conclusion and determined that the urban mixed use designation was not appropriate. As part of the negotiations, the Washington Environmental Council and the ESC (Everett Shorelines Coalition) conceded to a mixed use designation and in order to make that concession, the parties were firm in that protections had to be in place to maintain ecological functions. The approach does allow for some flexibility through further functions assessment and for the flexibility of a reasonable use exception. Ms. Franz stated that in regards to restoration, the parties in negotiations established up front that the regulations can be used to encourage but not compel the restoration on private lands respecting the constitutional and legal limits on regulating private property which was one of the most important principals that was set up front during the negotiations and the result is that the restoration element recognizes and distinguishes between private and public property. The restoration element does not impose restoration burdens on the private property; it looks at it more on a voluntary basis. The restoration really looks at the public properties and those areas publicly owned that are identified under the Salmon Overlay. It takes the Salmon Overlay and integrates it into the SMP so that it is understood what the Salmon Overly was trying to achieve setting forth time frames and benchmarks that also have flexibility based on funding and based on timing. Ms. Franz stated that the marshlands have been identified as having significant tidal restoration potential for salmon habitat. The interim designation that has been set forth through the amendment recognizes the diverse property ownership and that was why they had gotten to a subarea planning process that would recognize the property ownership but also recognize that further scientific studies need to be done to determine what is going to be the best and most feasible way of allowing for restoration but also those areas that were not identified as key for restoration would still allow other opportunities for recreational uses.