CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT - Langley, Washington...species that depend on Puget Sound. Situated...

Draft

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT City of Langley Shoreline Master Program Update

Prepared for September 2012 City of Langley

City of Langley Shoreline Master Program Update

Draft Cumulative Impacts Assessment i September 2012

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Watershed Context ....................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Reach Scale Assessment of Shoreline Functions .......................................................................... 4

2.3 Summary of Current Conditions of Shoreline Functions ............................................................ 13

3.0 REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND RISK OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............ 17

3.1 Shoreline Residential (Langley East and West)........................................................................... 17

3.2 Urban (Langley Central) .............................................................................................................. 21

4.0 PROTECTIVE PROVISIONS OF THE PROPOSED SMP ......................................................................... 23

4.1 Critical Areas Protection and Mitigation .................................................................................... 23

4.2 Marine Setbacks ......................................................................................................................... 23

4.3 Restoration Opportunities .......................................................................................................... 24

4.4 Beneficial Effects of Established Regulatory Programs under Other Local, State, and Federal Laws ............................................................................................................................................ 25

5.0 ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ........................................................................................ 29

5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 35

6.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 37

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Achieving No Net Loss of Ecological Functions .............................................................................. 1

Figure 2. Reach Sheet Langley West ............................................................................................................ 7

Figure 3. Reach Sheet Langley Central ......................................................................................................... 9

Figure 4. Reach Sheet Langley East ............................................................................................................ 11

Figure 5. Residential Parcel Analysis ........................................................................................................... 19

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary of Shoreline Functions, Programmatic Restoration Opportunities and Management Recomendations ......................................................................................................................................... 14

Table 2. Protective Measures and Restoration Opportunities ................................................................... 30


Draft Cumulative Impacts Assessment 1 September 2012

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The City of Langley is updating its Shoreline Master Program (SMP) consistent with state guidelines

(WAC Chapter 173‐26). The City’s SMP was last updated in 2001. Under the shoreline guidelines, local

jurisdictions are required to evaluate and consider cumulative impacts of reasonably foreseeable future

development in the shorelines of the state (WAC 173‐26‐186(8)(d)). This report assesses the potential

cumulative impacts of development in the shoreline that could result from development and shoreline

uses over time under the provisions contained in the Draft Shoreline Master Program (SMP) (2012).

The City’s shoreline jurisdiction includes the open water areas of the Sound. The landward portion of the

shoreline jurisdiction within the city consists of residential development at the toe and on top of steep

bluffs, Seawall Park, the harbor area and portions of the downtown commercial core. The total length of

shoreline within the municipal boundary of the City is 1.73 miles. The provisions of the Shoreline Master

Program apply to all shorelines of the state, all shorelines of statewide significance and shorelands as

defined in RCW 90.58.030.

The Draft Langley SMP (2012) provides standards and procedures to evaluate individual uses or

developments for their potential to impact shoreline resources on a case‐by‐case basis through the

permitting process. The purpose of evaluating cumulative impacts is to ensure that, when implemented

over time, the proposed SMP’s goals, policies and regulations will achieve no net loss of shoreline

ecological functions from current “baseline” conditions. Baseline conditions were established and

described in the Final Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (ICR) prepared by ESA (2011). The

following graphic provides a visual description of the role of the SMP update in achieving no net loss.

Figure 1. Achieving No Net Loss of Ecological Functions

Source: Washington State Department of Ecology


2 Draft Cumulative Impacts Assessment September 2012

The State’s guidelines 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. Evaluation of such cumulative impacts should consider:

1. Current circumstances affecting the shorelines and relevant natural processes;

2. Reasonably foreseeable future development and use of the shoreline; and

3. Beneficial effects of any established regulatory programs under other local, state, and federal laws.”1

This cumulative impacts assessment uses these three considerations as a framework for evaluating the

potential long‐term impacts on shoreline ecological functions and processes that may result from

development or activities under the proposed SMP over time. This assessment considers current

circumstances; reasonably foreseeable future development and use; potential effects of development

under the proposed SMP provisions; restoration planning and other federal, state, and local programs.

Based on this information, an assessment is made as to whether the ecological functions in the

shorelines are likely to remain at current levels, improve or be degraded. If conditions are likely to

remain or improve, a conclusion of no anticipated cumulative impacts can be drawn.

The basic conclusion derived from the analysis in this report is that development allowed by the

proposed update to the City of Langley’s SMP will not result in cumulative and adverse affects to

existing shoreline ecological functions. That conclusion was based on the following:

The City of Langley is the only incorporated and urbanized area along a process unit from Baby

Point to Sandy Point, which was classified as “Least Degraded.”

Langley is the only urban waterfront along east Whidbey. It represents a small portion of the

total waterfront on Whidbey Island and satisfies several of the Act’s primary policy objectives by

providing abundant public access and reserving shorelines for water‐dependant uses.

Shoreline functions in Langley East and West are altered due to a lack of shoreline vegetation at

the top of the coastal bluffs.

Very little new development potential exists within Langley East and West. Adopted CAO

regulations, mitigation requirements, and restoration opportunities would limit future

alterations to shoreline vegetation and may improve it in some areas.

Langley Central is highly altered dues to shoreline armoring, lack of marine riparian vegetation,

and overwater structures.

Planned development in Langley Central would provide for increased public access and

connectivity to the City’s shoreline. Updated public access requirements and mitigation

requirements would result in greater shoreline access and would not further degrade existing

functions.

1 WAC 173-26-286(8)(d)



2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

The Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (ESA, 2011) identifies existing conditions and

evaluates the ecological functions and processes in the city’s shoreline as defined above. The conditions

identified in the Inventory and Characterization Report are summarized in this chapter.

2.1 Watershed Context

Multiple factors influence nearshore character and conditions, such as nearshore morphology, species

composition and water quality. These factors are primarily large scale phenomena that occur over broad

areas much larger than the city. The variables include climate, geology, oceanographic conditions, wave

energy (exposure), topography/bathymetry, littoral drift (net shore‐drift), freshwater/fluvial systems

and shoreline development. These processes and characteristics are fundamental defining factors that

form local shoreline functions.

The City of Langley occupies approximately 1.73 miles of shoreline on the southeast coast of Whidbey

Island in Island County. Whidbey Island is the largest island in the Puget Sound. It is 45 miles long and

235 square miles with approximately 159 miles of marine shoreline. The City of Langley comprises

roughly 1 percent of that shoreline.

Climate and geology have combined to make Whidbey Island an important habitat element for the many

species that depend on Puget Sound. Situated at the north end of Puget Sound, Whidbey Island has a

relatively cool and moist climate that is conducive to development of dense coniferous forests on land,

and a rich and diverse sea life. Many beaches on the island are backed by bluffs that erode and feed the

beach below. These beaches are important habitat for birds, shellfish, and small fish which provide the

food supply for the larger fish species.

Humans have inhabited the islands in northern Puget Sound for 10,000 to 12,000 years. However,

European‐American settlers arriving in the 19th century significant changed the landscape of Whidbey

Island. All but a small fraction of the forest was cleared during the 19th and 20th centuries. Farming

depleted soils and introduced a number of invasive weeds that persist to this day (White, 1980).

In modern times, residential and commercial uses inhabit the shorelines along East Whidbey Island and

the City of Langley. Urban uses have resulted in further clearing of vegetation along the shorelines for

various types of residential, commercial, and recreational development. In many places on Whidbey

Island and in Langley, bulkheads have been constructed to protect development from coastal erosion.

As a result of these changes, together with other changes throughout the region, many of the fish,

marine mammal, bird, shellfish, and native plant populations of Whidbey Island have been substantially

reduced.

The specific characteristics of Langley’s shoreline are influenced by nearshore processes that extend

along the eastern side of Whidbey Island. This area typically consists of high bluffs with beach and

mudflats extending into Puget Sound. The bluffs, beaches, and mudflats are interrelated landforms

driven by tidal and wave energy. The riparian and intertidal landforms created at the toe of the bluffs



provide key aquatic habitats and other shoreline functions. Development along Langley’s shorelines has

directly modified portions of these landforms and also influenced the processes that drive the formation

and maintenance of shoreline functions.

The generation and movement of sediments in the nearshore are key to maintaining shoreline functions

in Langley. Bluffs west of the city limits as well as unarmored bluffs within the city contribute sediment

that is transported along the shore toward Sandy Point, southeast of the city. Some of the sediment is

diverted by the docks in Langley’s harbor area, where it accumulates along an accretion shoreform

shown in Map 8 of the ICR.

Sediments are also delivered to the city’s nearshore by the three small streams that flow through the

city. Saratoga, Brookhaven and Noble Creeks are small contributors of sediments. Although the area is

characterized by lower wave energy, enough sediment is deposited via the streams and drift to create

adequate substrate to support eel grass and forage fish habitat.

Shoreline development is another major factor affecting physical and biological processes that form

shoreline functions. East Whidbey Island includes the most densely populated shorelines on the island,

and more of the shoreline is armored. This is particularly true of Langley, which is one of only three

incorporated municipalities on Whidbey Island. Development has resulted in shoreline armoring, loss of

marine riparian vegetation, a lowered capacity to slow and filter runoff and additional overwater

coverage. All of these changes have resulted in generally adverse changes to nearshore habitats.

However, urban waterfronts represent a small portion of the total waterfront on Whidbey Island and

provide a multitude of community benefits including abundant public access to the shoreline. Further

enhancement of the urban waterfront is in the community’s interest.

A Puget Sound Nearshore Environmental Restoration Project (PSNERP) analysis completed in 2010 as

part of the Strategic Needs Assessment Report (SNAR) rated the level of degradation of geomorphic

processes in the Puget Sound. The analysis was an evaluation of the overall level of degradation (ranging

from “most degraded” to “least degraded”) for each the following nearshore processes: sediment input,

sediment transport, erosion/accretion, tidal flow, distributary channel formation, tidal channel

formation, detritus import/export (detritus is material produced by erosion), freshwater input, physical

disturbance, and solar incidence and then aggregated them into a single classification. The process unit

from roughly Baby Point to Sandy Point, which includes Langley, was classified as “Least Degraded.”

While local sediment transport processes in Langley, have been altered by shoreline armoring and

overwater structures, it is important to note that the city lies in a process unit that has some of the least

degraded geomorphic processes in the Puget Sound.

2.2 Reach Scale Assessment of Shoreline Functions

The purpose of the reach scale assessment in the ICR was to characterize conditions within the city’s

shorelines in greater detail and in the context of the larger landscape. The general intent was to identify

and asses the conditions of shoreline functions and establish a “baseline” of conditions that the

Shoreline Master Program and other City efforts would strive to maintain and/or improve overtime. The

reach scale assessment and analysis was presented in the ICR using reach‐scale summaries (or reach

sheets) for each of three shoreline reaches (Langley West, Central and East)



The reach sheets are used in this document as the summary of existing shoreline conditions. They

summarize and characterize the inventory data and analysis presented in ICR. Pertinent characteristics

are detailed and presented within each reach map (2009 aerial photography) and illustrative shoreline

photos. Reach inventory and characterization information is grouped into three broad categories: 1)

physical resources; 2) habitats and species; 3) shoreline use patterns.

In addition, key alterations and impairments and potential restoration opportunities were identified

within each reach. Key alterations and impairments were summarized from existing data sources.

Identified reach‐specific restoration opportunities were identified by PSNERP Puget Sound Restoration

Planning Activities as well as review of city documents and shoreline conditions.

[³

Sara

toga

Cre

ek

1st St

Saratoga Creek Ln

Bra

cken

woo

d A

ve

StreamsPiped Stream [d Boat RampParks/Publiclly Owned Land

Wetlands n| Marina [³ Marine Access

City Limits Existing Paths

Feeder BluffAccretion ShoreformModified

Shoreline Planning Area

REACH SUMMARYLangley West is located immediately west of downtown Langley. Geo-morphic shoreline processes are characterized by an E/SE-trending drift cell moving through Langley to Sandy Point. The reach is a mix of feeder bluff shoretype with areas of shoreline modifi cation, which likley affect the littoral drift. Saratoga Creek fl ows via pipe under a beach front home and exits to an outfall within a concrete bulkhead (Photo A).

There are no wetlands mapped in the reach. Saratoga Creek drains through the reach and a signifi cant portion of the reach contains steep slopes. Marine aquatic areas provide sandlance, geoduck, and Dunge-ness crab habitat, including areas of patchy and contiguous eelgrass habitat. WDFW designates gray whale habitat throughout Saratoga Passage.

Approximately half of the reach is mapped as feeder bluff. The other half is mapped as modifi ed. The high slopes of the west end are moderately or well vegetated with mixed forest and shrub communities. Evidence of recent sloughing is apparent. In lower bluff areas to the east (Photo B), the shoreline slopes and uplands are less vegetated and native marine riparian vegetation decreases. Shoreline uses consist of single-family residences on medium and large lots, primarily landward of the shoreline. A bulkhead west of Saratoga Creek supports three single-family homes and extends water-ward of OHWM. Vegetation on top of the bulkhead is primarily lawn.

REACH: LANGLEY WEST

SHORELINE LENGTH:0.45 Miles

REACH AREA:10.89 Acres

PSNERP PROCESS UNIT:6002

Microsoft Co. photos (2010)

Saratoga Passage

FIGURE 2

KEY MANAGEMENT ISSUES

• Continued degradation of shoreline processes due to armoring (bulkheads).

• Disconnection of feeder bluff areas from shoreline due to toe armoring and/or development fronting bluff areas leading to greater down-drift erosion rates (issue is related to short portions of reach Saratoga Creek Mouth). The presence of the bulkhead also alters littoral drift.

• Piping of Saratoga Creek creates a fi sh barrier, alters the hydrologic processes of the creek and disrupts transport of organic debris to shoreline.

• Potential implications of sea level rise (SLR) and coastal fl ooding on development within or near coastal fl oodplain areas (shoreline residential development).

• Slope / bluff stability for existing and future land uses at the top or toes of slopes, (considering land uses and modifi cations such as clearing, creation of impervious surfaces, modifi ed surface/groundwa-ter dynamics).

• Subdivision and intensifi ed use – additional modifi cation of feeder bluff / steep slope areas and water quality implications due to greater intensity of use.

RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES

• Soften bulkhead particularly around the mouth of Saratoga Creek.

REACH: LANGLEY WESTFIGURE 2

GEOMORPHIC KEY INFORMATIONSteep Slopes Geomorphic Shoretype

32% Feeder Bluff (61%); Modifi ed (39%)

Shoreform Current

100% Bluff-backed beach

Coastal Floodplain Lagoons

4% Floodplain None mapped

Net Shore Drift

Eastward/southeastward drift along entire reach. Drift cell originates two miles north of city and continues to Sandy Point. An area in the reach has been bulkeaded and backfi lled, extending waterward of the OHWM, likely altering littoral drift.

Coastal Landslides & Toe Erosion

To immediate east of Saratoga Creek along shoreline and at far western shore of reach

LAND & SHORELINE USEShoreline Modifi cations

Approximately 550 feet of concrete bukhead east of Saratoga Creek associ-ated with residential development. Bulkhead covers mouth of Saratoga Creek.

Current Land Use

Number of Parcels: 30 Average Parcel Size: 0.63 acresResidential (93%); Vacant (5%); Tidelands (2%). Nearly all low-density resi-dential development landward of the bluffs along the shoreline. Three single family homes are at the toe of the bluff near the mouth of Saratoga Creek supported by a concreate bulkhead.

Zoning

Residential: 100%; (RS15000: 57%, RS 7200: 32%, RS 5000: 11%)

Public Access

Public access is limited. There are two public rights-of-way that terminate at the shoreline (Debruyn Right-of-way and Park Right-of-way. There are county owned tidelands. Visual access is provided from adjacent roadways. The City has mapped a conceptual trail along Saratoga Creek, but it has not been developed.

Overwater Structures

No overwater structures

Shellfi sh & Aquaculture

Shellfi sh growing is approved west of Saratoga Creek and prohibited east of Saratoga Creek due to a sewer outfall located waterward of Anthes Avenue.

HABITATS & SPECIESSignifi cance & Unique Features

Orca and Dungeness Crab habitat are present throughout Saratoga Passage. Geoduck habitat extends across the reach as part of a larger habitat that extends along the majority of the southeast coast of Whidbey Island. Patchy eelgrass extends along shoreline west of Saratoga Creek while continuous eelgrass extends along the shoreline east of Saratoga Creek. Clam beds are identifi ed across the entirety of the reach.

Coastal Stream Mouths

Saratoga Creek. The mouth of the creek is a 24-inch RCP culvert that dis-charges onto the beach.

Forage Fish

Sandlance Smelt Herring

30% None mapped None mapped

Recruitment and Distribution of Large Woody Debris (LWD)

A moderate amount of large woody debris (LWD) is present on the high bluff, unarmored portions of the reach. Wood is largely absent from the armored portions of the reach. Wood deposited below armored shorelines is removed during high tides. Recruitment potential is moderate. The bluff slopes in this reach are moderately or well vegetated serving as sources of LWD. Signifi cant areas on the top of the bluffs are cleared, removing sources of LWD.

Shoreland Priority Habitats & Species

Bald Eagle buffer

Marine Priority Habitats & Species

Gray whale are present throughout Saratoga Passage.

Salmonid Fish Use

Resident Cutthroat Trout mapped along Saratoga Creek. A 24-inch culvert under Saratoga Road creates a fi sh blockage as there is a 4-1/2 ft. drop from the culvert outlet to the channel bed. Additionally, a fi sh passage barrier near the mouth of the stream restricts salmonid presence to resident cutthroat. Nearshore areas are designated ESA critical habitat for Chinook (Puget Sound ESU) and bull trout.

[³

[³

[³

[³

[³[³

[³n|

[d

Brookhaven Creek

1st St

4th St

2nd St

3rd St

Park

Ave

Mel

sen

Aly A

nthe

s Av

e

Mcleod Aly

Wharf S

t

Cascade Ave

Sunrise Ln






REACH SUMMARYLangley Central extends from a point east of Park Avenue through Langley’s downtown core and the harbor area to the east end of Wharf Street. Geomorphic shoreline processes are characterized by an E/SE-trending drift cell continuing through Langley to Sandy Point. There is evidence of net shore-drift being diverted to the shallow nearshore area by structures at the Nichols Brothers boatyard. The breakwater at the marina and the boat ramp also alter the movement of sediment. There are two mapped geomorphic shoretypes: modifi ed and accretion. The modifi ed shoreline includes Seawall Park. The accretion shoreline extends through the boat harbor area.

There are no wetlands mapped in the reach. Brookhaven Creek fl ows through the reach in a pipe to an outfall at the north end of Anthes Ave. Portions of the reach are mapped as steep slopes. Marine aquatic areas provide sand lance, geoduck, and Dungeness crab habitat. The entire reach is mapped as containing contiguous eelgrass habitat. WDFW

designates gray whale habitat throughout Saratoga Passage. The reach is also closed to aquaculture because of the presence of the City’s wastewater outfall. Marina riparian vegetation is generally lacking as a result of shoreline armoring and modifi cation.

The reach is developed more intensely than adjacent areas. The shoreline is completely armored (and backfi lled) through Seawall Park (Photo A), from the reach’s western extent through the Langley Boat Harbor. The western portion of the shoreline is characterized by residential and commercial uses and development, including hotels and retail businesses along 1st Street. The eastern portion contains the Langley Marina and boat launch, Nichols Brothers boatyard, the Boatyard Inn and several private residences (Photo B). Public access is provided at Seawall Park, the marina, Phil Simon Park, and several other parks and view points. Access is nearly continuous be-tween Seawall Park and the Marina. It is interrupted by private development and tideland ownership.

REACH: LANGLEY CENTRAL





Saratoga Passage

FIGURE 3


• Continued degradation of shoreline processes due to armoring (bulkheads).

• Docks degrade nearshore habitat, alter sediment transport, and pose potential water quality threat if not managed properly.

• Potential implications of sea level rise (SLR) and coastal fl ooding on development within or near coastal fl oodplain areas (commercial uses and shoreline residential development).

• Piping of Brookhaven Creek creates a fi sh barrier, alters the hydro-logic processes of the Creek and disrupts transport of organic debris to shoreline.

• Loss of native shoreline vegetation due to commercial and residential development.

• Sediment accretion in the harbor area currently necessitates mainte-nance dredging, specifi cally at the boat ramp at Phil Simon Park.

• The city is reviewing alternatives for redeveloping the marina. Such a project would include public access improvements and mitigation actions.


• Soften bulkhead including Seawall Park bulkhead face.

• Remove derelict dock, sunken marina, piles and bulkhead.

• Restore marine riparian vegetation along seawall park and in harbor area.

• Other restoration may occur associated with private shoreline armoring (including potential for use of soft shore protection as an alternative to existing low bank bulkheads).

• Coordinate with Port of South Whidbey on developing mitigation for proposed harbor redevelopment project.

REACH: LANGLEY CENTRAL


16% Modifi ed (57%); Accretion Shoreform (43%)

Shoreform Current

56% Bluff-backed beach;44 % Barrier Beach (Langley Boat Launch)



Net Shore Drift

Eastward/southeastward drift along reach; Drift cell originates two miles north of city and continues to Sandy Point to the southeast. Sediment transport is partially diverted by docks in harbor area.


At far western shore of reach


Armoring throughout reach. Concrete bulkhead/seawall extends from western extent of reach through harbor area. The harbor area contains three docks, bulkheads, and boat ramp. Expansion of the Marina has been proposed and is in the planning stages.

Current Land Use

Number of Parcels: 57 Average Parcel Size: 0.24 acresROW/Other (44%); Commercial (20%); Residential (19%); Vacant (13%); Cultural (3%); Tidelands (1%).

Zoning

Commercial Business: 65%, Public Use: 24%, RS 7200: 11%

Public Access

Seawall Park extends a quarter of a mile with fi ve stair cases directly access-ing the beach/water. Visual access is available from private and public land along 1st Street and Cascade Avenue. Robert L. Smith Park provides direct access from 1st Avenue to shoreline via a staircase. Phil Simon Park provides picnic facilities, bathroom and shower immediately south of marina. Access is also available to public tidelands at low tide. Continuous access is limited only by residential development between Seawall Park and the Marina

LAND & SHORELINE USE (CONTINUED)


Harbor area includes Nichols Brothers Boatyard dock, an old derelict dock and marina. The three docks total approximately 20,841 square feet (0.5 acres) of over water coverage. The abandoned/derelict dock and sunken marina are planned to be removed as part of the planned marina expansion. Additional remnant pilings are located near existing docks.


Shellfi sh growing is prohibited throughout reach due to a sewer outfall located along Anthes Avenue extended.


Orca and Dungeness Crab habitat are present thoughout Saratoga Passage. Geoduck habitat extends across reach as part larger habitat that extends along the majority of the southeast coast of Whidbey Island. Continuous eelgrass and clam bed habitat extends across entirety of reach.


Brookhaven Creek (piped)

Forage Fish




There is very little large woody debris (LWD) present within this reach. Nearly all of the reach is armored. There is an accumulation of wood at the unarmored eastern end of the reach past the marina. Recruitment of LWD is extremely limited. Marine riparian vegetation is largely lacking. Vegetation on top of the shoreline armoring is largely lawn and ornamental shrubs and trees.


Bald Eagle buffer


Gray Whale extends seaward along reach and throughout the larger Saratoga Passage.

Salmonid Fish Use

Resident Cutthroat Trout identifi ed within Brookhaven Creek. The last 1/4 mile of the creek fl ows through an 18-inch storm drain along Second Street and An-thes Avenue. Nearshore areas are designated ESA critical habitat for Chinook (Puget Sound ESU) and bull trout.

FIGURE 3

[³[³[d

Nob

le C

reek Edgecliff Dr

Cam

ano Ave

Decker A

ve

Furman A

ve

Dalton Ln

Woodsong Ln

Cas

cade

Ave

Noblecliff Pl

Manchester Way






REACH SUMMARYLangley East includes the high bank portion of the city east of the har-bor. It extends from the eastern city limit westerly to the shoreline bends northward. Geomorphic shoreline processes are characterized by an E/SE-trending drift cell continuing through Langley to Sandy Point. The reach is largely a feeder bluff shoretype with two small areas noted as modifi ed because of abandoned/derelict timber shore protection struc-tures. The beach is categorized as bluff-backed (Photo A).

There are no wetlands mapped in the reach. Noble Creek drains through the reach and a signifi cant portion of the reach is mapped as steep slopes. Marine aquatic areas provide sand lance, geoduck, and Dungeness crab habitat. WDNR mapped the entire shoreline as patchy eelgrass habitat. The City’s data indicate an area east of Noble Creek of continuous eelgrass habitat. WDFW designates gray whale habitat throughout Saratoga Passage.

Most of the reach feeder bluff; shoreline slopes are steep and well vegetated with mixed forest and shrub communities. There are areas where recent sloughing is evident. Shoreline uses in this reach consist of residences on large lots landward of the shoreline (Photo B). Some residences are located within close proximity of the edge of the bluff. Substantial clearing on top of the coastal bluff has occurred, marine riparian vegetation on the face and toe of the slopes remains relatively intact in the reach.

REACH: LANGLEY EAST





Saratoga Passage

FIGURE 4


• Potential increases in coastal fl ooding and rates of bluff erosion due to sea level rise (SLR) or other factors

• Slope / bluff stability for existing and future land uses at the top or toes of slopes, (considering land uses and modifi cations such as clearing, creation of impervious surfaces, modifi ed surface/groundwa-ter dynamics)

• Subdivision and intensifi ed use – additional modifi cation of feeder bluff / steep slope areas and water quality implications (septic sys-tems and road runoff) due to greater intensity of use

• Potential increases in coastal fl ooding and rates of bluff erosion due to sea level rise (SLR) or other factors

• Residential structures are close to the edge of bluffs. Retreat of the bluffs due to natural erosive processes my result in requests for bank stabilization structures.


• Remove derelict and abandoned wood bulkhead and piles (CGS, 2004)

REACH: LANGLEY EAST


29% Feeder Bluff (90%); Modifi ed (9%); Accretion Shoreform (1%)

Shoreform Current

100% Bluff-backed beach



Net Shore Drift

Eastward/southeastward drift along entire reach. Drift cell originates two miles north of city and continues southeast to Sandy Point.


Several slides are evient along bluff east of Furman Avenue.


Reach is mostly unarmored. Small patches of abandoned wood pilings and derelict timber armoring.

Current Land Use

Number of Parcels: 48 Average Parcel Size: 0.72 acresResidential (93%); Vacant (5%); Tidelands (2%). Nearly all low-density resi-dential landward of the bluffs along the shoreline.

Zoning

Residential: 97% (RS 15000: 78%, RS 7200: 19%), Neighborhood Business: 2%, Commercial Business: 1%

Public Access

Undeveloped lands around Noble Creek (reffered to as Noble Greenway) are the only mapped public uplands. Tidelands from east of Noble Creek are public. Limited visual access from adjacent roadways because of residential development and forest cover.


No overwater structures


Although shellfi sh growing is approved starting approximately 300 ft. east of Noble Creek, the shellfi sh beach is closed per DOH (2010). Shellfi sh growing is prohibited in the western portion of the reach due to a sewer outfall.


Orca and Dungeness Crab habitat are present thoughout Saratoga Passage. Geoduck habitat extends across reach as part larger habitat that includes the majority of the southeast coast of Whidbey Island. Patchy eelgrass extends along the entirety of the reach. Clam bed habitat extends across the western three quarters of the reach. Burrowing sand shrimp are present across nearly the entirety of the reach. Soft shell crab have also been identifi ed along the western half of the reach.


Noble Creek

Forage Fish




A moderate amount of large woody debris (LWD) is present within the reach. Recruitment potential is moderate or high. The bluff slopes in this reach are moderately or well vegetated serving as sources of LWD. Signifi cant areas on the top of the bluffs are cleared, removing sources of LWD.


Bald Eagle buffer


Gray Whale extends seaward along reach and throughout the larger Saratoga Passage.

Salmonid Fish Use

None identifi ed along Noble Creek. Nearshore areas are designated ESA critical habitat for Chinook (Puget Sound ESU) and bull trout.

FIGURE 4



2.3 Summary of Current Conditions of Shoreline Functions

As part of the City’s Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (ESA, 2010), the evaluation of

ecological functions and processes of shoreline areas within the city was synthesized to key findings.

Table 1 presents these key findings including a summary of shoreline ecological functions and causes of

impairment. General or programmatic restoration opportunities to address impairments are described

along with management recommendations.



Table 1. Summary of Shoreline Functions, Programmatic Restoration Opportunities and Management Recomendations

Conditions and Causes of Impairment Shoreline Ecological Function Affected

Programmatic Protection and Restoration Opportunities Management Recommendations

Bulkheads on the shoreline deflect wave action and disrupt natural coastal processes. Bulkheads disrupt natural delivery of sediment to coastal areas, as well as increase beach scouring.

Hydraulic

Sediment transport and deposition

Restoration limited due to low probability of removing or softening shoreline armoring in Langley West because of the presence of homes and in the harbor area because of the presence of vertical structures and the fact that the entire Langley waterfront is developed over what would have been the backshore area.

Prohibit development that would require future armoring except for limited instances to support water dependent uses.

Alteration to and development near feeder bluffs can reduce the potential of these areas to provide sediment delivery to coastal zones, disrupting natural coastal beach accretion. The seawall and other bulkheads have separated coastal bluffs from the shoreline.

Sediment delivery and beach creation

Protecting unarmored bluffs should be priority. Streams can also be a source of sediment to the nearshore. Moderate probability of ensuring that existing culverts are large enough and fish‐friendly.

Include geologic hazard development standards from CAO in SMP. Prohibit new development that would result in an increase risk of slope failure, pose a safety risk, or require bank or bluff stabilization in the future.

Marina riparian vegetation is generally absent due to development of the seawall and harbor area. Input of wood and other organic materials is lacking. The absence of a back beach reduces the changes to accumulate large wood.

Riparian Habitat structure

Explore potential to remove or soften portions of the seawall. Revegetate area above seawall with native vegetation. Redevelopment of the marina could be an opportunity to enhance shoreline riparian vegetation

Include provisions to ensure no net loss of habitat with new development, Limit removal of native riparian vegetation as part of development proposals. Prioritize re‐vegetation of shorelines with native species when considering mitigation options and/or restoration efforts.

Man‐made debris and remnant structures, including the derelict dock in the harbor area and pile and wood structures along Langley East, potentially disrupt nearshore habitats and sediment transport and accretion processes.

Nearshore habitat

Water quality

Target removal of abandoned and dilapidated man‐made structures in the shoreline. Determine if remnant pilings are creosote and prioritize removal.

Prioritize removal of derelict structures and creosote coated pilings as mitigation for future development or restoration activities. Two columns seem repetitive



Conditions and Causes of Impairment Shoreline Ecological Function Affected

Programmatic Protection and Restoration Opportunities Management Recommendations

Overwater structures created by the docks in the harbor area create uniform shade altering the predator‐prey dynamic the marine vegetation communities.

Nearshore habitat

Decreasing total overwater coverage is unlikely. However, in the event that the marina is redeveloped, grating can be used to increase light penetration through the docks and piers.

Consider prohibiting new overwater structures. Include provisions to ensure no net loss of shoreline functions when permitting repairs or expansions of existing structures. Require that expanded structures do not increase coverage through the use of grated materials.

Conveyance and treatment problems within the stormwater infrastructure in Langley contributes to water quality issues and adds to the instability of bluffs.

Water quality

Bluff Stability

Implement recommendations of the 2009 Comprehensive Stormwater Management plan including the use of LID tools, such as rain gardens, pervious pavement and other methods described in the LID Manual.

Limit impervious surface in the shoreline. Ensure that new development complies with stormwater regulations.



Based on the analysis of the shoreline conditions and alterations and impairments to functions the

following key management issues dealing with Langley’s shoreline ecological functions were identified:

1. Construction of bulkheads in Langley West and along the Seawall Park have disconnected the

shoreline from the coastal bluffs and uplands. As a result the natural processes that erode the

bluffs and nourishbeaches and support wildlife habitats over time, have been altered.

2. The three docks in the harbor area partially intercept the transport of sediment along the drift

cell. As a result sediment builds up within the harbor and at the boat launch. That sediment is

not available for beach nourishment further along the cell.

3. The docks create overwater coverage of portions of the nearshore. Overwater coverage creates

uniform shade altering the predator‐prey dynamic and nearshore vegetation communities.

Expansion of the facilities could exacerbate these issues.

4. The mouth of Saratoga Creek is completely modified. A natural stream mouth provides

important inputs to intact habitats, such as wood and other nutrients.

5. Marine riparian vegetation has been greatly altered by installation of the seawall; commercial

development on 1st Street, Wharf Street and Sunrise Lane; shoreline modification; and

landscaping with lawn. Natural inputs of wood and detrital debris as well as shade in the near

shore are diminished.

6. Several primary residential structures are located close to the bluff edge, particularly in Langley

East. As the bluff retreats due to erosive processes, homeowners may request permits for bank

stabilization. Shoreline modification updrift of these shorelines could accelerate erosion, as

could sea level rise. Lack of stormwater facilities may also increase soil saturation and

accelerate bluff erosion.

7. There is abundant public access in Langley. Approximately 14 percent of the shoreline is

physically accessible. The City also provides a boat launch and numerous locations where visual

access of Saratoga Passage and Camano Island are visible. A connection between the city center

and the marina is lacking. The City is planning to provide access from Cascade Ave to the marina

via a funicular.



3.0 REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND RISK OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS

Ecology Shoreline Guidelines (WAC 173‐26) require that the City “address the cumulative impacts on

shorelines ecological functions that would result from future shoreline development and uses that are

reasonably foreseeable.” (WAC 173‐26‐201(3)(d)(iii)). This chapter describes reasonable foreseeable

development that is likely to occur during the next 20 years and associated impacts that have the

potential to negatively affect ecological functions identified above.

Ecology guidelines require the inclusion of reasonably foreseeable development as part of the

cumulative impacts analysis (WAC 173‐26‐186). According to the Ecology Handbook (Chapter 17

Cumulative Impacts Analysis, 2010), reasonably foreseeable development is development that is likely

to occur during the next 20 years based on the proposed shoreline environment designations, proposed

land use density and bulk standards, and current shoreline development patterns.

3.1 Shoreline Residential (Langley East and West)

The residential areas within Langley’s shorelines general consist of the Langley East and West reaches

and generally occupy the City’s high bank shorelines. As noted in the ICR, there is no development at the

bluff toe of Langley West and only three homes supported by a bulkhead at the toe of Langley East’s

bluff. Shoreline functions, such as habitat, water quality, and sediment deposition and transport occur

along and are reliant on the coastal bluffs. Many of these functions are supported and controlled by the

vegetation along the bluffs and the movement of bluff sediments along the shoreline. Impacts to

shoreline functions from residential development in these areas will largely result from damage to or

alteration of this vegetation and or modification to the bluff toe.

The potential for shoreline armoring in these areas is very low. The risks of future impacts are,

therefore, a function of the current condition of bluff vegetation and potential future development that

might disturb it. In other words, if shoreline vegetation is in good condition and there is a high likelihood

of new development, shoreline functions could be at risk. If vegetation were highly altered, risk to

functions from development would be lower. Conversely, if vegetation were in excellent condition, but

development was not expected risk would be low.

A GIS parcel analysis was conducted to assess foreseeable residential development and likely impacts.

Assessment of risk to shoreline functions was based on the existing condition of the shoreline

vegetation and potential damage from future development. The analysis determined whether each

parcel was developed or vacant and assessed the condition of shoreline vegetation within the City’s

required 50 foot setback and 15 foot building setback (for principal structures) from the top of the bluff.

Vegetation condition was classified as one of the following:

1. Nearly no or no vegetation (5% or less)

2. Minimal or partial vegetation (up to 25%)

3. Moderate to well vegetated (up to 75%)

4. Completely vegetated (more that ¾ vegetated)



As shown in Figure 5, there are approximately 55 parcels adjacent to the shoreline within these two

reaches. All but ten (82%) of these parcels are developed with single‐family homes. Of the ten

undeveloped or vacant parcels, only 2 appear readily developable. The others are either part of a

combined lot that is developed, within a greenway (Noble Creek), or largely on the face of the coastal

bluff. Based on these results it is apparent that foreseeable new development in Langley East and

Langley West reaches is limited. Redevelopment of existing homes is more likely. The results also

indicate that on 69% of these parcels (38 parcels) vegetation within 50 feet of the top of the bluff is

minimal or absent. Most of these areas are covered with lawn or accessory structures. Seven parcels are

moderately well vegetated and ten of the parcels are completely vegetated. These include the ten

undeveloped parcels noted above, which appear to have limited development potential. In addition,

lots cannot be subdivided unless they have a suitable building site outside of any critical area or buffer.

Based on these data, it appears that risk to existing shoreline functions from new development is

minimal as opportunities for new development along the shoreline are severely limited. The risk to

shoreline functions from redevelopment is higher since the residential areas are largely already

developed. However, because most of the developed parcels have shoreline vegetation that is in poor

condition (<25% coverage), risk to shoreline functions are also relatively low. There are a small number

of parcels (noted in Figure 5) which have shoreline vegetation in better condition and on which

residential development or redevelopment is possible. Risk to shoreline existing functions exists on

these individual parcels, but because their number is low, citywide, risk from residential development on

shoreline functions is low. The following sections will describe the proactive means by which these risks

are managed.

Wood Bulkhead Rotting(30 ft Offset)

Dock (Industrial Use)

Marina

Dock (Derelict - To be removed with marina expansion)

Sara

toga C

reek

Noble CreekBroo

khav

en C

reek

Figure 5 Vegetation Coverage and Distance from BluffCity of Langley: Shoreline Master Program Update

S:\

GIS

\Pro

ject

s\2

11xx

x\2

111

42

La

ng

ley

SM

P\m

xd\w

ork

ing

\Sh

ore

line

Ana

lysi

s A

C.m

xd (

AW

C;

10/5

/20

12

)

This map is intended for planning purposes only. Inaccuraciesmay exist. This map depicts the approximate location and extentof areas subject to the City of Langley SMP. The actual extent ofthe shoreline planning area requires a site-specific evaluation toidentify the location of the ordinary high water mark and anyassociated wetlands.

SOURCE: City of Langley, 2011; Island County, 2010; PSNERP,2010; WDNR, 2006.

Department of Ecology Grant G1100124/Task 2.3

(0 425 850

Feet

Legend15ft setback

50ft Buffer

Top of Slope

Reaches

Eastimated Buffer Vegetation Coverage0 - 5%

6 - 25%

26 - 75%

76 - 100%

Distance from Top of Bluff10 - 50

51 - 75

76 - 100

101 +

Saratoga PassageLangley West

Langley East

Langley Central



Leave Blank



3.2 Urban (Langley Central)

As shown in the reach sheet for Langley Central, this .5 mile stretch is the only incorporated and largely

developed shoreline along the south east side of Whidbey Island. This area encompasses the City’s

urban core and is a vital part of the central downtown area. It is largely developed with parks, stores,

hotels and the Langley Marina. Redevelopment of several existing uses is anticipated in the next 20

years. In its ongoing effort to improve the city’s connection to the shoreline, the following

activities/development are envisioned:

1. Public Access from Cascade Avenue. Public improvements projects that enhance physical

connections to and within the central waterfront. These improvements would connect the

marina and Wharf Street to Cascade Avenue. They include a pedestrian tramway or funicular

and stairs;

2. Commercial Development. Commercial development along the shoreline east of the marina

area and the Nichols Brothers pier. This development would replace existing residential

development behind an existing seawall/bulkhead. It would include expanded and improved

public access and provide physical or visual connections with the water;

3. Marina Expansion. In 2004, the City developed the Langley Boat Harbor and Environs Plan along

with the Port District of South Whidbey, the plan’s intent was to draw more recreational boat

users to the City. The plan included rebuilding the marina with more and larger slips (either 245

or 117), increased public access and removal of the derelict dock and sunken marina. The plan

would also consolidate the marina and Nichols Brothers operation into one structure. The plan

would also include a fueling option, either floating or upland, a small boat center, and updated

boat launch and float plane facility. The Boat Harbor Master Plan is in need of a major update as

the Port of South Whidbey continues to modify its plan for the expansion of the marina. A 2007

proposed update to the plan failed to be adopted; and

4. A new public pier to replace the original “999’ Pier” at the foot of Anthes Ave.

Risk to existing shoreline functions depends on the current condition of the shoreline in Langley Central.

As documented in the ICR and summarized above, Langley Central has a highly modified shoreline and,

as a result, highly altered shoreline functions. The reach is developed more intensely than adjacent

areas.

The shoreline is completely armored (and backfilled) from seawall park through the boat harbor.

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.

The harbor area contains three docks and a boat launch with a total overwater area of approximately

0.5 acres. Overwater structures, such as docks and piers can have several impacts to nearshore

processes. They change the levels of light, shoreline energy regimes, substrate type and stability, and



water quality (Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). These changes result in altered abundance and

diversity of species in nearshore marine ecosystems.

While new development is proposed within Langley Central, the risk to existing shoreline functions is

relatively low because of the altered nature of existing shoreline functions documented in the ICR. It is

also important to recognize that while local sediment transport processes in Langley have been altered

by shoreline armoring and overwater structures, the city lies in a process unit that has some of the least

degraded geomorphic processes in the Puget Sound. It is equally important to note that Langley’s .5

miles of urban shoreline implements other policies objective of RCW 90.58 by providing shoreline space

for water‐dependent uses as well as public access.



4.0 PROTECTIVE PROVISIONS OF THE PROPOSED SMP

The following section identifies policies and regulations from the Draft SMP that would protect

ecological functions along with provisions from the Draft Restoration Plan that will help to enhance

functions over time. Based on this information, knowledge of current conditions, and foreseeable future

development, the future performance of shoreline functions is assessed.

The proposed SMP includes policies and regulations that require allowed uses to achieve “no net loss”

of shoreline functions. This is achieved through implementation of use regulations, development

standards, mitigation requirements and other regulatory provisions. The proposed SMP includes several

provisions that encourage shoreline conservation and prohibit uses and activities that would cause

adverse impact to shoreline functions and processes.

4.1 Critical Areas Protection and Mitigation

The proposed draft SMP adopts the City’s existing critical area standards and applies those protections

to the City’s shorelines. The critical areas code prohibits direct impacts to wetlands and streams and

provides for protection of their functions through buffers. Although none are currently mapped within

the shoreline, wetland buffers range in size from 50 to 250 feet depending on wetland type (LMC

16.20.065). Stream buffers range in size from 50 to 250 feet (LMC 16.20.065). Type 3 streams have a

100‐foot buffer and Type 4 and 5 streams have a 50‐foot buffer. Noble Creek is classified as a Type 4

stream. Brookhaven Creek is classified as a Type 4 stream from the south edge of the pavement on 3rd

Street north to Saratoga Passage. From the south edge of the pavement on 3rd Street south to the

creek’s source, Brookhaven Creek is classified as a Type 3 stream. Saratoga Creek is classified as a Type 3

stream (LMC 16.20.065).

The critical areas code also provides protections from geologic hazard areas. This is particularly relevant

in the high bluff areas east and west of Langley Central. In those areas no development is allowed within

50 feet of the top or toe of a steep slope (15% of greater) except under certain circumstances. Primary

structures must be setback an additional 15 feet from the buffer.

4.2 Marine Setbacks

As noted above, shoreline functions in the city of Langley are altered due in large part to shoreline

armoring and loss of riparian vegetation. The proposed SMP seeks to achieve no further loss of function

while allowing implementation of city plans for additional water‐oriented commercial development,

marina expansion and connection from downtown to the harbor area. The City also desires to continue

to allow reasonable use of residential properties. To those ends, the City will rely on the established 50‐

foot geologic hazard area buffers in Langley East and West (Shoreline Residential) and a 25‐foot buffer in

Langley Central (Urban). The purpose of these buffers is to protect existing riparian vegetation and to

protect these areas for potential future improvement to shoreline riparian vegetation.



4.3 Restoration Opportunities

In addition to the application of shoreline use regulations and development standards, the Draft SMP

includes a Shoreline Restoration Plan (City of Langley, 2012). Key restoration goals are identified in the

plan for the City’s shorelines. The restoration plan identifies programmatic actions and restoration

opportunities that are or would be implemented through the City’s existing efforts, including the

comprehensive plan, critical areas regulations, and storm and surface water utility. The plan also

identifies projects and programs being implemented by regional agencies, Tribes, and conservation

groups. The restoration plan includes the following goals:

Improve or maintain water quality

Restore degraded and lost habitat within the boat harbor

Improve the connectivity of the shoreline environments

Protect and restore natural processes that are needed to support no net loss of ecosystem and

habitat functions

In addition to establishing restoration goals, the Restoration Plan includes several restoration

opportunities and sites in the City's shoreline planning area. Exact locations for each type of restoration

would be determined during the design of specific projects.



4.4 Beneficial Effects of Established Regulatory Programs under Other Local, State, and Federal Laws

4.4.1 Local laws

The City’s SMP works in concert with the Comprehensive Plan and a variety of other regulatory plans

and programs to manage shoreline resources and regulate development near the shoreline. The

Comprehensive Plan establishes the general land use pattern and provides an overall vision for growth

and development for areas inside and outside shoreline jurisdiction. Various sections of the Langley

Municipal Code (LMC) also play a major role in how shorelines are managed. These include:

LMC Title 18 – Zoning. Establishes zoning districts and regulates land use in the City including the

shorelines.

LMC 16.04 – Environmental Policy. Establishes procedures and policies to implement the state

environmental policy act (SEPA). All non‐exempt City actions require environmental review under SEPA.

LMC 16.20 – Resource Lands and Environmentally Sensitive (Critical) Areas Management. Establishes

policies, regulations and land use controls to protect critical areas, including wetlands, streams and

other fish and wildlife habitats, geologically hazardous areas, and aquifer recharge and wellhead

protection areas. Once adopted, critical areas within shoreline jurisdiction will be regulated through the

City’s Shoreline Master program and not LMC 16.20.

LMC 15.24 – Flood Hazard Areas. Establishes procedures for the planning official and/or building official

to ensure that new development plan adequately when in flood‐prone areas.

LMC 15.01.420 through 455. Building and Construction(Stormwater). Includes erosion prevention and

stormwater management requirements for all development proposals.

2009 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. This plan guides management of surface water

runoff to protect people and property and meet water quality and resource protection goals, including

development of an stormwater system for the City of Langley. The plan identifies deficiencies in the

City’s stormwater systems and recommends improvements.

The SMA requires local governments and state agencies to review their plans, regulations, and

ordinances that apply to areas adjacent to shoreline jurisdiction and modify those plans, regulations,

and ordinances so they “achieve a consistent use policy” in conformance with the Act and the SMP2.

This means that the City’s comprehensive plan and development regulations must be consistent with

the SMP overall.

One of the most important areas for consistency is between the SMP and the City’s development

standards and use regulations for environmentally critical areas. Although critical areas in shoreline

jurisdiction are to be identified and designated under the Growth Management Act (GMA), they must

also be protected under SMA. According to Engrossed Senate Bill 1651 passed in 2010, once the City

updates its SMP critical areas within the shoreline jurisdiction, these areas are protected under the SMA

and are no longer subject to the procedural and substantive requirements of the GMA. The SMP must

2 RCW 90.58.340



protect critical areas such that there is “no net loss of shoreline ecological functions [including feeder

bluff retreat] necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources” as defined by the SMP Guidelines.

4.4.2 State and Federal Programs

As stated in WAC 173‐27, it is the intent of the SMA to provide for integration of the shoreline permit

into a consolidated environmental review and permit process. In achieving this goal, the shoreline

policies and regulations contained in the updated SMP will also have to work in concert with several

state and federal laws and regulations that relate to shorelines. The major state and federal regulations

include:

Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA). Under the State Hydraulic Code (RCW 75.20), an HPA is required for

any construction activity in or near the waters of the state, including Puget Sound. The program is

administered by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). All applicable projects

are required to submit permit applications to show that construction is done in a manner to prevent

damage to the state’s fish, and shellfish, and their habitats.

Clean Water Act Section 404 Dredge and Fill Requirements. Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act

(33 USC 1344) regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. Any project that

proposes discharging dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States, including special

aquatic sites such as wetlands (non‐isolated), must get a Section 404 permit. The U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (Corps) can authorize activities by a standard individual permit, letter‐of‐permission,

nationwide permit, or regional permit. The Corps makes the determination on what type of permit is

needed.

State Water Pollution Control Act. The Washington State Department of Ecology regulates state water

quality standards through the State Water Quality Pollution Control Act (RCW 90.48). State regulations

include wetlands considered to be isolated under the Clean Water Act.

Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Applicants receiving a section 404 permit from

the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, a Coast Guard permit or license from the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission (FERC), are required to obtain a section 401 water quality certification from the Washington

Department of Ecology (Ecology). Issuance of a certification means that Ecology anticipates that the

applicant’s project will comply with state water quality standards, including the state’s Water Pollution

Control Act (RCW 90.48), and other aquatic resource protection requirements under Ecology’s authority.

Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). All federally funded projects or projects that require federal

permits, must comply with the federal Endangered Species Act (7 USC 136). Projects that have the

potential to directly or indirectly impact species listed as endangered or threatened (including several

species in Puget Sound) are subject to approval by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA Fisheries).

Section 10 Rivers and Harbors Act (Permit for Work in Navigable Waters). Under the Rivers and Harbors

Act, the Corps has jurisdiction in all navigable waters of the U.S (33 USC 403). Any work in, over, or

under navigable waters must apply for a Section 10 permit, which prohibits the obstruction or alteration

of navigable waters.



All of these local, state and federal regulation work to ensure that development in the shoreline is

protective of ecological functions and public resources. Together with the City’s proposed SMP, these

regulatory programs would ensure no net loss of ecological functions.



5.0 ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The assessment of cumulative impacts considers the impacts of reasonably foreseeable future

development on existing conditions and then assesses whether the provisions of the proposed Draft

SMP will, at the least, maintain shoreline functions at their present condition. Section 2.0 of this report

summarizes the existing conditions of shoreline functions in the City of Langley as described in the

Shoreline Inventory and Characterization report (ESA, 2011). Section 3.0 of this report identifies

reasonably foreseeable future developments in the shoreline and risks of potential impacts. Section 2.0

of this document and Table3, below, summarize the protective measures of the policies and regulations

in the proposed Draft Master Program and potential restoration opportunities.

Table 2, below, summarizes current conditions of key shoreline functions: hydrology, shoreline

vegetation and Habitat. It identifies reasonably foreseeable development and potential risks. Protective

policies, regulations and restoration opportunities that address those risks are listed. Based on this

information an assessment of the future condition of each function is provided in the last column.



Table 2. Protective Measures and Restoration Opportunities

Existing Conditions Foreseeable Development Ecological Functions at Risk

SMP Provisions Addressing Functions at Risk:

Anticipated Future Performance

Langley East and West (Shoreline Residential)

Langley East and West are both predominantly developed with single family homes.

Both reaches have high coastal bluffs with most development at the top of the bluff. The bluffs are unarmored except for approximately 500 feet of bulkhead along Langley East supporting 3‐4 residences.

Vegetation on top of the bluff within the 50 foot geological hazard buffer is low or absent in most of the shoreline parcels.

Saratoga Creek is piped through the bulkheaded area in Langley East.

Conveyance and treatment problems within the stormwater infrastructure in Langley contributes to water quality issues and adds to the instability of bluffs.

Both areas are predominantly zoned for residential development.

82% of shoreline adjacent parcels are built out.

Foreseeable development includes remodels or redevelopment of existing residential structures and accessories

Hydrologic: Low risk due to limited development potential and unarmored shorelines. Risk is also low due to new modification/stabilization provisions. Two of three creeks are piped through the shoreline. Buffer requirement provides protection and new development unlikely to degrade this condition further.

Shoreline vegetation: Low risk for impact to riparian habitat – some opportunity for additional impact through redevelopment and encroachment from existing residential uses; however little intact shoreline vegetation remains on tops of bluffs. Vegetation along bluff face is protected by new provisions and as geohazard critical area.

Habitat: Low risk of direct impacts to marine nearshore because potential for new armoring and/or docks is very low. Aquatic habitats are at risk from basinwide elements such as untreated stromwater and use of chemicals in residential landscaping. Risk to upland forest is low because bluff face vegetation is protected

Protection

Proposed SMP adopts critical areas protections for streams, fish and wildlife habitat areas, and geological hazard areas from LMC 16.20. 50‐foot buffer and 15‐foot building setback is required from top of bluff (4.3.2).

SMP requires that impacts are mitigated according to mitigation sequencing (4.3.2(B))

SMP requires all development to comply with stormwater management plan and use BMPs and LID techniques to control and treat runoff (4.6).

SMP preserves natural vegetation by controlling plant clearing and earth grading within the shoreline jurisdiction for development to achieve no net loss (4.7 and 5.6)

SMP promotes vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds and nonnative species to avoid adverse impacts to soil hydrology, and to reduce the hazard of slope failures or accelerated erosion (4.7).

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT:

No Change

Shorelines are primarily high bluff. New armoring and overwater structures are not anticipated.

Development is primarily at top of bluff. Vegetation is highly altered. New development and redevelopment must comply with critical areas standards.

No further loss of native vegetation and habitat is anticipated with critical area provisions, buffers and mitigation requirements are

Improvement to water quality conditions associated with larger Puget Sound efforts to land use practices


Preliminary Draft Cumulative Impacts Assessment 31 September 2012




and top of bluff vegetation if highly altered.

Shoreline stabilization is not allowed on accretion shoreforms or marine feeder bluffs under most circumstances (5.1.2).

The use of hard shoreline stabilization armoring is limited and soft shore bank stabilization techniques are encouraged. (5.1).

Repair or replacement of existing shoreline stabilization is allowed as a conditional use if necessary to protect existing structures and achieve no net loss.

Jetties, groins, and breakwaters are prohibited (4.10).

Residential development and accessory structures must not require new structural shore or slope defense measures and must retain and protect natural vegetation(6.7)

Restoration

Soften bulkhead particularly around the mouth of Saratoga Creek.

Remove derelict and abandoned wood bulkhead and piles.

Protect and restore native vegetation corridors along stream mouths and the nearshore riparian zone.

Ensure that culverts allow for fish passage.

throughout the watershed.

32 Preliminary Draft Cumulative Impacts Assessment September 2012




Langley Central (Urban)

The reach is approximately .5 miles. The western portion of the shoreline is characterized by residential and commercial uses and development. The eastern portion contains the Langley Marina and boat launch, Nichols Brothers boatyard, the Boatyard Inn and several private residences

The reach is developed more intensely than adjacent areas. The shoreline is completely armored (and backfilled) through Seawall Park from the reach’s western extent through the Langley Boat Harbor.

There are no wetlands mapped in the reach. Brookhaven Creek flows through the reach in a pipe to an outfall at the north end of Anthes Ave.

There is evidence of net shore‐drift being diverted to the shallow nearshore area by structures at the Nichols Brothers boatyard. The breakwater at the marina and the boat ramp also alter the movement of sediment.

Marina riparian vegetation is generally absent due to

The following developments are foreseeable:

1. Public Access from Cascade Avenue: A pedestrian tramway or funicular and stairs;

2. Commercial Development along the shoreline east of the marina area and the Nichols Brothers pier.

3. Marina expansion including rebuilding the marina with more and larger slips, increased public access and removal of the derelict dock and sunken marina.

4. A new public pier to replace the original “999’ Pier” at the foot of Anthes Ave.

5. A pedestrian connection between the marina and Seawall Park

Hydrologic: Low risk. Existing highly altered conditions limit potential for additional future impairment; any major redevelopment of facilities may provide opportunity to improve hydrologic functions through implementation of mitigation requirements.

Shoreline vegetation: Low risk. Existing highly altered conditions limit potential for additional future loss of shoreline or aquatic vegetation. Redevelopment may provide opportunity to improve shoreline vegetation through mitigation and permit conditions.

Habitat: Moderate risk. Aquatic habitats threatened by water quality degradation – associated with accidental spills, stormwater, illegal dumping – common sources of contamination from high intensity boating facility uses.

Protection

Proposed SMP Adopts critical areas protections for streams, fish and wildlife habitat areas, and geological hazard areas from LMC 16.20. (4.3.2).

SMP requires that impacts to shoreline functions are mitigated according to mitigation sequencing to achive no net loss (4.3.2(B))

SMP requires all development to comply with stormwater management plan and use BMPs and LID techniques to control and treat runoff (4.6).

SMP preserves natural vegetation by controlling plant clearing and earth grading within the shoreline jurisdiction for development to achieve no net loss (4.7 and 5.6).

The use of hard shoreline stabilization armoring is limited soft shore bank stabilization techniques are encouraged. (5.1).

Repair or replacement of existing shoreline stabilization is allowed as a conditional use only if necessary to protect existing structures, nonstructural measures are not feasible and they achieve no net loss (5.1.2).

Moorage facilities (docks and Piers)

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT:

No Change

Shoreline ecological functions in Langley Central (Urban) are highly altered and are not anticipated to change.

New development is anticipated landward of shoreline armoring and water‐dependant overwater development may occur, however

Critical area provisions, buffers and mitigation requirements have the potential to achieve no further loss of native vegetation and habitat elements along the shoreline.

Controls on overwater structures and mitigation also limit future loss of nearshore marine habitat.

Requirements to achieve no net loss,






development of the seawall and harbor area.

are allowed as CU for water‐dependent commercial uses only when consistent with development standards for safety and to avoid or mitigate for impacts to nearshore habitats and processes (5.3.2).

Marina development must be compatible with surrounding uses, minimize impacts to nearshore habitats, consistent with state federal requirements and ensure water quality and personal safety (6.3.2).

New commercial development must be set back 20 feet from seawall park and must provide public access to the shore (6.4.2).

Industrial development is only allowed in the urban and aquatic boat harbor SEDs and only when impacts to nearshore habitat are minimized or mitigated (6.5.2).

Residential development and accessory structures must not allow new structural shore or slope defense measures and must retain and protect natural vegetation(6.7)

Restoration

Remove derelict dock, sunken marina, piles and bulkhead.

Improve marine riparian vegetation along seawall park and in harbor area

water quality and mitigation, and public access may result in improved shoreline riparian vegetation.

Improvement to water quality conditions associated with larger Puget Sound efforts to land use practices throughout the watershed.

34 Preliminary Draft Cumulative Impacts Assessment September 2012




Coordinate with Port of South Whidbey on developing mitigation for proposed harbor redevelopment project



5.1 Conclusions

As noted throughout, new development opportunities in the City of Langley’s shorelines are limited, but

redevelopment is likely to occur. In the Langley East and West reaches redevelopment is likely to be

limited to remodels and accessory structures. In Langley Central, redevelopment of the marina area is

likely. Risk of impacts to ecological shoreline functions is low throughout the City, because shoreline

functions are already highly altered from shoreline stabilization structures and loss of marine riparian

vegetation within the shoreline. Therefore, when reasonably foreseeable shoreline developments and

potential risks are considered together with the policies and regulations in the Draft SMP and other

beneficial plans and programs, cumulative impacts to shoreline ecological functions from those

established in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (ESA, 2010) are anticipated to be

negligible.



6.0 REFERENCES

City of Langley. 2000. Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan for the City of Langley. Prepared by

URS Corp. and Katyisaken & Assoc., May 2009. City of Langley.

City of Langley. 2010. City of Comprehensive Plan. City of Langley, Island County, Washington.

Environmental Science Associates (ESA). Final Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report.

Prepared for the City of Langley. October 2011.

Nightingale, B. and C. Simenstad. 2001. Overwater Structures: Marine Issues. Prepared for Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington Department of

Transportation. University of Washington. Seattle.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT - Langley, Washington...species that depend on Puget Sound. Situated...

Documents

Transcript of CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT - Langley, Washington...species that depend on Puget Sound. Situated...