The URL can be used to link to this page

21-100869 - wetland study - 03-16-21-V1 Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway S – Federal Way, Washington King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 Project No. 21007 Prepared for: Israel Alvarez (206) 856-5286 israel@washingtonbestfinishes.com Prepared by: Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC PO Box 1721 Issaquah, Washington 98027 February 16, 2021 WETLAND DELINEATION • MITIGATION DESIGN • COMPLIANCE MONITORING February 16, 2021 Project Number 21003 Israel Alvarez (206) 856-5286 israel@washingtonbestfinishes.com Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 Israel, Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC is pleased to present this wetland delineation and rating report an undeveloped property located at approximately 35855 Pacific Highway South in Federal Way, Washington. During a February 9, 2021 review of the site, I determined that wetlands do not exist within the site and a Category III wetland exists immediately south of the site. A 50 ft standard width buffer is required from the off-site wetland and a 15 ft setback is required from the outer limits of the wetland buffer for buildings and other structures. The wetland buffer and related building setback from the off-site wetland encumber the southern portion of the site. The information presented in this report is based on an analysis of conditions within and adjacent to the site, an examination of the wetland development standards contained within Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas), and the best available science regarding wetlands. I trust that this report meets your present needs. If you have any questions regarding this report or require additional assistance with this project, please do not hesitate to call or email. Sincerely, Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC Peter P. Super Professional Wetland Scientist PO Box 1721 Issaquah, Washington 98027 (425) 677-7166 www.evergreenarc.com Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South Federal Way, Washington King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 Project No. 21007 Prepared for: Israel Alvarez (206) 856-5286 israel@washingtonbestfinishes.com Prepared by: Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC PO Box 1721 – Issaquah, Washington 98027 (425) 677-7166 | www.evergreenarc.com February 16, 2021 Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page i February 16, 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT SITE & LANDSCAPE SETTING .............................................................................................. 1 3.0 WETLAND DELINEATION AND RATING ASSESSMENT ..................................................................... 1 3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Background Research........................................................................................................................................................... 2 3.3 Site Assessment – Project Site .......................................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Site Assessment – Off-Site ................................................................................................................................................. 4 4.0 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 5 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 5 6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 6 7.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 6 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Wetland Map Appendix B – Photographs Appendix C – Wetland Determination Forms Appendix D – Wetland Rating Forms Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 1 February 16, 2021 1.0 INTRODUCTION This wetland delineation and rating report has been prepared to describe wetlands that exist within and adjacent to a vacant property located at approximately 35855 Pacific Highway South in Federal Way, Washington. Where applicable, an opinion of buffers and setbacks per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas) has been provided. It is understood that this report may be used, in part, to supplement site planning and permitting efforts related to future development of the site. The exact scope and timing of future development is not known. 2.0 PROJECT SITE & LANDSCAPE SETTING The project site is an irregular shaped, undeveloped parcel located at 35855 Pacific Highway South in Federal Way, Washington. The site is situated in the northeast quarter of Section 29, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M. and the King County tax parcel number for the site is 292104-9051. An abbreviated legal description for the site is Lot 3 of King County Short Plat 674211 as recorded under King County recording number 7801240947, records of King County, Washington. The project site has total area of approximately 42,449 sf (0.97 acres) and measures approximately 180 feet wide (north to south) by approximately 204 feet deep (east to west). Access to the site is from Pacific Highway South (State Route 99), which is a paved roadway within dedicated public right-of-way. Topography within the site trends to the east and south from a maximum elevation of approximately 205 feet in the northwest corner of the site to approximately 190 feet along the eastern property line. Vegetation within the site includes primarily trees and shrubs. The City of Federal Way zoning designation for the site is “OP” (Office Park). The project site is situated west of Pacific Highway South and south of S 356th Street in the southern portion of Federal Way. Land use surrounding the site is generally open space, vacate land, and religious service properties. The Brooklake Community Church exists north and west of the site and the Hylebos and Spring Valley Open Spaces exist east of the site. 3.0 WETLAND DELINEATION AND RATING ASSESSMENT A wetland delineation and rating assessment was completed on February 9, 2021. The purpose of the assessment was to screen the project site and local vicinity for wetlands. The entire project site was reviewed during the assessment. Areas located within 200 ft of the project site were also reviewed using information obtained from readily available literature and aerial photographs as well as by observing conditions directly from the project site and public right-of-way. Off-site wetlands were noted only to the degree necessary to determine buffer widths and any related buffer encroachment onto the project site. Based on the wetland delineation rating assessment, it was determined that wetlands do not exist within the project site and a Category III wetland exists immediately south of the site. The wetland delineation and rating assessment was not conducted during the growing season. Climatic conditions prior to the assessment as well as natural seasonal variations related to the time of year were considered during the assessment. Weather conditions on February 9, 2021 included partly cloudy sky conditions with ambient air temperatures ranging to approximately 45° F. Rainfall measured at SeaTac Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 2 February 16, 2021 International Airport during the seven days preceding the assessment was 0.73 inches. Rainfall for the period October 1, 2020 through January 7, 2021 was above average, but within one standard deviation of the historic mean. Precipitation during the month of January totaled 8.75 inches and included two days with over 1.75 inches of rainfall each. The higher-than-normal rainfall did not limit the wetland delineation and rating assessment. At the time of the wetland delineation and rating assessment, it was determined that “normal circumstances” existed within the project site as defined by the wetland delineation manual. There was no evidence of a recent change to site conditions that could limit or otherwise prevent an accurate wetland determination. Problematic or atypical conditions do not exist within the site. A map showing the location of wetlands, buffers, and related building setbacks is included with this report in Appendix A. Photographs of the site are included with this report in Appendix B. Wetland determination forms are included with this report in Appendix C. Wetland rating forms are included with this report in Appendix D. 3.1 Methodology The wetland delineation and rating assessment included background research and a site assessment to determine if wetlands are present on or adjacent to the project site. Wetland determinations were made using the “routine determination” methods required for “on-site inspections” as described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Vegetation, soil, and hydrology characteristics were examined at multiple locations and then compared to the specific criteria established for the three wetland indicators described in the Regional Supplement To The Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region - Version 2.0 (US Army Corps of Engineers 2010). When hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology indicators were present, an area was determined to be a wetland. In the absence of all three indicators or when exclusionary situations apply, an area was considered non- wetland, or “upland”. Wetland determination points were marked on-site using sequentially numbered orange flagging. Wetland ratings conformed to the methods described in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – 2014 Update (Hruby, T 2014). 3.2 Background Research The project site exists within the Hylebos Creek drainage area of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 10 – Puyallup-White River Basin. The West Fork Hylebos Creek (10-0014) exists approximately 0.25 miles west of the project site and the Nork Fork tributary to the West Fork Hylebos Creek (10- 0013) exists 0.15 miles east of the project site. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) online “Web Soil Survey” maps Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes (EwC) throughout the project site and local vicinity. Everett soils are somewhat excessively drained soils that are formed under conifers in very gravelly glacial outwash deposits (Snyder et al. 1975). Everett soils are generally not classified as hydric (wetland) soils. Alderwood soils are moderately well drained soils formed under conifers in glacial deposits (Snyder et al. 1975). Alderwood soils are also generally not Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 3 February 16, 2021 classified as hydric soils; however, inclusions of hydric soils can occur when this soil type is found in depressional landforms and along drainageways. Wetlands have not been previously mapped within or immediately adjacent to the project site. The City of Federal Way maps the West Hylebos Wetlands Park, including Brook Lake and the Hylebos Blueberry Farm, approximately 0.25 miles northwest of the project site. The Hylebos Open Space and larger Spring Valley Open Space properties are located east Pacific Highway South and a smaller unnamed open space property is located approximately 400 feet south of the project site. All open space properties contain large, mapped wetlands. Historic aerial photographs of the project site show that forest cover was completely removed from the site prior to 1936. From 1940 to approximately 1980, the site remained largely unchanged, except for the development of native forest cover. During the 1980’s, church buildings were constructed on the properties located north and east of the site. Around the year 2000, the southern and western portions of the site were used for access and staging during construction of improvements on the church property located west of the site. Between 2002 and 2005, improvements were made to Pacific Highway South including widening the street towards the project site and the installation of rockeries along the eastern property line. In the mid 2010’s, water and sewer infrastructure was installed along Pacific Highway S, primarily from the southeast corner of the site to properties located to the south. In 2018, additional pedestrian improvements were made to Pacific Highway South including the construction of new driveway entrance near the northeast corner of the site. 3.3 Site Assessment – Project Site Environmental conditions within the project site are relatively uniform and include a retained native forest, areas managed for frisbee golf, and areas that have been impacted by construction activities over the last 20 years. Four wetland determination points were established within the site to document representative conditions. Photographs of conditions at each wetland determination point are included with this report in Appendix B. Based on a review of site conditions it was determined that wetlands do not exist within the project site. This report section describes vegetation, soil, and hydrologic conditions within the site. 3.3.1 Vegetation Vegetation within the project site is comprise predominantly of upland vegetation. The northern and central portions of the site support forest, while areas surrounding the forest include a mix of shrub and grass plant communities. Dominant vegetation within forested areas includes bigleaf maple (Acer circinatum, FACU) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii, FACU) with occasional younger western redcedar (Thuja plicata, FAC) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla, FACU) over salal (Gaultheria shallon, FACU) and western swordfern (Polystichum munitum, FACU). Moderately dense stands of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus, FAC) with occasional bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata, FACU) and salmonberry (R. spectabilis, FAC) exist along the eastern and southern property lines. The western portion of the site includes mowed grass with areas of vine maple (A. circinatum, FAC), salal, English ivy (Hedera Helix, FACU), Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum, FACU), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis, FACU), western swordfern, trailing blackberry (R. ursinus, FACU) and Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius, NI). The vegetation distribution within the site reflects prior clearing and Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 4 February 16, 2021 more recent management for a frisbee golf course as well as impacts associated with construction activities that have occurred during the last 20 years. 3.3.2 Soils Soil within the project site comprise generally native upland soil. Soil along the southern and eastern property lines was comparatively more consolidated and disturbed than elsewhere within the site. Soil was generally a very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) to very dark brown (10YR 2/2) gravelly sandy loam to silt loam overlying a brown (10YR 4/3) to a light olive brown (2.5Y 4/3) gravelly sandy loam to clay loam. Minor differences in soil conditions within the site are attributed to the construction activities that have affected the site during the last 20 years. 3.3.3 Hydrology Indicators of wetland hydrology were not present within the site. Soils were generally dry and friable in the western and central portions of the site. Soil along the eastern property line was wet, but not saturated. Ponded water, shallow groundwater conditions, or saturated soils were not present. 3.4 Site Assessment – Off-Site 3.4.1 Wetland 1 An elongated north-south oriented wetland (Wetland 1) exists south of the project site on King County tax parcel numbers 292104-9102 and 292104-9038. The wetland measures approximately 14,000 sf in total area and supports forested seasonally saturated (PFOB) and palustrine emergent persistent temporarily flooded (PEM1E) Cowardin wetland classes. The wetland exists within a sloping landform and is separated from the project site by abrupt changes in topography created by an access road. Dominant vegetation within the wetland includes red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), salmonberry, and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) with a patchy distribution of common ladyfern (Athyrium filix-femina, FAC), common rush (Juncus effusus, FACW), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FAC). Supporting wetland hydrology appears to be related to shallow groundwater conditions within the local area. A surface water inlet was not observed. The wetland drains directly to the asphalt shoulder of Pacific Highway South. The wetland was assigned a Category IV rating based on the total score of 14 that the wetland received for functions. Overall, the wetland has low function potential because of its landform, location, and general habitat characteristics. The wetland rated moderately low for water quality improvement and hydrologic functions (score = 5/9) and low for habitat functions (scores = 4/9). The wetland requires a 50 foot standard width buffer. In addition, a 15 foot building setback is required from the outer limits of the buffer for buildings and other structures. 3.4.2 Hylebos Wetlands Several large wetlands (Hylebos Wetlands) are located east of Pacific Highway South but were not studied in detailed because the project site is separated from the wetlands by Pacific Highway South. The portion of any standard width wetland buffer that may extend onto the site from these wetlands does not provide buffer function because of the physical separation from the wetland provided by Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 5 February 16, 2021 Pacific Highway South. Under current code, the standard width wetland buffers would be reduced to the eastern edge of Pacific Highway South. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the recent wetland delineation and rating assessment, the following conclusions have been developed: 1. Wetlands: Wetlands do not exist within the project site. A Category III wetland exists south of the site on King County tax parcel numbers 292104-9102 and 292104-9038. The wetland was not formally delineated because it is located off-site on private property. The wetland requires a 50 foot standard width buffer plus a 15 foot setback from the outer limits of the buffer for buildings and other structures. The buffer and building setback associated with this wetland encroach the southern portion of the project site. Work within or otherwise affecting the wetland, buffer, or building setback would require notification to and/or permits from the City of Federal Way. 2. State and Federal Permitting: Any proposed filling, grading, or other similar impacts to the wetlands discussed in this report may require notification to and/or permits from the Corps of Engineers, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and/or the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Work within wetlands could also require consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the NOAA Fisheries to address Endangered Species Act compliance. In addition, any work within wetlands could require a cultural resource study per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the recent wetland delineation and rating assessment, the following recommendations have been developed: 1. Prior to Purchase: Apply for an obtain a wetland basic review service from the City of Federal Way. This is a flat fee service the City of Federal Way offers to review and confirm wetland report findings. More information and an application form for this service can be found on this website: https://www.cityoffederalway.com/sites/default/files/Documents/Department/CD/Planning/Land%20 Use%20Apps%20and%20Info%20Handouts/063%20Wetland%20%26%20Stream%20Review%20Basic %20Service.pdf 2. Future Development: Buildings and other structures should be located outside of the buffer and building setback from the off-site wetland. Design plans for future development should accurately depict the wetland and buffer locations. To determine exact wetland and buffer location, it may be necessary to formally delineate (flag) and map the limits of the buffer. If this is required, the wetland limits should be flagged by a qualified wetland professional and the flagged limits should then be mapped by a professional land surveyor. Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 6 February 16, 2021 6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, the consulting services summarized in this report conform to the generally accepted standard of care in effect at the time the work was conducted. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. The collection, assessment, and determinations made, if any, related to soil characteristics and groundwater conditions are for the sole purpose of wetland delineation and have been conducted in accordance with the wetland delineation methods adopted under RCW 90.58.380 and WAC 173-22-035. The purpose of the work described in this report is to describe site conditions per City of Federal Way critical area regulations in effect at the time of report preparation. All opinions presented in this report should be considered preliminary until reviewed and confirmed by the City of Federal Way. Site mapping included with this report is not based on a site survey and is not of sufficient quality that it could be considered a substitute for a land survey where required by law or otherwise. 7.0 REFERENCES Environmental Laboratory. (1987). Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Vicksburg, MS: Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station. Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-029. Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Ecology. King County. 2021a. iMap online GIS available at the following website: https://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/iMap/. Accessed February 9, 2021. King County. 2021b. SeaTac precipitation data available from the Hydrologic Information Center at the following website: https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/environment/watersheds/hic/SeaTacPrecipitation.aspx. Accessed February 9, 2021. Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19-145 – Environmentally Critical Areas. Current through Ordinance 20-904, passed December 1, 2020. Federal Way, City of. 2019. “City of Federal Way: Official Zoning Map”. Effective date: April 10, 2019 by ordinance #19-866. Available at the following website: https://www.cityoffederalway.com/sites/default/files/maps/zoning_0.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2021. Federal Way, City of. undated. “City of Federal Way: Critical Areas Map”. Available at the following website: https://www.cityoffederalway.com/sites/default/files/maps/sensitive_2016.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2021. United States Army Corps of Engineers. (2010). Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0.). Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Research and Development Center: ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Wetland Delineation and Rating Report 35855 Pacific Highway South – Federal Way, Washington Page 7 February 16, 2021 United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service. “Web Soil Survey” website available at the following address: websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed February 8, 2021. United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service. “Soil Data Access (SDA) Hydric Soil List” available at the following website: www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316620.html. Accessed February 8, 2021. United States Department of Fish and Wildlife. “National Wetlands Inventory – Surface Waters and Wetlands” website available at the following address: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html. Accessed February 9, 2021. Washington State Department of Ecology. Washington State Water Quality Atlas online website available at the following address: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterqualityatlas/map.aspx. Accessed February 9, 2021. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021. “Priority Habitats on the Web” website available at the following address: https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/. Accessed February 10, 2021. Williams, R. Laramie, R., and Ames, J. 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization: Volume 1 – Puget Sound Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries. November 1975. Appendix A Wetland Map DP1 DP4 DP2 DP3 Hylebos Wetlands (per City of Federal Way Critical Area Map) Hylebos Wetlands (per City of Federal Way Critical Area Map) (Spring Valley Open Space) 100 ftPacific Highway South(State Route 99)Wetland 1 Category IV (±14,000 sf) 50 ft Wetland Buffer50 ft Wetland Buffer 15 ft BSBL TPN 292104-9051 Tax Parcel 292104-9051 Federal Way, Washington Wetland Map Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC 02/16/2021Page 1 0 30 60 N Legend Approximate Wetland 50' Wetland Buffer 15' Building Setback Wetland Determination Point DP1 Appendix B Photographs Tax Parcel 292104-9051 Federal Way, Washington Photographs Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC 02/16/2021Page 1 DP1 Soil Conditions February 9, 2021 DP1 Vegetation Conditions February 9, 2021 DP2 Vegetation Conditions February 9, 2021 DP3 Vegetation Conditions February 9, 2021 DP2 Soil Conditions February 9, 2021 DP3 Soil Conditions February 9, 2021 Tax Parcel 292104-9051 Federal Way, Washington Photographs Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC 02/16/2021Page 2 DP4 Soil Conditions February 9, 2021 DP4 Vegetation Conditions February 9, 2021 Wetland 1 February 9, 2021 Project Site from SW Corner February 9, 2021 Wetland 1 (Photo From Pacific Hwy S) February 9, 2021 Project Site from NE Corner February 9, 2021 Appendix C Wetland Determination Forms WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Acer macrophyllum 10 YES FACU Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) 2. Populus balsamifera 5 YES FAC 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) 4. 15 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 83% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Rubus spectabilis 30 YES FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Salix sitchensis 25 YES FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Thuja occidentalis 15 YES FACW OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 70 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. YES Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. n/a = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. Rubus armeniacus 20 YES FAC 2. 20 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 02/09/2021 Applicant/Owner: Alvarez State: WA Sampling Point: DP 1 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE S 29, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 15% max Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.28105 Long: -122.32369 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 1 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 15 10YR 2/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 15 to 18+ 10YR 3/2 99 10YR 3/6 1 C M gravelly silt loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soils were wet at 10”, but not saturated Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Acer macrophyllum 90 YES FACU Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 15 NO FACU 3. Thuja plicata 10 NO FAC Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. 115 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Hedera helix 75 YES FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Vaccinium parviflorum 20 NO FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Gaultheria shallon 15 NO FACU OBL species 0 x1 = 0 4. FACW species 0 x2 = 0 5. FAC species 10 x3 = 30 110 = Total Cover FACU species 215 x4 = 860 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species 0 x5 = 0 1. Column Totals: 225 (A) 890 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3.95 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. NO Dominance Test is >50% 5. NO Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. NO Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. NO 8. NO Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. NO Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. n/a = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 02/09/2021 Applicant/Owner: Alvarez State: WA Sampling Point: DP 2 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE S 29, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 15% max Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.28105 Long: -122.32369 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 2 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 15 10YR 3/2 100 silt loam 15 to 18+ 2.5Y 5/3 95 10YR 3/6 10YR 4/6 5 C M clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Equisetum telmateia 30 YES FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. YES Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 30 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. Rubus armeniacus 100 YES FAC 2. 100 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – 70 Remarks: Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 02/09/2021 Applicant/Owner: Alvarez State: WA Sampling Point: DP 3 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE S 29, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 15% max Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.28105 Long: -122.32369 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 3 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 14 10YR 3/2 100 gravelly sandy clay loam 14 to 18+ 2.5Y 5/2+ 95 10YR 3/6 10YR 4/6 5 C M gravelly sandy clay 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soils were wet, but not saturated. Project Site: 3318 239th Avenue SE – Sammamish, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Acer macrophyllum 65 YES FACU Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Thuja plicata 40 YES FAC 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4. 105 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33.3 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Polygonum cuspidatum 100 YES FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species 0 x1 = 0 4. FACW species 0 x2 = 0 5. FAC species 40 x3 = 120 100 = Total Cover FACU species 165 x4 = 660 Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species 0 x5 = 0 1. Column Totals: 205 (A) 780 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3.8 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. NO Dominance Test is >50% 5. NO Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. NO Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. NO 8. NO Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. NO Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. n/a = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 02/09/2021 Applicant/Owner: Alvarez State: WA Sampling Point: DP 4 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE S 29, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 15% max Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.28105 Long: -122.32369 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , Or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 4 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 14 10YR 2/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 14 to 18+ 10YR 4/3 100 gravelly sandy loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: King County Tax Parcel No. 292104-9051 – Federal Way, Washington Appendix D Wetland Rating Form Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____ Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______ HGM Class used for rating_________________ Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________ OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ (based on functions___ or special characteristics___) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 _______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 _______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 _______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Wetland 1 Wetland 1 02/09/2021 Peter Super X Slope X see attached IV X X 5 5 4 14 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1 attached attached Figure 2 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. X X X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 11 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SLOPE WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality S 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? S 1.1. Characteristics of the average slope of the wetland: (a 1% slope has a 1 ft vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft of horizontal distance) Slope is 1% or less points = 3 Slope is > 1%-2% points = 2 Slope is > 2%-5% points = 1 Slope is greater than 5% points = 0 S 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions): Yes = 3 No = 0 S 1.3. Characteristics of the plants in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the plants in the wetland. Dense means you have trouble seeing the soil surface (>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 in. Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > 90% of the wetland area points = 6 Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > ½ of area points = 3 Dense, woody, plants > ½ of area points = 2 Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > ¼ of area points = 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for plants points = 0 Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page S 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? S 2.1. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft on the uphill side of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 S 2.2. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in question S 2.1? Other sources ________________ Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for S 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1-2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? S 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 S 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where water quality is an issue? At least one aquatic resource in the basin is on the 303(d) list. Yes = 1 No = 0 S 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? Answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which unit is found. Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for S 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page 0 0 6 7 X 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 X X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 12 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SLOPE WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion S 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? S 4.1. Characteristics of plants that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits conditions in the wetland. Stems of plants should be thick enough (usually > 1/8 in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows. Dense, uncut, rigid plants cover > 90% of the area of the wetland points = 1 All other conditions points = 0 Rating of Site Potential If score is: 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? S 5.1. Is more than 25% of the area within 150 ft upslope of wetland in land uses or cover that generate excess surface runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? S 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems: The sub-basin immediately down-gradient of site has flooding problems that result in damage to human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2 Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient points = 1 No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0 S 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for S 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: X X 1 0 1 0 1 X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points 2 X 1 1 1 X X X X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) ____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2 It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page 0 X 5 X 0 2 0 2 X 0 0 1.5 1.5 40 6 46 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report ). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above). Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above). Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page). Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? The dominant water regime is tidal, Vegetated, and With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV Cat. I SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Cat. I Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105 Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3 SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat I Cat. II Cat. III Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form N/A 150 ft 150 ft PFOB PEM1E Tax Parcel 292104-9051 Federal Way, Washington Wetland Unit including 150 ft Offset Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC Figure 1 0 40 80 N Wetland unit Area Does Not Drain to Wetland (43%) Land Use that Generates Pollutants (4%) Land Use that Generates Excess Runoff (21%) Tax Parcel 292104-9051 Federal Way, Washington Accessible Habitat, Relative Undist. Habitat, & Low Intensity Land Use within 1 km of Wetland Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC Figure 2 0 500 1000 N Wetland unit (<1%) Accessible Undisturbed Habitat (0%) Relatively Undisturbed Habitat (40%) Moderate/Low Intensity Land Use (12%) WetlandsSource: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityWetlandsEstuarine and Marine DeepwaterEstuarine and Marine WetlandFreshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub WetlandFreshwater PondLakeOtherRiverineFebruary 9, 202100.10.20.05mi00.150.30.075km1:5,915This page was produced by the NWI mapperNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI)This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.This 13.10 acre Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland habitat is classified as a PFO/SSC. Photo interpreted using 1:58,000 scale, color infrared imagery from 1980.This 0.36 acre Freshwater Emergent Wetland habitat is classified as a PEM1C. Photo interpreted using 1:58,000 scale, color infrared imagery from 1980.This 16.63 acre Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland habitat is classified as a PFOA. Photo interpreted using 1:58,000 scale, color infrared imagery from 1980.This 25.69 acre Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland habitat is classified as a PFOA. Photo interpreted using 1:58,000 scale, color infrared imagery from 1980.Project Site S 356th StSpring ValleyOpen SpaceProject site Soil Map—King County Area, Washington Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/16/2021 Page 1 of 35236470523648052364905236500523651052365205236530523654052365505236560523657052365805236590523660052364705236480523649052365005236510523652052365305236540523655052365605236570523658052365905236600551080551090551100551110551120551130551140551150551160551170551180 551080 551090 551100 551110 551120 551130 551140 551150 551160 551170 551180 47° 16' 51'' N 122° 19' 28'' W47° 16' 51'' N122° 19' 23'' W47° 16' 46'' N 122° 19' 28'' W47° 16' 46'' N 122° 19' 23'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 30 60 120 180 Feet 0 10 20 40 60 Meters Map Scale: 1:703 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 16, Jun 4, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 6, 2020—Jul 20, 2020 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—King County Area, Washington Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/16/2021 Page 2 of 3 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Bh Bellingham silt loam 0.1 3.7% EwC Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes 2.2 96.3% Totals for Area of Interest 2.3 100.0% Soil Map—King County Area, Washington Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/16/2021 Page 3 of 3 303d Water Quality Atlas Map Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and February 10, 2021 0 1 20.5 Miles K Assessed Water/SedimentWater Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 Sediment Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 :$:HWODQGVRI+LJK&RQVHUYDWLRQ9DOXH&RXQW\ RI .LQJ %XUHDX RI /DQG 0DQDJHPHQW (VUL +(5( *DUPLQ.QRZQ:HWODQGVRI+LJK&RQVHUYDWLRQ9DOXH&RXQWLHV30 PL NP:DVKLQJWRQ1DWXUDO+HULWDJH3URJUDP&RXQW\RI.LQJ%XUHDXRI/DQG0DQDJHPHQW(VUL+(5(*DUPLQ,1&5(0(1731*$86*6_86)LVKDQG:LOGOLIH6HUYLFH1DWLRQDO6WDQGDUGVDQG6XSSRUW7HDPZHWODQGVBWHDP#IZVJRY_:DVKLQJWRQ6WDWH'HSDUWPHQWRI1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHV_:DVKLQJWRQThuja plicata - Tsuga heterophylla / Lysichiton americanus Swamp Forest (North Pacific Conifer Seepage Swamp ID 2947).Spiraea douglasii Wet Shrubland (Vancouverian Shrub Basin Swamp ID 240).Project SiteWetland unit