Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
17-103983
CITY OF . Fe d le ra I Way Centered on Opportunity January 8, 2019 Mr. Jamie Walter --3, 1 LE Mr. Chris Burrus Harbour Homes LLC 400 North 341h Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Re: File #17-103983-AD; 3— PARTY WETLAND REVIEW Harbour Homes/Ellingson, Parcel #322104-9050, South 376,h Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. Walter & Mr. Burrus: On August 17, 2017, the City of Federal Way received your request for third party review of the Wetland Report for parcel number 322104-9050, prepared by Soundview Consultants quly 2017). The report was peer reviewed and the city provided you with a response letter on November 15, 2017 (copy enclosed). Further action on your part is necessary. A revised wetland report must be submitted. It is encouraged that this occurs prior to submitting an application for development. After status checks on January 31, 2018, July 30, 2018, and November 6, 2018, by city staff, no resubmittal has been received. The peer review fees collected were completely expended, so there is neither an outstanding balance for further review work nor a refund due. The peer review file #17-103983-AD is now closed. If you want to continue the wetland review process prior to submitting an application For development, a new Request for Administrative Decision form, applicable fee, and revised wetland report must be submitted to the Perniit Center. The revised report will be peer reviewed at the applicant's expense in accordance with Federal Wray Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.080(3). As part of that process, the revised report will be sent to the city's consultant for preparation of a review cost estimate. Should you have any questions about this letter, I can be reached at sta ev.welsliof ederahvay- cn, or 253-835-2634. Sincerely, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: November 15, 2017, Letter from City of Federal Way Doc CD. 78644 17-103983-00-AD A�kCITY OF . . Federal Way November 15, 2017 Mr. Jamie Walter Harbour Homes LLC 400 North 34th Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Jim Ferrell, Mayor FILE Re: File #17-103983-AD; 3- PARTY WETLAND REVIEW Harbour Homes/Ellingson, Parcel #322104-9050, South 376th Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. Walter: On August 17, 2017, the City of Federal Way received your request for third party review of the Wetland Report for parcel number 322104-9050, prepared by Soundview Consultants Quly 2017). The report indicated that there is a Category IV wetland onsite (Wetland A) with a 40-foot buffer. WETLAND REPORT The city forwarded your request to our wetland consultant, Perteet, for their review. Perteet completed a site visit, reviewed relevant documents, and prepared a letter (November 9, 2017) in which they do not concur with some components of the Soundview report. Perteet states that Wetland A is a Category III wetland with a 60-foot buffer. The city concurs with Perteet's review and requests more information. NEXT STEPS Please review the findings in the enclosed letter prepared by Perteet. A revised wetland report must be submitted. It is encouraged that this occurs prior to submitting an application for development. The revised report will be peer reviewed at the applicant's expense in accordance with Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.080(3). Should you have any questions about this letter, I can be reached at tace .welsh ffeder Ll�va .ca , or 253-835-2634. Sincerely, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: November 9, 2017, Letter from Perteet File #17-103983-00 _AD Doc. I.D. 76M PERTE ET 50cee! cvnmu i c<, W di To: Stacey Welsh, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way From: Bill Kidder, PWS, Lead Ecologist Jason Walker, PLA, PWS, Environmental Manager and Wetland Ecologist Date: November 9, 2017 Re: Harbor Homes— Initial Critical Areas Review PROJECTDESCRIPTION PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Perteet Inc. conducted a critical areas review of the Harbor Homes site, located at 1224 South 376" Street, Federal Way, Washington. The 4.77 acre parcel is listed as King County Tax Assessor Parcel 322104-9050 (subject property). It is located east of Interstate 5 and east of Milton Road immediately north of the joint border between the City of Federal Way and the City of Milton in the NE quarter of Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 4 East. The applicant is proposing to subdivide and develop the parcel for proposed residential construction. The applicant requested the city review and respond to their consultant's Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment dated July 28, 2017 (hereafter referred to as the SVC Report). DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following documents and resource information websites were reviewed by Perteet prior to the site visit: ■ Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment— Ellingson Property, prepared for Harbor Homes, prepared by Soundview Consultants, dated July 28, 2017 • King County Online Parcel Viewer with historic aerial photography htt:11'www.kin coup ovlo erotions/GIS/Ma s1iMAP.os x , accessed October 13, 2017 • City of Federal Way Critical Areas map[http:llwww.cityoffederolwoy.comloaoelmaos), accessed Oct 13, 2017 r Washington Department of Ecology Water Quality Assessment (303[d]) and Water Quality Improvement (TMDL) (httg./Iwww.ecy,wo.gov/progroms/wg/links/wq ossessments.html) • Google Earth Pro with historic imagery from 1990 to present SITE DESCRIPTION Perteet ecological staff completed a site visit on October 17, 2017. The day was warm and sunnywith a light breeze. Don Babineou, Soundview Consultants project manager, was present for the applicant during the site visit. The subject parcel is a partially logged forested parcel with undulating topography dominated by Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii) canopy with lesser quantities of big leaf maple (Acermocrophy//um) and red alder (A/nus rubro). Partial logging was completed by the current landowner (Arnie Ellingson) in the last three to four years as related directly to Perteet staff by the landowner during a separate critical areas review in 2016. On the subject property, the SVC Report identifies one palustrine emergent wetland (Wetland A) situated in a depression at the parcel's northeast corner. A depression with hydrophytic vegetation in the southeast quarter of the subject parcel was also identified by the SVC report. Discussion and topographic observations by Perteet and the applicant's representative during the October 17, 2017 site visit determined that Wetland A's offsite extent could not easily be estimated by over the fence observation, and that Wetland A did not have a defined surface water outlet or surface connection to other waters. The most likely potential outlet would be to the west about 90 feet at a wooden fence and about 2 feet above the bottom of Wetland A's lowest elevation. Harbor Homes South 376" Street— Initial Critical Areas Review Page I PERTEET PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Three sample plots completed in the parceI's southeast quarter depression confirmed that wetland conditions are not present in that area. Perteet completed one sample plot adjacent to SVC wetland flag DP-5 and agreed with the SVC Report findings. The landscape surrounding the subject parcel contains few other City of Federal Way (City) regulated critical areas. North of the subject parcel are residential homes (<1/acre) containing mostly mowed yards with domestic pets. All parcels north of the subject property are currently in the planning process for density upzoning by the City. To the south of South 376" Street is a large residential retirement community built around 2010. To the west are parcels that contain residential dwelling units (<l/acre) and a horse barn with small pasture. Approximately 200 feet west of the subject parcel is a large seasonally to permanently flooded depressional palustrine wetland with multiple Cowardin classes maintained by shallow groundwater. The buffer from this off -site wetland does not extend to encroach on the subject property, due to the approximate 200 foot distance. East of the subject property is a relatively undisturbed upland forested parcel containing a single residential dwelling with small mowed yard and one small barn concentrated in the southwest corner of the parcel. No other critical areas could be discerned off -site under the dense forest canopyfrom aerial photography or from the edge of the subject parcel boundary. The SVC Report submitted to the City for review does not include discussion regarding proposed development actions, possible project impacts, or possible critical areas mitigation. This review is limited to the evaluation of existing site conditions. FINDINGS Listed below are Perteet's findings along with requested actions in bold type: 1. The SVC Report submitted to the City complies with the requirements of FWMC 19.145.080 Critical Area Report for site characterization. No development action was proposed and the SVC report was not reviewed for the code subsections pertaining to proposed improvements, DARPA, or mitigation. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.430 and .440, no intrusions or impacts to critical areas or critical area buffers are approved at this time. The SVC Report submitted to the City provides a minimum information necessary to review subject property vegetation, soils, and hydrologic conditions pursuant to FWMC 19.145.410 Of. Physical characteristics pertaining to wetland hydrology questions and a discussion of observed hydrologic conditions during SVC's March 2017 site investigation (Sample plot DP-1 hydrology remarks) are not present in the SVC Report to explain the wetland's hydrology and drainage characteristics. Additional details were directly observed and other details provided by the applicant's representative during the October 17, 2017 site visit to adequately complete this review. Perteet confirms that one depressional palustrine emergent wetland containing no defined outlet and no surface connection to other waters is present at the northeast corner of the subject property. This wetland extends north, east, northwest, and northeast onto adjacent parcels. This wetland boundary as illustrated by the SVC Report only approximates the wetland boundary on adjacent parcels. Perteet confirms no wetlands are present in the southeast quarter of the subject property as determined by the SVC Report. The SVC Report page 7 describes Wetland A as approximately 890 square feet on -site and extends off -site; the off -site extent being visually esl imaged frorn the subject property by SVC. No topographically defined outlet or surface water connection was observed by Perteet and SVC during the site visit. This wetland might be construed as isolated, and a Corps jurisdictional determination QD) would clarify its connections. The on -site and off -site extent of Wetland A was observed to be at least 1,000 square feet in total and would require a wetland buffer per FWMC 19.145.420 (1) and (2). 4; The SVC Report Section 5.2 Offsite Features briefly discusses two off -site wetlands east/southeast and west of the subject property. These wetlands are not illustrated on any SVC Report figures. Perteet was able to observe and confirm the palustrine depression wetland within 225 feet to the west. Perteet was not able to access, view, or confirm the wetland listed to the east/southeast of the subject property. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.410 and .420, Perteet determines these wetlands / wetland buffers should not constrain the subject property at this time. Harbor Homes South 376" Street — Initial Critical Areas Review Page 2 JOPERTEET UE,SUITE900 �cac• canmu �: es. ,vie 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 5. Perteet confirms no on -site fish & wildlife habitat conservation areas were observed on the subject property pursuant to FWMC Chapter 19 Article III Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. Wetland flag and plot locations illustrated on SVC Report figures did not accurately correspond with conditions and property lines observed in the field on October 17, 2017. Some flags present on the ground that did not appear to be altered or moved were almost 10 feet out of position from the positions illustrated in figures. Flags Al and DP-1 as illustrated on SVC Report figure 1 at least 5 feet east of the subject property boundary were observed approximately 2 and 5 feet, respectively, inside the subject property boundary (see attached photos). These inaccuracies were described by Perteet to the applicant's representative during the site visit. The representative explained that flags were collected by handheld recreational grade GPS (Garmin or similar) and imported into GIS with figure parcel boundaries downloaded from public data sets. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.080 (2)d and f, capture wetland boundaries and sample plots during land survey to accurately depict boundary and sample plot locations and resultant buffer locations on future proposed development plan drawings. The SVC Report submitted to the City does not include all figures associated required by Ecology's 2014 western Washington wetland rating form. The applicant's representative provided the some figures during the October 17 site visit. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.420 (1), please include all rating form figures attached to the critical areas report for future critical areas review submissions. 8. The SVC Report rated the wetlands pursuant to FWMC 19.145.420 Wet/andrating andbuffers. The SVC Report states the wetland rating to be a Category IV wetland with a 40-foot buffer. Perteet finds Wetland A to have a low Category III rating with a 60-foot buffer based on all documents provided, discussion with the applicant's representative during the site visit, and observed Wetland A topography and landscape position as of October 17, 2017. The table below lists the rating scores for SVC and Perteet and provides explanation when question scores differ. While there are discrepancies between question scores, most do not change the functions' scores. Two questions D5.2 and H3.1 change function's scores based on site features present that meet Ecology's 2014 manual criteria. Two questions D4.1 and D4.2 change functions scores based on "significant ponding was also observed during March 2017 site visit" (SVC data form DP-1 hydrology remarks) and SVC's wetland rating form figure 2 seasonal hydrology (attached). The report text does not discuss early season ponding or hydrology. Inconsistencies therefore occur between SVC's data form DP-1 remarks, the report text, and the wetland rating form hydrology figure and related scores. Perteet's October 17, 2017 observations of Wetland A topography and geomorphic position indicates this wetland occurs in a depression with no observed distinct outlet and therefore has a likelihood to pond greater than 0.5 feet (6 inches) deep. Please provide evidence to clarify the SVC sample plot data form comment, report text that does not describe observed early -season hydrology as remarked in the data form, and the rating form figure discrepancies that do not correlate with this information. A topographic land survey would suffice to illustrate the configuration of the depression and the depth of ponding necessary from the bottom point of the wetland relative to the topography west along the fence line where the most likely overflow drainage may occur. The SVC Report correctly states building setbacks shall be a minimum of 5 feet from the outer edge of critical area buffers pursuant to FWMC 19.145.160 Building Setbacks. 10. No proposed land use development actions or critical areas impacts were proposed by the submitted SVC Report. In general, a mitigation plan consistent with Federal Way code 19.145.430 and 19.145.440 is required for possible impacts. Please submit a complete mitigation plan if critical area or buffer intrusions/impacts are proposed with the formal plat or development submittal that satisfies the provisions for FWMC 19.145.130 through 19.145.200 and 19.145.430 through 19.145.440. END OF MEMORANDUM (See Attachments) Harbor Homes South 376'h Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Page pERTEET WETLAND RATING DETERMINATION Department of Ecology 2014 Western Washington Wetland Rating Scores • - Rating Rating 1.1 2 3 12 0 0 1.3 0 0 1.4 4 4 DI Subtotal 6 7 2.1 0 0 2.2 0 1 2.3 1 1 2.4 0 0 D2 Subtotal 1 2 3.1 1 0 3.2 1 1 3.3 2 2 D3 Subtotal 4 3 4.1 2 4 4.2 0 3 4.3 0 0 D4 Subtotal 2 7 5.1 0 0 5.2 0 1 5.3 0 0 D5 Subtotal 0 1 6.1 0 0 6.2 0 0 D6 Subtotal 0 0 Harbor Homes South 376" Street— Initial Critical Areas Review PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT. WA 98201 425.252.7700 Per October 17 site visit observations with SVC present. Wetland sits in a topographic depression about 1.5 to 2 feet deep with no distinct visible outlet. Most likely possible outlet would be upslope to the west. See attached photos. Remains Medium Ecology 2014 manual page 48 includes residential areas Per tax assessor data Remains Medium No defined outlet. No nearby waters Remains High Per October 17 site visit observations with SVC present. Wetland sits in a topographic depression about 1.5 to 2 feet deep with no distinct visible outlet. Most likely possible outlet would upslope be to the west. See attached photos. Per October 17 site visit observations with SVC present of Wetland A as described in Question 8 above, in table Q4.1 corresponding to SVC sample plot DP-1 hydrology notes describing "significant ponding" and the attached rating determination figure 2 hydrology (attached) showing extensive seasonal ponding in the depression. Not certain the actual on -the -ground extent of basin draining to wetland compares to SVC's extent estimated using GIS from public topography data set using 5 foot contour intervals. Changes from Low to Medium Ecology 2014 manual page 56 includes residential lawns Changes from Low to Medium Remains Low Page 4 pERTEET 11 0 0 1.2 1 1 1.3 0 1 1.4 0 0 1.5 0 0 Hl Subtotal 1 2 2.1 0 1 2.2 1 1 2.3 -2 -2 H2 Subtotal -1 0 3.1 0 1 H3 Subtotal 0 1 PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Perteet observed spiraea, buttercup, roses, black twinberry, blackberry, asters, willows, 2 unidentifiable mowed grasses, and reed conarygross. Remains Low SVC draws polygons based on parcel boundary as observed in figures provided and confirmed during site visit by SVC staff. However, the Ecology 2014 manual methods (page 103) clearly illustrate that polygons should be drawn around ecological (not political) boundaries. The use of gridded graph overlay as described in item 3 on page 100 further confirms that political parcel boundaries are not a sufficient method for dividing up ecological habitat polygons. Please use ecologically based polygons forfuture analyses. Remains Low Perteet and SVC observed large logs meeting the PHS snags and logs criteria in the undisturbed forest immediately southeast of Wetland A. See first attached photo. Changes from Low to Medium Harbor Homes South 376" Street— Initial Critical Areas Review Page 5 A iN .4 10 P E RTE ET OLICr COrlrlu-) L B., by PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Orange wetland flag Aland pink sample plot flag DP-1 (tied on ground in sun) located on subject property based on fence line Harbor Homes South 376" Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Page7 pERTEET Topography rising to west of wetland with from near flag Al (east behind camera). PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT. WA 98201 425.252.7700 Harbor Homes South 376" Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Page 8 1 JO pERTEET Harbor Homes South 376" Street — Initial Critical Areas Review PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 and A. Page 9 JkPERTEET Setter cornn)U" L es, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 ATTACHED WETLAND RATING FORM MAPS MISSING FROM THE SUBMITTED SVC REPORT AND PROVIDED TO PERTEET DURING OCTOBER 17, 2017 SITE VISIT Harbor Homes South 376" Street— Initial Critical Areas Review Page 10 ELLINGSON PROPERTY - WETLAND RATING " ho. Soundv*ew Consultants wn iRO qm suklos GIG HARIJOR, WASHING1 .0 N 'J833-5 F -",.%314.8954 ELLINGSON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO: 1224 S. 376TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER. 322104-9050 DATE:7/27/2017 joa 1155.0016 By. DLS sc,,,LE: 1 601 FIGURE NO. 1 ELLINGSON PROPERTY - WETLAND RATING MAP Soundview Consultants w 2907}IAIWORVIIWDRIVI,SUICLD 1'.2=3.514h'453 GIG IiARJiOR, LVASHING MN 98333 1'. 253--914 8954 \VV r% SOPNDV1VWCONSI LIAN ELLINGSON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO: 1224 S. 376TH SI' FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER 322104-9050 DATE:7/27/2017 JOB:1155.0016 BY: DES SCALE: 1 " = 60' FIGURE NO. 2 ELLINGSON PROPERTY - WETLAND RATING MAP D.4.0 D.4.3 Area of Contributin Basin S 844,977 Area of Wetland A S 3,066 Area of High Intensity within the Contributing Basin (SF) 101,123 Percent of Wetland A within Contributing Basin 0.36% Percent of High Intensity within the Contributing Basin u% EnvKaftmemal Amosmem • RegMV - Lan W4 SoMmiu „9H7 PEA H 11 URVI FM' DIMC, $01 CG D P VC3.514-MZ GM MRHQR. WAS 144LC's• N 9035 F 1;3.514.6W# WSC'%.SOU YAV i PW -CG,N r,U LTAN-n.CON ELLINGSON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO: 1224 S. 376TIl ST FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER 322104-9050 DATE:7/27/2017 JOB:1155.0016 BY: DLS SCALE:1 " = 300 ' WETLAND RATING FIGURE NO. gpsS D M PAF.,CGL ptlAJVAR11E.�, J►fOT 6CQLoG1CAL 100LICOA15 pER ELLINGSON PROPERTY - WETLAND RATING MAP 2'] H.2.0 Wetlands A H2.1 Abutting Undisturbed Habitat 0.00% Abutting Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 0.65% Accessible Habitat 0.33% H.2.2 Undisturbed Habitat 13.77% Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 30.38% Undisturbed Habitat in 1 KM Polygon 28.96% H.2.3 High Intensity Land Use in 1 RAI Polygon 55.86% si�Fl l3�'v.i9v ti�th?eti�� LLL ' � Enntanmenrnf lsaes+ma:n PLyn�njl l..7riJ USa Sahjlmns xnr HARIJUM 11.W DfM L. SUI rss 1a P islS M2 i1014AR130R,NA51VNC 4991M 1s 2&M14.8954 DATE:7/27/2017 JOB:1155.0016 BY: DM SCALE: 1 " = 1,250' FG= RATINQ 14AA PAW j43 ELLINGSON PROPERTY - WETLAND RATING MAP 10175 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water COMMENCEMENT BAY (OUTER) Mari"jFull Grids) 21576 5 Total Phosphorus Water KILLARNEY (NORTH ARM) LAKE Lakes 75i7 5 6actertx Water WAPATOCREEK Rivers/Streams 78126 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water HYLEBOS CREEK, W.F. Rivers/Streams 15887 5 Bacteric Water HYLEBOS CREEK Rivers/Streems 7503 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water FIFE DITCH Rivers/Streams 7518 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water WAPATO CREEK Rivers/Streams 158BB 5 Bacteria Water HYLEBOS CREEK, E.F. Rivers/Streams 79625 5 Mercury Water UNNAMED CREEK(TRIBTO HYLEBOS CREEK) Rlvors/Stroams 7504 5 Bacteria Water WAPATO CREEK Rivers/Streams 726U 5Tempereture Water HYLEBOS CREEK, W.F. Rlvers/Streams 7519 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water WAPATO CREEK Rivers/Streams 7520 5 Bacteria Water WAPATO CREEK Rivers/Streams 45361 5 Copper 'c_§� Water HYLEBO5 CREEK. E.F. Rivers/Streams 8678 5 Ammonia-N Water FIFE DITCH Rivers/Streams 76389 5 Lead Water UNNAMED CREEK(TRIB TO WEST HYLEB05 CREEK) Rivers/Streams 78259 5 Copper Water UNNAMED CREEK(TRI B TO WEST HYLEBOS CREEK) Rivers/5treams 78496 5Zinc Water UNNAMED CREEK(TRIB TO WEST HYLEBOS CREEK) Rlvers/Streams 71889 5 pH Water UNNAMED CREEK(TRIS TO WEST HYLEBOS CREEK) Pi-cs/Streams 72619 5Temperature Water UNNAMED CREEK(TRIB TO WEST HYLEBOS CREEK) R!vers/Streams 78125 5 Dissolved Oxygen Water UNNAMED CREEK{TRIBTO WEST HYLEBOS CREEK) Rivers/Streams E669 5 Dieldrin Tissue COMMENCEMENT BAY (INNER) Marine (Full Grids) 9671 5 Polychlorinated BipherryLs(PCBs) Tissue COMMENCEMENT BAY (INNER) Marine (Full Grids) 36173 5 Chlorinated Pesticides Tissue COMMENCEMENT BAY (INNER) Marine (Full Grids) 36174 5 DDT (and -tatwlitos) Tissue COMMENCEMENT BAY (INNER) Marine (Full Grids) 36176 5 High Molecular Weight Polycycllc Aromatic Hydrocarbons(HPAHI Tissue COMMENCEMENT BAY (INNER) Marine (Full Grids) 3011.ndvlo; 7 Envrronrnrrtzi Awssmdtm - P4anntrtp • Wr4 U92 SOP00ni .907 }LA0110RI'll IM 0ItI%L. sui rb J,1 It 753.5141953 [.IG i IA 110H, WASH IXG 170-4 "11IS F u3.51+.89$4 ►["<i W UN G"tl PWCOW f TA[e i'S.CONI ELLINGSON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO: 1224 S. 376TH ST FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER: 322104-9050 DATE:7/27/2017 JOB:1155.0016 BY: DLS SCALE: 1 " = 10,400' WETLAND RATING 5 FIGURE NO. 1. Review the critical areas report for consistency with the requirements of Federal Task Scope: way Revised Code (FWRQ Chapter 19.145, "Environmentally Critical Areas," especially Article IV Wetlands. 2. Conduct site visit(s) as necessary. (One site visit to be conducted). 3. Provide written response to findings, recommendations, and request additional information from applicant if needed. (One primary review memo assumed) 4. Possible meeting with applicant's wetland biologist. (During Perteet site visit). 5. Review of resubmitted/corrected documents as needed (Up to one resubmittal review, as .peeded). 6. Project management as necessary if additional land use review is required. Task Cost: Not to exceed $ 3,760.00 without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. (Estimated persuant to 2017 Perteet standard rates and fees). ACrpntanrp• of �AIW, �.�: �Ar� LIQW57 ir" EM y RS35.D �o 3IIID5 I.Q •a13a 32-21.-129 FwtOny: a =TDAaMS stet St36 am Date =104 9Q5Q 14H ±ztadI= 3b21-4431 Lim�[s maatQ awm 732101 22214131 � a;nmoQlQ ! stsz FWfrea'Iq:u File M 039B3-AD Doe ID 46479 CITY OF Federal Way WETLAND CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM Date: August 31, 2017 City: City of Federal Way Community Development Department 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Consultant: Jason Walker Perteet 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 iwa ikerPperteet.c_om Project: Harbour Homes — Wetland Delineation Ellingson property off of South 376`h Street, Federal Way Parcel: 322104-9050 File No.: 17-103983-AD Project Harbour Homes Proponent: 400 North 34" Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 206-315-8130 i waltie�arbourhomes.com_ cburrus(a.harb ourhomes.com Project Planner: Senior Planner Stacey Welsh stacey.welsbAcityoffederalway.com, 253-835-2634 Project The applicant is interested in development of the 4.77 acre site, which contains a Background: wetland. Prior to submitting permit applications, review of the critical areas report is requested. This property is adjacent to other parcels owned by Mr. Ellingson, where previous wetland review work was conducted under file 16-103310-AD and 17-100351-AD. Documents • Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report, prepared by Provided: Soundview Consultants (report date: July 2017) e City Map, see next page. File 17-103983-AD Doe M 46478 CITY of ti. Federal Way September 14, 2017 Mr. Jamie Walder Harbour Homes LLC 400 North 34t" Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Jim Ferrell, Mayor FILE Re: File #17-103983-AD; WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW ESTIMATE Harbour Homes/Ellingson — Wetland Delineation Review, Parcel #322104-9050 South 376th Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. Waltier: Enclosed please find the consultant task authorization with scope of work for review of the critical areas report. The department's wetland consultant, Perteet, was asked to provide an estimate for their review of information prepared by Soundview Consultants. The normal course of action is for the city to set up an account to be funded by the applicant and drawn down by the work performed by Perteet. Please note that if any of the funds are not used, they will be returned to the applicant. A check in the amount of $3,760.00, payable to the City of Federal Way, and signature on the consultant authorization form, must be submitted before the review will begin. Please note —this fee will cover the review of the materials, field review, memorandum, plus one revision review. Any meeting would occur during Perteet's field review if requested by the applicant. Additional reviews or meetings beyond that will require a supplemental cost and authorization. Following receipt, I will authorize Perteet to begin their formal review; they are available to begin the work next week. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your project, please contact me at 253-835-2634, or stace;�..��elsh c� cih offederalway.cn>n. Sincerely, , 7-- Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: Wetland Consultant Authorization Form City of Federal Way Invoice File 9 17-103983-00-:\D Doc. LD. 7G350 CITY OF �. Federal Way CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Jim Ferrell, Mayor August 31, 2017 Mr. Jason Walker Perteet 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 FILE Re: File #17-103983-AD; REQUEST FOR THIRD PARTY REVIEW Harbour Homes (Ellingson) Wetland Delineation, Parcel 322104-9050 Off of South 376th Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. Walker: Enclosed please find the task authorization form and critical area report for third party review. City staff is requesting review pursuant to the agreed terms of the on -call contract. Please review the scope of work on the task authorization form, enter the task cost on page two of the document, sign, and return it to the city. Following the deposit of funds by the applicant, staff will provide you with an authorization to proceed with the scope of work. Please contact me at 253-835-2634, or stacZL. yelshQcityoffederalway.com, if you have any questions regarding this task. Sincerely, F Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: Task Authorization Form Critical Area Report File 17-103983-00-AD Doc. I.D. 76479 http://gismaps.kingeounty.gov/arcgis/rest/directories/arcgisoutputIPrintingIPrintingService... 8/3 0/2017 ti Page 1 of 1 o � / 3221049157 a3:3xz o 3221049114 3221049126 0 1 R N N co II f F� r 3?�1049138 I r I l ! 3221049063 r� 3221049036 I l r! 3221049136 ! `lzia 61110 I S 376th St Ivfflton 4366200010 4368200005 61414 '92'�149164 I i 3221049162 322104 9163 http://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/arcgis/rest/directories/arcgisoutputIPrintingIPrintingService... 8/3 0/2017 King County Department of Assess,12Tts: eReal Property Page 1 of 2 ADVERTISEMENT tii;v Vic:+red I'rnpciE}rna F'iEE 4€;�I, 71�]s F'i•�l:ert� l�IusS:tr�cf lern.:s araa n.•�urt PE4rz: 1'ron,;e�i3>>E,�i! �'j PARCFL DATA Parcel , �2.f 9- vJ L ... o.€3irE5dFGtlOn-� •„ — IF=DC-R.;LVv7AY — f '_LINGSON Levy Code— 3275 Name— ARNOiI:)*Cti' R[ Property Type v • R Site Address _ - Plat Block i Building Number Residential Area C65-018 (SW Aopl e..sa - j Plat Lot! Unit Number Property Name - - -- - — — - : Quarter -Section -Township- NE-32-23-4 -- _ _ — Range Legal Description _•• LOT3 OF REV €<C SHORT FLAT 4; 6QR3 RE(, AF *7704050493 SD PI_A•r DAF Si> 314 OF SE 314 OF NE VA LESS CO RD Plat Block: Plat Lot; Highest & Best Use As If SINGLE FAMILY Vacant Highest & Best Use As I ifurkrown) ]mproved Present Use Var..a=�ti,5!r,0i'-rare i!yl Land SgFt —20 . 8'1 .Acres 4,71 Views LAND DATA Poe"ntago Unusable Unbuildable NO Restrictive Size Shape ---- — -- Zoning P.53^G RS Y�'ater PRIVATE SewerlSeptir. (none) Road Access PUBLIC.' — Parking ADE0UA3c Street SnTtaeE] PAVED Waterfront — Paioter I Waterfront Location Territorial Waterfront Footage C 0lymples. Lot Depth Factor i) Cascades Waterfront Bank Sestdo Skyline TideiShore Puaat Sound Waterfront Restricted Access Lake Washington Waterfront Access Rights NO Lake Saminamish Poor Quality NO Lake,'River;Creek Proximity Influence NO Other View Designations Nuisances Historic Site Current USE Nbr Bldg Sites _ Adjacent to Golf Fairway Adjacent to Greenbelt Other Designation Deed Restrictions Development Rights Purchased Easements Native Growth Protection Easement DNR Lease I Topography (hone) ' Traffic Noise Ai"rt Noise NO Power Lines NO NO Other Nuisances NO NU Problems NO : Water Problems NO ' Concurrency N. O NOTransportation Other Problems NO NO Environmental NO FalYlmnlmertlai NO NO BUILDING TAX ROLL HISTORY Account Valued Tax Omit Levy iAppraised!Apprnised Appraised New Taxable'Taxat+lt Taxable Tax Year Year Year Code Land Imps Total Dollars Land imps Total Value Value (S) P Value ($) Value ($) (5) Reason ADVERTISI http:/iblue.kinacounty.com/Assessor/eRealProperty/Detail.aspx?ParceINbr=3221049050 8/30/2017 King County Department er lssessments: eReal Property Page 2 of 2 Value Value , Value 1 W 3221lr190500' `23- •U' , 1205 21 213 000 0 21 000 J 1213.0U0 3221^-4 0500312G?6 0 2017 1205 i 21: 3,00 i 213,000 � 0 213 L 0u0 . 1213,000 1{I 22210,4905UO3 -016 1205 213 0G0 0 J 213,000_ 0 .213 000 .0, 213.rk-'- . 322104?05003=20!e 2015 1205 213,0W; 0 213,000 0 1213n00 13 2'3,000 22:G4fr05003+Z013 .2014 1205 203C'vi; 0 20's,0U0U t203.IXi0 1p—�2G3,GGG 322'T 5050ri3 i01'2 2013 1205 '3,0 [l 103.000 G 120.3,000 0 203 000 32210.1 05003;311 1 2012 1205 239 000 0 239,000 j — 230.l]f10 .0 000 322iO4 G500:; 20t(i 201E �UkX i'262.0D0 :0 �252,U(iE} '1 ;.'.r.�.OQ4 i0 1`2000 - 322104905003'2C(i9 2310 1205 2.52000 0 F��6T00O 0 [2531000 I 1,000 1 322104905003t2wa 2009 1205 252,00-0 U 1252,000 11) 1252,000 O 252.00G .1-- 322104905003[2M7 120-: 1205'WOW J 1240000 0 ^240.000 0 240,OGU --! 322'G4 05003 20.CiB 1200' 112G5 2i9,OCv !? H,000 i0 219,000 ID (213,000 _- 322104905003 2005 2006 1205 18600-00 , 1860013 0 Ii54+;;000 •0 322`:.04s05003126f?J 2005 s:L'i 176.000 0 �:176,000 '0 176,000 0 176,000�1� 32210490500312003 2004 349E ':66,GG0 rf - 168,000 '.p 1%•6,000 0 1168,0G0 _ 3 VU905=:2 02 2003 3490 160,O0.3 1 1$p,00i3 `�! 11160.000 i0 3.00�0 ly 322104905003 2w1 2002 .`.1(•:i ?53,GCv 0 153-000 0-y�153,000 Q. '" 000 322104905003'2OGO 2001 (3490 146 OGO G 1146,000 0 1146:000 116000 I 32210 -'05003 1999 2OW 1490 131 G00 0 ' - l 131 00ri 0 131,000 10 13` 000 T 322`:049{i5003 1998 1999 `_. 4,90 131 ODD G 1131.000 0 =,131.000 i4. '31.000 3 104'lOSIXi3 199i' 998 iS9} G (1 10 7 131.000 10 131.00Ei 22 04905003;1396 09% 3490 0 0 10 :1 123.0010 IO 123,ODU 322' 34'IM5003 1994 4,`i 3490 '.J 0 0 - _ �'9_ I l _ 1zaa o 2, oeEi 1 322`34KI5=y111993 11994 . 13490 1 0 10 i 12c�000 10 1125,000 T �322104 1.4570311992 1993 3490 0 �10 :3 125,000 0 125 000 32'LLu}9Q50^3.139U 1199'i 3490 7 p 0 86,400 301 186.400 3`.2104X6 003i1968 1.989 3490 ;., .D u _ 0 '81,000 TRf 51,000 .._......._.- - - - - -- " --... ............. 32Z 49d? i1sn6 198i 3490 u �0 0 3i.000 r0 1,OOG j ?I N90MI 1984 9851 3458 0 0- 0 3 62,000 0 f 62000 iy f 1 322 ` 14 7113 1962 ? `JJ3 I : �is9 '0 0 : 0 52 Ow i 0 02.000 1 SALES HISTORY Excise recording Document Seta Price Seller Buyer Name Instrument Salo I R€umber. Number Date Name Reason SKAR1 ,TnS ELI.€GSC N TTEE ,Na:uter 27M3 20160212001316 218/2016 i2'.}�3.=}». }3: NI K0LE,'1A- ELL AI G+CFICRII LWr[nly Use-1�h5f SK;ARLATOS SK.SRLATOS Deed'M '2744753 20150722001414`�;2112015 $OG(l Ni<OLETTA NIIff7LETTA 1ft"oflal E8'nw KAT=RINA :--FAMjILY ;uzmon: -PR ;TRUST ReFrmsanE-.:..* REVIEW HISTORY Tax Review Review Appealed Hearing Settlement Decision, Year Number Type Value Date Value Status i 993 19213006 : Local Appeal S134.2J0 iii 0 ; $125 0�Y : REVISE Corrtclebec 1991 9003569 R 1Local Appeal $Ub.4100 .1r1:":-900 $86,400 SOSTAIN ICol1t[:le'sr� PERMIT HISTORY HOME IMPROVEMENT EXEMPTION 1uw `.arclr 1'rrpcxl;r Tax l3ili :Yx€�'fhic Prrlr�p fl•ssxru r,t Trrnn Arc>a ii�i,�:r: t°rin: 1`ra l3cr;c I1ee:ui ADVERTISEMENT http://blue.kingeounty.com/Assessor/eRealProperty/Detail.aspx?ParceINbr=3221O49050 - 8/30/2017 AM RECEIVED REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION CITY of DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUG 17 20V 33325 8 h Avenue South Federal Way Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 GOMMUN[TY DEVELOPMENT www.cityoffederalway.com FILE NUMBER 1 7- - 1 O � Date 8 / 17 / 2 017 Applicant LI��.Y��s ��e•l.o�.�u�`S,C� NAME PRIMARY PHONE Jamie Waltier (206) 315-8130 BUS]NESS/ORGANIZATION ALTERNATE PHONE Harbour Homes, LLC BEAMING ADDRESS E-MAIL 400 N. 34th St., STE 300 jwaltier@harbourhomes.co CITY STATE FAX Seattle WA I 98103 (206) 315-8131 Property Address/Location 1224 S. 376th St., Federal Way, WA 98003 Description of Bequest Wetland verification List/Describe Attachments 2 copies of Wetland Report For Staff Use ❑ Code Interpretation/Clarification Critical Areas Letter/Analysis/Peer Review ❑ Request for Extension (Land Use/Plat Approval) ❑ Revisions to Approved Permit ❑ Tree Removal ❑ Zoning Compliance Letter - No Fee - No Fee (Actual Cost if Applicable) - Check Current Fee Schedule - Check Current Fee Schedule - No Fee - Check Current Fee Schedule Bulletin #079 - January 4, 2016 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Request for Administrative Decision 1 WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT ELLINGSON PROPERTY JuLY 2017 RECEIVED AUG 17 2017 CM OF FEL EI�AL WAY COMMUNIfTy �D VEEC PMEN ( I °T.. Joulyd d iew Consultants Environmental Assessment Planning + Land Use Solutions WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT ELLINGSON PROPERTY JULY 28, 2017 PROJECT LOCATION ADJACENT TO 1224 S 376TH ST FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 PREPARED FOR HARBOUR HOMES 400 N 34TH ST., SUITE 300 SEATTLE, WA 98103 PREPARED BY SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 (253) 514-8952 S oundview Consultants Environmental Assessment Planning + Land Use Solutions Executive Summary Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) is supporting Harbour Homes (Applicant) with a wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment for a potential future residential development on an approximately 4.77-acre property located adjacent to 1224 South 376`h Street in Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of one parcel situated in the Northeast'/a of Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 3221049050). SVC investigated the subject property for potentially -regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species in March 2017 with a follow-up visit in June 2017. Using current methodology, the site assessment efforts identified and delineated one wetland (Wetland A) in the northern portion of the subject property, which extends offsite to the north and east. Wetland A is a Category IV wetland with a low habitat score which is subject to a standard 40-foot associated buffer per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.420. Two additional wetlands were also identified offsite of the subject property further away than their potential buffers would extend. The potential future residential development is assumed to be a typical single-family subdivision of greater than one dwelling unit per acre. The summary table below identifies regulation by different agencies. Wetland Size On -Site Category: Regulated Under FWRC Chapter Regulated Linder Regulated Under Section 4U4 of the Name (square feet) 19.L4S RCW 90 48 Clean Water Act Wetland A 890 IV Yes Yes Yes 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment i July 28, 2017 Site Map 1155.0016 Ellingson Propertc Sound iew Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & \\ ildlife Habitat Assessment if I Lllv, 28, 2017 Table of Contents Chapter1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................1 Chapter2. Proposed Project......................................................................................................................2 2.1 Location...........................................................................................................................................2 2.2 Project Description........................................................................................................................2 Chapter3. Methods.....................................................................................................................................3 Chapter4. Background Information........................................................................................................4 4.1 Existing Site Conditions...............................................................................................................4 4.2 Soils.................................................................................................................................................. 4 4.3 Vegetation....................................................................................................................................... 5 4.4 Wetland and Stream Inventories.................................................................................................5 4.5 Priority Habitats and Species.......................................................................................................5 4.6 Precipitation....................................................................................................................................6 Chapter5. Results........................................................................................................................................7 5.1 Wetlands..........................................................................................................................................7 5.1.1 Overview......................................................................................................................................7 5.1.2 Wetland Buffer............................................................................................................................9 5.1.3 Wetland Functions......................................................................................................................9 5.2 Offsite Features............................................................................................................................10 5.3 Critical Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas...................................................................................10 Chapter6. Closure.....................................................................................................................................11 Chapter7. References................................................................................................................................12 Figures Figure1. Vicinity Map................................................................................................................................ 2 Figure2. King County Parcel Map........................................................................................................... 4 Tables Table1. Precipitation Summary'.............................................................................................................. Table2. Wetland Summary ....................................................................................................................... 7 Table3. Wetland A Summary ................................................................................................................... 8 Table 4. Functions and Values of Existing Onsite Wetland A ............................................................ 9 Appendices Appendix A — Methods and Tools Appendix B — Background Information Appendix C — Site Map Appendix D - Wetland Data Forms Appendix E — Wetland Rating Form Appendix F — Qualifications 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment iu July 28, 2017 Chapter 1. Introduction Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) is supporting Harbour Homes (Applicant) with a wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment for a potential future residential development on an approximately 4.77-acre property located adjacent to 1224 South 376`'' Street in Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of one parcel situated in the Northeast '/a of Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 3221049050). The purpose of this wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment report is to identify the presence of potentially -regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species that may be found on or near the subject property; and assess potential impacts to any such critical areas and/or species from the potential project. This report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding: • Site description, project description, and area of assessment; • Identification, delineation, and assessment of potentially -regulated wetlands and other hydrologic features within the vicinity of the proposed project; • Identification and assessment of potentially regulated fish and wildlife habitat and/or priority species located on or near the subject property; • Standard buffer recommendations, building setbacks, and development limitations; • Existing site map detailing identified critical areas and standard huffers; • Supplemental information necessary for local regulatory review. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment I July 28, 2017 Chapter 2. Proposed Project 2.1 Location The proposed project is located adjacent to 1224 South 376`' Street in Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of one parcel situated in the Northeast'/4 of Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 3221049050). To access the site from Interstate-5 North, take Exit 137 for WA-99 N. Continue on WA-99 N/54`s Avenue E for 0.2 mile, and then take a right onto WA-99N/Pacific Highway E. Continue for 1.4 miles and then turn right on Porter Way. Continue on Porter Way for 0.4 mile, and then turn left onto 5t' Avenue and travel for 1 mile. Turn right onto S 376`' Street. The site is on the left-hand side after approximately 0.1 mile. twure 1. vicinity Aia a x M � � .. b" _- T" P.A h S 366M PIHyb n m c.Mn 0 A g e a i 3370M s1 M >e ., 77otbrIs ]71sts1 Approximate Location gtpd Nat' S373sd51 5 "2""" g' of Subject Property 3377r111I - y C SW 3741Am It SUM 01 � S 376t651377th r q S*' �o r sl 1' 0 Cs HE 7195 °' c s 3a0In d � sA Sr I 5 389M PI A ! N71e0as Ave _- V I V TV L 7 a a c a 1 n � - i n � $ July 24, 2017 1:18,056 0 0.16 CO 0-611i Iang County parcels _Query result 0 0176 Q35 0-7 1— 2.2 Project Description The potential future project would include single-family residential development at more than one unit per acre. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 2 July 28, 2017 Chapter 3. Methods SVC investigated, assessed, and delineated wetlands, waterbodies, and other potentially -regulated fish and wildlife habitat within the subject property and identified potentially -regulated features within 225 feet of the subject property on March 16, 2017 with a follow-up visit on June 20, 2017. All wetland determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in conjunction with data from the U.S. Geographic Survey (USGS) topographic map, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) SalmonScape and Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) maps and data, City of Federal Way Geographic Information System (GIS) data, King County GIS data, local precipitation data (NOAA), and various orthophotographic resources. Appendix A contains further details for the methods and tools used to prepare this report. Wetland boundaries were determined using the routine approach described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and modified according to the guidelines established in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast region (Version 2.0) (USACE, 2010). Qualified wetland scientists marked boundaries of on -site wetlands with orange surveyor's flagging labeled alpha -numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation along the wetland boundary. Pink surveyor's flagging was labeled alpha -numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation at formal sampling locations to mark the puiuts where detailed data was collected (DP1-DP5). Additional tests pits were excavated at regular intervals inside and outside of the wetland boundaries to further confirm the delineation. Wetlands were classified using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin (Cowardin, 1979; Federal Geographic Data Committee, 2013) classification systems, and assessed using the Wetland Functions Characteri.Zation Tool for Linear Projects (Null et al., 2000). Following classification and assessment, all wetlands were rated and categorized using the Washington State Wetlands Bating System far Western WasGington —Washington State Department of Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029, published October 2014 (Hruby, 2014) and guidelines established in the FWRC 19.145.420. The fish and wildlife habitat assessment was conducted during the same site visits by qualified fish and wildlife biologists. Experienced biologists made visual observations using stationary and walking survey methods for both aquatic and upland habitats noting any special habitat features or signs of fish and wildlife activity. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 3 Jul), 28, 2017 Chapter 4. Background Information 4.1 Existing Site Conditions The subject property is located in an urban -residential setting in Federal Way, Washington and is currently undeveloped mixed -deciduous and coniferous forest with some open grassy areas. Topography on the site slopes gently downward from south to north (Appendix B1). The subject property abuts a large lot single: -family residence and undeveloped forested land to the west, large lot single-family residences to the north, a single-family residence and undeveloped forest to the east, and S 376`' Street to the south with a senior living facility beyond. Jul 24, 2017 1:4.514 y o a35 0.07 a14 mt long County parcels Query result 0-- 0 QW25 0.085 a17 r, sang County parcels ■.r �, 1 • Mn 9r .sue. . MOM7M " rbWw,ea."�rr CO'NV 4.2 Soils The NRCS Soil Survey of King County identified two soil series on the subject property: Everett gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes, and Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes. Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes (EvC) According to the survey, Everett gravelly sandy loam is rolling. Soils within the soil are Alderwood, Everett and Neilton. Alderwood can be up to 5 percent overlying consolidated glacial till. Neilton 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wedand & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 4 July 28, 2017 can be up to 20 percent gravelly loamy sand. Everett can be up to 15 percent where slopes are gentler and where they are steeper than 15 percent. Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes (KpB) This undulating soil is found on low terraces in valleys. In a typical soil profile, the A horizon from a depth of zero to five inches is usually a very dark brown color. The B horizon from five to 24 inches varies from a dark yellowish brown to a dark brown and from silt loam to silty clay loam. From a depth of 24 to 60 inches, the soil ranges from grayish brown to olive gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam. Brown mottles are also common in the upper part of this horizon. This soil has moderate permeability above the substratum and slow permeability within it. Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes is listed as non-hydric on the King County Hydric Soils List (MRCS, 2001). 4.3 Vegetation Vegetation on the subject property is dominated by a canopy of red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus balsarnifera), big leaf maple (Ater macropbyllum), and Douglas fir (Pseudostuga men#esii) with an understory of creeping buttercup (Kanunculus repens), oxeye daisy (Leucantbemum volgare), lady fern (Atbyerium fi&-femina), non-native invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rebus armeniacus), and various field grasses. 4.4 Wetland and Stream Inventories The King County Sensitive Areas slap (Appendix B3) identifies a wetland area approximately 300 feet offsite to the west. The City of Federal Way Critical Areas map (Appendix B4) identifies this same wetland area west of the subject property, as well as a wetland unit approximately 290 feet offsite to the east. The USFWS NWI map (Appendix B5) and DNR Stream Typing map (Appendix 138) do not identify any other wetlands or streams on or within 225 feet of the subject property. 4.5 Priority Habitats and Species The WDFW PHS map (Appendix B7) identifies a wetland area offsite to the west of the subject property. The WDFW SalmonScape map (Appendix B6) does not identify any critical fish presence near the subject property. No other priority habitats and/or species presence are identified on or within 225 feet of the subject property. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property SoundN7ew Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 5 July 28, 2017 4.6 Precipitation Precipitation data was obtained from NOAA for Tacoma in order to obtain percent of normal precipitation during and preceding the investigation. A summary of data collected is provided in Table 1. Table 1. Precipitation Summary' Percent of Date Day Day 1 Week 2 Weeks Month to Date Year to Date Normal of Before Prior Prior (Observed/Normal)2 (Observed/Nonnal)a (Month/Year) 3/16/17 0.0 1.05 2.96 4.70 4.72/2.16 38.87/27.85 219/140 6/20/17 0.0 0.0 0.80 1.35 1.54/1.13 50.65/30.99 136/163 1. Precipitation volume provided in inches. Data obtained from NOAA (http:lln u�v.ucathen.guv/climatc/indcx.php?u'fo=se%vj forTacom: 2. Month -to -date and year-to-date precipitation shown is from the first of the month to the date of the site visit, and from October 1" to the date of the site visit. Precipitation was at 140 and 163 percent of normal for the water year during site inspection and wetland delineation efforts on March 16 and June 20, 2017. In addition, month to date precipitation was at 219 and 136 percent above normal for the field visits. This precipitation data suggests that significantly high precipitation for the water year may have caused some areas not normally wet to become saturated and/or inundated at the time of the site investigations. Such conditions were considered in making professional wetland and stream typing determinations. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wedand & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 6 July 28, 2017 Chapter 5. results 5.1 Wetlands 5.1.1 Overview The site investigations identified one potentially -regulated wetland on the subject property (Wetland A). One potentially -regulated wetland was observed offsite to the west of the subject property within 225 feet. No other potentially -regulated wetlands were identified within 225 feet of the site per FWRC 19.145.410(2) (f . The offsite wetland to the west is located approximately 200 feet from the west project boundary. The identified onsite wetland contained indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation according to current wetland delineation methodology. Wetland data forms are provided in Appendix D, and wetland rating forms are provided in Appendix E. Table 2 summarizes the wetland identified onsite during the site investigations. Table 2. Wetland Summary Predominant Wetland Classification / Rating — — — - --- Wetland i Buffer Wetland Size On Cowardinl HGM2 WSDOE3 Federal Way4 site wle (acres) A i PEME Depressional 1V N 0.02 40 Rotes: 1. Cowardin et al. (1979) and Federal Geographic Data Committee (2013) or NWI Class based on vegetation: PEM = Palustrine Emergent; Modifier for Water Regime or Special Situations: E= Seasonally Flooded and Saturated. 2. Brinson, M. M. (1993). 3. WSDOE rating according to Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — Revised Hruby (2014). 4. FWRC 19.145.420(1) definition. 5. FWRC 19.145.420(2) buffer standards. Wetland A Wetland A is approximately 890 square feet (0.02 acres) in size onsite (approximately 3,066 square feet in total size), and is located in the northern portion of the subject property and extends off -site to the north and east. Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by surface sheet flow, surface runoff from surrounding upland area, direct precipitation, and a seasonally -high groundwater table. Wetland vegetation is dominated by creeping buttercup, reed canarygrass, colonial bentgrass, with sparse hardhack located on its eastern boundary (less than 10 percent of the wetland unit). Wetland A is a Palustrine Emergent, Seasonally Flooded and Saturated (PEME) wetland. Under FWRC 19.145.420(1)(d), Wetland A is a Category IV depressional wetland. Table 3 summarizes Wetland A. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 7 July 28, 2017 Tol,lP 3 WPtlanrl A S,ttmmary WETLAND A — INFORMATION SUMMARY Located in the northeastern portion of the subject property extending offsite to the Location: north and east. Local Jurisdiction City of Federal Wa 10 — Puyallup- ' WRIA White t WSDOE Rating IV rub , 2014 Federal Way Rating IV Federal Way Buffer 40 feet Width Wetland Size 0.02 acres Cowardin Classification PEME HGM Classification Depressional Wetland Data Sheet(s) DP-1 andData Sheet (s) F DP-2 ndary Flag color Orange Dominant Wetland A is dominated by creeping buttercup, reed canarygrass, colonial bentgrass, and Vegetation s iraea. Primary hydric soil indicators All (Depleted Below Dark Surface) and F3 (Depleted Soils Matrix) criteria observed with a fine silt texture. Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by surface sheet flow, direct precipitation, and a Hydrology seasonally -high groundwater table. Meets for seasonal ponding observations as well as geomorphic position and FAC-Neutral test. Rationale for Wetland boundaries were determined by point of saturation and a transition to Delineation h ydroh =tic plant community. Rationale for Local rating is based upon WSDOE's current rating system and FWRC Article IV Local Rating 19.145.420 1 Wetland Functions Summary Wetland A has a moderate potential to retain sediments and pollutants from surface runoff due to its size of seasonal ponding, intermittently flowing outlet, and is located Water Quality within 250 feet of a septic system to provide water quality enhancement. Wetland A's score for Water Quality Functions u `M the 2014 method is moderate Wetland A has a limited potential to provide hydrologic function to the landscape and society as it does not have persistent and non -mowed vegetation to stop significant storm Hydrologic flows and prevent downgradient erosion and is not located near an area that generates excess runoff. Wetland A's score for Hydrologic Functions using the 2014 method is very low 3 . Little to no wildlife habitat functions are provided by Wetland A as the unit lacks any special habitat features as a regularly mowed lawn. Wedand A is also not located in Habitat proximity to any priority habitats or threatened or endangered species. Wedand A's score for Habitat Functions using the 2014 method is very low (3). Buffer The buffer surrounding Wetland A is a degraded mown lawn to the north, west, and Condition south. To the east the unit is comprised of red alder, black cottonwood, and Do rlas Fir. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 8 July 28, 2017 5 L2 wedand Buffer Per FWRC 19.145.420(2), Category IV wetlands are subject to standard 40-foot buffers. In addition, buildings and other structures require a 5-foot buffer setback from the regulated wetland buffer edge (FWRC 19.145.160). 5. L3 wetland Functions Using the rapid assessment method (Null et al., 2000), the wetland on the subject property provides several water quality and hydrologic functions, such as sediment and toxic removal, limited stormwater retention and infiltration, and water quality enhancement (Table 5). The unit provides a moderate degree of water quality functions as the unit is seasonally ponded for more than half the size of the wetland area. The wetland unit potentially has a longer runoff retention time to filter out pollutants; however, since the majority of the vegetation within the wetland is mowed, it provides limited filtration. In addition, the hydrologic functions are significantly limited by the wetland unit's lack of depth of storage and the fact that the outflow from the wetland unit drains to the offsite wetland which is so constrained by surrounding natural and human conditions that waters that enter the onsite unit cannot reach areas that flood. Wetland A also provides little to no habitat functions, as the unit lacks multiple Cowardin classifications to provide abundant strata and lacks large, downed woody debris or special habitat features. Vegetation within the wetland unit is mowed and will not support ecologic diversity. The unit does have multiple hydroperiods of seasonal flooding and seasonal saturation and would provide potential habitat for amphibians if it weren't mowed regularly. Wetland A is not likely to provide any function of educational value, uniqueness, or heritage to the best of our professional judgement. Table 4. Functions and Values of Existing Onsite Wetland A Function / Value' Wetland A Water Quality Functions Sediment Removal x Nutrient and Toxicant Removal x Hydrologic Functions Flood Flow Alteration Erosion Control & Shoreline Stabilization Habitat Functions Production & Export of Organic Matter x General Habitat Suitability _ Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates - Habitat for Amphibians - Habitat for Wetland -Associated Mammals - Habitat for Wetland -Associated Birds - General Fish Habitat - Native Plant Richness - 1155.1101E Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 9 July 28, 2017 Special Characteristics Educational or Scientific Value - Uniqueness and Heritage - t. `-" means that the function is not present; "x" means that the function is present and is of kwer quality; and "+" means the function is present and is of higher quality. 5.2 Offsite Features Two wetlands were identified offsite (Offsite West, Offsite East complex). The offsite wetland to the west is approximately 2.45 acres in size (106,722 square feet) and is located approximately 200 feet west of the subject property. This unit is a Palustrine Forested and Unconsolidated Bottom, Permanently Flooded and excavated (PFO/UBHx) wetland. A rating was given to the offsite wetland and it is considered a Category III wetland with a habitat score under four (4) points. Per FWRC 19.145.420(2), a Category III wetland with less than five (5) habitat points has an associated 60-foot wetland buffer. A second offsite wetland complex was observed to the east of the subject property (two units that share similar hydrology). This complex is a Palustrine Forested, Seasonally Flooded and Saturated (PFOE) complex with three out of the five strata underneath the forest canopy. This unit is located approximately 350 feet southeast of the subject property. A 1998 wetland report categorized this wetland unit as a Type 2 wetland. To current standards, this wetland unit is considered a Category III wetland with less than five (5) habitat points, which would have a 60-foot associated buffer. These offsite features and associated buffers do not encumber the subject property. 5.3 Critical Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas No critical fish and wildlife habitat areas or threatened and endangered species were identified during the site investigation on the subject property or within 225 feet of the site. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildfife Habitat Assessment 10 July 28, 2017 Chapter 6. Closure The findings and conclusions documented in this assessmcnt rcport have been prepared for specific application to the Ellingson Property. These findings and conclusions have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this assessment report are professional opinions based on an interpretation of information currently available to us and are made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this assessment may need to be revised wholly or in part in the future. Wetland status and boundaries identified by SVC are based on conditions present at the time of the site visit and considered preliminary until the flagged wetland boundaries are validated by the jurisdictional agencies. Validation of the wetland boundaries and jurisdictional status of such features by the regulatory agencies provides a certification, usually written, that the wetland determination and boundaries verified are the units that will be regulated by the agencies until a specific date or until the regulations are modified. Only the regulatory agencies can provide this certification. As wetlands and waterbodies are dynamic communities affected by both natural and human activities, changes in boundaries may be expected; therefore, delineations cannot remain valid for an indefinite period of time. Regulatory agencies typically recognize the validity of wetland delineations for a period of five years after completion of an assessment report. Development activities on a site five years after the completion of this assessment report may require reassessment of the wetland delineations. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this site may need to be revised wholly or in part. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 11 July 28, 2017 Chapter 7. References Brinson, M. M., 1993. A hydrageomorphic classication for wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Cooke, S.S.,1997. Wetland Plants of Western Washington. Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Washington D.C. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87- 1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Federal Way Revised Code, 2017. Chapter 19.145 — Environmentally Critical Areas. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Hruby, T., 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-29. Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List- 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42. Munsell® Color, 2000. Munsell0 Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2001. Hydric Soils List in King County Area, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C. Null, William, G. Skinner, and W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects. Washington State Department of Transportation Environmental Affairs Office Wetland Strategic Plan Implementation Project Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands. National Summary. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Biol. Rep. 88 (26.9). Reed, P.B., Jr., D. Peters, J Goudzwaard, I. Lines, and F. Weinmann, 1993. Supplement to National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest Region 9. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Supplement to Biol. Rep. 88 (26.9). Snyder, Dale E., Philip S. Gale, Russell F. Pringle, 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (LISACE), 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Vallys, and Coast Region (Ver2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, Mississippi. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundiriew Consultants LLC Wedand & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment 12 July 28, 2017 Appendix A — Methods and Tools Table A-1. Methods and Tonls Used to Prepare the Report. Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Wetland USACE 1987 Weland htm:Ilcl.rrdr.usaccatm�.miI1c y�uln_ Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Delineation Delineation Manual ITdf1«•W= 7_�ndf Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Regional Supplement to http://wNvw.usace.arm),.md/CECW U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional the Core of Engineers /Documents/cecwo/reg/west_mt_f Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Wetland Delineation inalsupp.pdf Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Manual: Western Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Mountains, Valleys, and Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, Coast Region (Version MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development 2.0) Center. Wetland USFWS / Cowardin r . rev wi Pubs Re Cowardin, L M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. ports1class la u a s lidepZhi Classification Classification System 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of Rt the United States. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Hydrogeomorphic Brinson, M. M. (1993). "A hydrogeomorphic classification ds/per,/wq Ic4.ndf Classification (HGM) for wetlands," Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Amory System Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Wetland Rating Washington State httn ,u s l xa.1 uitlirat Hruby, T. (2014). Washinpy Slate Wetland Rating System for iomldneuments11406029.ndF Wetland Rating System Western ll%4Wyigtpn: 2014 Update. (Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology. Federal Way Revised h^rrr/Iu1ay.cotlepuhlis 1;.rornlW Most current western Washington wetland rating system A lrrdoranGnv Code adopted per Federal Way Reviocd Code Chapter 19.145. Wetland Indicator Status 2014 National Wetland Plant List 1ro:1luctland pIanrs.itxLc,atr�v.nti IL Liehvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Weiland Ratings. Phytoneuron 201441: 1-42. Plants USDA Plant Database utwllp anrs.usda.lrnvl Website Wetland Plants of hvr:�lsnurldnadven ants,comJwnm Cooke, S.S. 1997. Wetland Plants of Western Washington. content /uploads/Retcrcncrs and R Western Washington Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington. LLourcer.pdf Flora of the Pacific hap,./ luwnres Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Northwest KJecarch1ho0kslf llTl-1 f:.htmJ Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Soils Data NRCS Soil Survey lt�m:Iltcehsaikun•cy_nrrs.usda.p Website a=l'tVCl)4oilSur E!X.as,nx Soil Color Charts Munsell® Color. 2000. Munsell® Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. King County Hydric Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2001. Hydric Soils List Soils List: King County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C. Threatened and Washington Natural http://ww-wl.dnr.wa.gov/nbp/refde Washington Natural Heritage Program (Data Endangered Heritage Program i sk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf published 07/24/15). Endangered, threatened, and Species sensitive plants of Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, WA Washington Priority ltttp;/iwd .wa.rovlha6lpjmpfl�,�.h Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (Data tm Habitats and Species requested 09/21 /16). Map of priority habitats and species in project vicinity. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Washington h[tnTlLu .unilu.wa¢nn Isa] nnxr SalmonScape (Data requested on 09/21/16). Washington Pclmap.html SalmonScape State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Species of Local WDFW GIS Data hbm:l/wrlfic•.wa,gar/m:1ppinelsalnt Website Importance onsca e 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference and hjW-1/apps.wdAv.wg.Sgv/ph9ont e ■vcbl. Report prgw,11lon Federal Way Revised Code h V:lhvww.codepublishing c AfFederaffs 1 Federal %Nay Revised Code — Environmentally Critical Areas Chapter 19.145 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 Appendix B - Background Information This appendix includes a King County topographic map (B1), NRCS Soil Survey Map (B2), King County Sensitive Areas Map (B3), Federal Way Wetlands Map (B4), USFWS NWI Map (B5), WDFW PHS Map (B6), WDFW SalmonScape map (B7), and DNR Stream Typing Map (B8). 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Sound-.iew Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 H VA V 8 ao N C W vi ar dl f/! T N � v E h U o c y U c a�u Qv N Y Z c OI O ❑ w LL V 4i O G O ui g ^ ul v i o � o � d 0 a wl d w�Q O v44 NC d �� o �s 0 .0 s� �a u M ►§ 1 u e LL n 0 a z O c Q W LL Cl) OV �w za wo z a�US w� ZQao O= z� Q 0 U N p L O 7 C �' O p F LL U h V g L' C 6 qq� �! S si�6 $ a IL N rf z 7 y Y N N CD .0 I-U z V)a W c ¢ u ao � :aF. 0 R � v 9 m U G v P eyL N (A 90 6s IL W iV� O yV y �p O b O � S." P." - N O P trY a� n C. R n y p p n pis, 401 �r rr+ s • r --via i O'e4a 1I O 0 It II v �o 0 Ei w z A Appendix C - Site Map 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Sound -view Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 ELLIN % SON PROPERTY- EXIST -,� G CONDITIONS Soundview Consultants 2907 HARBURVIEW DIIINT', 1) i. 2;.3.514.8932 GIG I 1AH130R, N\ ASHINICITON' 9S335 F. 253.51-1.8954 ELLINGSON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO: 1224 S. 376TH ST FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 IONG COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER: 322104-9050 DATE:7/27/2017 JOB: 1155.0016 By.. DLS SCALE: 1 80' FIGURE NO. Appendix D — Wetland Data Sheets 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1155.0016 Ellingston City/County: Federal W2ViKinq Sampling Date:06120/2017 Applicant/Owner: Geonerco Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: DP-1 Investigator(s): R. PeeJ and E. Swaim Section, Township, Range: 32 T21N R4E _ Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Floor Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): <5 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 47.26630828 Long:-122.31640345 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: EverettlAlderwood NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) 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 — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑ within a Wetland? Yes ® No ❑ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: All three wetland criteria observed. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 40 Y FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 1 Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 40 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) SaplinalShrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Spiraea douglasii 15 Y FACW 2 Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 15 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinacea 40 Y FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Ranunculus repenss 30 Y FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ® Dominance Test is >50% 6 ❑ Prevalence Index is 53.0' 7 ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 70 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation = Total Cover Present? Yes ® No ❑ % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DPA Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-10 10YR 2/2 99 10YR 4/4 1 C M Silt Fine Silt 10-16 10YR 6/1 93 10YR 6/8 7 C M Silt Fine Silt 'Type: 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 Sal10: ❑ Histosol (At) ❑ 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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ® Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ® Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (176) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators F3 and Al observed. HYDROLOGY Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑ Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Pr Lrylairy Indicators minimum of one re uiredo check all that apply) Secondary Indicators 2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (All) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Drainage Patterns (610) ❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (613) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ® Geomorphic Position (132) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (133) ❑ Iron Deposits (B5) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ® FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) i Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary hydrologic indicators D2 and D5 observed. Significant ponding also observed during March 2017 site visit. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1155.0016 El linciston City/County: Federal Wav/King Sampling Date:06120/2017 Applicant/Owner: Geonerco Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: DP-2 Investigator(s): R. Peel and E. Swaim Section, Township, Range: 32. T21 N. R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 47.266201 Long:-122.316549 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett/Aldenaood NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) 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 — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. I Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria observed. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No ED Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2• Total Number of Dominant 3, Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (AB) SaplinalShrub Stratum_ (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1 2 Total % Cov r of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = 3 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Straturn (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Ranunculus repens 50 Y FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Aarostis capillaris 25 Y FAC 3. Phalaris arundinacea 20 Y FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 5 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ® Dominance Test is >50% 6 ❑ Prevalence Index is 53.01 7 ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydre soil and wetland hydrology must 95 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1' Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation = Total Cover Present? Yes ® No ❑ % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 312 99 7.5YR 4/6 1 C M Silt Fine Silt 'Type: C=Concentration. D=De lotion. RM=Reduced Matrix. CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ 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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (173) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators observed. HYDROLOGY wetrana Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators minimum of one re uired' check all that apply) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 46) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ® FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary hydrologic indicators D5. No other secondary indicators nor primary hydrologic indicators of wetland hydrology observed. Upslope of DP1 in different vegetation community. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1155.0016 Ellin stun City/Gounly: Federal Way/KingWay/King Sampling Date:G&2012017 Applicant/Owner: Geonerco Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: DP-3 Investigator(s): R. Peel and E. Swaim Section, Township, Range: 32 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): A2 Let: 47.26510291 Long:-122.3662788 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: EverettlAlderwood NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation x, Soil , or Hydrology x 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 — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. 1 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ® within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria observed. In a location of a former logging road with anthropogenic disturbance. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Testworksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 30 Y FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 Y FACU Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 40 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60 (AB) SaplinglShrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Sambucus racemoss 1 Y FACU 2 Total % Cover of; Multiply by. 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 1 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. Athyrium filix-femina spp. cvclosorum 15 Y FAC Column Totals: (A) IBl 2. Ranunculus repens 10 Y FAC 3. Geum macro h Ilum 5 N FAG Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Rubus lacf atus 5 N FACU 1 N NL ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. Aiuqa re tans ® Dominance Test is >50% 6 ❑ Prevalence Index is !93.0' 7 ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydre soil and wetland hydrology must 36 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1 Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation = Total Cover Present? Yes ® No ❑ % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 64 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast— Version 2.0 SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Sampling Point: DP-3 Remarks 0.14 10YR 3/2 99 7.5YR 4/6 <1 C M SaLo Sandy Loam 14-16 10YR 5/3 80 10YR 4/6 20 C M SaLo Sandv Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Linina. M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ 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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): I Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators observed. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apDly) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 413) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Drift Deposits (63) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ® Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (65) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ® Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ® Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Primary hydrologic indicator B4 and secondary hydrologic indicators B9 and D2 observed. In a location of a former logging road with anthropogenic disturbance. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1155,0016 Ellin stun City/County: Federal VVaylKinq Sampling Date:O8i20120t7 Applicant/Owner: Geonerco Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: DP-4 Investigator(s): R. Peel and E_ Swaim Section, Township, Range: 32. T21N. R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 47.26463210 Long:-122,31666135 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: EvereltlAIdcmeood NWI classification: NIA Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation x, Soil , or Hydrology x 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 — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ® within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria observed. In a location of a former logging road with anthropogemc 01SIUruance. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicato Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover 5�ctes? Status 1 2. 3. 4. Sapiin /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) 1. E ilobium ciliatum spp.. watsonii 2. Lolium perenne 3. Holcus lanatus 4. Ranunculus re ens 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed. = Total Cover = Total Cover 20 Y FACW 20 Y FAC 10 N FAC 10 N FAC 60 = Total Cover = Total Cover Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (AB) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multi b OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ® Dominance Test is >50% ❑ Prevalence Index is 53.0' ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-4 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Locz Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 3/3 97 7.5YR 3/4 3 C M GrSiLo Gravelly Silt Loam 7_11 10YR 4/3 93 10YR 3/6 7 C M GrSiLo Gravelly Silt Loam 11-14 7.5YR 4/3 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M SaLo Sandy Loam 'Type: 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 Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ 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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (173) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (176) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators observed. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one reouired: Chuck all that apply) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4113) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (65) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68) Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouired) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ® Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (133) ® FAC-Neutral Test (135) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Secondary hydrologic indicator D2 and D5 observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 r� WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1155.0016 Ellingston City/County: Federal WaylKing Sampling Date:0812012017 Applicant/Owner: Geonerco Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: DP-5 Investigator(s): R. Peel and E. Swaim Section, Township, Range: 32. T21N. R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): A2 Lat: 47264867 Long:-122.31$63154 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Fverett/Alderwood NWI classification: N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation x, Soil , or Hydrology x 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 — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ® within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No ED Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: Not all three wetland criteria observed. In a location of a former logging road with anthropogenic disturbance. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolule Dominant Indicator Darninance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2• Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) SapIlnalShrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1 2 Total % Cover of Multiply —by; 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species x 5 = 1. E ilobium ciliatum spp. watsonii 15 Y FACW' Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Carex s . 5 Y FAC" 3 Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ® Dominance Test is >50% 6 ❑ Prevalence Index is s3.0' 7 ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 20 = Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1' Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation = Total Cover Present? Yes ® No ❑ % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed. Subspecies not listed- but ciliatium listed as FACW. "Listed a faculative for scoring purposes only. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-5 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features finches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loci Texture Remarks 0-3 10YR 3/4 100 SiLo Silt Loam 3-12 10YR 2/2 98 10YR 5/6 2 C M SiLo Silt Loam 12-16 10YR 4/3 90 7.5YR 4/6 10 C M SiLo Silt Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Linina. M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ 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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (177) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): TVoe: Depth Remarks: No hydric soil indicators observed. HYDROLOGY Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one renuired: check all that apply) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 413) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Sediment Deposits (62) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Iron Deposits (65) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial pt Remarks: Secondary hydrologic indicators B10 and D2 observed. Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouired) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 413) ® Drainage Patterns (610) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ® Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (137) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ previous inspections), if available: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 Appendix E - Wetland Rating Form 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 Wetland name or number A RATING SUMMARY — Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID ft 1155.0016 Ellingston Wetland A Date of site visit: 6/20/2017 Rated by D. Babineau, E. Swaim Trained by Ecology? 0 Yes ❑ No Date of training 3/31/2016 HGM Class used for rating Depressional & Flats Wetland has multiple HGM classes? ❑ Yes Ul No NOTE: Form is not complete with out the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map Google Earth Pro 2016 OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY IV (based on functions 121 or special characteristics ❑ ) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I - Total score = 23 - 27 Category 11- Total score = 20 - 22 Category III - Total score = 16 - 19 X Category IV - Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving I Hydrologic I Habitat j Water Quality List appropriate rating (H, M, Q Site Potential M L L Landscape Potential M L L Value H L L Total Score Based on 7 3 3 13 Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC Category Estuarine Wetland of High Conservation Value Bog Mature Forest Old Growth Forest Coastal Lagoon Interdunal None of the above X 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 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 1 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A Maps and Figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington ❑epressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure N 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 ofhydroperfods) 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 H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat 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 Lake Frinne Wetlands Slope We€lands Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 2 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A 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 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 3 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A HGM Classification of Wetland in Western Washington For questions 1 -7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If 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. 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)? 121 NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ❑ YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classed 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. ID 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). 17 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. 0 NO-goto5 ❑ 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. E1 NO-goto6 ❑ YES - The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A 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-goto7 El 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. B NO-gotoB ❑ 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-P?Iand 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. NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 5 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 6 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Duality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 2 ❑ Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 ❑ Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer] is true clay or true organic 0 (use NRCS definitions). Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub -shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants >'/z of area points = 3 0 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants >'/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <'/,a of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is >'/ total area of wetland points = 4 4 Area seasonally ponded is > '/ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is <'/ total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes abovel 6 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ❑ 12 -16 = H 0 6 -11 = M ❑ 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that 0 generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1 - D 2.3? 0 Source Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes abovel 1 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ❑ 3 or 4 = H p 1 or 2 = M ❑ 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, 1 lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes=1 No=O 1 D 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 2 which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 4 Rating of Value If score is: I] 2 - 4 = H ❑ 1 = M ❑ 0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 7 Record the rating on the first page WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet points = 2 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wetperiods: Estimate the freight of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 0 ❑ Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 ❑ The wetland is a "headwater" wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft 6 inpoints = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetiand unit itself. ❑ The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 0 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 ❑ Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above 2 Ratinq of Site Potential If score is: ❑ 12 -16 = H ❑ 6 -11 = M B 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic function of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 D 5.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes=1 No=O 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes=1 No=O 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ❑ 3 = H ❑ 1 or 2 = M 0 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding roblems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest_ score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): e Flooding occurs in a sub -basin that is immediately down - gradient of unit. points = 2 0 p e Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down - gradient. points = 1 ❑ Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub -basin. points = 1 111 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points = 0 ❑ There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 8 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 " Total for D 6 Add theoints in the boxes abovel 0 Rating of Value If score is: ❑ 2 - 4 = H u 9 = M 0 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 9 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A 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 Y4 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, mossipround-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 % ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods ). ❑ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 0 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ❑ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 [21 Saturated only 1 types 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 ftz. 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 = C 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. G O00 None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3 points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 10 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 11 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A 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) 0 ❑ 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 % 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 1 Rating of Site Potential If Score is: ❑ 15 -18 = H ❑ 7 -14 = M p 0 - 6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat function of the site? H 2.1 Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: 0 % undisturbed habitat + ( 1 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2) = 0.5% If total accessible habitat is: 0 >'/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: 14 % undisturbed habitat + ( 30 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2) = 29% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 1 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) -2 <_ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above -1 Ratina of Landscaae Potential If Score is: ❑ 4 - 6 = H ❑ 1 - 3 = M 0 < 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) with in 100m points = 1 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 12 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A Site does not meet any of the criteria above Rating of Value If Score is: ❑ 2 = H ❑ 1 = M p 0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 13 Record the rating on the first page WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A 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.odf or access the list from here: hfp://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/iistl 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. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 14 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 15 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A ��-1 LIf1►J Type 5 Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. list the catego►y when the appropriate crrterfa are met. SC 1.0. Estuarine Wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? C] The dominant water regime is tidal, Vegetated, and © With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt ❑ Yes - Go to SC 1.1 Ip No = Not an estuarine wetland SC 1A. 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 EI No - Go to SC 1.2 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 % 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 0 No = Categn 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 SC2.2 0 No - Go to SC2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? ❑ Yes = Category I 0 No = Not WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? htt ://wwwl.dnr,wa. ov/nh /refdesk/dalasearch/wnh wetlands. df ❑ Yes - Contact WNHPIWDNR and to SC 2.4 0 No = Not 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 0 No = Not WHCV 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 3.3 121 No - Go to SC3.2 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 3.3 121 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 0 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) Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 16 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A listed in Table 4 provide more than 36/6 of the cover under the canopy? ❑ Yes = Is a Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 O No = Is 17 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number A 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 = Catesm I 0 No = Not a forested wetland for this section 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 0 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 % 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'/10 ac (4350 ft2) ❑ Yes = Category 1 0 No = Category 11 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 0 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 = CateAory III 0 No = Category IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all es, enter "Not Applicable" on Summa Form Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 18 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Appendix F — Qualifications All field inspections, wetland determinations, habitat assessments, and supporting documentation, including this wetland gnd Fish and Wildlife HahitatAssessmentRWortprepared for Homes, were prepared by, or under the direction of, Don Babineau of Soundview Consultants LLC. In addition, report preparation was performed by Kyla Caddey, and site inspections were performed by Richard Peel and Emily Swaim. Don Babineau Environmental Planner/Project Manager Professional Ext)erience: > 10 vears Don Babineau is an Environmental Planner and Project Manager with a diverse background in urban and commercial forestry, land planning, landscape architecture, stormwater monitoring and civil engineering. Don has experience as a Forester with Washington State Department of Natural Resources stream typing and delineating stream protection zones, as well as implementing Washington State's Habitat Conservation Plan to foster the creation of old -growth forest characteristics on state trust lands. Don earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Forest Ecosystems Management and a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture degree, both from the University Of Idaho. Don has been formally trained by the Washington State Department of Ecology in the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System. Ili addition, he has received formal training in wetland delineation from the Northwest Environmental Training Center and is an experienced certified erosion and sediment control lead (CESCL). He is also a Pierce County Professional Forester. Richard Peel Wedand Scientist Professional Experience: 5 years Richard Peel is a Wetland Scientist with diverse professional experience in wetland ecology, monitoring, and delineation throughout Washington and Oregon. Richard is Washington State trained in conducting wetland delineations, assessing wetland systems, mitigation planning and design, implementation of monitoring programs, and mitigation monitoring and reporting. He also has extensive experience in an analytical laboratory using state-of-the-art equipment in bacteriological and chemical analysis of soil and water samples. Richard is a graduate of The Evergreen State College, with dual degrees in Ecology and Economics. He has focused his academic career on ecology, disturbance ecology, chemistry, and the economic impacts of current environmental management. Richard has extensive training and field experience in wetland related disciplines, and has experience in wetlands both east and west of The Cascades. He has been trained by The Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) Wetland Ecology and Monitoring team in the use of the wetland delineation, mitigation, monitoring, and restoration techniques. In addition, he was directed by WSDOT's Wetland Protection and Preservation Policy to ensure wetlands are preserved and protected whenever possible. This direction ensures no net loss in the quantity or quality of wetlands in the future and minimization of impacts to wetlands in the present. He is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Sound\7ew Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017 Emily Swaim Wetland Scientist/Field Geologist Professional Experience: 4 years Emily Swaim is a Wetland Scientist and Field Geologist with a background in conducting Phase I, II and III Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), underground natural gas pipeline and overhead electrical transmission line project assessment and environmental inspections, construction oversight, stonmwater compliance inspections, soil sampling, delineating and assessing wetland and aquatic systems, and stormwater, floodplain, and wetland permitting. Ms. Swaim's expertise focuses on projects involving sensitive wetland and stream habitats where extensive team coordination and various regulatory challenges must be carefully and intelligently managed from project inception to completion. Emily earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Geology from Illinois State University and Wetland Science and Management Professional Certification from the University of Washington, Seattle. She is also educated in Environmental Science from Iowa State University. Her education and experience has provided her with extensive knowledge on soils, wetland science, hydrogeology, sedimentology, environmental law, environmental geology, landscape ecology, and structural geology. Ms. Swaim has been formally trained in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (IIAZWOPER) and is Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) 30-hour Construction and 10-hour Construction certified. She is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist. Kyla Caddey Staff Scientist Professional Experience: 2 years Kyla Caddey is a Staff Scientist and Pierce County Certified Wildlife Biologist with 2 years of professional experience in riparian habitat restoration and stewardship projects throughout western Washington while working for both a state agency and a small non-profit. Kyla has a background in habitat restoration design, implementation, and maintenance, wildlife studies, grant writing, project management, report writing, water quality monitoring, benthic macroinvertebrate assessments, vegetation surveys and monitoring, forest surveying, data entry and statistical analysis, research writing and presentations, fish/salmonid monitoring, rain garden design and implementation, native plant nursery maintenance, and customer service. Kyla earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Science and Resource Management from the University of Washington, Seattle with a focus in Wildlife Conservation and a minor in Quantitative Science. She has received formal training through the Coastal Training Program in Using the Credit -Debit Method in Estimating Mitigation Needs, How to Determine the Ordinary High Water Mark, How to Administer Development Permits in Washington Shorelines, Puget Sound Coastal Processes, and Forage Fish Survey Techniques, as well as training through UW Botanic Gardens in Restoring Natural Areas in the Built Environment. Her education and experience has provided her with the knowledge base and tools necessary to assist in scientific field work and report preparation for the development, management, and implementation of Soundview Consultant's environmental planning and land use services. 1155.0016 Ellingson Property Soundview Consultants LLC Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment July 28, 2017