HEX 18-001 Perteet Wetland Review MemoJP P E RTE ET 2707 COLBY AVENPERTEETUE, SUITEE00 9
00
�uL:�r _oi is"'u.' :�_,s, �y u�sigrn EVERETT, WA 98201
425.252.7700
To: Becky Chapin, Associate Planner, City of Federal Way
From: Jason Walker, PLA, PWS, Environmental Manager and Professional Wetland Scientist, Perteet
Date: July 30, 2018
Re: City of Federal Way Karl Family Trust Wetland Review, File No. 18-100666-00-AD
SUMMARY
Perteet Inc. conducted a critical areas review of a submitted wetland study to consider the extent of functional
wetland buffers for the site of an existing motel located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pacific
Highway S and 356th St., occurring at 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, Washington. An older motel
and other outbuildings were observed on the site along with a gravel parking area and driveway and with
salvaged equipment and other stored items surrounding the buildings and occurring south and east of the
existing gravel areas. The property is zoned CE - Commercial Enterprise and includes tax parcels: #2921049099,
#2921049052, and #2921049106. The site is situated at the south end of the City of Federal Way in NE Section
29, Township 21 North, Range 4 East.
A stream identified as the East Fork of Hylebos Creek (Type F) flows through City Parcel 2921049006 to the east
and south of the subject property. A wetland identified as Wetland A is associated with Hylebos Creek occurs to
the east and south of the subject property. A smaller wetland identified as Wetland X occurs to the south and
west of the subject property. Our findings related to the determination, delineation, mapping, and ratings of these
wetlands are stated further in this memo.
The applicant is proposing to utilize a provision in the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) to determine the
extent of functional wetland buffers that extend into the subject property. That code provision (FWRC
19.145.440(4)) is as follows:
(4) Permanently altered buffer. The director may provide written approval for a buffer reduction when existing
conditions are such that portions of the required buffer exist in a permanently altered state (e.g., roadways,
paved parking lots, and permanent structures) and do not provide any buffer function. The buffer may be
reduced up to the area where the altered conditions exist.
The review of specific site features that may constitute a permanently altered state is subject to further City
consideration. Specific efforts under this review were focused on the buffer function requirement in this code
section to evaluate if and where the buffers do notprovide any buffer function. No redevelopment is proposed
at this time, but it is understood that the result of this request would potentially influence future site
development actions on the subject property.
Perteet ecological staff completed a site visit and critical areas review of the subject property and a review of the
proposed request with an initial site meeting onjuly 11, 2017, and with a follow-up technical evaluation of
wetland indicators and ratings on July 19, 2018. A review of readily available best available science guidance
literature related to wetland buffer functions was also conducted. In consideration of the reviewed information,
Perteet has conceptually mapped our interpretation of the functional buffers occurring in the subject property in
consideration of observed site characteristics, provided information, and related findings.
JP P E RTE ET 2707 COLBY AVENPERTEETUE, SUITEE00 9
00
-u L:�r _oi i:" u.' :i-s, �y u�sigrn EVERETT. WA 98201
425.252.7700
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
The following documents and resource information were reviewed by Perteet for this request:
• Wetlands Study for 35620 Pacific Coast Highway, prepared by B&A, Inc., dated December 16, 2018.
• Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.145 Environmentally Critical Areas
(http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/FederalWay/), accessedJuly25, 2018.
• City of Federal Way Critical Areas maps (http://www.cityoffederalway.com/page/mats), accessed July
25, 2018.
• Google Earth Pro with historic imagery from 1990 to present.
• EPA Approved Water Quality Assessment for Washington State
(http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/currentassessmt.html), accessed July 25, 2018 for
wetland rating considerations.
• King County Public Health sewage plans search system
(http://www.kingcountygov/depts/health/environmental-health/piping/onsite-sewage-
systems/records/as-built-drawings.aspx), accessed July 25, 2018 for wetland rating considerations.
• Ecology Wetland Mitigation in Washington State Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance, Publication #
06-06-011a (https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/060601]a.pdf).
• Ecology Wetlands in Washington State Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science, Publication #05-06-006
(https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/summarypages/0506006.html).
• Ecology Wetlands in Washington State Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands,
Publication #05-06-008 (https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/summarypages/0506008.html).
• Ecology Update on Wetland Buffers: The State of the Science, Final Report, Publication #13-06-11
(https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/summarypages/l306011.html)
• Ecology Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update, Publication #
14-06-029 (httl2s://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/1406029.pdf)
FINDINGS
1) Perteet completed a reconnaissance and comparative rating of Wetland A that occurs east and south of
the subject property and north of S 359'h St. Perteet scored Wetland A as a Category II with a Habitat
Score of 6. Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.420(2) Wetland A requires a 165 foot standard buffer. Perteet also
completed a reconnaissance and determination (but not delineation) of Wetland X. Wetland X was
found to have positive wetland indicators (wetland data form attached). Perteet scored Wetland X as a
Category III with a Habitat Score of 5. Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.420(2) Wetland X requires a 105 foot
standard buffer. The report or wetland maps provided by the applicant do not state the survey date or
mapping methods and the report indicates that survey of recently delineated boundaries has not yet
occurred. Wetland A along the eastern perimeter of the subject property was understood to be recently
delineated in the field by the applicant and occurs along and near the toe of the historic fill slope for the
site; this boundary was observed. Wetland X was also mapped on applicant information and it was
discussed with the consultant for the applicant that this feature was mapped from a prior City
delineation. Wetland boundaries would need to be surveyed and mapped for any future development
applications.
2
JP P E RTE ET 2707 COLBY AVENPERTEETUE, SUITEE00 9
00
�uL:�r _oi is —u :�-s, �y u�sigrn EVERETT, WA 98201
425.252.7700
2) Hylebos Creek (Type F) would require a standard buffer of 100 feet pursuant to FWRC 19.145.270
3) The consideration of areas of the developed site that may not provide any buffer function pursuant to
FWRC 19.145.440(4) was evaluated by first considering the basis of buffer functions in Ecology
guidance literature. The site has an active use, a gravel parking area, and structures inclusive of buildings
as well as other equipment and materials stored east and south of the outer gravel access driveway that
circles around the site buildings to the south and east. Outside of the gravel access driveway, vegetation
conditions were observed to include areas of mowed or infrequently mowed vegetation within and
between the stored equipment areas and existing trees with canopy coverage extending over much of the
equipment storage areas and partially over the gravel driveway. Pursuant to reviewed guidance
regarding buffer functions, there can be numerous factors in the built environment that can constitute
common disturbances within buffers and within other critical areas. Regular wetland disturbance
characteristics are described in the Ecology Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington, Ecology Publication #14-06-029, and include: residential and urban development, grazing,
paved roads or frequently used gravel roads, mowing, and pets. In the consideration of disturbances to
specific to ecological function, disturbances can have variable limitations on site processes, which are
defined by Ecology Publication #05-06-006 as environmental factors that occur within the wetland itself
or within its buffer. The interactions of site processes with landscape processes define how a wetland
functions. Pursuant to Ecology Publication #05-06-008, generally, any use that results in the creation of
impervious areas, clearing of vegetation, or compaction of soils will be incompatible with buffer
functions. Buffer functions are primarily associated with two parameters to protect a wetland, 1) water
quality, and 2) habitat. For water quality protection, a buffer's effectiveness at improving water quality is
largely a factor of how polluted water travels across and through the buffer. In urban areas, the
pollutants of concern are primarily sediments and metals from roads, parking lots, and construction sites.
For wildlife habitat, the two primary disturbances to wildlife habitat can be 1) connectivity to other
habitat areas, and 2) the intensity of intrusion of noise, light, people, and pets. The vegetation condition
of a wetland buffer is also an important characteristic for bird habitat. Ecology Publication #05-06-006
states that trees and shrubs provide screening for birds, as well as providing additional habitat in the
buffer itself (Johnson and Jones 1977, Milligan 1985). And in summary of publication #05-06-006,
functions provided by buffers generally include: removing sediment, removing excess nutrients
(phosphorous and nitrogen), removing toxics (bacteria, metals, pesticides), influencing the microclimate,
maintaining adjacent habitat critical for the life needs of many species that use wetlands, screening
adjacent disturbances (noise, light, etc.) and maintaining habitat connectivity. Tree canopy is an
important aspect of microclimate which is most important to riparian habitat (the interface between land
and a river or stream). Tree canopy also provides water quality function through interception of
precipitation that would otherwise generate site runoff.
4) The areas of buffer within the subject property that were considered to be so functionally impaired to not
provide any buffer functions are the site areas with permanent buildings and the limit (edge) of the
frequently used gravel driveway that occurs outside of tree canopy along the buffer. While buffer
functions are also intermittently disturbed outside (south and east) of the gravel access driveway, these
areas include some herbaceous, shrub, and canopy vegetation with disturbed functions but do not meet
the code criterion to not provide any buffer function.
5) For illustration, a roughly approximated mapping of our findings of the effective buffer area is provided
on the attached map and includes the applicant's submitted wetland mapping. This map should not be
3
JP p E RTE ET
nH--r _oii: "u.• :;-s, �jy u�,sigrn
PERTEET.COM
2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900
EVERETT. WA 98201
425.252.7700
used for development applications. For future development considerations the existing limits of the gravel
driveway and tree canopy should be surveyed by the applicant along with the associated delineated and
surveyed wetland boundaries adjacent to the subject property (on City property) and inclusive of the
standard buffers for consideration of the buffer reduction allowance under FWRC 19.145.440(4) for
buffers to stop at either the actively used and paved driveway edge (if the City determines gravel
pavement to be a permanenfly a/teredstate) and at the edge of tree canopy along the buffer. Any future
development should also be evaluated for increased disturbances related to the use intensity adjacent to
the buffer. Buffers can be substantially enhanced on the subject property to potentially remove stored
equipment, uncompact existing soils, and to substantially enhance the existing vegetation in the buffer
areas to increase and restore buffer functions.
END OF MEMO
0
S 356TH ST
99
h
E
a z
>
o
> Q
4
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
WETLAND
BUFFER
LIMIT OF \
FUNCTIONAL
BUFFER
s
� r
GRAVEL
EDGE
,,,,_WETLAND
BOUNDARY
,1PPR0J 01/lrl7E
TREE 11-7!rlJVD rl
CANOPY rrl7ll
r1rlDI"r-117 J
�( UZ) L) Y riS
' r1PP�iJ�fJl'/lrl7�
rrl7lll, rlrl�lrrl7� WETLAND EXTENDS
EAST / SOUTHEAST
WETLAND
BOUNDARY
LWETLAND
Legend
BUFFER
■ Wetland
Wetland Buffer
Limit of Functional Buffer
Stream
0 Parcel
O Subject Property
e
pERTEET 01 o100
Feet
i r r r
STREAM J
Karl Family Trust Wetland Review
e:7/27/2018 Source: 20171magery (King County); Stream(
icant
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project Site: 35620 Pacific Hwy South City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: Karl Family Trust State: WA Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): B Kidder Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none
Subregion (LRR): NW Forest Lat: Long:
Soil Map Unit Name: edge between Bellingham silt loam & Everett-Aldenvood gravelly sandy loam 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?
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.
19 July 2018
Wetalnd X SP-
1
Slope
Datum:
Upland
Yes ® No ❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑
Is the Sampled Area Yes ® No ❑
within a Wetland.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑
Remarks: Wetland X south of applicants parcels
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of nlants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 10 m)
Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Populus balsamifera
50
)LQS
FAC
Number of Dominant Species 5
(A)
2. Alnus rubra
15
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3.
Total Number of Dominant
5
(B)
q
Species Across All Strata:
50% = 20% =
65
= Total Cover
Percent of Dominant Species
100
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 5 m)
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
1. Spiraea douolasii 55 yes FACW
2. Salix hookeriana
5
no
FAC
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3.
OBL species x1 =
4.
FACW species x2 =
5.
FAC species x3 =
50% = 20% =
60
= Total Cover
FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 M)
UPL species x5 =
1. Stachys chamissonis (cooleyae)
15
yq-s
FACW
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
2. Ranunculus repens
70
yes
FAC
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
3. Gallum aparine 5 no FACU
4. Pteridium aouilinum
5
no
FACU
❑ 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.
® 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6.
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.0'
7.
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
g
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
9.
❑ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
10.
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
11.
50% = 20% _
= Total Cover
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 5 m)
1. Rubus armeniacus 6 Yes FAC
2
Hydrophytic
Vegetation Yes ® No
El
= 20% =
6
=Total Cover
Present?
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
Project Site: 35620 Pacific Hwy South
SOIL
SamDlino Point: Wetland X SP-1
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' Loc'
Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR4/1 97
10YR4.6
3 C M
loam oxidzed rhisosoheres
5 - 12 10YR4/1 40
10YR5/8
8 C M
clay loam 5% gravels: oxidized rhizosoheres
2.5Y5/2 40
volcanic ash
10YR6/1 12
volcanic ash Deds
12 - 16+ 10YR5.5/1 80-
10YR5/6
20+ C M
clay very dense
'Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, 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 (F3)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
❑
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑
Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ® No ❑
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check
all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 413)
(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 46)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑
Salt Crust (1311)
❑
Drainage Patterns (610)
❑ Water Marks (61)
❑
Aquatic Invertebrates (613)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (62)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Drift Deposits (63)
®
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
®
Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
®
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Iron Deposits (65)
❑
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑
Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A)
❑
Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
❑ 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):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: D3 possible over clay subsurface layer. No
water table or saturation evident due to observation
in dry
summer conditions, hydric indicators ohterwise
present as noted.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0