08-105954AkCITY OF
Federal Way
January 28, 2009
Ms. Lizzie Zemke
ESA Adolfson
5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98107
RE: FILE #08-105954-00-AD; AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED
ST Fabrication Redevelopment Wetland Review
Dear Ms. Zemke:
CITY HALLFILE
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
The purpose of this letter is to authorize the services of ESA Adolfson in review of the Critical Areas
Assessment Study prepared by Habitat Technologies, dated November 10, 2008, for the above -referenced
proposal.
In a December 23, 2008, task authorization request the City requested an estimate and timeline from
Adolfson for review of the wetland report. Your scope of work dated January 14, 2009, indicated that a
budget of $3,715.00 would be appropriate for the identified tasks. At this time, funds in the amount of
$3,715.00 have been received. A copy of the wetland consultant task authorization signed by the applicant
is forwarded to your attention. Please sign and return to my attention.
Please consider this letter as authorization to proceed with the review as detailed in the City's December
23, 2008, task authorization and your January 14, 2009, scope of work.
I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
Enclosure as noted
c: Tamara Fix, Administrative Assistant
Doc [ D 48754
� ESAAdolfsoii
�J
WETLAND CONSULTANT TASK AUTHORIZATION
TASK AUTHORIZATION NO. 207004-48-A
RECEIVED BY
"—IMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
JAN 2 0 2009
DATE
14-Jan-09
CITY
City of Federal Way
PO Box 9718
33326 Eighth Avenue South
Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718
CONSULTANT
ESA Adolfson
5309 Shilshole Avenue NW
Seattle, WA 98107
PROJECT
S.T. Fabrication Redevelopment 08-105954-00-AD
PROJECT PROPONENT
Roberta Marta
TASK AUTHORIZATION NO.
207004-48-A
CITY PLANNER
Deb Barker
TASK SCOPE
1 Review submitted documents for conformance with FWCC
1 staff 3 hrs $ 460.00
2 Conduct site visit to verify wetland boundaries and classification
2 staff 6 hrs $ 570.00
3 Prepare memo regarding additional information needs
1 staff 4 hrs $ 635.00
4 Possible meetings with applicant, etc.
2 staff 4 hrs $ 1,000.00
5 Prepare memo regarding proposal's conformance with FWCC
1 staff 8 hrs $ 950.00
6
Reimbursables
FRIIXIIIJ
TOTAL COST Not to exceed $ 3,715.00
without a prior written amendment to this Task
TASK SCHEDULE Task 2 to be completed within 10 business days of
receiving notice to proceed from the City.
DELIVERABLES Information needs memo and wetland verification review letter
AU O TIO
112-tl lq�
City of Federal Way Date
ESA Adolfs ( Principal) Date
• Section 22-1359 Structure, improvements and land surface
modification within regulated wetland buffers_'
2) Provide technical memorandum(s) identifying additional information
requested as necessary.
3) Conduct site visit(s) as necessary.
4) Possible meetings on site and/or with applicant's wetland biologist_
5) Provide written technical memorandum(s) regarding the proposal's
conformance with FWCC.
Task Schedule: Provide task cost estimate by January 15, 2009_
Task Cost: Not to exceed S 3 CIS without a prior written amendment to this Task
Authorization. (The total task amount to be filled in by planner after the
consultant returns this form with all items filled out including the total work
estimate and said estimate has been approved by the Project Planner.)
Acceptance:
kv� &JuD
City of Federal Way (Planner) Date
(Consul nt) Date
;�7
d2pa
(Pro ct ponent) Date
1 NOTE_ I do not believe that the report contains any information to document the extent of any buffer intrusion or how
applicable intrusion criteria are met.
Dm I.D. 48168
ESQ. Ad o s0 '�
Febru 23, 008
Deb Barker
City of Federal Way
Department of Community Development Services
PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
5309 Shilshole Avenue M �j
Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98107
206.789.9658 phone
206.789.9684 fax
Div v4ff
www.adolfson.com
Subject: ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)--Wetland Determination and Delineation
Review, Federal Way, WA
Dear Deb:
ESA Adolfson is pleased to present our review of critical area application materials for the proposed ST
Fabrication Redevelopment located at 35703 16Ih Avenue South, Federal Way. The site is 16.63 acres and is
composed of two parcels: 292104-9095 and 292104-9107. Currently, Parcel 292104-9107 is developed with a
metal fabrication facility. Parcel 292104-9095 is undeveloped and is covered with a mix of shrub and forest plant
communities. Two wetlands have been identified on the site.
The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a mixed -use development that will include residential and
commercial complexes. Development will consist of demolishing the existing metal fabrication shop and
constructing several new structures, which will extend onto the currently undeveloped portion of the site.
Structural development (including stormwater features, basketball and tennis courts, etc.) will be located outside
of critical areas and buffers. A five-foot wide walking path and split rail fence are planned as open -space
recreational areas. The majority of this walking path intrudes into critical area buffers on -site.
Document Review
ESA Adolfson reviewed the following materials, which were sent by the City of Federal Way (City) on
December 23, 2008:
■ Cover Letter (Roberta Marta, December 16, 2008)
• Critical Areas Assessment Study (Habitat Technologies, November 10, 2008)
■ Pre -application Conference Letter (City, September 18, 2008)
• ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets (Abbey Road, January 14, 2009)
■ Landscape Plan Sheets (Jeffrey B. Glander & Associates, PLLC, January 12, 2009)
Our comments are based on our review of the project materials provided by the applicant and sent by the City on
December 23, 2008, the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIV--Critical Areas, and a site
visit conducted on February 5, 2008.
Cover Letter
The December 16, 2008 Cover Letter describes the proposed development and mentions the preparation of a
critical areas study for wetlands on the site. The letter notes the presence of two wetlands on Parcel 292104-
r ESAAdoifsos,
J
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and tion Review --+
February 23, 2009
Page 2 Ir.
9095: Wetland A, a Category III wetland with a 25-foot buffer, located in the central portion of the site, and
Wetland B, a Category I wetland with a 200-foot buffer, located in the west portion of the site.
Critical Areas Assessment Study
The November 10, 2008 Critical Areas Assessment Study prepared by Habitat Technologies reviewed several
maps for information regarding critical areas. National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Priority Habitats and Species
(PHS), Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), and Federal Way Zoning maps identify a
wetland along the west portion of the site, extending offsite to the northwest and southwest. According to the
Federal Way Zoning Map, the wetland is listed as a forested, Category I wetland. WDFW, PHS, and WDNR
maps show a stream located within this wetland, to the west of the site. The WDNR map also shows a stream
feature running east to west through the site. Coho salmon, rainbow trout, and steelhead trout are mapped
directly to the south of the site, according to PHS and WDFW maps.
Federal Way City Code (FWCC 22-1357) was used for determining wetland categories and buffer ratings.
Wetlands were assessed for hydrologic support, stormwater and floodwater storage, water quality, groundwater
recharge, and natural biological functions using criteria from Adamus (1987) and Reppert (1979).
The report describes two wetlands on -site. Wetland A is described as a small depressional, scrub -shrub wetland
located in the central portion of the site. The wetland was rated as a Category 3 wetland with a 25-foot buffer.
The report states that Wetland A appeared to be hydrologically supported by stormwater sheet flow from
surrounding areas. Wetland A was rated as having low functions for all categories. The report text did not state
the size of the wetland.
According to the Habitat Technologies report Wetland B is located along the west portion of the site and is part of
a larger wetland, which extends off -site to the northwest and southwest. Wetland B is forested and receives water
from seasonal stormwater sheet flow from surrounding areas and ground water seeps. The wetland was rated as a
Category 1 wetland with a 200-foot buffer. Wetland B was rated as having moderately high to high functions for
all categories. The report text did not state the size of the wetland.
The Habitat Technologies report did not identify any streams on the site. The stream off -site to the west was
rated as a major stream with a 200-foot buffer.
The report does not mention development plans for the site or discuss how those plans may affect critical areas
and buffers. The development plan that is attached to the report is dated August 7, 2008 and does not reflect the
latest site design. The walking trails planned for the site intrude into the buffers of Wetlands A and B. According
to FWCC 22-1359(d), minor improvements, including walkways, are allowed within a wetland buffer if approved
through Process III, and provided that the following criteria are met:
1. It will not adversely affect water quality;
2. It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or buffer's wildlife habitat;
3. It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities;
4. It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards; and
`Pr ESA Ad o s o'
__1
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 23, 2009
Page 3
5. It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property nor to the
city as a whole.
The report does not discuss the proposed walkway with respect to the walkway design (e.g. construction materials
to be used), the amount of buffer intrusion that will occur, or the required criteria listed in FWCC 22-1359(d).
Based on the footprint of the walkway and its proximity to wetlands on -site (especially Wetland A), it is not clear
that the walkway meets the requirements of these criteria.
A stormwater detention pond and a storm trench are planned as part of the development and are located upslope,
away from critical area buffers. However, these features are located in the vicinity of Wetland A. According to
the report, stormwater sheet flow is a primary water input to Wetland A. The report does not discuss the
placement of stormwater features near Wetland A or potential impacts to Wetland A that might result from
changes in hydrology.
Pre -application Conference Letter
The Pre -application Conference Letter, prepared by the City and dated September 12, 2008, discusses the
proposed site development with regards to critical areas. This letter asks the applicant to include narrative to
demonstrate how wetland buffer intrusions from the proposed pedestrian trail meet FWCC 22-1359(d) criteria, or
to redesign the site to avoid all wetland buffer intrusions.
ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets
The ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets, dated January 14, 2009, depict the Binding Site Plan for the proposed
development. A series of five-foot walking paths, totaling 11,419 square feet, are shown intruding into the
buffers of Wetland A and B. The trail appears to pass within 20 feet of Wetland B, along the central portion of
the wetland, and within five feet of the north and south sides of Wetland A.
Wetland labels, categories, and sizes are shown on Figure 3 of the ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets. Wetland
A (2,775 square feet) is listed as a Category III wetland. Wetland B (115, 876 square feet) is listed as a Category
I wetland.
The stormwater detention pond and storm trench are shown to the northeast and southeast of Wetland A and its
buffer.
Landscape Plan Sheets
The Landscape Plan Sheets, dated January 12, 2009, show proposed landscaping in areas outside of critical areas
and buffers. Site plan details appear to be consistent with the ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets.
Site Visit
1' ESAAdolfsoi,
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD) _ n
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 23, 2009
Page 4
ESA Adolfson biologists Laura Brock and Rosemary Baker conducted site visit on February 5, 2009 to verify
the boundary and classification of on -site critical areas and to review the laps for the proposed development.
Conditions on -site generally matched the descriptions given in the reports The eastern and central portions of the
undeveloped parcel were covered with Scots broom and patches of Himala blackberry. Forested areas
covered the northern and western edges of the parcel.
ESA Adolfson agreed with the boundaries and classifications of Wetlands A and 9. Wetland A is located within
a small depression in the south-central portion of the parcel. Spirea and crabapple were the dominant vegetation
in the wetland. Soils were generally dark silt loams in the first layer, with depleted silt loams and distinct
redoximorphic features present in the layer below. Soils were moist to saturated. Signs of ponding included
water -stained leaves and drainage patterns.
Wetland B is located within a large depression along the west portion of the parcel. The stream, mapped off -site
as a tributary to Hylebos Creek, was not visible from the property. Large, mature red alder, Western red cedar,
and black cottonwood provide forested cover for the wetland. Vine maple, salmonberry, and wood fern were
observed in the understory. Soils generally consisted of dark loams in the surface layer, with depleted or gleyed
silty clay matrices below. Prominent and distinct redoximorphic features were present in the subsurface layer.
Small ponded areas, matted leaves, and drainage patterns were observed in lower depressional areas.
No signs of streams or other drainage features were observed on the site.
Recommendations
Based on the above findings, ESA Adolfson recommends the following:
Critical Areas Assessment Study
1. The sizes of Wetlands A and B should be added to the report text and figure.
2. A discussion of the proposed walkway design and construction materials to be used, the amount of buffer
intrusion that will occur, and the required criteria listed in FWCC 22-1359(d) should be added to the
report text.
3. A discussion of stormwater features near Wetland A and potential hydrologic impacts.
4. The report figure should be updated to reflect the most recent design.
ST-FAB Redevelopment and Landscape Plan Sheets
1. The design plan should be evaluated for compliance with the criteria given in FWCC 22-1359(d) and
amended as necessary.
Limitations
Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in
accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 23, 2009
Page 5
criteria in effect at the time this study was performed. The results and conclusions of this report represent the
authors' best professional judgment; based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that
obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
Sincerely,
ESA Adolfson, Inc.
Laura Brock, Project Scientist
cc: Lizzie Zemke, Project Manager
CITY OF
�. Federal
March 4, 2009
Roberta Marta
Abbey Road Group
923 Shaw Road, Suite A
Puyallup, WA 98372
.:a
FILt
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
RE: File #08-105954-00-AD; FORWARD WETLAND DETERMINATION AND DELINEATION REVIEW
ST Fabrication Wetland Review, 35703 16`h Avenue South, Federal Way
Dear Ms. Marta:
ESA Adolfson, the City's wetland consultant, has reviewed technical information prepared in conjunction
with the redevelopment application for the above -referenced project. This information was submitted to
the City on December 23, 2008, in advance of applications for the commercial property redevelopment as
a mixed -use site. A copy of their February 24, 2009, memorandum is enclosed.
After reviewing the submitted information, the Federal Way City Code (FWCC), and conducting a site
visit, ESA Adolfson agreed with the boundaries and classifications of Wetlands A and B delineated by
Habitat Technologies. They recommended that specific items be included in the Critical Areas
Assessment Study and subsequent design plans, including an evaluation of proposed wetland buffer
intrusions with criteria of FWCC section 22-1359(d). Note that additional funding will be required in
order for ESA Adolfson to review these recommended items.
When resubmitting, please provide two copies of any revised plans or reports, accompanied by the
enclosed Resubmittal Information form. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions
about this letter.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
Enclosure as noted
c: Laura Brock, ESA Adolfson, 5309 Shilshole Ave NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98107
Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Doc I D 49243
Em Adolfson
February 24, 2008
Deb Barker
City of Federal Way
Department of Community Development Services
PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
5309 Shilshole Avenue NVh www.adolfson.com
Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98107
206.789.9658 phone
206.789.9684 fax
RECEIVED BY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MAR 0 3 2009
Subject: ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)—Wetland Determination and Delineation
Review, Federal Way, WA
Dear Deb:
ESA Adolfson is pleased to present our review of critical area application materials for the proposed ST
Fabrication Redevelopment located at 35703 10h Avenue South, Federal Way. The site is 16.63 acres and is
composed of two parcels: 292104-9095 and 292104-9107. Currently, Parcel 292104-9107 is developed with a
metal fabrication facility. Parcel 292104-9095 is undeveloped and is covered with a mix of shrub and forest plant
communities. Two wetlands have been identified on the site.
The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a mixed -use development that will include residential and
commercial complexes. Development will consist of demolishing the existing metal fabrication shop and
constructing several new structures, which will extend onto the currently undeveloped portion of the site.
Structural development (including stormwater features, basketball and tennis courts, etc.) will be located outside
of critical areas and buffers. A five-foot wide walking path and split rail fence are planned as open -space
recreational areas. The majority of this walking path intrudes into critical area buffers on -site.
Document Review
ESA Adolfson reviewed the following materials, which were sent by the City of Federal Way (City) on
December 23, 2008:
• Cover Letter (Roberta Marta, December 16, 2008)
• Critical Areas Assessment Study (Habitat Technologies, November 10, 2008)
• Pre -application Conference Letter (City, September 18, 2008)
• ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets (Abbey Road, January 14, 2009)
• Landscape Plan Sheets (Jeffrey B. Glander & Associates, PLLC, January 12, 2009)
Our comments are based on our review of the project materials provided by the applicant and sent by the City on
December 23, 2008, the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIV—Critical Areas, and a site
visit conducted on February 5, 2008.
Cover Letter
The December 16, 2008 Cover Letter describes the proposed development and mentions the preparation of a
critical areas study for wetlands on the site. The letter notes the presence of two wetlands on Parcel 292104-
r ESA Adolfson
J
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 24, 2009
Page 2
9095: Wetland A, a Category III wetland with a 25-foot buffer, located in the central portion of the site, and
Wetland B, a Category I wetland with a 200-foot buffer, located in the west portion of the site.
Critical Areas Assessment Study
The November 10, 2008 Critical Areas Assessment Study prepared by Habitat Technologies reviewed several
maps for information regarding critical areas. National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Priority Habitats and Species
(PHS), Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), and Federal Way Zoning maps identify a
wetland along the west portion of the site, extending offsite to the northwest and southwest. According to the
Federal Way Zoning Map, the wetland is listed as a forested, Category I wetland. WDFW, PHS, and WDNR
maps show a stream located within this wetland, to the west of the site. The WDNR map also shows a stream
feature running east to west through the site. Coho salmon, rainbow trout, and steelhead trout are mapped
directly to the south of the site, according to PHS and WDFW maps.
Federal Way City Code (FWCC 22-1357) was used for determining wetland categories and buffer ratings.
Wetlands were assessed for hydrologic support, stormwater and floodwater storage, water quality, groundwater
recharge, and natural biological functions using criteria from Adamus (1987) and Reppert (1979).
The report describes two wetlands on -site. Wetland A is described as a small depressional, scrub -shrub wetland
located in the central portion of the site. The wetland was rated as a Category 3 wetland with a 25-foot buffer.
The report states that Wetland A appeared to be hydrologically supported by stormwater sheet flow from
surrounding areas. Wetland A was rated as having low functions for all categories. The report text did not state
the size of the wetland.
According to the Habitat Technologies report Wetland B is located along the west portion of the site and is part of
a larger wetland, which extends off -site to the northwest and southwest. Wetland B is forested and receives water
from seasonal stormwater sheet flow from surrounding areas and ground water seeps. The wetland was rated as a
Category 1 wetland with a 200-foot buffer. Wetland B was rated as having moderately high to high functions for
all categories. The report text did not state the size of the wetland.
The Habitat Technologies report did not identify any streams on the site. The stream off -site to the west was
rated as a major stream with a 200-foot buffer.
The report does not mention development plans for the site or discuss how those plans may affect critical areas
and buffers. The development plan that is attached to the report is dated August 7, 2008 and does not reflect the
latest site design. The walking trails planned for the site intrude into the buffers of Wetlands A and B. According
to FWCC 22-1359(d), minor improvements, including walkways, are allowed within a wetland buffer if approved
through Process III, and provided that the following criteria are met:
1. It will not adversely affect water quality;
2. It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or buffer's wildlife habitat;
3. It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities;
4. It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards; and
r ESA Adoifson
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 24, 2009
Page 3
5. It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property nor to the
city as a whole.
The report does not discuss the proposed walkway with respect to the walkway design (e.g. construction materials
to be used), the amount of buffer intrusion that will occur, or the required criteria listed in FWCC 22-1359(d).
Based on the footprint of the walkway and its proximity to wetlands on -site (especially Wetland A), it is not clear
that the walkway meets the requirements of these criteria.
A stormwater detention pond and a storm trench are planned as part of the development and are located upslope,
away from critical area buffers. However, these features are located in the vicinity of Wetland A. According to
the report, stormwater sheet flow is a primary water input to Wetland A. The report does not discuss the
placement of stormwater features near Wetland A or potential impacts to Wetland A that might result from
changes in hydrology.
Pre -application Conference Letter
The Pre -application Conference Letter, prepared by the City and dated September 12, 2008, discusses the
proposed site development with regards to critical areas. This letter asks the applicant to include narrative to
demonstrate how wetland buffer intrusions from the proposed pedestrian trail meet FWCC 22-1359(d) criteria, or
to redesign the site to avoid all wetland buffer intrusions.
ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets
The ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets, dated January 14, 2009, depict the Binding Site Plan for the proposed
development. A series of five-foot walking paths, totaling 11,419 square feet, are shown intruding into the
buffers of Wetland A and B. The trail appears to pass within 20 feet of Wetland B, along the central portion of
the wetland, and within five feet of the north and south sides of Wetland A.
Wetland labels, categories, and sizes are shown on Figure 3 of the ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets. Wetland
A (2,775 square feet) is listed as a Category III wetland. Wetland B (115, 876 square feet) is listed as a Category
I wetland.
The stormwater detention pond and storm trench are shown to the northeast and southeast of Wetland A and its
buffer.
Landscape Plan Sheets
The Landscape Plan Sheets, dated January 12, 2009, show proposed landscaping in areas outside of critical areas
and buffers. Site plan details appear to be consistent with the ST-FAB Redevelopment Plan Sheets.
ESAAdolfson
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 24, 2009
Page 4
Site Visit
ESA Adolfson biologists Laura Brock and Rosemary Baker conducted a site visit on February 5, 2009 to verify
the boundary and classification of on -site critical areas and to review the plans for the proposed development.
Conditions on -site generally matched the descriptions given in the reports. The eastern and central portions of the
undeveloped parcel were covered with Scots broom and patches of Himalayan blackberry. Forested areas
covered the northern and western edges of the parcel.
ESA Adolfson agreed with the boundaries and classifications of Wetlands A and B as delineated by Habitat
Technologies. Wetland A is located within a small depression in the south-central portion of the parcel. Spirea
and crabapple were the dominant vegetation in the wetland. Soils were generally dark silt loams in the first layer,
with depleted silt loams and distinct redoximorphic features present in the layer below. Soils were moist to
saturated. Signs of ponding included water -stained leaves and drainage patterns.
Wetland B is located within a large depression along the west portion of the parcel. The stream, mapped off -site
as a tributary to Hylebos Creek, was not visible from the property. Large, mature red alder, Western red cedar,
and black cottonwood provide forested cover for the wetland. Vine maple, salmonberry, and wood fern were
observed in the understory. Soils generally consisted of dark loams in the surface layer, with depleted or gleyed
silty clay matrices below. Prominent and distinct redoximorphic features were present in the subsurface layer.
Small ponded areas, matted leaves, and drainage patterns were observed in lower depressional areas.
No signs of streams or other drainage features were observed on the site.
Recommendations
Based on the above findings, ESA Adolfson recommends the following:
Critical Areas Assessment Study
1. The sizes of Wetlands A and B should be added to the report text and figure.
2. A discussion of the proposed walkway design and construction materials to be used, the amount of buffer
intrusion that will occur, and the required criteria listed in FWCC 22-1359(d) should be added to the
report text.
3. A discussion of stormwater features near Wetland A and potential hydrologic impacts.
4. The report figure should be updated to reflect the most recent design.
ST-FAB Redevelopment and Landscape Plan Sheets
1. The design plan should be evaluated for compliance with the criteria given in FWCC 22-1359(d) and
amended as necessary.
r ESAAdolfson
J
ST Fabrication Redevelopment (08-105954-00-AD)
Wetland Determination and Delineation Review
February 24, 2009
Page 5
Additional Review Costs
It should be noted that we estimate the cost to review the documents that will address the above recommendations
to be approximately $500.00.
Limitations
Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in
accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and
criteria in effect at the time this study was performed. The results and conclusions of this report represent the
Authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that
obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
Sincerely,
ESA Adolfson, Inc. 1
JVV�e—j n�
Laura Brock, Project Scientist
cc: Lizzie Zemke, Project Manager
CITY OF
Ak Federal
January 15, 2009
Ms. Roberta Marta
Abbey Road Group
923 Shaw Road, Suite A
Puyallup, WA 98372
FILE
CITY HALL
Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
RE: FILE #08-105954-00-AD; WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW ESTIMATE
S. T. Fabrication Site Wetland Review
Dear Ms. Marta:
Enclosed please find a Wetland Consultant Task Authorization dated January 14, 2009, prepared by ESA
Adolfson, for wetland review of the S.T. Fabrication site redevelopment application.
ESA Adolfson (Adolfson), the City's wetland consultant, was asked to provide an estimate for their
review of information submitted by you, including the Critical Areas Assessment Study, parcels
2921049095 and 2921049107, prepared by Habitat Technologies, dated November 10, 2008, and your
cover letter dated December 16, 2008. Copies of the Adolfson task authorization with task scope and the
City's December 23, 2008, Wetland Consultant Authorization Form are enclosed.
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 Adolfson. If any of the funds are not used, they will be returned to the
applicant. Please note that the Adolfson task authorization does not include review of any documents
other than those listed in the City's December 23, 2008, Wetland Consultant Authorization Form, and
review of any revision to those documents will require additional funding.
At this point, please review the proposed Adolfson task authorization. If you agree with the cost estimate,
a check in the amount of $3,715.00, payable to the City of Federal Way, must be submitted with the
enclosed invoice before the wetland review will commence. Following receipt, I will authorize Adolfson
to begin their formal review. Also, please sign and return to my attention the enclosed Wetland
Consultant Authorization Form.
I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter or the wetland review
estimate. We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely;
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
Enclosures as noted
Doc. [.D. 48494
t
08-105954
December 16, 2008
Isaac Conlen
Planning Department
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98063
RE: ST Fabrication Redevelopment (Application# 08-103758-00-PC) Located at
35703 16th Avenue South; ARG Job No. 07-179
Dear Isaac,
Per the Pre -Development Conference conducted on August 28th, 2008, we are
submitting the Critical Areas Assessment Study for the above referenced property.
The site is 16.63 acres in size and currently consists of two parcels (292104-9095 and
292104-9107). The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a multi -family
development and associated commercial uses and parking. The proposal would
include demolishing the existing on -site buildings and constructing two multi -family
buildings with commercial uses and parking on the lower level. The two buildings are
proposed to be five stories, with the first four floors being residential and the ground
level floor would be various commercial uses with parking for the residences in the rear
of the commercial. The western residential building would have a single row of
residential as basement type units as well. The proposed residential units would range
in size from approximately 700 to 900 square feet.
The proposed project will be designed through a Binding Site Plan, SEPA, and Type III
Process Application. The proposed housing will be designed according to the City of
Federal Ways needs, and could be affordable housing. The commercial uses will
consist of common needs for the surrounding community such as coffee shop, offices,
and retail within the eastern building. Within the front portion of the western building,
uses relative to the residents needs are proposed, to include storage, barber shop,
laundry facilities, theatre area, etc. These commercial buildings would be 600 sf to 800
sf in size.
There are two additional buildings proposed, one located at the southeast corner of the
site (approximately 3,965 sf) and one located at the northern entrance to the site
(approximately 3,661 sf). These two buildings will also be commercial uses, most likely
office or retail areas. A total of 346 residential units, 38 commercial spaces, and two
commercial buildings are proposed for the site. There are a total of 500 parking stalls
provided within parking lot areas as well as parking within the proposed buildings.
There is approximately 113,568 sf of recreation/open space proposed fofti} pr ect,r E D
DEC 16 2008
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CDS
A Wetland Determination and Delineation bas been prepared for the site and is
attached for your review. There are two wetlands located on Parcel 291204-9095 (the
western parcel). Wetland A is in the central portion of the property, and is rated as a
Category III wetland with a 25' buffer. Wetland B is northwest of the property and
extends generally to the south through the western portion of the site; this wetland is
rated as a Category I wetland with a 200' buffer.
Please review the attached Critical Areas Assessment Study for ST Fabrication. If you
have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (253) 446-
3509 or via e-mail at Roberta.Marta@abbeyroadgroup.com.
Sincerely,
�DVA� NU4+k
Roberta L. Marta
Project Manager
rm
Enclosure: Critical Areas Assessment Study (2 copies)
cc: Jesse T. Cherian, ST Fabrication
Eric Hildebrandt, ST Fabrication
\\Abb-fs-01\Abbey Road Group\PROJECT\07-179 ST FAB Fed Way\PERMITT ING\Wetland
Review\12.16.08 Wetland Review Request to ISaaCAOC
HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES
C(DIPV 112.
CRITICAL AREAS ASSESSMENT STUDY
PARCELS 2921049095 and 2921049107
35703 -16th Avenue South
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON
prepared for
The Abbey Road Group
@ Project Number 07-179
PO Box 1224
Puyallup, Washington 98371
prepared by
HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES
P.O. Box 1088
Puyallup, Washington 98371-1088 — 10 9 -
253-845-5119 4
&SUBMITTED ,
November 10, 2008 DEC 16 2008
CITY�LWAY
❑ DING DEPFEDERALT,
wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife - mitigation and permitting solutions
P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371
voice 253-845-5119 fax 253-841-1942 habitattech@gwestoffice.net
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................1
DOCUMENTPURPOSE..............................................................................................................1
PROJECTSITE DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................1
BACKGROUNDINFORMATION....................................................................................................2
NATIONALWETLAND INVENTORY...........................................................................................2
STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES..........................I.................2
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE .......................................
2
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.................................2
CITYOF FEDERAL WAY MAPPING...........................................................................................
3
SOILSMAPPING...................................................................................,.........I...........................3
WASHINGTON STATE NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM- .....................................................
3
ONSITEASSESSMENT..................................................................................................................3
CRITERIA FOR WETLAND AND STREAM IDENTIFICATION...................................................3
STUDYMETHODS...........................................................................................I..........................4
FIELDOBSERVATION................................................................................................................4
Soils................................................................................. ................................................
5
Hydrology............................................................................................................................
5
Vegetation............................................................................................................................... 6
WETLAND AND DRAINAGE CORRIDOR DETERMINATION....„................................................8
WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT...................................................................9
ONSITEWETLAND VALUATION..............................................................................................11
WILDLIFEOBSERVATIONS........................................................................................................12
OBSERVEDSPECIES..................................................................................................I...........12
MOVEMENT.CORRIDORS.......................................................................................................
13
STATEPRIORITY SPECIES.....................................................................................................
13
FEDERALLYLISTED SPECIES.................................................................................................14
REGULATORYCONSIDERATION...............................................................................................14
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - SECTION 404................................................................15
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY.....................................................15
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY - CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS CHAPTER 22.....................................
16
FIGURES.......................................................................................................................................21
REFERENCELIST........................................................................................................................22
APPENDIXA — FIELD DATA FORMS..........................................................................................23
ATTACHMENT— SITE PLAN.......................................................................................................24
INTRODUCTION
This report details the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertaken
to complete a critical areas assessment study as an essential element of
potential project planning. The project site was approximately 16-acres in size,
was composed of two (2) existing parcels (parcels 2921049095 and
2921049107), and was located at 35703 16th Avenue South in the City of Federal
Way, Washington (part of Section 29, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M.)
(Figure 1). The evaluation and characterization of onsite and adjacent critical
areas (i.e. wetlands, drainage corridors, and critical habitats) is a vital element in
the planning and selection or a potential site development action. The goal of
this approach is to ensure that planned site development, to include the
establishment of protective buffers, does not result in either short-term or long-
term adverse environmental impacts to identified critical areas within and
immediately adjacent to the project site.
DOCUMENT PURPOSE
This purpose of this document is to present the results of an onsite assessment
and evaluation of potential critical areas within and immediately adjacent to the
project site following the methods and procedures defined in the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual), the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash Manual), the State of
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules
(WAC 222-16-030), the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Priority Species and Habitats Program, and City of Federal Way Chapter 22.
PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site was composed of two existing parcels. The project was
accessed via adjacent public roadways - 16t" Avenue South and South 356tn
Street. The eastern portion of the project site had been developed a number of
years ago, and continued to be used as a steel fabrication facility. The western
portion of the project site was vacant land that exhibited areas of regenerated
forest and overgrowing pasture areas. The site sloped generally from east to
west and a depressional corridor was present generally along the western
boundary of the project site.
The project site was located within an area of mixed urban developments. These
developments included commercial and light industrial uses, moderate to high
intensity residential uses, and remnant single-family homesites.
1
08136
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping completed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 2). This
mapping resource identified the upper end of a wetland complex encroaching
onto the western portion of the project site from areas to the west and southwest.
The onsite portion of this wetland complex was identified as palustrine, forested,
temporarily flooded (PFOA).
STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES
The State of Washington Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Mapping was
reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 3). This mapping resource
generally identified the upper end of a wetland complex within the western
portion of the project site as noted in the NWI Mapping above. This mapping
resource also identified the presence of resident and anadromous fish associated
with a drainage that originated well offsite to the north and continued through the
wetland area along the western boundary of the project site.
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
The State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Mapping
(Salmonscape) was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 4). This
mapping resource identified a stream crossing through the northern portion of the
project site and then turning to the south offsite to the west of the project site.
This mapping resource identified the presence of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus
kisutch) and rainbow/steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) directly south of the
project site. This mapping resource also identifies that Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) are present
further downstream (south) of the project site.
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
The State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Mapping
was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 5). This mapping resource
generally identified the upper end of a wetland complex within the western
portion of the project site as noted in the NWI Mapping above. This mapping
resource also identified a drainage corridor offsite to the west within the wetland
complex. This mapping resource identified the wetland as a WDNR Type FW
(forested wetland) and the drainage corridor as a WDNR Type F Water (fish
bearing).
2
08136
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MAPPING
The City of Federal Way Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment
(Figure 6). This mapping resource depicted a City of Federal Way "FW Rating 1"
wetland generally along the western boundary of the project site that continues
offsite to the west. This wetland was also identified to extend offsite generally to
the south west. This mapping resource further noted the start of a City of
Federal Way "Major stream" offsite to the southwest of the project site — adjacent
to South 3591h Street.
SOILS MAPPING
The soil mapping inventory completed by the Soils Conservation Service was
reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 7). This mapping resource
identified the soils throughout the majority of the project site as Everett gravelly
sandy loam (EvC). The Everett soil series is defined as somewhat excessively
well drained and as formed in gravelly glacial outwash. This mapping resource
also noted a band of Kitsap silt loam generally crossing through the central -
western portion of the project site. The Kitsap soil series is defined as
moderately well drained and as formed in glacial lake deposits. These soils are
not listed as "hydric."
This mapping resource also noted a band of Bellingham silt loam generally along
the western boundary of the project site. The Bellingham soil series is defined as
poorly drained, as formed in alluvium under grass and sedges, and as listed as
"hydric."
WASHINGTON STATE NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM
The Washington State Natural Heritage Program was reviewed as a part of this
assessment. This resource did not identify any high quality, undisturbed wetland
or a wetland that supports state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant
species within the Section/Township/Range of the project site.
ONSITE ASSESSMENT
CRITERIA FOR WETLAND AND STREAM IDENTIFICATION
Wetlands are transitional areas between aquatic and upland habitats. In general
terms, wetlands are lands where the extent and duration of saturation with water is
the primary factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant
and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface (Cowardin, et al., 1979).
Wetlands are generally defined within land use regulations as "areas that are
3
08136
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (1987 Manual).
Wetlands exhibit three essential characteristics, all of which must be present for an
area to meet the established criteria within the Wash. Manual and the 1987 Manual.
These essential characteristics are:
1. Hydrophytic Vegetation: A predominance of plants that are typically
adapted for life in saturated soils.
2. Hydric Soil: A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough
during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper
horizons.
3. Wetland Hydrology: Permanent or periodic inundation, or soil
saturation to the surface, at least seasonally.
A stream is generally defined as a location where surface waters produce a
defined channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is typically an area which
demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water and includes, but not
limited to, bedrock channels, gravel beds, sand and silt beds, and defined
channel swales. A stream need not contain water year-round. A stream typically
does not include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water run-off devices,
or other artificial watercourses unless the constructed watercourse conveys a
stream which naturally occurred prior to the construction of such watercourse.
STUDY METHODS
Habitat Technologies completed a series of site visits during October 2008. In
addition, the staff of Habitat Technologies has completed similar assessments for
a variety of parcels within the area of the project site dating back to 1979. The
objective of this evaluation was to define and delineate potential wetland and
drainage areas that may be present within the project area, and to characterize
existing habitats and habitat utilization. Boundaries between wetland and non -
wetland areas were established by examining the transitional gradient between
wetland criteria. Onsite activities were completed in accordance with criteria and
procedures established in the 1987 Manual, the Wash. Manual, City of Federal
Way Chapter 22, and the WDNR Forest Practice Rules. Delineation was
performed using the routine methodology for areas larger than five acres as
detailed in the 1987 Manual. Field data sheets are provided in Appendix A and
sample plot locations are noted in the surveyed site plan.
FIELD OBSERVATION
As noted above the project site contained two (2) parcels. The project site had
undergone prior land use manipulations to include forest harvest, clearing,
4
08136
grading, pasture creation, building construction, fencing, internal and external
roadway construction, and the development of adjacent properties. The project
site was generally sloped from east to west/southwest. Since the eastern portion
of the project site was dominated by an existing commercial/light industrial facility
the onsite assessment focused generally within the central and western portions
of the project site.
Soils
As identified at representative sample plots within the majority of the central and
western portions of the project site the soil exhibited a gravelly loam, gravelly
sandy loam, to sandy loam texture and coloration typical of the Everett and
Kitsap soil series. In addition, the soils did not exhibit prominent redoximorphic
features within the upper 20 inches of the soil profile. The soil appeared to drain
moderately well to well following seasonal storm events. Field indicators of
wetland hydrology patterns were absent throughout the majority of the project
site.
A small depression identified within the central portion of the project site
exhibited a surface layer of very dark gray (10YR3/1) coloration and silty loam
texture. The subsoil ranged from very dark gray (10YR3/1) to dark gray (10YR
4/1) in coloration and silty loam texture. The subsoil also exhibited prominent
redoximorphic features (i.e. soil mottles). Based on existing soil piles and the
eastern slope of this area this small depression appeared to have been
excavated a number of years ago.
A depressional corridor was present along the western boundary of the project
site. This corridor generally commenced offsite to the northwest of the project
site and continued offsite generally to the south. The soil within this depressional
corridor exhibited gravelly silty loam to silty loam texture. The surface soil
exhibited a black (10YR 2/1) to very dark brown (10YR 3/2) to a depth of six (6)
to twelve (12) inches. The surface soil often exhibited organic materials captured
in small depressions. The subsoil to a depth to approximately 20 inches
exhibited a black (10YR 2/1) to dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) coloration. The
subsoil also exhibited prominent redoximorphic features (i.e. soil mottles). The
surface and subsoil also exhibited prominent oxidized root channels. The soil
within this corridor exhibited field characteristics typical of hydric soil.
Hydrology
Onsite hydrology appeared to be the result of seasonal stormwater runoff from
onsite, seasonal stormwater runoff from adjacent properties, site topography, and
soil characteristics. The majority of the project site appeared to drain moderately
well and did not exhibit field indicators associated with the movement of seasonal
surface water runoff.
5
08136
The small depression identified in the central portion of the project site exhibited
an area of shallow seasonal stormwater ponding. This shallow depression
appeared to receive seasonal stormwater sheet flow from the upslope locations
generally to the east. This shallow depression appeared to have been excavated
a number of years ago. However, this shallow depression did not appear to be
supported by seeps.
A depressional corridor within the western portion of the project site was
identified to commence offsite to the northwest and continue offsite to the south.
This corridor was noted to receive season stormwater flow from an installed
culvert associated with South 356th Street Corridor and adjacent parcels, and
from adjacent onsite and offsite areas. This corridor extended generally to the
south along the western boundary of the project site. The prior development of
South 359t Street had filled this corridor to create the road right-of-way. The
development of the South 359t" Street Corridor included the placement of a
culvert with a controlled inlet on the upstream site of South 359t" Street. This
controlled culvert appeared to have created a large area for the impoundment of
seasonal surface flow upstream — north — of South 359t" Street.
The movement of seasonal surface water runoff within the western corridor was
generally to the southwest. No continuous defined channel was identified onsite
within this corridor. Portions of this corridor appeared to remain
ponded/saturated through at least the majority of the growing season. The
majority of this swale appeared to become dry at or near the surface by mid-
summer.
Vegetation
As noted above the eastern portion of the project site had been developed into a
commercial/light industrial facility.
The central and western portions of the project site generally exhibited four (4)
separate plant communities. The first plant community, noted in the east -central
and central portions of the project site, was identified as a prior managed
pasture. This community exhibited a few retained mature trees and a pasture
plant community that had become overrun with Scots broom (Cytisus scoparius)
and other invasives in many areas. Observed species within this plant
community included Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), domestic apple (Pyrus
spp.), crabapple (Pyrus fusca), hawthorne (Crataegus monogyna), Himalayan
blackberry (Rubus procera), evergreen blackberry (Rebus faciniatus), Pacific
blackberry (Rubus ursinus), Scot's broom, rose (Rosa spp.), snowberry
(5ymphoricarpus albus), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium), nettle (Urtica dioica),
Canadian thistle (Cirsium arvensis), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), fescue
(Festuca spp.), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare),
6
08136
smooth cats ear (Hypochaeris glabra), hairy cats ear (Hypochaeris redicata),
sheep sorrel (Rumex acetosella), dandelion (Taraxacum offrcinale), clover
(Trifolium spp.), bluegrass (Poa spp.), and buttercup (Ranunculus repens). This
plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of
uplands).
The second plant community was identified in a shallow depressional area within
the central portion of the project site. This depression was dominated by species
more typically associated with damp to saturated soils and included crabapple,
Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasir), salmonberry
(Rubes spectabilis), speedwell (Veronica scutellata), reed canarygrass (Phalaris
arundinacea), buttercup, big leaf avens (Geum macrophyllum), and curled dock
(Rumex crispus). This plant community was identified as hydrophytic in
character (i.e. typical of wetlands).
The third plant community was identified in the northwestern and west -central
portions of the project site. These areas exhibited remnant upland forests.
Observed species included Douglas fir, Western red cedar (Thuja plicata),
Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red
alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), cherry (Prunus
spp.), and cascara (Rhamnus purshiana). The understory was dominated by a
wide variety of shrubs and herbs that included Indian plum (Oemleria
cerasiformis), vine maple (Acer circinatum), hazelnut (Corylus comuta),
salmonberry, Pacific red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), red huckleberry
(Vaccinium parvifolium), Oregon grape (Serberis nervosa), salal (Gaultheria
shallon), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium),
nettle (Urtica dioica), and geranium (Geranium spp.). This plant community was
identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of uplands).
The fourth plant community was identified in the western portion of the parcel.
This plant community was within a topographical corridor and was dominated by
species more typically associated with damp to saturated soils. Observed
species included Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), black cottonwood, Western red
cedar, Western hemlock, Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), crabapple, Sitka willow,
salmonberry, black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), red osier dogwood (Comus
stolonifera), Douglas spiraea, vine maple, Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), reed
mannagrass (Glyceria grandis), reed canarygrass, common lady fern (Athyrium
filix-femina), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), skunk cabbage (Lysichitum
americanum), water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa), speedwell, buttercup, and
big leaf avens. This plant community was identified as hydrophytic in character
(i.e. typical of wetlands). This plant community extended offsite to the west,
northwest, and south.
7
08136
WETLAND AND DRAINAGE CORRIDOR DETERMINATION
Wetland determination was based on sample plots which contained hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology in accordance with the 1987
Manual and the Wash. Manual. Based on these methods two (2) areas within
the project site were identified to exhibit all three of the established wetland
criteria. In addition, no area within the project site was identified to exhibit
characteristics of a continuously defined stream.
WETLAND CLASSIFICATION FEDERAL WAY FUNCTIONAL FEDERAL WAY
(USFWS) CATEGORY VALUE BUFFER WIDTH
onsite
A PSSEx 3 Low _ 25 feet
B PFOE 1 Moderate/hi h 200 feet
Wetland A: Wetland A was identified within a shallow depression in the central
portion of the project site. Wetland A had undergone prior land use
manipulations to include forest harvest, clearing, grading, excavation, and
utilization by livestock. Wetland A was dominated by Doulas spiraea.
Wetland A appeared to be hydrologically supported by seasonal stormwater
sheetflow from the surrounding area. Wetland A appeared to remain
ponded/saturated following seasonal storm events and to remain saturated to the
surface into at least the early part of the growing season.
Wetland A met the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for
classification of palustrine, scrub -shrub, seasonally flooded/saturated, excavated
(PSSEx). Wetland A was further identified to meet the criteria for designation as
a City of Federal Way Category 3 Wetland.
Wetland B: Wetland B was identified within topographical corridor crossing
along the western boundary of the project site. Wetland B was identified to
commence offsite to the northwest of the project site and to extend generally to
the south through the western portion of the project site. Wetland B had
undergone prior land use manipulations to include forest harvest, clearing,
grading, excavation, fencing, culvert installation, internal and external roadway
development, and the development of surrounding properties. Wetland B
exhibited a forest plant community.
Wetland B appeared to be hydrologically supported by seasonal stormwater
sheetflow from the surrounding area, stormwater from the South 355th Street
Corridor and adjacent parcels, seasonal ground water seeps, and soils
characteristics. Onsite Wetland B appeared to remain ponded/saturated
following seasonal storm events and to remain saturated to the surface into at
least the early part of the growing season. Areas within the lower portion of the
wetland would be expected to remain saturated throughout the growing season.
8
08136
Onsite Wetland B met the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for
classification of palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded/saturated (PFOE).
Wetland B had been identified by the City of Federal Way as a Category 1
Wetland. This wetland was further identified as a part of the Hylebos Creek
System.
Onsite Drainage: This assessment did not identify any continuously defined
stream channels within the project site. IF such a stream channel were present
within the area offsite to the west, such a stream channel would appear best
defined as a City of Federal Way Major Stream based on downstream fish
utilization. The standard City of Federal Way buffer for such a Major Stream
would be fully encompassed onsite within the defined areas for Wetland B and its
associated 200-foot buffer
WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT
Wetlands are known to perform significant roles in the ecosystem, some of which
are of immediate value to society. These roles vary greatly with the size, type,
hydrology, vegetation, and location of wetland areas. Although the ecological
functions performed by these wetlands are complex, interrelated, and difficult to
assess and quantify, methods have been developed for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Adamus et al. 1987: Reppert et al. 1979). The functions provided by
wetlands include hydrologic support, shoreline protection, stormwater and
floodwater storage, water quality, groundwater recharge, and provision of wildlife
habitat.
The HYDROLOGIC SUPPORT FUNCTION is defined by the measure of
hydrologic stability and environmental integrity that the wetland provides.
This function is measured by the frequency of inundation and saturation
by tidal actions, stream flow, runoff, and precipitation. Wetlands
permanently inundated or saturated, or intertidal wetlands are valued as
high. Medium valued wetlands are seasonally flooded or are open water
systems that remain saturated during most of the growing season.
Wetlands that are intermittently flooded or hydrologically isolated are
considered of low value.
The SHORELINE PROTECTION FUNCTION is defined by the measure of
shielding from wave action, erosion, or storm damage that a wetland
provides. This function is measured by the location and width of the
wetland along shoreline areas, types of vegetation present, and the extent
of development along the shoreline. A high value is given to wetlands
along a shoreline that have a width greater than 200 yards and dense
woody vegetation. A medium value is given to a wetland with a width of
100 to 200 yards, sparse woody vegetation, and dense emergent
9
08136
vegetation. Wetlands less than 100 yards in width and emergent or
lacking vegetation are considered of low value.
The STORMWATER AND FLOODWATER STORAGE FUNCTION is
defined by the ability of a wetland to store water and retard flow during
periods of flood or storm discharge. Wetlands of larger size are generally
considered to have greater ability to provide this function. In addition,
wetlands nearer to urban or potentially develop -able areas are also
considered to provide greater flood protections than wetlands that are in
undeveloped areas.
The WATER QUALITY FUNCTION is defined by the physical, biological,
and chemical processes which wetlands provide to naturally purify water.
This function removes organic and mineral particulates through natural
filtration. In general, wetlands of greater size, more dense vegetation, and
those that are close to point sources of pollution are considered to be of
higher value. Wetlands that are small (<5 acres), lacking dense
vegetation, and not close to point or non -point sources of pollution are
considered of low value.
The GROUNDWATER RECHARGE FUNCTION is defined by the
interaction of the underlying geology and soils, and the surface
topography. This function provides for the movement of surface water into
groundwater systems. Important to this function is wetland size, period of
inundation, and depth of standing water within the wetland. High value is
given to permanently inundated wetlands greater than 10 acres in size.
Medium value is given to wetlands that are seasonally flooded and 5 to 10
acres is size. Wetlands less than 5 acres in size, isolated, and temporarily
saturated are considered of low value.
The NATURAL BIOLOGICAL FUNCTION is defined by the complexity of
physical habitats and biological species within the wetland area. The value
given to a wetland depends upon its ability to provide habitat for nesting
(spawning), incubation, feeding, rearing, and cover of aquatic and
terrestrial animal and fish species. In addition, the ability of a wetland to
provide support for varying food chains is an important element in value
assessment. Wetlands of high species diversity, three or more habitat
types, unique habitat features, large in size, and associated with a
permanent stream or tidal marsh is considered of high value. Wetlands
with moderate species diversity, two habitat types, moderate in size, and
associated with an intermittent stream or high salt marsh are considered
of medium value. A low value is given to wetlands of low species
diversity, small size, and isolated.
These six functions are rated low, moderate, or high, based on the criteria
outlined above. These criteria are guidelines compiled from Adamus (1987) and
10
08136
Reppert (1979) and professional judgment must be exercised in assessing these
criteria. Overall values for a wetland are assigned, based on a synthesis of
individual values. In addition to intrinsic functions, extrinsic functions are also
recognized. These extrinsic functions provide social values that have indirect
benefits to wetlands. Education and recreational opportunities are most often
mentioned as extrinsic functions. Associated values are often in the eye of the
beholder and are thus difficult to evaluate. As such, these functions are not
rated, but are nonetheless important when considering creation, restoration, or
enhancement projects.
ONSITE WETLAND VALUATION
Wetland A was evaluated following the functional value assessment process
noted above and defined to exhibit an overall low functional value.
Water Quality Benefits and Hydrologic Support (low) - This wetland
had a total area larger less than 5,000 square feet and had been
modified by prior land use actions. This wetland appeared to
seasonally pond This wetland appeared to retain and convey less than
30% of the runoff which occurred within the local area and exhibited a
vegetation density greater than 90%. The primary water quality benefit
provided by this wetland included biofiltration of surface stormwater
from onsite areas.
• Stormwater Storage and Groundwater Recharge (low) - This
wetland had a total area larger less than 5,000 square feet. This
wetland had been modified by prior land use actions. Wetland A
appeared to retain a limited amount of seasonal stormwater
• Natural Biological Function (low) — This wetland had been modified
by prior land use actions and was dominated by Douglas spiraea. This
wetland exhibited no unique habitat features.
Wetland B was evaluated following the functional value assessment process
noted above and defined to exhibit an overall moderate to high functional value.
• Water Quality Benefits and Hydrologic Support (moderatelhigh) -
This wetland appeared to have a combined area larger than twenty-
five (25) acres in total combined size and had been modified by prior
land use actions. This wetland was identified to seasonally pond and
was identified by mapping resources to contain a Hylebos Creek. This
wetland appeared to retain and convey more than 80% of the runoff
which occurred within the local area and exhibited a vegetation density
greater than 80%. The primary water quality benefit provided by this
wetland included biofiltration of surface stormwater from public
11
08136
roadways, onsite and offsite areas.
• Stormwater Storage and Groundwater Recharge (high) - This
wetland was identified to extend offsite and appeared to have a
combined area greater than twenty-five (25) acres in total size. This
wetland had been modified by prior land use actions. Wetland B
appeared to retain a high amount of seasonal stormwater following
rainfall events.
Natural Biological Function (moderate/high) — This wetland had
been modified by prior land use actions and exhibited a moderate
range of plant diversity and vegetation complexity. This wetland was
associated with a stream corridor and exhibited a moderate amount of
unique habitat features.
WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS
The onsite assessment of wildlife species presence was also completed as a part
of the onsite assessment of wetland and drainage corridor characteristics. It is
unlikely based upon the existing site conditions, coupled with adjacent land uses,
that species which require large areas of undisturbed habitat would exist onsite.
OBSERVED SPECIES
Onsite assessment was completed during October 2008. In addition, Habitat
Technologies had completed prior site assessments within the surrounding area.
Avian species that were observed to utilize the habitats provided by the project
site or that may potentially utilize these habitats included red tailed hawk (Buteo
jamaicensis), pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), brown creeper (Certhia
familiaris), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), American crow (Corvus
brachynchos), American robin (Turdus migratodus), dark eyed junco (Junco
hyemalis), Steller's jay (Cyanocitta stellen), starling (Stumus vulgaris), black
capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), Northern
flicker (Colaptes auratus), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), sharp -shinned
hawk (Accipiter striatus), merlin (Falco columbarius), American kestrel (Falco
sparverius), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), Western screech owl (Otus
kennicotti), barred owl (Strix varia), common raven (Corvus corax), rock dove
(Columbia livia), red winged blackbird (Agelaius phoenisues), Brewer's blackbird
(Euphagus cyanocephalus), marsh wren (Cistothorus palustirs), house sparrow
(Passer domesticus), violet green swallow (Tachycineta thallassina), barn
swallow (Hirundo rustica), brown creeper (Certhia familieds), song sparrow
(Melospiza melodia), Steller's jay (Cyanocitta stellen), starling (Stumus vulgaris),
black capped chickadee (Pares atricapillus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides
12
08136
villosus), rufous hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus), and great blue heron (Ardea
herodias). Many of these avian species would be expected to feed throughout
the project site. Many of these species would also be expected to nest within the
habitats provided by the project site.
As a result of its forested character and lack of long-term ponding into the
growing season the project site did not appear to provide habitats suitable for
concentrations of waterfowl.
Mammal species that were observed to utilize the habitats provided by the
project site or that may potentially utilize these habitats included black tailed deer
(Odocoileus hemionus), coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor),
porcupine (Frithizon dorsatum), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), opossum
(Didelphis virginianus), eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), Townsend mole (Scapanus townsendii), deer
mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), voles (Microtus spp.), Norway rat (Rattus
norvegicus), shrew (Sorex spp.), and bats (Myotis spp.).
The project site also provided habitats for Pacific treefrog (1-lyla regilla), red -
legged frog (Rana aurora), roughskin newt (Taricha granulosa), and common
garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis).
Onsite assessment did not include a specific assessment of fish species. During
the onsite assessment no portion of the project site exhibited surface water. In
addition, the movement of surface water within the Wetland B Corridor appeared
seasonal and did not appear to exhibit a continuously defined channel. The
placement of a control culvert at South 359th Street also appeared to have
created a passage barrier to the upstream movement of fish from south of South
359th Street to north of South 3591h Street.
MOVEMENT CORRIDORS
Numerous active wildlife trails were identified throughout the central and western
portions of the project site and into adjacent parcels that allowed the movement
of mammals. Wetland B also provided a movement corridor for a wide variety of
aquatic and terrestrial species.
STATE PRIORITY SPECIES
Game Species: A couple of species identified by the State of Washington as
"Priority Species" potentially may utilize the project site and immediately adjacent
habitats. These species are identified as "game species" and are regulated by
the State of Washington through recreational hunting bag limits, harvest
seasons, and harvest area restrictions. These species include black -tailed deer
and mourning dove.
13
08136
State Candidate: State Candidate species are presently under review by the
State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) for possible listing
as endangered, threatened, or sensitive. A single State Candidate species -
pileated woodpecker - was identified during the assessment to utilize the habitats
provided within and adjacent to Wetland B. As a result of the protective buffer
required by the City these usage areas were also noted as outside of the areas
of potential future development.
State Monitored: State Monitored species are native to Washington but require
habitat that has limited availability, are indicators of environmental quality, require
further assessment, have unresolved taxonomy, may be competing with other
species of concern, or have significant popular appeal. Two State Monitored
species — great blue heron and merlin - may potentially use the habitats provided
within the project site.
State Threatened: State Threatened species are defined as any wildlife species
native to the state of Washington that is likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of its range within
the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The project site
did not provide critical habitats for State Threatened species. However, a single
listed threatened species — bald eagle —may occasionally overfly the project site.
FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES
No Federal listed endangered or threatened species, or critical habitats for such
listed species, were observed within the project site. However, a single recently
de -listed threatened species — bald eagle —may occasionally overfly the project
site. Chinook salmon — a federally listed threatened species -- has also been
documented with the Hylebos Creek System downstream (south) of the project
site.
REGULATORY CONSIDERATION
The proposed alteration of lands defined by various federal, state, and local
authority rules and regulations as "wetlands," "streams," or "critical areas" raises
environmental concerns that are generally addressed in the development review
process. These concerns center on the development's potential adverse impacts
to the structure, function, value, and size of these areas. Such adverse impacts
may include a reduction in wildlife habitats, reduced surface water quality,
reduced water retention, a reduced ground water recharge rate, reduced plant
species diversity, and the reduction in the function and value of other associated
characteristics.
14
08136
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - Section 404
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) prohibits the discharge of
dredged or fill material into Waters of the United States" without a permit from
the Corps of Engineers (Corps). The Corps has jurisdiction over freshwater
systems waterward from the ordinary high water line of a water body or
waterward from the upland boundary of the adjacent wetland. The definition of
fill materials includes the replacement of aquatic areas with dry land, grading
which changes the surface contour of a wetland, and mechanized land clearing
in wetlands. For the purposes of Section 404 permitting the Corps makes the
final determination as to whether an area meets the wetland definition and would
be subject to regulation under the Corps program. Applications to the Corps for
permitting actions must follow the 1987 (Manual wetland delineation format.
Currently the Corps has two specific types of permits which apply to wetland fill
proposals. These two types are a series of specific Nationwide Permits and the
Individual Permit. The Nationwide Permit process identifies specific categories
of work that can be undertaken following a set of specific conditions applicable to
each Nationwide Permit number. The Corps requires an Individual Permit
where a proposed activities within an identified jurisdictional wetland area cannot
be authorized under one of the Nationwide Permits. Within the Individual Permit
process the Corps undertakes a much more in-depth review of the proposed
project and the proposed impacts. The Corps must evaluate whether the
benefits derived from the project outweigh the foreseeable environmental
impacts of the project's completion.
All projects that proceed forward using either one of the Nationwide Permits or
the Individual Permit process must also comply with the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act. As defined by a recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions
the Corps of Engineers does not typically regulated "isolated" wetlands pursuant
to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Under this decision "isolated" wetlands
do not exhibit a continuous surface water connection to other, downstream
aquatic system.
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Proposed action undertaken through either of the Corps of Engineers processes
(Nationwide, Individual, or isolated) are also subject to the provisions of the
Washington State Department of Ecology Wafer Qualify Certification Process.
Projects that may be exempt from Corps of Engineers Section 404 jurisdiction
may still require review by the Washington State Department of Ecology to
ensure consistency with State water quality protection provisions.
15
08136
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY - Critical Areas Regulations Chapter 22
The City of Federal Way regulates activities in and around wetlands, streams,
and other critical areas through Critical Areas Regulations Chapter 22. The City
has adopted the following criteria to define wetlands and streams for purposes of
this regulation (22-1357).
Wetlands and Streams Defined
Category 1 Wetlands meet one of the following criteria:
a. Contain the presence of species or documented habitat recognized by
state or federal agencies as endangered, threatened or potentially
extirpated plant, fish or animal species; or
b. Contain the presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence,
irreplaceable ecological functions, or exceptional local significance
including but not limited to estuarine systems, peat bogs and fens,
mature forested wetlands, groundwater exchange areas, significant
habitat or unique educational sites; or
c. Have three or more wetland classes, one of which is open water.
Category 2 Wetlands are greater than 2,500 square feet in area, do not
exhibit the characteristics of Category 1 wetlands, and meet one of the
following criteria:
a. Are contiguous with water bodies or tributaries to water bodies which
under normal circumstances contain or support a fish population,
including streams where flow is intermittent; or
b. Are greater than one acre in size in its entirety; or
c. Are less than or equal to one acre in size in its entirety and have two or
more wetland classes, with neither class dominated by non-native
invasive species.
Category 3 Wetlands are greater than 2,500 square feet in area and do not
exhibit those characteristics of Category 1 or 2 wetlands.
Major Stream means any stream, and the tributaries to any stream, which
contains or supports, or under normal circumstances contains or supports,
resident or migratory fish. If there exists a natural permanent blockage on the
stream course which precludes the upstream movement of anadromous
salmonid fish, then that portion of the stream which is downstream of the
natural permanent blockage shall be regulated as a major stream.
Minor Stream means any stream that does not meet the definition of "major
stream."
16
08136
• Wetland and Stream Buffers
The City of Federal Way has established the following standard protective buffers
for regulated wetlands and streams.
WETLAND OR STREAM
1 Wetland
2 Wetland
Category 3 Wetland
STANDARD CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PROTECTIVE BUFFER WIDTH
200 feet
100 feet
50 feet >10,000sgft wetland
25 feet < 10,000s ft wetland
Ma'or Stream 100 feet
Minor Stream 50 feet
The protective buffer is measured perpendicular from the identified wetland
boundary or from the ordinary high water mark of a stream.
The City of Federal Way may allow intrusions into regulated wetlands, streams,
and the associated protective buffers for such areas based on the following:
Structures, improvements, and land surface modification within
regulated wetland buffers (22-1359).
(a) Generally. Except as allowed in this section, no land surface
modification may take place and no structure or improvement may be
located within a regulated wetland buffer.
(b) Buffer Averaging. Buffers may be averaged only when the wetland
or the buffer which is proposed to be reduced contains habitat types
which have been so permanently impacted that reduced buffers do not
pose a detriment to the existing or expected habitat functions. Through
process Ill, the applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
director of community development that the proposed buffer averaging
will meet all of the following criteria:
(1) Reduced buffers will not affect the water quality entering a wetland
or stream;
(2) Reduced buffers will not adversely affect the existing quality of
wildlife habitat within the wetland or the buffer;
(3) Reduced buffers will not result in unstable earth conditions nor
create erosion hazards; and
(4) Reduced buffers will not be detrimental to any other public or private
properties, including the loss of open space.
At no point shall the buffer width be reduced to less than 50 percent of the
required standard buffer width, unless the buffer, in existing conditions,
17
08136
has already been permanently eliminated by previous, legally permitted
actions. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging shall be
equal to the area required for standard buffer dimensions.
(c) Essential public facilities, public utilities and other public
improvements. The director of community development may permit
the placement of an essential public facility, public utility or other
public improvements in a regulated wetland buffer if he or she
determines that the line or improvement must traverse the buffer
because no feasible or alternative location exists based on an
analysis of technology and system efficiency. The specific location
and extent of the intrusion into the buffer must constitute the minimum
necessary encroachment to meet the requirements of the public
facility or utility.
(d) Minor improvements. Minor improvements such as footbridges,
walkways and benches' may be located within the buffer from a
regulated wetland if approved through process III, based on the
following criteria:
(1) It will not adversely affect water quality;
(2) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or
buffer's wildlife habitat;
(3) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention
capabilities;
(4) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion
hazards; and
(5) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the
area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole.
(e) Buffer reduction. Through process III, the director of community
development may reduce the standard wetland buffer width by up to
50%, but in no case to less than 25 feet, on a case -by -case basis, if
the project includes a buffer enhancement plan which utilizes
appropriate native vegetation and clearly substantiates that an
enhanced buffer will improve and provide additional protection of
wetland functions and values, and where one of the following
conditions can be demonstrated:
(1) Existing conditions are such that the required standard buffer
exists in a permanently altered state (e.g., roadways, paved
parking lots, permanent structures, etc.) which does not
provide any buffer function, then the buffer can be reduced
for that portion where the intrusions are existing.
(2) Except for Category 1 wetlands, existing conditions are such
that the wetland has been permanently impacted by adjacent
development activities, as evidenced by such things as
18
08136
persistent human alterations or the dominance of non-native
invasive species.
(3) A project on an existing single-family lot platted prior to the
incorporation of the city, where imposition of the standard
buffer would preclude reasonable use of the lot.
The director shall have the authority to determine if buffer averaging is
warranted on the subject property and, if so, may require additional buffer
area on other portions of the perimeter of the sensitive area.
(f) Modification. Other than as specified in subsections (b) and (c) of this
section, the city may approve any request to locate an improvement or
engage in land surface modification within the buffer from a regulated
wetland through process IV, based on the following criteria:
(1) It will not adversely affect water quality;
(2) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or
buffer's wildlife habitat;
(3) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention
capabilities;
(4) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion
hazards; and
(5) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the
area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole,
including the loss of open space.
Any modification under this subsection shall not reduce the standard
buffer by more than 50%, and in no case shall the remaining buffer be less
than 25 feet. The city may require, as a condition to any modification
granted under this subsection, preparation and implementation of a
wetland buffer enhancement plan to protect wetland and buffer functions
and values.
(g) Revegetation. The applicant shall stabilize all areas left exposed after
land surface modification with native vegetation normally associated
with the buffer.
(h) Buffer increases. The director shall require increased
environmentally sensitive area buffer widths on a case -by -case basis
when the director determines that a larger buffer is necessary to protect
environmentally sensitive area functions, values or hazards based on
site -specific conditions. This determination shall be supported by
appropriate documentation showing that additional buffer width is
reasonably related to protection of environmentally sensitive area
functions and values, or protection of public health, safety and welfare.
Such determination shall be attached as permit conditions. The
19
08136
determination shall demonstrate that at least one of the following factors
are met:
(1) There is habitat for species listed as threatened or endangered by
state or federal agencies present within the sensitive area and/or its
buffer, and additional buffer is necessary to maintain viable
functional habitat;
(2) There are conditions or features adjacent to the buffer, such as
steep slopes or erosion hazard areas, which over time may pose an
additional threat to the viability of the buffer and/or the sensitive
area. In such circumstances the city may choose to impose those
buffers, if any, associated with the condition or feature posing the
threat in addition to, or to a maximum, beyond the buffer required
for the subject sensitive area.
STANDARD OF CARE
This wetland, drainage corridor, and critical habitat assessment study and
delineation report has been completed by Habitat Technologies for use by The
Abbey Road Group. Prior to extensive site planning the wetland and drainage
corridor boundaries, wetland and drainage corridor classifications, wetland and
drainage corridor ratings, the defined critical habitats, and proposed protective
buffers should be reviewed and verified by the City of Federal Way and
potentially other resource and permitting agencies. Habitat Technologies has
provided professional services that are in accordance with the degree of care
and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work accomplished. No other
warranties are expressed or implied. Habitat Technologies is not responsible for
design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate
resource and permitting agencies.
Bryan W. Peck
Wetland Biologist
Thomas D. Deming
Certified Professional Wetland Scientist
20
08136
FIGURES
21
08136
-- .4
HABITAT
TECHNOLOGIES
Figure 2
NWI Resource Mapping
A-1
;m
12
HABITAT
7ECHHOLOGIES
"m
Figure 3
Pvl
PHS Resource, Mapping
I
13 PLSS Townships RIVERSi124,000)
°NR Trans 24k
PLSS Sectlons
• • Paved Road
CITIES r' Unpaved Road
Road Surface Unknown
* Major Cities Trap
Cities Rallroad �'
• Road
M Towns AbandonedfOrphan
HABITAT Figure 4 ("124. 00°°'ES
TECHNOLOGIES WDFW Mapping COUNTY
ELEVATION
"� 4r Contours, d0' uunsal
STREAMS
,/✓ Strcatu Warer Type S, EN
U U. unknown
K i (loll-(yped per W AC 222-3 6
s Watcr T}'(ae Chwge
HABITAT
TPLANSPOB.T.LTIO\'
11_ TERBODIES
1-1 P—d P—d
Opcn Water
_ Unpas dRoad, Sufi—UuLvolstt
Via! Flats�C}tm tl Bnrs
Abandoned P—d (mton
Ali, mmap)
o� Orphaned Road (-t-All.-Yaup)
® �I.su 3Tade Feantrc
Teail
Wct Area
Railroad
,A-'-
? ? ? iSnlasowNUnclasciiied
RETE-ANDS- ttnwut• N'nre'IMeDJ�RF
a.a TypeA a iv Faesied
Tvp<B �,t cn other
Figure 5
TECHNOLOGIES WDNR Mapping
MINIM CE
nx
CE
CE'"Nm
35354. at=
CE
S 356TH ST
CE
tin Ali
ZR'4d:§-q
r4n
CE
a:12496%
BID
crosapo
RS 15.0 RS'l 51: 0
-
Ism
212IMN 2111195
RM:4 )29 lin luo
ILI
531 M-I
S 3:5971
J
IRS 15.0 � FR-
7x
MU451-If NWa
IN] im RE33ma MOM 3VUS34
Zill Eg
N Z FIRS
in-
-3mm
ngls - RS 15.0 -04-
ril; VAN
awifto
sill
HABITAT Figure 6
TECHNOLOGIES City of Federal Way Mapping
ao m
CG'S ELS G��`-�Z7 Ct79 r.LS COL9"ci5 CC56£�5 G7�a:"•ZS OCS:3F,7 O.�.ES$7S O O
N �
w. i '1A F� 4 • Ilr d
r Ij
r#►J
s _ r-7 r
N u 7
p fn
O. 7 '�• �_ m NCO
Y > Cli
f6 _
Q2 ~� s — i 1 g Z>
as0n 8 '7 !K oc.
LO a
rp
Q _y a
+ IS o Z
Cli
ui
0ra
REFERENCE LIST
Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland
Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft
Technical Report Y-87, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological
Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
FWS/OBS-79/31.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle, Washington.
Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington. Revised, Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #04-
06-025.
Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland
Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir,
Virginia.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of King
County Area Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication Number 96-94.
Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and
Salmon Utilization, Volume 1., 1975.
22
08136
APPENDIX A - FIELD DATA FORMS
23
08136
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site , Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner: County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
1.
C tisus sco anus
S
UPL
9.
2.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
10.
3.
Galium a arine
H
FACU
11.
4.
Poa sp2.
H
--
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing 0%
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Northern portion of site — area dominated by Scots broom
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
! Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 1
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Munsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Rhizos hares, etc.
0-18 10YR 3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
None
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Northern portion of site — area dominated by Scots broom
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 2
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species
observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Ind
1.
Pseudotsu a menziesii
T
FACU
9.
2.
C tisus scoparius
S
UPL
10.
3.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
11.
4.
Galium aparine
H
FACU
12.
5.
Taraxacum officinale
H
FACU
13.
6.
Poa spp.
H
---
14.
7
15.
g
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Area dominated by Scots broom
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
0%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 2
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description;
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist)Abundance/Contrast Rhizos hares, etc.
0-4 10YR 3/2
4-18 10YR 3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
None
None
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Gravelly sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of h dric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? -YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? -YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Area dominated by Scots broom
Area appears to drain moderate!y well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 3
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT —
Applicant/Owner:
County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies
State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
YES
NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area?
YES
NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological
adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Cytisus sco arius S I UPL
9.
2. Rubus ursinus S FACU
10.
3. Cirsium arvensis H FACU+
11.
4. Poa s . H ---
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7
15.
g
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Area dominated by Scots broom
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
0%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 3
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches (Munsell Moist Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-3
3-18
10YR 3/2
10YR 3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
None
None
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Gravelly sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT Present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Area dominated by Scots broom
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 4
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: I King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
M^n innnt Plnnf _qetariPc Stratum Indicator
1.
P rus spp.
T
2.
C tisus sco arius
S
UPL
3.
Rubus procera
S
FACU
4.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
5.
Cirsium arvensis
H
FACU+
6.
Pteridium a uilium
H
FACU
7.
Dact lis glomerata
H
FACU
8.
Poa spp.
H
--
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Prior m
HYDROLOGY
d pasture area
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
0%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 4
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Munsell Moist) Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-3 10YR 3/2
3-18 10YR 3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
None
None
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Gravelly sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of h dric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Prior managed pasture area
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 6
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site I Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner:
County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies
State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
YES
NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area?
YES
NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological
adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant Specie Stratum
Indicator
Dominanf Plant 5 eq s Stratum Indicator
1. Pseudotsu a menziesii T
FACU
9.
2. Acer circinatum S
FAC-
10.
3. C tisus sco arius S
UPL
11.
4. Rubus ursinus S
FACU
12.
5. Pteridium a uilium H
FACU
13.
6. A rostis tenuis H
FAC
14.
7
15.
g
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Adiacent to shallow depression
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): -
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
33%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 6
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Rhinos heres, etc.
0-4 10YR 3/2
4-18 10YR 3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
None
None
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of h dric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Adjacent to shallow depression
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 7
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Date:
28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner:
County:
King
Investigator:
Habitat Technologies
State:
Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
n....,,:--- 4 01--f C.,e, ids ¢frnh im Inriinntnr nnminant Pinnf SnRcias Stratum Indicator
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
P rus spp. - - - -
J T
-----
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
P rus fusca
T
FACW
S iraea dou lasii
S
FACW
Rubus procera
S
FACU
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
Pteridium a uilium
H
FACU
1
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 7
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist)Abundance/Contrast Rhizos hares, etc.
0-3 10YR 3/2
3-1 g 10YR 4/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
None
None
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Adjacent to shallow depression
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology atterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 8
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 1 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner:
County: King
Investigator: I Habitat Technologies
State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
YES
NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area?
YES
NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Cratae us mono na T FACU+
9.
2. P rus fusca T FACW
10.
3. P rus spp. T -----
11.
4. Rubus ursinus S FACU
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
g
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Adiacent to shallow depression
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
33%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Evidence of pondin
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 8
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-18
10YR 4/2
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
10YR 4/6
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Few/prominent Sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of h dric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES: NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Adjacent to shallow depression
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
Wetland Edge
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 10
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner: County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
1.
P rus fusca
T
FACW
9.
2.
Rubus laciniatus
S
FACU-
10.
3.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
11.
4.
E ilobium an ustifolium
H
FACU+
12.
5.
Pteridium a uilium
H
FACU
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
g.
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing 20%
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western portion of project site along edge of forest
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 10
Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist)Abundance/Contrast Rhinos heres, etc.
0-1 g 10YR 4/2
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
10YR 4/6
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Few/faint Silty loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Westernortion of project site along edge of forest
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrolM patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 13
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technoloqies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
r)nmisiant slant SnariPC Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Ind
1.
Po ulus trichocar a
T
FAC
9.
2.
Acer circinatum
S
FAC-
10.
3.
Sambucus racemosa
S
FACU
11.
4.
Ath rium filix-femina
H
FAC
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
g
_
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western portion of project site
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
75%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
x Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Area appears to seasonal) pond
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 13
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) {Munsell Moist} Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Rhinos heres, etc.
0-6
Duff
6-18 10YR 3/1 None Silty loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking
x Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features present
Field indicators of h dric soil present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES
WETLAND CRITERIA MET
Western portion of pr9ject site
Area appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 14
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
n^min7nt Plant _gn0niPcZ Stratum Indicator
1.
Thu'a plicata
T
FAC
2.
Alnus rubra
T
FAC
3.
Acer circinatum
I S
FAC-
4.
L sichitum amencanum
H
OBL
5.
Ath rium filix-femina
H
FAC
6.
7.
g
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC 1 oOp/0
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western portion of project site within Wetland B
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
x Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 14
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
nches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-3 Duff
3-18 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/6 Few/faint Course sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features present
Field indicators of h dric soil present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA MET
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES
Western portion of project site within Wetland B
Area appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 15
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner: i I County: I King
Investigator: I Habitat Technologies State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
YES NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area?
YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant Species Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Sp ecies Stratum Indicator
1. Tsu a hetero h Ila T
FACU
9.
2. Thu'a plicata T
FAC
10.
3. Alnus rubra T
FAC
11.
4. Rubus s ectabilis S
FAC+
12.
5. Rubus ursinus S
FACU
13.
6. Polvstichum munitum H
FACU
14.
7.
15.
g.
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western Dortion Of project site
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
50%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 15
Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist)Abundance/Contrast Rhinos heres, etc.
�:111111
8-18
Hydric Soil Indicators:
10YR 4/2
10YR 4/6
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Duff
Few/faint Silly loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximor hic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT {SET
Upland forest
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrolo2y patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 16
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
TransectlD:
VEGETATION (Note those species
observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Ind
1.
Alnus rubra
T
FAC
9.
2.
Po ulus trichocar a
T
FAC
10.
3.
Thu'a plicata
sap
FAC
11.
4.
Athvrium filix-femina
H
FAC
12.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western portion of project site
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
13.
14.
15.
16.
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
100%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
x Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Area appears to seasonal) pond
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 16
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rttizos heres, etc.
0 Duff -8
8-18 10YR 3/1 None Course sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking
x Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features present
Field indicators of h dric soil present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO;
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA MET
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES
Western portion of project site
Area appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
Wetland Edge
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 17
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner: County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies IState: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
1.
Pseudotsu a menziesii
T
FACU
9.
2.
Acer circinatum
S
FAC-
10.
3.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
11.
4.
Pol stichum munitum
H
FACU
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
g.
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing 0%
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western portion of site upslope from wetland
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 17
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches (Munsell Moist Munsell Moist)Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-18 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/6 Few/faint Gravelly sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximor hic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Western portion of site upslope from wetland
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 18
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
. .-.• . - -1 -1..-. Dlr of Cnor'ioe qtrnfiim Ind
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
g.
Alnus rubra
T
FAC
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Acer circinatum
S
FAC-
Ath rium filix-femina
H
FAC
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing 100%
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Western portion of project site within Wetland B
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
x Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Area appears to seasonal) pond
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 18
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam
Drainage Class: Moderately well
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Munsell Moist) Munsell Moist
Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc.
0.6
Duff
6-18 10YR 2/1 None
Loose loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Concretions
Histic Epipedon
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Sulfidic Odor
Organic Streaking
x Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximor hic features present
Field indicators of h dric soil present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES
WETLAND CRITERIA MET
Western portion of project site within Wetland B
Area appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Field evidence of wetland hydrology atterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 20
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant S ecies
Stratum
Indicator
_Dominant Plant Species Stratum Ind
1.
Pseudotsu a menziesii
T
FACU
9.
2.
Acer circinatum
S
FAC-
10.
3.
Gaultheria shallon
S
FACU
11.
4.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
12.
5.
Pteridium a uilium
H
FACU
13.
6.
Pol stichum munitum
H
FACU
14.
7.
i
15.
g.
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Upland forest
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
0%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPB 20
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Munsell Moist Munsell Moist)Abundance/Contrast Rhizos hares, etc.
0-18 10YR 3/2
Hydric Soil Indicators:
10YR 4/6
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Few/prominent
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Upland forest
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner: County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
nnminnnt Plant SnPri¢G Stratum Indicator Dominant Plana t Species Stratum Indicator
1.
2.
3.
C tisus sco arius
5 m horicar us albus
Rubus ursinus
4.
Pteridium a uilium
5.
Poa s
6.
7.
A
S
UPL
9.
10.
11.
S
FACU
S
FACU
H
FACU
12.
H
---
13.
14.
15.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
16.
Remarks: Area dominated by Scots broom
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
0%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated)
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 1
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-2
2-18
Hydric Soil Indicators:
10YR 3/2
10YR 3/3
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
None
None
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Gravelly sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximor hic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?:,, YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Area dominated by Scots broom
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology atterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 2
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Date:
28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner:
County:
King
Investigator:
Habitat Technologies
State:
Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID;.
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant 5 e ies alo_bim Ind
1.
P rus spp.
T
-----
9.
2.
Rubus procera
S
FACU
10,
3.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
11,
4.
C tisus sco arius
S
UPL
12.
5.
Cirsium arvensis
H
FACU+
13.
6.
Agropyron cristatum
H
----
14.
7.
Pteridium a uilium
H
FACU
15.
8.
1 Poa spp.
H
---
16.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 2
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Munsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-3 10YR 3/2 None
3-16 10YR 3/3 None
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Gravelly sandy loam
Gravelly sandy loam
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present
Field indicators of h dric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Area dominated by Scots broom
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 3
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technologies
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 128 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morpholo ical ada tations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Small depression in central project site
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
100%
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
x Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
x Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Area appears to seasonally pond
Excavated depression
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 3
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam
Drainage Class: Moderately well
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type
YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon
Matrix Color Mottle Colors
Mottle
Texture, Concretions,
inches
Munsell Moist Munsell Moist
Abundance/Contrast
Rhizos heres, etc.
0-1
10YR 3/1
Leaves/loam
1-16
10YR 4/1 10YR 4/6
common/prominent
Sil loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
x Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximorphic features present
Field indicators of h dric soil present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES
WETLAND CRITERIA MET
Small depression in central project site
Area appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events
Field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 4
Project Site
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107
Habitat Technol
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO
Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO
Date: 1 28 OCT 08
County: King
State: Washington
Community ID:
Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
r)nminnnf Plant Cnuniae Rfrnfl im Indinntnr
1.
C tisus sco arius
S
UPL
2.
Rubus ursinus
S
FACU
3.
Pteridium a uilium
H
FACU
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide -Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Everett gravelly sandy loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 4
Drainage Class: Somewhat excessive
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches
Munsell Moist
Munsell Moist
Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0.8
None
Gravelly sandy loam
10YR 3/2
8-18
10YR 3/3
None
Gravelly sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximor hic features NOT present
Field indicators of h dric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Area dominated by Scots broom
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland h drology patterns
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 8
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site 1 Parcels 292104-9095 /-9107 Date: 28 OCT 08
Applicant/Owner:
County: King
Investigator: Habitat Technologies
State: Washington
Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed?
YES
NO Community ID:
Is the area a potential Problem area?
YES
NO Transect ID:
VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *)
❑ominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Thu'a plidata T FAC
9.
2. Alnus rubra T FAC
10.
3. Acer circinatum j S FAC-
11.
4.
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7
15.
g
16.
Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing 67%
morphological adaptations to wetlands
Describe Morphological Adaptations:
Remarks: Mixed forest in western project site
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage
Aerial Photograph
Other
No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water Pit: None
Depth to Saturated Soil: None
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12"
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 "
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Onsite assessment during fall 2008
Soil appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
SAMPLE PLOT SPTT 8
Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type YES NO
Profile Description:
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizos heres, etc.
0-4
4-18
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
10YR 3/1
10YR 4/2
None
10YR 4/6
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Probable Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Gravelly sandy loam
Few/faint Gravelly sandy loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer
Organic Streaking
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: :
Soil appears to drain moderately well following -seasonal storm events
Prominent redoximor hic features NOT present
Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic,Vegetation Present? YES NO
Hydric Soils Present? YES NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO
Remarks:
WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET
Mixed forest in western project site
Area appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events
No field evidence of wetland hydrology patterns
ATTACHMENT -SITE PLAN
24
08136
L1.yLDniO WitlIMA:INi�
BUILDWO A (DROUP 11-2. OCCUPANCY V-B):
12! RESOVISIAL UNIT5
_,S.4r - WAOO SF EACH
TOTAL- 110.193.00 Si
16 COMMERCIAL SPACES
Ia.34 - mmo) SF EACH
TOTA,_ 9.70P00 SF�
PARKHO REOIK,ED. 3}44 (DEPENDENT ON USE)
TOTAL BWDmG 'l: 130.x40.60 SF
!;E eIES: 5 00 SF
Si01ilE5: 5
/ TOTAL PARKING:
REWIRED: CASE BY CASE BASIS
PROMOED: 162 STALLS
BUILDING B (GROUP R-2. OCCUPANCY V-B):
218 RESIDENTIAL UNITS
20'.45' - 90000 SF EACH
TOTAL 243,505.10 SF
22 COMMERCIAL SPACES /
24Vr56' - 790,00 SF EACH
TOTAL 17."9614S V
'P."mG RF.OUW�9n 60-30.(DEPENDENT ON USE)
TOTAL BUILOOBO SF: 295,789 37 SF
PAD: S2,,
264.27 It
STORIES: $
TOTAL PARK NG:
REQUIRED: CASE BY CASE BASIS
- PROMOED: 262 STALLS
BUILDING C (GROUP B. OCCUPANCY III-B):
COMMERCIAL/JVAIL/ENTERTAINMENT _
3.964.7' SF PAD
PARKING: r
REQUIRED - 13-40 -
PROVIDED - 40
BUILDIN017 (GROUP. R, OCCUPAIGY W-Hl'
CO]a!TCRtrsr PAD A4•%[NTEkTA
PARV Q0 SF PAD
PA RE U
REOUIRED - 12-37-
PROVIOEDy40
i7�1'n1Ae1 PFNNS ]G hrMPMA:I�' 'REQUIRED STALLS:
COMMERCIAL: 119-201
RESIDENTIAL: DETERMINED ON CASE BY CASE BY CITY
PARKING PROVIDED: 504 STALLS
� s9xlDwose
ST—FAB FEDERAL WAY
SEC. 29/TWP. 21/RGE. 04 E., W.M.
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
GRAPaaC SCnie
E 1mh-
1 6o ti
V�VRO�f1lTRlM, �
ADDRESS. 3M 16TH A`T S
rWAL WA, WA
PARCEL:
2921049095
2921049107
SITE AREA: 724.539.02 SF/16.63 ACRES
JURISDICTION: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY -
Zo,C%� (COMNFRdAL E]ITVPRISE)
TOTAL D=RBED AREA 474,199 93 SF/10 90 ACRES
I
IF r
� 1
_. - 7931D1'lP9D�-..�wr�r-�«-��_�--�-_�-•-�'�- _ �� -� � �-� - '- .- SO_356171 _i _- n ,.'_. - -�=F
99RIG49001 _ _
LANa6CA7'E -94c 3 = 1.r. = :.'1_n.• — — . - c. `
• �• `TCvc' APEp SnAGx LFt [ 1
rTP �•.
yI I y7f41 s I! .6 1 SITE
4 'PAO A I I
r'_ • ' . •' . _ �' `REEnAnoN�L
L j
I.i -
�. - . - . - . - . ' _ _ - - - • . - - - - I f� I � 1'I';' .�',� -,. ..I�� j�� i9:�019CM I l921D4904R I �
TYPE I I f
WETLAND A.... � l l � i �. r'r '' ✓ �
n �. ... 6ATEG. :. • ... • . ' .... .
oL - Ii
MIC-4000 • • +� I l.� S I L PROPUREO EUILDW6 A L
12 COMM - 43 11- {][[I
E _ h' I.j
f �(
f I PROPOSED BUILDING 8 • i j � I ...
1 - - • . • . • . - // ! 1 21B UNITS - 20.45 I ■ kF I ■T l • . • . - .. - . - • . • .. - - - .,'• +'- i. 22 COMM. - 20xJB i 1 .I
SPLIT RA1L
• FENCE
[.
----.. —__. — —-
TEWS
fr .lo,
L. WhLKWe EDT 1e+ �11 I ti I
. • . . _ . TRA1E� ; r I I �, r �• n• P 1r+.
1 PAD
- -- - - -'- - - - - - -
/ SBB'3Y22"E 1261 BY �• -
4YAIO+90tlD 34:10490lI1 j 2921049OB9 2921049072 1 2O2T049071 ` 2921049063 { ! 292104900]9 292104p070 2921049062 I 2921049054 I 2921C49105
nk �
E� Erc Ej
4
TL
zz
?E
vE - o
cE uE
Is
a it jig
0
y
LL
U
J
J
W C7
�E LuNa10
n. 0 5 co
U En m Ci CLIO,
U ¢O T X
-� rr�aLL
�cl) Q Q
�2
M a. p
Q CL 0 co
Lo
o a�
a)
0