The URL can be used to link to this page

17-105489-Critical Areas Report-04-10-2020-V14 CRITICAL AREAS REPORT AND PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN WOODBRIDGE BUSINESS PARK FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Prepared For: DANA OSTENSON FEDERAL WAY CAMPUS, LLC Los Angeles, California Prepared By: TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, INC. Woodinville, Washington 9 April 2020 Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan Woodbridge Business Park Federal Way, Washington Prepared For: Dana Ostenson Federal Way Campus, LLC 11100 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 850 Los Angeles, California 90025 Prepared By: Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 150250 Bear Creek Road NE Woodinville, Washington 98077 (425) 861-7550 9 April 2020 Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROJECT NAME: Woodbridge Business Park PROJECT LOCATION: The approximate address for the Site is 32901 Weyerhaeuser Way South in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The project will take place on five (5) parcels (King County Parcel numbers 1621049056, 1621049013, 1621049030, 1621049036, and 2285000010) totaling 136 acres. The Public Land Survey System location of the Site is Sections 16 and 21, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. CLIENT: Dana Ostenson, Executive Vice President, Federal Way Campus, LLC PROJECT STAFF: Bill Shiels, Principal; Ann Olsen, RLA; David Teesdale, PWS, Senior Ecologist; Richard Tveten, Senior Ecologist; Aaron Ellig, Ecologist; and Matt Wagner, Mitigation Designer. FIELD SURVEY: Site evaluations and wetland delineations were performed over multiple days between December 2015 and April 2016. DETERMINATION: Forty-eight (48) wetlands were identified on the Project Site. North Lake occurs adjacent to the Site. One (1) man-made stream (Stream AC) connects the existing stormwater pond to Weyerhaeuser Pond off-site to the south. HYDROLOGY: Hydrology for the on-site wetlands is supported, for the most part, by seasonal precipitation and interception of surface water flow, as well as groundwater to a lesser extent. SOILS: The NRCS maps one (1) type of soil over the majority of the Site, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes. A small area in the northwest corner is mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8-15% slopes, and a small area of Orcas Peat is mapped over the far eastern portion of the Site. The National Technical Committee on Hydric Soils does not include Alderwood gravelly sandy loam as a hydric soil, however, Orcas Peat is identified as a hydric soil. VEGETATION: The Site is mix of developed areas and conifer and deciduous mixed forests. Typical native species present within the forested areas include Douglas fir, western red cedar, big-leaf maple, red alder, black cottonwood, salmonberry, vine maple, sword fern, and other native herbaceous and shrub species. Several non-native species of tree are present throughout the property, including several species of eastern oak and European ash. Typical vegetation within the wetlands includes salmonberry and hardhack with limited amounts of sedges and rushes. PROPOSED PROJECT: The Applicant proposes to construct a new business park with three (3) new warehouses with office space and associated infrastructure. The existing Weyerhaeuser Tech Center will remain, but the existing parking lots will be reconfigured to a more compact arrangement around the Tech Center. Associated infrastructure to be constructed includes five (5) new stormwater detention facilities, including reconfiguring the existing stormwater pond, parking for both cars and trucks, and enough maneuvering space for the truck traffic anticipated around these buildings. Due to the size of the proposed buildings, required parking and stormwater, direct and indirect impacts to some wetlands and buffer encroachments are unavoidable. ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS: Development on the property is governed by the Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre-Annexation Zoning Agreement (Concomitant Agreement). While the project would be allowed under the Concomitant Agreement, the Applicant has also analyzed the project under the critical area regulations of the FWRC in effect when the project application was submitted (2015 Critical Areas Regulations). The applicant is performing this analysis voluntarily at the request of the City, although it is under no obligation to do so, and does not waive its Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page ii rights under the Concomitant Agreement. The analysis, which follows, demonstrates that the project meets the requirements of the 2015 Critical Areas Regulations. The proposed site plan has been designed to minimize impacts to critical areas to the greatest extent practicable while meeting the criteria for development of a viable project and conforming to the City of Federal Way standards. In attempting to avoid wetland impacts on this site, several different configurations were evaluated to find the best fit for the project needs. Despite these efforts, some impacts to critical areas are unavoidable in order to achieve a viable project. Portions of 48 wetlands, one stream, and North Lake are located on or adjacent to the Site. Construction of the proposed development would directly impact (fill) 12,070 square feet (0.28 acres) of wetlands for the buildings, parking, and stormwater facilities. Four (4) wetlands will have buffer impacts, resulting in an additional 7,840 square feet (0.18 acres) of wetland as being considered indirect wetland impacts due to site development encroachments. For the construction of a replacement detention pond access road, 3,024 square feet (0.07 acres) of permanent impact are proposed to wetland buffers. Additionally, for construction, 29,819 square feet (0.68 acres) of temporary construction impacts are proposed. The area of temporary construction impacts includes the existing trail through the Site. No impacts are proposed to Stream AC or its buffer. No development activities are proposed on or adjacent to North Lake. PROPOSED MITIGATION: This report proposes two mitigation alternatives for direct and indirect wetland impacts. The Applicant will determine the preferred mitigation method at a later date. OPTION 1: Potential Wetland Creation The proposed wetland creation option is provided if on-site mitigation is determined to be the preferred method chosen by the applicant. • Wetland Creation 38,901 square feet • Wetland Enhancement 2,021 square feet • Wetland Buffer Creation 80,225 square feet • Wetland Buffer Enhancement 7,204 square feet • Wetland Buffer Restoration 13,296 square feet OPTION 2: In-Lieu Fee It may be deemed preferred by State and Federal regulatory agencies for the Applicant to purchase credits from a certified In-Lieu Fee (ILF) program as a form of mitigation for wetland impacts. If this is the case, Option 1 mitigation measures would not be enacted. Wetland buffer impacts will be mitigated through a multi-part mitigation plan including elements of wetland buffer creation, wetland buffer replacement, and wetland buffer restoration. Temporary construction impacts resulting from site grading will be restored post-construction. For proposed wetland buffer impacts, the following mitigation will be provided: • Wetland Buffer Creation 27,113 square feet • Wetland Buffer Replacement 3,184 square feet Wetland Buffer Restoration 29,819 square feet All critical area mitigation will be constructed prior to or concurrent with site development activities. A final mitigation plan will be prepared and submitted once preliminary concurrence has been provided for this proposed mitigation plan. Performance monitoring will extend for a minimum of five (5) years over all elements of the mitigation plan. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ iii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................vi List of Appendices ...........................................................................................................vi Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of Report ............................................................................... 1 1.2 Statement of Accuracy ........................................................................ 1 1.3 Qualifications ....................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Property Description .................................................................................. 2 2.1 Property Location and Description ...................................................... 2 2.2 Existing Site Development................................................................... 2 2.3 Historical Land Uses............................................................................ 2 Chapter 3. Methodology .............................................................................................. 3 3.1 Background Data Reviewed ................................................................ 3 3.2 Field Investigation ............................................................................... 3 Chapter 4. Results ....................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Analysis of Existing Information ........................................................... 4 4.1.1 USGS Quadrangle .............................................................................. 5 4.1.2 National Wetland Inventory ................................................................. 5 4.1.3 Natural Resources Conservation Service ............................................ 5 4.1.4 King County GIS Database ................................................................. 5 4.2 Analysis of Existing Conditions – Wetlands ......................................... 5 4.2.1 Wetlands AE, AF and AH .................................................................... 6 4.2.2 Wetland AG ......................................................................................... 7 4.2.3 Wetlands AI, AJ, AL, AM, AO, AR, AS ................................................ 7 4.2.4 Wetland AV ......................................................................................... 7 4.2.5 Wetland BA ......................................................................................... 7 4.2.6 Wetland BA-2 ...................................................................................... 7 4.2.7 Wetland BB ......................................................................................... 8 4.2.8 Wetland BD-North ............................................................................... 8 4.2.9 Wetland BR ......................................................................................... 8 4.2.10 Wetland BS-North ............................................................................... 8 4.2.11 Wetland BS-South ............................................................................... 8 4.2.12 Wetland CG ......................................................................................... 8 4.2.13 Wetland DE ......................................................................................... 9 4.2.14 Wetlands DF, DG, DH, and DI ............................................................. 9 4.2.15 Wetland DK ......................................................................................... 9 4.2.16 Wetland EI ........................................................................................... 9 4.2.17 Wetlands EJ, EK, EL, and EM ............................................................. 9 4.2.18 Wetland FB ........................................................................................ 10 4.2.19 Wetland FD ....................................................................................... 10 4.2.20 Wetland FE ........................................................................................ 10 4.2.21 Wetland FF ........................................................................................ 10 4.2.22 Wetland GB-North ............................................................................. 10 Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page iv 4.2.23 Wetland IA ......................................................................................... 10 4.2.24 Wetlands KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, KN, KT, KU, KV, KW ....................... 11 4.2.25 Wetland PK ....................................................................................... 11 4.3 Analysis of Existing Conditions – Streams and Other Features ........ 11 4.3.1 North Lake ......................................................................................... 11 4.3.2 Weyerhaeuser Pond (off-site) ............................................................ 11 4.3.4 Non-regulated Ditches ....................................................................... 12 Chapter 5. Wildlife and Listed Species ...................................................................... 12 5.1 Wildlife Surveys and Assessments .................................................... 12 5.2 Listed Species ................................................................................... 13 Chapter 6. Regulatory Review ................................................................................... 13 6.1 Federal and State Regulations .......................................................... 13 6.2 City of Federal Way Zoning Code ..................................................... 14 6.2.1 Non-SMZ Wetlands ........................................................................... 14 6.2.2 Streams ............................................................................................. 15 6.3 Shoreline Management Zone (SMZ) ................................................. 15 6.4 Other Linear Features ....................................................................... 15 Chapter 7. Proposed Project ..................................................................................... 15 7.1 Proposed Project ............................................................................... 15 7.2 Stormwater Treatment ....................................................................... 16 Chapter 8. Impact Analysis ........................................................................................ 17 8.1 Direct and Indirect Wetland Impacts .................................................. 17 8.2 Permanent and Temporary Construction Impacts ............................. 18 8.3 Indirect Wetland Impact Analysis ...................................................... 19 8.3.1 Quality, Sensitivity, and Functions of the Aquatic Resource.............. 19 8.3.2 Nature of Adjacent Land Use Activity and its Potential for Impacts on the Aquatic Resource ........................................................................ 20 8.3.3 Character of the Existing Buffer Area (including soils, slope, vegetation, etc.) ................................................................................. 20 8.3.4 Intended Functions of the Buffer ....................................................... 21 Chapter 9. Proposed Mitigation Plan ......................................................................... 22 9.1 Agency Policies and Guidance .......................................................... 22 9.2 Mitigation Sequencing ....................................................................... 22 9.3 Watershed Approach ......................................................................... 23 9.4 Standard Mitigation Measures ........................................................... 23 9.5 Mitigation Analysis ............................................................................. 23 9.6 Direct and Indirect Wetland Impact Mitigation Options ...................... 25 9.6.1 OPTION 1: Potential Wetland Creation ............................................ 26 9.6.2 OPTION 2: In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Credit Purchase ................................. 26 9.7 Proposed Wetland Buffer Mitigation Details ...................................... 27 9.7.1 Wetland Buffer Creation .................................................................... 27 9.7.2 Wetland Buffer Restoration ............................................................... 28 9.8 Performance Monitoring and Maintenance ........................................ 28 Chapter 10. Summary ................................................................................................. 28 Chapter 11. References .............................................................................................. 30 Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page v LIST OF FIGURES Figures occur at the end of the report. Figure 1 – Vicinity Map & Driving Directions Figure 2 – National Wetlands Inventory Map Figure 3 – NRCS Map Figure 4 – Hydrologic Connections Overview LIST OF TABLES Table 1. FWRC Wetland Buffer Requirements (FWRC 19.145.420) ............................ 15 Table 2. Summary of Proposed Wetland Impacts and Mitigation ................................. 18 APPENDICES Appendix A: Wetland Determination Data Forms, Talasaea Consultants, 2016 Appendix B: Feature Summary Table, Talasaea Consultants, 2020 Appendix C: Photodocument, Talasaea Consultants, 2016 Appendix D: Wetland Rating Forms with Figures, Talasaea Consultants, 2016 & 2017 Appendix E: Mitigation Plan Sheets Sheet W1.0. Site Overview Plan Sheet W1.1. Existing Conditions Plan Sheet W1.2. Existing Conditions Plan Sheet W1.3. Proposed Site Plan, Impacts, & Mitigation Overview Plan Sheet W1.4. Proposed Site Plan, Impacts, & Mitigation Overview Plan Sheet W2.0. Potential Mitigation Grading Plan Sheet W2.1. Fencing Plan & Details Sheet W2.2. Grading Specifications Sheet W3.0. Proposed Plant Community Plan Sheet W3.1. Proposed Plant Community Plan Sheet W4.0. Planting Specifications Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of Report This report is the result of an existing conditions study for a 136-acre project area that is a part of the Federal Way Campus, LLC property (referred to hereinafter as the “Site”). The Site is located in Federal Way, Washington (Figure 1). The Site is comprised of five parcels (King County Parcel numbers 1621049056, 1621049013, 1621049030, 1621049036, and 2285000010). This report has been prepared to comply with the requirements of the City of Federal Way guidelines. This report will provide and describe the following information: • General property description; • Methodology for critical areas investigation; • Results of critical areas background review and field investigation; • Existing site conditions; • Wildlife assessment; • Regulatory review; • Proposed project discussion; • Project impacts analysis; • Proposed mitigation plan; and • Project summary 1.2 Statement of Accuracy Stream and wetland characterizations and ratings were conducted by trained professionals at Talasaea Consultants, Inc., and adhered to the protocols, guidelines, and generally accepted industry standards available at the time the work was performed. The conclusions in this report are based on the results of analyses performed by Talasaea Consultants and represent our best professional judgment. To that extent and within the limitation of project scope and budget, we believe the information provided herein is accurate and true to the best of our knowledge. Talasaea does not warrant any assumptions or conclusions not expressly made in this report, or based on information or analyses other than what is included herein. 1.3 Qualifications Field investigations and evaluations were conducted by Bill Shiels, Principal; David R. Teesdale, PWS, Senior Wetland Ecologist; Richard Tveten, Senior Ecologist; Aaron Ellig, Ecologist; and Matt Wagner, Mitigation Designer. Bill Shiels has a Bachelor’s Degree in Biology from Central Washington University and a Master’s Degree in Biological Oceanography from the University of Alaska. He has over 35 years of experience in wetland delineations and mitigations. David Teesdale has a Bachelor’s Degree in Biology from Grinnell College, Iowa, and a Master’s Degree in Ecology from Illinois State University. He has 15 years of experience in wetland delineations and biological evaluations. Richard Tveten has a Bachelor of Science and Master of Science in Biology from Western Washington University with a focus on terrestrial ecology and fire ecology, respectively. Richard has worked for the public and private sectors for 20 years in wetlands, water quality, and forest management. Aaron Ellig has Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 2 a Bachelor’s Degree in Environmental Science from Western Washington University. He has 5 years of experience in vegetation management and restoration ecology. He has 3 years of experience working with wetland mitigation and monitoring. Matt Wagner holds a Bachelor’s in Landscape Architecture from the University of Washington and a Certificate of Landscape Design from Edmonds Community College. Matt has worked in landscape installation, oversight, and mitigation design for a combined 19 years. CHAPTER 2. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2.1 Property Location and Description The Site is an assemblage of five parcels currently owned by Federal Way Campus, LLC. The approximate address is 32901 Weyerhaeuser Way South in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The Site is approximately 136 acres in size. The remainder of the associated parcels under Federal Way Campus, LLC ownership are not a part of this project. The Public Land Survey System location of the Site is Sections 16 and 21, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. The topography of the main portion of the Site, west of Weyerhaeuser Way South, is gently sloping downhill from north to south. The properties east of Weyerhaeuser Way South slope eastward to North Lake. The Site is bound to the east by North Lake, to the south by South 336th Street, and Interstate 5 abuts the western edge of the Site. An office park is located north of the Site. The previous Weyerhaeuser headquarters building is located south of the Site across from Weyerhaeuser Pond. 2.2 Existing Site Development The Site is currently developed with the Weyerhaeuser Tech Center and associated infrastructure including six (6) parking lots, paved roads, and gravel access roads. A private trail system surrounds the existing building through the adjacent forested areas. A gas pipeline easement extends along the interstate frontage on the western edge of the property, and another gas pipeline extends from the off-site parcels north of the Site diagonally across the northeast corner of the Site. A stormwater pond is located southwest of the Tech Center and collects runoff from all of the roads and parking areas associated with the Tech Center. This pond discharges south into an artificial channel, now a naturalized stream, before ultimately discharging into Weyerhaeuser Pond. 2.3 Historical Land Uses The land at the north end of North Lake was historically developed as far back as the 1930s, based on accessible historical aerial photographs. The 1936 aerial photograph (www.historicaerials.org) reflects docks present all along the eastern shore of North Lake as well as around the northwest corner of the lake, along the existing shoreline within the Site. The 1964 aerial photograph (www.historicaerials.org) clearly shows a development of some kind that had multiple docks, buildings, and infrastructure. Evidence of wetland fill is noticeable between the 1936 and 1964 aerial photographs. This facility appears to have been abandoned around the time Weyerhaeuser purchased the property. The 1980 aerial photograph (www.historicaerials.com) seems to show the area being left to vegetate naturally. The previously apparent docks along this section of shoreline are no longer present in current aerial imagery. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 3 In addition to the historical developments around North Lake, there is evidence of houses and residential areas along the old alignment of South 336th Street. These areas were maintained through the 1960s, but appear to be overgrown by 1969, and by 1980 this area was completely redeveloped as part of the Weyerhaeuser Campus construction. CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY The critical areas analysis of the Site involved a two-part effort. The first part consisted of a preliminary assessment of the Site and the immediate surrounding area using published environmental information. This information includes: 1) Wetland and soils information from resource agencies; 2) Critical Areas information from King County and the City of Federal Way; 3) Orthophotography and LIDAR imagery; and, 4) Relevant studies completed or ongoing in the vicinity of the Site. The second part consisted of site investigations where direct observations and measurements of existing environmental conditions were made. Observations included plant communities, soils, hydrology, and stream conditions. This information was used to help characterize the site and define the limits of critical areas on-site and off-site for regulatory purposes (see Section 3.2 – Field Investigation below). 3.1 Background Data Reviewed Background information from the following sources was reviewed prior to field investigations: • US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Wetlands Online Mapper (National Wetlands Inventory, NWI) (USFWS, 2017) (www.wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/wtlnds/launch.html); • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2017)(www.websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/); • King County GIS Database (King County, 2017); • Orthophotography from USDA’s National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP 2017), Earth Explorer (USGS), and Google Earth. • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) Mapper; • USFWS listed species data; and • National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 3.2 Field Investigation Talasaea Consultants originally evaluated the Site for Federal Way Campus, LLC beginning in December 2015. Talasaea re-verified the wetland boundaries in April 2016 once water levels returned to a normal state after the extremely high rains of December 2015. Brief site evaluations have been conducted since to verify that previously delineated boundaries are still appropriate. Wetland boundaries were evaluated by Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 4 Ecological Science Associates (ESA) for the City of Federal Way between April and June 2017 as part of a boundary line adjustment request. Talasaea’s wetland delineation utilized the routine approach described in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountain, Valleys, and Coast Regions (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). Plant species were identified according to the taxonomy of Hitchcock and Cronquist (Hitchcock, et al. 1969). Taxonomic names were updated and plant wetland status was assigned according to North American Digital Flora: National Wetland Plant List, Version 2.4.0 (Lichvar, et al. 2012). Wetland classes were determined with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s system of wetland classification (Cowardin, et al. 1979). Vegetation was considered hydrophytic if greater than 50% of the dominant plant species had a wetland indicator status of facultative or wetter (i.e., facultative, facultative wetland, or obligate wetland). Wetland hydrology was determined based on the presence of hydrologic indicators listed in the Corps’ Regional Supplement. These indicators are separated into Primary Indicators and Secondary Indicators. To confirm the presence of wetland hydrology, one Primary Indicator or two Secondary Indicators must be demonstrated. Indicators of wetland hydrology may include, but are not necessarily limited to: drainage patterns, drift lines, sediment deposition, watermarks, stream gauge data and flood predictions, historical records, visual observation of saturated soils, and visual observation of inundation. Soils on the Site were considered hydric if one or more of the hydric soil indicators listed in the Corps Regional Supplement were present. Indicators include presence of organic soils, reduced, depleted, or gleyed soils, or redoximorphic features in association with reduced soils. An evaluation of patterns of vegetation, soil, and hydrology was made along the interface of wetland and upland. Wetland boundary points were then determined from this information and marked with wire flags or surveyors tape. Appendix A contains data forms prepared by Talasaea for representative locations in both upland and wetland locations. These data forms document the vegetation, soils, and hydrology information that aided in the wetland boundary determination. CHAPTER 4. RESULTS This section describes the results of our in-house research and field investigations. For the purpose of this report, the term “vicinity” describes an area within 105 feet of the Site. 4.1 Analysis of Existing Information The following sources provided information on site conditions based on data compiled from resource agencies and local government. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 5 4.1.1 USGS Quadrangle The Project Site occurs on the Poverty Bay quadrangle. No features are mapped on the property, however, the quadrangle map indicates North Lake and Weyerhaeuser Pond in close proximity to the Site to the east and south, respectively. Wetlands are shown along the north shoreline of North Lake. No stream features are indicated on this map. 4.1.2 National Wetland Inventory The NWI maps a large wetland complex along the north shoreline of North Lake and a palustrine scrub-shrub/emergent, persistent, seasonally flooded wetland (PSS/EM1C) to the northwest of the Site (Figure 2). The large wetland complex is classified as a palustrine scrub -shrub/emergent, persistent, seasonally flooded (PSS/EMC) wetland adjacent to a palustrine emergent (persistent)/palustrine scrub-shrub, semi-permanently flooded (PEM1/SSF) wetland. One stream is mapped along the southern edge of the property flowing westbound, though this feature is not present in the field. No NWI wetlands are mapped within the Site. 4.1.3 Natural Resources Conservation Service The NRCS maps one (1) type of soil over the majority of the Site, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (Figure 3). Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8-15% slopes is mapped over a small area in the northwest corner of the Site, while Orcas Peat is mapped over a small eastern portion of the Site near an existing wetland that is adjacent to North Lake. The National Technical Committee on Hydric Soils does not include Alderwood gravelly sandy loam as a hydric soil, though Orcas Peat is identified as a hydric soil. 4.1.4 King County GIS Database King County does not map any critical areas on the Site. Both North Lake and Weyerhaeuser Pond are, however, mapped as wetland units. One 2S stream is indicated as connecting North Lake and Weyerhaeuser Pond off-site. 4.2 Analysis of Existing Conditions – Wetlands The Site west of Weyerhaeuser Way South is currently developed with the former Weyerhaeuser Tech Center and associated infrastructure including parking and stormwater facilities. The buildings and infrastructure were constructed in 1978. Roughly half of the Site contains conifer/deciduous mixed forests, though the forested areas are separated by the roads, trails, and broadly-spaced parking configuration. The stormwater pond on-site collects runoff from much of the existing development, and conveys the treated water downstream through a man-made channel. The channel (identified as Stream AC) flows southward to its confluence with a perennial stream that connects North Lake to the Weyerhaeuser Pond (Figure 4). North Lake abuts the eastern edge of the Site, and is a Shoreline of the State. The areas on the east side of Weyerhaeuser Way South are separated by an access road to a public boat ramp managed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). North of this boat ramp road, outside of the project site, are the northern limits of a large wetland complex that extends to North Lake, surrounded by a Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 6 coniferous forest. A sewer line easement crosses this area and was replanted some time ago. South of the boat ramp road are portions of several wetlands that appear to collect extra runoff from the roadside ditches associated with the boat ramp road through the winter months. Most of these wetlands are not directly associated with North Lake. The sewer line easement continues across this portion of the property, within the project site, as well. Much of the Site is underlain by glacial till. This dense material frequently possesses inclusions consistent with redoximorphic features except they lack the diffuse boundaries characteristic of active wetland hydrology. This material is also very difficult to dig through for complete soil profiling. In addition, a number of non-native species of trees have been planted along the existing gravel roads over the years. A large area immediately west and southwest of the Tech Center, identified on older maps as an “experimental tree farm,” was completely cleared of the existing native conifers sometime between 1980 and 1990, and replanted primarily with European ash (Fraxinus excelsior) trees. This area has since regrown with the European ash being dominant is some areas, and the remainder dominated by a combination of black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) and red alder (Alnus rubra) with scattered Western red cedar (Thuja plicata). These areas coincide with the location of many of the delineated wetlands, which are small depressions in the landscape that are likely residual from the clearcutting effort of the 1980s. Talasaea Consultants performed an initial delineation of on-site wetlands beginning in December 2015. Talasaea re-verified the wetland boundaries in April 2016 as the initial delineations were completed after several atypically high rainfall events. Forty-eight (48) wetlands were identified on the Project Site (Appendix E, Sheets W1.0-W1.2). North Lake occurs adjacent to the Site. One man-made stream (Stream AC) connects the existing stormwater pond to Weyerhaeuser Pond off-site to the south. Several ditch-outs and old log skid trails occur through the western woods on-site that hold water during the winter but neither convey water nor meet the definition of a wetland. The wetland labels given in this report are non-sequential as the wetlands were delineated as part of a larger effort. A complete summary table outlining the wetland classification, size, and other information of all the wetlands can be found in Appendix B. General descriptions can be found below. Photographs of typical conditions within the wetlands, including typical uplands and access roads, are included within Appendix C. Wetlands outside of the Shoreline Management Zone (SMZ) have been rated using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology Publication # 14-06-029) (Appendix D). Wetlands occurring within the SMZ along North Lake were rated using the rating system outlined in the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 15.10 Critical Areas. 4.2.1 Wetlands AE, AF and AH Wetlands AE, AF, and AH are small, depressional palustrine emergent wetlands located south of the stormwater pond. Hydrology is provided seasonally by the stormwater pond through surface water and groundwater leakage from the pond, which collects Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 7 runoff from the entire Weyerhaeuser Tech Center. Typical vegetation includes sedges and rushes, such as soft rush and slough sedge. 4.2.2 Wetland AG Wetland AG is a palustrine forested/scrub-shrub wetland located around the stormwater pond. This wetland occurs at the toe of the slope of the berm surrounding the stormwater pond, and it is likely that hydrology comes from groundwater seeping through the berm as well as surface water from the vicinity. This wetland extends south along either side of Stream AC, the artificial discharge of the stormwater pond. Typical vegetation is red alder, black cottonwood, and salmonberry. 4.2.3 Wetlands AI, AJ, AL, AM, AO, AR, AS These wetlands are a series of small slope and depressional wetlands that occur north of South 336th Street. These herbaceous wetlands are dominated by pasture grasses, typically a mix of rye (Lolium spp.), fescues (Festuca spp.), bentgrasses (Agrostis spp.), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum), and others. 4.2.4 Wetland AV Wetland AV is a medium sized wetland-upland mosaic located to the west of the Tech Center. Wetland AV is classified as a palustrine forested wetland. Typical species include red alder, salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). This is part of an area that was planted with European ash, located in clear rows. This general area has poor drainage due to disturbance over the past few decades that has resulted in ponded water within small depressional pockets through these woods. Many of these pocket wetlands were delineated based on the presence of hydrology and hydric soils as the vegetation across a broad area is facultative. 4.2.5 Wetland BA Wetland BA is a relatively small depressional, forested wetland located adjacent to the boat ramp road. This wetland is partially located within the SMZ. This wetland receives runoff from the boat ramp road, and has a culvert that connects it to an off-site wetland complex on the northeast side of the boat ramp road. Typical vegetation includes red alder and salmonberry. This wetland is also topographically connected to Wetlands BA- 2 and PK at high water levels common through the winter months, though this connection is generally not apparent outside of the winter rainy season. 4.2.6 Wetland BA-2 This small, depressional, shrubby wetland is dominated by salmonberry and other small wetland shrubs. This wetland was formerly part of a larger delineation for Wetland BA, however, after a thorough analysis of this larger area, it was determined that Wetlands BA and BA-2 represented the true wetland components that reflected all three parameters of a wetland. The other, discarded areas lacked hydric soils and/or sufficient, long-term hydrology that met the parameters to be considered wetlands. This wetland occurs outside of the SMZ. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 8 4.2.7 Wetland BB This small, depressional, forested wetland is located adjacent to the boat ramp road, and falls within the SMZ. This wetland receives road runoff from the boat ramp road and drains south to Wetland BD-North. 4.2.8 Wetland BD-North Wetland BD-North is a large lakeshore wetland associated with North Lake that occurs within the SMZ. The entirety of this wetland extends off-site to the north and to the south. This wetland is mostly forested and is dominated by red alder and salmonberry. Hydrology for Wetland BD-North is supported by the lake, surrounding uplands, and Weyerhaeuser Way South. During the winter site visits, water was observed sheet flowing across the gravel path upslope near Wetlands BE and BF before entering Wetland BD-North. 4.2.9 Wetland BR Wetland BR is a pocket of wetland located west of the stormwater pond. This wetland occurs at the edge of the forested area, immediately east of a gravel road that is used to access this portion of the Site. This wetland is a collection of small depressional pockets that contain soft rush and various sedges, with small areas of salmonberry and red elderberry (Sambucus racemose). Western red cedar and red alder also occur within the wetland. Hydrology is generally provided through the interception of shallow ground water and precipitation. Some overland flow is likely provided from Wetland AG with higher rainfall or higher discharges from the stormwater pond. 4.2.10 Wetland BS-North Wetland BS-North is a palustrine forested wetland located in a depression between two parking lots north of the Tech Center. Vegetation within the wetland is dominated by salmonberry, tall manna grass (Glyceria maxima), and soft rush (Juncus effuses) with quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) and red alder present as well. Hydrology for BS- North is supported by parking lot runoff and precipitation. 4.2.11 Wetland BS-South Wetland BS-South is a palustrine emergent wetland located off-site adjacent to Wetland BR. Vegetation is dominated by various grass species with hydrology supported by surface water flows and precipitation. 4.2.12 Wetland CG Wetland CG is located on the east side of Weyerhaeuser Way South and is a depressional pocket within the surrounding coniferous forest. This wetland connects to Wetlands BA, BA-2 and PK during periods of high water in the rainy season, though no long-term hydrologic connection is apparent between these wetlands. Wetland CG appears to be a remnant of past logging activities. No vegetation is dominant within this wetland as overall vegetative coverage is less than 20% total and is restricted to small shrubs on hummocks. A dense canopy cover is present due to the adjacent western red cedars, most of which occur outside of the wetland boundaries. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 9 4.2.13 Wetland DE Wetland DE is a large palustrine forested wetland located west of the Tech Center. Vegetation within the wetland is dominated by European ash, soft rush, a variety of sedges and facultative grasses. Hydrology for Wetland DE is provided by precipitation and interception of surface flows. This is part of an area that was planted as part of the Weyerhaeuser Campus experimental tree farm with European ash, arranged in clear rows. This general area has poor drainage due to disturbance over the past few decades that has resulted in ponded water within small depressional pockets through these woods. Consolidated till generally occurs near the soil surface which precludes the downward movement of water. 4.2.14 Wetlands DF, DG, DH, and DI Wetlands DF, DG, DH, and DI are a series of wetlands located within the woods between Wetland DE and the Tech Center. These wetlands are classified as palustrine forested, and are dominated by black cottonwood, European ash, Douglas spirea (Spireaea douglasii), salmonberry, and Dewey’s sedge (Carex deweyana). Hydrology for these wetlands is provided by precipitation and interception of surface flows. This is part of an area that was planted as part of the former Weyerhaeuser Campus experimental tree farm with European ash, arranged in clear rows. This general area has poor drainage due to disturbance over the past few decades that has resulted in ponded water within small depressional pockets through these woods. Consolidated till near the soil surface severely restricts the downward movement of water. 4.2.15 Wetland DK Wetland DK is a palustrine scrub-shrub wetland located west of the Tech Center. This wetland is generally dominated by small patches of wetland grasses, sedges, and rushes with trees occurring within proximity to the wetland, but not within the wetland. Hydrology for this wetland is provided by precipitation and interception of surface flows. This is part of an area that was planted as part of the former Weyerhaeuser Campus experimental tree farm with European ash, arranged in clear rows. This general area has poor drainage due to disturbance over the past few decades that has resulted in ponded water within small depressional pockets through these woods. Consolidated till near the soil surface severely restricts the downward movement of water. 4.2.16 Wetland EI Wetland EI is a small palustrine forested wetland located northwest of the Tech Center. Vegetation within the wetland is dominated by salmonberry and ruffled starwort (Stellaria crispa). Soils were hydric, and hydrology for this wetland is provided by precipitation and interception of surface flows. 4.2.17 Wetlands EJ, EK, EL, and EM Wetlands EJ, EK, EL, and EM are a cluster of wetlands located northwest of the Tech Center. These wetlands are located within an area dominated by deciduous tree species, as the conifers were logged out years ago. These wetlands are classified as palustrine scrub-shrub and are dominated by salmonberry. Hydrology for Wetlands EJ, EK, EL and EM is provided by precipitation and interception of surface flows. The Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 10 wetland boundaries were delineated based on the presence of wetland hydrology and hydric soils since many species in the area were facultative wetland species. 4.2.18 Wetland FB Wetland FB is a palustrine scrub-shrub wetland located along the northern property line in the northeast corner of the property. Vegetation within the wetland is dominated by young Oregon ash and salmonberry. Hydrology for FB is provided through precipitation and interception of surface flows. 4.2.19 Wetland FD Wetland FD is a palustrine forested wetland located north of the Tech Center that abuts a pipeline right-of-way. This wetland resulted from the impoundment of water behind a berm created through the installation of a pipeline across this area. Hydrology for FD is provided through precipitation and interception of surface flows. 4.2.20 Wetland FE Wetland FE is a palustrine forested wetland located north of the Tech Center by an outdoor volleyball court, adjacent to a gravel road. Portions of this wetland appear to have been artificially excavated, and given the location of this feature near the highest point across the Site, this wetland formed through the impoundment of water because the gravel road acts as a berm. Vegetation within the wetland includes red alder, salmonberry, and creeping buttercup. Hydrology for FE is provided through precipitation and interception of surface flows. 4.2.21 Wetland FF Wetland FF is a palustrine scrub-shrub wetland located north of the Tech Center. This wetland resulted from the impoundment of water behind a berm created through the installation of a pipeline across this area. Vegetation within the wetland is dominated by red alder, salmonberry, and lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina). Hydrology for FF is provided through precipitation and interception of surface flows. 4.2.22 Wetland GB-North Wetland GB-North is a palustrine scrub -shrub wetland located west of the Tech Center. Vegetation within the wetland is dominated by red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea) and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Hydrology for GB-North is provided through precipitation and interception of surface flows. 4.2.23 Wetland IA Wetland IA is a slope wetland located in the southwest corner of the Site. This wetland intercepts surface water and shallow subsurface flows from the adjacent hillslopes and conveys the water to a culvert under South 336th Street. This water ultimately flows into Weyerhaeuser Pond. The wetland is dominated by a variety of grasses and sedges. Saturated soil conditions were observed throughout winter and early spring with hydric soil indicators present. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 11 4.2.24 Wetlands KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, KN, KT, KU, KV, KW These wetlands are a series of small slope and depressional wetlands that occur north of South 336th Street. These herbaceous wetlands are dominated by pasture grasses, typically a mix of rye (Lolium spp.), fescues (Festuca spp.), bentgrasses (Agrostis spp.), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum), and others. 4.2.25 Wetland PK Wetland PK is part of the former larger delineation of Wetland BA, and is a small forested wetland within a more recently disturbed area. This wetland occurs within an area that lacks the conifer canopy common through much of this portion of the Site. The areas within and around Wetland PK are dominated by red alder and other deciduous trees that are generally younger than the surrounding conifers. 4.3 Analysis of Existing Conditions – Streams and Other Features No natural streams occur within the Site, though a stream connecting North Lake to Weyerhaeuser Pond occurs off-site to the south. A number of man-made depressional features occur across the landscape that neither convey water nor meet the definition of a wetland. These features appear to be remnants from when this forest was logged in the 1980s shortly after the construction of the Tech Center. Some of the features were likely dug for surface water management to ensure the gravel paths through the woods remained free from ponded water. These features rarely connect to wetlands, but where they did, they were delineated as part of the wetland where appropriate. Many of the ditches and swales connect to the on-site stormwater facility in some fashion, either through direct surface connections or via the pipes that drain the roads and parking areas to the on-site stormwater pond (Figure 4). This stormwater pond then discharges through a man-made conveyance (Stream AC) that ultimately flows into Weyerhaeuser Pond through a connection to a natural stream. The combined streams flow for approximately 600 feet before entering the Weyerhaeuser Pond. The Weyerhaeuser Pond then discharges south through a control structure into a buried pipe that is located underneath the former Weyerhaeuser Headquarters Building. The flows from this stormwater pond and associated channel ultimately enter the Hylebos Creek several miles south of the Site. 4.3.1 North Lake North Lake is a Shoreline of the State and is located adjacent to the northeast parcel of the Site. This 50-acre lake is periodically stocked with rainbow trout by WDFW, and has a resident largemouth bass population that is maintained for fishing. While no motorized boats are allowed on this lake, there is a dock at the north end at the WDFW maintained access point. 4.3.2 Weyerhaeuser Pond (off-site) Weyerhaeuser Pond was constructed in conjunction with the former Weyerhaeuser Headquarters building. Weyerhaeuser Pond is located off-site to the south but is the receiving body for some of the site ’s stormwater. Weyerhaeuser Pond serves both as a stormwater pond and natural feature that attracts waterfowl and other wildlife. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 12 Weyerhaeuser Pond does collect runoff from the surrounding areas, as well as from the North Lake. This man-made pond is not a Shoreline of the State. A control structure at the south end of the pond limits the flows out of this pond. A pipe conveys flows out of the pond, underneath the Weyerhaeuser Headquarters building, through the meadow immediately south of the building, before discharging at a headwall located south of Weyerhaeuser Road, north of Highway 18. 4.3.3 Stream AC A stormwater pond for the Tech Center, located north of the Headquarters building, collects runoff from approximately two-thirds of the Tech Center and surrounding areas. This stormwater pond conveys the treated water downstream through a man-made channel (Stream AC) that extends into the Property before flowing south under South 336th Street to its confluence with Stream HA (off-site). The combined streams flow for approximately 600 feet before entering Weyerhaeuser Pond. Weyerhaeuser Pond then discharges south through a structure into a buried pipe that is located underneath the Headquarters building. The flows from this series of streams ultimately enter Hylebos Creek approximately two miles south of the Property. This conveyance feature, identified as Stream AC for the purposes of this report, has not been maintained and has become naturalized, despite the primary source of flow being the stormwater pond discharge. Stream AC starts at the stormwater pond outlet, but also collects water from the adjacent wetlands. The flow regime of this stream is directly tied to the discharges from the stormwater pond. While this feature was artificially created, its connection to fish-bearing waters and naturalization over time ensures that this feature has at least the potential to sustain fish habitat. 4.3.4 Non-regulated Ditches Several ditches and swales have been constructed and are actively maintained across the Property that tie into natural features. A pair of swales (AT1 and AT2) convey water from the sewer line easement north of South 336th Street south to a culvert under South 336th Street, before discharging these waters into Weyerhaeuser Pond. CHAPTER 5. WILDLIFE AND LISTED SPECIES 5.1 Wildlife Surveys and Assessments The Site was evaluated for wildlife habitat and observations of wildlife were recorded during all field visits since December 2015. The general habitat on-site is a blend of small depressional wetlands, third-growth Douglas fir forest with a patchy salal/sword fern understory, and a mixed deciduous forest with a primarily salmonberry understory. An existing stormwater pond occurs adjacent to several wetlands near the west side of the Site, and a naturalized stream originating from the stormwater pond discharge also occurs on-site. North Lake occurs adjacent to the eastern most portion of the project area. No unique habitats occur on-site. Both North Lake and Stream AC are potential habitats for salmonids and other freshwater fish. Both features provide fish habitat at a minimum. Though no fish of any species were observed within Stream AC, North Lake is regularly stocked with rainbow trout, and presumably has many other fish species present. Listed species evaluated for effects include the listed salmonids (Chinook Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 13 salmon, steelhead, bull trout) to address the potential for downstream water quality impacts. General wildlife observations during field work include: American Robin, Pacific Wren, Canada Goose, Chickadee, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, Red-winged Blackbird, Pileated Woodpecker, Bufflehead, Mallard, American Widgeon, American Crow, American Coot, Pied-billed Grebe, Rufous Hummingbird, mountain beaver (burrows), rabbit, deer, coyote, and bullfrogs. 5.2 Listed Species There are no known listed species occurring on or adjacent to the Site. Listed species (salmonids) do occur downstream within Hylebos Creek, and a bald eagle nest is located more than 1,000 feet SE of North Lake. While bald eagles likely use North Lake for foraging, no direct impacts are proposed to North Lake. Any stormwater discharges would be treated prior to being discharged into North Lake or into downstream waterbodies. North Lake is stocked with rainbow trout. Weyerhaeuser Pond off-site to the south of the Site may also be used by bald eagles for foraging, but has previously been recognized as a large stormwater facility that acts as detention and treatment. Salmonids have not been observed in any stream, lake, or pond within the greater Federal Way Campus, LLC property. The apparent hindrances restricting salmonid migration into this area appear to be several not-fish-accessible culverts downstream. There is also a long stretch of pipe (roughly 1,600 linear feet) from the Weyerhaeuser pond, under the former Weyerhaeuser headquarters building, to its outlet just north of Highway 18, that is likely problematic for fish passage. The potential for Federal or State listed species occurring within the Site is very low. North Lake and the associated streams have the capacity for salmonids to occur, though accessibility from Hylebos Creek is artificially restricted. North Lake is stocked with rainbow trout, at a minimum. While no salmon species have been observed within North Lake or associated streams that does not preclude the potential for their presence. No impacts within the ordinary high water mark for any stream or lake is proposed as part of this project, though maintenance of an existing stormwater structure will be necessary. All stormwater will be treated prior to discharge and conveyance into a fish-bearing water. CHAPTER 6. REGULATORY REVIEW 6.1 Federal and State Regulations Wetland impacts on the project site are subject to applicable State and Federal regulations. Wetland impacts are regulated on the Federal level by Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The US Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for administering compliance with Section 404 via the issuance of Nationwide or Individual Permits for any fill or dredging activities within wetlands. Any project that is subject to Section 404 permitting is also subject to requirements of Section 401 of the CWA, administered by the Department of Ecology (DOE). Because direct wetland impacts are proposed on the project site, the proposed project would be required to comply with all Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 14 Section 404 and 401 permitting requirements prior to any construction-related activities that would affect waters of the US. The project is currently being evaluated by the Corps for a Nationwide Permit 39. 6.2 City of Federal Way Zoning Code Development on the property is governed by the Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre-Annexation Zoning Agreement (Concomitant Agreement). The Concomitant Agreement, Exhibit C, Section XII, sets out regulations for Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Subsection H provides a complete exemption from critical areas regulations for “development affecting wetlands which are individually smaller than 2,500 square feet and/or cumulatively smaller than 10,000 square feet in size in any 20-acre section of this property.” For wetland impacts exceeding this exemption threshold, the Concomitant Agreement allows impacts to wetlands and buffers meeting certain standards that are set out in the Concomitant Agreement itself and in the 1994 Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), which was in effect at the time of the Agreement. The Business Park property divides into seven 20-acre sections. Within each section, the project impacts well under 10,000 square feet of wetland area. While the project would be allowed under the Concomitant Agreement, the Applicant has also analyzed the project under the critical area regulations of the FWRC in effect when the project application was submitted (2015 Critical Areas Regulations). The applicant is performing this analysis voluntarily at the request of the City, although it is under no obligation to do so, and does not waive its rights under the Concomitant Agreement. The analysis, which follows, demonstrates that the project meets the requirements of the 2015 Critical Areas Regulations. Mitigation is also proposed that meets the requirements of the 2015 Critical Areas Regulations and applicable state and federal regulations. Wetlands and other critical areas in Federal Way located outside of the Shoreline Management Zone (SMZ) are regulated under the 2015 Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145. Wetlands identified within the Shoreline Management Zone are addressed under 2015 FWRC Chapter 15.10. 6.2.1 Non-SMZ Wetlands Wetlands occurring outside of the SMZ in Federal Way are currently regulated under FWRC 19.145.420. Wetlands regulated under Chapter 19 of the FWRC should be rated using the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (2014). The ratings for wetlands determine the appropriate buffer width requirements as specified in the FWRC. Wetland ratings and rating figures can be found in Appendix D. Wetlands identified within the Site, outside of the SMZ, typically rated as a Category III or IV with Habitat Scores ranging from three (3) to six (6). Wetland setbacks in the FWRC are determined first by Category and then by Habitat Score (Table 1). See Appendix B for wetland ratings, categories, and standard buffer for all critical areas. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 15 Table 1. FWRC Wetland Buffer Requirements (FWRC 19.145.420) Wetland Category Wetland Buffer Width (based on Habitat Score) 3-4 5 6-7 8-9 Category I: Bogs and wetlands of high conservation value 190 feet 190 feet 190 feet 225 feet Category I: Forested and based on function score 75 feet 105 feet 165 feet 225 feet Category II 75 feet 105 feet 165 feet 225 feet Category III 60 feet 105 feet 165 feet 225 feet Category IV 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 6.2.2 Streams Stream AC is classified as a fish-bearing Type F stream. Type F streams under FWRC Chapter 19.145.270 require a 100-foot standard buffer. No other streams occur within the Site. 6.3 Shoreline Management Zone (SMZ) North Lake is listed as a Shoreline of the State, and thus is located within the SMZ for the Department of Ecology and the City of Federal Way. Shorelands extend for 200 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) for North Lake and include Wetlands BA, BB, and BD-North. In addition to a 50-foot lakeshore buffer, these areas along the shoreline of North Lake have extra protections under the SMZ, which require additional coordination for any modifications within this area. 6.4 Other Linear Features All other man-made depressional features would not require buffers as they are all non- jurisdictional features. CHAPTER 7. PROPOSED PROJECT 7.1 Proposed Project The Applicant proposes to construct a new business park comprised of three (3) new warehouses with office space and associated infrastructure. The Weyerhaeuser Tech Center will be retained, but the existing parking lots will be reconfigured to a more compact arrangement around the Tech Center. Associated infrastructure to be constructed includes five (5) new stormwater detention facilities, reconfiguring the existing stormwater pond, parking for both cars and trucks, and enough maneuvering space for the truck traffic anticipated around these buildings. Portions of 48 wetlands, one (1) stream, and North Lake are located on or adjacent to the Site. Construction of the proposed development would directly impact (fill) 12,070 square feet (0.28 acre s) of wetlands for the buildings, parking, and stormwater facilities. Four (4) wetlands will have buffer impacts, resulting in an additional 7,840 square feet (0.18 acre s) of wetland being considered indirect wetland impacts due to site development encroachments (Appendix E, Sheets W1.3-1.4 ). Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 16 Proposed construction of a replacement detention pond access road will permanently impact 3,024 square feet (0.07 acres) of wetland buffers. Additionally for construction, 29,819 square feet (0.68 acres) of temporary construction impacts are proposed. The area of temporary construction impacts includes the existing trail through the Site. No impacts are proposed to Stream AC or its buffer. No development activities are proposed on or adjacent to North Lake. 7.2 Stormwater Treatment Five (5) stormwater ponds (Ponds 1-5) are currently proposed to address stormwater treatment and detention needs for the five (5) basins located within the project area. A brief description of the stormwater components of this project are outlined below, though a more in-depth discussion is provided within the Civil Engineering documents submitted with this application. Pond 1 is proposed on the east side of Weyerhaeuser Way South and is designed to handle the existing basin that discharges to North Lake, rather than to Weyerhaeuser Pond like the remainder of the Site. Pond 1 will handle detention only as the incoming water is coming from standard parking areas, landscaped areas, and a portion of one (1) building. Basic water quality treatment will be provided through the use of Modular Wetlands filter vault or the approved equivalent. This pond will discharge into the potential wetland creation area proposed within the Site between Weyerhaeuser Way South and North Lake in order to hydrate the wetland creation areas. Ponds 2-5 are located around the western boundaries of the proposed development. One of the ponds (Pond 4) is a reconfiguration of the existing stormwater pond, while the other three are new ponds. Ponds 2, 4, and 5 will handle water quality and detention. Modular Wetlands filter vaults, or the approved equivalent, will provide the required two train enhanced water quality treatment. Pond 3 is solely for detention and will receive clean roof runoff only. Drainage from these four ponds will all ultimately collect within Stream AC and will be conveyed to Weyerhaeuser Pond, consistent with the current condition for most runoff from this developed portion of the Site. It is assumed that any discharges from the Site will reach ambient temperatures before this water is discharged into a fish-bearing water. The stormwater facilities will be designed to meet current DOE Water Quality Standards. The project will meet or exceed the current stormwater standards and will be based on the 2016 King County Stormwater Manual. The discharge from the proposed permanent stormwater detention ponds will be designed to meet pre- development conditions. An approved National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (TESCP) and/or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be in place prior to the start of construction and will remain in place throughout all earthmoving activities. The following Best Management Practices Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 17 (BMPs) are proposed in the SWPPP: silt fence and native growth protection fence (possibly combined into just orange silt fence), stake and wire fence (around dripline of trees to be retained), stabilized construction entrance, two temporary sedimentation ponds, storm drain inlet protection (for existing and proposed open lid catch basins), temporary and permanent seeding, mulching, sodding, dust control, straw waddles, interceptor dike and swales, as well as outlet protection. Other measures may be implemented as deemed appropriate for the site conditions and/or as directed by City inspectors. CHAPTER 8. IMPACT ANALYSIS The proposed site plan has been designed to minimize impacts to critical areas to the greatest extent practicable while meeting the criteria for development of a viable project and conforming to the City of Federal Way standards. In attempting to avoid wetland impacts on the Site, several different configurations were evaluated to find the best configuration and scale for the project needs. Despite these efforts, some impacts to critical areas are unavoidable in order to achieve a viable project. Portions of 48 wetlands, one (1) stream, and North Lake are located on or adjacent to the Site. Construction of the proposed development would directly impact (fill) 12,070 square feet (0.28 acres) of wetlands for the buildings, parking, and stormwater facilities. Four (4) wetlands will have buffer impacts, resulting in an additional 7,840 square feet (0.18 acres) of wetland as being considered indirect wetland impacts due to site development encroachments (Appendix E, Sheets W1.3-1.4). For the construction of a replacement detention pond access road, permanent and temporary wetland buffer impacts are proposed east of the existing Tech Center. No impacts to Stream AC or its buffer are proposed. No development activities are proposed on or adjacent to North Lake. 8.1 Direct and Indirect Wetland Impacts Wetlands BS-North, EI, EJ, EK, EL, EM, FD, FE, and FF are proposed to be filled for the construction of the buildings and associated parking (Table 2). Partial fill of Wetlands AG and DE are proposed for the construction of buildings. Wetlands AE, AH, and CG are proposed to be filled for the construction of stormwater ponds. The remaining wetlands will be retained in their current conditions. All of the wetlands proposed to be impacted are low quality, depressional features that mostly appear to have developed over the past several decades as a result of poor land management practices by the previous property owner. Proposed wetland fill totals 12,070 square feet (0.28 acres). Small portions of Wetlands AF, AG, AH, AV, DE, DK, and GB-North will have buffer impacts due to the proposed development, and thus will not be able to have full standard buffers (Table 2). Where portions of the wetlands have intrusions into standard buffers required by the FWRC, these will be considered indirect impacts and Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 18 are included within the mitigation plan as if these areas are filled. Indirect impacts comprise another 7,840 square feet (0.18 acres). Table 2. Summary of Proposed Wetland Impacts and Mitigation 8.2 Permanent and Temporary Construction Impacts For the construction of a replacement detention pond access road, permanent construction impacts are proposed to 3,024 square feet (0.07 acres) of wetland buffer. Temporary construction impacts are proposed to 29,819 square feet (0.68 acres) of wetland buffer on-site to accommodate site grading, which includes areas of existing trail within buffers. Any critical area buffer area identified as a temporary buffer impact due to grading will be restored post-construction with native woody tree and shrub Wetland ID 2014 DOE Rating Wetland Impact Required Mitigation Category Impact Type - Direct (D) Indirect (I) Direct Square Feet Indirect Square Feet DOE/FWRC Ratios for Creation Square feet of Creation Required to offset impact AE III D 231 2:1 462 I 8 2:1 16 AF III I 448 2:1 896 AG III D 2,063 2:1 4,126 I 427 2:1 854 AH III D 120 2:1 240 I 591 2:1 1,182 AV III I 406 2:1 812 BS (N) III D 2,683 2:1 5,366 CG III D 3,458 2:1 6,916 DE III D 264 2:1 528 I 3,961 2:1 7,922 DK III I 1,981 2:1 3,962 EI IV D 175 1.5:1 263 EJ III D 231 2:1 462 EK III D 179 2:1 358 EL III D 372 2:1 744 EM III D 306 2:1 612 FD IV D 686 1.5:1 1,029 FE III D 324 2:1 648 FF IV D 978 1.5:1 1,467 GB (N) III I 18 2:1 36 Totals 12,070 7,840 38,901 Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 19 species, and will be included within the overall mitigation plan for monitoring and maintenance. 8.3 Indirect Wetland Impact Analysis Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands (2005, Ecology Publication #05-06-008) identifies four (4) primary factors that should be considered when determining an appropriate buffer width: • Quality, sensitivity, and functions of the aquatic resource; • Nature of adjacent land use activity and its potential for impacts on the aquatic resource; • Character of the existing buffer area (including soils, slope, vegetation, etc.); and • Intended functions of the buffer. The below discussion outlines the existing and proposed conditions for the four (4) wetlands anticipated to be indirectly impacted. In addition to this comparison and discussion of the impacted buffers, the portions of the wetlands identified as having buffer impacts will be mitigated for, as if they were filled. This will ensure that the functions of these wetlands that are potentially lost through the development will be thoroughly compensated. 8.3.1 Quality, Sensitivity, and Functions of the Aquatic Resource The aquatic resources of concern are Wetlands AG, AV, DE, and GB-North. These wetlands appear to have been inadvertently created through human disturbances. Wetland AG occurs at the toe of slope of the berm around the existing stormwater pond, and it appears to receive hydrology via seepage from the pond through the berm, as well as through interception of surface and subsurface flows from the surrounding uplands. Species diversity within the wetland is low with typical plant species including salmonberry with red alder. Almost no herbaceous vegetation occurs within the wetland. Wetland AG wraps around the base of the stormwater pond berm, and Stream AC begins around the central portion of the wetland, where the existing stormwater pond outfall is located. The stormwater pond outfall greatly increases the baseflow and hydrology to Wetland AG. Wetland DE occurs over an area that was clear-cut back in the 1980s and 1990s, and where European ash was replanted. These ash trees are non-native, and are planted in very clear rows. Wetland AV occurs within an area that is surrounded by roads on three sides causing water ponding before exiting into the existing stormwater system. Wetlands AV and DE occur where soil conditions and drainage are poor, a direct result of the unconsolidated till near the soil surface. As many of the plants within these areas were facultative, a Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 20 combination of soils and hydrology were the determining factors for establishing wetland boundaries. Wetland GB-North is located adjacent to a gravel road near Wetland DE. Wetland GB-North is a linear, depressional area that likely resulted from the former land use activities on this property. This is an unnatural wetland system that holds water within the winter/spring months and, as a result, hydrophytic vegetation has thrived within this feature. Wetlands AG, AV, DE, and GB-North are not unique systems nor sensitive systems, but rather are low-quality wetlands that generally only function for water quality and water storage. These wetlands do provide limited opportunities for habitat features for commonly occurring species, but do not provide habitat for any listed species. While none of these wetlands are near an open body of water, Stream AC does enter Wetland AG just south of the proposed direct impacts. No wildlife was observed using these wetlands directly, though bullfrogs were identified within Stream AC near Wetland AG. Several species of songbird were observed across the Site. Mountain beaver holes were observed at several locations nearer the Douglas fir on-site, and a coyote was observed on-site. There is a known coyote den off-site to the south and west of the Site near the rhododendron garden (approximately 3,000 feet from the subject wetland). 8.3.2 Nature of Adjacent Land Use Activity and its Potential for Impacts on the Aquatic Resource The area in and around the Site is zoned as Commercial Park (CP-1), and allows for corporate offices, research facilities, warehousing and distribution, production and light assembly of goods, etc. While there are large areas of undeveloped land in proximity to the Site, all of this land has the potential to be developed into land uses consistent with the CP-1 zoning. The adjacent areas to the north are already developed as office park, as well as the existing Tech Center on-site. The proposed project is within the parameters of the current zoning for the Site. Full buffers are being provided around all non-impacted critical areas, or appropriate compensation to off-set any lost functions. The remaining buffers will protect these remaining wetlands from future human intrusions, as will the removal of the gravel road that occurs in close proximity. 8.3.3 Character of the Existing Buffer Area (including soils, slope, vegetation, etc.) The existing buffer adjacent to Wetland AG is a mix of a native trees and shrubs. Typical species present within the understory include salmonberry, and young red alder. The canopy is primarily red alder and black cottonwood with some western red cedar present. Douglas fir are present at the higher (drier) elevations on the site. Consolidated till occurs typically at fairly shallow depths throughout this area. Wetland AG is located around the base of the berm around Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 21 the existing stormwater pond. There is a gravel path along the top of this berm, as well as gravel trails in close proximity to Wetland AG. The northeastern most point of Wetland AG is located at the edge of the asphalt ring road around the Tech Center. There are no steep slopes in the area, and the area within the buffer is gently sloping towards the east and south, more or less, with minor variations in the contours present on-site. The existing buffer adjacent to Wetlands DE & GB-North is a mix of native trees and shrubs though a gravel road with adjacent road-side ditches separate these two wetlands. Typical species present within the understory include salmonberry and young red alder. The canopy is primarily red alder and black cottonwood with some western red cedar present. Douglas fir are present at the higher (drier) elevations on the site. Consolidated till occurs typically at fairly shallow depths throughout this area. There are no steep slopes in the area, and the area within the buffer is gently sloping from north to south, more or less, with minor variations in the contours present on-site. Wetland AV occurs near Wetland DE and is similar in landscape position and cover, though Wetland AV is vegetated mostly with salmonberry. The buffer for Wetland AV is the most limited of these wetlands paved and gravel roads surround this feature on three sides, leaving little native vegetation behind. 8.3.4 Intended Functions of the Buffer The existing buffer functions primarily for protection against water quality concerns, as well as protecting the wetland from potential contaminants from the adjacent land uses. The designed stormwater treatment system for the proposed development will address and compensate for most, if not all, water quality functions performed by the existing upland buffer. The incorporation of a full stormwater management system for the new development will greatly contribute towards the protection of all remaining wetlands from water quality impacts. Wetland AG will continue to receive discharge from the stormwater pond, consistent with the current condition, with additional water added to the north end of Wetland AG to compensate for the adjustment of outfall location anticipated for the proposed project. The remainder of Wetland DE will continue to receive runoff from the surrounding areas. Wetlands AG, AV, DE, and GB-North will be maintained as part of a larger forested buffer corridor that will connect these wetlands through a City-required 100-foot forested buffer along Interstate-5 and with other undeveloped areas so a corridor will be formed that local wildlife can use. Based on the foregoing details, we feel we can achieve the equivalent buffer functions through the construction and management of the proposed stormwater management plan and densely vegetated planted buffer. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 22 CHAPTER 9. PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN 9.1 Agency Policies and Guidance The proposed mitigation plan was designed in accordance with the policies and guidance provided in the following documents: • The Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Publication #06-06-011a, Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance, and Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1), dated March 2006; • The Federal Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources Final Rule (Title 33 CFR 325 and 332, April 10, 2008), and Title 40 CFR 230.93), effective June 9, 2008; and • Critical Areas Regulations set forth in the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, and Chapter 15 Shoreline Management (City of Federal Way, 2017). The objective of the mitigation is to offset the direct and indirect wetland impacts resulting from complete or partial filling of wetlands as outlined in Table 2. 9.2 Mitigation Sequencing All agencies involved require that a sequence of actions be taken for proposals that will impact wetlands. This is referred to as mitigation sequencing. It is administered under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) administered by DOE, as well as under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act, administered by the Corps. The mitigation sequencing requirements are: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts. 3. Rectifying the impact to the critical area by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project 4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. 5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments. 6. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. During the site planning process, every effort was undertaken to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to critical areas to the maximum extent practicable while still allowing for a viable development and conforming to City of Federal Way zoning requirements. However, the large, rectangular footprint of the warehouses precludes any creative site planning that might avoid centrally located wetlands. The size and exact locations of the buildings have been adjusted to the greatest extent practicable to minimize wetland impacts. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 23 All of the proposed wetland impacts are necessary in order to meet the requirements for building, parking, stormwater facilities, and access for emergency services and trucks. The proposed development plan avoids impacting the largest and best quality of the wetlands. The majority of the wetlands to be filled are generally low-quality depressional systems that appear to have been created by poor land management activities in the last few decades and in conjunction with development over the years in adjacent areas. Every effort was taken to avoid wetlands that rated as higher quality, higher functioning wetlands. 9.3 Watershed Approach Selecting a mitigation site using a watershed approach is a process of determining both the suitability and sustainability of a potential mitigation site within the landscape. The process aims to guide potential mitigation to those areas within the landscape where success is most likely to occur. The process is outlined in “Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach” (Hruby, et al., 2009). A watershed plan does not exist for this area. This mitigation site was chosen based on its availability (under same ownership) as well as its connectivity to other critical areas, consistent with the watershed approach. 9.4 Standard Mitigation Measures The following standard mitigation measures will be taken for all non-impacted wetlands, stream, and buffers post-construction. • Lights – Lighting around parking areas will be directed away from the remaining wetlands on-site. • Noise – The remaining wetlands are already located within an area that is regularly used by pedestrians and dogs. Much of this foot traffic will be rerouted away from the wetland complexes remaining on-site. • Toxic Runoff/Stormwater runoff/change in water regime - A new stormwater system designed to the current King County standards will be installed for this project. All runoff from the project site will be routed through the stormwater system. Clean roof runoff will be routed as well to the remaining wetlands, as needed, through their adjacent buffers to hydrate the wetland systems in the post-development condition. • Pets and Human Disturbance – Critical area fencing will be added to the remaining wetland and buffer areas to prevent human intrusions into the buffer/wetland areas. Pets and children are not expected on or near the Site as this is a commercial development. 9.5 Mitigation Analysis The 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Corps establishes a three-part process of mitigation sequencing to help guide mitigation decisions and determine the type and level of mitigation required to comply with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Two additional steps are included to ensure that mitigation projects successfully achieve the design goal of no net loss of wetland functions and services. These steps are listed below in order of preference. The Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 24 mitigation analysis guidelines are listed below (in bold font), followed by a discussion (in italic text) of how the proposed project meets each criterion. i. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; The project cannot avoid impacts to wetlands by avoiding certain actions or parts of actions and still have a viable project. The large, rectangular footprint of the warehouses precludes any creative site planning that might avoid centrally located wetlands. Additionally, necessary project components such as parking, roads, landscaping, and stormwater requirements take up additional project area. All of the wetlands proposed to be impacted are low quality, depressional features that mostly appear to have developed over the past several decades as a result of poor land management practices by the previous property owner. Large tracts of wetland will remain in the post-development condition. No impacts are proposed to Stream AC, the Stream AC buffer, or North Lake. ii. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts; The Woodbridge Business Park project has been designed to minimize impacts to wetlands and streams to the maximum extent practicable while maintaining a developable area suitable for a viable warehouse distribution project. The size and scope of the necessary building space, infrastructure, and stormwater needs precludes much variability with regards to avoiding wetland and stream impacts. Every effort was taken to avoid higher quality wetlands, and focus the necessary critical area impacts to those lower functioning wetlands. Several site plan iterations were evaluated to balance the needs of the Project against the constraints of the Site. iii. Rectifying the impact to the critical area by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; The majority of the affected environment will not be able to be re-established, rehabilitated, or restored, nor are impacts to uplands generally regulated that would require such rehabilitation or restoration. The identified wetland impacts on the Site will be permanent and compensatory mitigation will be provided to offset those impacts. Opportunities do exist to enhance the remaining critical areas on-site through buffer enhancement and restoration, though the majority of the compensatory mitigation will occur within the eastern portion of the Site near North Lake. Changes to the stormwater outfall should have no impact on the hydrology of Stream AC as additional sources of hydrology will be provided to ensure the upper limits of Stream AC and Wetland AG are hydrated. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 25 Opportunities to re-establish, rehabilitate, or restore buffer around the Site will be taken where available. iv. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. Permanent impacts to critical areas cannot be reduced or eliminated over time. However, those critical areas that will remain in proximity to the new development will be protected over time through maintenance of their buffers and ensuring the boundaries are clearly demarcated to prevent human intrusions. Mitigation activities include wetland creation and enhancement and buffer enhancement and restoration. These improvements will be monitored for a minimum of five (5) years with maintenance activities continuing beyond this time. These areas are expected to function as a native system and long-term maintenance is expected to be minimal. The stormwater facilities will be maintained as needed in the long-term. v. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments. The Project proposes to compensate for wetland impacts by creating wetlands adjacent to existing wetlands, further outlined in Chapter 9 below. Additionally, proposed buffer restoration and enhancement on the Site will provide ecological benefits to the adjacent critical areas. Temporary impacts due to construction activities will be restored after construction to their pre-construction condition. vi. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. The proposed on-site mitigation requires a performance monitoring and maintenance program for a minimum of five (5) years for the wetland creation and buffer enhancement/restoration. The monitoring and maintenance plan will include goals and objectives for the mitigation plan, success criteria for which the mitigation will be assessed, a contingency plan in case of failure, and proof of a written contract with a qualified professional who will perform the monitoring program. The monitoring program requires at least two (2) site visits per year by a qualified professional, with annual reports submitted to the Planning Official and all other agencies with the jurisdiction. 9.6 Direct and Indirect Wetland Impact Mitigation Options Two alternatives are being provided as mitigation for direct and indirect impacts to wetlands on the Site. The intent is to provide two options that can be evaluated simultaneously, but only one will be provided as mitigation for the project impacts as chosen by the Applicant. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 26 9.6.1 OPTION 1: Potential Wetland Creation If wetland creation is determined to be the preferred method, a large wetland complex will be created around Wetlands BA-2 and PK in the vicinity of North Lake. The acreage of palustrine emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested wetland created as mitigation for direct wetland impacts was derived using the ratios provided within Table 1a of Chapter 6.5 of Wetland Mitigation in Washington State Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance (Ecology Publication #06-06-011a), which are consistent with those provided within FWRC Chapter 19.145.430(5), and reflected in Table 2. Proposed mitigation areas for wetland creation are as follows: • Wetland Creation 38,901 square feet • Wetland Enhancement 2,021 square feet • Wetland Buffer Creation 80,225 square feet • Wetland Buffer Enhancement 7,204 square feet • Wetland Buffer Restoration 13,296 square feet The potential wetland creation will integrate the hydrology of the proposed stormwater discharge into a meandering wetland system before allowing the water to discharge south towards North Lake through Wetland BD. Great care has been taken to avoid larger existing trees and to incorporate existing trees into the mitigation design. Wetland creation will include the following measures: 1) Clearing and grubbing all invasive, non-native weedy species in the wetland creation areas; 2) Grading to create a series of shallow depressions within upland areas. Hydrology will be provided by grading down to the early growing season groundwater elevation and using stormwater runoff associated with Woodbridge Business Park; 3) Installation of habitat features such as rootwads, down logs, stumps, and snags with bird nesting and bat roosting boxes; and 4) Planting a variety of wet-adapted native tree, shrub, and emergent species to provide structural diversity and increased species diversity to the wetland system. The potential mitigation grading concept (Appendix E, Sheet W2.0) includes an area east of the wetland creation area to demonstrate the hydrologic connection between the required wetland creation area and Wetland BD to the south. This additional mitigation area will be part of a future mitigation project for Woodbridge Warehouse A for Corps- required mitigation. 9.6.2 OPTION 2: In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Credit Purchase The federal rule titled Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources; Final Rule (Federal Rule) 33 CFR Section 332.3(b) specifies that when considering options for successfully providing the required compensatory mitigation for federal permits, the Corps District Engineer shall consider the type and location options in the following order: Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 27 a. Wetland mitigation banks, b. In-lieu fee programs, c. Permittee-responsible mitigation under a watershed approach, d. Permittee-responsible mitigation through on site and in-kind mitigation, and lastly e. Permittee-responsible mitigation through off site and/or out-of-kind mitigation. The impact project area is within the Puyallup-White Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 10. King County has one Ecology approved Mitigation Bank in the vicinity within WRIA 9, not WRIA 10, Springbrook Wetland Mitigation Bank. The Springbrook Wetland Mitigation Bank is used for Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) projects and cannot be utilized for private projects. The Upper Clear Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank is located within WRIA 10, but has not yet been approved. It is also unclear whether or not this service area would include the proposed project. As stated above, there are no Corps-certified wetland mitigation banks in the vicinity of the Project or in WRIA 10. The only Corps-certified In-Lieu Fee (ILF) program that services WRIA 10 is the King County ILF mitigation program. The King County ILF program will provide mitigation within the watershed of the project. The current King County mitigation project that would be the recipient of credits purchased by the proposed project will result in wetlands that are higher quality in terms of water quality functions, hydrologic functions, and habitat functions compared to the impacted wetlands’ current functional values. If it is determined that purchasing ILF credits is the preferred mitigation plan, the project would propose using the King County ILF Program. All required documentation for the use of an ILF program would be provided at a later date. This would include avoidance and minimization to aquatic resources, an analysis of mitigation alternatives, appropriate credit-debit analysis to ensure sufficient compensation is provided, and any other documentation provided in a ILF Plan. 9.7 Proposed Wetland Buffer Mitigation Details Mitigation measures for the proposed development impacting wetland buffers include wetland buffer creation, wetland buffer replacement, and wetland buffer restoration (Appendix E, Sheets W1.3 – W2.2): • Wetland Buffer Creation 27,113 square feet • Wetland Buffer Replacement 3,184 square feet • Wetland Buffer Restoration 29,819 square feet 9.7.1 Wetland Buffer Creation Wetland buffer creation is proposed around the wetland creation area (Appendix E, Sheets W3.0 – W4.0). Wetland buffer enhancement will include the following measures: 1) Clearing and grubbing all toxic and invasive species; 2) Removal of man-made features, where necessary; Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 28 3) Placement of topsoil where necessary; 4) Placement of habitat features such as rootwads, down logs, stumps, and snags with bird nesting and bat roosting boxes; 5) Installation of three inches of bark mulch in all bare soil areas; 6) Planting a variety of native deciduous and evergreen tree and shrub species; and 7) Installing critical area fencing and signs at buffer boundaries where required. 9.7.2 Wetland Buffer Restoration Buffer restoration will occur around the on-site remaining stream and wetlands through the removal of an existing gravel road and by restoring buffer temporarily impacted through site grading activities. Wetland buffer restoration will include the following measures: 1) Remove passive recreational trail/gravel access road; 2) Scarify soils and amend with topsoil from on-site sources as necessary; 3) Installation of habitat features such as rootwads, down logs, stumps, and snags with bird nesting and bat roosting boxes; 4) Installation of three inches of bark mulch in all bare soil areas; 5) Planting a variety of native deciduous and evergreen tree and shrub species; and 6) Installing critical area fencing and signs at buffer boundaries where required. 9.8 Performance Monitoring and Maintenance All mitigation components will be monitored for a minimum of five (5) years, consistent with agency requirements to ensure compliance with detailed performance objectives. Upon preliminary approval of this proposed mitigation design, a final mitigation plan will be prepared that outlines the performance objectives, as well as detailed elements of the mitigation plan installation, long-term monitoring and maintenance, contingency plans, and others. Critical area fencing will be placed at the perimeter of the mitigation areas as needed to ensure pedestrian and pet traffic is restricted into the designated mitigation areas. CHAPTER 10. SUMMARY The Woodbridge Business Park Site is an approximately 136-acre assemblage of five parcels located within the City of Federal Way in King County, Washington. The (former) Weyerhaeuser Tech Center already occurs within the Site, along with associated parking, paved roads, existing gravel access roads, and trails for passive recreation. Talasaea Consultants performed an initial delineation of on-site wetlands beginning in December 2015. Talasaea re-verified the wetland boundaries in April 2016 as the initial delineations were completed after several atypically high rainfall events. Forty-eight (48) wetlands were identified on the Site. North Lake occurs adjacent to the Site. One man-made stream (Stream AC) connects the existing stormwater pond to Weyerhaeuser Pond off-site to the south. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 29 Development on the property is governed by the Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre-Annexation Zoning Agreement (Concomitant Agreement). While the project would be allowed under the Concomitant Agreement, the Applicant has also analyzed the project under the critical area regulations of the FWRC in effect when the project application was submitted (2015 Critical Areas Regulations). The applicant is performing this analysis voluntarily at the request of the City, although it is under no obligation to do so, and does not waive its rights under the Concomitant Agreement. The analysis, which follows, demonstrates that the project meets the requirements of the 2015 Critical Areas Regulations. Wetlands and other critical areas in Federal Way located outside of the Shoreline Management Zone (SMZ) are regulated under the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145. Wetlands identified within the Shoreline Management Zone are addressed under FWRC Chapter 15.10. The Applicant proposes to construct a new business park with three (3) new warehouses with office space and associated infrastructure. The Weyerhaeuser Tech Center will remain, but the existing parking lots will be reconfigured to a more compact arrangement around the Tech Center. Associated infrastructure to be constructed includes five (5) new stormwater detention facilities, including reconfiguring the existing stormwater pond, parking for both cars and trucks, and enough maneuvering space for the truck traffic anticipated around these buildings. Due to the size of the proposed buildings, required parking and stormwater infrastructure, direct and indirect impacts to some wetlands and buffer encroachments are unavoidable. Portions of 48 wetlands, one (1) stream, and North Lake are located on or adjacent to the Site. Construction of the proposed development would directly impact (fill) 12,070 square feet (0.28 acre s) of wetlands for the buildings, parking, and stormwater facilities. Four (4) wetlands will have buffer impacts, resulting in an additional 7,840 square feet (0.18 acre s) of wetland as being considered indirect wetland impacts due to site development encroachments. Two options are being proposed as mitigation for direct and indirect impacts to wetlands: Potential wetland creation or purchase of credits from a King County In-Lieu Fee (ILF) program. The Applicant will determine which mitigation option is preferred at a later date. Wetland buffer impacts will be mitigated through a multi-part mitigation plan including wetland buffer creation, wetland buffer replacement, and wetland buffer enhancement. Temporary construction impacts resulting from site grading will be restored post- construction. All critical area mitigation will be constructed prior to or concurrent with site development activities. A final mitigation plan will be prepared and submitted once preliminary concurrence has been provided for this proposed mitigation plan. Performance monitoring will extend for a minimum of five (5) years over all elements of the mitigation plan. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 30 CHAPTER 11. REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. FWSOBS-70/31. 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., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. 730 pp. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. 2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-029. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, Maryland. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed [September 2017]. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. Wetland Regulatory Assistance Program. ERDC/EL TR-10-3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1989. National Wetlands Inventory Map, Poverty Bay Quadrangle. Washington State Department of Ecology. March 1997. Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology. Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) List. 2016. www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d (accessed September 2017). Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife [Map Online], Olympia (WA): SalmonScape [September 2017]. URL: <http//wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/index.html> Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2016. Priority Habitats and Species Database [online], Olympia, WA. [accessed September 2017]. <www.wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/> Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Page 31 FIGURES Figure 1 – Vicinity Map & Driving Directions Figure 2 – National Wetlands Inventory Map Figure 3 – NRCS Map Figure 4 – Hydrologic Connections Overview a a a a a a a a Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Appendix A APPENDIX A WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS, TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, 2016 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federall Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: AV-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.306750 Long: -122.298169 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Located uphill from wetland VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Acer macrophyllum 40 Y FACU 2. Populus tremuloides 35 Y FACU 3. 4. 75 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 45 Y FAC 2. Rubus armeniacus 25 Y FAC 3. Oemleria cerasiformis 10 N FACU 4. 5. 80 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Dicentra formosa 20 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 20 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: AV-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-10 10YR 2/2 100 Loam 10-16 10YR 3/2 100 Loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No redox features present HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 16 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. Saturation occurred below 12" depth. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federall Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: AV-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial Till Plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave depression Slope (%): <1 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.306750 Long: -122.298169 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Wetland is a disturbed area flanked by roads on 3 sides which has slowed drainage of the area. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 70 Yes FAC 2. Populus tremuloides 20 Yes FACU 3. 4. 90 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 50 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 50 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 100 x 3 = 300 FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 100 (A) 300 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: AV-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-13 10YR 2/1 100 silty loam OM present 13-16 10YR 5/1 80 10YR 5/8 20 C M Silt Prominent 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: OM present in upper horizon but insufficient qualities to be muck. Carbon content doesn't feel high enough-no organic carbon testing done. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 4 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: TAL-1572 City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: IRG/Weyerhauser State: WA Sampling Point: BA-UPL1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 8-10% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.309777 Long: -122.289189 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO/PSS Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 20 Y FAC 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 15 Y FACU 3. Thuja plicata 5 N FAC 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Gaultheria shallon 75 Y FACU 2. Alnus rubra 5 N FAC 3. 4. 5. 80 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 30 x 3 = 90 FACU species 90 x 4 = 360 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 120 (A) 450 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.75 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BA-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 2/1 100 Sandy loam Digging around rocks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No indicators of wetland hydrology despite unusually wet conditions. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: TAL-1572 City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: IRG/Weyerhauser State: WA Sampling Point: BA-WET1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.309768 Long: -122.289239 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO/PSS Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 15 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 15 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Alnus rubra 45 Y FAC 2. Spiraea douglasii 40 Y FACW 3. Rubus spectabilis 5 N FAC 4. 5. 90 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 0 x 3 = 0 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BA-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Cannot dig within the feature, soils look dark but disperses into the ponded water and turn to mud before they can be describ ed. Indicators are assumed from strong hydrologic indicators. Soils too wet. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 8 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Unusually wet weather. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: TAL-1572 City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: IRG/Weyerhauser State: WA Sampling Point: BB-UPL1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2-3 Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.309067 Long: -122.289319 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 60 Y FACU 2. Alnus rubra 15 N FAC 3. Acer circinatum 10 N FAC 4. 85 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Acer circinatum 10 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 10 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. Polystichum munitum 2 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 2 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 37 x 3 = 111 FACU species 62 x 4 = 248 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 99 (A) 359 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.63 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BB-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 2/1 100 Sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Despite a lack of a clean hydric soil indicator, this soil could be either. It was assumed not hydric based on the other two indicators. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 3 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Hydrology indicator likely result of recent unusually wet weather; despite presence of saturation, this does not reflect wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: TAL-1572 City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: IRG/Weyerhauser State: WA Sampling Point: BB-WET1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1-2% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.309056 Long: -122.289374 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 50 Y FAC 2. Populus balsamifera 15 Y FAC 3. 4. 65 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Rubus spectabilis 45 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 45 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 0 x 3 = 0 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BB-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 2/2 100 Sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Cannot pull sample because feature is completely under water, soil pit was dug where it was drier near the wetland boundary. Assumed hydric soils from strong hydrologic indicators. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 2 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1-2 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: BD-UPL1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308979 Long: -122.290309 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 40 Yes FAC 2. Acer circinatum 35 Yes FAC 3. Populus balsamifera 20 No FAC 4. Pseudotsuga menziesii 5 No FACU 90 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Yes FACU 2. Lamiastrum galeobdolon 1 No NL 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 21 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FACU 2. Rubus laciniatus 5 No FACU 35 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 79 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BD-UPL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Impossible to dig - extremely compact and suspected old logging road HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: BD-WET1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 1-3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308804 Long: -122.28969 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus latifolia 65 Yes FACW 2. 3. 4. 65 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 60 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 60 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 15 Yes FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2 Yes FAC 2. 2 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 85 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 65 x 2 = 130 FAC species 62 x 3 = 186 FACU species 15 x 4 = 60 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 142 (A) 376 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.64 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BD-WET Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-12 10YR 2/2 100 Loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Structure obliterated because of surrounding ponded water. Difficult to describe but assumed hydric from hydrologic indicators. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1-2 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1-2 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: BS (N)-UPL Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309008 Long: -122.295682 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: SP located within generally flat area around wetland. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Thuja plicata 30 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 30 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Gaultheria shallon 40 Yes FACU 2. Rubus spectabilis 30 Yes FAC 3. Oemleria cerasiformis 20 Yes FACU 4. 5. 90 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 30 Yes FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 20 Yes FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 50 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 60 x 3 = 180 FACU species 110 x 4 = 440 UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 170 (A) 620 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.6 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BS-UPL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 Duff 2-8 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam 8-16 10YR 4/3 100 Silty loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators identified HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. Saturation observed within 12 in of soil subsurface US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: BS (N)-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 4 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309008 Long: -122.295682 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Wetland located adjacent to parking lot. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 5 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Glyceria elata 5 N FACW 2. Juncus effusus 5 N FACW 3. Veronica anagallis-aquatica 2 N OBL 4. Ranunculus repens 25 Y FAC 5. 6. 7. 8. 37 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 63 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: BS(N)-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-9 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 9-16 10YR 6/1 50 10YR 4/6 50 C M Silt Prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 5 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: CB-UPL1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2-5% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: Long: Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PSS Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 40 Y FACU 2. Thuja plicata 15 Y FAC 3. Alnus rubra 5 N FAC 4. 60 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Acer circinatum 40 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 40 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. Polystichum munitum 50 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 50 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 60 x 3 = 180 FACU species 90 x 4 = 360 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 150 (A) 540 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.6 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: CB-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 10YR 4-2 100 Silt loam 2-16 7.5YR 4/4 100 Silt loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No indicators US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/22/2015 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: CB-WET1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0-3 Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.304053 Long: -122.293896 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 40 Y FAC 2. Fraxinius latifolia 15 Y FACW 3. 4. 55 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 0 x 3 = 0 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: CB-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Stream substrate within the braided channels made acquiring a soil sample difficult. Soils that were identified were a 2/1 sa ndy loam but could not dig very deep. Assumed hydric from strong hydrologic indicators. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 4-6 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Braided channels US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: CD-UPL1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): non Slope (%): 2-5% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.310362 Long: -122.288643 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO/PSS Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 50 Y FACU 2. Thuja plicata 15 Y FAC 3. 4. 65 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Gaultheria shallon 80 Y FACU 2. Thuja plicata 10 N FAC 3. Ilex aquifolium 1 N FACU 4. Arbutus menziesii 1 N NL 5. 92 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2 Y FACU 2. 2 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 25 x 3 = 75 FACU species 133 x 4 = 532 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 158 (A) 607 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.84 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Mountain beaver burrows present US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: CD-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 10YR 2/1 100 Silt loam 2-8 7.5YR 4/4 100 Silt loam 8-10 10YR 2/1 100 Silt loam 10-16+ 7.5YR 4/6 100 Silt loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: CD-WET1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0-2% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.310326 Long: -122.288310 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PFO/PSS Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 10 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Alnus rubra 60 Y FAC 2. Rubus spectabilis 40 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 100 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 0 x 3 = 0 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Mountain beaver burrows inside feature US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: CD-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 2/1 100 Silt loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Hydric indicators assumed, as hydrologic indicators are strong. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1-2 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 2 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: TAL-1572 City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: IRG/Weyerhauser State: WA Sampling Point: CE-UPL1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: S15 T21N R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 5+% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.310529 Long: -122.289913 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PEM Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 30 Y FACU 2. Thuja plicata 10 Y FAC 3. 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. Gaultheria shallon 75 Y FACU 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 N FACU 3. Mahonia aquifolium 5 N FACU 4. Ilex aquifolium 2 N FACU 5. 92 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. Polystichum munitum 10 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 10 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 10 x 3 = 30 FACU species 132 x 4 = 528 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 142 (A) 558 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.93 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: CE-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-3 10YR 4/2 100 3-18 7.5 YR 4/4 100 Sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: TAL-1572 City/County: Federal Way/King County Sampling Date:12/19/2015 Applicant/Owner: IRG/Weyerhauser State: WA Sampling Point: CE-WET1 Investigator(s): JMM, DRT Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1-3% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.310580 Long: -122.289874 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravel sandy loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification: PEM Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5) 1. Carexsp. 30 Y FACW* 2. Ranunculus repens 25 Y FAC 3. Urtica dioica 15 Y FAC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 70 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30) 1. 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 0 x 3 = 0 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Carex sp. assumed FAC or wetter, unable to ID to species. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: CE-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-13 10YR 2/1 100 Sandy loam Cannot dig deeper than 13 inches 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Hydric indicators assumed based on other indicators. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1-4 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:7/19/2016 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DE-UPL1 Investigator(s): Jennifer Marriott Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308117 Long: -122.297907 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus tremuloides 40 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Populus tremuloides 30 Y FACU 2. Gaultheria shallon 25 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 55 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 5 N FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 70 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 75 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 25 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DE-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1-16 10YR 3/3 100 loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators identified HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hyrology indicators identified US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:7/19/2016 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DE-WET1 Investigator(s): Jennifer Marriott Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308117 Long: -122.297907 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: This atypical wetland occurs within a broad area where the till is shallow; the delineation includes area of upland as the wetland winds through the trees. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus balsamifera 30 Y FAC 2. Fraxinus excelsior 60 Y NL 3. 4. 90 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Fraxinus excelsior 80 Y NL 2. Rubus spectabilis 20 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 100 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 50 x 3 = 150 FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 50 (A) 150 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Fraxinus excelsior (European ash) is considered to be a wetland plant in Europe. We can safely assume this test plot represents hydrophytic vegetation. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DE-WET Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-12 10YR 2/1 100 Silty loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Soil was very dry, hardpan at 12 inches. Soil is assumed to be hydric based on hydrology and hydrophytic plants. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Surface ponding and saturation within the upper 12" was previously noted in January 2016 though wetland hydrology was not present at our evaluation in April 2016. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DF-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308059 Long: -122.297303 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Abies grandis 40 Yes FACU 2. Fraxinus excelsior 40 Yes NL 3. 4. 80 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 20 Yes FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 20 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Yes FACU 2. Rubus spectabilis 40 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 60 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 20 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species 120 x 4 = 480 UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 120 (A) 480 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: F. excelsior (European ash) is not listed in the US, but is considered a wetland tree in its home territory. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DF-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-16 10YR 2/2 100 Loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Soil appears to have been disturbed at some point. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DF-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave depressiom Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308059 Long: -122.297303 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Soils disturbed at some point many years ago. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus excelsior 30 Yes NL 2. Populus balsamifera 50 Yes FAC 3. 4. 80 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Spiraea douglasii 20 Yes FACW 2. Rubus spectabilis 20 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 40 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Carex obnupta 10 Yes OBL 2. Carex deweyana 10 Yes FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 20 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 83 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Fraxinus excelsior (European ash) is considered to be a wetland plant in Europe We can safely assume this test plot represents hydrophytic vegetation. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DF-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-9 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 9-16 10YR 6/4 100 Silt sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 3 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DG -UPL Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308021 Long: -122.297457 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Thuja plicata 30 Yes FAC 2. Acer macrophyllum 40 Yes FACU 3. Pseudotsuga menziesii 30 Yes FACU 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Rubus ursinus 20 Yes FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 20 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DG-UPL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-9 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam 9-16 10YR 3/3 100 Sandy loam gravelly 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hyrology indicators identified US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DG-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308021 Long: -122.297457 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Wetlands located within disturbed woods near wetlands DE and DF VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 30 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Carex deweyana 15 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 85 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DG-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-11 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 11-16 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Silt prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DH UPL 1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): gentle slope Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.307786 Long: -122.297435 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Thuja plicata 30 Yes FAC 2. Acer macrophyllum 40 Yes FACU 3. Psuedotsuga menziesii 30 Yes FACU 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Rubus ursinus 20 Yes FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 20 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DH UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-9 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam 9-16 10YR 3/3 100 Sandy loam gravelly 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DH-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.307786 Long: -122.297435 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation no, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 30 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Carex deweyana 15 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 85 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DH-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-11 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 11-16 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Silt 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DI UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): gentle slope Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 43.307767 Long: -122.297341 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Thuja plicata 30 Yes FAC 2. Acer macrophyllum 40 Yes FACU 3. Psuedotsuga menziesii 30 Yes FACU 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Rubus ursinus 20 Yes FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 20 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. 2. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80-litter % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DI-UPL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-9 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy loam 9-16 10YR 3/3 100 Sandy loam gravelly 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology indicators identified US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DI-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 43.307767 Long: -122.297341 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 30 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Carex deweyana 15 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 85 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DI-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-11 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 11-16 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Silt 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DJ-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.307429 Long: -122.297907 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Soils graded at somepoint in the past. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Abies grandis 40 Yes FACU 2. Fraxinus excelsior 40 Yes NL 3. Acer macrophyllum 20 Yes FACU 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 20 Yes FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 20 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Yes FACU 2. Dicentra formosa 30 Yes FACU 3. Rubus ursinus 20 Yes FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 70 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 7 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: F. excelsior (European ash) is not listed in the US, but it is recognized as a wetland tree in its home territory. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DJ-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 3/3 100 Gravelly loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology indicators US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/6/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: DJ-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.307429 Long: -122.297907 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology NO naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus balsamifera 50 Yes FAC 2. Fraxinus excelsior 50 Yes NL 3. 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Carex deweyana 10 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 10 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 90 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: F. excelsior (European ash) is recognized as a wetland tree in its hom e territory. It is not listed in the US. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DJ-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 2/2 100 Mucky loam 8-12 10YR 2/1 100 Mucky loam 12-16 10YR 6/2 80 10YR 5/6 20 C M Gravel sand Redox features prominent 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 5 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EI-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309559 Long: -122.298034 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 90 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 90 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Sambucus racemosa 15 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 15 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 15 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 30 Y FACU 3. Galium aparine 20 Y FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 65 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0- moss % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 4 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EI-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-4 10YR 2/2 100 loam gravelly 4-16 10YR 4/3 100 loam gravelly 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hyrics soil indicators HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology indicators observed US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EI-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309559 Long: -122.298034 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 30 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Stellaria crispa 30 Y FAC 2. Carex deweyana 15 Y FAC 3. Claytonia sibirica 20 Y FAC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 65 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0-moss % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EI-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-10 10YR 2/1 100 Loam 10-16 10YR 5/1 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M silt Gravelly, prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 8 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EJ-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309238 Long: -122.297874 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus excelsior 30 Y NL 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 30 Y FACU 3. Thuja plicata 20 Y FAC 4. 80 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 15 Y FACU 2. Rubus spectabilis 25 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 40 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 15 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 35 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 65 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 7 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 28.6 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Fraxinus excelsior (European ash) is not listed in the US, but is recognized as a wetland tree in its home territory. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EJ-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 3/3 100 Loam 8-16 10YR 3/4 100 Silty loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators observed HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology indicators observed US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EJ-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309238 Long: -122.297874 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus latifolia 40 Y FACW 2. 3. 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 35 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 35 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EJ-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 Duff 2-6 10YR 3/2 100 Mucky loam 6-10 Duff, roots, and wood 10-16 10YR 6/1 100 Sandy silt 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EK-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309099 Long: -122.297926 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 20 Y FACU 2. Thuja plicata 15 Y FAC 3. Fraxinus excelsior 35 Y NL 4. 70 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 15 Y FACU 2. Rubus spectabilis 5 N FAC 3. Acer circinatum 10 Y FAC 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 10 Y FACU 3. Rubus armeniacus 10 Y FAC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 40 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 60 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 8 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 37.5 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Fraxinus excelsior (European ash) is considered a wetland tree in Europe. Not listed in US. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EK-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-3 10YR 3/3 100 Loam 3-7 10YR 6/3 90 10YR 5/8 10 C M Silt Prominent feature 7-16 10YR 3/3 100 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: It appears soils were disturbed from 3-7", having come from Wetland EK. No hydric soil indicators identified HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydology indicators identified US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EK-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309099 Long: -122.297926 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Spiraea douglasii 45 Y FACW 2. Rubus spectabilis 25 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 70 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EK-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 Duff 2-11 10YR 3/2 100 Mucky loam 11-16 10YR 5/2 80 5YR 5/6 20 C M silt gravelly 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 7 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EL-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309049 Long: -122.297756 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus excelsior 30 Y NL 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 30 Y FACU 3. Thuja plicata 20 Y FAC 4. 80 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 15 Y FACU 2. Rubus spectabilis 25 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 40 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 15 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 35 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 65 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 7 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 28.6 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: F. excelsior (European ash) is not listed in the US, but is considered a wetland tree in its home territory. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EL-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 3/3 100 Loam 8-16 10YR 3/4 100 Silty loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: No hydric soil indicators identified HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology present US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhauser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EL-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309049 Long: -122.297756 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus latifolia 40 Y FACW 2. 3. 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 35 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 35 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EL-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 Duff 2-6 10YR 3/2 100 Mucky loam 6-10 Duff, roots, and wood 10-16 10YR 6/1 100 Sandy silt 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EM-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308991 Long: -122.298042 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 20 Y FACU 2. Thuja plicata 15 Y FAC 3. Fraxinus excelsior 35 Y NL 4. 70 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 15 Y FACU 2. Rubus spectabilis 5 N FAC 3. Acer circinatum 10 Y FAC 4. 5. 30 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 20 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 10 Y FACU 3. Rubus armeniacus 10 Y FAC 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 40 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 60 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 8 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 37.5 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Fraxinus excelsior (European ash) is not listed in the US, but is recognized as a wetland tree in its home territory. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EM-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-3 10YR 3/3 100 Loam 3-7 10YR 6/3 90 10YR 5/8 10 Silt Prominent feature 7-16 10YR 3/3 100 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: It appears soils were disturbed from 3-7", having come from wetland EK.No hydric soil indicators observed. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No wetland hydrology indicators were oberved US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: EM-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308991 Long: -122.298042 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Spiraea douglasii 45 Y FACW 2. Rubus spectabilis 25 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 70 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: EM-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-2 Duff 2-11 10YR 3/2 100 Mucky loam 11-16 10YR 5/2 80 5YR 5/6 20 C M silt gravelly 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 7 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/16/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FA-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Till Plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 10 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310939 Long: -122.291696 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 40 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Cytisus scoparius 60 Y NL 2. Rubus armeniacus 20 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 80 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Rubus ursinus 60 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 60 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 60 x 3 = 180 FACU species 60 x 4 = 240 UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 120 (A) 420 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.5 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FA-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 4/2 100 Gravel loam 4-16 10YR 5/2 100 Gravel loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 2 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/16/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FA-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Till Plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310939 Long: -122.293696 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 30 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 30 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 60 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 60 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Alopecurus sp. 30 Y FAC 2. Epilobium ciliatum ssp. watsonii 2 N FACW 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 32 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 68 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FA-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Litter 1-3 10YR 2/2 100 Sandy loam 3-18 10YR 6/1 100 Sandy loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/16/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FB-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Till Plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 15 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310897 Long: -122.290114 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Tsuga heterophylla 70 Y FACU 2. Alnus rubra 30 Y FAC 3. 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 60 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 60 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 30 Y FACU 2. Pteridium aquilinum 10 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 40 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 60 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FB-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 2/2 100 Duff 7-16 10YR 3/4 100 Gravel sand 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/16/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FB-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310897 Long: -122.290114 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Fraxinus latifolia 20 Y FACW 2. 3. 4. 20 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 5 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 10 Y FACU 2. Athyrium filix-femina 5 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 15 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 85 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FB-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 2/1 Duff/litter 4-13 10YR 2/1 100 Gravel muck 13-16 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FD-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Road prism in Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): west slope Slope (%): 20 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310030 Long: -122.292461 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: At some point decades ago a utility line was buried and a road way was built on top of it. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Acer macrophyllum 60 Y FACU 2. Alnus rubra 40 Y FAC 3. 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 15 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 15 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 10 N FACU 2. Dicentra formosa 30 Y FACU 3. Rubus ursinus 20 Y FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 60 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Litter % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 55 x 3 = 165 FACU species 120 x 4 = 480 UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 175 (A) 645 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.7 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FD-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 3/3 100 Gravel loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Fill for buried utility corridor. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FD-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310030 Long: -122.292461 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Drainage blocked by utility corridor fill. Soil originally not hydric but changing due to blocked drained and prolonged innundation. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: .30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Thuja plicata 30 Y FAC 2. Alnus rubra 10 Y FAC 3. 4. 40 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 45 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 45 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Athyrium filix-femina 10 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 10 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 90 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Mostly open water US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FD-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Rotting leaves 1-7 10YR 3/2 100 Silt loam 7-16 10YR 4/3 90 10R 4/8 10 Silt loam Prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Strong hydrogen sulfide odor. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FE-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 4-7 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310379 Long: -122.296255 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Acer macrophyllum 30 Y FACU 2. Populus balsamifera 30 Y FAC 3. Alnus rubra 15 Y FAC 4. 75 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Oemleria cerasiformis 20 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 20 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 25 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 10 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 35 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 65 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FE-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Duff 1-16 10YR 3/3 Loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/8/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FE-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.310379 Long: -122.296255 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Populus balsamifera 45 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 45 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 60 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 60 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Ranunculus repens 45 Y FAC 2. Carex deweyana 15 Y FAC 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 60 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 % Cover of Biotic Crust Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FE-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-13 10YR 2/2 100 Mucky loam 13-16 10YR 5/1 40 10YR 4/6 60 Sandy silt Prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FF-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Road prism in Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): west slope Slope (%): 20 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309731 Long: -122.292461 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: At some point decades ago a utility line was buried and a road way was built on top of it. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Acer macrophyllum 60 Y FACU 2. Alnus rubra 40 Y FAC 3. 4. 100 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 15 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 15 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 10 N FACU 2. Dicentra formosa 30 Y FACU 3. Rubus ursinus 20 Y FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 60 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 litter % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FF-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 3/3 100 Gravel loam 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Fill for buried utility corridor. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: FF-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): closed depression Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.309731 Long: -122.292461 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil Yes, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Drainage blocked by utility corridor fill. Soil originally not hydric but changing due to blocked drained and prolonged innundation. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: .30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 90 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 90 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 10 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 10 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Athyrium filix-femina 10 Y FAC 2. Polystichum munitum 10 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 20 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: Mostly open water US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: FF-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-1 Rotting leaves 1-7 10YR 3/2 100 Silt loam 7-16 10YR 4/3 90 10R 4/8 10 Silt loam Prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Strong hydrogen sulfide odor. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 1 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: GB-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308279 Long: -122.298501 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Record rainfall in recent months. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Thuja plicata 30 Y FAC 2. Fraxinus excelsior 60 Y NL 3. 4. 90 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 20 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 20 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 15 Y FACU 2. Rubus ursinus 25 Y FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 40 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 60 litter % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 50 x 3 = 150 FACU species 40 x 4 = 160 UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 90 (A) 310 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.4 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: GB-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-10 10YR 3/4 100 Sandy loam 10-16 10YR 3/4 100 Sandy loam With charcoal 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 10 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Record rainfall in previous months. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: GB-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Glacial till plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): drainage channel Slope (%): 1 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.308279 Long: -122.298501 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology Yes significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Soils probably disturbed in past logging probably contributing to topographic - Perhaps skid trail. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. None 2. 3. 4. 0 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Cornus sericea 15 Y FACW 2. 3. 4. 5. 15 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 30 Y FACW 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 30 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 70 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: GB-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 3/3 100 Loam 4-16 10YR 5/1 80 10YR 5/8 20 Silty sand Prominent feature 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: Soils probably disturbed in past logging probably contributing to topographic - Perhaps skid trail. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: PG-UPL1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 3-5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.305356 Long: -122.292863 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 70 Yes FAC 2. 3. 4. 70 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 40 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 40 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. Polystichum munitum 70 Y FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 70 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species 110 x 3 = 330 FACU species 70 x 4 = 280 UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: 180 (A) 610 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.39 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: PG-UPL1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-9 10YR 3/1 100 SiL 9-13 10YR 4/1 100 No redox 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Weyerhaeuser City/County: Federal Way/King Sampling Date:4/9/16 Applicant/Owner: Federal Way Campus, LLC State: WA Sampling Point: PG-WET1 Investigator(s): Richard Tveten Section, Township, Range: Section 16, T21N, R4E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 1-2 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: 47.304224 Long: -122.293305 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation No, Soil No, or Hydrology No naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft) % Cover Species? Status 1. Alnus rubra 25 Yes FAC 2. Populus balsamifera 5 N FAC 3. 4. 30 = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. Rubus spectabilis 80 Y FAC 2. 3. 4. 5. 80 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft) 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft) 1. None 2. 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast– Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: GB-WET1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 3/1 100 Loam 6-8 10YR 4/1 100 SiL 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1 (except MLRA 1)) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)) High Water Table (A2) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6(LRR A) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6-8 (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Appendix B APPENDIX B FEATURE SUMMARY TABLE, TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, 2020 Greenline Business Park FEATURE SUMMARY TABLE Category Habitat Score 1 AE PEM Depressional III 4 0.0055 239 60 2 AF PEM Depressional III 4 0.0109 473 60 3 AG PFO Depressional III 4 0.1469 6,397 60 4 AH PSS Depressional III 4 0.0163 712 60 5 AI PEM Slope IV 3 0.0699 3,044 40 6 AJ PEM Slope IV 3 0.0012 51 40 7 AL PEM Slope IV 3 0.0246 1,072 40 8 AM PEM Slope IV 3 0.0303 1,319 40 9 AO PEM Slope IV 3 0.0018 79 40 10 AR PEM Slope IV 3 0.0006 26 40 11 AS PEM Slope IV 3 0.0068 295 40 12 AV PFO Depressional III 4 0.2831 12,332 60 13 BA-2 PSS Depressional III 4 0.0154 670 60 14 BR PEM Depressional III 5 0.0508 2,211 105 15 BS (N)PFO Depressional III 4 0.0616 2,683 60 16 BS (S)PEM Depressional IV 3 0.0044 192 40 17 CG PFO Depressional IV 4 0.0794 3,458 40 18 DE PFO Depressional III 3 0.4948 21,554 60 19 DF PFO Depressional III 3 0.0019 81 60 20 DG PFO Depressional III 3 0.0253 1,103 60 21 DH PFO Depressional III 3 0.0062 271 60 22 DI PFO Depressional III 3 0.0052 227 60 23 DK PFO Depressional III 3 0.1454 6,332 60 24 EI PFO Depressional IV 3 0.0040 175 40 25 EJ PSS Depressional III 3 0.0053 231 60 26 EK PSS Depressional III 3 0.0041 179 60 27 EL PSS Depressional III 3 0.0085 372 60 #Wetland ID Cowardin HGM Acreage Square Footage** Standard Buffer (feet), FWRC Ch.19 2014 DOE Wetland Rating ** Reflects on-site acreage for wetlands that continue off-site 3/20/2020 9:12 AM Greenline Business Park FEATURE SUMMARY TABLE Category Habitat Score #Wetland ID Cowardin HGM Acreage Square Footage** Standard Buffer (feet), FWRC Ch.19 2014 DOE Wetland Rating 28 EM PSS Depressional III 3 0.0070 306 60 29 FB PSS Depressional III 4 0.1688 7,353 60 30 FD PFO Depressional IV 3 0.0157 686 40 31 FE PFO Depressional III 5 0.0074 324 105 32 FF PSS Depressional IV 3 0.0225 978 40 33 GB (N)PSS Depressional III 3 0.0775 3,377 60 34 IA PEM Slope IV 3 0.0603 2,625 40 35 KA PEM Slope IV 4 0.0238 1,038 40 36 KB PEM Slope IV 5 0.0003 15 40 37 KC PEM Slope IV 6 0.0072 314 40 38 KD PEM Slope IV 7 0.0407 1,771 40 39 KF PEM Slope IV 8 0.0087 378 40 40 KN PEM Slope IV 10 0.0156 678 40 41 KT PEM Slope IV 11 0.0055 239 40 42 KU PEM Slope IV 12 0.0013 55 40 43 KV PEM Slope IV 13 0.0017 74 40 44 KW PEM Slope IV 14 0.0176 765 40 45 PK PFO Depressional III 4 0.0310 1,350 60 ** Reflects on-site acreage for wetlands that continue off-site 3/20/2020 9:12 AM Greenline Business Park FEATURE SUMMARY TABLE WETLANDS WITHIN SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ZONE 46 BA PFO Depressional 0.1980 8,626 47 BB PFO Depressional 0.0687 2,992 48 BD (N)PFO/PSS Depressional 2.6667 116,160 #Wetland ID 100 100 Standard Buffer (feet), FWRC Ch.15 25 Cowardin HGM Square Footage**Acreage 3/20/2020 9:12 AM Greenline Business Park FEATURE SUMMARY TABLE LINEAR FEATURES - STREAMS/LAKES 1 Stream AC F 2 North Lake Lake Standard Buffer (feet), FWRC Ch.15/19 100 50 #Waterbody ID Type 3/20/2020 9:12 AM Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Appendix C APPENDIX C PHOTODOCUMENT, TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, 2017 Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 1 The following is a compilation of photos taken between December 2015 and May of 2016 by employees of Talasaea Consultants on various site visits. Wetlands delineated on-site were part of a larger effort to document all wetlands found throughout the Federal Way Campus, LLC property in Federal Way (formerly owned by Weyerhaeuser), which explains the irregular wetland labels. Included in this photodocument are photos of typical wetland vegetation, typical coniferous and deciduous upland, and gravel access roads throughout the site. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 2 Typical Herbaceous Wetland (Photo 1) Photo 1. Typical herbaceous wetland – salmonberry, Himalayan blackberry, red alder, reed canarygrass, and creeping buttercup. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 3 Typical Forested Wetlands (Photos 2 - 4) Photo 2. Typical forested wetland: black cottonwood, European ash, and salmonberry. Photo 3. Typical wetland canopy consists of European ash. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 4 Photo 4. Typical salmonberry wetland with European Ash planted in rows. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 5 Typical Open Field (Photos 5 – 7) Photo 5. Panorama of open field from the east side. Photo 6. Typical emergent wetland vegetation within the open field. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 6 Photo 7. Typical wetland vegetation within open field. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 7 Stream Channel (Photos 8 – 9) Photo 8. Stream channel looking north from the access road. Photo 9. Stream channel looking south from the access road. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 8 Stormwater (Photo 10) Photo 10. Stormwater pond located on site. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 9 Forested Uplands (Photo 11) Photo 11. Typical conifer forested upland: Douglas fir, salmonberry, and sword fern. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 10 Upland Understory (Photo 12) Photo 12. Typical herbaceous understory in uplands: sword fern and creeping buttercup. Federal Way Campus, LLC Existing Conditions Report 26 January 2017 Copyright © 2017 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Photodocument (01-27-2017) Page 11 Access Roads (Photo 13) Photo 13. Along the access road in the northwest corner of the property, facing south. Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Appendix D APPENDIX D WETLAND RATING FORMS, TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, 2016 & 2017 Meadow Wetlands 400 ft N➤➤N Meadow Wetlands 1km 3000 ft N➤➤N Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan 9 April 2020 Copyright © 2020 Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 1572C Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan V6.docx Appendix E APPENDIX E MITIGATION PLAN SHEETS Sheet W1.0. Site Overview Plan Sheet W1.1. Existing Conditions Plan Sheet W1.2. Existing Conditions Plan Sheet W1.3. Proposed Site Plan, Impacts, & Mitigation Overview Plan Sheet W1.4. Proposed Site Plan, Impacts, & Mitigation Overview Plan Sheet W2.0. Potential Mitigation Grading Plan Sheet W2.1. Fencing Plan & Details Sheet W2.2. Grading Specifications Sheet W3.0. Proposed Plant Community Plan Sheet W3.1. Proposed Plant Community Plan Sheet W4.0. Planting Specifications Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.aTHIS AREA IS PROTECTEDTO PROVIDE WILDLIFE HABITATAND TO MAINTAIN CRITICALAREA(S) FUNCTIONS/VALUES.PLEASE DO NOT DISTURB THISVALUABLE RESOURCECRITICAL AREAPROTECTION AREACONTACT CITY OF FEDERAL WAYFOR MORE INFORMATION Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.¼a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.a½½¼½½¾½