20-102338-Critical Area Report - Wetland Assessment Report and Buffer Enhancement Plan-06-05-2020-V1WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
ASSESSMENT REPORT AND WETLAND BUFFER
REDUCTION AND ENHANCEMENT PLAN
LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT MAIN
CAMPUS
JUNE 2020
WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
ASSESSMENT REPORT AND WETLAND BUFFER
REDUCTION AND ENHANCEMENT PLAN
LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT MAIN
CAMPUS
JUNE 4, 2020
PROJECT LOCATION
LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTH
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003
PREPARED FOR
HELIX DESIGN GROUP, INC.
6021 12TH STREET EAST, SUITE 201
TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98424
ATTN: JEFF BLACHOWSKI
PREPARED BY
SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC
2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D
GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335
(253) 514-8952
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan i June 4, 2020
Executive Summary
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Helix Design Group, Inc. (Client) with a
wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment and buffer reduction and enhancement plan for the
proposed redevelopment of the 12.03-acre Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus
property located at 31623 and 31627 1st Avenue South in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The
subject property consists of one tax parcel situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section 7, Township 21
North, Range 4 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 0721049017).
SVC investigated the subject property for the presence of potentially regulated wetlands, streams, and
other fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas in July 2018 and January 2020. The site investigations
identified and delineated the boundaries of one regulated wetland (Wetland A) located in the
southeastern portion of the subject property, extending offsite to the south. In general, Wetland A is
a Category IV depressional wetland that requires a 50-foot protective buffer according to Federal Way
Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.420(1). No other potentially regulated wetlands, streams, or other fish
and wildlife habitat conservation areas were identified on or within 225 feet of the subject property.
The City of Federal Way’s critical area inventory, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland
Inventory, and the DNR water typing map misidentify a potential stream within and upgradient of
Wetland A. In fact, no defined stream channel exists in the mapped location. Stormwater is conveyed
from an upgradient, excavated stormwater detention pond into Wetland A, where the stormwater
sheet flows across the landscape prior to infiltration.
The proposed redevelopment of the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Headquarters will service
the growing community of southwest King County with expanded water and sewer utilities. The
project includes new administrative and operations/maintenance buildings and associated
infrastructure including paved parking, road improvements, landscaping, and stormwater facilities.
The site will continue to be accessed via a driveway extending from 1st Avenue South to the east. The
project was carefully designed in order to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas to the greatest
extent feasible; however, complete avoidance of the standard wetland buffer is not possible. In order
to develop the site and accommodate stormwater infrastructure, approximately 5,190 square feet of
wetland buffer reduction is required as allowed administratively per FWRC 19.145.440(6).
Additionally, improvements to the existing shared driveway access and frontage improvements along
the west side of 1st Avenue South are required to improve vehicle maneuvering and safety for fleet
vehicles from both the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District as well as South King Fire and Rescue.
Driveway improvements will consist of general road widening and the addition of a sidewalk and
retaining walls along the south side due to steep slopes; frontage improvements will consist of full half
street upgrades to widen the roadway and include a sidewalk, curb, gutter and landscaping and utility
strip and the use of a retaining wall due to steep slopes. These actions will result in approximately
5,623 square feet of permanent buffer impact to serve these public facilities. These impacts are likely
partially exempt from critical area regulations per FWRC 19.145.120(1) – Essential Public Facilities.
A stormwater dispersion outfall will also be located within the outer 25 percent of the modified
wetland buffer pursuant to FWRC 19.145.440(3).
To offset the indirect impacts associated with the buffer reduction and permanent driveway and
frontage improvements, the entire remaining buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be
enhanced (approximately 30,742 square feet). The buffer enhancement is anticipated to increase
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan ii June 4, 2020
habitat and wetland protection, providing an increase in ecological function over existing baseline
conditions onsite. The buffer enhancement actions will include the removal of trash/debris and non-
native invasive vegetation and replanting with a diverse assemblage of native vegetation. These buffer
enhancement actions will provide greater than 5:1 compensation for the required buffer impacts. The
project will also incorporate appropriate best management practices (BMPs) and temporary erosion
and sediment control measures (TESC); overall, the project in anticipated to result in no net loss in
ecological functions.
The table below summarizes the onsite wetland and identifies the potential regulatory status of local,
state, and federal agencies.
Wetland
Name Size onsite Category1 Regulated Under
FWRC Chapter 19.145
Regulated Under
RCW 90.48
Regulated Under
Clean Water Act
A 9,647 sf IV Yes Yes Likely
1. Current Washington State Department of Ecology (Hruby, 2014) wetland rating methods per FWRC 19.145.420(1).
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan iii June 4, 2020
Existing Site Map
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan iv June 4, 2020
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2. Proposed Project ........................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Location ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Project Description................................................................................................................. 2
Chapter 3. Methods ......................................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 4. Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Landscape Setting ................................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Soils ........................................................................................................................................ 5
4.3 Vegetation .............................................................................................................................. 6
4.4 Critical Area Inventories ......................................................................................................... 6
4.5 Precipitation ........................................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 5. Results ........................................................................................................................... 8
5.1 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................ 8
5.2 Constructed Stormwater Detention Ponds ........................................................................... 10
5.3 Drainage ............................................................................................................................... 10
Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations ........................................................................................... 11
6.1 Local Critical Areas Requirements ........................................................................................ 11
6.2 State and Federal Considerations .......................................................................................... 14
Chapter 7. Buffer Enhancement Plan ............................................................................................ 15
7.1 Existing Buffer Functions ..................................................................................................... 15
7.2 Description of Impacts ......................................................................................................... 15
7.3 Buffer Enhancement Strategy ............................................................................................... 16
7.4 Approach and Best Management Practices ........................................................................... 17
7.5 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards ..................................................................... 17
7.6 Plant Materials and Installation for Mitigation Actions ......................................................... 18
7.7 Maintenance and Monitoring Plan ........................................................................................ 20
7.8 Reporting ............................................................................................................................. 20
7.9 Contingency Plans ................................................................................................................ 20
Chapter 8. Closure ........................................................................................................................ 22
Chapter 9. References ................................................................................................................... 23
Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map. ................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 2. Aerial Image of Subject Property. ................................................................................. 5
Tables
Table 1. Precipitation Summary1 .................................................................................................. 7
Table 2. Wetland Summary. ......................................................................................................... 8
Table 3. Wetland A Summary ...................................................................................................... 9
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan v June 4, 2020
Appendices
Appendix A — Methods and Tools
Appendix B — Background Information
Appendix C — Existing Conditions Exhibit & Site Plan Set
Appendix D — Data Sheets
Appendix E — Wetland Rating Form
Appendix F — Wetland Rating Maps
Appendix G — Qualifications
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 1 June 4, 2020
Chapter 1. Introduction
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Helix Design Group, Inc. (Client) with a
wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessments and buffer reduction and enhancement plan for the
proposed redevelopment of the 12.03-acre Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus
property located at 31623 and 31627 1st Avenue South in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The
subject property consists of one tax parcel situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section 7, Township 21
North, Range 4 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 0721049017).
The purpose of this assessment is to document the presence of potentially regulated wetlands, streams,
and other fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas on or near the subject property; assess potential
impacts to any such critical areas from the proposed project; and provide mitigation to offset those
impacts.
This report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding:
• Site description, project description, and area of assessment;
• Identification, delineation, and assessment of potentially regulated wetlands on or near the
subject property;
• Identification and assessment of potentially regulated fish and wildlife habitat conservation
areas on or near the subject property;
• Standard buffer and setback recommendations and development limitations;
• Existing site map detailing identified critical areas;
• Site plan outlining the proposed project;
• Description of impact avoidance and minimization measures;
• Buffer reduction and enhancement plan; and
• Supplemental information necessary for local regulatory review.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 2 June 4, 2020
Chapter 2. Proposed Project
2.1 Location
The proposed project is located at 31623 and 31627 1st Avenue South in the City of Federal Way,
Washington. The subject property consists of one tax parcel situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section
7, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 0721049017).
To access the site from Interstate 5 (I-5) North, travel through Federal Way and take Exit 143. Use
any lane to merge onto South 320th Street. Continue for 1.8 miles and turn right onto 1st Avenue
South. Continue for 0.2 mile, where the subject property will be on the left.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map.
2.2 Project Description
The proposed redevelopment of the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Headquarters will service
the growing community of southwest King County with expanded water and sewer utilities. The
project includes new administrative and operations/maintenance buildings and associated
infrastructure including paved parking, road improvements, landscaping, and stormwater facilities.
The site will continue to be accessed via a driveway extending from 1st Avenue South to the east. The
project was carefully designed in order to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas to the greatest
extent feasible; however, complete avoidance of the standard wetland buffer is not possible. In order
to develop the site and accommodate stormwater infrastructure, approximately 5,190 square feet of
wetland buffer reduction is required as allowed administratively per FWRC 19.145.440(6).
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 3 June 4, 2020
Additionally, improvements to the existing shared driveway access and frontage improvements along
the west side of 1st Avenue South are required to improve vehicle maneuvering and safety for fleet
vehicles from both the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District as well as South King Fire and Rescue.
Driveway improvements will consist of general road widening and the addition of a sidewalk and
retaining walls along the south side due to steep slopes; frontage improvements will consist of full half
street upgrades to widen the roadway and include a sidewalk, curb, gutter and landscaping and utility
strip and the use of a retaining wall due to steep slopes. These actions will result in approximately
5,623 square feet of permanent buffer impact to serve these public facilities. However, these impacts
are likely partially exempt from critical area regulations per FWRC 19.145.120(1) – Essential Public
Facilities. A stormwater dispersion outfall will also be located within the outer 25 percent of the
modified wetland buffer pursuant to FWRC 19.145.440(3).
To offset the indirect impacts associated with the buffer reduction and permanent driveway and
frontage improvements, the entire remaining buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be
enhanced (approximately 30,742 square feet). The buffer enhancement is anticipated to increase
habitat and wetland protection, providing an increase in ecological function over existing baseline
conditions onsite. The buffer enhancement actions will include the removal of trash/debris and non-
native invasive vegetation and replanting with a diverse assemblage of native vegetation. These buffer
enhancement actions will provide greater than 5:1 compensation for the required buffer impacts. The
project will also incorporate appropriate best management practices (BMPs) and temporary erosion
and sediment control measures (TESC); overall, the project in anticipated to result in no net loss in
ecological functions.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 4 June 4, 2020
Chapter 3. Methods
SVC investigated, assessed, and/or delineated wetlands, drainages, and other potentially regulated fish
and wildlife habitat conservation areas on or within 225 feet of the subject property on July 17, 2018
and January 27, 2020. All determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils
in conjunction with data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map, the Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) National Wetland
Inventory (NWI), King County geographic information systems (GIS) data, Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) and SalmonScape mapping tools,
Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water typing system, local precipitation
data through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and various
orthophotographic resources. Appendix A contains further details on the methods and tools used to
prepare this report.
Wetland boundaries were determined using the routine approach described in the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and modified
according to the guidelines established in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE, 2010) and Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (NRCS, 2018). Qualified wetland scientists marked the
boundary of the onsite wetland with orange surveyor’s flagging labeled alpha-numerically and tied to
3-foot vegetation along the wetland boundary. Pink surveyor’s flagging was labeled alpha-numerically
and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation at formal sampling locations to mark the points where detailed
data was collected (DP-1 to DP-5). Additional tests pits were excavated at regular intervals inside and
outside of the wetland boundary to further confirm the delineation. Wetland boundary flags and data
plot locations were obtained by a professional land use survey.
SVC classified all wetlands using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin
(Cowardin, 1979) classification systems. Following classification and assessment, wetlands were rated
and categorized using the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2014)
and the guidelines established in Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.420.
The fish and wildlife habitat assessment was conducted during the same site visit by qualified fish and
wildlife biologists. The experienced biologists made visual observations using stationary and walking
survey methods for both aquatic and upland habitats noting any special habitat features or signs of
fish and wildlife activity.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 5 June 4, 2020
Chapter 4. Existing Conditions
4.1 Landscape Setting
The subject property is located in an urban residential area in the City of Federal Way and is currently
developed with a dog park on the northern portion of the site and several buildings and infrastructure
encompassing the Lakehaven Utility District Headquarters on the southern portion of the site (Figure
2). Two intentionally created, artificially constructed stormwater ponds were also identified on the
southwest corner of the subject property and offsite to the north/east of the site associated with the
fire station on King County Parcel Number 0721049210. The subject property abuts a fire station,
dog park, and 1st Avenue South to the east with single-family residences and apartments beyond;
apartment complexes to the south and southwest; and single-family residential lots to the north and
west. Topography on the subject property generally slopes downward from north to south-southeast,
with elevations ranging from approximately 360 feet to 325 feet above mean sea level. A King County
topographic map is provided in Appendix B3. The subject property is located within the Miller Creek-
Frontal East Passage sub-basin within Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 10 – Puyallup - White.
Figure 2. Aerial Image of Subject Property.
4.2 Soils
The NRCS Soil Survey of King County identifies three soil series on the site: Alderwood gravelly
sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes; Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes; and Arents,
Alderwood material, 0 to 6 percent slopes. A soil map is provided in Appendix B2. Descriptions of
the soil series are provided below.
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 6 June 4, 2020
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB)
According to the survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes is a moderately well-
drained soil that is nearly level and undulating. Alderwood soils generally have surface and subsoils
that are very dark brown, dark brown, and grayish-brown gravelly sandy loam about 27 inches thick.
This soil is very similar to Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, but it some places
the surface layer is up to 3 inches thicker. Some areas include as much as 15 percent Norma,
Bellingham, Tukwila, and Shalcar soils. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes is listed
as partially hydric on the King County Hydric Soils List as it can contain up to 10 percent hydric
inclusions of McKenna, Shalcar, and Norma soils (NRCS, 2020).
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (AgC)
According to the survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes is a moderately well-
drained soil. In a typical profile, the surface layer to approximately 2 inches is a very dark brown to
dark grayish-brown gravelly sandy loam with dry, fine, granular structure. The subsoil to a depth of
12 inches is a dark brown gravelly sandy loam and slightly hard. The substratum to a depth of 27
inches is a grayish-brown gravelly sandy loam and light gray with many distinct mottles of light olive
brown. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes is listed as non-hydric on the King
County Hydric Soils List, however it can contain up to 5 percent inclusions of the hydric soils Norma
sandy loam and Shalcar muck (NRCS, 2020).
Arents, Alderwood Material, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AmC)
According to the survey, Arents, Alderwood Material, 6 to 15 percent slopes, consists of Alderwood
series soils that have been so disturbed by urbanization that the soils can no longer be classified as
Alderwood soils. The upper horizon to an approximate depth of 20 to 40 inches is a gravelly sandy
loam that is brown to dark brown in color. The substratum is gray-brown, consolidated, and
impervious. Arents, Alderwood Material, 6 to 15 percent slopes is listed as non-hydric on the King
County Hydric Soils List (NRCS, 2020).
4.3 Vegetation
Vegetation on the northern portion of the subject property within French Lake Dog Park consists of
scattered Douglas fir (Pseudostuga menziesii) with maintained lawn and ornamental landscaping
underneath. The center portion of the site is developed with buildings and pavement associated with
the existing Lakehaven Utility District Headquarters and lacks any substantial vegetation. The
southern portion of the subject property is undeveloped and forested by a canopy of Douglas fir, red
alder (Alnus rubra), and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) with an understory of osoberry (Oemleria
cerasiformis), non-native invasive Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus), and sword fern (Polystichum
munitum).
4.4 Critical Area Inventories
The USFWS NWI map (Appendix B1), DNR stream typing map (Appendix B6), and Federal Way
critical area inventory (Appendix B8) misidentify a potential stream in the far southeastern corner of
the subject property; DNR identifies this feature as a potential Type N water that potentially originates
on the subject property. The Federal Way critical area map also identifies a potential wetland located
approximately 210 feet offsite to the south of the southeastern corner of the subject property. The
WDFW SalmonScape map (Appendix B4) and WDFW PHS map (Appendix B5) do not identify any
priority habitats or species on or within 225 feet of the subject property. No other potentially regulated
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 7 June 4, 2020
wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, or priority species are documented within 225 of the
subject property.
4.5 Precipitation
Precipitation data was obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
weather station at the SeaTac International Airport in order to obtain percent of normal precipitation
during and preceding the investigations. A summary of data collected is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Precipitation Summary1
Date Day
of
Day
Before
1 Week
Prior
2 Weeks
Prior Last 30 days
(Observed/Normal)
Year-to-Date
(Observed/Normal)
Percent of
Normal
(month/year)
7/17/2018 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.25/1.00 19.21/19.46 2 25/99
1/27/2020 0.61 0.35 3.32 3.82 7.31/5.58 20.34/20.34 3 131/100
Notes:
1. Precipitation volume in inches. Data obtained from the NOAA (http://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=sew) for
SeaTac Airport.
2. Year-to-date precipitation is the total for the calendar year from January 1st to the onsite date.
3. Year-to-date precipitation is the total for the 2019/2020 water year from October 1st to the onsite date.
During the July 2018 site visit, precipitation levels were at statistical normal (99 percent of normal) for
the 2018 calendar year to date. Considering that July is one of the hottest and driest months in the
Pacific northwest region, this precipitation data suggests that relatively normal hydrologic conditions
were encountered during the time of the site investigation.
During the January 2020 site visit, precipitation levels were above the statistical normal for the prior
30 days (approximately 131 percent of normal) and at the statistical normal for 2019/2020 water year
(100 percent of normal) and, therefore, more representative of growing season conditions. Recent
precipitation levels were high, with 3.32 inches of rainfall recorded 2 weeks prior to the site
investigation, 3.32 inches of precipitation occurring in the 1 week prior to and 0.35 inch of
precipitation occurring the day prior to the site visit. These data suggest that the recent precipitation
likely resulted in substantial hydrologic input into groundwater conditions. Recent precipitation
conditions were considered in making professional wetland boundary determinations.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 8 June 4, 2020
Chapter 5. Results
The site investigations in July 2018 and January 2020 identified and delineated one potentially regulated
wetland (Wetland A) on the subject property. An excavated storm pond was also identified on the
subject property that would not be regulated. No other wetlands, streams, or other fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas were identified within 225 feet of the subject property during the site
investigations.
5.1 Wetlands
5.1.1 Overview
The identified wetland contained indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and a predominance
of hydrophytic vegetation according to current wetland delineation methodology. The data forms are
provided in Appendix D, and wetland rating form and maps are provided in Appendix E and
Appendix F, respectively. Table 2 summarizes the identified wetland identified during the site
investigation.
Table 2. Wetland Summary.
Wetland
Predominant Wetland Classification / Rating Wetland
Size
Onsite
Buffer
Width
(feet) Cowardin1 HGM2 WSDOE3 Federal Way4
A PFOBC Depressional IV IV 9,647 sf 50
Notes:
1. Cowardin et al. (1979) or NWI Class based on vegetation: PFO = Palustrine Forested; Modifier for Water Regime: B=
Seasonally Saturated, C = Seasonally Flooded.
2. Brinson, M. M. (1993).
3. Current WSDOE Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2014).
4. FWRC 19.145.420 wetland definitions.
Wetland A
Wetland A is 9,647 square feet (0.22 acre) in size onsite (approximately 0.87-acre total) and is located
on the southeastern portion of the subject property, extending offsite to the south. Hydrology for
Wetland A is provided primarily by outflows from a large stormwater detention pond offsite to the
east across 1st Avenue South in addition to surface sheet flow from the subject property and direct
precipitation. Vegetation within Wetland A is dominated by a canopy of red alder and black
cottonwood with an understory of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and some non-native, invasive
Himalayan blackberry. Wetland A is a Palustrine Forested, Seasonally Saturated/Seasonally Flooded
wetland (PFOBC). Per FWRC 19.145.420(1), Wetland A is considered a Category IV depressional
wetland. Table 3 provides a detailed summary of Wetland A.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 9 June 4, 2020
Table 3. Wetland A Summary
WETLAND A – INFORMATION SUMMARY
Location: Located on the southeastern portion of the site, extending offsite to the south.
Local Jurisdiction City of Federal Way
WRIA 10 – Puyallup White
WSDOE Rating
(Hruby, 2014) IV
City of Federal Way Rating IV
City of Federal Way Buffer
Width 50 feet
Wetland Size 9,647 square feet (0.22
acre) onsite
Cowardin Classification PFOBC
HGM Classification Depressional
Wetland Data Sheet(s) DP-3
Upland Data Sheet (s) DP-4
Boundary Flag color Orange
Dominant
Vegetation
Wetland vegetation is dominated by a canopy of red alder and black cottonwood with an
understory of salmonberry and non-native, invasive Himalayan blackberry.
Soils Hydric soil indicator F6 (Redox Dark Surface) was observed.
Hydrology
Hydrology for Wetland A is provided primarily by outflows from an identified stormwater pond
offsite to the east across 1st Avenue South in addition to surface sheet flow from the subject
property and direct precipitation.
Rationale for
Delineation
Wetland boundaries were determined by topographic breaks and transition to a hydrophytic plant
community.
Rationale for
Local Rating
Local rating is based upon Hruby (2014) rating system per FWRC 19.145.420(1).
Wetland Functions Summary
Water
Quality
Wetland A has moderate potential to improve water quality due to an intermittently flowing
outlet, persistent ungrazed plants in over 50% the area and seasonal shallow ponding in over 25%.
The landscape supports water quality improvement functions due to the adjacent road. The water
quality improvement functions are considered to be of low value to society due to the lack of
direct hydrologic connection with impaired waters within the sub-basin. Wetland A scores 5 out
of 9 points for water quality functions.
Hydrologic
Wetland A has low potential to reduce flooding and erosion due to the intermittently flowing
outlet, shallow depth of seasonal ponding, and small size of the wetland compared to the
watershed. The surrounding landscape provides hydrologic input due to adjacent existing public
facility and road and the presence of intensive land uses in over 25% of the contributing basin.
Any hydrologic functions performed by Wetland A are considered to be of low value to society
due to the physical separation of Wetland A from the nearest floodplain. Wetland A scores 5 out
of 9 points for hydrologic functions.
Habitat
Wildlife habitat functions may include small mammal, amphibian, and bird forage and cover.
Wetland A contains limited diversity with only one Cowardin class and low species richness. The
wetland provides some special habitat features such as large, downed woody debris. The
surrounding landscape has low potential to support habitat connectivity between the wetland and
other potential habitat due to residential and commercial development and roads. Wetland A
habitat is considered moderately valuable by society due to priority snags and logs assumed to be
present within 100 meters of the wetland. Wetland A scores 4 out of 9 points for habitat function.
Buffer
Condition
Where vegetated, the onsite buffer consists of Douglas fir, salmonberry, western swordfern, salal,
trailing blackberry and non-native, invasive Himalayan blackberry.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 10 June 4, 2020
5.2.2 Wetland Buffer
Wetland buffer widths are based on the wetland category and habitat score as specified per FWRC
19.145.420.2. Wetland A is a Category IV wetland; all Category IV wetlands require standard 50-foot
buffer widths (FWRC 19.145.420). In addition, buildings and other structures require a 5-foot buffer
setback from the regulated buffer edges per FWRC 19.145.160. As indicated on the existing
conditions map (Appendix), portions of the buffer are currently developed with impervious surfaces
that meet the definition of a permanently altered buffer per FWRC 19.145.440(4).
5.2 Constructed Stormwater Detention Ponds
Several intentionally created, artificially constructed stormwater ponds were identified on or
immediately adjacent to the subject property: one on the southwest corner of the subject property and
one offsite to the north of the site associated with the fire station on King County Parcel Number
0721049210. The onsite stormwater pond was constructed during the development of the Lakehaven
Utility District Headquarters. An As-Built Maintenance and Grading Plan (URS Company, 1980),
provided in Appendix B9, clearly identifies the onsite stormwater pond as a “Proposed Detention
Basin” with three 12-inch pipes directing stormwater to the feature. This site plan also depicts the
existing stormwater detention basin to the north associated with the fire station. The stormwater
ponds are likely intentionally created, artificially constructed depressions as soil berms are present
along some of the edges indicating prior excavation activities, and the shape of the features appear
somewhat unnatural. Per FWRC 19.05.230W, wetlands “do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally
created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals,
detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities.” Due to the clear artificial
nature of these features that is corroborated by documentation associated with the existing
development onsite (Appendix B9), the storm ponds should not be considered a regulated wetland
under FWRC 19.145.420.
5.3 Drainage
Though mapped as a potential water by Federal Way and DNR, the onsite drainage that extends
through Wetland A does not exhibit a defined channel or other indications of a natural stream channel.
The drainage receives overflow from another approximately 1-acre stormwater detention pond located
on the opposite side of 1st Avenue South. No stream is present upgradient of the storm pond, which
conveys stormwater onto the subject property (and into Wetland A) beneath the roadway. On the
subject property, the drainage lacks a defined bed and bank other than some limited sorting near the
culvert outlet, which is commonly found in non-typed water situations. The water passes through
Wetland A, ponding in small depressions but generally dispersing overland. [It is important to note
that the Wetland A buffer of 50 feet extends further than any possible FWHCA buffer.] This onsite
drainage does not meet the definition of a FWHCA under Article III of FWRC Chapter 19.145 but
will be avoided by the project regardless.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 11 June 4, 2020
Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations
6.1 Local Critical Areas Requirements
SVC identified one potentially regulated Category IV wetland (Wetland A) on the subject property.
No other regulated wetlands, streams, or other fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas were
identified within 225 feet of the subject property.
6.1.1 Wetland Buffers
FWRC 19.145.420(1) has adopted the 2014 wetland rating system. Category IV wetlands generally
provide low levels of function; they are typically more disturbed, smaller, and/or more isolated in the
landscape than Category I, II, or III wetlands. Category IV wetlands provide low levels of functions
and score less than 16 out of 27 points on the Revised Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington (Hruby, 2014). Per FWRC 19.145.420(2), Category IV wetlands require a standard 50-foot
buffer width. In addition, buildings and other structures require a 5-foot buffer setback from the
regulated buffer edges per FWRC 19.145.160.
Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.440(4), buffer reduction may be approved when existing conditions are
such that portions of the required buffer exist in a permanently altered state (e.g., roadways, paved
parking lots, and permanent structures) and do not provide any buffer function. The buffer may be
reduced up to the area where the altered conditions exist. Portions of the Wetland A buffer are in a
permanently altered state due to the existing access road from 1st Avenue South and onsite parking
areas. The wetland buffer is likely reduced by these permanently altered conditions and extends only
to the edge of the existing development.
6.1.2 Buffer Reduction with Enhancement
Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.440(6), buffers may be reduced by up to 25 percent on a case-by-case basis
if the project includes a buffer enhancement plan that clearly substantiates that an enhanced buffer
will improve and provide additional protection of wetland functions and values. The project proposes
buffer reduction and enhancement in order to accommodate the proposed site layout, including the
proposed stormwater treatment structure (bioretention pond) and parking. A buffer enhancement
plan is proposed in Chapter 7 of this report. Buffer reduction and enhancement is subject to the
following criteria per FWRC 19.145.440(6):
(a) It will not adversely affect water quality;
The proposed buffer reduction and enhancement actions are necessary to accommodate
stormwater treatment infrastructure for the proposed site. The proposed enhanced
treatment is designed to meet current standards consistent with City’s current stormwater
standards, and no adverse impacts to water quality are anticipated to result from this
development.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 12 June 4, 2020
(b) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland or buffer wildlife habitat;
The proposed enhancement activities will remove existing invasive species from the buffer
and include planting design elements specifically targeted to prevent the return of invasive
species and increase wetland and buffer wildlife habitat function.
(c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities;
No adverse impacts to drainage or stormwater retention are anticipated within the wetland
or buffer. The proposed stormwater treatment infrastructure is designed to capture and
treat (via enhanced measures) runoff from the development. Treated stormwater will be
released within the wetland buffer via dispersion methods, maintaining wetland hydrology
and minimize erosion potential.
(d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards;
During site development, erosion control measures will prevent erosion hazards.
Retention walls will be installed to support the proposed stormwater pond, and the
likelihood of unstable earth conditions is not anticipated to result from the proposed
buffer reduction and enhancement.
(e) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the city as a whole; and
Based on the proposed erosion control practices, stormwater treatment design, and buffer
enhancement activities, overall buffer function will not only be maintained, but improved
through enhancement activities which will prevent external impact associated with the
reduced buffers.
(f) All exposed areas are stabilized with native vegetation, as appropriate.
Any exposed areas within the reduced buffers will be stabilized with native seed mix,
shrubs and trees. Appropriate erosion control best management practices will be used to
prevent unstable conditions.
6.1.3 Additional Buffer Impacts
Per FWRC 19.145.120(1) – Essential Public Facilities – public utilities and other public improvements
may be partially exempt from critical area provisions:
Essential public facilities, public utilities and other public improvements. The director may permit the placement of
an essential public facility, public utility or other public improvements in a critical area if no practical alternative
with less impact on the critical area(s) exists. The specific location and extent of the intrusion into the critical area
must constitute the minimum necessary encroachment to meet the requirements of the public facility or utility and
not pose an unreasonable threat to the health, safety, or welfare on or off the subject property. The intrusion shall
attempt to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area function and values. The “public utility and other public
improvements” shall not include improvements whose primary purpose is to benefit a private development, including
without limitation interior roads or privately owned detention facilities installed within or during the construction of
a residential subdivision, binding site plan, or other commercial development. The director may require supporting
documentation to demonstrate compliance with partial exemptions.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 13 June 4, 2020
The proposed project includes minor buffer impacts resulting from improvements to the existing
driveway access as well as frontage improvements along 1st Avenue South to improve vehicle
maneuvering and safety as well as pedestrian safety. Both of these areas are proposed to be widened
and include a sidewalk as well as retaining walls due to the adjacent steep slopes. The sidewalk is
necessary as an improvement along the access road to provide pedestrian access to the site from 1st
Avenue South and increases pedestrian safety over existing conditions. In addition, the frontage
improvements will upgrade the roadway within the project area to the City of Federal Way’s Cross
Section Type G roadway which will include five drive lanes, sidewalk, curb, gutter, landscape strip,
and a utility strip, resulting in required full half street improvements at this location. As such, there is
no practical onsite alternative to the proposed impacts and no unreasonable threat to the health, safety,
or welfare exists. Additionally, full wetland buffer enhancement will be provided which will help
screen the wetland from the proposed development, thus protecting wetland function and values.
Per FWRC 19.145.440(3) stormwater dispersion outfalls and bioswales may be placed within the outer
25 percent of the buffer of Category IV wetlands provided that such facilities will not degrade the
functions or values of the wetland. The proposed project includes a stormwater outfall within the
outer 25 percent of the modified wetland buffer. The outfall will discharge treated stormwater runoff
from an underground stormwater detention feature. The proposed stormwater treatment is designed
to meet the standards of the King County Surface Water Design Manual as adapted by the City of
Federal Way, including enhanced treatment to meet water quality standards. As such, no degradation
of wetland functions or values is anticipated.
6.1.4 Mitigation Sequencing
Per FWRC 10.145.130 mitigation sequencing must be demonstrated for alteration to a critical area:
(1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
The project was carefully designed in order to avoid and minimize impacts to Wetland A to the greatest
extent feasible; however, complete avoidance of the standard wetland buffer is not possible given the
site layout needs, including stormwater treatment, pedestrian access, and roadway improvements to
improve vehicle maneuvering and safety. Buffer reduction and enhancement are therefore proposed
to facilitate redevelopment of the site for the public facility and compensate for the unavoidable
impacts. No direct wetland impacts are proposed.
(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;
The proposed project incorporates recommended minimization measures and proposes wetland
buffer enhancement actions to further protect the wetland over current baseline conditions. The
proposed project has also located the proposed bioretention facility adjacent to the wetland buffer,
such that the more intensive activities associated with the buildings and parking are located further
upland from the wetland. Appropriate construction BMPs and TESC measures will be implemented
to minimize the potential for unintentional impacts to the modified wetland buffer.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 14 June 4, 2020
(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;
The project proposes wetland buffer reduction and enhancement per FWRC 19.145.440(6). BMPs
will be implemented to minimize impacts during construction. The Applicant proposes buffer
enhancement throughout the entirety of the remaining buffer area associated with Wetland A. The
proposed buffer enhancement actions consist of the replacement of non-native, invasive plant species
with a diverse assemblage of native vegetation to improve vegetative diversity and habitat functionality
and to improve screening of the wetland from the proposed development.
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action;
The proposed buffer enhancement plan in Chapter 7 incorporates a five-year maintenance and
monitoring plan to ensure the long-term success of the buffer enhancement actions.
(5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and
The onsite buffer areas are currently degraded by non-native, invasive plants, and the enhancement
and creation actions will ensure no net loss and result in a net gain in ecological functions and values
due to the proposed project. Approximately 30,742 square feet of buffer enhancement is proposed
to increase habitat and wetland protection, providing an increase in ecological function over existing
baseline conditions onsite. These buffer enhancement actions will provide greater than 5:1
compensation for the unavoidable buffer impacts.
(6) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary.
The proposed buffer enhancement plan in Chapter 7 incorporates a five-year maintenance and
monitoring plan to ensure the long-term success of the buffer enhancement actions. A contingency
plan is also proposed.
6.2 State and Federal Considerations
Wetland A likely has surface and/or subsurface connections to other Waters of the United States and,
therefore, is likely regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The WSDOE also
regulates wetlands under RCW 90.48. As the proposed project will likely avoid all impacts to the
identified wetland, authorizations from USACE under Section 404 of the CWA or WSDOE under
RCW 90.48 would not be required.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 15 June 4, 2020
Chapter 7. Buffer Enhancement Plan
The following chapter presents the proposed buffer reduction and enhancement plan to address the
unavoidable buffer impacts associated with the proposed development including stormwater and
public access infrastructure. The proposed buffer reduction and enhancement actions outlined below
are designed to closely adhere to FWRC 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas). While the sidewalk
buffer impacts are partially exempt from critical area requirements per FWRC 19.145.120(1), buffer
enhancement will be provided facing the sidewalk to offset the unavoidable impacts.
7.1 Existing Buffer Functions
Wetland A is located in an urban setting in the City of Federal Way, and the buffer functions for this
wetland are typical of such a setting. Historical aerial photographs indicate that the buffer area was
cleared around 1936 and has since revegetated. The buffer functions are limited by the existing access
road and development, including parking areas. The vegetated buffer area consists of a canopy of
Douglas fir with an understory of salmonberry, western swordfern, salal, trailing blackberry, and non-
native, invasive Himalayan blackberry. This vegetation provides a low to moderate amount of habitat
diversity and screening for small mammals and birds that may use the wetland. Himalayan blackberry
is an aggressive, non-native invasive species that degrades the habitat quality and threatens understory
habitat diversity within the buffer. This tree and shrub vegetation also likely provide erosion
protection on moderate and steep gradients adjacent to the wetland. Soils within the buffer are
mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes. Alderwood soils are made up of
moderately well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at
a depth of 24 to 40 inches. Moderately well drained soils consist of soils where water is removed from
the soil somewhat slowly during some periods of the year, and the buffer areas may make minor to
moderate contributions to groundwater recharge.
7.2 Description of Impacts
The proposed design includes careful site planning in order to avoid direct impacts to Wetland A;
however, reduction and enhancement of the wetland buffer as allowed per FWRC 19.145.440(6) is
proposed to accommodate the required site layout, including stormwater infrastructure and associated
grading work. The standard 50-foot buffer width of Wetland A will be reduced by 25 percent to 37.5
feet resulting in a reduction of 5,190 square feet square feet of Wetland A buffer. Additionally,
improvements to the existing shared driveway access and frontage improvements along the west side
of 1st Avenue South are required to improve vehicle maneuvering and safety for fleet vehicles from
both the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District as well as South King Fire and Rescue. Driveway
improvements will consist of general road widening and the addition of a sidewalk and retaining walls
along the south side due to steep slopes; frontage improvements will consist of full half street upgrades
to widen the roadway and include a sidewalk, curb, gutter and landscaping and utility strip and the use
of a retaining wall due to steep slopes. These actions will result in approximately 5,623 square feet of
permanent buffer impact to serve these public facilities. Any grading within or adjacent to the wetland
buffer will incorporate BMPs and TESC measures to minimize impacts to the maximum extent
feasible. No activities are proposed that will directly impact the wetland. The project proposes
approximately 30,742 square feet of buffer enhancement which will provide greater than 5:1
compensation for the required buffer impacts.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 16 June 4, 2020
7.3 Buffer Enhancement Strategy
The proposed project has been designed to avoid direct impacts to the onsite wetland. Beneficial
buffer enhancement actions are proposed to offset impacts from the buffer reduction and additional
minor impacts and provide an overall improvement in buffer functions. Impacts to habitat,
stormwater retention, groundwater recharge, water quality, and erosion protection functions resulting
from buffer reduction are being offset by stormwater treatment designed to meet the standards of the
King County Surface Water Design Manual as adapted by the City of Federal Way and buffer
enhancement actions. Stormwater from the development will be collected and treated to meet
enhanced water quality and applicable flow control standards. Treated stormwater from a detention
system near the wetland will be discharged into the wetland buffer via a dispersion outfall. The
proposed stormwater treatment will minimize impacts to water quality and maintain hydrological input
to the buffer area.
The proposed buffer enhancement actions consist of removing non-native, invasive plant species and
trash/debris and replanting with native trees, shrubs, and groundcover. The existing wetland buffer
contains non-native, invasive species dominated by Himalayan blackberry that may spread and further
degrade buffer functions if unmanaged. Approximately 30,742 square feet of buffer enhancement is
proposed to provide a net gain in ecological functions for the wetland buffer area. These buffer
enhancement actions will provide greater than 5:1 compensation for the required buffer impacts.
Buffer enhancement actions will take place concurrently to project development.
The onsite wetland buffer is currently degraded by non-native, invasive plants. Removing non-native,
invasive vegetation and replacing with native plantings within the buffer will restore the habitat
functions and critical area protection provided by the site and further improve hydrology and quality
of water leaving the project site. A diverse assortment of trees, shrubs, and groundcover will be
established to provide browse, cover, and nesting for small mammals, which in turn provide prey for
raptors and other mammals. This buffer enhancement will occur between the development and the
wetland and will further protect and screen the wetland. The proposed buffer enhancement plan will
provide a net gain in wetland functions and values relative to the existing conditions.
The proposed wetland buffer enhancement actions include, but may not be limited to, the following
recommendations:
• Enhance the remaining 30,742 square feet of wetland buffer area as shown in Appendix C;
• Remove any trash and other debris within the enhancement area;
• Pre-treat invasive plants with a Washington Department of Agriculture approved herbicide.
After pre-treatment, grub to remove the invasive plants (or remove manually) and replant all
cleared areas with native trees, shrubs, and groundcover listed in Appendix C; pre-treatment
of the invasive plants should occur a minimum of two weeks prior to removal;
• Replant the enhancement area with native trees, shrubs, and groundcover listed in Appendix
C, or substitutes approved by the responsible Project Scientist, to help retain soils, filter
stormwater, and increase biodiversity;
• An approved native seed mix will be used to seed the disturbed enhancement area after
invasive removal and native replanting;
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 17 June 4, 2020
• Maintain and control invasive plants annually, at a minimum, or more frequently if necessary.
Maintenance to reduce the growth and spread of invasive plants is not restricted to chemical
applications but may include hand removal, if warranted;
• Monitor the enhancement actions for a period of 5 years;
• Provide dry-season irrigation if necessary to ensure native plant survival;
• Direct exterior lights away from the wetland wherever possible; and
• Place all activities that generate excessive noise (e.g., generators and air conditioning
equipment) away from the wetland where feasible.
7.4 Approach and Best Management Practices
The proposed enhancement plan is intended to provide increased wetland protections by maintenance
or improvement of wetland functions. Impacts to buffer are being minimized through careful
planning efforts and project design. The enhancement actions should occur immediately after
development actions have concluded and should be completed during one enhancement effort if
feasible. TESC measures will be implemented that consist of high-visibility fencing (HVF) installed
around native vegetation along the reduced perimeter of the buffer, silt fencing between the graded
areas and undisturbed buffer, plastic sheeting on stockpiled materials, and seeding of disturbed soils.
These TESC measures should be installed prior to the start of development and enhancement actions
and actively managed for the duration of the project.
All equipment staging and materials stockpiles should be kept out of the wetland and buffer, and the
area will need to be kept free of spills and/or hazardous materials. All fill material and road surfacing
should be sourced from upland areas onsite or from approved suppliers and will need to be free of
pollutants and hazardous materials. Construction materials along with all construction waste and
debris should be effectively managed and stockpiled on paved surfaces and kept out of the wetland
and buffer area. Following completion of the development activities, the entire site should be cleaned
and detail graded using hand tools wherever necessary, and TESC measures will need to be removed.
In addition, permanent stormwater treatment features will need to be implemented as designed by the
project engineer. Following completion of the proposed project, all wetland and associated buffer
areas adjacent to the planned development areas will be protected by installation of split-rail fencing
and/or critical areas signage to discourage intrusion and improper use of these areas.
7.5 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards
The goals and objectives for the proposed buffer enhancement actions are based on providing
additional habitat and protection for the onsite wetland. The buffer enhancement actions are capable
of improving habitat function for the wetlands over time by establishment of a dense native vegetation
barrier between the project and the critical areas. The goals and objectives of the mitigation actions
are as follows:
Goal 1 – Improve wetland buffer conditions by enhancing approximately 30,742 square feet of
wetland buffer area, as necessary.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 18 June 4, 2020
Objective 1 – Establish dense cover of native trees, shrubs, and groundcover within the
enhancement area to create diverse horizontal and vertical vegetation structure and improve
wildlife habitat.
Performance Standard 1.1.1 – Minimum plant survivorship within the buffer area
will be 80 percent of installed trees and shrubs at the end of Year 1. Native recruits
may be counted.
Performance Standard 1.1.2 – Minimum native woody species cover in the
enhancement areas will be a minimum 20 percent total cover at the end of Year 2, 30
percent total cover at the end of Year 3, and 50 percent at the end of Year 5.
Performance Standard 1.1.3 – At least 2 native tree species and 3 native shrub
species will be present in the enhancement areas in all monitoring years. Native
volunteer species will be included in the count.
Performance Standard 1.1.4 – Non-native invasive plants will not make up more
than 20 percent total cover in any growing season during the monitoring period
following Year 1.
7.6 Plant Materials and Installation for Mitigation Actions
7.6.1 Plant Materials
All plant materials to be used for enhancement actions will be nursery grown stock from a reputable,
local source. Only native species are to be used; no hybrids or cultivars will be allowed. Plant material
provided will be typical of their species or variety; if not cuttings they will exhibit normal, densely
developed branches and vigorous, fibrous root systems. Plants will be sound, healthy, vigorous plants
free from defects, and all forms of disease and infestation.
Container stock shall have been grown in its delivery container for not less than six months but not
more than two years. Plants shall not exhibit rootbound conditions. Under no circumstances shall
container stock be handled by their trunks, stems, or tops. Seed mixture used for hand or
hydroseeding shall contain fresh, clean, and new crop seed mixed by an approved method. The
mixture is specified in this plan set.
All plant material shall be inspected by the Project Scientist upon delivery. Plant material not
conforming to the specifications below will be rejected and replaced by the planting contractor.
Rejected plant materials shall be immediately removed from the site.
Fertilizer will be in the form of Agroform plant tabs or an approved like form. Mulch will consist of
sterile wheat straw or clean recycled wood chips approximately ½-inch to 1-inch in size and ½-inch
thick. If free of invasive plant species, the mulch material may be sourced from woody materials
salvaged from the land clearing activities.
7.6.2 Plant Scheduling, Species, Size, and Spacing
Plant installation should occur as close to conclusion of clearing and grading activities as possible to
limit erosion and limit the temporal loss of function provided by the wetland and buffer. All planting
should occur between September 1 and May 1 to ensure plants do not dry out after installation, or
temporary irrigation measures may be necessary. All planting will be installed according to the
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 19 June 4, 2020
procedures detailed in the following subsections using the species and densities outlined in the buffer
enhancement plan set in Appendix C.
7.6.3 Quality Control for Planting Plan
All plant material shall be inspected by the Project Scientist upon delivery. Plant material not
conforming to the specifications above will be rejected and replaced by the planting contractor.
Rejected plant materials shall be immediately removed from the site. Under no circumstances shall
container stock be handled by their trunks, stems, or tops.
The landscape contractor shall provide the Project Scientist with documentation of plant material that
includes the supplying nursery contact information, plant species, plant quantities, and plant sizes.
7.6.4 Product Handling, Delivery, and Storage
All seed and fertilizer should be delivered in original, unopened, and undamaged containers showing
weight, analysis, and name of manufacturer. This material should be stored in a manner to prevent
wetting and deterioration. All precautions customary in good trade practice shall be taken in preparing
plants for moving. Workmanship that fails to meet industry standards will be rejected. Plants will be
packed, transported, and handled with care to ensure protection against injury and from drying out.
If plants cannot be planted immediately upon delivery they should be protected with soil, wet peat
moss, or in a manner acceptable to the Project Scientist. Plants, fertilizer, and mulch not installed
immediately upon delivery shall be secured on the site to prevent theft or tampering. No plant shall
be bound with rope or wire in a manner that could damage or break the branches. Plants transported
on open vehicles should be secured with a protective covering to prevent windburn.
7.6.5 Preparation and Installation of Plant Materials
The planting contractor shall verify the location of all elements of the enhancement plan with the
Project Scientist prior to installation. The responsible Project Scientist reserves the right to adjust the
locations of landscape elements during the installation period as appropriate. If obstructions are
encountered that are not shown on the drawings, planting operations will cease until alternate plant
locations have been selected by and/or approved by the Project Scientist.
Circular plant pits with vertical sides will be excavated for all container stock. The pits should be at
least 12 inches in diameter, and the depth of the pit should accommodate the entire root system. The
bottom of each pit will be scarified to a depth of 4 inches.
Broken roots should be pruned with a sharp instrument and rootballs should be thoroughly soaked
prior to installation. Set plant material upright in the planting pit to proper grade and alignment.
Water plants thoroughly midway through backfilling and add Agroform tablets. Water pits again upon
completion of backfilling. No filling should occur around trunks or stems. Do not use frozen or
muddy mixtures for backfilling. Form a ring of soil around the edge of each planting pit to retain
water and install a 4- to 6-inch layer of mulch around the base of each container plant.
7.6.6 Temporary Irrigation Specifications
While the native species selected for mitigation are hardy and typically thrive in northwest conditions
and the proposed actions are planned in areas with sufficient hydroperiods for the species selected,
some individual plants might perish due to dry conditions. Therefore, irrigation or regular watering
may be provided as necessary for the duration of the first two growing seasons while the native
plantings become established.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 20 June 4, 2020
7.7 Maintenance and Monitoring Plan
Maintenance and monitoring plans are described below following the guidelines of FWRC 19.145.140.
The Applicant is committed to compliance with the enhancement plan and overall success of the
project. As such, the Applicant will continue to maintain the project, keeping the site free from of
non-native invasive vegetation, trash, and waste.
The buffer enhancement plan will require continued monitoring and maintenance to ensure the
actions are successful. Therefore, the project site will be monitored for a period of five years with
formal inspections by a qualified Project Scientist. An as-built site investigation will be completed
following site construction. Monitoring events will be scheduled annually for Years 1 through 5.
Closeout assessment will also be conducted in Year 5 to ensure the adequate enhancement area was
established.
Monitoring will consist of percent cover measurements at permanent monitoring stations, walk-
through surveys to identify invasive species presence and dead or dying enhancement plantings,
photographs taken at fixed photo points, wildlife observations, and general qualitative habitat and
wetland function observations.
To determine percent cover, observed vegetation will be identified and recorded by species and an
estimate of areal cover of dominant species within each sampling plots. Circular sample plots,
approximately 30 feet in diameter (706 square feet), are centered at each monitoring station. The
sample plots encompass the specified wetland areas and terminate at the observed wetland boundary.
Trees and shrubs within each 30-foot diameter monitoring plot are then recorded to species and areal
cover. Herbaceous vegetation is sampled from a 10-foot diameter (78.5 square feet) within each
monitoring plot, established at the same location as the center of each tree and shrub sample plot.
Herbaceous vegetation within each monitoring plot is then recorded to species and includes an
estimate of percent areal cover. A list of observed tree, shrub, and herbaceous species including
percent areal cover of each species and wetland status is included within the monitoring report.
7.8 Reporting
Following each monitoring event, a brief monitoring report detailing the current ecological status of
the enhancement actions, measurement of performance standards, and management
recommendations will be prepared and submitted to the City of Federal Way by December 31st each
year to ensure full compliance with the enhancement plan.
7.9 Contingency Plans
If monitoring results indicate that performance standards are not being met, it may be necessary to
implement all or part of the contingency plan. Careful attention to maintenance is essential in ensuring
that problems do not arise. Should any portion of the site fail to meet the success criteria, a
contingency plan will be developed and implemented with regulatory approval. Such plans are
adaptive and should be prepared on a case-by-case basis to reflect the failed mitigation characteristics.
Contingency plans can include additional plant installation, erosion control, and plant substitutions
including type, size, and location.
Contingency/maintenance activities may include, but are not limited to:
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 21 June 4, 2020
1. Replacing plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary;
2. Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater mortality rate after two (2) growing
seasons with the same species or native species of similar form and function;
3. Irrigating the mitigation areas only as necessary during dry weather if plants appear to be too
dry, with a minimal quantity of water;
4. Reseeding and/or repair of wetland buffer areas as necessary if erosion or sedimentation
occurs;
5. Spot treat non-native invasive plant species; and
6. Removing all trash or undesirable debris from the wetland buffer area as necessary.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 22 June 4, 2020
Chapter 8. Closure
The findings and conclusions documented in this assessment report have been prepared for specific
application to the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus site. These findings and
conclusions have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally
exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar
conditions in the area. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this assessment report
are professional opinions based on an interpretation of information currently available to us and are
made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this project. No warranty, expressed or
implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to
such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this assessment may need to be revised
wholly or in part in the future.
Wetland status and boundaries identified by SVC are based on conditions present at the time of the
site visit and considered preliminary until the flagged wetland boundaries are validated by the
jurisdictional agencies. Validation of the wetland boundaries and jurisdictional status of such features
by the regulatory agencies provides a certification, usually written, that the wetland determination and
boundaries verified are the units that will be regulated by the agencies until a specific date or until the
regulations are modified. Only the regulatory agencies can provide this certification.
As wetlands are dynamic communities affected by both natural and human activities, changes in
boundaries may be expected; therefore, delineations cannot remain valid for an indefinite period of
time. Regulatory agencies typically recognize the validity of wetland delineations for a period of five
years after completion of an assessment report. Development activities on a site five years after the
completion of this assessment report may require reassessment of the wetland delineations. In
addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to such changes, our
observations and conclusions applicable to this site may need to be revised wholly or in part.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan 23 June 4, 2020
Chapter 9. References
Brinson, M. M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S.
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
City of Federal Way. 2020. Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.145 – Environmentally Critical Areas.
Website: https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/FederalWay/. Current through Ordinance 20-
887, passed March 3, 2020.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-
87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press.
Seattle, Washington.
Hruby, T., 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – Revised. Washington
State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-29.
Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List:
2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42.
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell soil color charts. New Windsor, New York.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2018. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States,
Version 8.2. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation
with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
NRCS. 2020. Soil Data Access Hydric Soils List (Soil Data Access Live).
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316620.html
Snyder, Dale E., Philip S. Gale, Russell F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the
Washington Agricultural Experiment Station.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar,
and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix A — Methods and Tools
Table A-1. Methods and tools used to prepare the report.
Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference
Wetland
Delineation
USACE 1987
Wetland
Delineation
Manual
http://el.erdc.usace.army.mi
l/elpubs/pdf/wlman87.pdf
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Regional
Supplement to the
Corp of Engineers
Wetland
Delineation
Manual: Western
Mountains,
Valleys, and Coast
Region (Version
2.0)
http://www.usace.army.mil
/CECW/Documents/cecw
o/reg/west_mt_finalsupp.p
df
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010.
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western
Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version
2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V.
Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS:
U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center.
Wetland
Classification
USFWS /
Cowardin
Classification
System
http://www.fws.gov/nwi/P
ubs_Reports/Class_Manual
/class_titlepg.htm
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T.
LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and
deepwater habitats of the United States.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Hydrogeomorphic
Classification
(HGM) System
http://el.erdc.usace.army.mi
l/wetlands/pdfs/wrpde4.pd
f
Brinson, M. M. (1993). “A hydrogeomorphic
classification for wetlands,” Technical Report
WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Wetland
Rating
Washington State
Wetland Rating
System
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy
/publications/documents/1
406029.pdf
Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland
Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update.
(Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA:
Washington Department of Ecology.
Wetland
Indicator
Status
2016 National
Wetland Plant List
http://wetland-
plants.usace.army.mil/nwpl
_static/data/DOC/lists_20
16/Regions/pdf/reg_WMV
C_2016v1.pdf
Website
Plant Names USDA Plant
Database
http://plants.usda.gov/
Website
Flora of the Pacific
Northwest
http://www.washington.ed
u/uwpress/search/books/
HITFLC.html
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora
of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle, Washington.
Soils Data NRCS Soil Survey http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.u
sda.gov/app/WebSoilSurve
y.aspx
Website
Soil Color Charts Munsell® Color. 2000. Munsell® Soil Color
Charts.
New Windsor, New York.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference
Hydric Soils
Data
King County
Hydric Soils List
http://www.wa.nrcs.usda.g
ov/technical/soils/hydric_li
sts/hydsoil-wa-653.pdf
Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2001. Hydric Soils List: King County,
Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Washington D.C.
Threatened
and
Endangered
Species
Washington
Natural Heritage
Program
http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/n
hp/refdesk/datasearch/wn
hpwetlands.pdf
Washington Natural Heritage Program.
Endangered, threatened, and sensitive plants of
Washington. Washington State Department of
Natural Resources, Washington Natural
Heritage Program, Olympia, WA
Washington
Priority Habitats
and Species
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/p
hspage.htm
Priority Habitats and Species (PHS)
Program (Data requested 08/20/2018). Map
of priority habitats and species in project
vicinity. Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife (WDFW).
USFWS species
lists by County
http://www.fws.gov/westw
afwo/se/SE_List/endanger
ed_Species.asp
Website
Species of
Local
Importance
WDFW GIS Data http://wdfw.wa.gov/mappi
ng/salmonscape/
Website
Report
Preparation
Federal Way
Revised
Code
http://www.codepublishing
.com/WA/FederalWay/
FWRC Chapter 19.145 – Environmentally
Critical Areas
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B — Background Information
This Appendix includes a USFWS NWI map (B1); NRCS Soil Survey map (B2); King County
Topographic map (B3); WDFW SalmonScape map (B4); WDFW PHS map (B5); DNR Stream Typing
map (B6); King County Sensitive Areas map (B7); Federal Way Critical Areas inventory (B8); and
Maintenance Building Grading & Drainage Plan (URS Company, 1980) (B9).
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B1. USFWS NWI Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B2. NRCS Soil Survey Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B3. King County Topographic Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B4. WDFW SalmonScape Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B5. WDFW PHS Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B6. DNR Stream Typing Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B7. King County Sensitive Areas Map
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B8. Federal Way Critical Areas Inventory (9/2012)
Subject Property
Location
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix B9. Maintenance Building Grading & Drainage Plan (URS Company, 1980)
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix C — Existing Conditions Exhibit & Site
Plan Set
XYXY'&'&XY'&'&'&A-9 A-8
A-7 A-6 A-5 A-4
A-3 A-2 A-1
A-10 A-4A
A-3A
A-11
A-2A
A-1A
DP-5U
DP-4U
DP-3W
DP-2U
DP-1W
Pictometry, King County
LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT - EXISTING CONDITIONS
¢www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC 31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTHFEDERAL WAY, WA
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER:072104-9017
LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
8/23/2018
1458.0005
DLS
1
1 " = 100 '
Constructed StormDetention Pond
Wetland A Category IV
9,647 SF Onsite
Permanently Altered Buffer - FWRC 19.145.440(4)
XY Culvert
'&Data Point
Wetland Flag
Culvert
!!5' Building Setback
ààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà50' Wetland Buffer
Storm Detention Pond
Wetland
Offsite Wetland (Not Delineated)
Site Boundary
0 100 20050 Feet
PRELIMINARYINFORMATION ONLYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMESNO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SETNOT BASED ON SURVEY
A-5AStorm Detention
TT1ST AVENUE SOUTH1ST AVENUE SOUTH1ST AVENUE SOUTH2ND AVENUE SWSTANDARD 50'WETLAND BUFFERSWITH 5' BUILDINGSETBACKSWETLAND ACATEGORY IV~9,647 SFON-SITEPERMANENTLYALTERED BUFFER(FWRC 19.145.440(4))LAKEHAVEN - EXISTING CONDITIONSBY: DBSCALE: SEE GRAPHICSOURCES:SHEET1OF 3LAKEHAVEN
31623 / 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTH
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON
THE SE 1 4 OF SECTION 07, TOWNSHIP 21N,
RANGE 04E, W.M.DATE: 6/01/2020JOB: 1458.0005PRELIMINARYINFORMATION ONLYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMESNO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET
TT1ST AVENUE SOUTH1ST AVENUE SOUTH1ST AVENUE SOUTH2ND AVENUE SWSTANDARD 50'WETLANDBUFFER WITH5' BUILDINGSETBACKWETLAND ACATEGORY IV~9,647 SFON-SITEPROPOSEDBLDG. B2PROPOSEDBLDG. B1EXISTINGBLDG. B4PROPOSEDBLDG. B3BUFFER IMPACTAREA 5,623 SF(FWRC 19.45.120(1))BUFFERENHANCEMENTAREA 30,742 SFRETAINING WALLNEXT TOBIOSWALEREDUCED 37.5'WETLAND BUFFERWITH 5' BUILDINGSETBACKBY: DBSCALE: SEE GRAPHICSOURCES:PRELIMINARYINFORMATION ONLYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMESNO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SETLAKEHAVEN - PROPOSED PROJECTSHEET2OF 3LAKEHAVEN
31623 / 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTH
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON
THE SE 1 4 OF SECTION 07, TOWNSHIP 21N,
RANGE 04E, W.M.DATE: 6/01/2020JOB: 1458.0005
BY: DBSCALE: SEE GRAPHICSOURCES:PRELIMINARYINFORMATION ONLYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMESNO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SETLAKEHAVEN - NATIVE PLANT LISTSHEET3OF 3LAKEHAVEN
31623 / 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTH
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON
THE SE 1 4 OF SECTION 07, TOWNSHIP 21N,
RANGE 04E, W.M.DATE: 6/01/2020JOB: 1458.0005NATIVE PLANT SCHEDULE
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix D — Data Sheets
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: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 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 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (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:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1458.0005 - Lakehaven Federal Way / King 07/17/2018
Lakehaven WA DP-1
Richard Peel, Matt DeCaro 7 / 21N / 04E
Valley Floor Concave 0
A2 447.317494 -122.33689543 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam N/A
Data plot taken within constructed stormwater detention pond and therefore is not considered a regulated wetland. Feature has been
excavated and receives stormwater from parking lot catch basins.
Populus balsamifera 40 Yes FAC 4
Salix lasiandra 30 Yes FACW
4
70 100%
Populus balsamifera 20 Yes FAC
20
Phalaris arundinacea 80 Yes FACW
80
0
20
Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met through the dominance test.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
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) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
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 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
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:
DP-1
0 - 10 10YR 2/2 95 10YR 3/4 5 C M SaLo Sandy loam
10 - 18 10YR 3/3 100 ----SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
Hydric soil criteria technically met through indicators A4 and F6. However, data plot is located in stormwater detention
pond. Hydric soils are indicative of subsoil and/or resultant from an artificial source of hydrology (stormwater from rooftop
and parking lot) and not representative of natural conditions.
None
3
Surface
Wetland hydrology criteria technically met through primary indicators A2 and A3. However, construction documents
indicate the area was excavated to create a stormwater detention pond. Area receives stormwater from parking lot
catch basins.
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: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 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 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (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:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
NL 180 590
3.28
1458.0005 - Lakehaven Federal Way / King 07/17/2018
Lakehaven WA DP-2
Richard Peel, Matt DeCaro 7 / 21N / 04E
Valley Floor Convex 2
A2 47.317095 -122.33713004 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam N/A
No wetland criteria observed. Data plot taken in far southwest corner of site to the south of the identified stormwater pond.
Alnus rubra 60 Yes FAC 2
4
60 50%
Rubus armeniacus 70 Yes FAC
Rubus laciniatus 10 No FACU
Oemleria cerasiformis 10 No FACU 0 0
0 0
130 390
90 50 200
0 0
Hieracium sp. 70 Yes
Rubus ursinus 20 Yes FACU
Geranium robertianum 10 No FACU
100
0
0
No hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed; did not meet dominance test or prevalence index.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
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) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
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 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
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:
DP-2
0 - 16 10YR 3/4 100 ----SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
No hydric soil indicators observed.
None
None
None
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: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 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 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (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:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1458.0005 - Lakehaven Federal Way/ King 1/27/2020
Lakehaven WA DP-3
Kyla Caddey, Rachael Hyland 7 / 21N / 04E
Valley Floor Concave 1
A2 47.317883 -122.33501343 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam N/A
All three wetland criteria met. Data collected in Wetland A.
3
3
0 100%
0 0
40 80
40 120
0 0 0
0 0
Malus fusca 40 Yes FACW 80 200
Rubus armeniacus 20 Yes FAC
Rubus spectabilis 20 Yes FAC 2.5
80
0
20
Hydrophytic vegetation met through the dominance test.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
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) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________ Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
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 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
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:
DP-3
0-8 10YR 3/2 100 ----SaLo Sand Loam
8-16 10YR 3/2 85 10YR 3/4 15 C M GrSaLo Gravelly Sand Loam
None
N/A
Hydric soil criteria met through indicator F6 (Redox Dark Surface).
None
1
Surface
Wetland hydrology criteria met through primary indicators A2 (High Water Table) and A3 (Saturation).
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: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 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 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (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:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
1458.0005 - Lakehaven Federal Way / King 07/17/2018
Lakehaven WA DP-4
Richard Peel, Matt DeCaro 7 / 21N / 04E
Valley Floor Concave 3
A2 47.317911 -122.33512423 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam N/A
Upland plot to Wetland A. No wetland criteria observed. Data plot taken upslope to the northwest of wetland.
Pseudotsuga menziesii 70 Yes FACU 1
6
70 17%
Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FAC
Oemleria cerasiformis 30 Yes FACU
60
Polystichum munitum 10 Yes FACU
Geranium robertianum 5 Yes FACU
Hedera helix 5 Yes FACU
20
0
80
No hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
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) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
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 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
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:
DP-4
0 - 3 ------Organic Duff
3 - 16 10YR 3/4 100 ----SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
No hydric soil indicators observed.
None
None
None
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: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 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 ft) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft)
1.
2.
= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (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:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Yes
Yes
No
0 0
0 0
0 0
90 270
20 80
350110
3.18
1458.0005 - Lakehaven Federal Way / King 07/17/2018
Lakehaven WA DP-5
Richard Peel, Matt DeCaro 7 / 21N / 04E
Valley Floor Convex 1
A2 47.319389 -122.33706769 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam N/A
No wetland criteria observed. Data plot taken in mowed lawn on northern portion of site. Soils appear to be fill consisting of sand
material.
Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 FACU 1
2
10 50%
0
Agrostis sp.*90 FAC
Hypochaeris radicata 10 FACU
100
0
0
No hydrophytic vegetation criteria observed. Did not meet dominance test or prevalence index. *Agrostis sp.
assumed FAC for scoring purposes.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
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) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:________________________________
Depth (inches):________________________
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
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 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
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:
DP-5
0 - 12 10YR 5/2 100 ----Sand Fill material
None
--
No hydric soil criteria observed; soils appear to be fill material consisting of sand.
None
None
None
No wetland hydrology indicators observed.
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix E — Wetland Rating Form
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
Score for each
function based
on three
ratings
(order of ratings
is not
important)
9 = H,H,H
8 = H,H,M
7 = H,H,L
7 = H,M,M
6 = H,M,L
6 = M,M,M
5 = H,L,L
5 = M,M,L
4 = M,L,L
3 = L,L,L
RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____
Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______
HGM Class used for rating_________________ Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N
NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined).
Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ (based on functions___ or special characteristics___)
1.Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
_______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27
_______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22
_______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19
_______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15
FUNCTION Improving
Water Quality
Hydrologic Habitat
Circle the appropriate ratings
Site Potential
Landscape Potential
Value TOTAL
Score Based on
Ratings
2.Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY
Estuarine I II
Wetland of High Conservation Value I
Bog I
Mature Forest I
Old Growth Forest I
Coastal Lagoon I II
Interdunal I II III IV
None of the above
A - Lakehaven
A - Lakehaven 7/17/18
Matt DeCaro, Rachael Hyland 4 6/29/16
Depressional 4
ESRI Arc Map
IV 4
M L L
M H L
L L M
5 5 4 14
N/A
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2
Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2
Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3
Riverine Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods H 1.2
Ponded depressions R 1.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2
Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1
Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3
Lake Fringe Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3
Slope Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods H 1.2
Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3
Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
(can be added to figure above)
S 4.1
Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3
A - Lakehaven
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods?
NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1
1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it
is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to
score functions for estuarine wetlands.
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater
and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any
plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size;
___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual),
____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from
seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks,
____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft
deep).
5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that
stream or river,
____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you
probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in
questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
A - Lakehaven
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not
flooding
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the
surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior
of the wetland.
NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank
flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be
maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural
outlet.
NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM
classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small
stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY
WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the
appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the
wetland unit being scored.
NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or
more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2
is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the
total area.
HGM classes within the wetland unit
being rated
HGM class to
use in rating
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional
Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional
Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
Treat as
ESTUARINE
If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have
more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the
rating.
A - Lakehaven
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS
Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality
D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality?
D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet).
points = 3
Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet.
points = 2
Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1
Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1
D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 4 No = 0
D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes):
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > ½ of area points = 3
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area points = 0
D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation :
This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual.
Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4
Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2
Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0
Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1 -D 2.3?
Source_______________ Yes = 1 No = 0
Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the
303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES
if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
A - Lakehaven
2
0
3
2
7
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
D 3.0: Nearest 303(d) water is approximately 2 linear miles to the west (Joes Creek). Wetland A appears to have no direct
hydyrologic connection with Joes Creek or any other 303(d) waterbody. The subject parcel is not covered by any water
quality improvement project. Nearest water with a TMDL in sub-basin is approximately 14.5 linear miles to north (Fauntleroy
Creek). Wetland A does not provide any water quality improvement potential above a minimis level for this section.
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS
Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation
D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion?
D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4
Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2
Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1
Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0
D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands
with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part.
Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7
Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5
Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3
The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3
Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1
Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0
D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin
contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5
The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3
The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0
Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5
Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site?
D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0
D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at
>1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0
Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around
the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met .
The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has
damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):
Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2
Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1
Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1
The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the
points = 0 water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why __________________
There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0
D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
Yes = 2 No = 0
Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
A - Lakehaven
2
3
0
5
1
1
1
3
0
Nearest mapped floodplain is
miles away. Connection is highly degraded, ineffective culverts make water movement highly restricted/limited.
0
0
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.
HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat?
H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the
Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold
of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked.
____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4
____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2
____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1
____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0
If the unit has a Forested class, check if:
____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)
that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon
H 1.2. Hydroperiods
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover
more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3
____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2
____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1
____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0
____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2.
Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name
the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle
If you counted: > 19 species points = 2
5 - 19 species points = 1
< 5 species points = 0
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats
Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you
have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high.
None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points
All three diagrams
in this row
are HIGH = 3points
A - Lakehaven
0
2
1
0
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points.
____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long).
____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland
____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m)
over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m)
____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree
slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered
where wood is exposed)
____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are
permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of
strata)
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site?
H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).
[(% moderate and low intensity land uses) /2] = _______% Calculate: % undisturbed habitat +
If total accessible habitat is:
> 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3
20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2
10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1
< 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0
H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland.
[(% moderate and low intensity land uses) /2] = _______%
points = 3
points = 2
points = 1
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat +
Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches
Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0
H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If
> 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2)
≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society?
H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score
that applies to the wetland being rated.
Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2
It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)
It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species
It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources
It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a
Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan
Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1
Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0
Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
A - Lakehaven
3
6
0.00 0.42 0.21
0
1
10.44 8.90 14.89
-2
-1
1
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
WDFW Priority Habitats
Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can
be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington.
177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/)
Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is
independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.
Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and
wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).
Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-
layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200
years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less
than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that
found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak
component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).
Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet
prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).
Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide
functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and
Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report –
see web link on previous page).
Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock,
ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite,
and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to
enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western
Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft
(6 m) long.
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed
elsewhere.
A - Lakehaven
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Wetland Type
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met.
Category
SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands
Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
The dominant water regime is tidal,
Vegetated, and
With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland
SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area
Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 -30-151?
Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2
SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less
than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)
At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or
contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High
Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3
SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value?
Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf
Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on
their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
SC 3.0. Bogs
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key
below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or
more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep
over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or
pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog
SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30%
cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory , you may substitute that criterion by
measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the
plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog.
SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar,
western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the
species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy?
Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog
A - Lakehaven
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA
Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate
the wetland based on its functions.
Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered
canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of
age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more.
Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the
species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm).
Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from
marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks
The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt)
during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom)
Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less
than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).
At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un -grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2)
Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If
you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103
Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105
Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating
SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M
for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger?
Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3
SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac?
Yes = Category III No = Category IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form
A - Lakehaven
Wetland name or number ______
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 18
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
This page left blank intentionally
A - Lakehaven
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix F — Wetland Rating Maps
Pictometry International Corp.
LAKEHAVEN - WETLAND RATING MAP
¢
31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTHFEDERAL WAY, WA KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER:072104-9017
Lakehaven
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO. of 5
10/17/2018
1458.0005
DLS
11 " = 200 '
0 200 400100 Feet
Cowardin Map
330' Boundary
Forested
Site Boundary
Wetland A
Pictometry International Corp.
LAKEHAVEN - WETLAND RATING MAP
¢
31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTHFEDERAL WAY, WA KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER:072104-9017
Lakehaven
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO. of 5
2/7/2020
1458.0005
DLS
21 " = 150 '
0 150 30075 Feet
Hydroperiod Map
Saturated
Seasonally Flooded
Occassionally Flooded
150' Boundary
Site Boundary
Wetland A
ààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
ààààà
King County
LAKEHAVEN - WETLAND RATING MAP
¢
31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTHFEDERAL WAY, WA
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER:072104-9017
Lakehaven
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO. of 5
10/17/2018
1458.0005
DLS
31 " = 600 '
0 590 1,180295 Feet
Contributing Basin Map
àààààààààààà
ààà
ààà
Wetland
Contributing Basin
Site Boundary
Area of Contributing Basin (SF)3,844,120
Area of Wetland A (SF)37,875
Percent of Wetland A within Contributing Basin 0.985%
Area of Contributing Basin 3,844,120
Area of Intensive Human Land Uses 2,979,721
Percent of Intensive Human Land Use
within Contributing Basin 78%
D.4.0
D.4.3
D.5.0
D.5.3
Pictometry International Corp.
LAKEHAVEN - WETLAND RATING MAP
¢
31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTHFEDERAL WAY, WA
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER:072104-9017
Lakehaven
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO. of 5
10/17/2018
1458.0005
DLS
41 " = 1,400 '
0 1,400 2,800700 Feet
Habitat Map
1 KM Polygon
High Intensity
Undisturbed Habitat
Moderate and Low Intensity
Site Boundary
SITE
Abutting Undisturbed Habitat 0.00%
Abutting Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 0.42%
Accessible Habitat 0.21%
Undisturbed Habitat 10.44%
Moderate & Low Intensity Land Uses 8.90%
Undisturbed Habitat in 1 KM Polygon 14.89%
High Intensity Land Use in 1 KM Polygon 80.66%
H.2.2
H.2.3
H.2.0 Wetland A
H.2.1
LAKEHAVEN - WETLAND RATING MAP
¢
31623 & 31627 1ST AVENUE SOUTHFEDERAL WAY, WA
KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER:072104-9017
Lakehaven
www.soundviewconsultants.com
2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954
Soundview ConsultantsEnvironmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions LLC
DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO. of 5
10/17/2018
1458.0005
DLS
51 " = 3 mi
303d Map
Category 4A Assessed Waters
Category 5 Assessed Waters
Ecology Hydrology
Sub Basin
SITE
0 3 61.5 Miles
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
Appendix G — Qualifications
All field inspections, jurisdictional wetland boundary delineations, habitat assessments, and supporting
documentation, including this Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and
Buffer Reduction and Enhancement Plan prepared for the Lakeha ven Water and Sewer District
Main Campus Project, were prepared by or under the direction of Matt DeCaro of SVC. In addition,
the site inspections were performed by Matt DeCaro and Rachael Hyland; and report preparation was
completed by Laura Livingston.
Matt DeCaro
Senior Scientist / Environmental Planner
Professional Experience: 10+ years
Matt DeCaro is a Senior Scientist/Environmental Planner with a diverse background in environmental
planning, wetland science, stream ecology, water quality, site remediation, and environmental
regulatory compliance. Matt currently provides permitting and regulatory compliance assistance for
land use projects from their planning stages through review, approval, and construction. Matt
performs wetland, stream, and shoreline delineations and fish & wildlife habitat assessments; provides
land use planning assistance for residential, commercial, and industrial projects; conducts code and
regulation analysis; prepares reports and permit applications; and provides restoration and mitigation
design.
Matt earned a Bachelor of Science degree with a focus in Environmental Science from the Evergreen
State College in Olympia, Washington, with additional graduate-level coursework and research in
aquatic restoration and salmonid ecology. Matt has received 40-hour wetland delineation training
(Western Mtns, Valleys, & Coast and Arid West Regional Supplement), and he is a Pierce County
Qualified Wetland Specialist and Wildlife Biologist. Matt has been formally trained in the use of the
Washington State Wetland Rating System and Determination of Ordinary High Water Mark by the
Washington State Department of Ecology. He has attended USFWS survey workshops for multiple
threatened and endangered species, and he is a Senior Author of WSDOT Biological Assessments.
Matt holds 40-hour HAZWOPER training and has managed Phase I Environmental Site Assessments,
subsurface investigations, and contaminant remediation projects throughout the Pacific Northwest.
His diverse experience also includes NEPA compliance for federal projects; noxious weed abatement;
army ant research in the Costa Rican tropical rainforest; spotted owl surveys on federal and private
lands; and salmonid spawning and migration surveys.
Rachael Hyland
Environmental Scientist
Professional Experience: 6 years
Rachael Hyland is a Wetland Professional in Training (WPIT) through the Society of Wetland
Scientists and a Certified Associated Ecologist through the Ecological Society of America. Rachael
has a background in wetland and ecological habitat assessments in various states, most notably
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Washington. She has experience in assessing
tidal, stream, and wetland systems, reporting on biological evaluations, permitting, and site
1458.0005 – Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Main Campus Soundview Consultants LLC
Assessment Report & Buffer Enhancement Plan June 4, 2020
assessments. She also has extensive knowledge of bats and white nose syndrome (Pseudogymnoascus
destructans), a fungal disease affecting bats which was recently documented in Washington.
Rachael earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from the University
of Connecticut, with additional ecology studies at the graduate level. Rachael has completed Basic
Wetland Delineator Training with the Institute for Wetland Education and Environmental Research,
received 40-hour wetland delineation training (Western Mountains, Valleys, & Coast and Arid West
Regional Supplement), and received formal training from the Washington State Department of
Ecology in the Using the Revised 2014 Wetland Rating System for Western Washington, How to
Determine the Ordinary High Water Mark, Navigating SEPA, and Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites
Using a Watershed Approach.
Laura Livingston
Environmental Planner
Professional Experience: 6 years
Laura Livingston is an Environmental Planner with a background in water quality monitoring, invasive
species monitoring, wildlife monitoring, wilderness stewardship, and erosion control projects. Laura
has field experience working on natural resources projects, with an emphasis on stream and river
projects, in the Northwest, Northeast, and Southwest United States. She has also worked on a variety
of environmental science research, grant, and teaching projects requiring scientific writing, science
communication, laboratory work, and statistical analysis. She currently performs ordinary high water
delineations; conducts environmental code analysis; and prepares environmental assessment and
mitigation reports, biological evaluations, and permit applications to support clients through the
regulatory and planning process. Laura has a particular interest in shoreline projects and has prepared
a variety of application materials to support projects within Shoreline Master Program jurisdictions.
Laura earned a Master of Science degree in Environmental Science from Washington State University,
Pullman. In addition, she has received training from the Washington State Department of Ecology in
How to Administer Shoreline Development Permits in Western Washington’s Shorelines,
Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark, the revised Washington State Wetland Rating System,
Puget Sound Coastal Processes, How to Conduct a Forage Fish Survey. Laura has also received
training from the Washington State Department of Transportation in Biological Assessment
Preparation for Transportation Projects and is listed by WSDOT as a junior author for preparing
Biological Assessments.