21-104105-Critical Areas Report-10-06-2021-V1WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
ASSESSMENT REPORT
TWIN TRAILS
SEPTEMBER 2021
WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
ASSESSMENT REPORT
TWIN TRAILS
SEPTEMBER 28, 2021
PROJECT LOCATION
1605 SOUTHWEST 341ST PLACE
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98023
PREPARED FOR
JUSTIN HOLLAND
PROSPECT DEVELOPMENT
19410 HIGHWAY 99, SUITE A #135
LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98036
PREPARED BY
SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC
2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE
GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335
(253) 514-8952
1310.0029 – Twin Trails i Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Executive Summary
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Prospect Development (Applicant) with a
Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment for the proposed residential redevelopment of a
17.33-acre site located at 1605 Southwest 341st Place in the City of Federal Way, King County,
Washington. The subject property consists of two parcels situated in the Northeast ¼ of Section 24,
Township 21 North, Range 3 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Numbers 2421039008 and
2421039051).
SVC investigated the subject property for the presence of potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies,
fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species in December of 2020 and May and July of 2021. Using
current wetland delineation methodology, no potentially regulated wetlands or fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas were identified on the subject property. However, three wetlands (Wetlands 1-3)
were identified offsite to the east that were previously delineated and assessed by Wetland Resources
in 2020 associated with the Saghalie Heights project. Wetlands 1 and 2 are classified as Category III
depressional wetlands with low habitat scores of 5 points, which are subject to standard 80-foot
buffers per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.420(2). Wetland 3 is classified as a Category
IV depressional wetland subject to a standard 50-foot buffer regardless of the habitat score. Due to
the small size of Wetland 3 (less than 1,000 square feet), no buffer is required per 19.145.420(3).
However, none of the wetland buffers project on the subject property. No other potentially-regulated
wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, or priority species were identified within 225 feet of
the subject property.
The table below summarizes the wetlands 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
1 N/A - Offsite III Yes Yes Not Likely
2 N/A - Offsite III Yes Yes Not Likely
3 N/A - Offsite IV Yes Yes Not Likely
1. Current Washington State Department of Ecology (Hruby, 2014) wetland rating methods per FWRC 19.145.420(1).
1310.0029 – Twin Trails ii Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Site Map
1310.0029 – Twin Trails iii Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2. Proposed Project Location .......................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter 3. Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Chapter 4. Background and Existing Conditions ........................................................................................ 4
4.1 Landscape Setting ................................................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Soils ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
4.3 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................ 5
4.4 Critical Area Inventories ........................................................................................................................ 5
4.5 Precipitation ............................................................................................................................................. 5
Chapter 5. Results ............................................................................................................................................. 7
5.1 Onsite Wetland Absence ....................................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Offsite Wetland Findings ....................................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations ......................................................................................................... 10
6.1 Local Considerations ............................................................................................................................ 10
Chapter 7. Closure .......................................................................................................................................... 11
Chapter 8. References .................................................................................................................................... 12
Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map. ................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 2. Aerial Image of the Subject Property. ........................................................................... 4
Tables
Table 1. Precipitation Summary1 .................................................................................................. 6
Table 2. Wetland Summary. ......................................................................................................... 8
Appendices
Appendix A –– Methods and Tools
Appendix B –– Background Information
Appendix C –– Existing Conditions Exhibit
Appendix D –– Non-Wetland Data Forms
Appendix E –– Qualifications
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 1 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 1. Introduction
Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Prospect Development (Applicant) with a
Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment for the proposed residential redevelopment of a
17.33-acre site located at 1605 Southwest 341st Place in the City of Federal Way, King County,
Washington. The subject property consists of two parcels situated in the Northeast ¼ of Section 24,
Township 21 North, Range 3 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Numbers 2421039008 and
2421039051).
The purpose of this wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment is to identify the presence of
potentially regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species on or
near the subject site.
This report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding:
• Site description and area of assessment;
• Background research and identification of potentially-regulated critical areas within the vicinity
of the proposed project;
• Identification and assessment of potentially-regulated wetlands and other aquatic features;
• Identification and assessment of potentially-regulated fish and wildlife habitat;
• Existing site map detailing data plot locations; and
• Supplemental information necessary for regulatory review.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 2 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 2. Proposed Project Location
2.1 Project Location
The subject property consists of a 17.33-acre site located at 1605 Southwest 341st Place in the City of
Federal Way, King County, Washington. The subject property consists of two parcels situated in the
Northeast ¼ of Section 31, Township 21 North, Range 3 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel
Numbers 2421039008 and 2421039051).
To access the subject site from I-5 North, take exit 142B to merge onto Washington-18 West from
the Milton area and continue onto South 348th Street. After 0.8 mile, continue onto Southwest Campus
drive for 1.1 miles and turn left onto 12th Avenue Southwest. At the traffic circle, take the first exit
onto Southwest 340th Street and turn left on 19th Avenue Southwest. Proceed for 400 feet and turn
left at the first cross street onto Southwest 341st Place, where the subject property will be located on
the right.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map.
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 3 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 3. Methods
SVC investigated and assessed any potentially regulated wetlands, drainages, and other fish and wildlife
habitat on and within 225 feet of the subject property in December of 2020 and May and July of 2021.
All wetland determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in
conjunction with data from the U.S. Geographic Survey (USGS) topographic map, the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) SalmonScape and Priority Habitats and
Species (PHS) maps and data, City of Federal Way Geographic Information System (GIS) data, King
County GIS data, local precipitation data (NOAA), and various orthophotographic resources.
Appendix A contains further details for the methods and tools used to prepare this report.
Wetlands, streams, and select fish and wildlife habitats and species are regulated features per Federal
Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145 - Environmentally Critical Areas and subject to restricted
uses/activities under the same title. In accordance with FWRC 19.145.410, wetland presence/absence
was 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). Pink surveyor’s flagging was labeled alphanumerically 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-7). Additional tests pits were excavated at regular intervals throughout the site
to further confirm wetland absence. Offsite wetlands were not flagged; however, boundaries were
estimated, and features labeled numerically beginning with 1.
Wetlands were classified using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin (Cowardin,
1979; Federal Geographic Data Committee, 2013) classification systems. Following classification and
assessment, all wetlands were rated and categorized using the updated Washington State Wetlands
Rating System for Western Washington – Washington State Department of Ecology Publication No.
14-06-029, published October 2014 (Hruby, 2014) and 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.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 4 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 4. Background and Existing Conditions
4.1 Landscape Setting
The 17.33-acre subject property is located in a residential setting in the City of Federal Way (Figure
2). The northernmost parcel (2421039051) consists of a single-family residential home, gravel
driveway, and a maintained lawn. The southernmost parcel (2421039008) consists of undeveloped
forested area on the eastern portion and a paved parking lot on the western portion. The subject
property abuts a mix of residential developments and undeveloped forested land to the north and
south, 21st Ave Southwest to the west, and is bound by forested land to the east. Topography onsite
generally slopes down approximately 60 feet from the east to the west with elevations ranging from
410 feet above mean sea level (amsl) on the east boundary of the subject property to approximately
350 feet amsl on the western boundary of the subject property. A King County Contours map is
provided in Appendix B1. The subject property is located in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA)
10 – Puyallup-White.
Figure 2. Aerial Image of the Subject Property.
4.2 Soils
The NRCS Soil Survey of King County, Washington identifies two soil series on the subject property:
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to
15 percent slopes (AgC). A soil map is provided in Appendix B2. Below is a detailed description of
the soil profiles.
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 5 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB)
According to the NRCS soil survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes is a
moderately well drained soil derived from glacial drift and/or glacial outwash over dense glaciomarine
deposits. These soils have a very low water capacity. In a typical profile, the surface layer is
approximately 7 inches thick and is a gravelly sandy loam. From 7 to 59 inches, the subsoils is very
gravelly sandy loam. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes is listed as a partially hydric
soil but may contain as much as 10 percent hydric inclusions of McKenna, Shalcar, and Norma in
depressions and drainageways (NRCS, N.d.).
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (AgC)
According to the NRCS survey, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes is a moderately
well drained soil derived from glacial drift and/or glacial outwash over dense glaciomarine deposits.
These soils have a very low water capacity. In a typical profile, the surface layer is approximately 7
inches thick and is a gravelly sandy loam. From 7 to 59 inches, the subsoils is very gravelly sandy loam.
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes is listed as a partially hydric soil but may contain
as much as 5 percent hydric inclusions of Shalcar and Norma in depressions and drainageways (NRCS,
N.d.).
4.3 Vegetation
The northern parcel of the subject property consists primarily of maintained lawn/field dominated by
velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus), bluegrass (Poa sp.), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), hairy cat’s ear
(Hypochaeris radicata), smooth hawksbeard (Crepis capillaris), and common dandelion (Taraxacum
officinale). A small patch of western red cedar (Thuja plicata) and other ornamental plantings are present
around the single-family residence on the northern portion of the site. Vegetation within the southern
parcel is primarily facultative (FAC) and facultative-upland (FACU) species consisting of Douglas fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii), osoberry (Oemleria cerasiformis), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), and non-native
invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus).
4.4 Critical Area Inventories
The King County Sensitive Areas map (Appendix B3), WDFW PHS map (Appendix B4), USFWS
NWI map (Appendix B5), DNR Stream Typing map (Appendix B6), and WDFW SalmonScape map
(Appendix B7) and do not identify any potentially regulated wetlands, waterbodies, or priority habitats
or species on the subject property. However, the City of Federal Way wetland inventory (Appendix
B8) identifies a potentially wetland on the south-central portion of the subject property as well as two
potential offsite wetlands east of the subject property. No other potential wetlands, waterbodies, or
fish and wildlife habitat are mapped within 225 feet of the subject property.
4.5 Precipitation
Precipitation data was acquired from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
station at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac) in order to obtain percent of normal
precipitation for the general Puget Sound region during and preceding the investigations. A summary
of data collected is provided in Table 1.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 6 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Table 1. Precipitation Summary1
Date Day
Of
Day
Before
1 Week
Prior
2 Weeks
Prior 30 Days Prior
(Observed/Normal)
Year to Date
(Observed/Normal)2
Percent of
Normal3
12/09/2020 0.17 0.73 0.93 1.41 5.10/6.44 9.09/11.92 79/76
5/04/2021 0.03 0.25 0.42 1.07 1.34/3.10 32.19/33.11 43/97
7/14/2021 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04/1.06 20.10/20.54 4/98
Notes:
1. Precipitation levels provided in inches. Data obtained from NOAA (http://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=sew)
for Sea-Tac International Airport.
2. Year-to-date precipitation for the December and May site visits is the 2020/2021 water year from October 1; year-to-date
precipitation for the July site visit is the 2021 calendar year from January 1 to the onsite date.
3. Percent of normal is shown for the last 30 days and 2020/2021 water year to date.
Precipitation levels during the site reconnaissance in December of 2020 were within the lower range
of statistical normal for both the prior 30 days and the 2020/2021 water year (79 and 76 percent of
normal, respectively). Precipitation levels during the site reconnaissance in May of 2021 were below
the statistical normal range for the prior 30 days (43 percent of normal) and within the normal range
for the 2020/2021 water year (97 percent of normal). During the formal site investigation in July of
2021, precipitation levels were below the statistical normal range for the prior 30 days (4 percent of
normal) and within the statistical normal for the 2021 calendar year (98 percent of normal). This
precipitation data suggest that hydrologic conditions encountered at the time of site investigations
were relatively normal during the December 2020 site visit but may have been slightly drier during the
May and July 2021 site visits. However, it is important to note that July is one of the driest summer
months and typically observes very little precipitation. Therefore, low precipitation levels during the
time of the July 2021 site visit are considered normal and were likely not affecting wetland hydrology.
Such conditions were considered in making professional wetland determinations.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 7 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 5. Results
During the site reconnaissance in December of 2020 and May of 2021 and the site investigation in
July of 2021, no wetlands or fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas were identified on the subject
property. However, three wetlands (Wetlands 1-3) were identified offsite to the east that were
previously delineated and assessed by Wetland Resources in 2020 associated with the Saghalie Heights
project. No other potentially regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, or priority
species were identified within 225 feet of the subject property during the site investigation.
5.1 Onsite Wetland Absence
The site investigations confirmed onsite wetland absence as no areas met all three wetland delineation
criteria (a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology) according to
current wetland delineation methodology. Seven representative data plots (DP-1 to DP-7) were
collected to document the non-wetland conditions in the subject property. Please refer to Appendix
C for the Existing Conditions Exhibit which depicts the data plot locations, and Appendix D for the
non-wetland data forms. Specifically, data plots DP-1 to DP-4 document non-wetland conditions in
an area on the southwest portion of the site and data plots DP-5 to DP-7 document general upland
conditions throughout the remaining areas of the subject property.
Data plots DP-1 to DP-4 are representative of non-wetland conditions in a depression on the
southwestern portion of the subject property. The area appears to receive hydrology from a city
stormwater line discharging into the area from a large culvert on the south end of the site, which
converges into a manmade ditch lined with rip rap further north. The area met wetland hydrology
criteria indirectly through a combination of secondary indicators B9 (Water-Stained Leaves) and D2
(Geomorphic Position). This area contained a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation due to the
presence of facultative (FAC) species including red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus
balsamifera), redosier dogwood (Cornus alba), creeping buttercup, lady fern (Athyrium cyclosorum) and
non-native invasive Himalayan blackberry. No facultative-wetland (FACW) or obligate (OBL) plant
species were observed with the exception of non-native invasive reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea)
which is typical to colonize disturbed areas. While the depression met wetland hydrology and
hydrophytic vegetation criteria, no hydric soils were observed. Soils in this location were generally
too bright to meet for indicators A11 (Depleted Below Dark Surface) or F3 (Depleted Matrix) and/or
did not contain any or enough redoximorphic concentrations to meet indicator F6 (Redox Dark
Surface). As such, the depression on the southwestern portion of the subject property does not meet
all three required wetland criteria.
Data plots DP-5 to DP-7 are representative of general upland conditions throughout the remaining
areas of the subject property. Data plot DP-6 exhibited hydrophytic vegetation due to a dominance
of FAC vegetation typical of upland areas, including non-native invasive Himalayan blackberry and
stinging nettle (Urtica dioica). However, DP-5 and DP-7, as well as the surrounding upland areas,
exhibited primarily FACU vegetation species including Douglas fir, bitter cherry, scotch broom
(Cytisus scoparius), hairy cat’s ear, and smooth hawksbeard. The soils at all three data plots did not meet
for any hydric soil indicators. Additionally, no primary or secondary indicators of wetland hydrology
were observed. As such, the remainder of the site was determined to not meet wetland criteria. As
none of the seven data plots met all three wetland criteria, the subject property was determined to be
unencumbered by potentially regulated wetlands.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 8 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
5.2 Offsite Wetland Findings
Three wetlands (Wetlands 1-3) were identified offsite to the east that were previously delineated and
assessed by Wetland Resources in 2020 associated with the Saghalie Heights project. The identified
wetlands contained indirect indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils (presumed), and a
predominance of hydrophytic vegetation according to current wetland delineation methodology. Due
to the offsite locations of the identified wetlands, no formal data was collected. Given their distance
from the site, the buffers do not project onto the subject property; as such, these wetlands and
associated buffers are not depicted on the Existing Conditions Exhibit in Appendix C and no wetland
rating forms are provided. 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
1 PFO/SSBC Depressional III III N/A -
Offsite 80
2 PFO/SSABC Depressional III III N/A -
Offsite 80
3 PSSBC Depressional IV IV N/A -
Offsite N/A5
Notes:
1. Cowardin et al. (1979) or NWI Class based on vegetation: PFO = Palustrine Forested, PSS= Palustrine Scrub-Shrub; Modifier
for Water Regime: A = Temporarily Flooded, 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.
5. Due to the small size of Wetland 3 (less than 1,000 square feet), no buffer is required per 19.145.420(3)
Wetland 1
Wetland 1 is located approximately 150 feet offsite to the east of the subject property at its closest
point. Wetland Resources identified this wetland as Wetland A. Hydrology for Wetland 1 is provided
by surface sheet flow, direct precipitation, and a seasonally high groundwater table. Wetland
vegetation is dominated by black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) and red alder (Alnus rubra) along the
perimeter and salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis). Wetland 1 is a Palustrine Forested/Scrub-Shrub,
Seasonally Saturated and Seasonally Flooded wetland (PFO/SSBC). Per FWRC 19.145.420(1),
Wetland 1 is a Category III depressional wetland.
Wetland 2
Wetland 2 is located approximately 210 feet offsite to the east of the subject property at its closest
point. Wetland Resources identified this wetland as Wetland B. Hydrology for Wetland 2 is provided
by surface sheet flow, direct precipitation, and a seasonally high groundwater table. Wetland
vegetation is dominated by black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), hardhack (Spiraea douglasii), and
creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). Wetland 2 is a Palustrine Forested/Scrub-Shrub, Temporarily
Flooded, Seasonally Saturated, and Seasonally Flooded wetland (PFO/SSABC). Per FWRC
19.145.420(1), Wetland 2 is a Category III depressional wetland.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 9 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Wetland 3
Wetland 3 is located approximately 280 feet offsite to the east of the subject property at its closest
point. Wetland Resources identified this wetland as a portion of Wetland B (Wetland 2 by SVC);
however, SVC identified a topographic break between the two areas and as such identified these areas
as separated wetlands. Hydrology for Wetland 3 is provided by surface sheet flow, direct precipitation,
and a seasonally high groundwater table. Wetland vegetation is dominated by hardhack. Wetland 3
is a Palustrine Scrub-Shrub, Seasonally Saturated and Seasonally Flooded wetland (PSSBC). Per
FWRC 19.145.420(1), Wetland 3 is a Category IV depressional wetland.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 10 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations
The site investigations in October of 2020 and May and July of 2021 identified three potentially
regulated offsite wetlands to the east of the subject property. No other wetlands, waterbodies, or
priority habitats and species were identified on or within 225 feet of the subject property.
6.1 Local Considerations
6.1.1 Wetland Buffer Standards
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). Wetland 3 is classified as a Category IV wetland. Per FWRC 19.145.420(2),
Category IV wetlands typically require a standard 50-foot buffer width; however, due to the small size
of Wetland 3 (less than 1,000 square feet), no buffer is required per 19.145.420(3). Category III
wetlands generally provide moderate levels of function and have typically been disturbed in some ways
and/or more isolated in the landscape than Category I or II wetlands. Category III wetlands score
between 16 and 19 points on the Revised Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington
(Hruby, 2014). Wetlands 1 and 2 are classified as Category III wetlands. Per FWRC 19.145.420(2),
Category III wetlands require a standard 80-foot buffer width based on the low habitat scores of 5
points. However, none of the wetland buffers project on the subject property. In addition, buildings
and other structures require a 5-foot buffer setback from the regulated buffer edges per FWRC
19.145.160.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 11 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 7. Closure
The findings and conclusions documented in this assessment report have been prepared for specific
application to the Twin Trails 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 wetland boundaries validated by the jurisdictional
agencies. Validation of the boundaries and jurisdictional status of such features by the regulatory
agencies provides a certification, usually written, that the critical area 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 critical area delineations for a period of 5
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 status and/or
boundaries. 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.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 12 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Chapter 8. References
Brinson, M. M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-4. U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
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 and Wildlife Service. Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-
87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal
Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC). 2021. Chapter 19.145 – Environmentally Critical Areas. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/FederalWay/#!/FederalWay19/FederalWay19145.html
#19.145.420. Current through July 12, 2021.
Hitchcock, C.L. & A. Cronquist, Ed. by D. Giblin, B. Ledger, P. Zika, and R. Olmstead. 2018. Flora
of the Pacific Northwest, 2nd Edition. U.W. Press and Burke Museum. Seattle, Washington.
Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update.
(Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology.
Munsell Color, 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York.
Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS). N.d. Soil Data Access Hydric Soils List (Soil Data
Access Live). Accessed May 17, 2021. Website:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316620.html.
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
Sheldon, D., T. Hruby, P. Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. Stockdale.
2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science. Washington State
Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-006. March, 2005. Olympia, Washington.
Snyder, D., Gale, P., and Pringle, R. 1973. Soil survey of King County Area, Washington. United States
Department of Agriculture. Website:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/washington/KingWA1973/King
WA_1974.pdf
USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains,
Valleys, and Coast Region (Ver2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-
10-3. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails 13 Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2018. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.4.
http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix A –– Methods and Tools
Table A1. Methods and tools used to prepare the report.
Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference
Wetland
Presence/
Absence
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.
Western
Mountains,
Valleys, and Coast
Region Regional
Supplement
http://www.usace.army.mil
/Portals/2/docs/civilworks
/regulatory/reg_supp/west
_mt_finalsupp.pdf
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
Indicator
Status
2018 National
Wetland Plant List http://wetland-
plants.usace.army.mil/
USACE. 2018. National Wetland Plant List,
version 3.4. Website.
Plant Names
and
Identification
USDA Plant
Database
http://plants.usda.gov/ Website.
Flora of the Pacific
Northwest
http://www.pnwherbaria.or
g/florapnw.php
Hitchcock, C.L. & A. Cronquist, Ed. by D.
Giblin, B. Ledger, P. Zika, and R. Olmstead.
2018. Flora of the Pacific Northwest, 2nd
Edition. U.W. Press and Burke Museum.
Seattle, Washington.
Soils Data
NRCS Soil Survey http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.u
sda.gov/app/
Website GIS data based upon:
Debose, Alfonso and M. W. Klungland. 1983.
Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington.
Soil Conservation Service United States
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service, in cooperation with the Washington
Agricultural Experiment Station. Natural
Resource Conservation Service.
Soil Color Charts Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color
Charts. New Windsor, New York.
Soil Data Access
Hydric Soils List
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov
/Internet/FSE_DOCUME
NTS/nrcseprd1316620.html
Natural Resources Conservation Service.
N.d. Soil Data Access Hydric Soils List (Soil
Data Access Live).
Field Indicators of
Hydric Soils
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov
/Internet/FSE_DOCUME
NTS/nrcs142p2_053171.pd
f
NRCS. 2018. Field Indictors of Hydric Soils in the
United States, Version 8.2. L.M. Vasialas, G.W.
Hurt, and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in
cooperation with the National Technical
Committee for Hydric Soils.
Threatened
and
Endangered
Species
Washington
Natural Heritage
Program
http://data-
wadnr.opendata.arcgis.com/
datasets/wnhp-current-
element-occurrences
Washington Natural Heritage Program.
Endangered, threatened, and sensitive plants of
Washington. Washington State Department of
Natural Resources, Washington Natural
Heritage Program, Olympia, WA
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference
Washington
Priority Habitats
and Species
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/p
hspage.htm
Priority Habitats and Species (PHS)
Program Map of priority habitats and species
in project vicinity. Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife.
Species of
Local
Importance
WDFW GIS Data http://wdfw.wa.gov/mappi
ng/salmonscape/
Website
Report
Preparation
Federal Way
Revised Code
(FWRC)
https://www.codepublishin
g.com/WA/FederalWay/#!
/FederalWay19/FederalWa
y19145.html
Chapter 19.145 – Environmentally Critical
Areas
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B –– Background Information
This appendix includes a King County Contours Map (B1); NRCS Soil Survey Map (B2); King County
Sensitive Areas Map (B3); WDFW PHS Map (B4); USFWS NWI Map (B5); DNR Stream Typing Map
(B6); WDFW SalmonScape Map (B7); and City of Federal Way Wetland Inventory (B8).
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B1 –– King County Contours Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B2 –– NRCS Soil Survey Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B3 –– King County Sensitive Areas Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B4 –– WDFW PHS Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B5 –– USFWS NWI Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B6 –– DNR Stream Typing Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B7 – WDFW SalmonScape Map
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix B8 – City of Federal Way Wetland Inventory
Subject Property
Location
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix C –– Existing Conditions Exhibit
XY XY
'&
'&
'&'&
'&
'&
'&DP-7
DP-6
DP-5
DP-4DP-3
DP-2
DP-1
EagleView Technologies, Inc.
TWIN TRAILS - EXISTING CONDiTIONS
¢
0 125 25062.5 Feet
PRELIMINARYINFORMATION ONLYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC ASSUMESNO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FORCONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, ORESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SETRECONNAISSANCE LEVEL ONLYNOT BASED ON SURVEY
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 1605 SW 341ST PLFEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 KING COUNTY PARCEL NUMBERS:2421039008 & 2421039051
TWIN TRAILS DATE:
JOB:
BY:
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
7/22/2021
1310.0029
RJK
1
1 " = 125 '
'&Data Point
XY StormwaterCulvert
Non RegulatedStormwater Pond
Site Boundary
W
PB
COS
CO
COS
PB
S
S
PB
S S
PB
COSCOCOS
PB
S
PB
PB
S
IR
PB
S
S
D
S
P
GRAVELCONCRETE WALK6' IRON FENCE4' IRON FENCE
FENCE POST
WITH SINGLE CHAIN
GRAVEL DRIVEWAY
COVEREDCARPORTGRAVELWIRE FENCE
GRAVELCONCRETE
6' BOARD FENCEASPHALT
WIRE FENCED6' BOARD FENCEWIRE FENCEWIRE FENCEWIRE FENCEWIRE FENCEWIRE FENCECONCRETE WALKASPHALTASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALTASPHALT6' BOARD FENCE6' BOARD FENCE
D
PB
PB
ASPHALTASPHALT
CONCRETE WALKLAWNGRAVELLAWN S
S
SS
S COS
COS
COS
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
CONCRETE
CONCRETECONCRETECONCRETECONCRETECONCRETECONCRETE WALK
CONCRETE WALK CONCRETE WALK
CONCRETE WALK
EDGE VEGETATION
EDGE VEGETATIONEDGE VEGETATIONEDGE VEGETATIONEDGE VEGETATIONEDGE VEGETATION
LAWN
LANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPING STORM PONDSTORM PONDFENCENO.DESCRIPTION/DATE BY
REVISIONS
DWG. NAME:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
OF SHEETS
JOB NO.:
PRINT:
DATE OF
\\\\esm8\\ENGR\\ESM-JOBS\\1316\\003\\020\\P-plat\\Plots\\PP-02.dwg9/13/2021 9:27 AMPlotted:File:Plotted By: Raeline GarciaEVERETTFEDERAL WAYΒ Ν Μ Ρ Τ Κ Σ Η Μ Φ ∆ Μ Φ Η Μ ∆ ∆ Θ ΡΚ Κ ΒCivil EngineeringProject ManagementLand SurveyingLandscape ArchitectureLand Planningwww.esmcivil.com(253) 838-6113(425) 297-9900Public WorksΕδχδθκ ςξ+ ς≅ 87//2223// 7σγ ≅υδ Ρ+ Ρτησδ 1/4≅ ΟΝΘΣΗΝΜ ΝΕ Ρ∆ 0.3 Μ∆ 0.3 ΝΕ Ρ∆ΒΣΗΝΜ 13+ Σ 10 Μ+ Θ 2 ∆+ ς−Λ−ΟΘΝΡΟ∆ΒΣ Χ∆Υ∆ΚΝΟΛ∆ΜΣΣςΗΜ ΣΘ≅ΗΚΡEXISTING CONDITIONSWASHINGTONCITY OF FEDERAL WAY1316-003-020
PP-02
BML
JAT
9/10/2021
ΟΟ,/1
1 6
µ
ΒΝΜΣΝΤΘ ΗΜΣ∆ΘΥ≅Κ < 1&
ΡΒ≅Κ∆9 0! <
0 25
4/&
10050
Ρς 231ΜΧ ΟΚ 08ΣΓ ≅Υ∆ ΡςΡς 230ΡΣ ΟΚ
Ρς 233ΣΓ ΡΣ
BOLLARD
MAILBOX
INFORMATION SIGN
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN
D STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
YARD DRAIN
P GUY ANCHOR
ELECTRICAL METER
POWER POLE W/TJB
POWER POLE W/LIGHT
POWER POLE
TELEPHONE JUNCTION BOX (UG)
TELEPHONE POLE
FIRE HYDRANT
WATER METER
WATER VALVE
DRAINAGE DITCH
FENCE, CYCLONE
FENCE, HOG WIRE
FENCE, WOOD
GUARDRAIL
POWER, OVERHEAD
STORM
Κ∆Φ∆ΜΧ
S
POWER POLE W/TRANSFORMER
GAS VALVE
FOUND MONUMENT
SANITARY SEWER
WATER
NATURAL GAS
WETLAND EDGE
WETLAND BUFFER
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M.,
IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF A DISTANCE OF 412.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE TRACT HEREIN
DESCRIBED;
THENCE WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION TO A POINT IN A LINE WHICH IS 1077.20 FEET EAST (MEASURED
ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION) AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 412.00 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF
THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SUBDIVISION;
THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 24;
THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Κ∆Φ≅Κ Χ∆ΡΒΘΗΟΣΗΝΜ9 ∋Ο≅ΘΒ∆Κ 1310/2,8/40(
REFERENCE TO TITLE EXCEPTIONS3
13 18
24 19
24 50.00'126.55' (R8-C)126.53' (ESM)157.50' (R8-C)
157.51' (ESM)126.55' (R8)126.57' (ESM)10ΡΣ ≅Υ∆ΜΤ∆ ΡςNATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (NGVD29) BASED ON CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BENCHMARK NO. 2166-48
WASHINGTON COORDINATE SYSTEM (WCS) - NORTH ZONE (BASED UPON NAD 83/2011) UTILIZING THE WASHINGTON STATE REFERENCE NETWORK (WSRN) IN MAY OF 2021.
Α≅ΡΗΡ ΝΕ Υ∆ΘΣΗΒ≅Κ Χ≅ΣΤΛ9
Α≅ΡΗΡ ΝΕ ΓΝΘΗΨΝΜΣ≅Κ Χ≅ΣΤΛ9
SURVEYING PERFORMED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS SURVEY DOCUMENT UTILIZED ALL
OR A PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING EQUIPMENT:
FIELD TRAVERSE AND/OR GLOBAL NAVIGATION SATELLITE SYSTEM (GNSS)
ELECTRONIC TOTAL STATIONS, INCLUDING TOPCON PS-103A,
LEICA TCRA 1105 PLUS, TRIMBLE S5.
TRIMBLE R8, TOPCON GR-5 GNSS EQUIPMENT.
FARO FOCUS S350 LASER SCANNER.
PROCEDURE USED : FIELD TRAVERSE WORK COMPLIES WITH CURRENT STANDARDS AS
OUTLINED IN WAC-332-130-070, -080 AND -090. ALL INSTRUMENTS MAINTAINED TO
MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY WAC-332-130-100.
ΡΤΘΥ∆Ξ ΗΜΡΣΘΤΛ∆ΜΣ≅ΣΗΝΜ
1. BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION AS SHOWN HEREON IS DERIVED FROM FIELD CONDITIONS
OBSERVED IN 2021.
2. BURIED UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON ADJACENT ROADWAYS WERE LOCATED IN THE FIELD BY UTILITY
LOCATE SERVICES IN OF 2021. THE LOCATION OF SAID UTILITIES IS APPROXIMATE AND SHOULD BE
VERIFIED PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. PLEASE CALL 811 "CALL BEFORE
YOU DIG" A MINIMUM OF 2 DAYS PRIOR TO SUCH ACTIVITIES.
3. LEGAL DESCRIPTION, EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ARE FROM CHICAGO
TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT NO. 211304-SC AND COMMITMENT NO. 0204755-16 2ND REVISION. IT
SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IN PREPARING THIS SURVEY MAP, ESM HAS NOT CONDUCTED AN INDEPENDENT
TITLE SEARCH NOR IS ESM AWARE OF ANY TITLE ISSUES AFFECTING THE PROPERTY OTHER THAN THOSE
SHOWN ON THIS MAP. ESM HAS WHOLLY RELIED ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED TITLE REPORT TO PREPARE
THIS SURVEY AND THEREFORE QUALIFIES THE MAP'S ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS TO THAT EXTENT.
ΡΤΘΥ∆ΞΝΘ&Ρ ΜΝΣ∆Ρ9
Κ∆Φ≅Κ Χ∆ΡΒΘΗΟΣΗΝΜ9 ∋Ο≅ΘΒ∆Κ 1310/2,8//7(
A
44925
T
S
SGIRE DRETE
GNTE
FO IHSAW
T
ON
PARCEL NO. 2421039008
PARCEL NO. 2421039051\A1;30' R/W\A1;30' R/W
\A1;50' R/W\A1;50' R/W\A1;50' R/W
07ΣΓ ≅Υ∆ Ρς
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix D –– Non-Wetland Data Forms
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:
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-1
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Swale Concave 2
A2 47.294150 122.35863273 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Not all three wetland criteria met; lacking hydric soils. Data collected on southwestern portion of the subject property.
Alnus rubra 25 Yes FAC 3
Populus balsamifera 5 No FAC
Acer macrophyllum 5 No FACU 3
35 100%
Rubus armeniacus 20 Yes FAC
20
Ranunculus repens 80 Yes FAC
Athyrium cyclosorum 7 No FACW
87
0
13
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-1
0 - 5 10YR 2/2 100 ----MedLo Medium loam
5 - 9 10YR 2/2 99 7.5YR 4/4 1 C M MedLo Medium loam
9 - 16 10YR 3/4 99 7.5YR 4/6 1 C M SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
Wetland hydrology criteria met indirectly through secondary indicators B9 and D2; soil pit dug to 24 inches.
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:
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-2
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Swale Concave 2
A2 47.293872 -122.35856126 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Not all three wetland criteria met; lacking hydric soils. Data collected on southwestern portion of the subject property.
Malus sp.*25 Yes FAC 4
Alnus rubra 10 Yes FAC
4
35 100%
Rubus armeniacus 40 Yes FAC
40
Ranunculus repens 40 Yes FAC
Athyrium cyclosorum 5 No FACW
Geum macrophyllum 1 No FAC
46
0
54
Hydrophytic vegetation met through the dominance test. *Malus species 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-2
0 - 4 10YR 2/2 100 ----MedLo Medium loam
4 - 16+10YR 3/4 100 ----SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
Wetland hydrology criteria met indirectly through secondary indicators B9 and D2; soil pit dug to 20 inches.
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:
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-3
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Swale Concave 2
A2 47.293656 -122.35858239 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Not all three wetland criteria met; lacking hydric soils. Data collected on southwestern portion of the subject property.
Alnus rubra 60 Yes FAC 3
Populus balsamifera 7 No FAC
3
67 100%
Cornus alba 80 Yes FACW
Rubus armeniacus 2 No FAC
82
Ranunculus repens 40 Yes FAC
40
0
60
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 - 5 10YR 2/2 100 ----MedLo Medium loam
5 - 16+10YR 3/4 97 7.5YR 4/6 3 C M MedLo Medium loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
Wetland hydrology criteria met indirectly through secondary indicators D2 and D5. Soil pit dug to 24 inches.
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:
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-4
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Swale Concave 1
A2 47.293670 -122.35834580 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Not all three wetland criteria met; lacking hydric soils. Data collected ion southwestern portion of the subject property.
2
2
0 100%
Populus balsamifera 5 Yes FAC
5
Phalaris arundinacea 100 Yes FACW
100
0
0
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-4
0 - 11 10YR 2/2 100 ----MedLo Medium loam
11 - 16+10YR 3/4 98 7.5YR 4/6 2 C M SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
Wetland hydrology criteria met indirectly through secondary indicators D2 and D5; soil pit dug to 20 inches.
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:
0
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-5
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Rolling Convex 1
A2 47.294348 -122.35730185 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
No wetland criteria met. Data collected in upland area on the central portion of the subject property.
Pseudotsuga menziesii 10 Yes FACU 1
Prunus emarginata 5 Yes FACU
Frangula purshiana 2 No FAC 5
17 20%
Populus balsamifera 5 Yes FAC
Cytisus scoparius 5 Yes UPL
10
Rubus ursinus 100 Yes FACU
Athyrium cyclosorum 5 No FAC
Poa sp.*2 No FAC
Cirsium arvense 2 No FAC
109
0
No hydrophytic vegetation criteria met; prevalence index not warranted due to lack of hydric soils or wetland
hydrology.
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 - 9 10YR 3/2 70 ----SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam; mixed matrix
10YR 4/3 30 ----SaGrLo Very fine material
9 - 16+10YR 4/4 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C M SaGrLo Sandy gravelly loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
No wetland hydrology criteria met; soil pit dug to 20 inches.
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:
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-6
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Swale Concave 2
A2 47.293739 -122.35605960 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Not all three wetland criteria met; only hydrophytic vegetation present. Data collected in upland area on the southeastern portion of
the subject property.
2
2
0 100%
Rubus armeniacus 100 Yes FAC
100
Urtica dioica 20 Yes FAC
20
0
80
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-6
0 - 4 10YR 3/2 100 ----MedLo Medium loam
4 - 9 10YR 3/4 97 10YR 4/6 3 C M MedLo Medium loam
9 - 16+2.5Y 5/3 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M MedLo Medium loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
No wetland hydrology criteria met; soil pit dug to 20 inches.
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: 0
1310.0029 Twin Trails Federal Way, King 7/14/2021
Propsect Development - Justin Holland WA DP-7
Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta 24/21N/3E
Toe of slope Concave 1
A2 47.294973 -122.35597452 WGS 84
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes N/A
Not all three wetland criteria met; only hydrophytic vegetation present. Data collected on the northern portion of the subject
property.
2
2
0 100%
0
Holcus lanatus 40 Yes FAC
Poa sp.*40 Yes FAC
Ranunculus repens 20 No FAC
Hypochaeris radicata 5 No FACU
Crepis capillaris 5 No FACU
110
0
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-7
0 - 5 10YR 3/2 100 ----SaLo Sandy loam
5 - 8 10YR 3/2 100 ----SaLo Sandy loam with 2% concretions in matrix
8 - 16+10YR 3/4 95 7/5YR 4/4 5 C M SaLo Sandy loam
None
--
No hydric soil criteria met.
None
None
None
No wetland hydrology criteria met; soil pit dug to 20 inches.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Appendix E –– Qualifications
All field inspections, wetland determinations, habitat assessments, and supporting documentation,
including this Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report prepared for the Twin
Trails project site were prepared by, or under the direction of, Jon Pickett of SVC. In addition, the
site investigations were performed by Ryan Krapp and Mae Ancheta, report preparation was
completed by Mae Ancheta, and additional project oversight and final quality assurance/quality
control was completed by Kyla Caddey.
Jon Pickett
Associate Principal
Professional Experience: >10 years
Jon Pickett is an Associate Principal and Senior Scientist with a diverse background in environmental
and shoreline compliance and permitting, wetland and stream ecology, fish and wildlife biology,
mitigation compliance and design, and environmental planning and land use due diligence. Jon
oversees a wide range of large-scale industrial, commercial, and multi-family residential projects
throughout Western Washington, providing environmental permitting and regulatory compliance
assistance for land use entitlement projects from feasibility through mitigation compliance. Jon
performs wetland, stream, and shoreline delineations and fish & wildlife habitat assessments; conducts
code and regulation analysis and review; prepares reports and permit applications and documents;
provides environmental compliance recommendation; and provides restoration and mitigation design.
Jon earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Natural Resource Sciences from Washington State
University and Bachelor of Science and Minor in Forestry from Washington State University. Jon has
received 40-hour wetland delineation training (Western Mountains, Valleys, & Coast and Arid West
Regional Supplements) and regularly performs wetland, stream, and shoreline delineations. Jon is a
Whatcom County Qualified Wetland Specialist and Wildlife Biologist and is a Pierce County Qualified
Wetland Specialist. He has been formally trained by WSDOE in the use of the Washington State
Wetland Rating System 2014, How to Determine the Ordinary High-Water Mark (Freshwater and
Marine), Using Field Indicators for Hydric Soils, and the Using the Credit-Debit Method for
Estimating Mitigation Needs.
Ryan Krapp
Environmental Scientist / Field Lead
Professional Experience: 10+ years
Ryan Krapp is an Environmental Scientist and Field Lead with a background in conducting wetland
delineations, habitat assessments, botanical surveys, avian surveys, threatened & endangered species
surveys, and fisheries studies. He has considerable experience in production of Environmental
Assessments and Biological Assessments and Evaluations under NEPA guidelines for projects
regulated by the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Bureau of Indian Affairs as
well as leading Section 7 ESA consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Project planning,
permitting, and compliance are all part of his professional experiences and practices at SVC.
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Ryan has managed environmental investigation projects including wetlands, streams, and critical
habitats data collection on large pipeline corridors, overhead electrical transmission corridors, and
oil/natural gas drilling development. He has extensive experience in utilizing GIS to collect, manage,
and analyze large volumes of spatial and temporal field data to aide in project management,
monitoring, analysis, and mapping. In addition, he is a FAA trained recreational pilot and a PADI
certified SCUBA diver with fresh and saltwater diving experience.
Kyla Caddey
Environmental Scientist & Certified Ecologist
Professional Experience: 7 years
Kyla Caddey is a senior-level Environmental Scientist with a diverse background in stream and wetland
ecology, wildlife ecology and conservation, wildlife and natural resource assessments and monitoring,
and riparian habitat restoration at various public and private entities. Kyla has field experience
performing in-depth studies in both the Pacific Northwest and Central American ecosystems which
included various environmental science research and statistical analysis. Kyla has advanced expertise
in federal- and state-listed endangered, threatened, and sensitive species surveys and assessment of
aquatic and terrestrial systems throughout the Puget Sound region. She has completed hundreds of
wetland delineations and has extensive knowledge and interest in hydric soil identification. As the
senior writer, she provides informed project oversight and performs final quality assurance / quality
control on various types of scientific reports for agency submittal, including: Biological
Assessments/Evaluations; Wetland, Shoreline, and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessments; Mitigation
Plans, and Mitigation Monitoring Reports. She currently performs wetland, stream, and shoreline
delineations and fish and wildlife habitat assessments; prepares scientific reports; and provides
environmental permitting and regulatory compliance assistance to support a wide range of
commercial, industrial, and multi-family residential land use projects.
Kyla earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Science and Resource Management from
the University of Washington, Seattle with a focus in Wildlife Conservation and a minor in
Quantitative Science. She has also completed additional coursework in Comprehensive Bird Biology
from Cornell University. Ms. Caddey is a Certified Ecologist through the Ecological Society of
America. She has received 40-hour wetland delineation training (Western Mtns, Valleys, & Coast and
Arid West Regional Supplement), is a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist and Wildlife
Biologist, and is a USFWS-approved Mazama pocket gopher survey biologist. Kyla has been formally
trained through the Washington State Department of Ecology, Coastal Training Program, and the
Washington Native Plant Society in winter twig and grass, sedge, and rush identification for Western
WA; Using the Credit-Debit Method in Estimating Wetland Mitigation Needs; How to Determine the
Ordinary High Water Mark; Using Field Indicators for Hydric Soils; How to Administer Development
Permits in Washington Shorelines; Puget Sound Coastal Processes; and Forage Fish Survey
Techniques. Additionally, she has received formal training in preparing WSDOT Biological
Assessments.
Megan Mae Ancheta
Staff Scientist
Professional Experience: 2 years
1310.0029 – Twin Trails Soundview Consultants LLC
Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report September 28, 2021
Megan (Mae) Ancheta is a Staff Scientist with a background in wildlife and conservation biology in
Washington state. Mae earned her Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Science with a focus
in Conservation Biology and Ecology and a certificate in Restoration Ecology from University of
Washington, Tacoma. There she gained extensive, hands-on experience working in lab and field
settings, and studying socio-ecological restoration and wildlife conservation in old growth forests,
historic Puget lowland prairies, and wetland and riparian areas. Mae has applied her studies working
in the local government at the city and county level as well as within federal entities conducting wetland
mitigation planning, stream habitat monitoring, habitat restoration for federally listed species, and
thorough site analyses for natural resource management utilizing ArcGIS and model analyses.
Mae currently assists in wetland, stream, and shoreline delineations and fish and wildlife habitat
assessments; 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 for various land use projects.