The URL can be used to link to this page

21-104125-Wetland Assessment-10-05-2021-V1 Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington King County Tax Parcel No. 768380-0280 Project No. 20030 Prepared for: VSM PO Box 1226 Kent, Washington 98035 Prepared by: Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC PO Box 1721 Issaquah, Washington 98027 March 15, 2021 WETLAND DELINEATION • MITIGATION DESIGN • COMPLIANCE MONITORING March 15, 2021 Project Number 20030 VSM Attention: Sikander Sekhon PO Box 1226 Kent, Washington 98035 Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington King County Tax Parcel No. 768380-0280 Sikander, Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC is pleased to present this wetland and stream delineation and rating report for your residential property located at 2625 S 298th Street in Federal Way, Washington. I determined that three small Category IV wetlands and a Type Ns stream exist within the western portions of the site. A 50 ft standard width buffer is required from each wetland and a 15 ft setback is required from the outer limits of each wetland buffer for buildings and other structures. A 35 ft standard width buffer is required from the stream and a 15 ft setback is required from the outer limits of the stream buffer for buildings and other structures. The wetlands and stream as well as related buffers and setbacks encumber much of the western portion of the project site. The information presented in this report is based on an analysis of conditions within and adjacent to the site, an examination of the wetland and stream development standards contained within Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas), and the best available science regarding wetlands and streams. I trust that this report meets your present needs. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this report or require additional assistance with this project, please do not hesitate to call or email. Sincerely, Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC Peter P. Super Professional Wetland Scientist PO Box 1721 Issaquah, Washington 98027 (425) 677-7166 www.evergreenarc.com Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington King County Tax Parcel No. 768380-0280 Project No. 20030 Prepared for: VSM PO Box 1226 Kent, Washington 98035 Prepared by: Evergreen Aquatic Resource Consultants, LLC PO Box 1721 – Issaquah, Washington 98027 (425) 677-7166 | www.evergreenarc.com March 15, 2021 Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page i March 15, 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT SITE & LANDSCAPE SETTING ................................................................................................ 1 3.0 WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION AND RATING ASSESSMENT ............................................. 1 3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Background Research ........................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Site Assessment ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.3.1 Wetland 1 .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.3.2 Stream 1 ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 3.3.3 Upland ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 3.3.4 Off-Site Wetlands and Streams ................................................................................................................................ 6 4.0 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 6 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 7 6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 8 7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 8 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Critical Area Map: Wetlands and Streams Appendix B – Photographs Appendix C – Wetland Determination Forms Appendix D – Wetland Rating Form Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 1 March 15, 2021 1.0 INTRODUCTION This wetland and stream delineation and rating report has been prepared to describe existing wetland and stream conditions within and adjacent to an existing residential property located at 2625 S 298th Street in Federal Way, Washington. Where applicable, an opinion of buffers and setbacks has been provided per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas). It is understood that this report may be used, in part, to supplement site planning and permitting efforts related to future development of the site. The exact scope and timing of development is not known, but it is understood that future development may include a residential land subdivision comprising up to approximately five lots as well as tracts for access, stormwater control, critical areas, and open space. 2.0 PROJECT SITE & LANDSCAPE SETTING The project site is an irregularly shaped developed residential parcel located at 2625 S 298th Street in Federal Way, Washington. The site is situated in the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 4, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M. The King County tax parcel number for the site is 768380-0280. A legal description for the site is Parcel B, City of Federal Way boundary line adjustment No. 03-100726- 00, recorded under recording No. 20030430900001, records of King County Auditor, situate in the City of Federal Way, County of King, State of Washington. The project site has a total area of 124,582 sf (5.4 acres) and measures approximately 326 feet wide (east to west) by approximately 461 feet deep (north to south). Access to the site is from S 298th Street, which is a paved roadway within dedicated public right-of-way. Topography within the site trends to the northwest. Total elevation change across the site is approximately 34 feet, ranging from a maximum elevation of 364 feet (NGVD 29) in both the southeast and southwest corners of the site to a minimum elevation of approximately 330 feet (NGVD 29) in the northwest corner of the site. A 1,920 sf single- family residence exists in the northeast corner of the site and several older outbuildings exist elsewhere throughout the site. Vegetation within the site includes primarily mowed pasture grasses and a few scattered trees. The City of Federal Way comprehensive plan designation for the site is “Single-Family Residential - High Density”. The City of Federal Way zoning designation for the site is RS7.2 (single-family residential, one dwelling unit per 7,200 sf). There are no known critical area special district or zoning overlays that apply to the site. The project site is situated south of S 298th Street, west of Military Road S, north Steele Lake, and east of Pacific Highway S. Land use surrounding the site is primarily single-family residential, though Wildwood Elementary School is located southwest of project site and Laurelwood Park is located northwest of the project site. 3.0 WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION AND RATING ASSESSMENT The wetland and stream delineation and rating assessment summarized in this report included an initial site reconnaissance completed on August 19, 2020, a detailed site assessment completed on January 15, 2021, and a follow-up site review completed on January 29, 2021. The purpose of this work was to screen Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 2 March 15, 2021 the project site and local vicinity for wetlands and streams. The entire project site was assessed and areas located within 200 ft of the project site were also reviewed to determine buffer widths and any related buffer encroachments onto the project site. Off-site areas were assessed using information obtained from readily available literature and aerial photographs as well as by observing conditions directly from the project site and public right-of-way. The wetland and stream delineation and rating assessment was not conducted during the growing season. Climatic conditions prior to the assessment as well as natural seasonal variations related to the time of year were considered. Rainfall measured at SeaTac International Airport during the period October 1, 2020 to January 7, 2021 was higher than the historical mean for the 43 year period of historic record. Rainfall during the seven days preceding the January 15, 2021 site assessment totaled 3.77 inches, with 2.33 inches of the total 3.77 inches received two days prior to the site assessment. The higher-than- normal rainfall preceding the site assessment resulted in atypical soil saturation and high water table conditions throughout the site. At the time of the wetland and stream delineation and rating assessment, it was determined that “normal circumstances” exist within the project site as defined by the wetland delineation manual. There was no evidence of a recent change to the site that would limit or otherwise prevent an accurate wetland determination. Although vegetation within the site is highly modified from a native condition and has been historically managed as pasture, problematic or atypical wetland conditions do not exist within the site. 3.1 Methodology The wetland and stream delineation and rating assessment included background research and site assessments to determine if wetlands are present on or adjacent to the project site. Wetland determinations were made using the “routine determination” methods required for “on-site inspections” as described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Vegetation, soil, and hydrology characteristics were examined at multiple locations and then compared to the specific criteria established for the three wetland indicators described in the Regional Supplement To The Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region - Version 2.0 (US Army Corps of Engineers 2010). When hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology indicators were present, an area was determined to be a wetland. In the absence of all three indicators or when exclusionary situations apply, an area was considered non-wetland, or “upland”. Delineated wetland limits were marked on-site using sequentially numbered pink wire stake flags labeled “Wetland Delineation”. Wetland determination points were marked on-site using sequentially numbered orange wire stake flagging. Each delineated wetland was rated (classified) using the methods described in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – 2014 Update (Hruby, T 2014). Stream determinations utilized the definitions and related water typing criteria described within Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 222-16-030 (Water Typing System) and Article III of FWRC Chapter 19.145 (Environmental Critical Areas). An aquatic feature was considered a stream if there was clear evidence of the passage of water including, but not limited to, defined channels, swales, and hydraulically sorted gravel, sand, and silt beds. Salmonid utilization within a stream considered the Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 3 March 15, 2021 physical parameters of the stream such as width, gradient, and flow as well as records of any known naturally reoccurring salmonid populations and barriers to fish migration. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) for each stream was marked on-site using sequentially numbered blue flagging wire stake flagging. Following the critical area delineation and rating assessment, Encompass Engineering & Surveying completed a boundary and topographic survey to map the delineated wetland and stream limits. 3.2 Background Research The project site exists within the lower Duwamish River drainage area of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 – Duwamish-Green River Basin. The upper portion of Bingaman Creek (09-0045) exists approximately 700 feet north of the project site. Bingaman Creek originates in Laurelwood Park and then drains northeast to Mullen Slough via the Bingaman Pond Natural Area with eventual discharge to the Green River at approximately river mile 21.75. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) online “Web Soil Survey” maps Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) throughout much of the project site and Arents, Alderwood material, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AmC) in the extreme southern and eastern portions of the site. Alderwood soils are moderately well drained soils formed under conifers in glacial deposits (Snyder et al. 1975). Arents, Alderwood material consists of Alderwood soils that have been so disturbed by urbanization that the soil can longer be classified as Alderwood series soils (Snyder et al. 1975). The USDA “Soil Data Access (SDA) Hydric Soil List” website does not classify either mapped soil type as a hydric soil; however, inclusions of hydric soils are known to occur within Alderwood soils when the soil type is found in depressional landforms and along drainageways. Wetlands have not been previously mapped within or immediately adjacent to the project site. The closest mapped wetland is located approximately 950 feet northwest of the project site in and adjacent to Laurelwood Park. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) “Surface Waters & Wetlands” online mapper identifies this wetland as a 13.61 acre freshwater forested/shrub wetland habitat that is classified palustrine scrub-shrub seasonally flooded (PSSC). The outlet from the wetland is Bingaman Creek. The City of Federal Way’s “Critical Areas Map” identifies a stream within the project site. The stream originates at the southern property line and flows northwest across the project site. The stream continues off-site to the northwest, eventually draining to Bingaman Creek near the outlet of the Laurelwood Park wetland. Historic aerial photographs of the project site show that the site was converted to pasture use between 1936 and 1957. Except for the construction of a new single-family residence in 2003, the project site has remained largely unchanged for the last approximately 20 years. 3.3 Site Assessment Environmental conditions within the project site are uniform and include former pasture areas that support predominantly grass. Ten wetland determination points were established throughout the site Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 4 March 15, 2021 to document representative conditions. The location of each wetland determination point was selected to document representative conditions within wetlands and adjoining uplands. Vegetation within the site is mowed on at least an annual basis. At the time of the wetland and stream delineation and rating, grass species was difficult to identify to species due to the combination of mowing and the time of year. With few exceptions, wetland determinations were made based largely on the soil and hydrologic conditions. It was determined that three small Category IV wetlands and a Type Ns water (stream) exist within the western portion of the site. A map showing the location of wetlands, streams, buffers, and related building setbacks is included with this report in Appendix A. Photographs of the site are included with this report in Appendix B. Wetland determination forms are included with this report in Appendix C. Wetland rating forms are included with this report in Appendix D. This report section describes each delineated wetland and stream. 3.3.1 Wetland 1 TABLE 1 – SUMMARY INFORMATION FOR WETLAND 1 Flagging Scheme Cowardin Classification HGM Classification Hydrologic Regimes Rating Standard Buffer Building Setback WL 1-101 to WL 1-105 WL1-1 to WL1-12 WL1-201 to WL1-210 PEMB slope seasonally saturated Category IV 4 habitat points 50 ft 15 ft Wetland 1 is a series of three small wetlands located in shallow sloping landforms along Stream 1. The Cowardin classification for each wetland is palustrine emergent, persistent, seasonally saturated (PEM1B). Total wetland area for the three wetlands is 10,947 sf, ranging from 532 sf for Wetland 1A to 8,616 sf for Wetland 1C. The determination for each wetland was made based on the presence of wetland hydrology and hydric soil indicators as well as a dominance by hydrophytic vegetation within the local area. Vegetation within the wetlands is dominated by tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC) with occasional creeping jenny (Lysimachia nummularia, FACW), common rush (Juncus effusus, FACW), bird’s-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus, FAC), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW). The hydric soil field indicator present within each wetland was depleted below dark surface. Soil was generally a very dark gray (10YR 3/1) sandy loam overlying a mottled dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) gravelly to sandy clay loam. Each wetland appears to have a seasonally saturated hydrologic regime supported primarily by localized shallow groundwater conditions, though Wetland 1C also receives stormwater flows from a roadside ditch located east of the wetland. Flood or overbank flows from Stream 1 do not appear to be an appreciable source of supporting wetland hydrology. It is expected that soil within the wetlands would be saturated at or near the soil surface for extended periods during the early growing season, but unsaturated conditions would prevail by the end of the growing season in most years. Surface water would typically be absent within the wetlands but may occur for a few days after heavy rain. Wetland hydrology indicators present within each wetland at the time of the wetland delineation included a high water table and saturated soils. Surface water from the wetlands drains to Stream 1 and subsequently the Green River via Bingaman Creek. Because of very similar characteristics and proximity to each other, Wetland 1A, Wetland 1B, and Wetland 1C were rated collectively and each assigned a Category IV rating based on the total score of Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 5 March 15, 2021 15 that the wetlands received for functions. The wetlands rated moderate for water quality improvement functions (score = 6/9), moderately low for hydrologic functions (score = 5/9), and low for habitat functions (4/9). Each wetland requires a 50 foot standard width buffer. In addition, a 15 foot building setback is required from the outer limits of the buffer for buildings and other structures. 3.3.2 Stream 1 Stream 1 is a narrow, low gradient linear aquatic feature that begins at a 12 inch diameter concrete culvert located near the center point of the southern property line. Stream 1 drains north-northwest across the project site to an 18 inch diameter concrete culvert located in the northwest corner of the site. The horizontal limits of the OHWM are defined by the top of stream bank and were flagged 1-1E through 1-20E and 1-1W through 1-20W. Stream 1 measures an average of approximately three feet wide by approximately six inches deep. Average channel gradient was calculated to be 3.5 percent. Channel substrate includes occasional hydraulically sorted small gravels with patchy areas of sand and silt, though the stream channel is vegetated in topographically flatter areas. Flow within Stream 1 is seasonal, possibly ephemeral, and derived from the concentration of stormwater generated by impervious surfaces located in the residential subdivision south of the project site. A reconnaissance of the subdivision revealed that no stream or wetland located south of the project site drains to Stream 1. Stream 1 is not mapped by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), or King County. The City of Federal Way maps that Stream 1 flows northwest from S 298th Street to Bingaman Creek near the outlet of the Laurelwood Park wetland. A defined channel, drainage patterns, or similar features north of S 298th Street were not visible on historic aerial photographs extending back to 1937. Based on the limited contributing basin as well as the observable environmental conditions located north of S 298th Street, it is assumed that off-site stream characteristics, at most, would be similar in width, gradient, and flow regime to the on-site stream segment, though it is very possible that any defined channel would become more defuse and potentially simply a wetland based on a broadening topography and lack of stream flow. Fisheries utilization within Stream 1 is likely limited by natural blockages presented by stream flow and the potential for the absence of an above ground open-channel system and/or open water wetland north of S 298th Street. Stream 1 was classified a Type Ns water as 1) it is as a seasonal, non-fish bearing stream, 2) it is not located downstream of a known Type Np water, and 3) is presumably physically connected to a Type S, F, or Np water (Bingaman Creek). A 35 foot buffer is required from the OHWM of Stream 1. A 15 foot setback is required from the outer limits of the stream buffer for buildings and other structures. 3.3.3 Upland Upland areas within the project site include the eastern portion of the site as well as areas located south and west of Stream 1. Vegetation within upland areas includes pasture grasses with occasional herbaceous weeds. Soils are generally a very dark brown (10YR 2/2) gravelly sandy loam overlying a dark brown (10YR 3/3) to brown (10YR 4/3) gravely sandy loam to gravelly clay loam. A high water table and saturated soils were occasionally present in upland areas due to the unusually heavy rainfall immediately prior to the site assessment. Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 6 March 15, 2021 3.3.4 Off-Site Wetlands and Streams Stream 1 is mapped north of S 298th Street. The off-site stream segment and any associated wetlands is separated from the project site by S 298th Street. Excavated roadside ditches also exist along S 298th Street but would not be regulated critical areas because they are entirely artificial features excavated in upland soils. No other off-site wetlands or streams exist within 200 feet of the project site. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the recent critical area delineation and rating assessment, the following conclusions have been developed: 1. Wetlands: Three small wetlands exist within the western portion of the project site. Each wetland requires a 50 foot standard width buffer plus a 15 foot setback from the outer limits of the buffer for buildings and other structures. The buffer and building setback associated with the three wetlands occupy much of the western portion of the project site. Development within or otherwise affecting the wetlands, buffers, or building setbacks would likely require notification to and/or permits from the City of Federal Way. 2. Streams: A Type Ns stream crosses the project site in a southeast to northwest orientation. Flow within the stream is seasonal and likely ephemeral derived primarily from the concentration of stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces. The stream requires a 35 foot standard width buffer plus a 15 foot setback from the outer limits of the buffer for buildings and other structures. The buffer and building setback associated with the stream occupies much of the western portion of the project site. Development within or otherwise affecting the stream, buffer, or building setback would likely require notification to and/or permits from the City of Federal Way. 3. Buffer Increases: The City of Federal Way can require buffer increases beyond the standard critical area buffers discussed in this report to protect critical area functions, values, or hazards. The specific on-site conditions outlined in FWRC Chapter 19.145 for buffer increases do not exist within the project site. 4. Wetland Buffer Averaging: Wetland buffer averaging can be used to reduce standard wetland buffers by 75 percent. Subject to specific conditions, buffer averaging could be used to accommodate future development within the project site. Buffer averaging is approved by the City of Federal Way Community Development Director and approvals can be appealed via the City’s hearing examiner. 5. Wetland Buffer Reduction with Enhancement: Wetland buffer reduction with enhancement can be used to reduce standard wetland buffers by 25 percent (12.5 feet for a 50 ft buffer). Subject to specific conditions, wetland buffer reduction with enhancement could be used to accommodate future development within the project site. Wetland buffer reduction with enhancement is approved by the City of Federal Way Community Development Director and approvals can be appealed via the City’s hearing examiner. 6. Stream Buffer Intrusions: Stream buffer intrusions may be permitted with a buffer enhancement Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 7 March 15, 2021 plan. Subject to specific conditions, stream buffer intrusion with enhancement could be used to accommodate future development within the project site. Stream buffer intrusions are approved by the City of Federal Way Community Development Director and approvals can be appealed via the City’s hearing examiner. 7. Notice on Title: A critical area notice on title is required for any property containing critical areas or buffers on which development is proposed or on any property for which critical area mitigation is proposed. The form and content of the critical area notice is subject to City of Federal Way review and the notice must be recorded with King County recorder’s office. For land subdivisions, the critical area notice is typically incorporated into the plat documents via tract designation and related notes. 8. Critical Area Signage and Fencing: For new development, permanent critical area fencing and signage is required along the outer limits of the wetland and stream buffers described in this report. Acceptable fencing types include a standard three foot tall cedar split rail design. 9. State and Federal Permitting: Any proposed filling, grading, or other similar impacts to the wetlands discussed in this report may require notification to and/or permits from the Corps of Engineers, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and/or the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Work within wetlands could also require consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the NOAA Fisheries to address Endangered Species Act compliance. In addition, any work within wetlands could require a cultural resource study per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the recent critical area delineation and rating assessment, the following recommendations have been developed: 1. Wetland Basic Review Service: Apply for and obtain a wetland basic review service from the City of Federal Way. This is a flat fee service the City of Federal Way offers to review and confirm the findings of this report. More information and an application form for this service can be found on this website: https://www.cityoffederalway.com/sites/default/files/Documents/Department/CD/Planning/Land%20 Use%20Apps%20and%20Info%20Handouts/063%20Wetland%20%26%20Stream%20Review%20Basic %20Service.pdf 2. Future Development: Plans for future development should accurately depict the wetlands, streams, buffers, and setbacks discussed in this report. Impacts to wetlands and streams should be completely avoided. Unavoidable impacts to wetland and stream buffers should be minimized and appropriately mitigated. 3. Critical Area Report and Mitigation Plan: Unless waived or modified by the City of Federal Way, a critical area report and mitigation plan should be prepared for impacts or alterations to the critical areas, buffers, and/or setbacks discussed in this report. The critical area report should evaluate the proposed development and probable impacts to affected buffers as well as the net improvement to critical area buffer functioning resulting from any proposed mitigation. The mitigation plan should Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 8 March 15, 2021 detail the specifics of the proposed work that will offset adverse impacts to critical areas and buffers. 6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, the consulting services summarized in this report conform to the generally accepted standard of care in effect at the time the work was conducted. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. The collection, assessment, and determinations made, if any, related to soil characteristics and groundwater conditions are for the sole purpose of wetland delineation and have been conducted in accordance with the wetland delineation methods adopted under RCW 90.58.380 and WAC 173-22-035. The purpose of the work described in this report is to describe site conditions per City of Federal Way critical area regulations in effect at the time of report preparation. All opinions presented in this report should be considered preliminary until reviewed and confirmed by the City of Federal Way. 7.0 REFERENCES Environmental Laboratory. (1987). Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Vicksburg, MS: Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station. Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-029. Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Ecology. King County. 2021a. iMap online GIS available at the following website: https://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/iMap/. Accessed January 15, 2021. King County. 2021b. SeaTac precipitation data available from the Hydrologic Information Center at the following website: https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/environment/watersheds/hic/SeaTacPrecipitation.aspx. Accessed March 12, 2021. Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19-145 – Environmentally Critical Areas. Current through Ordinance 20-904, passed December 1, 2020. Federal Way, City of. 2019. “City of Federal Way: Official Zoning Map”. Effective date: April 10, 2019 by ordinance #19-866. Available at the following website: https://www.cityoffederalway.com/sites/default/files/maps/zoning_0.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2021. Federal Way, City of. undated. “City of Federal Way: Critical Areas Map”. Available at the following website: https://www.cityoffederalway.com/sites/default/files/maps/sensitive_2016.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2021. United States Army Corps of Engineers. (2010). Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0.). Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Research and Development Center: ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Wetland and Stream Delineation and Rating Report 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Page 9 March 15, 2021 United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service. “Web Soil Survey” website available at the following address: websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed January 15, 2021. United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service. “Soil Data Access (SDA) Hydric Soil List” available at the following website: www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316620.html. Accessed February 8, 2021. United States Department of Fish and Wildlife. “National Wetlands Inventory – Surface Waters and Wetlands” website available at the following address: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html. Accessed January 15, 2021. Washington State Department of Ecology. Washington State Water Quality Atlas online website available at the following address: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterqualityatlas/map.aspx. Accessed January 15, 2021. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021. “Priority Habitats on the Web” website available at the following address: https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/. Accessed January 15, 2021. Williams, R. Laramie, R., and Ames, J. 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization: Volume 1 – Puget Sound Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries. November 1975. Appendix A Critical Area Map 50 FT 50 FT 50 FT 50 FT 35 FT 35 FT 35 FT 50 FT S 298th Street DP1 DP7 DP3 DP2 DP8 DP9 DP10 DP4 DP5 DP6 Wetland 1A Category IV Wetland 1B Category IV Wetland 1C Category IV Stream 1 Type Ns Unregulated Roadside Ditches CulvertsCulverts Culverts 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC03060 N Critical Area Map Wetlands and Streams Figure 1 Legend Flagged Wetland Flagged Stream Critical Area Buffer 15' Building Setback Wetland Determination PointDP1 Appendix B Photographs 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC Photographs Photo 1 Wetland 1A January 15, 2021 Wetland 1B January 15, 2021 Stream 1 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP1 January 15, 2021 Wetland 1C January 15, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP 1 January 15, 2021 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC Photographs Photo 2 Vegetation Conditions @ DP2 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP2 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP3 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP4 January 15, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP3 January 15, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP4 January 15, 2021 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC Photographs Photo 3 Vegetation Conditions @ DP5 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP5 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP6 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP7 January 15, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP6 January 15, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP7 January 15, 2021 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC Photographs Photo 4 Vegetation Conditions @ DP8 January 15, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP8 January 29, 2021 Soil & Hydrology Conditions @ DP9 January 29, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP10 January 29, 2021 Soil and Hydrologic Conditions @ DP10 January 29, 2021 Vegetation Conditions @ DP9 January 29, 2021 Appendix C Wetland Determination Forms WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 1 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 1 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 7 10YR 2/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 7 to 18+ 10YR 3/3 80 10YR 3/6 20 C M gravelly sandy loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 2 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Festuca arundinacea 100 YES FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. YES Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 2 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: YES SOIL DP 2 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 9 10YR 3/1 100 gravelly silty clay loam 9 to 18+ 10YR 4/2 85 10YR 3/6 10YR 4/6 15 C M gravelly clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 10 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – 0 Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 3 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 3 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 12 10YR 2/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 12 to 18+ 10YR 4/3 100 gravelly sandy loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 7 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 3 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3.8 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 4 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 4 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 11 10YR3/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 11 to 18+ 10YR 4/3 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M sandy clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 18 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 14 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3.8 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 5 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 5 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 14 10YR 3/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 14 to 18+ 10YR 4/2+ 98 10YR 3/6 2 C M gravelly sandy loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 8.5 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 3 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Festuca arundinacea 100 YES FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. YES Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 6 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: YES SOIL DP 6 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 13 10YR 3/1 100 sandy loam 13 to 18+ 10YR 4/2 95 10YR 3/6 5 C M sandy clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 3 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 0 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Festuca arundinacea 100 YES FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. YES Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/15/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 7 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: YES SOIL DP 7 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 10 10YR 3/1 100 silt loam 10 to 18+ 10YR 4/2 95 10R 3/6 5 C M sandy clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 9 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 3 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/29/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 8 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 8 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 10 10YR 2/2 100 sandy loam 10 to 18+ 10YR 5/3 85 10YR 3/6 15 C M sandy clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 18 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 10 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. 2. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/29/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 9 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 9 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 13 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/3 10YR 3/3 95 5 10YR 4/6 2.5Y 5/4 C/D M mixed matrix 13 to 18+ 10YR 2/2 100 gravelly sandy loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soils were wet, but not saturated. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10 meter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. n/a = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot Size: 5 meter) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = n/a = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) UPL species x5 = 1. Pasture grasses 100 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Dominance Test is >50% 5. Prevalence Index is <3.01 6. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 7. 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 11. 100 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: 1 meter) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 3. 4. n/a = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum – n/a Remarks: Wetland determination made based on soil and hydrology only. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street City/County: Federal Way Sampling Date: 01/29/2021 Applicant/Owner: VSM State: WA Sampling Point: DP 10 Investigator(s): Peter P. Super – Professional Wetland Scientist Section, Township, Range: NE ¼ of SE ¼ S 4, T 21 N, R 4 E Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 10% Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.33418 Long: -122.29936 Datum: NAD 88 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB) NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Rainfall is higher than normal. 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 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: NO SOIL DP 10 Profile Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 to 18+ 10YR 3+/2 to 10YR 4/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M gravelly sandy clay loam mixed matrix – large angular rock present 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) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Type: Depth (Inches): Remarks: Soil textures stated are apparent field textures. Soil colors are for moist soil per Munsell Soil Color Charts (GretagMacbeth 2001 with updated color charts). 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) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 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 Stresses 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): n/a Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): n/a Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 15 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Soils were wet, but not saturated. Project Site: 2625 S 298th Street – Federal Way, Washington Appendix D Wetland Rating Form Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____ Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______ HGM Class used for rating_________________ Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________ OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ (based on functions___ or special characteristics___) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 _______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 _______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 _______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Wetland 1 Wetland 1 01/15/2020 Peter Super X Slope X see attached IV X X 6 5 4 15 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1 attached attached Figure 2 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. X X X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 11 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SLOPE WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality S 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? S 1.1. Characteristics of the average slope of the wetland: (a 1% slope has a 1 ft vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft of horizontal distance) Slope is 1% or less points = 3 Slope is > 1%-2% points = 2 Slope is > 2%-5% points = 1 Slope is greater than 5% points = 0 S 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions): Yes = 3 No = 0 S 1.3. Characteristics of the plants in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the plants in the wetland. Dense means you have trouble seeing the soil surface (>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 in. Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > 90% of the wetland area points = 6 Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > ½ of area points = 3 Dense, woody, plants > ½ of area points = 2 Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > ¼ of area points = 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for plants points = 0 Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page S 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? S 2.1. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft on the uphill side of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 S 2.2. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in question S 2.1? Other sources ________________ Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for S 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1-2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? S 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 S 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where water quality is an issue? At least one aquatic resource in the basin is on the 303(d) list. Yes = 1 No = 0 S 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? Answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which unit is found. Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for S 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page 2 0 0 2 X X 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 X Wetland is mowed on a seasonal basis. None known. Wetland drains north to Laurelwood Park. Laurelwood Park drains east via Bingaman Creek and Mullen Slough to the Green River. Mullen Slough is 303d listed for bioassessment and bacteria. The Green River is 303d listed for dissolved oxygen and the Duwamish River further downstream maintains multiple 303d listings. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 12 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SLOPE WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion S 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? S 4.1. Characteristics of plants that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits conditions in the wetland. Stems of plants should be thick enough (usually > 1/8 in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows. Dense, uncut, rigid plants cover > 90% of the area of the wetland points = 1 All other conditions points = 0 Rating of Site Potential If score is: 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? S 5.1. Is more than 25% of the area within 150 ft upslope of wetland in land uses or cover that generate excess surface runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? S 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems: The sub-basin immediately down-gradient of site has flooding problems that result in damage to human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2 Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient points = 1 No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0 S 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for S 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: X X 0 1 1 0 1 X Wetland is mowed on a seasonal basis. King County iMAP maps drainage complaints downstream of the project site along Bingaman Creek. Although the status and accuracy of the drainage complaints could not be confirmed, the presence of drainage complaints suggests that flooding problems may exist downstream of the wetland within the drainage subbasin. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points X 0 1 0 0 X X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) ____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2 It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page X 1 X 2 X 0 1 -2 -1 X 1 0 0 0 10 2.6 12.6 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report ). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above). Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above). Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page). Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. X Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? The dominant water regime is tidal, Vegetated, and With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV Cat. I SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Cat. I Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105 Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3 SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat I Cat. II Cat. III Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form N/A Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 18 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 This page left blank intentionally 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC050100 N Wetland 1A, 1B, & 1C 150' offset 150' offset 150' offset PEM1B PEM1B Culvert Wetland unit Area that can generate pollutants Area that can generate excess surface water runoff S 298th Street S 300th Street Area does not drain to wetland Note: Project site has not been recently used for pasture or farm use. Figure 1 2.3% 1% 1.6% 2.8%0.2%0.6% 0.5% 2.3% 0.7% 1.0% 1.8% 0.4% 2625 S 298th Street Federal Way, Washington Evergreen Aquatic Wetland Delineation Mitigation Design Compliance Monitoring Resource Consultants, LLC 0 750 1500 N Accessible Habitat, Relative Undist. Habitat, & Low Intensity Land Use within 1 km of Wetland Wetland unit Accessible Undisturbed Habitat (0%) Relatively Undisturbed Habitat (10%) Moderate/Low Intensity Land Use (5.2%) 1 KM Figure 2 303d Map Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, EsriJapan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and January 21, 2021 0 0.25 0.50.125Miles K Assessed Water/SedimentWater Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 Sediment Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1